How strange that none of you will now refute that this is a inside job now that the wall of silence coming down...?????
Why The Towers Fell
- Thread starter I think not
- Start date
- Status
What are you on about?
What wall of silence?
Another conspiracy?
I'd love to stick around and tell you what a moron you are........but unfortunately my home computer is currently off-line, and I am using a friend's.
Seek treatment.
Soon.
quandary121
It's entirly inconceiveable to Colpy and other folk participating here at CC that governmens would lie to their people...
Why would anyone imagine that governments might lie and politicians be anything less than absoutely truthful....?
Never happens and like Watergate and the Iran/Contra missile deal....and the sub-prime mortgage scam....and the petroleum cartels running America....it's all just business as usual.
"Nothing to see here.....move along...."
It's entirly inconceiveable to Colpy and other folk participating here at CC that governmens would lie to their people...
Why would anyone imagine that governments might lie and politicians be anything less than absoutely truthful....?
Never happens and like Watergate and the Iran/Contra missile deal....and the sub-prime mortgage scam....and the petroleum cartels running America....it's all just business as usual.
"Nothing to see here.....move along...."
Tim Russert, Dick Cheney, and 9/11
Contradictions between the Two Accounts OF Dick Cheney
According to Cheney, he arrived in the PEOC, or shelter conference room, before he learned about the attack on the Pentagon. According to the 9/11 Commission, by contrast, he entered the PEOC after he learned about this attack (and, in fact, about 20 minutes after its occurrence at 9:38 AM).
This contrast leads to another: According to Cheney, the telephone call in which he urged the president to stay away from Washington occurred before he learned about the Pentagon strike. According to the Commission’s account, however, this call occurred after he had learned about the strike, so he was able to talk to Bush about it.
The two accounts appear, moreover, to contradict each other with regard to the time at which Cheney was taken downstairs to the underground corridor. According to what Cheney told Russert, this occurred as soon as the Secret Service agents heard that a plane was approaching the White House---they did not wait until the plane came that direction a second time---and this seems to have been shortly after Cheney called the president about the latter’s public statement---a call that, according to the New York Times, occurred at 9:12. If Cheney was taken down about five minutes later, his account would not conflict, at least not strongly, with the testimony of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, who told the 9/11 Commission during an open hearing in 2003 that Cheney was already there when he got to the PEOC at 9:20.10
If Cheney meant something close to this, his account would, however, strongly contradict The 9/11 Commission Report, according to which he did not even head downstairs until 9:36 and did not enter the corridor until 9:37.
However, even if Cheney did not mean to imply that he had entered the PEOC before 9:20, the natural interpretation of his statement---“when I arrived there [in the PEOC] within a short order, we had word the Pentagon’s been hit”---would seem to be that the Pentagon attack occurred after he had entered the PEOC.
One can point out, to be sure, that Cheney did not actually say this. He said only that he learned about the Pentagon attack after he entered the PEOC. One who wanted to support the 9/11 Commission’s timeline might argue that, although the Pentagon was attacked at 9:38, Cheney did not hear about this attack until 20-some minutes later, after he, as the Commission says, entered the PEOC at 9:58. On that basis, one might argue, Cheney’s account and that of the Commission could be reconciled.
However, besides being extremely implausible (by suggesting that Vice President Cheney, who was formerly the secretary of defense and on 9/11 was the person in charge at the White House, would not have been notified about such an attack for over 20 minutes), this attempted reconciliation would also be ruled out by the Commission’s timeline, which says that Cheney learned about the Pentagon attack while he was still in the corridor, before he entered the PEOC. He told Russert that he learned about it after he entered the PEOC.
It is impossible, therefore, to reconcile the two accounts. If the story that Cheney told Russert at Camp David, just five days after 9/11, was true, then the story told by the 9/11 Commission in July 2004, almost three years later, was false.
The Unique Source for the 9/11 Commission’s Timeline
On what did the 9/11 Commission base its timeline? It claimed that the 9:37 time for Cheney’s entry into the corridor, from which the 9:58 estimate for his entry into the PEOC followed, was based on a timeline in a Secret Service report. By the Commission’s own admission, however, the Secret Service said that “the 9:37 entry time in their timeline was based on alarm data, which is no longer retrievable.”11 The claim that Cheney entered the corridor at 9:37, in other words, is based on no official documentation.
Could the Commission cite journalistic accounts to support its timeline? It appears that there was one journalistic account, and only one, that supported this timeline. This was an MSNBC-Newsweek article by Evan Thomas, which was dated December 31, 2001, at MSNBC and appeared in the January 7, 2002, issue of Newsweek. This article said: “Shortly before 10 a.m., the Cheneys were led into the PEOC conference room. . . . [T]hey looked up at the TV screens. It was 9:58 a.m.”12
In saying this, Thomas disagreed not only with what Norman Mineta would later tell the 9/11 Commission, but also with what Richard Clarke would say in Against All Enemies, which became a best-selling book while the 9/11 Commission was still holding hearings.
According to Clarke, shortly after the meeting that Cheney had with Condoleezza Rice after the second attack on World Trade Center, which occurred at 9:03, the Secret Service wanted Rice as well as Cheney to go down to the PEOC. Rice, however, first went with Clarke to the White House’s Video Teleconferencing Center, where Clarke was to set up a video conference. This conference, Clarke’s statements suggest, began at about 9:10.13 After spending a few minutes there, Rice said, according to Clarke: “You’re going to need some decisions quickly. I’m going to the PEOC to be with the Vice President. Tell us what you need.” Clarke replied: “What I need is an open line to Cheney and you.”14 Some minutes later, evidently at about 9:15, Norman Mineta arrived and Clarke, after receiving him in the Situation Room, “suggested he join the Vice President.”15 Clarke thereby seemed to imply that Cheney was in the PEOC prior to 9:15.
In an ABC News program narrated by Peter Jennings on the first anniversary of 9/11, Condoleezza Rice is portrayed as supporting the early descent time. After describing Cheney’s trip down to the PEOC with the Secret Service agents, ABC’s Charles Gibson said: “Up above, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is trying to find the rest of the President's team,” after which Rice is shown saying: "As I was trying to find all of the principals, the Secret Service came in and said, 'You have to leave now for the bunker. The Vice President's already there. There may be a plane headed for the White House.’” Gibson then added: “In the bunker, the Vice President is joined by Rice and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta.”16 ABC agreed in advance, therefore, with Mineta’s account, according to which Cheney was down there before he arrived.
According to another ABC News program that same week, Cheney’s own White House photographer, David Bohrer, also supported the early descent time. Showing Bohrer describe the moment when the Secret Service agents told Cheney, “Sir, you have to come with us,’” ABC portrayed this event as happening “just after 9 a.m.,” presumably because that is what Bohrer himself had said.17
Mineta’s account was also supported in advance by a Wall Street Journal article, published about a month after 9/11, which told the story of that morning from the perspective of American and United Airlines. Discussing the actions of Donald J. Carty and Jim Goodwin, top executives of AA and UA, respectively, this article said:
“Mr. Carty and Mr. Goodwin . . . were talking on the phone with Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, who was in a government command bunker with Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. Carty told Mr. Mineta that American was ordering all 162 of its planes out of the sky; United already had ordered its 122 planes down. About five minutes later, the FAA shut down the skies over the U.S. completely to all but military aircraft. At [9:45 a.m.],18 American lost contact with a third flight, . . . But . . . radio contact was restored in 10 minutes. . . . Soon, reports began pouring in that a plane had crashed into the Pentagon.”19
Mineta had the FAA give two orders that morning. The first one, which was to prevent any more planes from taking off, was at 9:26. The second, which was for all planes to be brought down, occurred at 9:45, after the Pentagon was struck.20 In describing the FAA order that occurred before the attack on the Pentagon, the Journal erroneously called it an order to bring all planes down (confusion between the two orders was quite common).21 It is clear, in any case, that these two airline officials, as paraphrased by the Journal, reported that Cheney was present in the PEOC prior to the attack on the Pentagon.
The 9/11 Commission’s timeline, according to which Cheney arrived much later, was based on a twofold claim: that Cheney did not entering the corridor until 9:37 and that his phone call to the president then took about 20 minutes.
As we saw above, the alleged Secret Service claim that Cheney did not enter the corridor until 9:37 was, by the Commission’s own admission, undocumented. Surely this undocumented claim cannot trump the combined testimony of Norman Mineta, Richard Clarke, David Bohrer (as described by ABC News), American and United Airlines (as described by the Wall Street Journal), and even Dick Cheney himself (as given to Tim Russert five days after 9/11).
However, the claim that Cheney did not enter the corridor until 9:37 was mentioned by one journalistic account: the aforementioned MSNBC-Newsweek article by Evan Thomas. According to Thomas, it was 9:35 when the Secret Service entered Cheney’s office---where the vice president, incidentally, was not in a take-charge mode but was simply “standing by his desk, looking at the TV in the corner.” This article also has the other main elements later articulated in The 9/11 Commission Report: Cheney’s time-consuming phone call to the president (who was “not easy to reach”), Cheney’s being told about the Pentagon attack while he was still in the corridor, Lynne Cheney’s arrival while the vice president was still on the phone, and then the conclusion: “Shortly before 10 a.m., the Cheneys were led into the PEOC conference room. . . . [T]hey looked up at the TV screens. It was 9:58 a.m.”22
If the 9/11 Commission’s timeline was derived from the Thomas article, or else the source(s) for that article, the question becomes: Where did Thomas get the information on which he based his account?
The note provided by the 9/11 Commission for its conclusion that the Cheneys arrived in the PEOC “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58,” mentions three transcripts, all of which are White House transcripts: “Lynne Cheney interview with Newsweek, Nov. 9, 2001”; “Vice President Cheney interview with Newsweek, Nov. 19, 2001”; and “Rice interview with Evan Thomas, Nov. 1, 2001.” Evidently, therefore, the Evan Thomas MSNBC-Newsweek article of December 31, 2001, was based significantly on interviews with Condoleezza Rice and the Cheneys.
It would appear, accordingly, that the account given by Cheney to Newsweek in November differed significantly from what he had told Russert on “Meet the Press” two months earlier. He told Russert that he learned about the Pentagon attack after he was already in the PEOC, thereby suggesting agreement with all the witnesses who would indicate that he was in the PEOC prior to the attack. But according to the story that he (along with his wife and Rice) apparently told Newsweek, which was later accepted by the 9/11 Commission, Cheney did not enter the PEOC, where he took charge of matters, until about 20 minutes after the attack on the Pentagon had already occurred.
Contradictions between the Two Accounts OF Dick Cheney
According to Cheney, he arrived in the PEOC, or shelter conference room, before he learned about the attack on the Pentagon. According to the 9/11 Commission, by contrast, he entered the PEOC after he learned about this attack (and, in fact, about 20 minutes after its occurrence at 9:38 AM).
This contrast leads to another: According to Cheney, the telephone call in which he urged the president to stay away from Washington occurred before he learned about the Pentagon strike. According to the Commission’s account, however, this call occurred after he had learned about the strike, so he was able to talk to Bush about it.
The two accounts appear, moreover, to contradict each other with regard to the time at which Cheney was taken downstairs to the underground corridor. According to what Cheney told Russert, this occurred as soon as the Secret Service agents heard that a plane was approaching the White House---they did not wait until the plane came that direction a second time---and this seems to have been shortly after Cheney called the president about the latter’s public statement---a call that, according to the New York Times, occurred at 9:12. If Cheney was taken down about five minutes later, his account would not conflict, at least not strongly, with the testimony of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, who told the 9/11 Commission during an open hearing in 2003 that Cheney was already there when he got to the PEOC at 9:20.10
If Cheney meant something close to this, his account would, however, strongly contradict The 9/11 Commission Report, according to which he did not even head downstairs until 9:36 and did not enter the corridor until 9:37.
However, even if Cheney did not mean to imply that he had entered the PEOC before 9:20, the natural interpretation of his statement---“when I arrived there [in the PEOC] within a short order, we had word the Pentagon’s been hit”---would seem to be that the Pentagon attack occurred after he had entered the PEOC.
One can point out, to be sure, that Cheney did not actually say this. He said only that he learned about the Pentagon attack after he entered the PEOC. One who wanted to support the 9/11 Commission’s timeline might argue that, although the Pentagon was attacked at 9:38, Cheney did not hear about this attack until 20-some minutes later, after he, as the Commission says, entered the PEOC at 9:58. On that basis, one might argue, Cheney’s account and that of the Commission could be reconciled.
However, besides being extremely implausible (by suggesting that Vice President Cheney, who was formerly the secretary of defense and on 9/11 was the person in charge at the White House, would not have been notified about such an attack for over 20 minutes), this attempted reconciliation would also be ruled out by the Commission’s timeline, which says that Cheney learned about the Pentagon attack while he was still in the corridor, before he entered the PEOC. He told Russert that he learned about it after he entered the PEOC.
It is impossible, therefore, to reconcile the two accounts. If the story that Cheney told Russert at Camp David, just five days after 9/11, was true, then the story told by the 9/11 Commission in July 2004, almost three years later, was false.
The Unique Source for the 9/11 Commission’s Timeline
On what did the 9/11 Commission base its timeline? It claimed that the 9:37 time for Cheney’s entry into the corridor, from which the 9:58 estimate for his entry into the PEOC followed, was based on a timeline in a Secret Service report. By the Commission’s own admission, however, the Secret Service said that “the 9:37 entry time in their timeline was based on alarm data, which is no longer retrievable.”11 The claim that Cheney entered the corridor at 9:37, in other words, is based on no official documentation.
Could the Commission cite journalistic accounts to support its timeline? It appears that there was one journalistic account, and only one, that supported this timeline. This was an MSNBC-Newsweek article by Evan Thomas, which was dated December 31, 2001, at MSNBC and appeared in the January 7, 2002, issue of Newsweek. This article said: “Shortly before 10 a.m., the Cheneys were led into the PEOC conference room. . . . [T]hey looked up at the TV screens. It was 9:58 a.m.”12
In saying this, Thomas disagreed not only with what Norman Mineta would later tell the 9/11 Commission, but also with what Richard Clarke would say in Against All Enemies, which became a best-selling book while the 9/11 Commission was still holding hearings.
According to Clarke, shortly after the meeting that Cheney had with Condoleezza Rice after the second attack on World Trade Center, which occurred at 9:03, the Secret Service wanted Rice as well as Cheney to go down to the PEOC. Rice, however, first went with Clarke to the White House’s Video Teleconferencing Center, where Clarke was to set up a video conference. This conference, Clarke’s statements suggest, began at about 9:10.13 After spending a few minutes there, Rice said, according to Clarke: “You’re going to need some decisions quickly. I’m going to the PEOC to be with the Vice President. Tell us what you need.” Clarke replied: “What I need is an open line to Cheney and you.”14 Some minutes later, evidently at about 9:15, Norman Mineta arrived and Clarke, after receiving him in the Situation Room, “suggested he join the Vice President.”15 Clarke thereby seemed to imply that Cheney was in the PEOC prior to 9:15.
In an ABC News program narrated by Peter Jennings on the first anniversary of 9/11, Condoleezza Rice is portrayed as supporting the early descent time. After describing Cheney’s trip down to the PEOC with the Secret Service agents, ABC’s Charles Gibson said: “Up above, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is trying to find the rest of the President's team,” after which Rice is shown saying: "As I was trying to find all of the principals, the Secret Service came in and said, 'You have to leave now for the bunker. The Vice President's already there. There may be a plane headed for the White House.’” Gibson then added: “In the bunker, the Vice President is joined by Rice and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta.”16 ABC agreed in advance, therefore, with Mineta’s account, according to which Cheney was down there before he arrived.
According to another ABC News program that same week, Cheney’s own White House photographer, David Bohrer, also supported the early descent time. Showing Bohrer describe the moment when the Secret Service agents told Cheney, “Sir, you have to come with us,’” ABC portrayed this event as happening “just after 9 a.m.,” presumably because that is what Bohrer himself had said.17
Mineta’s account was also supported in advance by a Wall Street Journal article, published about a month after 9/11, which told the story of that morning from the perspective of American and United Airlines. Discussing the actions of Donald J. Carty and Jim Goodwin, top executives of AA and UA, respectively, this article said:
“Mr. Carty and Mr. Goodwin . . . were talking on the phone with Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, who was in a government command bunker with Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. Carty told Mr. Mineta that American was ordering all 162 of its planes out of the sky; United already had ordered its 122 planes down. About five minutes later, the FAA shut down the skies over the U.S. completely to all but military aircraft. At [9:45 a.m.],18 American lost contact with a third flight, . . . But . . . radio contact was restored in 10 minutes. . . . Soon, reports began pouring in that a plane had crashed into the Pentagon.”19
Mineta had the FAA give two orders that morning. The first one, which was to prevent any more planes from taking off, was at 9:26. The second, which was for all planes to be brought down, occurred at 9:45, after the Pentagon was struck.20 In describing the FAA order that occurred before the attack on the Pentagon, the Journal erroneously called it an order to bring all planes down (confusion between the two orders was quite common).21 It is clear, in any case, that these two airline officials, as paraphrased by the Journal, reported that Cheney was present in the PEOC prior to the attack on the Pentagon.
The 9/11 Commission’s timeline, according to which Cheney arrived much later, was based on a twofold claim: that Cheney did not entering the corridor until 9:37 and that his phone call to the president then took about 20 minutes.
As we saw above, the alleged Secret Service claim that Cheney did not enter the corridor until 9:37 was, by the Commission’s own admission, undocumented. Surely this undocumented claim cannot trump the combined testimony of Norman Mineta, Richard Clarke, David Bohrer (as described by ABC News), American and United Airlines (as described by the Wall Street Journal), and even Dick Cheney himself (as given to Tim Russert five days after 9/11).
However, the claim that Cheney did not enter the corridor until 9:37 was mentioned by one journalistic account: the aforementioned MSNBC-Newsweek article by Evan Thomas. According to Thomas, it was 9:35 when the Secret Service entered Cheney’s office---where the vice president, incidentally, was not in a take-charge mode but was simply “standing by his desk, looking at the TV in the corner.” This article also has the other main elements later articulated in The 9/11 Commission Report: Cheney’s time-consuming phone call to the president (who was “not easy to reach”), Cheney’s being told about the Pentagon attack while he was still in the corridor, Lynne Cheney’s arrival while the vice president was still on the phone, and then the conclusion: “Shortly before 10 a.m., the Cheneys were led into the PEOC conference room. . . . [T]hey looked up at the TV screens. It was 9:58 a.m.”22
If the 9/11 Commission’s timeline was derived from the Thomas article, or else the source(s) for that article, the question becomes: Where did Thomas get the information on which he based his account?
The note provided by the 9/11 Commission for its conclusion that the Cheneys arrived in the PEOC “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58,” mentions three transcripts, all of which are White House transcripts: “Lynne Cheney interview with Newsweek, Nov. 9, 2001”; “Vice President Cheney interview with Newsweek, Nov. 19, 2001”; and “Rice interview with Evan Thomas, Nov. 1, 2001.” Evidently, therefore, the Evan Thomas MSNBC-Newsweek article of December 31, 2001, was based significantly on interviews with Condoleezza Rice and the Cheneys.
It would appear, accordingly, that the account given by Cheney to Newsweek in November differed significantly from what he had told Russert on “Meet the Press” two months earlier. He told Russert that he learned about the Pentagon attack after he was already in the PEOC, thereby suggesting agreement with all the witnesses who would indicate that he was in the PEOC prior to the attack. But according to the story that he (along with his wife and Rice) apparently told Newsweek, which was later accepted by the 9/11 Commission, Cheney did not enter the PEOC, where he took charge of matters, until about 20 minutes after the attack on the Pentagon had already occurred.
The following text was first published in Italian in: Giuletto Chiesa (Editor), Zero, Perché la versione ufficiale sull' 11/9 è un Falso [Zero: Why the Official Version on 9/11 is a Falsehood], Piemme, Casale Monferrato, 2007.
A detailed analysis of the relevant issues covered in this article is also contained in the author's book America’s "War on Terrorism", Global Research, 2005
Introduction
One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to "fabricate an enemy". The "outside enemy" personified by Osama bin Laden is "threatening America".
Pre-emptive war directed against "Islamic terrorists" is required to defend the Homeland. Realities are turned upside down. America is under attack.
In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this "outside enemy" has served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the war in the Middle East and Central Asia. Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a "just war" with a humanitarian mandate.
As anti-war sentiment grows and the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this illusive "outside enemy" must be dispelled.
Counter-terrorism and war propaganda are intertwined. The propaganda apparatus feeds disinformation into the news chain. The terror warnings must appear to be "genuine". The objective is to present the terror groups as "enemies of America."
Ironically, Al Qaeda --the "outside enemy of America" as well as the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks-- is a creation of the CIA.
From the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of the "Islamic brigades". Propaganda purports to erase the history of Al Qaeda, drown the truth and "kill the evidence" on how this "outside enemy" was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number One".
The US intelligence apparatus has created it own terrorist organizations. And at the same time, it creates its own terrorist warnings concerning the terrorist organizations which it has itself created. Meanwhile, a cohesive multibillion dollar counterterrorism program "to go after" these terrorist organizations has been put in place.
Portrayed in stylized fashion by the Western media, Osama bin Laden, supported by his various henchmen, constitutes America’s post-Cold war bogeyman, who "threatens Western democracy". The alleged threat of "Islamic terrorists", permeates the entire US national security doctrine. Its purpose is to justify wars of aggression in the Middle East, while establishing within America, the contours of the Homeland Security State.
A detailed analysis of the relevant issues covered in this article is also contained in the author's book America’s "War on Terrorism", Global Research, 2005
Introduction
One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to "fabricate an enemy". The "outside enemy" personified by Osama bin Laden is "threatening America".
Pre-emptive war directed against "Islamic terrorists" is required to defend the Homeland. Realities are turned upside down. America is under attack.
In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this "outside enemy" has served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the war in the Middle East and Central Asia. Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a "just war" with a humanitarian mandate.
As anti-war sentiment grows and the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this illusive "outside enemy" must be dispelled.
Counter-terrorism and war propaganda are intertwined. The propaganda apparatus feeds disinformation into the news chain. The terror warnings must appear to be "genuine". The objective is to present the terror groups as "enemies of America."
Ironically, Al Qaeda --the "outside enemy of America" as well as the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks-- is a creation of the CIA.
From the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of the "Islamic brigades". Propaganda purports to erase the history of Al Qaeda, drown the truth and "kill the evidence" on how this "outside enemy" was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number One".
The US intelligence apparatus has created it own terrorist organizations. And at the same time, it creates its own terrorist warnings concerning the terrorist organizations which it has itself created. Meanwhile, a cohesive multibillion dollar counterterrorism program "to go after" these terrorist organizations has been put in place.
Portrayed in stylized fashion by the Western media, Osama bin Laden, supported by his various henchmen, constitutes America’s post-Cold war bogeyman, who "threatens Western democracy". The alleged threat of "Islamic terrorists", permeates the entire US national security doctrine. Its purpose is to justify wars of aggression in the Middle East, while establishing within America, the contours of the Homeland Security State.
Historical Background
What are the historical origins of Al Qaeda? Who is Osama bin Laden?
The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders".(Hugh Davies, "`Informers’ point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers." The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998).
In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan:
What are the historical origins of Al Qaeda? Who is Osama bin Laden?
The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders".(Hugh Davies, "`Informers’ point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers." The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998).
In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan:
"With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad." (Ahmed Rashid, "The Taliban: Exporting Extremism", Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999).
Connie Fogal says the SPP is the "hostile takeover" of the apparatus of democratic government and an end to the "rule of law". There has been a kind of coup d'état over the government operations of Canada, U.S.A. and Mexico.
The first formal step towards the NAU was NAFTA. Ron Pastor of the Council on Foreign Relations has affirmed that. The Canadian Action Party, a registered federal sovereigntist political party in Canada, began as a party in 1997 precisely because none of the mainstream parties were calling for the clear, outright, unequivocal abrogation of NAFTA, or for control of our national monetary system.
Even now, our mainstream Canadian political parties and significant citizen groups are still stuck on re-negotiation of NAFTA (they talk of fair trade) which completely misses the point. As such, they remain blinded, and of no use to the citizens who care about our nation and our sovereignty, our independence, our civil liberties, our civil rights, our culture, our freedom .
The second formal step was the integration and subjugation of Canada's military into the US military command under NORAD, NORTHCOM, and the Bi-National Planning Agreement. That is why our Canadian military is in Afghanistan.
The first formal step towards the NAU was NAFTA. Ron Pastor of the Council on Foreign Relations has affirmed that. The Canadian Action Party, a registered federal sovereigntist political party in Canada, began as a party in 1997 precisely because none of the mainstream parties were calling for the clear, outright, unequivocal abrogation of NAFTA, or for control of our national monetary system.
Even now, our mainstream Canadian political parties and significant citizen groups are still stuck on re-negotiation of NAFTA (they talk of fair trade) which completely misses the point. As such, they remain blinded, and of no use to the citizens who care about our nation and our sovereignty, our independence, our civil liberties, our civil rights, our culture, our freedom .
The second formal step was the integration and subjugation of Canada's military into the US military command under NORAD, NORTHCOM, and the Bi-National Planning Agreement. That is why our Canadian military is in Afghanistan.
Canadians, Americans deem post-9/11 security laws intrusive, new study finds
An international study finds a high level of concern about new anti-terrorism laws.
Almost half of Canadians and an even larger percentage of Americans say they find laws enacted since the 9-11 terror attacks in the U.S. to be intrusive.
The study by Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., looked at how 9,000 people in eight countries view surveillance and privacy.
It's believed to be the first cross-cultural study of its kind.
In other findings, two-thirds of Canadian respondents said they were worried about providing personal information on websites.
About six in 10 Canadians rejected racial profiling at airports for security purposes, while only one-third of Americans objected.
An international study finds a high level of concern about new anti-terrorism laws.
Almost half of Canadians and an even larger percentage of Americans say they find laws enacted since the 9-11 terror attacks in the U.S. to be intrusive.
The study by Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., looked at how 9,000 people in eight countries view surveillance and privacy.
It's believed to be the first cross-cultural study of its kind.
In other findings, two-thirds of Canadian respondents said they were worried about providing personal information on websites.
About six in 10 Canadians rejected racial profiling at airports for security purposes, while only one-third of Americans objected.
North American Union: "New 9/11 crisis could be catalyst to merge U.S., Mexico & Canada."
North American Union leader says merger just crisis away
Leading intellectual force behind effort toward EU-style unity looks at future
by Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily
December 13, 2006
Robert Pastor, a leading intellectual force in the move to create an EU-style North American Community, told WND he believes a new 9/11 crisis could be the catalyst to merge the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
American University Professor Robert PastorPastor, a professor at American University, says that in such a case the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP – launched in 2005 by the heads of the three countries at a summit in Waco, Texas – could be developed into a continental union, complete with a new currency, the amero, that would replace the U.S. dollar just as the euro has replaced the national currencies of Europe.
In May 2005, Pastor was co-chairman the Council on Foreign Relations task force that produced a report entitled "Toward a North American Community," which he has claimed is the blueprint behind the SSP declared by [FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important][FONT='Times New Roman', Georgia, Times]President [/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=blue! important][FONT='Times New Roman', Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important]Bush[/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT], Mexico's then-President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-[FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important][FONT='Times New Roman', Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important]Prime [/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]Minister[/COLOR][/COLOR] Paul Martin.[/FONT]
At American University in Washington, D.C., Pastor directs the Center for North American Studies where he teaches a course entitled "North America: A Union, A Community, or Just Three Nations?" As WND previously has reported, Pastor is on the board of the North American Forum on Integration, the NAFI, a non-profit organization that annually holds a mock trilateral parliament for 100 selected students drawn from 10 universities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Pastor had published an interview in Spanish in the Oct. 24 issue of Poder y Negocios. He told the magazine crises can force decisions that otherwise would not be made.
"The 9/11 crisis made Canada and the United States redefine the protection of their borders," Pastor explained. "The debt crisis in Mexico forced the government to adapt a new economic model. The crises oblige the governments to make difficult decisions."
This was the first time WND had found a major intellectual leader behind the push to integrate North America suggesting that a crisis of 9-11 proportions might be just what was needed to advance the process toward establishing a North American Union and the amero. WND reached Pastor in his office at American University and conducted a telephone interview to make sure the Spanish publication accurately reflected his views.
He affirmed the Spanish interview represents his thinking.
"What I'm saying is that a crisis is an event which can force democratic governments to make difficult decisions like those that will be required to create a North American Community," he said. "It's not that I want another 9/11 crisis, but having a crisis would force decisions that otherwise might not get made."
Pastor noted, for example that "Europeans, facing the crisis of two World Wars, turned to the European Community as a means to prevent war and advance their economic interests."
"The United States turned to the Marshall Plan when faced with the crisis of Western Europe falling into the hands of communism," he said. "So, I'm not advocating, or encouraging, or wanting a crisis, I'm only saying that in order to take important initiatives, sometimes one manner in which this occurs is when there is a crisis to which leaders need to respond."
Pastor told WND he lamented that the leadership of the three North American countries is not positioned to make the type of tough decisions needed to advance a North American Community agenda.
In his interview with Poder y Negocios, he argued, "Canada has a minority government and Mexico will soon have a minority government that will be confronted with what amounts to an uprising that we hope will be peaceful. The United States has a lame duck president whose principle preoccupation is the war in Iraq and instability in the Middle East."
Pastor further told WND Mexico's Fox made a tactical mistake by laying out an overly ambitious agenda to integrate with the United States.
"President Bush then took on the issue of illegal immigration, and it proved to be much more difficult than anticipated," he said. In the absence of strong North American leadership, is a crisis the way greater North American integration can be expected to happen?
"There are alternatives to a crisis for getting a major decision adopted by the president and by the congress," Pastor responded. "But what I am saying is that we lack the kind of North American leadership we need. Our founding fathers created a system of governance that was not designed to be efficient but was designed to protect freedom. Therefore, you created checks and balances that did protect freedom but also made it difficult to move forward on important issues."
Pastor was asked what North American leaders would need to do to move toward integration.
"We need to form a customs union to move North American integration to a new level," Pastor argued. "A customs union would eliminate rules of origin on the border and agree to a common external tariff. This would not be easy but not as difficult as NAFTA was, and it would lead to efficiencies in our economies and in the end contribute to a better standard of living for all parties."
Pastor also called for a North American Investment Fund to invest in Mexico's infrastructure.
"If we had a North American Investment Fund," Pastor explained, "over the long term, you would narrow the income gap between Mexico and the U.S."
WND previously reported Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, dropped his support for legislation (S. 3622) he introduced in the 109th Congress to create a North American Investment Fund after WND pointed out the proposed law would advance an important part of Pastor's agenda to create a North American Community.
Pastor was careful to distinguish that his proposals were designed to create a North American Community and that he never has proposed to create a North American Union as an EU-style regional government.
"What I am recommending is a series of functional steps that are more than incremental," Pastor admitted. "Each of the proposals I have laid out represent more than just small steps. But it doesn't represent a leap toward a North American Union, or even to some confederation of any kind. I don't think either is plausible, necessary, or even helpful to contemplate at this stage."
The idea seems to be to put new structures in place that change the look of the landscape. WND pointed out to Pastor that this step-by-step approach is the same approach taken to create the European Union. The memoirs of Jean Monnet, regarded as the architect of European unity, finally disclosed he had used a strategy of deceit, knowing his plan to form a European Union would never succeed if it were openly disclosed.
Pastor was asked if he thought a North American Union was a bad idea.
"No," he replied. "I don't think a political union of North America is an inherently bad idea, nor do I think it is a good idea for North America right now. I teach a course at American University in which I look at the different options for political integration of North America, and I put the options before the students."
Then why is a North American Union a bad idea right now?
"The reason the political integration is not a good idea at this stage now, perhaps never, is because of people like yourself who immediately begin to fear that their sense of America could disappear," Pastor responded. "Somehow, if you're fearful that America's sovereignty will disappear, you won't even take small steps forward. You just get mired in the status quo. The problem is that the world is moving very rapidly, and you can't stay competitive if you don't move."
Pastor did not reject the idea that a North American Union could form, but only after further continental economic integration and the development of a North American Community in which people are able to think as citizens of North America.
Is China the winner in the NAFTA super-corridors being planned for North America?
"If you define trade in zero-sum terms, China may be the winner in the transportation corridors," Pastor conceded. "But even in zero-sum terms, consumers benefit from the increasing imports that give them more choice and give them more quality. In the final analysis, we are all consumers."
Pastor affirmed he favors globalism.
"I believe," he explained to WND, "that globalization is a net plus for the world economy, for the middle class, and for all people."
[/FONT][/FONT]
North American Union leader says merger just crisis away
Leading intellectual force behind effort toward EU-style unity looks at future
by Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily
December 13, 2006
Robert Pastor, a leading intellectual force in the move to create an EU-style North American Community, told WND he believes a new 9/11 crisis could be the catalyst to merge the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
In May 2005, Pastor was co-chairman the Council on Foreign Relations task force that produced a report entitled "Toward a North American Community," which he has claimed is the blueprint behind the SSP declared by [FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important][FONT='Times New Roman', Georgia, Times]President [/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=blue! important][FONT='Times New Roman', Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important]Bush[/COLOR][/COLOR][/FONT], Mexico's then-President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-[FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important][FONT='Times New Roman', Georgia, Times][COLOR=blue! important]Prime [/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]Minister[/COLOR][/COLOR] Paul Martin.[/FONT]
At American University in Washington, D.C., Pastor directs the Center for North American Studies where he teaches a course entitled "North America: A Union, A Community, or Just Three Nations?" As WND previously has reported, Pastor is on the board of the North American Forum on Integration, the NAFI, a non-profit organization that annually holds a mock trilateral parliament for 100 selected students drawn from 10 universities in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Pastor had published an interview in Spanish in the Oct. 24 issue of Poder y Negocios. He told the magazine crises can force decisions that otherwise would not be made.
"The 9/11 crisis made Canada and the United States redefine the protection of their borders," Pastor explained. "The debt crisis in Mexico forced the government to adapt a new economic model. The crises oblige the governments to make difficult decisions."
This was the first time WND had found a major intellectual leader behind the push to integrate North America suggesting that a crisis of 9-11 proportions might be just what was needed to advance the process toward establishing a North American Union and the amero. WND reached Pastor in his office at American University and conducted a telephone interview to make sure the Spanish publication accurately reflected his views.
He affirmed the Spanish interview represents his thinking.
"What I'm saying is that a crisis is an event which can force democratic governments to make difficult decisions like those that will be required to create a North American Community," he said. "It's not that I want another 9/11 crisis, but having a crisis would force decisions that otherwise might not get made."
Pastor noted, for example that "Europeans, facing the crisis of two World Wars, turned to the European Community as a means to prevent war and advance their economic interests."
"The United States turned to the Marshall Plan when faced with the crisis of Western Europe falling into the hands of communism," he said. "So, I'm not advocating, or encouraging, or wanting a crisis, I'm only saying that in order to take important initiatives, sometimes one manner in which this occurs is when there is a crisis to which leaders need to respond."
Pastor told WND he lamented that the leadership of the three North American countries is not positioned to make the type of tough decisions needed to advance a North American Community agenda.
In his interview with Poder y Negocios, he argued, "Canada has a minority government and Mexico will soon have a minority government that will be confronted with what amounts to an uprising that we hope will be peaceful. The United States has a lame duck president whose principle preoccupation is the war in Iraq and instability in the Middle East."
Pastor further told WND Mexico's Fox made a tactical mistake by laying out an overly ambitious agenda to integrate with the United States.
"President Bush then took on the issue of illegal immigration, and it proved to be much more difficult than anticipated," he said. In the absence of strong North American leadership, is a crisis the way greater North American integration can be expected to happen?
"There are alternatives to a crisis for getting a major decision adopted by the president and by the congress," Pastor responded. "But what I am saying is that we lack the kind of North American leadership we need. Our founding fathers created a system of governance that was not designed to be efficient but was designed to protect freedom. Therefore, you created checks and balances that did protect freedom but also made it difficult to move forward on important issues."
Pastor was asked what North American leaders would need to do to move toward integration.
"We need to form a customs union to move North American integration to a new level," Pastor argued. "A customs union would eliminate rules of origin on the border and agree to a common external tariff. This would not be easy but not as difficult as NAFTA was, and it would lead to efficiencies in our economies and in the end contribute to a better standard of living for all parties."
Pastor also called for a North American Investment Fund to invest in Mexico's infrastructure.
"If we had a North American Investment Fund," Pastor explained, "over the long term, you would narrow the income gap between Mexico and the U.S."
WND previously reported Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, dropped his support for legislation (S. 3622) he introduced in the 109th Congress to create a North American Investment Fund after WND pointed out the proposed law would advance an important part of Pastor's agenda to create a North American Community.
Pastor was careful to distinguish that his proposals were designed to create a North American Community and that he never has proposed to create a North American Union as an EU-style regional government.
"What I am recommending is a series of functional steps that are more than incremental," Pastor admitted. "Each of the proposals I have laid out represent more than just small steps. But it doesn't represent a leap toward a North American Union, or even to some confederation of any kind. I don't think either is plausible, necessary, or even helpful to contemplate at this stage."
The idea seems to be to put new structures in place that change the look of the landscape. WND pointed out to Pastor that this step-by-step approach is the same approach taken to create the European Union. The memoirs of Jean Monnet, regarded as the architect of European unity, finally disclosed he had used a strategy of deceit, knowing his plan to form a European Union would never succeed if it were openly disclosed.
Pastor was asked if he thought a North American Union was a bad idea.
"No," he replied. "I don't think a political union of North America is an inherently bad idea, nor do I think it is a good idea for North America right now. I teach a course at American University in which I look at the different options for political integration of North America, and I put the options before the students."
Then why is a North American Union a bad idea right now?
"The reason the political integration is not a good idea at this stage now, perhaps never, is because of people like yourself who immediately begin to fear that their sense of America could disappear," Pastor responded. "Somehow, if you're fearful that America's sovereignty will disappear, you won't even take small steps forward. You just get mired in the status quo. The problem is that the world is moving very rapidly, and you can't stay competitive if you don't move."
Pastor did not reject the idea that a North American Union could form, but only after further continental economic integration and the development of a North American Community in which people are able to think as citizens of North America.
Is China the winner in the NAFTA super-corridors being planned for North America?
"If you define trade in zero-sum terms, China may be the winner in the transportation corridors," Pastor conceded. "But even in zero-sum terms, consumers benefit from the increasing imports that give them more choice and give them more quality. In the final analysis, we are all consumers."
Pastor affirmed he favors globalism.
"I believe," he explained to WND, "that globalization is a net plus for the world economy, for the middle class, and for all people."
[/FONT][/FONT]
Because you are completely off your rocker. It is like debating with the insane. Just like Wolf said...you are currently surrounded with yellow police tape and we are self policing ourselves to move along as there truly is nothing to see here. You are just echoing the same hum-drum over and over...and over. You do not have the ability to reason. I think Logic 7 has truly met his match in you.
Eaglesmack
It's just an opinion dude! You know like...Saddam Hussein is our pal so long as he's fighting Iran...but then as soon as he does something we (America) doesn't like...and legitimizes the destruction of Iraq....well then all palsy-walsy bets are off.
Your government lied to you and sent your nation into an economic and political spiral heading for the basement....
It's just an opinion dude! You know like...Saddam Hussein is our pal so long as he's fighting Iran...but then as soon as he does something we (America) doesn't like...and legitimizes the destruction of Iraq....well then all palsy-walsy bets are off.
Your government lied to you and sent your nation into an economic and political spiral heading for the basement....
Adolf S Hussein was harbouring tons of dangerous WMDs and building palaces while eating his own Iraqeyian babies at barbacues in those palaces and he hated American values and American morals. The war had nothing to do with the very cheap high quality oil which Saddam was selling for fast cars and drugs while his people starved. "He would have destroyed Texas with nukes someday"; said Colihn Prowel at an Aipac meeting.
Is that an admission of your static nature Smack? Why do you enjoy this same subject so much? It's history smack most of the sentient planet knows the buildings was trashed by the neo-cons and the Israelis led by the bankers, it's been a very sucessful venture made oddles of money, changed the face and direction of the American nation. Nation is a polite way to describe what is without anydoubt the biggest criminal organization ever. A few wornout buildings and a few thousand irrelevent citizens is a small price to pay for a planet Smack. I wonder if General Motors will go bankrupt this week?:lol:
If jet fuel brought down the towers why did the empire state building not collapes
on july 26 1945.????????????
Elevator World
3/01/96
July 28, 1945 - Plane Hits Building - Woman Survives 75-Story Fall
By William Roberts
NEW YORK Lost amid the hoopla surrounding the celebrations of the end of World War II has been the 50th anniversary of the army plane crash into the Empire State Building. Many do not know of the tragic incident of July 28, 1945 -- the day a B-25 bomber, lost in fog, rammed into what was then the world's tallest building. Fewer, still, remember the miraculous survival of the woman who fell 75 stories when the cables to her elevator were severed.
Lieutenant Colonel William F. Smith, Jr., a decorated veteran of 100 combat missions, was piloting the bomber from his home in Bedford, Massachusetts to Newark, New Jersey to pick up his commanding officer, before returning to home base in South Dakota. The flight plan called for Smith to land at LaGuardia Airport. A dense fog over the city led the air traffic controller to direct that a landing be made. Smith, however, apparently believing he could maneuver safely through the fog, asked and received permission to fly on to Newark -- on the other side of Manhattan from LaGuardia. The last thing the air traffic controller told Smith was, 'At the present time, I can't see the top of the Empire State Building.'
The War Department, now a section of the Defense Department, later determined the pilot erred in judgment when electing to fly over Manhattan in the weather conditions which prevailed at the time' -- Smith should never have been cleared to proceed on to Newark. Disoriented by the dense fog, he apparently believed he was on Manhattan's west side.
Smith's final blunder came when he passed the Chrysler Building. Had he kicked the left rudder, he would have been safe; instead, he went right rudder and directly on a path to the Empire State Building. At 200 miles per hour, the unarmed trainer bomber screamed down 42nd Street and banked south over 5th Avenue. The pilot tried desperately to climb, but it was too late. At 9:40 that Saturday morning, the B-25 slammed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building.
Luckily, the accident occurred on a weekend, with only about 1,500 people in the building -- compared with the 10,000-15,000 on an average weekday. Still, 14 died in the accident -- 11 in the building, plus Colonel Smith and the other two occupants of the plane. Hardest hit was the Catholic War Relief Office on the 79th floor, directly in the path of the bomber. Eight relief office workers were killed.
Extensive Damage Reported
Damage to the building and the surrounding area was extensive. An 18-by-20 foot hole was gouged by the B-25, and one of the plane's engines plowed through the building, emerging on the 33rd Street side and crashing through the roof of a neighboring building. Upon impact, windows shattered, and glass fell to the street. When the bomber hit, its fuel tanks exploded, sending flames racing across the 79th floor in all directions. According to Althea S. Lethbridge, a secretary for a trading company on the 72nd floor, 'Everything shook. (At the window), we saw flames below and above us. It was scary; we didn't know how fireproof the building was.'
Lethbridge and those not severely injured had to walk 70 flights down the darkened stairwell. Many reported seeing flaming debris fall down the elevator shafts. Unaware that the plane's other engine and part of its landing gear had fallen through the elevator shaft, rescue workers used elevators to transport casualties.
Unbeknownst to rescuers, when the hoist and governor cables of one of the elevators had been severed, ropes to other cars had been weakened. Nevertheless, the elevators had to be used to transport those severely injured, including Betty Lou Oliver. As the plane hit, Oliver, an elevator operator, was blown out of her post on the 80th floor and badly burned. After receiving first aid, she was put in another car to go down to an ambulance. As the elevator doors closed, rescue workers heard what sounded like a gunshot but what was, in fact, the snapping of elevator cables weakened by the crash. The car with Oliver inside, now at the 75th floor, plunged to the sub-basement, a fall of over 1,000 feet. Rescuers had to cut a hole in the car to get to the badly injured elevator operator.
Despite a harrowing experience, Oliver survived, due in large part to the elevator safety devices which served their function, though perhaps not as envisioned. The elevator car safety could not set because the governor cable had been severed by the plane's impact. Therefore, other factors contributed to slowing the elevator and 'cushioning' its fall. As the elevator fell, the compensating cables, hanging from beneath the car, piled up in the pit and acted as a coiled spring, slowing the elevator. Also, the hatchway was of a 'high-pressure' design, with minimum clearance around the car. In such a small space, the air was compressed under the falling elevator. With such a tight fit of the car in the hatchway, the trapped air created an air cushion in the lower portion of the shaft -- thereby further slowing the elevator car and allowing its occupant to survive.
Though this accident can certainly be noted as a tragedy, some comfort can be found; the loss of life was certainly not as great as it could have been. Had it occurred on a weekday, the accident would have claimed many more casualties. If the plane had been a fully armed B-25 bomber instead of a trainer, the destruction and devastation could have been catastrophic. In addition, had the elevator been installed improperly or had its safety devices been of poor quality -- even though they may not have worked exactly as envisioned, they still performed their duty by saving a human life -- Ms. Oliver could not have fallen 1,000 feet in an elevator and lived to tell about it.
In the March 1957 Reader's Digest, an article was published concerning the 'Nightmare on the 79th floor of the Empire State Building.' Following the Reader's Digest report, a letter was written by an Otis Elevator Company supervisor who was in charge of the elevator repair. The writer, who wished to remain anonymous, presented a detailed and colorful explanation of the damage and extensive repair effort. Following is a synopsis of the elevator supervisor's report.
I was superintendent for Otis Elevator Company and in charge of installing the 69 elevators when the Empire State Building was erected in 1930-31. When the steel was up to the main floor, I got in with my men -- the first week in May 1930. On May 1, 1931, the building with the elevators was completed, a remarkable undertaking in so short a time. On that day, we had lunch on the 86th floor. The party included James Walker, then New York City mayor; Franklin D. Roosevelt, then governor of the state; and my good friend Al Smith, ex-governor and president of the Empire State Corporation.
While the building was under construction, I always had a car running, so I could take Governor Smith and his party to the top. Architects and construction men from all over the world visited the building while it was under construction.
In September, at the peak, 3,500 men worked on the construction, and temporary elevators had to take them up and down. They never walked much -- six stories, at the most, to the top of the steel.
When the army bomber struck the building, I was called in to take charge of repairing the damage and get all 11 elevators running up to the 80th floor -- ten Bank 'G', one freight and #2 tower car, from 79th to 86th floor.
One plane motor went right through the bottom of the car equipment, hitting one of our guide rails (3-1/2 x 5"), doubling it in a 'V' shape. The motor then went through the building, tore a hole 20 feet wide, took the windows and wall down with it (78 floors) and landed in a building across the 33rd Street side. The plane was moving upward when it struck. (The pilot must have seen the building.) Walls between the three columns were torn 40 feet wide, the plane taking bricks and windows from the 78th and 79th floors with it, as well as one 10" I-beam -- eight feet inside the building -- supporting the 79th floor; the 20 foot long beam had a 30" bow. The plane penetrated the #6 and #7 car hatch walls, cutting the cable on the #6 car that was on its way down. Our selector in the motor room indicated the cables were cut when the car was at about the 38th floor.
All the governor and safety cables were sheared, so the car went into free fall. Fortunately for the female operator, the safety cable was severed; if not, the governor in the motor room would have applied the safety device under the cable. The car would then have stopped at the 34th and 35th floor in a blind hatch (blind hatch means no doors from the 40th to the main floor express cars) -- with marble and brick walls to break through to find where the car was located. When anything like that would happen, a mechanic can take the people off to the car next to his. Doors exist between the cars for that purpose, but the #7 car was hanging in the cables and burning on the 80th floor. The #6 car was afire -- it, too, stuck up there. The girl operator might have died from smoke suffocation.
A few seconds later, the car was in the basement. Fortunately, a basement door was in the #6 car shaft. The car doors were completely ripped out. No doubt, the air pressure -- caused by the car coming down -- blasted open the door in the pit. The operator stood in the corner, where the car switch was located. The rest of the car was filled with steel, bricks and plane parts. It surprised me that she was not more badly hurt.
When the installers first tested the safeties on the elevators, they had full load capacity -- 3500 lb -- in the car and ran them at 1,200 fpm from the tenth floor right down to the oil bluffers in the pits.
Now, the car was empty, and the cables under the car formed another cushion. The counterweight (balancing weight) was at about the 50th floor when the cables were cut. Over 10,000 lbs of iron started down. The two safety cables, also cut, struck the pit buffer block, went through 12" of concrete, shearing thirty 1" rivets; two 15" channels imbedded in concrete. (The column was only five feet away from the buffer block, the buffer piston and the weight oil buffer.) A steel rod -- 4" and about nine feet long -- went right through the concrete, broke a water main pipe, flooded the sub-basement, went through an 8" solid brick wall and landed in a storeroom in the sub-basement.
This was in addition to the oil, gas and bodies of the people from the 79th floor. We had the police emergency squad with us for ten days. When cleaned from the top of the car, we had to cut the cable by hand to get them out. It was a mess to clean up!
The motor went through the doors, the #6 and #7 cars, and over the hall, taking the wall and hatch doors with it down the #2 hatch. The motor cut the cables to that car. Cars #1 and #2 were shut down on the main floor and only slid down the bumpers with all the cables, doors, plane motor and parts on top of the #2 car. The counterweight was up at the 80th floor. When the cables were cut, 10,000 lbs of steel started down, but luckily, the two governor cables were okay. The governor and safety caught the weight at the 76th floor and hung there. When the #6 car was on the way down, the #7 car operator stood at the 80th floor -- awaiting orders from the starter at the main floor for the signal to start down. When the plane struck, the operator was blown out into the hall.
The #7 car hanging in the cables (at the 80th floor) was all burnt up. The metal trim and car-operating switch were all melted. The guide rails were all knocked out under the car at the 79th floor.
Five months after the accident, the girl (Betty Lou Oliver) who was in the #6 car visited the building. I talked with her. She did not know what happened. It was over in a few seconds. She took one of the cars and made a full trip with it. That took 'guts' after all she had been through.
I was there one year before the job was finished. The #1 car got all busted up and had to be replaced. In a week, we had six cars in operation, next #1-2 cars and finally #6-7 cars. We had some job keeping the men's time and the materials straight. The Army had to pay for all damage done by the bomber; the First Insurance Company paid for the damage by fire.
We had to replace all our equipment in four hatches from the 76th floor to the top, replacing all electric conduits and wiring from the 64th floor up. We had to get in an elevator hoist containing 5,000 ft of 1/2" steel cables on it. One armature had a cracked shaft; we had to replace it: a weight of 9,500 lbs. We took it in on the main floor, hoisted it up to the 79th floor in the #6 hatch, hauled it over the hall to the #2 tower car hatch, picked it up with a chain fall -- attached to the main rails -- to the 82nd floor motor room and up in the machine. The damaged armature had to go down the same way.
We also had to hoist the #6 counterweight frame up to the 80th floor.
Only one elevator fell. Number 1 and 2 cars were shut down at the main floor; #6 car was in the pit, with the #7 car hanging in the cables on the 80th floor. Cars three, four, five, eight, nine and ten were in their own wells. The only damage to them was hatch doors at the 78th and 79th floors being scorched by fire. We had to put in new compensating cables on the freight car running from the sub-basement to the 80th floor. They were damaged when the pit filled with water from the broken water main. After the pit was pumped and safety switches dried, we had that car running in a few days.
Part of the plane slid down the outside of the building on the 34th Street side, landing on the opposite side of the 5th floor. Some boys picked up plane parts and sold them to souvenir hunters on the street.
Industry Tribute
This historical report serves as a tribute to the members of the elevator industry who sprang into action to repair the elevators which were severely damaged during this unusual accident. Although this event was the first high-rise building catastrophe which wreaked havoc on elevator and escalator equipment, it would certainly not be the last.
The World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombings, as well as earthquakes and fires which have occurred in and around high-rise structures over the last 50 years, have presented severe challenges to our industry's field personnel and repair mechanics. Through dedication and hard work, field workers have, time and again, restored elevator service in record time and, as so often reported in ELEVATOR WORLD, assisted in the rescue of building occupants. This report is dedicated to the elevator industry personnel who have risen to the occasion and performed with selfless, heroic effort.
REPRINTS of this historical supplement can be obtained by contacting Stacie Hyman at phone: (334) 479-4514.
ELEVATOR WORLD UNCOVERS NEW INFORMATION
During the investigation into the event at the Empire State Building, ELEVATOR WORLD uncovered a major misconception regarding the circumstances.
It has long been believed that the elevator operator who fell 75 stories was operating her elevator when the crash severed the cables to her car. Our recent investigation found that Betty Lou Oliver had actually been thrown from her car station post during the aircraft's initial impact. When the plane hit the building, Oliver's car was parked at the 80th floor. The crash severed elevator cables, but those supporting Oliver's car remained intact, although they and many other cable attachments were weakened. After receiving care for severe burns, Oliver was taking another elevator down from the 80th floor first aid station when this second car's weakened cables snapped, sending Oliver and her elevator on a 1,000-foot plunge.
Fortunately, the reports of Oliver's survival had not been exaggerated, nor were the accounts of her remarkable experiences during the plane's initial impact, its resulting explosion and fire, and the 1,000-foot free fall into the elevator pit.
An often-asked question is, 'Has there even been a case where all elevator ropes were severed, causing an elevator to fall?' The plane crash into the Empire State Building is the only such occurance. This final report provides an accurate accounting of one of the most unusual accidents to ever occur in elevator and aircraft history. Coincidentally, just two weeks after the 50th anniversary of the B-25 crash, another accident occurred at the Empire State Building. Though far less severe, this most recent incident may be of greater concern to the elevator industry, for reasons behind the elevator crash of September 12, 1995 are still unclear. There were no fatalities, but four occupants slammed into the car ceiling -- receiving head, neck and back injuries when their elevator missed its 80th floor stop and crashed into the top of the shaft. Investigations into the accident are underway, and details pertinent to the elevator industry will be reported by ELEVATOR WORLD.
on july 26 1945.????????????
.
Elevator World
3/01/96
July 28, 1945 - Plane Hits Building - Woman Survives 75-Story Fall
By William Roberts
NEW YORK Lost amid the hoopla surrounding the celebrations of the end of World War II has been the 50th anniversary of the army plane crash into the Empire State Building. Many do not know of the tragic incident of July 28, 1945 -- the day a B-25 bomber, lost in fog, rammed into what was then the world's tallest building. Fewer, still, remember the miraculous survival of the woman who fell 75 stories when the cables to her elevator were severed.
Lieutenant Colonel William F. Smith, Jr., a decorated veteran of 100 combat missions, was piloting the bomber from his home in Bedford, Massachusetts to Newark, New Jersey to pick up his commanding officer, before returning to home base in South Dakota. The flight plan called for Smith to land at LaGuardia Airport. A dense fog over the city led the air traffic controller to direct that a landing be made. Smith, however, apparently believing he could maneuver safely through the fog, asked and received permission to fly on to Newark -- on the other side of Manhattan from LaGuardia. The last thing the air traffic controller told Smith was, 'At the present time, I can't see the top of the Empire State Building.'
The War Department, now a section of the Defense Department, later determined the pilot erred in judgment when electing to fly over Manhattan in the weather conditions which prevailed at the time' -- Smith should never have been cleared to proceed on to Newark. Disoriented by the dense fog, he apparently believed he was on Manhattan's west side.
Smith's final blunder came when he passed the Chrysler Building. Had he kicked the left rudder, he would have been safe; instead, he went right rudder and directly on a path to the Empire State Building. At 200 miles per hour, the unarmed trainer bomber screamed down 42nd Street and banked south over 5th Avenue. The pilot tried desperately to climb, but it was too late. At 9:40 that Saturday morning, the B-25 slammed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building.
Luckily, the accident occurred on a weekend, with only about 1,500 people in the building -- compared with the 10,000-15,000 on an average weekday. Still, 14 died in the accident -- 11 in the building, plus Colonel Smith and the other two occupants of the plane. Hardest hit was the Catholic War Relief Office on the 79th floor, directly in the path of the bomber. Eight relief office workers were killed.
Extensive Damage Reported
Damage to the building and the surrounding area was extensive. An 18-by-20 foot hole was gouged by the B-25, and one of the plane's engines plowed through the building, emerging on the 33rd Street side and crashing through the roof of a neighboring building. Upon impact, windows shattered, and glass fell to the street. When the bomber hit, its fuel tanks exploded, sending flames racing across the 79th floor in all directions. According to Althea S. Lethbridge, a secretary for a trading company on the 72nd floor, 'Everything shook. (At the window), we saw flames below and above us. It was scary; we didn't know how fireproof the building was.'
Lethbridge and those not severely injured had to walk 70 flights down the darkened stairwell. Many reported seeing flaming debris fall down the elevator shafts. Unaware that the plane's other engine and part of its landing gear had fallen through the elevator shaft, rescue workers used elevators to transport casualties.
Unbeknownst to rescuers, when the hoist and governor cables of one of the elevators had been severed, ropes to other cars had been weakened. Nevertheless, the elevators had to be used to transport those severely injured, including Betty Lou Oliver. As the plane hit, Oliver, an elevator operator, was blown out of her post on the 80th floor and badly burned. After receiving first aid, she was put in another car to go down to an ambulance. As the elevator doors closed, rescue workers heard what sounded like a gunshot but what was, in fact, the snapping of elevator cables weakened by the crash. The car with Oliver inside, now at the 75th floor, plunged to the sub-basement, a fall of over 1,000 feet. Rescuers had to cut a hole in the car to get to the badly injured elevator operator.
Despite a harrowing experience, Oliver survived, due in large part to the elevator safety devices which served their function, though perhaps not as envisioned. The elevator car safety could not set because the governor cable had been severed by the plane's impact. Therefore, other factors contributed to slowing the elevator and 'cushioning' its fall. As the elevator fell, the compensating cables, hanging from beneath the car, piled up in the pit and acted as a coiled spring, slowing the elevator. Also, the hatchway was of a 'high-pressure' design, with minimum clearance around the car. In such a small space, the air was compressed under the falling elevator. With such a tight fit of the car in the hatchway, the trapped air created an air cushion in the lower portion of the shaft -- thereby further slowing the elevator car and allowing its occupant to survive.
Though this accident can certainly be noted as a tragedy, some comfort can be found; the loss of life was certainly not as great as it could have been. Had it occurred on a weekday, the accident would have claimed many more casualties. If the plane had been a fully armed B-25 bomber instead of a trainer, the destruction and devastation could have been catastrophic. In addition, had the elevator been installed improperly or had its safety devices been of poor quality -- even though they may not have worked exactly as envisioned, they still performed their duty by saving a human life -- Ms. Oliver could not have fallen 1,000 feet in an elevator and lived to tell about it.
In the March 1957 Reader's Digest, an article was published concerning the 'Nightmare on the 79th floor of the Empire State Building.' Following the Reader's Digest report, a letter was written by an Otis Elevator Company supervisor who was in charge of the elevator repair. The writer, who wished to remain anonymous, presented a detailed and colorful explanation of the damage and extensive repair effort. Following is a synopsis of the elevator supervisor's report.
I was superintendent for Otis Elevator Company and in charge of installing the 69 elevators when the Empire State Building was erected in 1930-31. When the steel was up to the main floor, I got in with my men -- the first week in May 1930. On May 1, 1931, the building with the elevators was completed, a remarkable undertaking in so short a time. On that day, we had lunch on the 86th floor. The party included James Walker, then New York City mayor; Franklin D. Roosevelt, then governor of the state; and my good friend Al Smith, ex-governor and president of the Empire State Corporation.
While the building was under construction, I always had a car running, so I could take Governor Smith and his party to the top. Architects and construction men from all over the world visited the building while it was under construction.
In September, at the peak, 3,500 men worked on the construction, and temporary elevators had to take them up and down. They never walked much -- six stories, at the most, to the top of the steel.
When the army bomber struck the building, I was called in to take charge of repairing the damage and get all 11 elevators running up to the 80th floor -- ten Bank 'G', one freight and #2 tower car, from 79th to 86th floor.
One plane motor went right through the bottom of the car equipment, hitting one of our guide rails (3-1/2 x 5"), doubling it in a 'V' shape. The motor then went through the building, tore a hole 20 feet wide, took the windows and wall down with it (78 floors) and landed in a building across the 33rd Street side. The plane was moving upward when it struck. (The pilot must have seen the building.) Walls between the three columns were torn 40 feet wide, the plane taking bricks and windows from the 78th and 79th floors with it, as well as one 10" I-beam -- eight feet inside the building -- supporting the 79th floor; the 20 foot long beam had a 30" bow. The plane penetrated the #6 and #7 car hatch walls, cutting the cable on the #6 car that was on its way down. Our selector in the motor room indicated the cables were cut when the car was at about the 38th floor.
All the governor and safety cables were sheared, so the car went into free fall. Fortunately for the female operator, the safety cable was severed; if not, the governor in the motor room would have applied the safety device under the cable. The car would then have stopped at the 34th and 35th floor in a blind hatch (blind hatch means no doors from the 40th to the main floor express cars) -- with marble and brick walls to break through to find where the car was located. When anything like that would happen, a mechanic can take the people off to the car next to his. Doors exist between the cars for that purpose, but the #7 car was hanging in the cables and burning on the 80th floor. The #6 car was afire -- it, too, stuck up there. The girl operator might have died from smoke suffocation.
A few seconds later, the car was in the basement. Fortunately, a basement door was in the #6 car shaft. The car doors were completely ripped out. No doubt, the air pressure -- caused by the car coming down -- blasted open the door in the pit. The operator stood in the corner, where the car switch was located. The rest of the car was filled with steel, bricks and plane parts. It surprised me that she was not more badly hurt.
When the installers first tested the safeties on the elevators, they had full load capacity -- 3500 lb -- in the car and ran them at 1,200 fpm from the tenth floor right down to the oil bluffers in the pits.
Now, the car was empty, and the cables under the car formed another cushion. The counterweight (balancing weight) was at about the 50th floor when the cables were cut. Over 10,000 lbs of iron started down. The two safety cables, also cut, struck the pit buffer block, went through 12" of concrete, shearing thirty 1" rivets; two 15" channels imbedded in concrete. (The column was only five feet away from the buffer block, the buffer piston and the weight oil buffer.) A steel rod -- 4" and about nine feet long -- went right through the concrete, broke a water main pipe, flooded the sub-basement, went through an 8" solid brick wall and landed in a storeroom in the sub-basement.
This was in addition to the oil, gas and bodies of the people from the 79th floor. We had the police emergency squad with us for ten days. When cleaned from the top of the car, we had to cut the cable by hand to get them out. It was a mess to clean up!
The motor went through the doors, the #6 and #7 cars, and over the hall, taking the wall and hatch doors with it down the #2 hatch. The motor cut the cables to that car. Cars #1 and #2 were shut down on the main floor and only slid down the bumpers with all the cables, doors, plane motor and parts on top of the #2 car. The counterweight was up at the 80th floor. When the cables were cut, 10,000 lbs of steel started down, but luckily, the two governor cables were okay. The governor and safety caught the weight at the 76th floor and hung there. When the #6 car was on the way down, the #7 car operator stood at the 80th floor -- awaiting orders from the starter at the main floor for the signal to start down. When the plane struck, the operator was blown out into the hall.
The #7 car hanging in the cables (at the 80th floor) was all burnt up. The metal trim and car-operating switch were all melted. The guide rails were all knocked out under the car at the 79th floor.
Five months after the accident, the girl (Betty Lou Oliver) who was in the #6 car visited the building. I talked with her. She did not know what happened. It was over in a few seconds. She took one of the cars and made a full trip with it. That took 'guts' after all she had been through.
I was there one year before the job was finished. The #1 car got all busted up and had to be replaced. In a week, we had six cars in operation, next #1-2 cars and finally #6-7 cars. We had some job keeping the men's time and the materials straight. The Army had to pay for all damage done by the bomber; the First Insurance Company paid for the damage by fire.
We had to replace all our equipment in four hatches from the 76th floor to the top, replacing all electric conduits and wiring from the 64th floor up. We had to get in an elevator hoist containing 5,000 ft of 1/2" steel cables on it. One armature had a cracked shaft; we had to replace it: a weight of 9,500 lbs. We took it in on the main floor, hoisted it up to the 79th floor in the #6 hatch, hauled it over the hall to the #2 tower car hatch, picked it up with a chain fall -- attached to the main rails -- to the 82nd floor motor room and up in the machine. The damaged armature had to go down the same way.
We also had to hoist the #6 counterweight frame up to the 80th floor.
Only one elevator fell. Number 1 and 2 cars were shut down at the main floor; #6 car was in the pit, with the #7 car hanging in the cables on the 80th floor. Cars three, four, five, eight, nine and ten were in their own wells. The only damage to them was hatch doors at the 78th and 79th floors being scorched by fire. We had to put in new compensating cables on the freight car running from the sub-basement to the 80th floor. They were damaged when the pit filled with water from the broken water main. After the pit was pumped and safety switches dried, we had that car running in a few days.
Part of the plane slid down the outside of the building on the 34th Street side, landing on the opposite side of the 5th floor. Some boys picked up plane parts and sold them to souvenir hunters on the street.
Industry Tribute
This historical report serves as a tribute to the members of the elevator industry who sprang into action to repair the elevators which were severely damaged during this unusual accident. Although this event was the first high-rise building catastrophe which wreaked havoc on elevator and escalator equipment, it would certainly not be the last.
The World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombings, as well as earthquakes and fires which have occurred in and around high-rise structures over the last 50 years, have presented severe challenges to our industry's field personnel and repair mechanics. Through dedication and hard work, field workers have, time and again, restored elevator service in record time and, as so often reported in ELEVATOR WORLD, assisted in the rescue of building occupants. This report is dedicated to the elevator industry personnel who have risen to the occasion and performed with selfless, heroic effort.
REPRINTS of this historical supplement can be obtained by contacting Stacie Hyman at phone: (334) 479-4514.
ELEVATOR WORLD UNCOVERS NEW INFORMATION
During the investigation into the event at the Empire State Building, ELEVATOR WORLD uncovered a major misconception regarding the circumstances.
It has long been believed that the elevator operator who fell 75 stories was operating her elevator when the crash severed the cables to her car. Our recent investigation found that Betty Lou Oliver had actually been thrown from her car station post during the aircraft's initial impact. When the plane hit the building, Oliver's car was parked at the 80th floor. The crash severed elevator cables, but those supporting Oliver's car remained intact, although they and many other cable attachments were weakened. After receiving care for severe burns, Oliver was taking another elevator down from the 80th floor first aid station when this second car's weakened cables snapped, sending Oliver and her elevator on a 1,000-foot plunge.
Fortunately, the reports of Oliver's survival had not been exaggerated, nor were the accounts of her remarkable experiences during the plane's initial impact, its resulting explosion and fire, and the 1,000-foot free fall into the elevator pit.
An often-asked question is, 'Has there even been a case where all elevator ropes were severed, causing an elevator to fall?' The plane crash into the Empire State Building is the only such occurance. This final report provides an accurate accounting of one of the most unusual accidents to ever occur in elevator and aircraft history. Coincidentally, just two weeks after the 50th anniversary of the B-25 crash, another accident occurred at the Empire State Building. Though far less severe, this most recent incident may be of greater concern to the elevator industry, for reasons behind the elevator crash of September 12, 1995 are still unclear. There were no fatalities, but four occupants slammed into the car ceiling -- receiving head, neck and back injuries when their elevator missed its 80th floor stop and crashed into the top of the shaft. Investigations into the accident are underway, and details pertinent to the elevator industry will be reported by ELEVATOR WORLD.
Last edited:
Two completely different buildings, two completely different airplanes, two completely different sets of circumstances, two completely different sets of results....WOW!!! Mindboggling!!! 8O
You're really on to something there.
Well, there goes your pentagon conspiracy. :-(
You're really on to something there.
Well, there goes your pentagon conspiracy. :-(
- Status