September 11, 2012

Whatever Happened To Kieger Enterprises?

by Dick Mac

On Friday, March 5, 2004, the US Attorney for Minnesota announced the indictment of Kieger Enterprises and three of its former officers. They were were charged with

engaging in a fraud scheme to enrich themselves by taking advantage of funds available for disaster relief efforts, including those for the clean-up efforts related to the . . . September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center. . . .
United States Attorney District of Minnesota News Release

USA Today published a follow-up story, 9/11 thefts not prosecuted after FBI misdeeds, in 2006. In that story, it was revealed that other thefts connected to 9/11 had taken place and covered-up, including the theft of artifacts from Ground Zero and The Pentagon. It was concluded that no prosecution could take place, and one reason was that

16 government employees, including a top FBI executive and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, had such artifacts from New York or the Pentagon

Read more at (of all places) Fox News: AP Report: Sept. 11 Thefts of Donated Goods Not Prosecuted

Yep! The Secretary of State of the United States during the Bush II Administration was in possession of artifacts stolen from a 9/11 site; and because he was in possession of these stolen artifacts, the government could not prosecute a corporation that had robbed a warehouse of relief supplies for Ground Zero.

Everybody walked away. Even the whistle-blowers were made to walk away from their jobs when they were terminated for revealing the theft.

Whatever Happened To Kieger Enterprises? Nothing!

It's good to be well-connected.



Dead Enz
Kyle G. Brixton
Limited Availability



Dead Enz
Kyle G. Brixton

Caring For Our Heroes

by Dick Mac

Now that America's right-wing and their pals in Congress have finished their jack-off session about 9/11 and the amazing Americans who did so much to restore our country's hope in the aftermath of that attack on our sovereignty, now that the sperm has been wiped up off the floor of the Senate bathroom, and the pornographic pictures of President Bush and Mayor Giuliani humping Ground Zero have been folded up and filed away, and now that right-wing extremists have finished using 9/11 as a scare tactic to privatize more of our government security services, it's time to pay-off the poor suckers who did the dirty work: the first-responders who cared.

"They are heroes," declared every right-winger from the girl at the coffee shop, to the tea-party retiree, to the military hawk who never served a moment in the armed services, to the born-again Christian in Iowa who was so deeply hurt by the attack on the World Trade Center, to the Fox News talking heads, to the elected officials from Alaska and Nevada and Arizona who wouldn't know Greenwich Street from from Vesey Street from Liberty Street, and sadly to some actual New Yorkers who fly a flag of liberty for themselves as long as they don't have to pay any taxes. Yes, these brave first responders were the real Americans on September 12, 2001, and we are going to take care of them.

In 2006, New York City police officer James Zadroga died of respiratory illness that was attributed to his participation in rescue operations in the rubble of the World Trade Center. Less than five years after the WTC clean-up began, it became clear to non-conservative Americans that the people at and near that site who breathed-in the dust from the rubble were exposed to toxins that would likely compromise their health. Forever. On the other hand, "conservatives" aren't so convinced that first-responders are suffering long-term health problems as a result of their volunteerism.

"We must do something for them!" The same people who declared they were heroes shouted!

Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) introduced bills in their respective halls of Congress. It eventually passed the House in September 2010. In a Senate vote held in December, 2010, a Republican filibuster against the bill was eventually stopped but failed to get the sixty votes needed for the bill to proceed to an up-or-down vote. You see, the patriotic Republicans who'd won election after election on the back of 9/11 said that they would block any medical relief bill for 9/11 first responders unless tax cuts for families earning more than $250,000 were ensured.

Now, that's patriotism! That's showing love and concern for the first-responders: they can get health care as long as the top 5% of the population can have a tax cut. Maybe. Give us the tax-cuts and then we'll see.

Eventually, Congress managed to pass the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act.

It doesn't cover cancer treatment.

You see, there is no proof that first-responders are liable to get cancer, so we better not cover cancer because we might help a first-responder who got cancer from bad diet, or from smoking, or from something other than the silica, talc, cellulose, calcium phosphate, and methacrylate plastic, etc., he breathed at Ground Zero, trying to save the lives of those who perished.

Nice job, Congress!

We seem to have protected those tax cuts for the top 5% of American citizens, but we can't figure out how to pay the medical bills for first-responders who get cancer.

You see, this is America: the only people who deserve health care are those who can afford it; and just because you risked your life digging holes trying to find cops and firefighters and fellow citizens buried in rubble on the days following a gruesome crime committed against our nation, that doesn't mean you deserve anything.

You're a fucking hero, now shut the fuck up, get back to work and vote "conservative" (they'll protect you from the fags, niggers and abortionists - the real problems in your life). And, sadly, many first-responders will vote "conservative."

Law Firm Advertising

by Dick Mac

I have worked in law firms for almost thirty years. During that time law firms began advertising and sponsoring public event and institutions. The former has been tacky, at best, and the latter has actually been somewhat beneficial for all involved.

Prior to this, it was long held that law firms shouldn't advertise. It seems some people think that advertising would jeopardize the integrity and prudence of the industry.

If I was a lawyer who cared about the reputation of my industry, I would side with the people who say that law firms shouldn't advertise.

Law firm advertising stands alongside weight-loss programs, household tools to replace buttons and remove stains, and fitness equipment in the advertising arena. Law firm advertisements are shown late at night, when larger, more reputable industries cannot be bothered to advertise. There's your nationwide litigation firm asking if you've been injured or suffered at the hands of a professional who is not a lawyer, promising you boatloads of money and alternately showing heart-tugging photos of sad scenarios and photos of middle-aged, well-dressed white men presented as your knight in shining armor.

No, there is nothing sophisticated about law firm advertising, it's pretty cheesy.

Critics of law firm advertising both in the legal industry and outside it, also fear that lawyers using deceptive advertising practices will further injure the precarious reputation of the entire industry. Nobody like lawyers; it seems that other lawyers don't even like lawyers. In fact, the best lawyer jokes I've heard were told to me by lawyers.

Q: What do you call a ditch filled with dead lawyers?

A: A good start.

or this one:

Q: What's the difference between a catfish and a lawyer?

A: One is a bottom-feeding scum-sucker, and the other is a fish.

And they go from there.

When you have an industry that suffers a horrible reputation, even at its best of times, the last thing you need is deceptive advertising.

Come now, Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern, a law firm with offices in the Empire State Building, that actually uses . . . are you ready for this . . . the World Trade Center memorial as the banner of its website, and posts WTC victim-related information right on its front page:



So, in an effort to sink below the lowest piece of whale shit on the planet, this company is capitalizing on the crimes at the World Trade Center that killed three thousand people almost ten years ago.

The URL for their website is http://www.877wtchero.com/index.html! That's right: WTC Hero! Adding the 877 telephone area code just increases the sleaze factor!

If that isn't creepy enough, they recently created and published an ad (now removed from rotation) depicting a dirty, though rather handsome, fireman holding a framed picture of the WTC ruins and stating "I was there":



Well, that fireman was NOT there, and the law firm had, or allowed, its advertising agency Barker/DZP to doctor the picture. Originally, this was a picture of a firefighter holding his helmet, and the agency cropped out the helmet to insert the photo of the WTC.

Are you feeling grossed-out yet?

It gets better!

When the law firm came under fire for the advertisement, it didn't just remove it, they then went so far as to try and defend themselves by posting the model's signed release on their website; on the front page of their website! See the picture above of the firm's website with the WTC memorial lights and red headline about respiratory illnesses and you can see that they have posted "Robert Keiley's signed model release." This is in an effort to deflect criticism by the model that they cropped his image and made him look bad in the law enforcement and public safety communities.

Everything that lawyers feared could happen when law firms advertise is happening right here. The lawyers made a poor choice of advertising campaigns, they are exploiting for profit the pain of those who have suffered and are unable to advocate for themselves, they are promoting themselves with that pain, they are outright lying about their services, and now they are blaming the model in their advertisement in an effort to deflect responsibility.

These guys bring the reputation of all lawyers to a new low.

Here is the apology from the ad agency, in which they refer to this as a "mistake": U.S. agency apologizes over 9/11 ad mistake

See, also, New York law firm, advertising agency under fire over 9/11 ad.