Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
How 9/11 Should Be Remembered
The Extraordinary Achievements of Ordinary People
Eight years ago, 2,600 people lost their lives in Manhattan, and then several million people lost their story. The al-Qaeda attack on the Twin Towers did not defeat New Yorkers. It destroyed the buildings, contaminated the region, killed thousands, and disrupted the global economy, but it most assuredly did not conquer the citizenry. They were only defeated when their resilience was stolen from them by clichés, by the invisibility of what they accomplished that extraordinary morning, and by the very word "terrorism," which suggests that they, or we, were all terrified. The distortion, even obliteration, of what actually happened was a necessary precursor to launching the obscene response that culminated in a war on Iraq, a war we lost (even if some of us don't know that yet), and the loss of civil liberties and democratic principles that went with it.
Only We Can Terrorize Ourselves
For this eighth anniversary of that terrible day, the first post-Bush-era anniversary, let's remember what actually happened:
When the planes became missiles and the towers became torches and then shards and clouds of dust, many were afraid, but few if any panicked, other than the President who was far away from danger. The military failed to respond promptly, even though the Pentagon itself was attacked, and the only direct resistance that day came from inside Flight 93, which went down in a field in Pennsylvania on its way to Washington.
Flights 11 and 175 struck the towers. Hundreds of thousands of people rescued each other and themselves, evacuating the buildings and the area, helped in the first minutes, then hours, by those around them. Both PS 150, an elementary school, and the High School for Leadership and Public Service were successfully evacuated -- without casualties. In many cases, teachers took students home with them.
A spontaneously assembled flotilla of boats, ranging from a yacht appropriated by policemen to a historic fireboat, evacuated 300,000 to 500,000 people from lower Manhattan, a nautical feat on the scale of the British evacuation of an army from Dunkirk in the early days of World War II; the fleet, that is, rescued in a few hours as many people as the British fleet rescued in days (under German fire admittedly, but then New York's ferry operators and pleasure-boat captains were steering into that toxic cloud on a day when many thought more violence was to come).
Adam Mayblum, who walked down from the 87th floor of the north tower with some of his coworkers, wrote on the Internet immediately afterward:
"They failed in terrorizing us. We were calm. If you want to kill us, leave us alone because we will do it by ourselves. If you want to make us stronger, attack and we unite. This is the ultimate failure of terrorism against the United States."
We failed, however, when we let our own government and media do what that small band from the other side of the Earth could not. Some of us failed, that is, for there were many kinds of response, and some became more radical, more committed, more educated. Mark Fichtel, the president of the New York Coffee, Sugar, and Cocoa Exchange, who scraped his knees badly that morning of September 11th when he was knocked over in a fleeing crowd, was helped to his feet by "a little old lady." He nonetheless had his Exchange up and running the next day, and six months later quit his job, began studying Islam, and then teaching about it.
Tom Engelhardt, the editor of this piece, began to circulate emails to counter the crummy post-9/11 media coverage and his no-name informal listserv grew into the website Tomdispatch.com, which has circulated more than 1,000 essays since that day and made it possible for me to become a different kind of writer. Principal Ada Rosario-Dolch, who on the morning of September 11th set aside concern for her sister Wendy Alice Rosario Wakeford (who died in the towers) to evacuate her high school two blocks away, went to Afghanistan in 2004 to dedicate a school in Herat, Afghanistan, that included a garden memorializing Wakeford.
In a Dust Storm of Altruism
Hollywood movies and too many government pandemic plans still presume that most of us are cowards or brutes, that we panic, trample each other, rampage, or freeze helplessly in moments of crisis and chaos. Most of us believe this, even though it is a slander against the species, an obliteration of what actually happens, and a crippling blow to our ability to prepare for disasters.
Hollywood likes this view because it paves the way for movies starring Will Smith and hordes of stampeding, screaming extras. Without stupid, helpless people to save, heroes become unnecessary. Or rather, without them, it turns out that we are all heroes, even if distinctly unstereotypical ones like that elderly woman who got Fichtel back on his feet. Governments like the grim view for a similar reason: it justifies their existence as repressive, controlling, hostile forces, rather than collaborators with brave and powerful citizenries.
Far
more people could have died on September 11th if New Yorkers had not
remained calm, had not helped each other out of the endangered
buildings and the devastated area, had not reached out to pull people
from the collapsing buildings and the dust cloud. The population of the
towers was lower than usual that morning, because it was an election
day and many were voting before heading to work; it seems emblematic
that so many were spared because they were exercising their democratic
powers. Others exercised their empathy and altruism. In the evacuation
of the towers, John Abruzzo, a paraplegic accountant, was carried down
69 flights of stairs by his coworkers.
Here's how John Guilfoy, a young man who'd been a college athlete, recalled the 9/11 moment:
"I remember looking back as I started running, and the thickest smoke was right where it was, you know, a few blocks away, and thinking that, like, whoever's going to be in that is just going to die. There's no way you could -- you're going to suffocate, and it was coming at us. I remember just running, people screaming. I was somewhat calm, and I was little bit faster than my colleagues, so I had to stop and slow up a little bit and wait for them to make sure we didn't lose each other."
Had he been in a disaster movie, he would have been struggling in some selfish, social-darwinist way to survive at others' expense, or he would simply have panicked, as we are all supposed to do in disaster. In the reality of September 11th, in a moment of supreme danger, he slowed down out of solidarity.
Many New Yorkers that day committed similar feats of solidarity at great risk. In fact, in all the hundreds of oral histories I read and the many interviews I conducted to research my book, A Paradise Built in Hell, I could find no one saying he or she was abandoned or attacked in that great exodus. People were frightened and moving fast, but not in a panic. Careful research has led disaster sociologists to the discovery -- one of their many counter-stereotypical conclusions -- that panic is a vanishingly rare phenomenon in disasters, part of an elaborate mythology of our weakness.
A young man from Pakistan, Usman Farman, told of how he fell down and a Hasidic Jewish man stopped, looked at his pendant's Arabic inscription and then, "with a deep Brooklyn accent he said 'Brother if you don't mind, there is a cloud of glass coming at us. Grab my hand, let's get the hell out of here.' He was the last person I would ever have thought to help me. If it weren't for him I probably would have been engulfed in shattered glass and debris." A blind newspaper vendor was walked to safety by two women, and a third escorted her to her home in the Bronx.
Errol Anderson, a recruiter with the fire department, was caught outside in that dust storm.
"For a couple of minutes I heard nothing. I thought I was either dead and was in another world, or I was the only one alive. I became nervous and panicky, not knowing what to do, because I couldn't see... About four or five minutes later, while I was still trying to find my way around, I heard the voice of a young lady. She was crying and saying, 'Please, Lord, don't let me die. Don't let me die.' I was so happy to hear this lady's voice. I said, 'Keep talking, keep talking, I'm a firefighter, I'll find you by the response of where you are.' Eventually we met up with each other and basically we ran into each other's arms without even knowing it."
She held onto his belt and eventually several other people joined them to form a human chain. He helped get them to the Brooklyn Bridge before returning to the site of the collapsed buildings. That bridge became a pedestrian escape route for tens of thousands. For hours, a river of people poured across it. On the far side, Hasidic Jews handed out bottles of water to the refugees. Hordes of volunteers from the region, and within days the nation, converged on lower Manhattan, offering to weld, dig, nurse, cook, clean, hear confessions, listen -- and did all of those things.
New Yorkers triumphed on that day eight years ago. They triumphed in calm, in strength, in generosity, in improvisation, in kindness. Nor was this something specific to that time or place: San Franciscans during the great earthquake of 1906, Londoners during the Blitz in World War II, the great majority of New Orleanians after Hurricane Katrina hit, in fact most people in most disasters in most places have behaved with just this sort of grace and dignity.
It Could Have Been Different
Imagine what else could have sprung from that morning eight years ago. Imagine if the collapse of those towers had not been followed by such a blast of stereotypes, lies, distortions, and fear propaganda that served the agenda of the Bush administration while harming the rest of us -- Americans, Iraqis, Afghans, and so many others, for people from 90 nations died in the attacks that day and probably those from many more nations survived at what came to be called Ground Zero.
Not long ago I talked to Roberto Sifuentes, a Chicano performance artist who was then living in New York. Like many New Yorkers, he still marvels at that brief, almost utopian moment of opening in the midst of tragedy, when everyone wanted to talk about meaning, about foreign policy, about history, and did so in public with strangers. It was a moment of passionate engagement with the biggest questions and with one another. On a few occasions, Sifuentes was threatened and nearly attacked for having approximately the same skin tone as an Arab, but he was also moved by the tremendous opening of that moment, the great public dialogue that had begun, and he took part in it with joy.
In five years of investigation and in my own encounter with the San Francisco Bay Area's Loma Prieta earthquake 20 years ago, I've found that disasters are often moments of strange joy. My friend Kate Joyce, then a 19-year-old living in New Mexico, had landed in New York on the very morning of September 11, 2001, and spent the next several days in Union Square, the park-like plaza at 14th Street that became a regular gathering point.
She relished the astonishing forum that Union Square became in those days when we had a more perfect union: "We spoke passionately of the contemporary and historical conflicts, contradictions and connections affecting our lives," she wrote me later. "We stayed for hours, through the night, and into the week riveted and expressive, in mourning and humbled, and in the ecstasy of a transformative present." Such conversations took place everywhere.
We had that more perfect union, and then we let them steal it.
Perhaps Barack Obama, the candidate who delivered that address on race, pain, and nuance entitled "A More Perfect Union" some 18 months ago, could have catalyzed us to remain open-minded in the face of horror, to rethink our foreign policy, to try to grasp the real nature of the attack by that small band which was so obviously not an act of war, and to make of it an opportunity to change, profoundly. Such a response would have had to recognize that many were killed or widowed or orphaned on that September 11th , but none were defeated. Not that day. It would have had to recognize that such events are immeasurably terrible, but neither so rare as we Americans like to imagine, nor insurmountable. (Since 9/11, far more have been killed in the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the 2005 Pakistan earthquake, the 2008 Burma typhoon, and of course the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Congo, among other events. More in this country have, in fact, died of domestic violence since that day.)
Obama, the candidate, might have been capable of that; of President Obama I'm not so sure. He has, after all, expanded the war in Afghanistan that was the first monstrous outcome of that day in New York. But he's had his moments, too, and it may be that another set of disasters -- the social disasters of racism, poverty, and government failure laid bare during and after Hurricane Katrina -- helped make it possible for him to become our president.
After the 9/11 storm struck, the affected civilians in New York were seen as victims; after Katrina, those in New Orleans were portrayed as brutes. In both cities, the great majority of affected people were actually neither helpless nor savage; they were something else -- they were citizens, if by that word we mean civic engagement rather than citizenship status. In both places ordinary people were extraordinarily resourceful, generous, and kind, as were some police officers, firefighters, rescue workers, and a very few politicians. In both cases, the majority of politicians led us astray. All I would have wanted in that September moment, though, was politicians who stayed out of the way, and people who were more suspicious of the news and the newsmakers.
The media, too, stepped between us and the event, failing us with their stock of clichés about war and heroes, their ready adoption of the delusional notion of a "war on terror," their refusal to challenge the administration as it claimed that somehow the Saudi-spawned, fundamentalist al-Qaeda was linked to the secularist Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein and that we should fear mythical Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction." Rarely did they mention that we had, in fact, been bombing Iraq without interruption since 1991.
After 9/11, it could all have been different, profoundly different. And if it had, there would have been no children imprisoned without charges or release dates in our gulag in Cuba; there would have been no unmanned drones slaughtering wedding parties in the rural backlands of Afghanistan or the Iraqi desert; there would have been no soldiers returning to the U.S. with two or three limbs missing or their heads and minds grievously damaged (there were already 320,000 traumatic brain injuries to soldiers deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan by early 2008, according to the RAND Corporation); there would not have been a next round of American deaths -- 4,334 in Iraq, 786 in Afghanistan to date; there would have been no trillion dollars taken from constructive projects to fatten the corporations of war; no extreme corrosion of the Bill of Rights, no usurpation of powers by the executive branch. Perhaps.
We Are the Monument
It could all have been different. It's too late now, but not too late, never too late, to change how we remember and commemorate this event and that other great landmark of the Bush era, Hurricane Katrina, and so prepare for disasters to come.
For the 99 years before that hurricane hit the Gulf Coast on August 29, 2005, the biggest urban disaster in American history was in my city, San Francisco. Half the city, including more than 28,000 buildings, was destroyed, and about 3,000 people probably died. The earthquake early on the morning of April 18, 1906, did a lot of damage, but the fires did more. Some were started by collapsed buildings and broken gas mains, others by the army troops who streamed in from the Presidio at the northern tip of the city and ineptly built firebreaks that instead actually spread the fires.
The presiding officer, Brigadier General Frederick Funston, presumed that the public would immediately revert to chaos and that his task was restoring order. In the first days after the disaster, the truth was more or less the other way around, as the Army and the National Guard prevented citizens from fighting the fires and collecting their property, shot people as looters (including rescuers and bystanders), and generally regarded the public as the enemy (as did some of the officials presiding over the post-Katrina "rescue"). As with many disasters, a calamity that came from outside was magnified by elite fears and institutional failures within. Still, on their own, San Franciscans organized themselves remarkably, fought fires when they could, created a plethora of community kitchens, helped reconnect separated families, and began to rebuild.
Every year we still celebrate the anniversary of the earthquake at Lotta's Fountain, which, like Union Square after 9/11, became a meeting place for San Franciscans in the largely ruined downtown. That gathering brings hundreds of people together before dawn to sing the silly song "San Francisco," get free whistles from the Red Cross, and pay homage to the dwindling group of survivors. (Two, who'd been babies in 1906, arrived this year in the backseat of a magnificent 1931 Lincoln touring car.)
Some of us then go on to the fire hydrant at 20th and Church that saved the Mission District, the hydrant that miraculously had water when most of the water mains were broken and the men who had already been fighting the fire by hand for days were exhausted beyond belief. The oldest person at the gathering always begins an annual repainting of the hydrant with a can of gold spray paint, and then some kids get to wield the spray can.
San Francisco now uses the anniversary to put out the message that we should be prepared for the next disaster -- not the version the Department of Homeland Security spread in the years after 9/11 with the notion that preparation consists of fear, duct tape, deference, and more fear, but practical stuff about supplies and strategies. My city even trains anyone who wants to become a certified NERT -- for the nerdy-sounding Neighborhood Emergency Response Team -- member, and about 17,000 of us are badge-carrying, hard-hat owning NERT members (including me).
Every city that has had, or will have, a disaster should have such a carnival of remembrance and preparation. For one thing, it commemorates all the ways that San Franciscans were not defeated and are not helpless; for another, it reminds us that, in disaster, we are often at our best, however briefly, that in those hours and days many have their best taste of community, purposefulness, and power. (Reason enough for many of those who are supposed to be in charge to shudder.) For the fourth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, New Orleanians were invited to ring bells, lay wreaths, pray, encircle the Superdome, that miserable shelter of last resort for those stranded in the hurricane and flood, and of course listen to music and dance in the streets to second-line parades, but also to keep volunteering and rebuilding. (Perhaps the most overlooked aspect of that disaster is the vast army of citizen-volunteers who came to the city's aid, when the government didn't, and are still doing so.)
New York has its pillars of light and readings of names for the anniversary of 9/11, but it seems to lack any invitation to the citizenry to feel its own power and prepare for the next calamity. For there will be next times for San Francisco, New York, New Orleans, and possibly -- in this era of extreme and turbulent weather, and economic upheaval -- a great many other cities and towns in this country and elsewhere.
That hydrant on a quiet residential corner of San Francisco is about the only monument to the 1906 earthquake and fire. The rebuilt city, the eventual rise of disaster preparedness, the people who go on with their everyday lives -- these are the monument San Francisco needed and every city needs to transcend its calamities. New Yorkers could gather in Union Square and elsewhere to remember what happened, really remember, remember that the heroes weren't necessarily men, or in uniform, but were almost everyone everywhere that day.
They could open their hearts and minds to discuss mourning, joy, death, violence, power, weakness, truth and lies, as they did that week. They could consider what constitutes safety and security, what else this country could be, and what its foreign and energy policies have to do with these things. They could walk the streets together to demonstrate that New York is still a great city, whose people were not frightened into going into hiding or flight from public and urban life. They could more consciously and ceremoniously do what New Yorkers, perhaps best of all Americans, do every day: coexist boldly and openly in a great mixture of colors, nationalities, classes, and opinions, daring to speak to strangers and to live in public.
The dead must be remembered, but the living are the monument, the living who coexist in peace in ordinary times and who save one another in extraordinary times. Civil society triumphed that morning in full glory. Look at it: remember that this is who we were and can be.



203 Comments so far
Show AllNYC: two planes, three buildings.
NYC: no planes - seven towers
wtc 1,2,3,4,5,6, and 7
smallest skyscraper at wtc 15 stories, largest 110
building 7 - 45 stories
no plane in pennsyvania (just ask anyone who was on site that day)
pentagon - 15 foot wide hole through which the boeing fits then totally disintegrates - sure...
all three sites: planes "completely disintegrate"
one day three aviation firsts
war on terror: priceless
Did people on the ground see holographic projections? What happened to the real flights and pasengers?
And yes, airliners hitting the ground at high speed do indeed completely disintegrate into small pieces.
Keeping the comment utility disabled may have been a good idea.
you ask: What happened to the real flights and pasengers?
its a good question - ask cheney
that they are dead i have no doubt
as a side note: ted olsen - solicitor general from '01 to '04 says his wife called him twice on her cell (the first story said her cell the second said the plane phone) from one of the flights - those calls set up the psyop about the arab boys and the boxcutters
"The little white lie was about Barbara Olson, a conservative commentator for CNN and wife of US Solicitor General Ted Olson. Now deceased, Mrs Olson is alleged to have twice called her husband from an American Airlines Flight 77 seat-telephone, before the aircraft slammed into the Pentagon. This unsubstantiated claim, reported by CNN remarkably quickly at 2.06 am EDT [0606 GMT] on September 12, was the solitary foundation on which the spurious “Hijacker” story was built.
Without the “eminent” Barbara Olson and her alleged emotional telephone calls, there would never be any proof that humans played a role in the hijack and destruction of the four aircraft that day. Lookalike claims surfaced several days later on September 16 about passenger Todd Beamer and others, but it is critically important to remember here that the Barbara Olson story was the only one on September 11 and. 12. It was beyond question the artificial “seed” that started the media snowball rolling down the hill."
the fbi now concedes those calls "did not take place"
lastly, ted olsen was bush's lead lawyer who successfully argued at the supreme court that the florida recount should be stopped and the presidency awarded to bush by decree. we all know where that one went...
There were two E-10 MC2A's used in New York. If you watch...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2329092821935314404&ei=NaOqSpvVPIHEqAP4qJWWAw&q=911+in+plane+sight#
... you will see the equipment bulge of the E-10 in the film and photographs of the NY incident.
Reference - http://www.airforceworld.com/others/eng/mc2a.htm
Two Global Hawks were used in Pennsylvania and DC. No, 200,000 pound (90,000 kg) jetliners don't disintegrate into small peices with NO trace of bodies, luggage, seating, engines... metal does not evaporate. Jetliner crashes are routinely reconstructed in hangars with the actual plane fragments.
Please also see...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871&ei=LKCqStKVI4u2qAPJrJWaAw&q=911+mysteries+demolitions#
... for information about controlled demolition, and true laws of physics and chemistry as they pertain to fire, gravity, and structure.
There is only one conclusion one can come to, if you are not a paid shill. If you are such, then you know already anyway.
-t.
tobiasaurusrex: for the non-military among us may i add to your post:
E-10 MC2A: The Northrop Grumman E-10 MC2A was planned as a multi-role military aircraft to replace the Boeing 707 based E-3 Sentry, E-8 Joint STARS, and RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft in US service. It was based on the 767-400ER commercial airplane.
Global Hawk: The Northrop Grumman (formerly Ryan Aeronautical) RQ-4 Global Hawk (known as Tier II+ during development) is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) used by the United States Air Force as a surveillance aircraft.
let me clarify the no planes theory - this theory doesn't contend there were no planes in the air that day in nyc - rather that no planes hit the towers thereby commencing the, as you say, physics defying dustification of not only the twin towers but all seven of the skyscrapers at wtc
its a good post
Thank you for your opinions. What states do you have a PE license to practice structural engineering? I’m licensed in Pennsylvania and Virginia, an the building collapses sure look like structural failures, caused by the airliner impacts and fire, to me...
Some good folks in Seattle are showing a film tonight, i hope to be in attendance:
Friday, September 11, 2009, 7:00 to 9:30 PM
Film: “HEROES FRAGILES” …CHILE’S 9/11 (87 min, Emilio Pacull, 2007) with special guests, COMITÉ DE JUSTICIA Y SOLIDARIDAD EN CHILE
Through historic footage and amazingly candid modern day interviews with principals on both sides of the issue at the time, HEROES FRAGILES presents the events of the Chilean Military Coup d’état that removed democratically elected Socialist President Salvador Allende on September 11, 1973, and installed dictator Augusto Pinochet. The event is a classic illustration of the extreme difficulty of maintaining a democratic system in the face of wealthy and powerful forces exerting influence on military and media.
The Chilean Coup was also an iconic expose of US foreign policy-driven covert intervention that resulted in the destruction of a fledgling democracy, and how motivations behind that policy were a mix of the fear of Communist expansion and the promotion of US corporate interests in the third world.
Please join us following the film for a facilitated community discussion with The Seattle Committee of Solidarity and Justice in Chile, a group of Chilean individuals that came to the U.S. as political exiles in the late 70's. Their main goal now is to inform, educate, and create awareness among the community, and assure that people's rights are respected.
An excellent article.
Remember also that on several occasions prior to 9/11 members of the Bush administration took actions to protect themselves from a terrorist attack using hijacked airliners. For the first time ever at a "G" summit American anti-aircraft missiles were deployed to the G-8 summit in Genoa Italy in July 2001, President Bush spent at least one night of the Summit aboard an American aircraft carrier surrounded by its attack group (the strongest anti-aircraft defense system currently operating on planet Earth) and Attorney General John Ashcroft stopped flying on commercial airliners at the end of July 2001 due to "an unspecified security threat.
On the afternoon of 9/11/2001 President Bush and members of his cabinet started taking the antibiotic Cipro, used to prevent anthrax, a full three weeks in advance of public knowledge of the anthrax terrorist attacks.
The response of the top echelon of the Bush administration that day was universally horrible. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was on the lawn of the Pentagon pretending he was an EMT instead of directing a response to the attacks, President Bush was flying around the country like a fart in a whirlwind, and Dick Cheney’s wife was screwing up communications from “the bunker” while Cheney and Rice were clueless because they had not considered terrorism to be a major threat to the security to the U.S.
Instead of the President or the Sec. of Defense ordering the fleet from Norfolk to sea to provide the skycap for New York and Washington D.C. the Admiral in charge of the fleet ordered it to sea on his own command.
this is a day for respecting the loved ones and the victims of 9/11, all of them.
its hateful legacy of war and death i truly believe represents not only the lowest political ebb of this nation but also shows us the hand of the "secret government" (not so secret anymore - the secret government or more accurately the true governing body of the republic is a combo of wall street and the corporations who enjoy the swinging door from wall street to the white house and from the cia to the chair of the sec)at work.
9/11 is a classic example of the lowest of all political charades - a false flag event - a government's attack, for political purposes, against its own people.
the notion is, itself, repugnant to any decent person but i think we can all agree that we have, in this country, a vast supply of indecent politicians. that's a no-brainer. i would challenge anyone to show me an honest senator or congressman. they are for sale and we all know it, we see it every time the corporations want a favor or, as in the health care debate, they don't want something to take place.
64 years ago we knew the japanese were going to attack pearl harbor, we had broken their communication codes, and the government took the decision to allow that attack to occur. roosevelt, who was elected on an isolationist platform ordered a defensive stand down (not unlike cheney on 9/11):
"I was operating under the direct orders of the President of the United States and was ordered not to give vital intelligence information relating to the whereabouts of the Japanese fleet to our commanders in the field.
We had broken the Japanese code ... We'd been monitoring all their communications for months prior to the attack ... It was a lie that we didn't have direct radio communications with Washington, D.C.
It was at least 48 hours before the attack that I personally received the most tragic message of my life ... which was Top Secret and coded, which my radio operator handed to me. I had the code book and decoded it. The basic text of the message ran: "The Japanese will attack at (the approximate time). Do not prepare retaliatory forces. We need the full support of the American nation in a wartime effort by an unprovoked attack upon the nation in order to obtain a declaration of war."
LTC Clifford M. Andrew, U.S. Army intelligence officer
the infamous gulf of tonkin attack that drew us into the vietnam war is another false flag attack. the government now admits that the "incident" of north vietnamese "small boats" attacking us war ships never occurred. it was a lie.
false flag events happen, more often than we know. hitler used them, stalin used them.
so 9/11 was yet another false flag event that was used as the rationale for the "war on terror" - an abstract war against phantoms that can go on as long the MIC wishes. a warmonger's wet dream.
the absurd notion that 19 saudi boys operating under the control of a guy in a cave in afghanistan who happened to attack the us on the one morning that the air defenses of our country were taking a powder is - well - absurd.
first off, none of those boys can be placed on any of the planes. none of them are on any passenger lists. at the latest count, 8 or 9 of them have declared themselves to be alive - having appeared on the bbc to say that not only did they not commit the offense they are still - well - alive.
the fbi has never updated their wanted lists to include any of the "alive" perpetrators.
the fbi does not think obl committed the attacks of 9/11 because. as they point out, there is NO supporting evidence to that claim. he is on the ten most anted list for attacks during the 90's
if you recall - on 9/10/09, the day bfore 9/11, donld rumsfeld held an unusual press conference durng which he stated that the pentagon could not account for at least 2.3 trillion dollars of its budget funds.
"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions." According to a report by the Inspector General, the Pentagon cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends."
Such a disclosure normally might have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the attack on New York City and Washington in the morning would assure that the story remained buried. To the trillions already missing from the coffers, an obedient Congress terrorized by anthrax attacks would add billions more in appropriations to fight the "War on Terror.
The Comptroller of the Pentagon at the time of the attack was Dov Zakheim, who was appointed in May of 2001. Before becoming the Pentagon's money-manager, he was an executive at System Planning Corporation, a defense contractor specializing in electronic warfare technologies including remote-controlled aircraft systems. Zakheim is a member of the Project for a New American Century and participated in the creation of its 2000 position paper Rebuilding America's Defenses which called for "a New Pearl Harbor."
Great storytelling, Rebecca! I always look forward to reading what you write.
I do think the real story wasn't reported that day. You've chosen to focus on one important element of the 9/11 crisis, the reaction of New Yorkers.
Still, I cannot in good faith take pride in what went on that day, largely because I don't think those responsible have been held accountable.
Bush played on the unification element inherent in the "opportunity" that he and Rice called 9/11 for partisan political purposes. For that reason alone, I don't like the idea of 9/11 used as a unifying event. Instead 9/11 was as cynically manipulated as it was methodically planned and executed.
Nagging questions remain about the event overshadow the stoic reactions of the American public on that day. Can we say without a doubt that no foreign government(s) were involved? Do the months-long fires in the basement jibe with conventional fires?
And even if you bite wholly into the Official Explanation, what about our government's treatment of first responders? The amount of pride and solidarity we may have exhibited will always be overshadowed by the ongoing medical consequences for those who continue to pay a huge price for helping.
Rather than focus on things we are apparently unable to do anything about--like find the perpetuators of the deed--why can't we make sure the sick and injured firemen and other volunteers are taken care of medically? That heartlessness I'm afraid continues to overshadow any positives we might draw from the event.
What actually happened was that the Bush administration permitted an attack on US soil creating the desired "new Pearl Harbor" to support the neo-conservative for war on Iraq as the opening theater for 21st century domination of resources. This attack offered the go-ahead for the first live use of FEMA's secret catastrophe containment program that calls for demolition on demand or in short order known as Godzilla. The program remains in use today and hundreds of landmarks in cities throughout the nation still contain demolition explosives, awaiting only the command to charge and pull should the moment arrive. Thousands of other buildings have already submitted demolition plans and can be fit with demolition charges within a few hours.
The plan was conceived as a result of the Kobe earthquake of January 1995, where whole buildings were thrown intact into city streets and insurance actuaries began to see the potential for destruction in that type of earthquake. Godzilla was the government response to the alarm of the insurance companies wanting to contain claims in a large-scale catastrophe. It became operational January 1, 1997. All affected police and fire stations have a safe where packets of emergency instructions are stored, among which is an envelope to be opened in the event of the invocation of the Godzilla protocol. Revelation of this fact would remove the offending person from eligibility for pension, and perhaps invite prosecution for violation of national security.
In fact if Godzilla were to become public knowledge, it would drive a stake through the heart of capitalism. No one would want to place their business in a landmark property; its value would fall and drag behind it all local property values. Businesses could find no benefit in consolidating operations into a single location, thus taking the steam out of the stock market. On the other hand if the program were discontinued to protect property values, insurance rates would instead treble across the board. The only value in a plan such as Godzilla lies in maintaining its absolute secrecy, however inconvnenient the facts may become.
If there were any basis for this secret Godzilla program of FEMA, there would be mountains of documentation corroborating "hundreds of landmarks in cities throughout the country still contain demolition explosives awaiting only the moment to charge" and "all affected police and fire stations have a safe where emergency packets of instructions are stored, among which is an envelope to be opened in the event of the invocation of the Godzilla protocol....."
There would be a funding audit paper trail through FEMA for the demolition plans, acquisition and delivery of the explosives, the installation work, inspections, and periodic reinspection of the elaborate safeguards against the risk of mechanical malfunction or mistaken detonation. There would be thousands of potential live witnesses - from installers, repairmen, building custodial staff, hordes of security people, regular building occupants, visitors, and of course the ever shifting chain of command for this "protocol" itself - who would be personally aware that some pack of stark raving mad bureaucratic assholes had rigged up mini-Doomesday explosive devices in landmarks in the heart of every metropolitan area in the country - all ostensibly to save money on insurance premiums?
Scores of New York City police officers, firefighters and other first responders lost their lives on 9/11/01, trying to evacuate the WTC occupants. That was not a hoax or an optical illusion.
Do you seriously believe their grieving loved ones, and the surviving Fire and Police Department fellow officers, would silently sit on top of stacks and stacks of smoking gun evidence, showing 3,000 innocent people and their comrades had been murdered in broad daylight by some malicious (or boneheaded) demolition order, without anybody ever blowing the whistle because of fear of lost pensions, or fear of getting indicted for leaking secrets? This is just not the way that real cops, real fire fighters, and real people who have lost their dearest loved ones under suspicious circumstances would behave.
Yep, the WTC sure looked like a controlled demolition to me, as others having a whole lot more technical expertise in such things have maintained.
But the Godzilla protocol resembles science fiction and the Protocols of Zion a tad too much for me to swallow.
Too many people conspiring to keep silent for way too long about too obvious and dark a bloody secret that could be all too easily exposed.
Bill from Saginaw
Too many people, etc. This is why I am confident that it will eventually be exposed. However, any whistleblower will face providing an immense burden of proof while having only a piece of the evidence. The program was instituted by Clinton, so enjoys bipartisan paternity.
Employment manuals for FEMA advise that its top managers meet with top insurance actuaries to guarantee that employees who follow directives in an emergency will be immune to prosecution from potential litigants regarding any liabilities arising from their life saving activities. This provides a strong incentive to follow directives outside any punishments the agency could instigate.
How can blowing up a building known to have thousands of civilian occupants, fire fighters, policemen, and emergency people inside of it be considered a "life saving activity" on the part of FEMA?
Bill from Saginaw
Got to go with Bill on this one. A safe in every fire and police station in the US with a secret envelope? Too much of a paper trail and too many people for a successful conspiracy.
And what's up with all the conspiracies about FEMA? First it was FEMA camps, now this.
'Yep, the WTC sure looked like a controlled demolition to me, as others having a whole lot more technical expertise in such things have maintained."
Actually, as someone who has some technical expertise, the building's collapse look absolutely nothing like a controlled demolition, and everything like a catastrophic structural failure starting on the upper floors.
You, pjd, are utterly dishonest if you say that WTC7's collapse doesn't look like controlled demolition. I'd like to ask you a question. Please choose one or more of the following options. Are you 1) a paid troll; 2) willfully blind; 3) a fanatic right-wing ideologue; 4) just plain stupid?
Clovis,
in what states are you licensed to practice engineering?
Oh please, don't embarrass yourself. Over 800 professional architects and engineers have put their names, credentials and public statements out there opposing the official conspiracy theory:
http://www.ae911truth.org/supporters.php?g=ENG
Why don't you step up to the plate here and give use your name, credentials and license number to practice, since you seem so intent on repeating this over and over in this thread...
Then we shall compare your analysis to those in the link i posted.
Your Godzilla claims have intrigued me before.
Pre-loading tall buildings - your use of "landmarks" was inaccurate and open to misinterpretation as suggestive of nefarious intent - for a controlled demolition seems a sensible safety feature which I had considered before.
But, as has been pointed out, difficult to keep secret.
Or perhaps all the trillions missing from seemingly everywhere has been used as hush money.
It seems as if writers of the non-wingnut persuasion are determined to write profound and poignant commentaries on and about 9/11 that avoid the still-smoldering question of what actually happened that day.
(Regrettably, Amy Goodman remains in this see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil stance on the topic of 9/11.)
It's a hard, painful, and perhaps ultimately unanswerable question.
But those of us who aren't 9/11 Falsies-- my complementary, if uncomplimentary, term to the pejorative label "Troofer"-- can't help but be put off by those determined to tiptoe around the inconvenient uncertainty and ambiguity by simply using bits of the Official Story to set up commentaries unrelated to the mysterious origins and execution of the violent events.
I am sympathetic to those who dread the Sphere of Deviance, because there are indeed perils and traps that can daunt the clearest-headed analyst.
And unquestionably there are multitudes of important stories surrounding the events of 9/11 apart from the fundamental questions of what "really" happened and why.
Regardless of the typical Falsie slur that "Troofers" are pathologically obsessed with those questions, reasonable skeptics and cynics understand that regardless of how Pandora's Boxes collapsed and disintegrated, that the legion of evils released from those catastrophes must also be acknowledged, examined, and dealt with.
But the miasma of Denial hangs like halitosis over the works of those who hastily gloss over the primary questions, and implicitly or explicitly presume that the Official Story is good enough for their purposes.
Of course, this author may sincerely accept the Offical Story, and is not at all trying to avoid it. If so, her perspicacity and credibility is dubious at best.
· Yr Obd't Servant
double: its called a psyop - psychological operation and sadly as we see they are effective - that's why they use them
double: look at how many gullible folks are posting here on cd an allegedly progressive site
most of them with convictions based on watching tv
george orwell must be turning over in his grave
the destruction of building seven was "covered" by the bbc a full half hour before the building fell
lee harvey oswald was named as jfk's assassin in new zealand the day before jfk was shot in dallas - no doubt a glitch of time zones
the funniest one ever was the coke bottle rolling across the surface of the moon while the apollo astronauts were - as a precursor to michael jackson, moonwalking. that was shown in australia where the moon landing "feeds" were emanating. needless to say it was edited out
even the best psyops have their glitches...
Check out all the info on http://www.wanttoknow.info/abledanger911
it tells what is really being covered up.
I see, so as an engineer, seeing that the buildings obviously collapsed due to structural failure starting at the obviously badly damaged impact fire zones, it also being obvious that the planes were deliberately flown into them, and seem by many thousands of eyewitnesses and actual films from several angles, makes me a shill for Bush?
What do all you stupid USAns - left and right - do for a living? Don't any of you pursue careers that require rational, scientific analysis?
Hear, hear, OS. Your post appeared as I was writing mine below, which repeats some of your points.
With great respect to this and many other observations and opinions of "Yr Obd't Servant, I would offer the following -- not as rebuttal or argument with his post, but as adjunct. People will lie, but carefully examined patterns if thoughtfully noted will indicate certain trends in truth or not truth. There are just too many discrepancies in the official explanation of 9/11 for it to be real. A pattern of more not truth than truth is inescapable.I pretend to no knowledge of truth, but I am a farmer, and I know bullsh#t when it is piled high and deep. 9/11 was a tragedy and a travesty on this nation, and truth must out, not in a hundred years, but in time for the perpetrators to be held to justice, or the destruction to this nation, far outweighing the physical destruction or even the personal tragedy of the people who were victims will go down in history as the beginning of the end of our "Bold Experiment"
The "9/11 truthers" are as embarrassing to progressives as are the right-wing "birthers" to conservatives. Whack jobs all!
Julie;
To whom does "9/11 truthers" refer?
I would like to know the truth but I do not propose or support any "conspiracy theories".
I do, however, have a strictly technical question:
How did two airliners striking two skyscrapers cause three skyscrapers to be totally pulverized while collapsing into their own footprint at very near the speed of gravitational free fall?
Pursuing my own inquiries into metallurgy, combustion chemistry, structural design of the buildings and the history of large structural failures, I found significant evidence that the forces and factors cited in the official reports were simply inadequate to cause such total, rapid and uniform destruction. My doubts are reinforced by documented analysis performed by many independent professional engineers, architects and scientists.
I do not indulge in speculation or tinfoil hat conjecture. I simply want to know two things:
How did it happen - and why are those who ask this legitimate question grouped with and dismissed as screwballs?
If that embarrasses you, if you believe it is not "Progressive" to doubt, then just ignore it. You'll find plenty of company among those who believe whatever gives them comfort.
yet again i am forced to offer this: world trade center was comprised of 7 towers - not 2 towers with building seven thrown in for good measure
the smallest of these towers was 15 stories high - all of them were reduced to dust, dusitifaction as dr judy wood calls it
the physics of this event involving 7 skyscrapers cannot be explained by plane crashes - the energy required to transform these buildings into dust far exceeds the kerosene that comprises jet fuel
no getting around those old basics of science
we now have:
scholars for 9/11 truth
architects and engineers for 9/11 truth
pilots for 9/11 truth
lawyers for 9/11 truth
broadcasters for 9/11 truth
and countless millions americans for 9/11 truth
calling us all "nuts" is - well - nutty itself
lebeau;
Excellent points.
The crux of the entire issue is, as you wrote, "the physics of this event involving 7 skyscrapers cannot be explained by plane crashes..."
Ultimately, nonsense must yield to hard, incontrovertible facts. I focus on WTC 1,2 & 7 because multiple, widely circulated videos from independent sources mutually confirm the destruction sequences. Reverse engineering of each sequence using rigorous scientific methodology conclusively establishes that the energy, timing and focus points required to make them happen grossly exceed and therefore contradict the official explanation.
That single contradiction is the deal breaker. But I would not hazard a guess as to the magnitude of the "deal" or the potential ramifications of its fracture. I suspect various interests contemplate that with considerable trepidation.
Thank you for your opinions. What states do you have a PE licensed to practice structural engineering? I’m licensed in Pennsylvania and Virginia, an the building collpases sure look like structural failures, caused by the airliner impacts and fire, to me...
Progressives are embarrassing to leftists sometimes, but that is irrelevant to your ad hominem attack on those that question the official story, such as over 800 professional architects and engineers. You should read their testimonies before spouting ignorant nonsense:
http://www.ae911truth.org/supporters.php?g=ENG
Let's not overlook the extraordinary achievements of the Rulers:
1. They got most americans to swallow the 911 Commission Report in lieu of an actual investigation.
2. They got most americans to swallow the Iraq involvement + WMD story to enable an immensely profitable (for some) war.
3. They got most americans to swallow distractions when the lies fell apart.
Amazing what can be done when media and government are consolidated under corporate control.
thank you corporate media - we couldn't have done it without you - shout out to brian williams, wolf blitzer, fox news, billo, glen peckerhead et al - you know who you are
The British burned down the White House in the War of 1812. We should attack them so they don't do it again.
Russia has vast expanses of empty land, especially in Siberia, and there could be terrorists hiding out on a steppe somewhere, so we should attack. Ever heard of the outback? It's the anniversary of 9/11, so attack the outback. And Venezuela, because you never know what stoned people might do. And safe zones, where you buy booze cheap. And penguins. The International Space Station. I've heard of people owning an island with one hill and a castle on top where they live. One or two Predators would take care of them. North Korea? Obliterate. Iran? Well, some nice people appeared on TV during the last election there, but, well, they're collateral damage-- it can't be helped. People like them get destroyed in every war, and wars will never stop, are part of human nature, so make the best of wars and strike first. Afghanistan, Pakistan-- can't be helped. More troops. Obliterate (and don't be late). Vote Republican. Or Democrat. Obliterate anti-war activists. If not sure, shoot anyway. That person might have a bomb under their shirt. Be firm and manly; otherwise, the terrorist boots will walk all over you.
The US did invade Russia (Siberia) at the end of WW1 as part of multinational force. A fact not well known, but not controversial or disputed. This certainly must have had an effect on Soviet thinking during the Cold War, and probably since.
Like the Pearl Harbor story (see Stinnett), or 9/11/2001, or the impetus for the British invasions of the US in the War of 1812, much is left out not only in the "official" story, but also the story the vast majority of the US believes.
"The British burned down the White House in the War of 1812. "
Technically - no.
The British attempted to burn down the President's Residence in the war of 1812.
It was subsequently painted white to hide the black charred scars.
the author writes: "The al-Qaeda attack on the Twin Towers did not defeat New Yorkers."
really - what "proof" do you have to support the claim that al queda attacked us - none - ok, continue....
"When the planes became missiles and the towers became torches and then shards and clouds of dust,"
what planes i ask - you mean the ones that became the 9/11 tv show, the ones that "totally disnitegrated" an aviation first, not since repeated, those planes...
"Far more people could have died on September 11th if New Yorkers had not remained calm"
agreed - new yorkers showed the guts and courage that should be a guiding light to us all today - in yet another continuing phase of this evil psyop. what you say is true - the media presents the new yorkers as running in fear but this was not the case. they stood tall and they stood proud. as i write this my chest is pounding out of respect for their courage and i wonder if i could have been as courageous
"New Yorkers triumphed on that day eight years ago"
agreed
"Imagine if the collapse of those towers had not been followed by such a blast of stereotypes, lies, distortions, and fear propaganda that served the agenda of the Bush administration while harming the rest of us -- Americans, Iraqis, Afghans, and so many others, for people from 90 nations died in the attacks that day and probably those from many more nations survived at what came to be called Ground Zero."
agreed - its called a psyop - the terror campaign to justify the stealing of the mid-east gas and oil. our "leaders" like cheney rumsfeld wolfowicz et al would call this a small price to pay
"After the 9/11 storm struck, the affected civilians in New York were seen as victims; after Katrina, those in New Orleans were portrayed as brutes. In both cities, the great majority of affected people were actually neither helpless nor savage; they were something else -- they were citizens"
the pyop continues with the able assistance of the msm which as you note distorts every aspect of the event
"there would have been no trillion dollars taken from constructive projects to fatten the corporations of war; no extreme corrosion of the Bill of Rights, no usurpation of powers by the executive branch. Perhaps."
the psyop, though initially about the oil and gas, also concerns itself with the takeover of the republic by the nwo. kissinger has advised obama to take advantage of this "unique opportunity" to advance the nwo agenda
we are a good people, not a godly appointed chosen people, but a good people. we believe in our country and our ability to do good things. i believe that still.
WE are not the ones conducting the immoral wars, though we provide the bodies to do so, WE are against them.
WE don't seem to matter on this, and many other issues.
even on this day of remembering this evil day i believe, against all the odds, that we will resist this corporate nwo sweep of fascism over our land.
we need to overcome the corporations, the corporate media and the corporate government - a tall order indeed
we will keep faith, as the citizens did on 9/11, we will be strong and we shall prevail against the corporations
we will do this not because it is easy but to quote jfk "because it it the right thing to do"
This article is inspiring. It confirms my own experiences, and suggests that the democratic socialism most CDers say they want is hard-wired into us.
We as a species want to help, to collaborate, to share with and care for each other. The most relentless, pervasive and scientifically-advanced propaganda system ever devised is the only force preventing us from realizing this potential.
“The most relentless, pervasive and scientifically-advanced propaganda system ever devised is the only force preventing us from realizing…” how mind controlled we are by media blather that we still believe that some conspiracy of invisible bandits somehow managed to not only escape detection on September 11, 2001, but they even managed to somehow—how, by some Black Magic?—suspend the verifiable, immutable laws of physics and cause three steel superstructures to function identically to precision-engineered total demolitions with nothing more than two jetliner crashes.
Thank goodness that thousands of civil architects and engineers have been sufficiently deprogrammed from the mass hallucination known as Al-Qaeda. Read about them at sillyConValley.net.
SillyConValley sez:
"The most relentless, pervasive and scientifically-advanced propaganda system ever devised is the only force preventing us from realizing…”
***************
Poet sez:
"The most relentless, pervasive and scientifically-advanced propaganda system ever devised..." can still be turned off and ignored and replaced with more reliable sources of information.
Poet
Well said! That was exactly my response: that 9/11 (whatever its origin) proved the psychopaths are wrong. We're not like them. We're *nothing* like them. We care, and we put our lives on the line for no reward except the knowledge that we did the best anyone can do.
All that's wanted to bring us rallying 'round, it seems, is to know that we're needed, and that our work might make a life-or-death difference to other people.
mairead gets it. doublewhammy doesn't.
Solnit begins her piece: "the al-Qaeda attack on the Twin Towers ... destroyed the buildings."
Right off the bat we get the official myth. Journalists are supposed to ask questions. Has Ms. Solnit ever seen any evidence linking Al-Qaeda to the attack? Has she not read any of the many expert opinions pointing out that it is impossible, even for buildings hit by jetliners, to turn to dust in midair? Hell, forget the expert opinions. Has she not got eyes in her head to see the "collapse" of WTC7? Does she think all the points of structural support in a 47-story building can fail at exactly the same moment--or actually, at split-second intervals, allowing a smooth collapse into its own footprint? Has she not got ears in her head to hear the emergency responders, cops, etc. say on video, that WTC7 is coming down? Did she not hear Silverstein say that it was decided to "pull" building 7? Does she not know that aside from chumps like me, there are big fish like Daniel Ellsberg, Richard Falk, Robert Baer, John Loftus, and many many other public figures of importance and integrity, some of them former government insiders, calling for a new investigation? Why no mention of any of this? What interest does she have in perpetuating the lies? Does it make her feel better inside? Does it make her feel safer? Does it mean nothing to her that countless lives, indeed well over a million, have been lost in the "response" to an act that was never investigated according to the simplest rules of criminal procedure, and that the political landscape has been profoundly changed for the worse, far worse?
clovis: good stuff
That's exactly what I'm ON about! It's nice to know I'm not alone.
A point of clarification: if someone has a worthwhile 9/11 story irrelevant to the central questions surrounding the cause of the catastrophic events, and/or doesn't take a position on these controversies, so be it.
That is, I'm not insisting that everything published about that day HAS to deal with the deepest and stickiest aspect of the nightmare.
Some writers will frankly state that they recognize it's still an open question, and don't incorporate manufactured consent (aka Official Story) into their writing. That's fine with me.
What I object to is the insidious practice of blandly, blithely, and matter-of-factly incorporating elements of the dubious and problematic Official Story in passing, and thus implicitly reifying and ratifying them-- as Solnit does here.
· Yr Obd't Servant
I agree, OS, that there are many worthy stories to be told about that day (and other days) that needn't broach the question of whodunit. I was simply struck by the utter concision with which the official myth was asserted at the start of the article, like some sort of indispensable sine qua non of any discussion of the events. And there is also the fact that the heroism of the responders and the "pluckiness" of New Yorkers so foregrounded here, while certainly genuine, is an important, if true, element of the official lie, used to distract people from the more disturbing questions, and leaving out, above all, the sickening fact that many of those killed by the glaringly unexplained collapse of the buildings, were precisely those lionized in this narrative. It's the cynicism and hypocrisy of such a presentation--not, perhaps, embraced by Solnit, but surely corroborated by her, unwittingly or not--that I find most appalling.