Sunday, November 05, 2006

Temporary Mounds of Dirt Were Erected at Strategic Points at the Pentagon to Block Views of a Plane Strike

The largest of which shielded the Citgo gas station from direct views of the Pentagon impact zone, where an American Airlines 757 jetliner traveling over 500 miles per hour just a few feet off the ground crashed, disappearing entirely into the building's first and second stories, on September 11, 2001.

Perversely, the Citgo station became the center of media response in the days immediately following. That no professional reporter publicly questioned, to my knowledge, the presence of such massive impediments, might indicate no one had guaranteed immunity from a collective national delusion.

Compare the following two pictures: In the first, we see the firefighting response of September 11 occurring behind the dirt mound. In the second photo, taken ostensibly of promotional event, no dirt berm in place, although an erosion-control barrier has been installed, one may assume in anticipation of erection. Since the Pentagon is still whole, the picture must predate 9-11.


The pictures are deceptive, because of the unnaturally high vantage point both were taken from, it appears the Pentagon is visible in either, carrying a false implication the Pentagon was visible behind the dirt mound to anyone standing in the parking lot, where it would have been entirely obscured. Might not that have been the intent of staging a pre-dated event, complete with official press releases, the record to serve as back story, confounding analysis of the body of material surrounding 9-11?

The following satellite image, taken in the immediate aftermath of 9-11, has color notations illustrating the two-plane theory, in which a commercial jetliner overflew the Pentagon, while a missile or drone attacked from a slightly different angle.

Several buff colored earthworks are apparent, the most notable lies under the purple "Light Pole" path, extending from the elevated I-395 highway along the front of the Citgo gas station for several hundred feet. A smaller mound lies at the resumption of the green "Eyewitness" path, near the Route 27 cloverleaf interchange. It figures in a great many misleading shots taken on September 11.

A mound of earth behind the Citgo blocked higher views from the parking lot of the Navy Annex. A fourth earthwork was constructed north of the Pentagon, and can be seen in several shots.

But many other members of the Fourth Estate, including all of those on the scene in the earliest hours who produced the entirety of the meaningful public record, were clearly co-conspirators to a covert false flag operation, undertaken by agents of an international military industrial complex, to motivate, and galvanize, the American body politic into a endless future of war.

This aerial view shows the relationship of the Pentagon to the runways at Reagan National Airport and it shows how easily a second aircraft could have overflown the Pentagon and safely landed.

It is from a fascinating Russian-language website of a flight enthusiast nicknamed “Hectop,” http://www.maxho.com and apparently, it constitutes one-of-a-kind documentation, leading me wonder if such information wasn't meant to remain classified. Dated 8/25/2001, just 17 days before 9-11, we must question the coincidence as possible disinformation. I think not. Labeled "Commercial Rating Cross Country Trip/Pentagon,” the image emerges from a likely context of several dozen similar images taken on a sequenced, progressive itinerary that includes a very closeup aerial view of the post 9-11 devastation in lower Manhattan! These images' folder is just one element among many files, the various postings and musings reflecting a distinct, if unknown, Cyrillic personality. The contrast in authenticity couldn't be more startling, than with the contrived website of Steve Riskus, the putative source of officially "released" photographs.

I wonder what that might be. Checking out the higher resolution photo here, can anyone get a clear determination, one way or another, if wire spools are “left-over” near the site?Moreover, has anyone questioned the legitimacy of propane and diesel fuel storage tanks being exposed in such a location? Even if only temporary, as part of a construction project, a diesel generator seems anachronistic here on many levels--useful as a smudge pot perhaps, it did that quite well--but useless and contraindicated. That is, if a permanent and manned firefighting substation be part of a standard air-safety procedure protecting a heliport that receives frequent presidential visits along with other high-level utilization, to also place exposed combustibles there as well be considered unwise.

The southern edge of the mound can be seen in this photograph in which Pentagon employees are inexplicably shown going onto I-395, as reported, to walk home.

...although there was no reason they couldn't drive their home in their cars.The earthwork barricade petered out near a grove of trees......where press conferences were held in the shade. This picture has been taken at an unnatural height and angle and it is doubtful the Pentagon is in the sight line of an average-height person here.

In my opinion, the following photograph was created with the intent to deceive. These bored seeming cameramen are perched on top of a news van--a rolled-up awning is visible at the edge, by their feet. The featured man looks at first glance to be leaning on a crutch, he appears to be standing on asphalt by inference. The distance between the van and the black plastic is foreshortened, and with tight cropping the Pentagon would seem to appear visible at ground level.
The following two aerial images show another mound of earth beside a cloverleaf interchange of Route 27. It lies in a direct sight line between the impact zone and Columbia Pike, also blocking the view from Navy Annex parking along Southgate Road.


You can get a better understanding of the lay of the land with the Google Earth overview below. The imagery shows a nearly completed restoration of the Pentagon, with the earth berms removed, but their vestigial traces can still be seen. (Correction: The berm is in place but the grass atop is dying of thirst.)
This mound is featured in several photographs taken at the Pentagon on September 11. Exactly why it was introduced as a visual element escapes me, because once you understand its location relative to its surroundings, photographs like the following become ridiculous. Why did this service member go up the hill in the first place? And since the piles were not the result of construction, why is the trailer and debris there?


Other images that present the mound are so pointless and inane, they should have raised red flags.


Some photos contain enough detail to deconstruct them, thereby revealing a disconnect with objective reality and lack of basic commonsense. They become clues to the larger truth: That this was a staged, fabricated event, a manipulated media circus from start to finish.


For instance, in the images above and below, these medical personel are walking in on the off ramp of southbound Route 27, also known as Washington Blvd, the road which parallels the impact zone. They will have to walk over a thousand feet to get to the triage area, which is a feature in many shots.


But they will have to cross over two wide concrete barriers, and two additional metal Jersey barriers, to get to the wounded at a triage location that only made sense as a public relations setup, with the background of a burning Pentagon to frame the scene.


Why didn't they just drive? We see scores of extra and unneccesary ambulances and medical helicopter transports. Multiple sources report there were only 40-50 Pentagon victims hospitalized, and according to The Washington Times there were only seven serious burn victims. That makes the visual record of a medical overresponse so excessive as to be damning. In countless images the responders simply stand around looking bored, their casual pose and lack of focus detracting from the intended dramatic effect.


Another dirt mound was created behind the Citgo, higher up on the hill. It did a good job of blocking the view from the entrance to the Navy Annex parking lot.
Another mound was constructed north of the North Pentagon parking lot. The following two shots were taken from Lady Bird Johnson Memorial Park. Several buildings accessed from the North parking lot were screened in this way.





It is scary to contemplate how the news media could have been manipulated as they were.


It was obvious they were meant to stay behind the wall.



Maybe you needed special permission for a look.


These cameramen have to crane their lens for a look over their shoulders.


They were sandwiched at the short end of the Citgo canape, with Interstate 395 in the background.


The most consistent element throughout the entire body of Pentagon 9-11 photographs is the distortion in our perception of the field of depth, the product of using special wide angle and telephoto lens, the only intent of which is to confuse our witness. These cameramen were perhaps legitimate, but kept back a great distance.


The most dominant characteristic is the homogeneity and repetition, the lack of individualized effort, artistic vision, authorial voice, within the work product, indistinguishable between professional or amateur, with only the minimum quantity of information making its way to us in every case, and rarely emotion of any kind reflecting off these beings.


Maybe it's because the real journalists were getting manhandled:
Q: Around that side of the building where the fire is and where the fire fighting's going on, I would appreciate it if you could intercede on behalf of the FBI to make sure reporters are allowed into a certain area there and allowed access in there so -- and not being threatened or, in fact, handcuffed and dragged away, that reporters do have an area close to the action where they won't necessarily interfere with things. But I -- would you --


Clarke: Absolutely. You know, as I tried to say at the beginning of this, we understand and appreciate what you're trying to do. Understand and appreciate just how difficult this all is. You know, Pam, as you said, this has never happened before. People are dealing with it remarkably, and we are going to make every effort we can to provide that kind of support, that kind of news and information to you, as we can. So we will work on that.


Q: The only reason I say that is the FBI was just -- granted they have a job to do, but they were a bit overzealous yesterday I think, and -- and just --


Clarke: Let me push back on you a little bit. The FBI is doing a phenomenal job. And they have an extraordinary task on their hands, both here and elsewhere. And we, I think, surprised them a little bit, saying hey, here we come, and we didn't give them much advance notice. But going forward -- and, you know, as you get into day two of this, we can start to put a lot more of those processes in place. So, heard and understood.
Department of Defense News Briefing--Victoria Clarke, Presenter
September 12, 2001 Torrie


An artificial reality can only look artificial.


Is this the Brave New World of the Neo-cons?
Can real people look and see and stop it?


Temporary Mounds Bar Theory Updated November 15


Concerning the earlier of two photographs of the Citgo gas station that lies between the Pentagon and the Navy Annex, which together constitute the nut of my Mounds-Bar theory, wherein the erection of temporary dirt berms that served to block views of the airplane strike impact zone on the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001, is given its context and identification in a United States Department of Defense News Release here,, while the picture itself, in an uncropped, high-resolution, government-bandwidth version, here.


A writer for the American Forces Information Services, Jim Garamone, wrote an article for the DefenseLink News Alternative Fuels Help ‘Green’ the Pentagon, about an event I had the temerity to call a staged public relations happening. It was in fact an official ribbon-cutting ceremony opening the federal government's first multi-alternative fuel service station. In attendance were Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security Sherri W. Goodman; Assistant Secretary of the Navy Robert Pirie; Deputy Secretary of Energy T. J. Glauthier; Executive Director of the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition Phillip Lambert; and President of the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition Richard Kolodziej.


Even with the glamorous star wattage of two civilian alternative-fuels bigwigs I still say feh! The image depicts a contrived, artificial mock event in my opinion, performed by amateur actors under poor direction and little motivation. But why was the event undertaken and the image released?


An important detail to take under consideration is the date, May 1, 2000—significantly earlier then the date of just prior to 9-11, which I hazarded given the presence of a black-plastic erosion control dike in the picture--the first step toward building the earthwork. So if my theory is holds true, that the work was intended to block sightlines of the impact zone from areas which couldn’t be secured by other means, then the staging of this event, and dissemination of photographs recording it, served both to rationalize and alibi the subsequent images sharing the same contrived camera angles and views of the Pentagon building, providing a back story if you will, for the presence of the earthwork.


Jim Garamone is a military writer who also took photographs on 9-11 at the Pentagon, initially up close, and then back from the secured area at the Citgo. The implication of the earlier date is the conspiracy of September 11, which was a false-flag controlled self-wounding meant to galvanize Americans like a “new Pearl Harbor” into starting wars of choice against innocent resource-rich third-world nations, is far vaster than I first imagined. It reveals the enormous power of the “shadow government” at the heart of this undertaking to truly be bipartisan.


Other pieces of the puzzle fall into place under this new paradigm. The TWA Flight 800 disaster for instance, which for many Long Islanders remains a clear case of a military missile strike, regardless of what the FBI or NTSB reported. If true, two possible justifications for the event would be: it was staged to frame and blackmail current navy personnel into later participation in 9-11 (and the direct targeting of Navy war-game operations in the Pentagon signifies Navy involvement, witting or unwitting, and two, contrary to U.S. law, which makes the National Safety and Transportation Bureau the exclusive federal agency to investigate civil airliner crashes, the FBI was interjected as lead investigators of the crash on no legal or logical grounds except perhaps, as now seems probable, as precedent to co-opting the Pentagon disaster investigation.


Would the U.S. government, especially this one, have any compunction about killing hundreds of its citizens preparatory to killing thousands more, as a justification to wrongly kill hundreds of thousands around the world to get what they want? Hardly, in my opinion. It is our failure of imagination that people can stoop so low on a scale so vast, that shields the clandestine from discovery. We don't want to know the truth! It is hard, emotionally devastating work to arrive at this conclusion. Our minds revolt and resist until we’re exhausted. The canard, “the government is so incompetent there’s no way they could keep such a plot a secret,” is itself a dissemination of the big lie. The motto of the NSA is They Served in Silence, and it successfully guided their 38,000 employees, at least until recently, when the extraordinary circumstance of the warrentless wiretapping leak, which is proof the system worked, not the other way around.


Like the drunk who drinks around the clock but nobody realizes he's a drunk until, one day, he sobers up and everybody sees the difference, what makes the attack on the Pentagon so difficult to perceive is the completeness of the moral horror, let alone the enormity. No cameramen were independent of the plot, except perhaps some latecomers who took pointless shots with telescopic lens. Some researchers call the early photographs “pure,” as having come before a media clampdown, which is pure nonsense. The preparation, the execution, the response, and the recording were all micro managed, but poorly, with contempt. It is only by comparing 9-11 to a legitimate air disaster that we gain some insight. In the aftermath of Flight 800 for instance, private researchers were prosecuted for keeping a small fabric swatch of airplane seat upholstery, while at the Pentagon a fiberglass section of plane tail was “donated” to the Smithsonian after it supposedly fell in the open sunroof of a private citizen's automobile, while another fragment was mounted as sculpture for display in the office of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.


Jon Culberson and Charles Burroughs, the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority firefighters who "happened" upon the scene moments after the explosion, happened to take especially inane shots. Never do we see pictures of water or foam aiming at fire.


What once was unthinkable is our new Rosetta stone.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Steve Riskus & Critical Thrash Redux

My backwater blog, which attempts to debunk the evidence for a terrorist attack on the Pentagon on 9-11-01, by pointing out the inconsistencies in the eyewitness accounts, and by critiquing the photographic record from a performance perspective (how better to perceive reality than through bad acting?) generally receives about four hits a day, but it had a whitewater weekend with 45 hits on Saturday, as the Critical Thrash sluice gates opened, apparently at the hand of the risky American himself, the lowercase steve riskus.

Most, if not all, of the traffic was generated by a thread on a message board called the 9-11 pentagon conspiracy, a thread that originated for no especially good reason on November 7, 2005, by a man who substitutes a photo of a gerbil,

(or is it a Guinea pig?) on his profile page instead of using his own handsome face, or that of Richard Gere even. Although he tries to affect the bored detached tones of a dominant top, he winds up sounding more like a naughty bottom trying to get in or out of trouble. Whichever way he goes, he clearly has much too much time on his hands. He starts off by saying,
“After all these years people still track me down to try and argue with me about what happened. I figured i would make this thread and just post some of the shit I get from people. Thankfully I rarely get anything these days.”
But eleven months later, on October 28th, 2006, he posts a link to my blog about his thrash saying, “this shit is never going to end. I can only hope people don’t continue to point this crap out to me.”

Just for the record--I didn’t track him down, don't care to give him any shit, and I don’t want to argue with him.

In fact, I have to question why he would aid and abet me by promoting my point of view through linking his network to me, unless of course, this board is really a coded method of communicating with others, kind of like a secret handshake, or something.

But my real opinion is all this senseless effort goes only toward building some kind of record of credibility and authenticity for a person who likely doesn’t even exist, except that is, as a tax-funded Department of Homeland Security committee project. That would explain both the utter pointlessness and inanity of what passes for dialectics here, and the lack of personality differentiation between say,

jackthedripper


and bitchy michelle

although tryviolenceis not without interest....


(but if he changed his name to tryjustice he’d be even more handsome,)

while battlechrist is my kind of dish, (braised butch bottom,) or maybe I just love his name.


Getting back to business:



Here is the entire exchange on the thread as it pertains to me:

riskus posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 5:54:27

this shit is never going to end। I can only hope people dont continue to point this crap out to me

http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2006/10/steve-riskus-and-critical-thrash-is.html

bitchy michelle posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 5:56:31 pm

you are a very patient man.


riskus posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 5:56:45 pm

but really im not

xjacktarx posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 6:03:48

That guy says you waited months to make those photos public, but didn’t you post them on pr.n or pf.c or whatever it was on the actual day of the attacks?

roxy posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 6:04:54

yeah you have an entire board of people who are witnesses to your witnessing।

bitchy michelle posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 6:07:21 pm

i would’ve changed screenames, email addresses, the whole nine yards...let alone just blantantly ignoring questions. you answer them all

tryviolence posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 6:12:39 pm

yes

Moreover, team8plus a specialized 9-11 research group, reported that Steve Riskus had only established his avant guard web site devoted ostensibly to his abiding passion of skateboarding, one day previous to 9-11, on September 10, 2001, (Unfortunately, I haven’t confirmed this yet। I can’t, access to Team8’s website at the moment, or make the hyperlinks work—a temporarily problem I hope, but some dirty tricks being played, I well imagine by the tens of thousands of US Government employees who have too much time on their hands and should get real jobs—and yes, team8’s work is THAT good, it’s deserving of sabotage!
(Confirmed, in any case.)


BethX posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 6:31:16 pm

My now ex-gf is still convinced a missle hit the Pentagon। sigh

Jackthedripper posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 6:33:49 pm

Riskus, just agree with them and make shit up. get real creative. tell them you are a heavy drug user, or that they injected you in the balls with some neurotoxin that fucked you up real bad,Tell them the men in black put a hood over your head and beat you, they will leave you alone, or even idolize you if you give’em what they want to I don’t know if this has been brought up or not, so if it has, sorry.

wes posted this on October 28th, 2006 @ 8:20:01 pm

You should just say fuck it and start posting information about being a government agent for Israel and that the explosions were to generate angry from the US to attack every arab state.

fivestring posted this on October 29th,2006 @ 1:20:30 am

“of indeterminate age”

heh

O.K. Apparently some of these people are real and this is actual discourse.

To xjacktarx, if I got my facts wrong about when riskus posted the Pentagon pictures, do you really think it helps matters by affirming he posted them on September 11 on a different forum? Why did he do that and why exactly do you care? For a dude who posts things like, What the fuck: I seriously have a canker on my tonsil. and It's twenty to three am and I'm going out for ice cream is politics, international relations, or law enforcement really your thing?

Likewise, roxy—-what’s in it for you? “Witnesses to your witnessing?” I'm sure Google cached the page, you're not really needed. You sound paid.

To bitchy michelle—I make use of my real name and contact information because it establishes my credibility (Family motto: Frequently wrong, but never in doubt.) and it sends a signal of my fearlessness. Got it? So you can hide behind whatever screen name you want, although I think thewholenineyards would probably fit you to a tee.

To tryviolence—you quote at length my report of interference when as I accessed a terrific web site, team8plus, I entered a password only to see my screen flash blank. I can only infer you do this for billing purposes, but thanks for helping to get the word out. Meanwhile, I can go to the library, and you can fuck Ashcroft. (P.S. You might care to realize the signal your choice of screenname sends out is unhealthy. Why not try lostthewar instead?)

To BethX—is that supposed to provide a little verisimilitude? *sospero* Lez action makes my eyes glaze over.

To both wes and jackthedripper—you just make yourselves sound ridiculous when you go off topic and start in on the Jewish stuff or the UFO/conspiracy garbage. It’s tired. It’s unwholesome. Israel is not the 51st state of the union, which you should love or leave. The real world left you behind a long time ago. (P.S. Jack, try a little penicillin dude.)

To fivestring—-I didn’t mean “of indeterminate age” as an insult, if “heh” was your way of communicating you’re offended. I don’t pass judgment on any of your cultural trappings. I love diversity. By the way, who’s your friend?

Father Steven McGraw and Lloyd England have both come forward publicly, even been interviewed for the new edition of Loose Change, albeit they’re rather vague about the details these days. Steve Riskus, whoever he may be, needs to come out now too. I’m glad to have at least made contact with the e-version, as a beginning.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Daryl Donley: A Fireball Glissando

In the September 2002, Library of Congress Information Bulletin, Vol 61, No. 9, in a section, The Power of the Image, is an article, On the Scene of Catastrophe: Photojournalists Bring Images of Terror to Life, by Carol Johnson, about a panel of photographers, included one amateur and four professionals, who took images of 9-11. Daryl Donley, the amateur, a Falls Church, Va., resident, captured the Pentagon in flames while on his way to work in Washington, D.C.

In a panel discussion, Donley was asked how he brought his work to the media's attention. Donley said he contacted a friend who works for Gannett who in turn introduced him to Life's photo editor, which is how his image of the Pentagon fireball was published as a two-page spread in a memorial book Life published.

But in an interview Donley gave his hometown newspaper The Observer-Reporter only two months earlier, on July 2, 2002, he tells a different story:

Back home, Donley called a friend at Gannett, a company that owns newspapers across the country. He told her his story and that he had taken photos.

"I knew what I shot. There was no mystery. I just wanted to be able to get them out and show people what happened," he said.

Gannett bought his photos and made them available to 100 papers across the country. "I never saw them in print, so I have no idea who used them," he said.

In April, he learned from a reporter that some of his photos were published in Paris Match and in the Daily Mail in London.

"Then this reporter from Paris Match, who was working in New York, tells me she saw one of my pictures in the book. I asked, 'What book?'" Donley said.

Across two pages in "Life's Year in Pictures," published last November, is Donley's picture showing the huge fireball.

Donley is one of the eyewitnesses who attest to actually seeing a 757 fly into the Pentagon (Although, the Library of Congress piece reports only “he heard a low-flying plane and saw it crash into the Pentagon.”

His most widely disseminated report was on CNN: "I could see the windows. I saw the entire plane and then saw it fly right into the Pentagon." (CNN News Lexis-Nexis - Transcript #090803CN.V46)

The LoC article adds to the confusion by captioning this photo:

“Daryl Donley's first photo of the Pentagon in flames was taken through the rear-view mirror of his car.”

Which is impossible to reconcile with their narrative:

“Donley, the assistant director of operations for the National Symphony Orchestra, was the first photographer to show slides of his work. On the morning of September 11, he was driving past the Pentagon on his way to work. He heard a low flying plane and saw it crash into the Pentagon. Once he realized what had happened and regained his composure, Donley remembered that he had his camera with him. His first reaction was that he could not photograph the scene, but then he thought he must. He managed to pull to the side of the highway jammed with rush-hour traffic, stop, get out of his car, and use his camera with a zoom lens to capture the Pentagon in flames, within about three minutes of the attack.”

He would have had to cross over the median raced back through “heavy traffic,” stopped, regained his composure, and then snap the still-mushrooming pyroclastic fireball.

This in fact is Donley’s requiem. He can't hide behind the label of "amateur," when the route his pictures took to get in Life magazine and the collection of the Library of Congress, while bypassing the FBI, is itself newsworthy, especially when real photojournalists were being placed in handcuffs by the FBI when they got too close to the action at the Pentagon on 9-11. (DoD Briefing Q: Around that side of the building where the fire is and where the fire fighting's going on, I would appreciate it if you could intercede on behalf of the FBI to make sure reporters are allowed into a certain area there and allowed access in there so -- and not being threatened or, in fact, handcuffed and dragged away, that reporters do have an area close to the action where they won't necessarily interfere with things)
Two completely different stories, two months apart. You decide. http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=1617

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Daryl Donley's Pentagon Fireballs at the Library of Congress, But No Firebird at the Symphony

With just a tiny bit of digging, the evidence for a 757 American Airlines jetliner’s burrowing sideways into the 1st and 2nd floors of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, crumbles into reality-based dust and blows away in the wind of responsible skepticism.

Take the contribution of Daryl Donley, “a commuter” whose pictures taken in the first minutes after the 9:32 o’clock in the morning “attack” were the first record made by human hand of the fireball aftermath. Alas, unlike the slightly earlier security-camera fireball frames taken from a different angle, Donley’s corpus comes with human baggage, filled with some rather dirty laundry to air.
I first encountered Donley’s four iconic images at the Library of Congress website, which this link will get you to quickest. Being a latecomer to 9-11 studies, the nuances of authenticating the voluminous 9-11-eyewitness record, whether in camera, or as it tripped off tongues and webpages, took me some time—and as we know, timing is everything in life.

But my search didn’t take long--that is, with my beady little eyes already narrowed by prior hours of obsessive scrutiny. Just one article, from Mr. Donley’s hometown newspaper, The Observer-Reporter, of Greene county Pennsylvania, summed up the issues nicely.

It’s dated July 2, 2002, 'Son of Greene Co. man captured indelible moments when hijacked jet hit Pentagon,' by Jon Stevens, and it's well written—at times Donley sounds honest even. Like when he says, "I was looking for the plane. Where is the plane? I thought I saw a plane go into the building. It was gone, completely gone. I was in shock and disbelief."

The article continues, “Donley began shooting and didn't stop until the military police began yelling at him to get in his car and get moving. ‘I was a distraction. They had no idea what had happened and here I was taking photographs. I completely understand why they were yelling,’ he said.” (Aw, sociopathic empathy!)

But then comes the money shot! “Back home, Donley called a friend at Gannett, (oops,) a company that owns newspapers across the country (yes, we know.) He told her his story and that he had taken photos. Gannett bought his photos (how much?) and made them available to 100 papers across the country. ‘I never saw them in print, so I have no idea who used them,’ he said.” (Well actually Daryl, nobody used them. Apparently, Gannett bought and then sat on the biggest 9-11 visual scoop of the nascent century.)

My Algebraic Proof

Google returns 294 hits for “Daryl Donley” in quotation marks. Adding a “+ Pentagon” lowers it to 243. Out of my admittedly rushed search, I found a single newspaper, The Seattle Times, which included just one image, on this page and that was in a fancy special edition, which was produced months afterwards, by which time Donley had begun to become semi-famous.

That occurred because the ever-ready Gannett News Service had used an eyewitness quote of Donley’s, published on September 12, 2001:"’It just was amazingly precise,’ Daryl Donley, a commuter, said of the plane's impact. ‘It completely disappeared into the Pentagon.’"

But that article, U.S. Under Attack, by Larry Wheeler, is so filled with tripe and propaganda, that it's not surprising I find it only turning up once on Google, at the “Gannett Suburban Webpaper, The Journal News,” which serves Westchester, Rockland, and Putnam counties north of New York City. But at least the official record had begun!

Back to the July 2002 hometown puff piece, it continues: “In April, (seven months later,) he learned from a reporter that some of his photos were published in Paris Match and in the Daily Mail in London,” (although my Google search found only one very early critical piece in French, at Idainfos.com dated November 9, 2001)

More puffery: "Then this reporter from Paris Match, who was working in New York, tells me she saw one of my pictures in the book. I asked, 'What book?'" Donley said. “Across two pages in ‘Life's Year in Pictures,’ published last November, is Donley's picture showing the huge fireball.”

Now I can smell big bucks here, so Donley’s story starts to go all fishy. SIPA PRESS markets one of Donley’s images. Even the Library of Congress works to protect his copyright. It's highly unlikely Life used a two-page spread in a commemorative edition without his knowledge.

A final puff-puff from July 2002: “The Library of Congress has five of his pictures in its permanent collection, and some of the photos will be on display on the anniversary this September. No other photos are believed have been taken within the same time frame as Donley's.”

How did Donley’s Pentagon pictures, and his alone I might add, get into the Library of Congress in the first place? Did Donley "have a friend" there? When did he give the FBI the evidence, or did he ever? Donley, who continues in his day job as assistant director of operations for the National Symphony Orchestra in Washington, D.C. makes for a compliant spook--if not a very talented liar. He was well remunerated, I'm sure.

The entirety of Donley’s experience is fabricated, he is a staged stooge, a sell-out, to whom sacred truth was abandoned in favor of a cabal, and given evidence of his guilt, a trial by his peers, and a conviction, he should spend the rest of his life behind bars as a consequence. As for Gannett....

THIS is truth as I see it. Deal, Firebird.

The spooky pointless picture of a smoking man in the median in the mirror. You couldn't get this dumb if you tried.

Monday, October 09, 2006

Is There a Connection Between Ira Rennert & 9/11?


The Buildup

Perhaps. I’ve long wanted to post a report offering a wee soupçon of information—-hearsay actually, but very credible first-person hearsay—-concerning Ira Rennert on the two days preceding September 11, 2001, which potentially may carry some connective meaning, in which case it would constitute my first original contribution to 9/11 studies, every other avenue I’ve set down having already been cleared by earlier (and better) scouts.

But I hesitated because it’s about a sensitive subject. A Jew who is very bad in my opinion. Since the discourse around Jews is so completely unnatural and poisoned, any critical effort I attempted could only serve the one true purpose—that of revealing my inner unexplored loathing of all things Semitic, to the world, if not myself; so I thought, why bother?

But then, when writing up a blog about conservative commentator James S. Robbins, I was struck by a remark he made equating 9/11 skepticism to be on par with “holocaust deniers,” and I decided that the Jew’s sacred wound, was in fact, just a wounded sacred cow, and I thought, “it vouldn’t hurt.”

So for the purposes of what should have been a short little tidbit of a blog, I will separate out the good from the bad—the bad being right-wing warmongering armament-industry profiteers whose true agenda is seeing another $70,000 missile strike another $400 car in Iraq.

Director Stephen Spielberg is good. He only wants abundant sunshine and olive trees on a fecund homeland surrounded by loving neighbors, whether it’s Long Island or Gaza. Spielberg’s film Munich is the most moral film I ever saw, the moral being violence begets violence, and that the victim and the perpetrator are one.

I saw Munich at a winter matinée in East Hampton and I recall women sitting alone in the theater afterward having to collect themselves. I asked a friend who attended New Year’s services last week at the East Hampton synagogue if there was a different tenor in the room this year. He looked startled and abruptly changed the subject.


The Mini-Narrative

Ira Rennert built a notorious mega-mansion on the beach in Sagaponack, in eastern Southampton town. Next door is a public beach known as Peter’s Pond. The two can be said to be at odds.

The previous owner of the 60-acre farm field on which Mr. Rennert chose to build his house, went so far as to lobby town government to close Peter’s Pond Lane, the public access road that led down to the beach. That effort failed but it made the New York Times, along with quotes and a photograph of beach-access advocates, including yours truly—my only such reference in the NYT, still pre-Google.

As Mr. Rennert sculpted his dunes higher, turning a cold stucco shoulder to the outside world, he achieved a stasis with my informant, an off-season beach dog walker (and in-season when she can get away with it) who adamantly claimed Peter’s Pond as her own.

Rennert maintained a major security presence with an obviousness that was new in the Hamptons. Locals could recall the summer when Marvin Davis, the Denver oil billionaire, rented the Henry Ford compound on the ocean just outside Southampton Village and installed ex-LAPD in the dunes, but then the Davis’ had just been car-jacked in the South of France the previous winter, losing not only Mrs. Davis’ bling bling, but their innocence as well.

In addition to the Public Trust doctrine, which makes public any American beach up to the high-water mark, Southamptonites enjoy further access rights on the beach stemming from a 17th-century document called the Dongen patent, which extends the public property to the highest crest of the leeward dunes, so that we may access seaweed and shellfish and such.

It is no easy task asserting a shifting boundary like a windblown crest, and the politics of it were not new to Rennert. He permanently stationed visibly armed guards along the perimeter of his property. Whether intentional or not, in this conflicted context, my informant often felt targeted by the intimidations of Rennert’s personnel, and the games between the (mostly) men, working a light and boring duty, and the (mostly) women, who were long accustomed to asserting their privileges successfully, were long established.

So, dog walking at Peter’s Pond on September 9, 2001 stood out as something memorably different but not really. Rennert’s place that day was a beehive of extra activity, with an atmosphere of overkill, men wearing holstered guns outside their clothing and the cackle of walkie-talkies.

Naturally, my informant personalized these things, assuming somehow it was about the beachgoers, representing some sort of escalation in the Hegelian dialectics, her only context, so she stiffened her spine and gave back grimaces with occasional fierce, pointed stares.

The Crux

The following day was the same, but as she was returning to her car, the scene metastasized into what she describes as like “out of a movie,” as she was terrorized by the sudden advent of three low-flying helicopters, which swooped down and hovered over Rennert’s Fairfields on unknown business. The noise was deafening, definitely not town code, her dogs became hysterical, and it was a test to get to the car, unlock the doors, and escape the bedlam.

In that pre-9/11 consciousness, accustomed she says, to the quick visits of helicopters, even the low-flying private jets who wink goodbye on late Sunday evenings, she could only be outraged at the chutzpa. Immediately, she began to compose a mental letter to the Star.

Of course, all was forgotten the next morning, when a new paradigm took hold. It took a long time before she began to wonder whether there was an association with the events of the following day.

It may very well prove to be evidence of foreknowledge, with extraordinary security or surveillance measures taken just prior to 9/11. I make no claims. And no apologies to Jewish friends.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Steve Riskus and “Critical Thrash.” Yo! Is That an Adverb or an Adjective Dude?

On edit, September 11th, 2008:

This blog was the first of at least 15 I've posted about Mr. Stephen Riskus, and as such, gets an awful lot wrong. I'm leaving it as I wrote it because it displays such charming naiveté. However, it is the number one landing spot for Google searches. If you are a first-time Googler of things Riskus, I direct you to the following list. Mr. Riskus can be a key to understanding the events of 9/11 in Arlington. I've thoughtfully put asterisks beside two especially useful posts. I will assume you are already familiar with the 18 shots which make up the Riskus oeuvre, so I will not replace the missing Flickr images. My entire Flickr account, consisting of a 3000-image 9/11-researcg collection, which I downloaded off the web, was terminated by Yahoo at the request of government law enforcement authorities. We shall have to soldier on.


Steve Riskus and “Critical Thrash”: Is that an Adverb or an Adjective Dude? 10/5/06

*Steve Riskus and Critical Thrash Redux 11/2/06

Steve Riskus Needs a Critical Thrashing 11/14/06

My Solemn Pledge: Absolutely My Final Riff on Steve Riskus 2/8/07

Dude, It’s Only an Adjective! 2/9/07

The BCO Message Board 2/12/07

A List of IP Addresses Referred by BCO Boards 2/12/07

*Steve Riskus Exposed as a Fraud 2/27/07

Steve Riskus’s Pentagon Photographs: View Page Source 5/14/07

The Ever Expanding Oeuvre of Steve Riskus 5/29/07

Pentagon Coverup? 6/14/07

The Vulvet Underground: A List of IP Addresses 8/8/07

Tragdor IP Addresses Revealed! 11/11/07

Bored Cruel C.O. 11/14/07

Judy Wood’s “Nasty Pussy" 11/19/07


It is relatively straightforward to debunk a key group of photographic evidence taken on the morning of September 11, 2001 in front of the Pentagon, by a supposed eyewitness to a 757’s crash. The 12 photographs were taken by an unknown of indeterminate age named Steve Riskus, which he posted online at his own website, criticalthrash

The photographs made a sudden and very late appearance online several months after 9-11, which is a classic red flag in the eyewitness business, where testimonies may not have a sinister intent, as much as having over time, become redacted and re-informed within a fallible human memory. An unstable business, memory, but it needs to be an exact science, since in a nation of laws, people use the law to put other people to death based upon it.



Moreover, team8plus a specialized 9-11 research group, reported that Steve Riskus had only established his avant guard web site, devoted ostensibly to his abiding passion of skateboarding, one day previous to 9-11, on September 10, 2001, (Unfortunately, I haven’t confirmed this yet. I can’t access the Team8’s website at the moment, or make the hyperlinks work—a temporarily problem I hope, but some dirty tricks being played, I well imagine by the tens of thousands of US Government employees who have too much time on their hands and should get real jobs—and yes, team8’s work is THAT good, it’s deserving of sabotage!



Perhaps an explanation for Riskus’s time lag could be that he only roused himself from a deep dope lethargy to deliver the 12 belated images—four of some interest to the survival of the human species, the remaining eight so inane beyond measure as to become Daliesque: of clouds, and school buses, and a bridge overpass, which nearly exactly mimics the behavior and output of the other insider image maker from that morning: Mark Faram. Apparently, both men stopped making historically vital documentary evidence of this singular event in our nation’s history when they counted up to five fingers on one hand, but they then kept snapping away as they rode off into the sunset. (Riskus, with the benefit of time, credibly states that he left the scene out of fear of further attacks. Faram said he moved on to photograph “other things” (earthworm farms, maybe dude?) and had his pictures up on a news wire “by noon.” When did the FBI get them?



The stylistic “authorial voice” discernible in the Riskus’ series is the same standard military issue found on any government website. This anonymous point of view is so technically perfected, captured in a high resolution, that it lands utterly soulless. Perhaps this Generation X hipster lay-about is ex-military, but we wouldn’t know, as his public profile only begins on 9-10, and since then he has been traveling America photographing concrete municipal skate parks (nice work if you can get it.)


That the scenes pictured are staged events is obvious to my critical eye, if not my thrash. One long shot has a tree front and center blocking the action. Another shot is slightly to the left of the tree, a third, slightly to the right of the tree. Riskus travels in and out through the field of depth. (An unnecessary thing, as apparently most cameras had special lens to distort depth perception anyway. Go to Jack White’s 9-11 Photo Studies @ http://www.911studies.com/, to see some really glaring glitches in the corpus. Mr. White is a retired professional in the field of doctored images made for trans-surrealists. He even ascribes motive to these technical errors. Apparently they’re a well-known workplace hazard—secret clues that pass a supervisor’s muster, but signal something is up to others on the outside.)


The money shot though, depicts twelve eyewitnesses, who all could eventually be identified potentially for sworn eyewitness testimony, but haven’t so far, to my knowledge. It is here that the official Bush administration explanation falls apart.

This peopled image is apparently much doctored. People walk on various levels on planes which are impossible to reconcile with one another. One woman may be sitting out her open driver’s side car window, or standing in the same spot, either looks possible. Almost everyone has exited his or her automobile, which are all going in only one direction—away from the District of Columbia. We know from other photographs that the disabled pole-struck taxi, the Catholic priest’s abandoned automobile, and Elgas’ frenzied Dodge Neon Smithsonian shard-receiver are in these other lanes, but nearer the action at the I-395 underpasses. Other photos show lowered lane closure arms, construction barriers and bypasses, and blocked accesses and exits. Was a though review of the roadway done by the Virginia Highway Department?
Penny Elgas hyperventilates a hyperlink:

I didn't know what else to do so I got out of my car and ran back toward the highway yelling "Go Back! They just hit the Pentagon!" But of course, no one could move in any direction because traffic was at a standstill.”
And Gary Bauer, a former Presidential candidate, happened to be driving into Washington, D.C. that morning, to a press conference on Capitol Hill. "I was in a massive traffic jam, hadn't moved more than a hundred yards in twenty minutes. ... I had just passed the closest place the Pentagon is to the exit on 395.”

But it is the wide spacing between the cars present, the absence of cars stuck in traffic going the other way, the spatially off human relationships, and the unbelievably disparate focus of the observers, which shocks my consciousness.

Offhand, I might could make the claim that nobody in New York City is pictured that morning with their hands resting on their hips, or casually thrust in their front pockets. Here in Arlington, all the men are. In New York, if they look away, it is in horror, not the result of insufficient rehearsal and poor direction.


I’ll throw in a longer aside here. The TOTAL 911 INFO site reports on new footage being incorporated into a revision of the documentary, Loose Change, saying we crew "tracked down the cabdriver who was passing by the Pentagon when a light post came crashing through his windshield. This man, an elderly black gentleman who's been driving cabs in DC since 1959, said that a white man in a white van pulled over, helped remove the light post from his windshield, and took off -- WITHOUT EVER SAYING A WORD! The cab driver went on to say that he was very confused because he kept looking for a plane but all he saw at the Pentagon was a small hole and a small fire -- no debris, no engines, no wings, etc.”)

Incidentally, the improbably large number of witnesses who somehow discerned falling light poles as a distinct and separate component of an event, taking place in nano-seconds at 530 miles-per-hour, who would then just happen to specifically mention this talking point in the standard brief interviews and news accounts, will, in our nation of laws, eventually be put to oath.


Coming up next: were Depleted Uranium munitions used at the Pentagon, like they were in Iraq? Rigorous Hazmat cleanup garb in D.C. Not used in New York. Thousands take ill. Stay tuned.