Firefighters Urge "Peeling Of Giuliani's 9/11 Onion"

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Spokesman for largest Firefighters' union speaks out

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Monday, March 12, 2007

The press secretary of the biggest firefighters' union, the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) has today shed more light on the furor surrounding last week's press coverage of Giuliani's snubbing of the firefighters invitation to an upcoming presidential candidate forum.

Alex Jones was joined on air today by IAFF's Jeff Zack, who revealed in no uncertain terms that the image of Giuliani as some sort of a 9/11 hero could not be further from the truth as far as the firefighters of New York are concerned.

Last week the AP reported:

After Giuliani pulled out of a planned appearance at an International Association of Firefighters presidential forum next week, the group released a stinging draft letter indicating that it almost didn't invite him at all because of continuing anger at his "despicable" role in pulling firefighters off the Twin Towers' debris pile in 2001 before all hope of finding their dead comrades' remains was exhausted.

"The disrespect that he exhibited to our 343 fallen FDNY brothers, their families, and our New York leadership in the wake of that tragic day has not been forgiven or forgotten," said the three-page letter, drafted by union leaders in late February and first disclosed on Newsday's Web site Thursday.

A CNN report covers this in more depth here.

Mr Zack explained on the Alex Jones show that the initial decision from those debating the issue from New York City and from the national office was that Rudy Giuliani shouldn't be invited. Zack explained that this was:

"Because of the egregious way he treated our fallen and those attempting to pursue a dignified recovery of the citizens and firefighters that lost their lives that horrific day. In making that decision a discussion ensued about, well, how are we going to communicate to our membership that we're not Inviting Rudy because, you know, he would be the only person that was not invited, every other major candidate was invited from the Republican party and the Democratic party. So we drafted a letter to let people know of exactly the circumstances that were discussed and why Rudy didn't deserve an invitation."

Before there was a final decision another discussion ensued and it was finally decided that Giuliani should be given a platform regardless, so he did get invited, confirmed his appearance last Monday and then two days later changed his mind and canceled. The firefighters' union, feeling somewhat snubbed, decided to release their previous draft letter anyway in order to give more clarity to the situation.

Mr Zack went on to explain exactly why the firefighters hold Giuliani in such low esteem:

"There were a number of issues over which our firefighters had severe disagreements with the mayor prior to September 11th, and then his actions following that horrific day where he made the decision to pull firefighters off the pile from searching for citizens and firefighters that lost their lives, and he went to a full what we call 'scoop and dump', where he was just taking all what he determined was trash, putting it on a barge and sending it to Fresh Kills landfill. Well that what he called trash contained the remains of thousands of citizens, hundreds of firefighters, and we felt that the families of those people deserved some sort of closure and some sort of dignified recovery process because they were innocent victims."
To this day the remains of hundreds of innocent victims of the September 11 attacks are still sickeningly buried in the world's largest rubbish dump, on Staten Island, where it has been decalred by New York officials that they will stay for ever. Officials, citing financial constraints, have refused to make any concessions and wish to leave those victims to rot in the ground with acres of stinking trash.

Giuliani's official reasoning for this was that he was acting in the interest of safety. The IAFF believes this to be totally false, Jeff Zack commented:

"For him to determine that it was unsafe, OK this actually was the most unstable unsafe destruction area in the history of the Untied States. but for Rudy Giuliani to all of a sudden become concerned, six weeks after the initial accident where hundreds and thousands of people had been coming through and working on that pile for weeks and weeks, all of a sudden he became concerned about the safety of people on that pile? That's disingenuous."
Zack then reiterated the real reason behind Giuliani's action:

"The real reason was that the Bank of Nova Scotia's assets were buried in that rubble, the day they got those assets out of that pile, Rudy shut the pile down, said 'everybody off, we're going to full scoop and dump'... It was gold, it was silver, it was other assets, I've seen a lot of numbers too, I don't have an exact one so I don't wanna give it to you... Our firefighters were on the pile helping excavate the gold as well, our problem is that all Rudy cared about at the end of the day was the gold bricks, not the lives and the memories of those that were the true heroes that day."
At the time, in November 2001, it was reported that $200 million in gold bullion has been recovered from the site. One day later around 50% of firefighters were removed from the job and totally denied access.

Many declared they were being disrespected, that the city was more concerned with gold than people. Others said the city wanted to speed up the removal of debris to save money.

'We're on a mission, and we won't leave until it's done,' insisted fireman Chuck Horack. 'We see the site as sacred ground. Our brothers are still in the debris. No one can ever know how important it is to bring their husband home to a widow.' Mayor Giuliani launched a bizarre and savage attack on the firemen, saying their actions were 'sinful'. 'They have absolutely no monopoly in caring about the people there,' he said.
Another huge 9/11 scandal that has angered the firefighters and first responders, is that of the criminal culpibility on behalf of government officials who certified the air safe to breathe in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Mr Zack stated:

"That's a whole nother issue, the extreme denial, not only in which the Federal Government was, but the City of New York in cooperation with the Federal Government, about how dangerous it really was to be on that pile, not just working on the unsettled situation but breathing that air full of the toxic particles that we now know it was full of.
There was a whole lot of discussion including the Environmental Protection Administration, which said 'the air there is not a problem', New York City and Rudy Giuliani's administration agreed with that assessment and continued to put forward the idea that it wasn't a problem and that it was OK."

We have previously exposed in great detail how not only did the government know on the day itself that rescuers were being exposed to harmful dust, they also ordered misleading information to be given to the public, they ordered scientific research results on the air to be falsified, they allowed residents to return to their homes in the immediate vicinity knowing the air was corrosive and lethal and, to top it all off, they have since embarked on a collective program to block compensation and funding of health programs because that would be an admission of guilt.

We have also previously exposed how Rudolph Giuliani admitted to Peter Jennings that he got a warning that the South Tower was about to collapse.

Why is this important?

No steel framed building had ever collapsed from fire damage before in history. The event was unprecedented. To know the building was about to collapse would require inside knowledge of 'the 9/11 script' and how it was supposed to unfold on that fateful day.

Remember, right before the building collapsed, firefighters reported minimal fires which they could quickly and easily extinguish.

Why didn't the brave firemen and rescue workers who were rushing into the building get the same warning? Even if the warning was only only communicated minutes before the collapse, countless lives could have been saved.

Consider the amount of people on the lower floors, in the lobby and immediately outside that could have rushed to safety in those few minutes.

In the years after 9/11 Giuliani has made millions in speaker's fees, going around the country, billing himself as "America's Mayor". As Jeff Zack commented:

"Rudy Giuliani has made millions and millions of dollars off of 9/11, and the story he likes to tell about 9/11, and he has used those millions of dollars and those speeches around the country to build up this image that he was a hero that day and in the days following. As far as the firefighters of New York are concerned he is anything but a hero.
You should really be skeptical about someone who calls themselves a hero. Who spends millions and millions of dollars after the fact, building up an image as an American hero when in fact if you go back and look at what really happened that day and what the real heroes of that day really think of Rudy Giuliani, that's the true measure of who Rudy really is.

This Story, Rudy's onion will continue to be peeled and America will learn the true character and who Rudy Giuliani really is."
Giuliani called wanting to search for and give proper burials to fallen heroes 'sinful' while he was ordering them to be scooped up, shipped off and disposed of in a stinking trash heap. He knowingly lied and ordered false information to be released about the toxicity of the air at ground zero. Now this man has the gall to paint himself up as a 9/11 hero and want to use that to become President of the United States.

For an MP3 of this interview click here.
http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/120307Giuliani_onion.htm

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 568 • Replies: 9

No top replies

That guy is a true politician. Like most of them, it's all about image and spin at the end of the day.

0 Replies

You mean someone in a union speaking out against a Republican candidate?

Tell me it isn't so; tell me it can't be true. The fact that someone from a union would speak out against and not support a Republican candidate is beyond thought.

I thought the unions were squar behind Republican candidates and for nothing else. To think that a union wouldn't support a Republican candidate just makes me blush.

0 Replies

I wondered if it would be baldimo or the one of the other usuals who jumped in first to take one for the team Laughing

good thing no God fearing patriotic american, like say a swift boat veteran for instance would just pile on......

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

I wondered if it would be baldimo or the one of the other usuals who jumped in first to take one for the team

good thing no God fearing patriotic american, like say a swift boat veteran for instance would just pile on......

When have you ever known a union to support a Republican candidate? I'm just asking an honest question. Can you answer it?

0 Replies

I haven't paid thqt much attention but generally probably not.... so what?

This is not a union issue it's a character issue....

are you saying it's a lie made from whole cloth? A story concocted to make a republican figure look bad? Well, actually that's a rhetorical questin.... of course you would, unless Guiliani was a democrat.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

I haven't paid thqt much attention but generally probably not.... so what?

This is not a union issue it's a character issue....

are you saying it's a lie made from whole cloth? A story concocted to make a republican figure look bad? Well, actually that's a rhetorical questin.... of course you would, unless Guiliani was a democrat.

It is a union issue. It was the Union that did the invite in the first place. They even said they weren't going to invite him in the first place. They invited him anyways and then get upset when he declined a few days later. They weren't going to invite him so why be upset in the first place.

This is the union talking. How many fire fighters do they really speak for? We know that unions take union dues and spend them on political candidates and for political issues but how many of the fire fighters do they really represent? How many of those fire fighters really agree with everything the union says or their political views?

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

This is the union talking. How many fire fighters do they really speak for? We know that unions take union dues and spend them on political candidates and for political issues but how many of the fire fighters do they really represent? How many of those fire fighters really agree with everything the union says or their political views?

Same old crap from the anti-unionists.

Union leaders are freely elected by the members to represent them. That is the same for all organizations-leaders are elected to represent the membership on issues germane to the organization's purpose. The leaders need not confer with the membership on every issue-the membership invests them with their trust when they elect them. On issues which affect the membership's interests, the organization leadership does have every right to speak for the membership. That goes as much for unions as for any other organization.

Look at other organizations. If the elected leader of an organization named the Middletown Save The Elms Society made a speech publicly condemning the City of Middletown's decision to cut down a swath of elm trees in a city park, nobody would question that the leaders spoke for the membership.

If the elected leader of a large group called the Polish Heritage Society held a press conference announcing the organization's support for a plan to save an old building which once was the center of the Polish community, nobody would question his right to speak for the members.

We always assume the elected head of an organization speaks for the members in matters related to the orgainization's purpose.

Except for unions. Oh, no. And not only is the legitimacy of the union leader's ability to speak for the membership questioned, (when it never seems to be questioned for other organizations), it seems the questoners are always people who HATE unions! Haven't got a good thing to say about them. But that doesn't prevent them from running to the barricades to pretend to speak out on the union members' behalf.

None of the firefighters' union ever spoke to Baldimo or Foxfyre, another anti-unionist pretending to speak on their behalf. Baldimo or Foxfyre never met with any firefighters from 911, never talked to them at any length, never spoke to the families of the brave men and women who perished in the line of duty. But both of these people post here that they are speaking up for the firefighters against their own elected leaders.

0 Replies

An Open Letter to Mayor Giuliani
An Open Letter to Mayor Giuliani
by Gary Hart
04.28.2007

Dear Mayor Giuliani:

Since you have based your presidential campaign almost exclusively on your reaction to terrorist attacks on New York City, and since you have recently accused Democrats of being on the defense against terrorism and therefore guilty of inviting more casualties, I have one question for you: Where were you on terrorism between January 31, 2001, and September 11th?

The first date was when the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century issued its final report warning, as did its previous reports, of the danger of terrorist attacks on America. The George W. Bush administration did nothing about these warnings and we lost 3,000 American lives. What did you do during those critical eight months? Where were you? Were you on the defensive, or were you even paying attention?

Before you qualify to criticize Democrats, Mr. Giuliani, you must account for your preparation of your city for these clearly predicted attacks. Tell us, please, what steps you took to make your city safer.

Until you do, then I strongly suggest you should keep your mouth shut about Democrats and terrorism.

You have not qualified to criticize others, let alone be president of the United States.

Gary Hart
(co-chair, U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century)

P.S. You might ask these same questions of George W. Bush while you are trying to find a better reason to run for president.

0 Replies

Republicans Equal Life; Democrats Equal Death?
Republicans Equal Life; Democrats Equal Death?
By Keith Olbermann
MSNBC Countdown
Wednesday 25 April 2007

Olbermann: Rudy Giuliani exploiting fear for power and personal gain.
A special comment about Rudolph Giuliani's remarks at a Lincoln Day dinner in New Hampshire:

Finally tonight, a Special Comment about Rudolf Giuliani's remarks at a Lincoln Day Dinner in New Hampshire last night.

Since some indeterminable hour between the final dousing of the pyre at The World Trade Center, and the breaking of what Senator Obama has aptly termed "9/11 Fever," it has been profoundly and disturbingly evident that we are at the center of one of history's great ironies.

Only in this America of the early 21st Century could it be true, that the man who was president during the worst attack on our nation, and the man who was the mayor of the city in which that attack principally unfolded, would not only be absolved of any and all blame for the unreadiness of their own governments, but, more over, would thereafter be branded heroes of those attacks.

And now, that Mayor - whose most profound municipal act in the wake of that nightmare was to suggest the postponement of the election to select his own successor - has gone even a step beyond these M.C. Escher constructions of history.

"If any Republican is elected president - and I think obviously I would be best at this - we will remain on offense and will anticipate what (the terrorists) will do and try to stop them before they do it. "

Insisting that the election of any Democrat would mean the country was "back... on defense," Mr. Giuliani continued:

"But the question is how long will it take and how many casualties will we have. If we are on defense, we will have more losses and it will go on longer."

He said this with no sense of irony, no sense of any personal shortcomings, no sense whatsoever.

And if you somehow missed what he was really saying, somehow didn't hear the none-too-subtle subtext of 'vote Democratic and die,' Mr. Giuliani then stripped away any barrier of courtesy, telling Roger Simon of Politico.Com, quote....

"America will be safer with a Republican president."

At least that Republican President under which we have not been safer ... has, even at his worst, maintained some microscopic distance between himself, and a campaign platform that blithely threatened the American people with "casualties" if they, next year, elect a Democratic president - or, inferring from Mr. Giuliani's flights of grandeur in New Hampshire - even if they elect a different Republican.

How dare you, sir?

"How many casualties will we have?" - this is the language of Bin Laden.

Yours, Mr. Giuliani, is the same chilling nonchalance of the madman, of the proselytizer who has moved even from some crude framework of politics and society, into a virtual Roman Colosseum of carnage, and a conceit over your own ability - and worthiness - to decide, who lives and who dies.

Rather than a reasoned discussion - rather than a political campaign advocating your own causes and extolling your own qualifications - you have bypassed all the intermediate steps, and moved directly to trying to terrorize the electorate into viewing a vote for a Democrat, not as a reasonable alternative and an inalienable right ... but as an act of suicide.

This is not the mere politicizing of Iraq, nor the vague mumbled epithets about Democratic 'softness' from a delusional Vice President.

This is casualties on a partisan basis - of the naked assertion that Mr. Giuliani's party knows all and will save those who have voted for it - and to hell with everybody else.

And that he, with no foreign policy experience whatsoever, is somehow the Messiah-of-the-moment.

Even to grant that that formula - whether posed by Republican or Democrat - is somehow not the most base, the most indefensible, the most Un-American electioneering in our history - even if it is somehow acceptable to assign "casualties" to one party and 'safety' to the other - even if we have become so profane in our thinking that it is part of our political vocabulary to view counter-terror as one party's property and the other's liability... on what imaginary track record does Mr. Giuliani base his boast?

Which party held the presidency on September 11th, 2001, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party held the mayoralty of New York on that date, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party assured New Yorkers that the air was safe, and the remains of the dead, recovered - and not being used to fill pot-holes, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party wanted what the terrorists wanted - the postponement elections - and to whose personal advantage would that have redounded, Mr. Giuliani?

Which mayor of New York was elected eight months after the first attack on the World Trade Center, yet did not emphasize counter-terror in the same city for the next eight years, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party had proposed to turn over the Department of Homeland Security to Bernard Kerik, Mr. Giuliani?

Who wanted to ignore and hide Kerik's Organized Crime allegations, Mr. Giuliani?

Who personally argued to the White House that Kerik need not be vetted, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party rode roughshod over Americans' rights while braying that it was actually protecting them, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party took this country into the most utterly backwards, utterly counter-productive, utterly ruinous war in our history, Mr. Giuliani?

Which party has been in office as more Americans were killed in the pointless fields of Iraq, than were killed in the consuming nightmare of 9/11, Mr. Giuliani?

Drop this argument, sir. You will lose it.

"The Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us," Mr. Giuliani continued to the Rockingham County Lincoln Day Dinner last night. "Never, ever again will this country be on defense waiting for (terrorists) to attack us, if I have anything to say about it. And make no mistake, the Democrats want to put us back on defense."

There is no room for this.

This is terrorism itself, dressed up as counter-terrorism.

It is not warning, but bullying - substituted for the political discourse now absolutely essential to this country's survival and the freedom of its people.

No Democrat has said words like these. None has ever campaigned on the Republicans' flat-footedness of September 11th, 2001. None has the requisite, irresponsible, all-consuming, ambition. None is willing to say "I Accuse," rather than recognize that, to some degree, all of us share responsibility for our collective stupor.

And if it is somehow insufficient, that this is morally, spiritually, and politically wrong, to screech as Mr. Giuliani has screeched ... there is also this: that gaping hole in Mr. Giuliani's argument of 'Republicans equal life; Democrats equal death.'

Not only have the Republicans not lived up to their babbling on this subject, but last fall the electorate called them on it.

As doubtless they would call you on it, Mr. Giuliani.

Repeat, go beyond Mr. Bush's rhetorical calamities of 2006.

Call attention to the casualties on your watch, and your long, waking slumber in the years between the two attacks on the World Trade Center.

Become the candidate who runs on the Vote-For-Me-Or-Die platform.

Do a Joe McCarthy, a Lyndon Johnson, a Robespierre.

Only, if you choose so to do, do not come back surprised nor remorseful if the voters remind you that "terror" is not just a matter of "casualties." It is, just as surely, a matter of the promulgation of fear.

Claim a difference between the parties on the voters' chances of survival - and you do Osama Bin Laden's work for him.

And we - Democrats and Republicans alike, and every variation in between - We - Americans! - are sick to death, of you and the other terror-mongers, trying to frighten us into submission, into the surrender of our rights and our reason, into this betrayal of that for which this country has always stood.

Franklin Roosevelt's words ring true again tonight.

And, clarified and amplified, they are just as current now, as they were when first he spoke them, 74 years ago.

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself" - and those who would exploit our fear, for power, and for their own personal, selfish, cynical, gain.

Good night, and good luck.

0 Replies

Firefighters Urge "Peeling Of Giuliani's 9/11 Onion"

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know