FOLLOW US ON:
GET THE NEWSLETTER
CONTACT US
Um, wow. Mattress company airs totally tacky 9/11 ‘Twin Tower Sale’ commercial
09.09.2016
11:05 am
Topics:
Tags:


 
File this one under: “WHAT the fuck were they thinking?” I mean seriously, what the fuck were they thinking?  A Texas mattress company called Miracle Mattress aired this mind boggling commercial for their “Twin Tower sale” which happens on 9/11.

The company issued a statement saying, “We are very sorry we have offended you.”

Mike Bonanno, who owns Miracle Mattress, said in a separate statement that he would hold his employees “accountable” for the “serious lapse of decency.” “I say this unequivocally, with sincere regret: The video is tasteless and an affront to the men and women who lost their lives on 9/11.”

I’m not going to say much, but let this commercial speak for itself. I have no words. You won’t either. No one has words for this!

Posted by Tara McGinley
|
09.09.2016
11:05 am
|
George Carlin recorded vicious anti-cop bit just before 9/11, now hear the uncensored material


Carlin being arrested in 1972
 
One distinct post-9/11 memory I have was purchasing Is This It, the debut album by The Strokes, and noticing that it was missing a track. It turns out the song “New York City Cops” had been removed—the NYPD had essentially been canonized and absolutely no one wanted to be seen as critical of first responders. It turns out the same thing happened to the great George Carlin, who recorded some some anti-police material just a few weeks prior to 9/11, only to have it shelved in the wake of terrorist attacks and subsequent ennobling of the NYPD. Now via SiriusXM’s “Carlin’s Corner” you can hear the offending bit below.

George Carlin, let’s not forget, had very good—and personal—reasons to resent the police, having been famously arrested himself for obscenity in Milwaukee in 1972 for performing his “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television” routine—an off-duty police officer who was in the audience dropped a dime on him for using profanity onstage. As the well-known story goes, Carlin’s wife Brenda got onstage during her husband’s set to let him know that the police were congregating and waiting to arrest him. Carlin’s performance ran 30 minutes longer and he brought the house down, all the while making to ditch the cocaine in his pocket right before the cops nabbed him. Carlin only spent a few hours in jail and was freed on $150 bail, but it was a narrowly missed disaster over some dirty jokes.

The bit about cops, titled “Rats & Squealers” will be on the upcoming album of previously unreleased material I Kinda Like It When A Lotta People Die available from MPI Media/Eardrum Records on CD, limited edition vinyl and digital platforms on September 16, 2016.
 

Posted by Amber Frost
|
08.26.2016
10:27 am
|
Worst crowdfunding campaign EVER seeks to raise $1.5M to ‘recreate’ 9-11


 
This doesn’t seem to be a joke. Businessman Paul Salo has started a crowd-funding campaign on Indiegogo.com seeking 1.5 million dollars to purchase a 767 and a building. He intends to fly the plane, loaded with jet fuel, into the building, purportedly to prove “once and for all” what “really” happened on 9-11.

The project, titled 911 REDUX, is planned to take place in Thailand where Salo claims to have talked to the Thai military about purchasing a “used airplane” and a “used building.”

Salo’s campaign statement:

Many people want to know more about 9-11. We are like a Mythbusters for September 11th. It’s an important project for many reasons. Many people doubt various details of 9-11. As the world has changed our trust in government and media has declined significantly. We want to see for ourselves. We don’t need people to guide our thinking. In this project we will recreate 9-11 to the best of our ability given the funds raised. Our ultimate goal is a fully loaded 767 and a similar structure to the WTC. We will crash the fully loaded (with fuel) plane (complete with black box) into the building using autopilot at 500 MPH.

You will be able to see for yourself what happens under these extreme circumstances. I’m not sure which country we will purchase the aircraft and building but it doesn’t really matter much. I’m a globe trotter and will go where we need to go to complete this important project.

You can be a part of this. How will it end up? Will the plane disintegrate? Will the black box disappear? Will the out of date passports we scatter in the plane survive?  You will see it all.  We aren’t trying to prove anything either way. We will recreate the event and let the chips fall where they may.

At the time of this writing the campaign has raised $105 out of the $1.5M goal.
 

 

Posted by Christopher Bickel
|
05.17.2016
09:20 am
|
CONSPIRACY: 1979 Supertramp album cover reveals Freemasons ‘pre-knew about’ 9/11


 
Of all the 9/11 conspiracy theories floating around out there, this one’s my… favorite.

According to the fellow in the video below, which was influenced by a post on a David Icke conspiracy forum, the Masons were behind the September 11th attack on the World Trade Center. They left clues about their (long) planned event on the 1979 Supertramp album Breakfast In America.

According to the video, Supertramp financier Stanley August Miesegaes was a Mason who used the cover art of the best-selling Breakfast in America album to reveal details about a planned “event” against the World Trade Center.
 

Supertramp financier, Stanley August Miesegaes—according to the video, that *could be* a masonic pendant around his neck. A correction at the beginning of the video indicates that the theorist isn’t certain if Miesegaes was indeed a 33rd degree Mason or not. Just to, you know, clear that up for y’uns!
 
The video offers evidence that the iconic album cover is a bit of “predictive programming,” a notion popular among conspiracy buffs that our overlords embed messages into pop culture in order to psychologically prepare the general population for certain events. Apparently Breakfast in America was to be the subliminal mental lubrication citizens would need two decades later to accept the tragedy of 9/11. This evidence includes the cover’s depiction of the New York City skyline as seen from an airplane window. CHECK. A waitress posing as the Statue of Liberty holds a glass of orange juice over the center of the World Trade Center, indicating the color of the fireball that would tear through the buildings.  CHECK. Just above the World Trade Center, if you hold the record up to a mirror, you see that the “u” and “p” from “Supertramp” resembles the numbers “911.”  CHECK.
 

 
The fateful event was to take place in the morning of September 11—breakfast time in America.

DOUBLE CHECK!

Furthermore, the words “super” and “tramp” are synonyms for “great” and “whore,” which indicates the Great Whore of Babylon, a figure from Christian mythology, with Babylon also mentioned as a place of evil in the Book of Revelation. And if that’s not proof enough for you, why the back cover has yet another illustration of a plane flying above the twin towers.

All in all, it’s a pretty compelling case that “somebody pre-knew about it,” right?
 

 

Posted by Christopher Bickel
|
03.07.2016
09:52 am
|
Here are all the songs Clear Channel urged its stations not to play after 9/11
09.11.2015
03:23 pm
Topics:
Tags:


 
Today’s the 14th anniversary of 9/11, of course, so we present this list of songs that Clear Channel sent to its more than 1,100 stations following the attack as a guideline of songs not to play for a while.

The list hasn’t exactly been a secret—the list has its own Wikipedia page. Back in 2008, Snopes.com concluded that Clear Channel had not banned any songs and even took a bit of umbrage that people might be annoyed at the radio network for doing this. And as the New York Times stated, “compliance with the list varied from station to station.”

Similar to Snopes, I’m kinda glad they did this, speaking as a 2001 Manhattan resident. I see it less as censorship and more like a directive of tact and taste in case some of their local programmers weren’t using their thinking caps that month. I’m not crazy about blocking any expression, but at the same time I wouldn’t have been thrilled to hear “Jet Airliner” by the Steve Miller Band come on the radio on September 14th.

I wonder if any sneaky DJs were able to slip in Jonathan Richman’s “Lonely Financial Zone”???

Here’s the list, in alphabetical order:
 

3 Doors Down, “Duck and Run”
311, “Down”
AC/DC, “Dirty Deeds”
AC/DC, “Hell’s Bells”
AC/DC, “Highway to Hell”
AC/DC, “Safe in New York City”
AC/DC, “Shoot to Thrill”
AC/DC, “Shot Down in Flames”
AC/DC, “TNT”
Ad Libs, “The Boy from New York City”
Alanis Morissette, “Ironic”
Alice in Chains, “Down in a Hole”
Alice in Chains, “Rooster”
Alice in Chains, “Sea of Sorrow”
Alice in Chains, “Them Bone”
Alien Ant Farm, “Smooth Criminal”
All Rage Against The Machine songs
Animals, “We Gotta Get Out of This Place”
Arthur Brown, “Fire”
Bangles, “Walk Like an Egyptian”
Barenaked Ladies, “Falling for the First Time”
Barry McGuire, “Eve of Destruction”
Beastie Boys, “Sabotage”
Beastie Boys, “Sure Shot”
Billy Joel, “Only the Good Die Young”
 
The rest of the list after the jump…
 

READ ON
Posted by Martin Schneider
|
09.11.2015
03:23 pm
|
‘The Woman Who Wasn’t There’: The true story of Tania Head, who lied about being a 9/11 survivor
06.15.2015
08:15 am
Topics:
Tags:

The Woman Who Wasn't There
 
Last week, allegations emerged that Spokane NAACP president Rachel Dolezal—who says she is African-American and in the past claimed she was a victim of racism—is, in fact, white. Similar incidents have occurred over the years (Binjamin Wilkomirski pretended to be a holocaust survivor, for example), and after the initial shock of revelation, naturally many questions emerge, though the main one is always simply this: Why?

Lessor known is the story of Tania Head, a survivor of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks, who became a beloved figure within the community of 9/11 survivors. Tania was working in the south tower of the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001, and though badly burned, she made it out of the building alive; her fiancé, Dave, who was in the north tower, did not. Tania’s back-story and account of that horrific day were especially tragic, but her bright personality and positive outlook was inspiring to others, including her fellow survivors, even the media.

To behold (Tania) Head’s smile is to know the terrorists did not even close to winning. To see that smile is also to be challenged to be as decent and positive as this true survivor. (New York Daily News, September 7th, 2006)

 
Tania and her smile
 
On September 27th, 2007, the New York Times ran a front-page story about Tania: “In a 9/11 Survival Tale the Pieces Just Don’t Fit.” In the piece, it was revealed that no part of Tania’s story could be validated. Merrill Lynch, the company she claimed she was working for—the reason she was in the World Trade Center on 9/11—had no record of ever employing a Tania Head. Harvard, the school she claimed to have graduated from, didn’t have a record of her having attended. The family of Dave, who did die in the north tower, said they never heard of her. Friends and associates spoke of varying accounts that Tania had told over the years. The Times noted that she had nothing to gain financial from the deception.

So, why did she do it? Why would she pretend to be a involved in one of one of America’s greatest tragedies? How could she befriend and lie to actual victims of this horrific event?
 
Continues after the jump…

READ ON
Posted by Bart Bealmear
|
06.15.2015
08:15 am
|
Evocative 9/11 photo by Toby Amies
09.11.2014
10:15 am
Topics:
Tags:


Photo used with permission by ©Toby Amies
 
A statement from the photographer:

To say anything about my personal experience of September 11, 2001 feels insignificant in the shadow of the death and suffering that happened on that day and all the slaughter and pain that came after it. How anyone can think of war as holy, before 9/11, but especially after it, stretches my understanding and empathy past breaking point.

That said, here’s how I came to take the photograph.

It’s particularly fucked up that it started as a beautiful day, light and crisp, an Indian summer, with a tiny threat of winter in it. I left my studio on South 8th St. in Brooklyn to go to the bank without looking behind me, but as I came back to it via Berry St. I saw my neighbours standing in the road. They were frozen, just staring down towards Manhattan, towards something terrible and yet too far away to connect directly with. None of us could make immediate sense of what was happening on the other side of the East River. Automatically I took some pictures with the camera that I had originally taken out with me because of the excellent light.

It seems wrong now that I could take the time to frame that shot carefully, but the distance somehow “muted” the apocalypse taking place in Manhattan. Though soon common sense overruled my photographer’s tunnel vision and I realised that something very very bad was happening. Not something to photograph but to fear. Dread and panic took over and I ran upstairs to my girlfriend who was in the apartment [at the top of the red building in the photo] and we clung to each other as the towers crumbled. When they fell, the horror crossed the water and came right into us.

My brain’s too tiny to process and make complete sense of it even now, except to know that it was the opposite of holy. An obscenity in bright sunshine.

Toby Amies is the director of The Man Whose Mind Exploded available now on VOD.

Posted by Tara McGinley
|
09.11.2014
10:15 am
|
Irate woman calls 911 over raw waffles
02.26.2014
12:26 pm
Topics:
Tags:


 
“They gave me some raw waffles,” starts the woman’s story, “and I told him that I don’t want the waffles.”

Do I really need to say where this wacky-ass 911 phone call over raw waffles happened? Do I really?

Tampa. Florida.

 
Via Arbroath

Posted by Tara McGinley
|
02.26.2014
12:26 pm
|
Conspiracy Theory Corner: Top Five 9/11 Freudian Slips!
06.21.2013
12:11 pm
Topics:
Tags:


Can an expression THIS BEFUDDLED be faked?

One of things that interests me about 9/11 is how it violently divides people, creating a kind of epistemological schism. For many, entertaining the conspiratorial view of the event (“inside job” and all that) is tantamount to believing in the tooth fairy. For others, entertaining the official version of the event is also tooth-fairy credulous. There is little middle ground, and the adherents could easily be said to occupy parallel universes.

Needless to say, for those tending to the former perspective, my tongue is firmly, deeply buried in my cheek here: of course I didn’t and don’t think that such a vast and mind-bending conspiracy is possible, let alone credible, or that the following are really anything other than meaningless slips of the tongue (rather than what Freud liked to call “psychic facts”). That is to say, I’m being ironic. Gawd.

(As for everyone else, wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more…I’m just trying to get this information out there!)

Number 1 “The TV was obviously on…”  Dubya describes seeing the first plane hit.
 

 
Is this the greatest Freudian slip of all time? A predictable number one, certainly, but deservedly so. Where were you when you first saw the planes hit the towers? Remember? Well, apparently being POTUS during such an event plays havoc with your memory. “Kite… Plane…Must… Hit… Steel…”
 
More 9/11-related Freudian slips after the jump…

READ ON
Posted by Thomas McGrath
|
06.21.2013
12:11 pm
|
UK 9/11 Truthers get their day in court (well, kinda)
03.05.2013
11:53 am
Topics:
Tags:

image
 
A couple of Mondays ago, on a cold, colorless morning at 9am sharp, I found myself in the singular predicament of joining the back of a queue of around fifteen 9/11 “Truthers” in a dismal magistrates’ court in Horsham, a small English town about an hour from London. These Truthers were mostly male, middle aged, and—I’m sorry to say—a little stinky.

Their conversation sounded something like this:

“… you believe that you’ll believe anything…”

“…Building Seven…”

“… Osama Bin Laden, don’t make me laugh…”

And the delightful…

“… other than the lizard thing—which I personally don’t have any great problem with—everything else that man has said has been spot-on…”

What was I doing there, dog tired and trying not to breathe through my nose? I was a tourist, waiting to attend what promised to be the weirdest TV license prosecution in history.

Last year, documentary filmmaker Tony Rooke decided he’d had enough of the mainstream media’s repression of what he considered the irrefutable case for the existence of a 9/11 conspiracy, and in an ingenious illustration of the old adage about using an enemy’s own weight and strength against them, had refused to pay his TV license on the grandiose grounds of Article 3, Section 15 of the UK 2000 Terrorism Act, which states that it is an offence to provide funds if there is a reasonable cause to suspect that those funds may be used for the purposes of terrorism (the TV License is a compulsory fee for all UK TV owners and pays for the BBC).

“Mr Rooke’s claim is that the BBC has withheld scientific evidence that demonstrates that the official version of 9/11 is not possible,” explained a press release circulated by the AE911Truth UK Action Group, “and that the BBC has actively attempted to discredit those people attempting to bring this evidence to the public.” As part of his defense, it added, Rooke had secured three hours to present his case, and had assembled a “formidable team” of defense witnesses, including Professor Niels Harrit (Professor of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen) and former intelligence analyst Tony Farrell. “Evidence such as this,” it concluded, “has rarely, if ever, been seen in any court of law…”

Yes, your correspondent was in Horsham not so much for a backdoor inquiry into the more controversial or contentious aspects of 9/11, as a cat-flap one. And he was very much looking forward to it!

While not exactly the toughest crowd through which to cut a dash, I am pleased to report that man-of-the-hour Tony Rooke did all the same. He was stood outside chain-smoking, with slightly floppy dark hair and a fleshy, dignified face that looked calm, thoughtful and somewhat oversensitive. As befits a defendant, he was dressed smartly, but had pulled this off rather well, something I feared would have been well beyond the reach of the other attendant Truthers, who were pointing him out to one another, murmuring in near awe that he looked “like a barrister.”

Arguably he was inspiring too much confidence. While it seemed pretty clear you would have to riffle through a fair few parallel universes before coming across a judge brazen or bananas enough to pitch the UK into an epistemological crisis over a TV license, some of the more optimistic Truthers were daring to dream, and by the time they opened the doors to Court 1 there were over a hundred cramming the narrow corridor.

This proved far too many for the tiny courtroom, which didn’t even seat thirty. Fortunately, I quickly found myself a cushy spot in the front row of folding orange leatherette chairs, but the vast majority of that large crowd was refused entry by a wiry usher with an ex-cop vibe—it was to be one in, one out at Loose Change Live.
                      
The Truthers were in uproar: I was increasingly concerned about the possibility of the court being closed or cleared. Fortunately, the usher managed to eventually shut the door on them, and when Judge Stephen Nicholls entered those seated rose to their feet with something like reverence—due I supposed to the notion it was in this man’s power to turn the tide on their thus far rather one-sided battle with the Illuminati.

Nicholls was a man in his early-to-middle sixties, with glasses and bright white hair that had receded to a widow’s peak high on his brow. After scheduling later hearings for the day’s other defendants—a pair of understandably bewildered looking bruisers facing drink driving charges—Nicholls informed Rooke (who was representing himself), that although opening statements weren’t officially allowed, he would extend “a little leeway” in this instance

So, Rooke climbed into the witness box and launched into a decent speech. His tone was steady, reasonable, and wry as he addressed Nicholls. “I have incontrovertible—and I don’t use that word lightly—evidence against the BBC. The BBC had advance knowledge of twenty minutes of the events of 9/11 and did not do anything to clarify what the source of that information was. At the preliminary hearing I asked if you were aware of WTC7. You said you had ‘heard of it.’ Over ten years after 9/11 you should have more than heard of it. It’s the BBC’s job to inform the public—especially regarding miracles of science where the laws of physics become suspended. Instead, they have made documentaries making fools of and ridiculing those of us who believe in the laws of gravity.”

It crossed my mind that Judge Nicholls probably had since looked into WTC7 (a funny idea). Now, though, he interrupted (Rooke’s speech was getting increasingly polemical and wide-ranging). “This is not an inquiry into the events of 9/11,” Nicholls declared, collecting his No-Shit-Sherlock Award 2013 with the kind of silken irony you could only hope to spin from the soul of a judge. “This is an offence under Section 363 of the Communications Act.”

The prosecutor—a youngish guy called Garth Hanniford with a blandly handsome face and a horrible off-the-rack blue suit—was then invited to cross-examine the defendant. Good old Garth. He gave the impression of a man incapable of summoning much in the way of effort or enthusiasm for anything, and had been observing the extreme novelty of the day’s events—surely the most interesting afternoon of a working life spent prosecuting TV license avoidance?—with all the attentiveness of someone watching a friend play computer games.

He now stood up and launched into what one suspected was his habitual cross-examination.

“Do you possess a television Mr Rooke?”

“Yes I do.”

“And do you possess a television license?”

“No I do not.”

“And do you watch television?”

“Sometimes.”

So… you’re happy to make use of the service but not to pay for it?”

“Well, I’ll monitor it if I have to. Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law. And it was only through watching the BBC that I could know that I would be committing a crime by paying for it.”

“No further questions,” mumbled Perry Mason, another day’s work already behind him.

On the wall behind the witness box, two decent sized television screens were on standby. There was something delectably Dadaist about the prospect that, any minute now, in a British court, we would presumably be watching the famous clip of the BBC newscaster informing viewers that the third building in the World Trade Center complex, WTC7, had just collapsed, while, in the background of the shot, it was still stood there—a stubborn facet of that surreal riddle (9/11) that had driven tens of thousands into the cold arms of paranoid schizophrenia. Now, as the witnesses for the defense filed in – the as-advertised all-star cast of maverick academics and former spooks—it was as if the national unconscious really was going to momentarily overwhelm the national superego.

Judge Nicholls, however, had other ideas. With an air of mild mischief, he started to tip his hand. As I understood it, his argument was that, even were he to sit through the show and at the end exclaim, “Jumping Jesus—9/11 was an inside job and the BBC are a pack of scoundrels!”—it would be beyond his jurisdiction to consequently exempt Mr Rooke from paying his license fee (let alone brand the Beeb “an organisation that supports terrorism,” or whatever). The day’s witnesses and exhibits, therefore, were superfluous.

In short, Loose Change Live was facing a major existential threat!

Judge and defendant went round in circles for a while…

“…I don’t want to incriminate myself by paying fees to an organisation complicit in terrorism. I will pay once the police establish that the BBC has nothing to do with terrorism…”

“… I do not believe that I have the power to rule under the Terrorism Act…”

“… I just want to present the evidence, that I am not allowed to do so leaves me slightly baffled…”

“…even if I accept the evidence, this court has no power to create a defense in the manner which you put forward…”

And so on. Meanwhile, the atmosphere was growing flat; the day building to a brutal anti-climax. Then, sensing the jig was up, Rooke suddenly lashed out.

“There is such a thing as morality, you know,” he declared (hell of a thing to chuck in the face of a judge). “You had me swear on a Bible, and now you’re asking me to commit a crime. If the BBC covers up a pedophile ring—keep paying. If they cover up 9/11—keep paying. Keep paying keep paying keep paying keep paying. When on earth does it stop? I’m sick of it.”

Judge Nicholls’ features darkened: there had been insolence (unanswerable insolence) in Rooke’s outburst, and the weight of the audience seemed suddenly and for the first time to press against him. He muttered he would retire to consider the evidence, stood up, and exited the court stage right with as near to a flounce as he had surely come in his entire career. Rooke had drawn a drop of blood!

When Nicholls returned to sentence him, the mood in the court received a further lift—he handed the defendant a conditional discharge of six months, ordering him to pay £200 legal fees, but not a fine, or even the outstanding license fee—it was a so-called “zero sentence.”

Rooke was passed a form to fill in.

“Can I just clarify,” he said, pausing with his pen in hand, “you’re ordering me to commit a crime?”

“I’ve given the judgement,” Nicholls responded, “I won’t be adding anything further to it now.” He raised his eyebrows. “Now do you want to fill in that form for me?”

Hearty thanks to David Kerekes

Posted by Thomas McGrath
|
03.05.2013
11:53 am
|
Advertisement from 1982 eerily foreshadows 9/11
12.16.2011
02:48 pm
Topics:
Tags:

image
 
A rather drab ad for TDK videotape is haunted by history unforetold, giving it dark power from the future.

As a former New Yorker who loves the city, the twin towers still loom in my mind, casting shadows forever.
 
Via Copyranter

Posted by Marc Campbell
|
12.16.2011
02:48 pm
|
Chris Morris and Alan Partridge discuss Princess Di & JFK’s deaths

image
 
Finally!  This audio sketch originally appeared as a hidden bonus on the DVD release of The Day Today in 2004, and I have been waiting ever since for someone to upload it to the internet. Now you can hear two titans of British comedy riffing on conspiracy theories, assassinations, Russian spies and trade unions in their own particular love/hate (mostly hate) style. This sounds totally unscripted, which makes it even better. And this Partridge guy really knows his stuff, Alex Jones should get him on as a guest.
 
Chris Morris & Alan Partridge talk conspiracies:
 

 
Bonus!
 
This is the other Easter egg from The Day Today DVD - Chris Morris speaking to Peter O’Hanrahanrahan live from the World Trade Center on September 11th 2001.
 
The Day Today - 9/11
 

 
You can buy the complete The Day Today on DVD here.
 
Previously on DM: Nupticution: death row lovers to be married while strapped in electric chair and then exececuted

Posted by Niall O'Conghaile
|
03.11.2011
07:46 am
|