Maturin42's Blog

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

How Serious are the Democrats About Opposing Giuliani?

by Shelton F. Lankford

Rudy Giuliani is running on a platform of being the smart George W. Bush who was large and in charge on 9/11 in New York City. Why this should invoke anything other than condemnation and ridicule from thinking Americans is a mystery rivaling anything I have seen in popular culture. But Rudy is running on that platform, so let’s examine it for a few moments.

Rudy’s image that day is mostly based on the news footage of him walking rapidly through the devastated New York streets with an entourage of syncophants and hangers-on, clutching a dust-mask and barking orders. The reason he was doing that instead of taking up his post at the center of a communications network that coordinated city response to the attacks of that day, is because he had overruled most of the advice and counsel regarding the placement of his multi-million dollar Emergency Operations Center from which a response to a crisis of this nature could be directed. Most advice was to place it in Brooklyn, and experts warned that the World Trade Center, having once been a terrorist target, and literally the highest profile buldings in the city, likely would be again. But Rudy, heavily influenced by Jerome Hauer, his Director of Emergency Management, knew best, and so the EOC was placed on the 23rd floor of WTC Bldg. 7, after extensive modifications and reinforcements had been installed to provide environmental isolation and fortification against blast and other threats. This was the logical place for the Mayor to locate on the morning of the most serious attacks on American soil since the Civil War.

The Mayor never went there on 9/11, but instead set up a temporary command post at 75 Barkeley street - across West Street from Bldg. Seven. What did he know that kept him from going to his EOC? While the planes had damaged the tops of the towers and they were on fire, the possibility that they might collapse had to be considered remote, because nothing like that had ever happened. Building 7 was not damaged at that time. The Towers were designed to absorb such a blow and remain standing.

Here is Giuliani’s account, broadcast on 11 September, 2001 by ABC News:
"I--I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, the head of emergency management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us."

This year, confronted by protestors at a public appearance in New York, his account is somewhat different. The protesters wanted to know why, if he was warned of the imminent collapse of the buildings, firefighters and police officers inside the buildings were not warned to evacuate. Rudy, forgetting that modern devices called cameras and recorders exist, replied, saying "I didn't realize the towers would collapse." He later added, "No one that I know of had any idea they would implode. That was a complete surprise." Notice that his denials take the form of “I didn’t realize...” instead of “I was not warned”.

As the man says - “Were you lying then or are you lying now?” I can think of a few reasons why he would be lying now. Foreknowledge of an event with no precedent in history bespeaks either extraordinary prescience, or insider knowledge. Since FEMA had the foresight to locate in New York the night before for a “drill” scheduled for Tuesday, is it unreasonable to believe that they would have coordinated with the Mayor? The evidence of the deliberate destruction of the WTC complex by controlled demolition is overwhelming (See AE911truth.org for the particulars) and FEMA is a strong suspect as the one who pushed the buttons. Since it would have been bad form to blow up an important personage like the Mayor, his warning was most likely a courtesy - one insider to another. The warning did not originate from fire officials, some of whom were inside the building and died in the collapse, although it was noted that the temporary CP located inside the South tower mysteriously cleared out very shortly before the building exploded.

So the great leader of 9/11 is either an incompetent who used poor judgment or a liar and traitor to his own people about whom he had no thoughts at all when danger was upon them, or both. One would think that such a record would cause one to shrink from the public spotlight, but not Rudy.

In either case, it isn’t much of a recommendation for a candidate for President of the United States. It is much more of a reason to question him closely under oath in a court of law to determine if he should join Dick Cheney and others central to the false-flag attacks on America that day in the dock to show cause why the American people should not demand justice for their crimes.

The Democrats, while discomfited by the attacks on their front-runners by the Giuliani campaign, oddly avoid any mention of this bald-faced lie or the implications presented by it. You see, it involves opening a can of worms with 9/11 on the side, and according to the new rules of conduct apparently understood by everyone but written down nowhere, one does not mention 9/11 and insider knowledge in the same breath. It just is not done in polite political circles. This rivalry business must only go so far. So we must all voice our faith in the orthodoxy that Osama and the 19 caused 9/11 and anything else is just Conspiracy Theory. While this comes dangerously close to requiring a "religious test" for high office, something forbidden by Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution, failure to declare for it is akin to professing atheism for a candidate. The harpies of Fox News and other lame-stream outlets would descend en masse upon your head should you break this rule, and the other candidates would join the chorus.

As long as our politics are confined to the narrow field described by two parties, both controlled by insiders, and committed to keeping things pretty much as they are, with the bulk of our wealth going to the M/I complex and corporate welfare and the crumbs being squabbled over by the rabble, thus it shall ever be. The river Denial runs deep through our land and our politics.

It's a sad fate for what used to be the beacon of freedom for the world.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



<< Home