Posted on 09/08/2002 7:16:48 AM PDT by aculeus
ACCORDING to the New York Medical Examiner's Office, no one jumped from the hellish towers on that awful September day in Lower Manhattan. This despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Evidence like grotesque photos and video shots of the trapped victims jumping from the smoke-billowing, flame-ravished upper storeys of the 1,400ft buildings. Like the testimony of horrified spectators. Like the mangled bodies which spattered the large plaza between South and North Towers. Like the bodies which were found on the roof of the 22-storey Marriott Hotel, and the bodies which crashed through the VIP driveway awning on Tower 1's west side. Like the fact that at least one of the jumpers killed rescue personnel and/ or bystanders. Like the fact that an investigation by USA Today and ABC News revealed that more than 200 people jumped to their certain death.
But there are compelling reasons for the Medical Examiner's reluctance to classify the victims as "jumpers". "Jumper" is a term used to classify someone who deliberately and knowing plunges off a building to certain death. That's suicide. The 200 or so individuals who made the horrendous decision to jump on the morning of September 11 were forced to do so by fire, the smoke, the heat, the inexorable inevitability of death. In effect they did not jump. They were pushed. Homicide.
Suicide carries a taboo; the bereaved were entitled to protection from distressing images of their loved ones.
There was also a political consideration. In steeling America for the counter-terrorism war against Al Qa'ida, the victim numbers counted. There were 2,823 early and cruel deaths, 1,300 orphans and countless suicides arising from post-traumatic stress.
Many images haunted spectators and survivors. Images like the dust-lady (Marcy Border) staggering away, that of fireman Mike Kehoe rushing up the stairwell, but the image that has etched itself into the Western mind is of the people trapped above or near the impact points on the two towers. Of those working above the 84th floor on the South Tower, only 16 survived. (They had evacuated in the 16 minutes between the two air-strikes.) Of those on or above floor 91 on North Tower (impact 94th to 98th floors), no one survived. It was these people trapped in the upper reaches of the towering infernos who were left with the pitiful choice between the devilish flames and the sky.
The bereaved are individuals, not a category. They all react differently. One 12-year-old who lost her dad still watches only the Food Channel because it's the only channel guaranteed not to show images from September 11.
But others like Jean Coleman, who lost two sons, employees of Cantor Fitzgerald on the 104th floor have scoured all the photos, amateur video clips and TV footage to try to identify their relatives and figure out their states of mind.
The picture that has emerged from last phone calls, photographic evidence, emails and the 16 South Tower evacuees is truly terrifying, but also inspiring. There was panic, but most strove to survive, helped others, and many stoically accepted their fate and phoned love-messages to their loved ones. Urgent phone calls were made to the lobby fire control. The advice was to stay put. Some tried to evacuate via stairwells. All were driven back by the flames and smoke.
Others tried to make their way up to the roof, hoping for a helicopter rescue, but the roof exit doors were shut and a helicopter rescue was ruled out by emergency services.
Others phoned to tell relatives they were OK or to find out what had happened. Steve Tomsett on the 106th floor used his computer to ask his family, who were watching TV, for "updates". Shortly after, as the smoke and intense heat reached his floor, he emailed simply, "I'm scared."
Others trapped on the North Tower used their computers to break the windows, gasping for air and leaning out, looking for respite and rescue. Some peeled off their tops and waved them despairingly. Others made the awful decision and jumped.
They jumped singly, in pairs, in groups. Their bodies hurtling down at 140mph. From below they looked at first like debris. Then onlookers realised that they were humans. Some of them retched.
Those trapped in the South Tower were caught between a primal urge to flee and official advice that their building was "secure". But when some, like Andrecia Douglin-Traill on the 92nd floor, saw the North Tower jumpers, they decided to run. She was saved.
Indeed, many of the successful evacuees from the top floors of the South Tower testified later that it was the ghoulish sight of the jumpers which convinced them to flee.
For Jean Coleman it was important to track down her sons she found them in a photo which appeared in the New York Times. The two boys, Scott and Keith, were hanging out of adjacent windows. She felt the photo showed they were "relatively" serene. You see what you want to see. And you get closure.
Most people in America never wanted to see the pictures of the trapped people and non-jumpers. The images burned a passionate resentment into the soul.
Look...you're new around here, so I'll forgive your mistaken assumption. I get flamed on a regular basis for defending the regular Muslim Joes and Janes....however, I take exception to you're adding to the permanent record of a giant information archive like FR that no one around here cares about innocents, or your inferrence that everyone around here must therefore be bloodthirsty killers of innocent Muslim children. I've never hit the "abuse" button, except once to have one of my own replies pulled after I posted it to the wrong thread...but take some care with those accusations you are throwing around so freely, please.
Not the stereotypes, poobah...this is me we're talking about here. And I don't mean it in a negative way, which you should know. Survivor guilt, nightmares, daymares make for suicides, or at least self destructive behavior, later. The self destructive behavior is far more prevalant than the suicides, which made for great tear-jerking Hollywood productions, but the problem does exist. It exists among soldiers, it exists among EMTs, it exists among firefighters and even ER doctors. It's the same disorder...it isn't "post traumatic stress", which lessens the depth of the problem and blurs understanding of the symptoms, but it does, indeed, exist.
The oral history I am referring to was by Ernest Armstead (page149-155.) I went back to check on his description. From what I read it does appear that she either was thrown out of the buildings during one of the many explosions at the towers, or jumped when American Airlines Flight 11 hit the North Tower. I do not know how he came to the number but he said he thought she had fallen from about 1,000 feet.
As to the extensive injuries of the jumpers, I read narratives saying that a pink mist came out of the bodies when they hit the pavement. I saw the HBO special on 911 and they very quickly showed the remains of a body (at a distance) it was very much like describes in his narrative.
As to her survival, he seems very sure that she did not survive.
LOL...yeah, and roses are purple with orange spots. However, not all prople in Islamic countries are actual, rabid followers of the religion...many of them are...LAPSED. Just like us. They're a generic Muslim...they don't care about politics or even religios extremism: they care about getting their paychecks, raising their kids and paying the rent.
I'm gonna veg in front of the TV. Yall have a good night.
I'm not excusing their behavior. However, not all of them are dangerous. Some, like me, understand the psy-ops potential of the judicious use of the nuke option once in a while. It IS an option. A slim one at this point...whether the nuke option becomes FACT is entirely up to the extremist psychopaths who want to kill us all and rule the world under Sharia law. You DO know that is the plan, don't you?
Thanks, I'm glad to be here (though I may have to visit an addictions specialist soon ;-) ).
Just a few responses I want to make. First of all, yes, my little question at the end of my post was intended as sarcasm, but believe it or not, I wasn't trying to start trouble. It was more a case of, I sensed that Trouble would already find me for posting my views, and I wanted Trouble to be aware that I was ready to meet it. In particular, I was aware of the tactics of a perhaps small but certainly vocal crowd on FR, who respond to any dissent with accusations of "Troll!", "Disruptor!", what-have-you. And sometimes their accusations carry weight with the powers-that-be. I think it's also true that there are those who say such outrageous things as a way of intimidating people into silence, and it looks to me like they do a pretty effective job. I wanted it to be known that I had no intention of being silenced.
It's possible that I was being too defensive, as you've said. You certainly said something wise when you said there's a difference between those blowing off steam and those seriously intending to kill lots of people. These things tend to cause a very visceral reaction with me, so hopefully I can learn to discern the two a little better as I become more experienced with these threads.
On the other hand, I do have to say that I think you may have overreacted a bit by saying that my comments warranted a push of the Abuse button. I wasn't attacking anyone personally, I wasn't making any racist comments, in fact I was standing up to what initially looked like to me was a violation of FR's ban on racist postings. The worst you could say about my post was that it engaged in a bit of hyperbole - but only a little bit: I wasn't implying that most people here don't care about innocents, but that too many remain silent in the face of those who don't care about innocents. And I believe that is largely the case.
But anyway, thanks for the thoughtful replies and the friendly advice (seriously). And just a side note: I may not be an old hat here, but this wasn't "one of my first posts"! Six months is still a long time, enough for an addict like me do plenty o' Freepin'. At least I like to think I've made the rounds around this joint. :^)
Absolutely not. I was saying just the opposite, actually. By saying that innocent civilians are not responsible for their government's policies, I'm saying that a government's policies can never be considered the reason why its citizens are brutally murdered. That responsibility lies entirely with those who carry out the satanic deeds, and their supporters.
Your timing.
I wasn't trying to prove any type of superior quality on my part, intellectual or otherwise, and there sure as hell wasn't anything "ideological" in what I was saying. It certainly wasn't something I took pleasure in doing. It would have been plenty easier for me to just ignore it and look for a more comfortable thread where I could calmly discuss the proper legal scope of the 14th amendment or something. But when I see what looks to me like expressions of blind hatred towards people who've committed no crime, it feels wrong not to speak up. It may not be the most pleasant thing for people to hear at a particular moment, but it's still an important thing to hear. I believe such expressions - wittingly or unwittingly (most likely the latter) - degrade the lives of those who died on Sept. 11, because it turns innocent life into a legitimate target of anger. And I think it causes us to lose our focus against those who truly deserve punishment.
I'll try to be more mindful in the future about saying things that may seem uncalled for in a given situation, but I have no intention of remaining silent about this matter.
One of my friends came to investigate the fire. His bank was one of the main lessees in the building and many of the bank's employees, including its manager, jumped or were burned to death. He told me that they found very few human remains in the building as the temperature had been so high there was nothing left but ashes. The building materials inside the building were so flammable that the whole building became a huge torch in a matter of minutes. The number of victims was never published in Brazil, but it had to have been several hundred. The movie "Towering Inferno" was said to have been based upon that disastrous fire in Sao Paulo.
Nor would I expect you to.
Suffice it to say that while normally it may be appropriate to take someone to task for spontaneous, inflammatory or imprudent expressions of emotion, there are times when its best to leave them be. This IMO was one of those times.
BTW thanks for the thoughtful response.
Problem is of course that there are not buildings quite that tall!!
Stupido!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.