Fornits
General Interest => Let's talk about the weather... => Topic started by: Deborah on September 10, 2005, 10:10:00 AM
-
EXPLOSIVE RESIDUE FOUND ON FAILED LEVEE DEBRIS! Ruptured New Orleans Levee had help failing By: Hal Turner September 9, 2005 3:36 PM EDT New Orleans, LA -- Divers inspecting the ruptured levee walls surrounding New Orleans found something that piqued their interest: Burn marks on underwater debris chunks from the broken levee wall! One diver, a member of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, saw the burn marks and knew immediately what caused them. He secreted a small chunk of the cement inside his diving suit and later arranged for it to be sent to trusted military friends at a The U.S. Army Forensic Laboratory at Fort Gillem, Georgia for testing. According to well placed sources, a military forensic specialist determined the burn marks on the cement chunks did, in fact, come from high explosives. The source, speaking on condition of anonymity said "We found traces of boron-enhanced fluoronitramino explosives as well as PBXN-111. This would indicate at least two separate types of explosive devices." The levee ruptures in New Orleans did not take place during Hurricane Katrina, but rather a day after the hurricane struck. Several residents of New Orleans and many Emergency Workers reported hearing what sounded like large, muffled explosions from the area of the levee, but those were initially discounted as gas explosions from homes with leaking gas lines. If these allegations prove true, the ruptured levee which flooded New Orleans was a deliberate act of mass destruction perpetrated by someone with access to military-grade UNDERWATER high explosives. More details as they become available . . . . .
http://www.halturnershow.com/DiversFind ... dLevy.html (http://www.halturnershow.com/DiversFindExplosiveResidueOnRupturedLevy.html)
http://cathiefromcanada.dailykos.com/st ... 1752/03876 (http://cathiefromcanada.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/7/01752/03876)
Eminent Domain and other important questions
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/13 ... php#135100 (http://la.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/135069_comment.php#135100)
http://www.rense.com/general67/painful.htm (http://www.rense.com/general67/painful.htm)
-
Holy sheep shit, batman!
Ok, so if all indications point to an inside job again, will that finally be enough to get America united against these fascist idiots?
Government operates best when it allows all messengers to offer their views, allowing the American people to decide which take root and which wither away.
--Harold Furchtgott-Roth, member of the Federal Communications Commission
-
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/7/145445/9698 (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/7/145445/9698)
MILITARY RECRUITMENT - 9/7 JOB FAIR IN THE ASTRODOME
NO SCAVENGING THE GULF COAST CRISIS TO BOOST THE
DEPLETED RANKS OF THE MILITARY!
>
Stop the military from preying upon the vulnerable! Come educate youth dislocated from their lives and communities - facing homelessness, joblessness and often hopelessness -about the false promises of recruiters!
>
Doling out food to the hungry crowds overflowing
Houston's Astrodome, the National Guard has engaged in ad hoc recruiting in recent days.
Tomorrow, September 7, 2005, the U.S. military is
conducting a Job Fair in the Astrodome in a blatant effort to exploit the despair of masses of Americans evacuated from the Gulf Coast. Once
signed up, even if purportedly to reconstruct their region, they could easily find themselves deployed to Iraq, left with medical coverage for only two for only combat-related injury and the expectations for training eviscerated. And if they sign up on the promise of temporary relief,
they could find themselves bound for extended tours of duty.
>
*************************************************
Forwarding:
No link was provided with this. More on eminent domain at the end
-------------------------
Black Water
I've spent days scrutinizing satellite photos of New Orleans, helping people check out their houses. Inevitably, if they or their neighbors
had a swimming pool, the turquoise blue of the pool visible on the pre-Katrina image is black on Digital Globe's shots from August 31st 10 AM. Also, as I said in a previous post, I was pretty
certain that certain corporate names, familiar from the mercenary industry in Iraq, were going to turn up in New Orleans. So this evening I got an email from Patrick Nielsen Hayden informing me that Blackwater's in New Orleans. Bodyguards to the coalition, they have a certain cowboy
reputation among the private "security" firms. The
style of their website tends to be a little over-the-top macho in comparison to other private military firms, whose websites tend to mimic
accounting firms, as though it was sercurities (in the plural) they were selling, rather than "security."
And, yes, those were Blackwater guys who died in
Falluja, touching off the public revelation that at Paul Bremer's instigation, Iraq was awash in mercenaries who were pulling down salaries ten
times what the American troops stationed there were making.
Blackwater. From a novelistic standpoint, it is inevitable that they would turn up in the city in which there is so much water and on the satellite photos it looks like a black stain. And really, when you hire mercenaries, a certain amount of murkiness about accountability is part of what you are paying for. I lost track: were any of the private contractors implicated in the torture documented in the Taguba report ever actually
charged with anything? What ever happened to John
Israel and Steve Stephanowitz?
Sending Blackwater into New Orleans is the
twenty-first century's sad answer to that quaint twentieth-century phrase "send in the marines."
It is the public confession that too much of our
infrastructure has been "privatized," by which we mean that services formerly provided by
government employees accountable to the American
people can now be purchased, often at much higher prices, from the private sector, opening up much larger opportunities for war (and now disaster)
profiteering. This is not to say that there aren't
talented, strong, idealistic young men working for companies like Blackwater. But rather the privatization of these areas of endeavor, in light
of the Iraq experience, is part cynical exercise in looting of the public treasuries, and part liberating the government from the burdensome
accountability that keeps public employees from
behaving like action heroes do in the movies.
Put yourself in the shoes of those frightened,
traumatized people holed up in their houses, determined to hang on because what's left of their houses is all they have left in the world. What would you do if one of these big burly Blackwater guys, with sunglasses and a sub-machine gun, showed up on your doorstep and instructed you to evacuate?
As nearly as I can tell, New Orleans is awash in rumor. Suppose you had heard that they weren't really rescuing black people, but rather were rounding them up and putting them in concentration camps, something I wish were further from the truth [link via Xeni at boingboing].
What happens if the man from Blackwater reacts badly to your response?
And how much is Blackwater being paid to prance around with guns while firefighters who came for free are used as props for political photo ops?
(Via Attytood, thanks to Patrick Nielsen Hayden.)
A FURTHER THOUGHT: In August of 1955, Hurricane Connie passed through the Delaware Valley, followed shortly by the remnants of Hurricane
Diane. This resulted in the Great Flood of 1955. As the late science fiction literary agent Virginia Kidd (at the time of the flood, Mrs.
James Blish) told the story, the flood waters rose up to the window sills of the main floor of the house (to a depth of about 4 ft on one side of the house, and much deeper on the other side,
as Arrowhead has a daylight basement). The waters stayed for two weeks.
Meanwhile,
Virginia and her family stayed at Judy Merrill's
house, on much higher ground, 3 doors down from the Milford stoplight (for those who've been
there). As I recall, Virginia said they spent the
whole time playing cards, waiting for the waters to recede. Much of the contents of the house had to be discarded because the flooded houses all had septic systems and the septic systems had been destroyed. But the Blish family still had their house.
But not for long. The US government took most of the houses in the flood zone by eminent domain and tore many of them down. There was a plan for a vast flood management program involving making the whole area a lake. The plan was never enacted. When I worked for Virginia in the late 1980s, we were still sweeping the Delaware River mud out of the floor boards.
Virginia was allowed to rent the family house back
from the government for the rest of her life, though if the Feds had ever decided to act on
their plan, she would have been evicted. And the house it is where she founded and ran the Virginia Kidd Literary Agency. And when she died a few years ago, the agency was allowed to continue operating in the house, and there they are still.
Why is Blackwater in New Orleans to do work that many others have volunteered to do for free? Two words: Eminent Domain.
Think about it.
What is Eminent Domain?
Eminent Domain is how the government takes your
property for a public purpose, whether you chose to sell it to them or not, at a price they
specify.
In Kelo vs. New London, the supreme court vastly expanded the powers of government to take property in situations where it was arguably for a private, not a public, purpose. The American Bar Association outlines it thusly:
The exercise of eminent domain has a central role in urban redevelopment, smart growth, water quality improvements, wild land preservation and restoration, and a host of environmental and energy infrastructure projects.
The Fifth Amendment enjoins: "nor shall private
property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
This Quick Teleconference will examine the Supreme Court's recently decided 5th Amendment cases Kelo v. New London, No. 04-108 (June 23, 2005) and Lingle v. Chevron, 125 S. Ct. 2074 (May 23, 2005). In Kelo, the Court by a 5-4 majority upheld the City of New London, Connecticut's condemnation of 15 homes in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood for the sole purpose of furthering economic redevelopment around a planned pharmaceutical research facility. The QT will discuss the extent to which the decision allows
governmental officials to condemn private property for the purpose of increasing tax
revenues and promoting development.
In Lingle, the Court held in another 5-4 opinion that the 5th Amendment does not engender inquiry into whether the regulation "substantially
advances" legitimate state interests, as it would with an issue under the Due Process Clause. Instead, how the amendment applies is a function of the extent and duration of the governmental action.
Translation: in situations like Katrina, Kelo vastly expands the opportunities for corporate looting.
-
On 2005-09-10 09:40:00, Antigen wrote:
"Holy sheep shit, batman!
Ok, so if all indications point to an inside job again, will that finally be enough to get America united against these fascist idiots?
"
No. They had to flood New Orleans to keep it from being destroyed by terrorists, you see.
-
On 2005-09-10 07:10:00, Deborah wrote:
" EXPLOSIVE RESIDUE FOUND ON FAILED LEVEE DEBRIS! Ruptured New Orleans Levee had help failing By: Hal Turner
"
Is Hal Turner a real source?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Turner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Turner)
-
I did some research on this news story and found no other site anywhere on the internet that mentions this discovery. I then emailed a news site that I am very familiar with and that has a good reputation as being objective. they emailed me back and said that Hal Turner has a reputation as a crackpot. They said they doubt this story is for real.
-
Using Hal Turner as a legitimate source is just
proof that if it is on the internet there will
always be some moron who believes it as the
"truth" written by "experts"
People who believe anything written on the web,
especially by conspiry sites, are the most likely
to be compelled to post elsewhere, such as Fornits
to become the next level of "expert"
It happens, here, there and everywhere.
Intelligent people have to just pass them off as
dopes, just as one is selective who they talk
to in public as well as with one's friends in
private.
There is no known cure for gullibility!
-
On 2005-09-11 06:26:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I did some research on this news story and found no other site anywhere on the internet that mentions this discovery. I then emailed a news site that I am very familiar with and that has a good reputation as being objective. they emailed me back and said that Hal Turner has a reputation as a crackpot. They said they doubt this story is for real. "
Me too. This is a plain 'ol BUNK story. There's nothing to it whatsoever.
-
If 1,000,000 people believe a stupid thing,
it is still a stupid thing!
-
Failing to build up those levees and increase funding is JUST as negligent and criminal as placing explosives on it and blowing it up. Their lack of funds blew it up. This is a red-herring, a distraction from the REAL reason the levees failed.
-
On 2005-09-11 08:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"If 1,000,000 people believe a stupid thing,
it is still a stupid thing!"
Same as if 59 million people believe a stupid thing.
-
You obviously didn't follow all the links?
http://www.rense.com/general67/exple.htm (http://www.rense.com/general67/exple.htm)
Levee 'Explosives Residue'
Story Remains Unconfirmed
By Jim Moore
9-11-5
Note - This story below is racing around the net and we present it *only* as something to be so noted. 'Well placed sources' and unnamed sources 'speaking on conditions of anonymity' have essentially no credibility from a journalistic standpoint. Unless one of the principals steps out of the shadows and comes forward with proof of the allegations below, this story must be considered as just another internet rumor.
IF, in fact, the levee was initially breached with an explosive device, it would have been a very easy task to accomplish. One underwater demolition expert (a former Navy SEAL, for example) working undercover of night, or of the passing hurricane, could have slipped in and out of the area, unseen, in a matter of minutes. Interesting to contemplate how just one person could have triggered a $100 billion dollar disaster and mass murder. But such are the times in which we live. -ed
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/ame ... 309770.ece (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article309770.ece)
Explosions were heard and have been reported. The cause of those explosions, based on what I have read, is left to speculation.
Have you noticed where the breaks ocurred? Spacing is more than ironic.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2005/hurric ... trina.html (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2005/hurricanes/interactive/fullpage.nola.flood/katrina.html)
It's your perogative to limit who you speak to on the street and what you read on the internet. To limit one's exposure to all information has never seemed intelligent to me. Certainly no one is twisting your arm.
While on the subject, do you have any information that disprove the report?
-
"While on the subject, do you have any information that disprove the report?
Oh jeeperz, you are right, it is a good use of one's time to go to the most unreliable sources on the internet and invest time reading about bullshit ...
good one!
Look at all the quakes on this forum who quote experts from the most off the wall sites.
Do you invest your time believing all of it, as a quest for knowledge and not limiting your exposure to anything? From anyone?
-
If this story had even a little bit of credability the democrats would be all over it and it would be on every news station in a second. Jesse Jackson would provide photos of a white guy in a navy seal outfit as a back drop.
-
The bottom line is that "news" is supposed to be objectively verifiable and needs to be verified by the publisher.
This story is no more verifiable than "Martians did it." Can you PROVE they DIDN'T? No, of course you can't, but does that mean they DID?
When you see a story of dubious veracity, look at the publisher (a KNOWN quack), and check the sources (there are none). Why would anyone invest a scintilla more of their time to prove that it's NOT true?
-
Who the frig posted that article from Quackilvannia?
OK, it is time to confess and explain why quack sites are such an important news source.
OK, this is a short thread and clicking to the beginning our news hound is:
Deborah
What is this 'outside' of wich you speak?
Perhaps, Deborah, you can put some perspective on this news-quack source posting that goes on here,
there and everywhere by yourself and others?
-
Just checked and the story (true or false) has been updated:
When he surfaced and showed the evidence to his superior, the on-site Coordinator for FEMA stepped-in and said "You are not here to conduct an investigation as to why this rupture occurred, but only to determine how best to close it." The FEMA coordinator then threw the evidence back into the water and said "You will tell no one about this." At that point, the diver went back down to do more inspection of the levee.
Sounds 'fishy', but stranger things have happened. If it is true and one puts themself in the diver's position... what next? What do you do with the information?
Whether legit or not, this is a good argument for the posibility:
http://www.infowars.com/articles/new_or ... onally.htm (http://www.infowars.com/articles/new_orleans/locals_believe_levees_blown_intentionally.htm)
Locals believe Levees were Intentionally blown
-
On 2005-09-11 10:01:00, Deborah wrote:
"Just checked and the story (true or false) has been updated:
"
http://www.naturesongs.com/mallard1.wav (http://www.naturesongs.com/mallard1.wav)
-
DJ, who are you speaking to:
This story is no more verifiable than "Martians did it." Can you PROVE they DIDN'T? No, of course you can't, but does that mean they DID?
NO, I didn't state or imply that 'they DID'.
It's information. Use it how you will, or not. There is plenty else to discuss around this issue.
What I find curious is the rabid response to information (true or false) in this thread. And the unrelenting 'faith' that humans couldn't be capable of such an heinous act. Again, your choice. If it is not of interest... what draws you back over and over to slam it?
While I despise the man's disgusting racism, there were articles there that were not found elsewhere... such as the La Emergency Operations Plan
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =47#130812 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=11611&forum=47#130812)
Look past the sensationalism to see if there is any information of value. Why weren't the many buses put into service? Why has so much aid been turned away?
PS. DJ you said- The bottom line is that "news" is supposed to be objectively verifiable and needs to be verified by the publisher.
I suppose parents shouldn't listen to what ex students/staff and parents report about programs either; until or unless it has been filtered through a journalist and his/her publisher.
Come on. I know you're more intelligent than that comment suggests. This posting could very well be total BS. I for one would like to talk directly to people who lived close to the breaks. And yep, as gullible as it may sound, depending on their story, I may be more inclined to believe what they have to say over the press.
[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2005-09-11 10:55 ]
-
On 2005-09-11 10:21:00, Deborah wrote:
"
DJ, who are you speaking to:
This story is no more verifiable than "Martians did it." Can you PROVE they DIDN'T? No, of course you can't, but does that mean they DID?
NO, I didn't state or imply that 'they DID'.
It's information. Use it how you will, or not. There is plenty else to discuss around this issue.
What I find curious is the rabid response to information (true or false). And the unrelenting 'faith' that humans couldn't be capable of such an heinous act. Again, your choice. If it is not of interest... what draws you back over and over to slam it?
While I despise the man's disgusting racism, there were articles there that were not found elsewhere... such as the La Emergency Operations Plan
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =47#130812 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=11611&forum=47#130812)
Look past the sensationalism to see if there is any information of value. Why weren't the many buses put into service? Why has so much aid been turned away?
"
Hey Deborah,
I wasn't posting "to" anyone, just throwing in my opinion about what a "real" news story actually is.
Do I think for one second that our gov't is incapable of committing atrocities? Nooooo.... I sure don't.
This particular story, though, doesn't make any sense, comes from a thoroughly discredited source and cite absolutely no credible evidence to support it.
As far as my posts go, they're not "rabid" or even "strong." I just use capitals for emphasis, like italics, but I'm too lazy to edit the HTML, so it seems like I'm shouting. I'm actually a pretty measured guy...
DJ
-
On 2005-09-11 10:21:00, Deborah wrote:
"DJ, who are you speaking to:
This story is no more verifiable than "Martians did it." Can you PROVE they DIDN'T? No, of course you can't, but does that mean they DID?
NO, I didn't state or imply that 'they DID'.
Then we should not believe what you post, because
you don't identify it as bullshit, instead the reader is forced to make an assumption that you believe it!
It's information. Use it how you will, or not. There is plenty else to discuss around this issue.
Then you back down and deflect when called on it.
If you weren't called on dubious sources, then you
would carry on, as usual.
What I find curious is the rabid response to information (true or false) in this thread.
You attack the people questioning your posting of this information, just like the Republican Smashmouth manifesto.
And the unrelenting 'faith' that humans couldn't be capable of such an heinous act.
Put down to your detractors ...
Again, your choice. If it is not of interest... what draws you back over and over to slam it?
Discreting the enemy!
While I despise the man's disgusting racism, there were articles there that were not found elsewhere...
Re-inventing your sources value ...
On and on you go, like a passive-aggressive amateur know it all ...
Do you understand any of this constructive criticism?
-
On 2005-09-11 10:21:00, Deborah wrote:
"
I suppose parents shouldn't listen to what ex students/staff and parents report about programs either; until or unless it has been filtered through a journalist and his/her publisher.
Come on. I know you're more intelligent than that comment suggests. This posting could very well be total BS. I for one would like to talk directly to people who lived close to the breaks. And yep, as gullible as it may sound, depending on their story, I may be more inclined to believe what they have to say over the press.
[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2005-09-11 10:55 ]"
I didn't see this at first glance, but what you're saying doesn't make sense here. News stories about program abuse ARE objectively verifiable, and sources are quoted.
Why would you need to take empirical evidence from a first-hand source and filter it through a publication? You wouldn't.
There's a huge difference between someone's unverified, sourceless story on the internet that is not coroborrated by any other source whatsoever and consistent stories of abuse and neglect, published and signed (often sworn), by staff and clients of BM warehouses. The difference, in this case, is the reporter of the "event" did not witness it nor did he cite a single source that did (aside from his severely diminished credibility).
There's a credibility gap there that doesn't exist with hundreds of abused clients and their credible, coroborrated reports.
-
Yeh, I was editing as you were posting.
It's all relative DJ.
While I totally concur with the 'credibility' issue, my mind allows for the possibility.
Who might be able to corroberate the diver's story? Suspending all judgement for a second... contemplate what you would do with the information if you were the diver.
Would you go to your grave with it? Would you give it to anyone who would listen?
Personally, it will remain a question for me until it is proven to be wrong. I'm a skeptic. Some independent party would have to dive down there and dispell the story. Until then, I won't loose any sleep over it. There is so many other red flags to explore. I expect there will be a list of question compiled, just like with the absurdities of 911, which will never be answered.
Ho hum.
-
I'm not going to chime in on the credibility issue...and I have not read the links provided on this thread yet....but one thing hit me when I did read the 1st post about the explosives found.........NOT inside job.....but Terrorism...
Think about it....if the US Govt, hypothetically speaking of course, did this, then the aftermath--- lack of aid seems very inconsistent...the US now looks like a bunch of idiots in the eyes of many around the world...not just here...they have lost a lot of credibility in the eyes of the world becuase of their ridiculously inept response. Terrorism makes more sense because of the OBVIOUS lack of response...
I still believe the levees broke because lack of funding for proper upgrades that have been needed for years...which in itself it bad enough.....but I thought I'd contribute my first impression of the explosive article for the sake of argument.
-
I appreciated Richard Moore's commentary on this:
http://cyberjournal.org/ (http://cyberjournal.org/)
Several people responded, as you did, about the nature of Hal Turner's website. I had never heard of him - I got the article as a forward.
However, I don't see this residue story as being particularly related to Hal's propaganda line. If the story had a racist angle - "blacks blow up their own neighborhood" - that would be a different matter. I think he just got the story and figured it deserved air time, independent of his own perverse agenda.
I've seen various reports, from different sources, about residents hearing explosions just before the water started coming over the levee. And the levee did break a day after the
hurricane struck, in one of its strongest sections, and was well placed for the task of flooding the poorest part of the city. Perhaps the explosion story was intentionally leaked to
Hal, in particular, so that it could be quickly labelled as a 'right wing conspiracy theory'. In any case, I hope some independent evidence, one way or another, shows up.
In examining this kind of incident, i.e. Katrina as a whole, I find there are three phases of investigation. The first phase involves asking the question, "Are there enough suspicious
circumstances to warrant giving the incident any attention at all?" In the case of 9-11 that question was answered in the affirmative by the unprecedented lack of interceptor response. In the case of Katrina, the question is answered in the affirmative by a similarly unprecedented total lack of rescue support.
The second phase involves digging deeper, to see if the official story really is bogus. Are there enough anomalies, with enough substantiation behind them, to conclude that something else is going on, besides what we're being told. In the case of 9-11 the anomalies are staggering in their magnitude. In the case of Katrina, we've got the blocking of relief efforts, the bizarre treatment of the survivors, and a number of elements which don't make any sense, if things were on the up and up.
The third phase is to stick your neck out and investigate the incident as a covert operation: What is the purpose? Who stands to gain what? What precedents are being set? Who is being blamed? What remedies are being proposed? What cover story is being used and why? At this level little is hidden, and much can be learned.
Once you make the decision to examine the incident as a covert operation, then a given piece of evidence assumes a different
significance. If you are thinking in terms of a bungled rescue attempt, then rumors of an exploded dike are a bit far fetched. If you are considering a pre-arranged disaster scenario, then such sabotage makes perfect sense. If this scale of operation is to be carried out successfully, in its many dimensions, then nothing can be left to chance. If Katrina
turned out to be weaker than expected, then there must be a backup strategy to achieve the flooding objective. Standard procedure; Plan B.
Once you feel entering phase three is warranted, then debates about 'whether it's a conspiracy or not' become a bit tedious. Our next posting, soon to follow, will be entire in the space of phase 3.
cheers,
rkm