Remains of 9-11 victims were used to fill potholes, contractor says
By Thomas Zambito
New York Daily News
NEW YORK - The pulverized remains of bodies from the World Trade Center disaster site were used by city workers to fill ruts and potholes, a city contractor says in a sworn affidavit filed Friday in Manhattan Federal Court.
Eric Beck says debris powders - known as fines - were put in a pothole-fill mixture by crews at the Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island, N.Y., where more than 1.65 million tons of World Trade Center debris were deposited after the Sept. 11 attacks.
"I observed the New York City Department of Sanitation taking these fines from the conveyor belts of our machines, loading it onto tractors and using it to pave roads and fill in potholes, dips and ruts," Eric Beck said.
Beck was the senior supervisor for Taylor Recycling, a private contractor hired to sift through debris trucked to Fresh Kills after the trade center attacks. Before the arrival of Taylor's equipment at Fresh Kills in October 2001, the debris was sifted manually by workers using rakes and shovels.
Beck's affidavit was filed by lawyers for the families of Sept. 11 victims who are suing the city in hopes of creating a formal burial place for debris that they say contains human remains.
"It's devastating," Norman Siegel, an attorney representing the families, said of Beck's statement. "When the 9/11 families found about this, they were wiped out."
The families argue that the cleanup was hurried and slipshod, with the result that more than 400,000 tons of debris weren't properly combed for human remains.
The city recently asked Manhattan Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein to dismiss the lawsuit, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said he would like to turn the garbage dump into a "beautiful park."
In his first few months on the job, Beck said Taylor's mechanical sifters found 2,000 bones per day. He recalled finding "bones, fingers, skulls, feet and hands" as well as a man's chest and "the full body of a man dressed in a suit." The remains were catalogued and turned over to the city, he said.
But Beck said he was pushed to sift the debris quickly, and that remains may have been missed.
"I was constantly told . . . to move the job, to run the conveyor belts faster and to keep the tonnage up," Beck wrote.
Other affidavits support Siegel's claim that the sifting process was shoddy.
One comes from Theodore Feaser, the retired director of mechanical operations for the city Sanitation Department.
"From my experience at Fresh Kills, I am absolutely convinced that if the City of New York unearthed, resifted and washed the debris at Fresh Kills . . . it would find hundreds of human body parts and human remains," said Feaser, a 20-year veteran who supervised the recovery effort at Fresh Kills for the Sanitation Department.
Diane Horning, the president of WTC Families for Proper Burial, urged Hellerstein to allow the sifting to continue so that loved ones' remains will be found.
"There is no place to leave flowers," said Horning, whose son Matthew, an employee of Marsh and McLennan, was killed on Sept. 11, 2001. "There is no feeling of solace or closeness to your loved one."
Get stuff for searching! It actually works.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Monday, March 19, 2007
This needs repeating.
Here's a handy ranking of the various dangers confronting America, based on the number of mortalities in each category throughout the 11-year period spanning 1995 through 2005 (extrapolated from best available data). My buddy Bill recently underwent surgery for a hernia, it's a shame that Bush won't spend a billion a month on him while he recovers, but on the plus side, he's not at Walter Reed.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Another republican lie refuted.
From www.thesimpledollar.com
Public education and private education in America are roughly equal, even though private school students score higher. Why? Demographics. Private school test scores are better because the demographics of their students are tilted highly towards groups that do well no matter whether they’re schooled in public or private schools.
If you’re paying for private school, you’re not paying for a great education - you’re paying for demographics. The report actually says that on average, your student won’t do better on standardized tests in private school compared to public school; the only thing that makes a difference is their race, their income level, and their parents’ involvement in their education.
One more thing: you know all of those doomsday stories about how America’s schools are falling behind those of other nations? Those reports are similarly flawed because of Simpson’s paradox.
Take South Korea, for example. Their test scores in math and science dominate America and I do admire their strong education system. But read that article more closely: only 60% of their students of high school age actually attend high school; the “bottom” 40% are actually funneled into separate vocational schools. Thus, when standardized tests compare 12th graders in Korea and 12th graders in the United States, if you individual compare demographic groups, the United States does at least as well as Korea, but if you combine all students as a whole, South Korea appears to dominate the United States. That’s because their high schools, much like private schools in the United States, are full of students whose personal demographics are universally geared towards greater educational success regardless of the schools.
This same phenomenon is true in many countries; the United States is relatively rare in that they place all students in the same high schools and they have compulsory attendance requirements. Most of the nations that exceed the United States in average scores have high schools that are demographically skewed in some fashion.
In short, the best investment you can make in your child’s education is by being involved. Your involvement is a factor you can control - your race and (to a degree) your other demographics can’t be changed. Instead of dropping $50,000 on getting your kid into that ultimate private school, tone down your career a bit and get involved: find out what your child is interested in, be involved and interested in their homework, and let them know that they really are important to you. Love is the one investment in your child that can really pay off.
Public education and private education in America are roughly equal, even though private school students score higher. Why? Demographics. Private school test scores are better because the demographics of their students are tilted highly towards groups that do well no matter whether they’re schooled in public or private schools.
If you’re paying for private school, you’re not paying for a great education - you’re paying for demographics. The report actually says that on average, your student won’t do better on standardized tests in private school compared to public school; the only thing that makes a difference is their race, their income level, and their parents’ involvement in their education.
One more thing: you know all of those doomsday stories about how America’s schools are falling behind those of other nations? Those reports are similarly flawed because of Simpson’s paradox.
Take South Korea, for example. Their test scores in math and science dominate America and I do admire their strong education system. But read that article more closely: only 60% of their students of high school age actually attend high school; the “bottom” 40% are actually funneled into separate vocational schools. Thus, when standardized tests compare 12th graders in Korea and 12th graders in the United States, if you individual compare demographic groups, the United States does at least as well as Korea, but if you combine all students as a whole, South Korea appears to dominate the United States. That’s because their high schools, much like private schools in the United States, are full of students whose personal demographics are universally geared towards greater educational success regardless of the schools.
This same phenomenon is true in many countries; the United States is relatively rare in that they place all students in the same high schools and they have compulsory attendance requirements. Most of the nations that exceed the United States in average scores have high schools that are demographically skewed in some fashion.
In short, the best investment you can make in your child’s education is by being involved. Your involvement is a factor you can control - your race and (to a degree) your other demographics can’t be changed. Instead of dropping $50,000 on getting your kid into that ultimate private school, tone down your career a bit and get involved: find out what your child is interested in, be involved and interested in their homework, and let them know that they really are important to you. Love is the one investment in your child that can really pay off.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Rush = moron
“There’s no question the left has been trying to destroy the family structure.” — childless, thrice-divorced paragon of family values, Rush Limbaugh
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Fox News Devoted 12 Times More Coverage To Anna Nicole Than Walter Reed
Our national media embarrassment was again on full display on Friday. Both MSNBC and Fox News devoted more coverage to Anna Nicole Smith - three weeks after her death on Feb. 8 - than they did to the multiple developments involving the neglect and deplorable conditions at Walter Reed military hospital.
The most lop-sided coverage by far was aired by Fox News, which featured only 10 references to Walter Reed compared to 121 of Anna Nicole - roughly 12 times the coverage. MSNBC featured 84 references to Walter Reed and 96 to Anna Nicole.
The most lop-sided coverage by far was aired by Fox News, which featured only 10 references to Walter Reed compared to 121 of Anna Nicole - roughly 12 times the coverage. MSNBC featured 84 references to Walter Reed and 96 to Anna Nicole.
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Please read and help get out the truth!
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see a replay in what happened in the lead-up to the war with Iraq — the allegations of the weapons of mass destruction, the media leaping onto the bandwagon?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.
I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.
I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”