Laboratory director fired for questioning official federal Sept. 11 scenario SOUTH BEND, Ind.—A former laboratory director of a division of Underwriters Laboratories (UL) in South Bend generated considerable heat in professional circles on Nov. 11 when he fired off a letter via email to a prominent metallurgist, questioning the theory that jet fuel fires set by the 9-11 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center were hot enough to soften or melt structural steel. Sending that email led to Kevin R. Ryan being fired from his job as site manager at the UL-affiliated Environmental Health Laboratories Inc., in South Bend. Ryan wrote his professional opinion to metallurgist Frank Gayle at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) because NIST, with Gayle at the helm, is conducting a $16 million, two-year investigation of the twin towers’ collapse, with a draft report expected in January. UL has played “a limited role in the investigation,” noted The South Bend Tribune on Nov. 22. The investigation reportedly involves testing the type of steel used to construct the World Trade Center—mainly its ability to withstand fires. The federal probe postulates that burning jet fuel was a primary factor in the structural collapse that led to the “pancaking”-style, vertical demolition of the 110-story WTC towers on Sept. 11, 2001. However, any clear information that throws water on that theory is bound to furl some brows among those who accept the government’s story of how the WTC towers were destroyed. Ryan, whose firing may be in response to his decision to share his letter beyond the confines of his company and its affiliates, did not return phone messages left for him by AFP on Nov. 29 and Nov. 30. According to the 911Truth.org News Service, he copied his letter, via email, to David Ray Griffin, author of the book about 9-11 called The New Pearl Harbor. Ryan also copied it to Catherine Austin Fitts, a member of the 911Truth.org board. Griffin reportedly received permission to distribute Ryan’s letter to other parties. On Nov. 12, the letter was published at septembereleventh.org, the web site of the 9-11 Visibility Project. AFP obtained a copy of Ryan’s letter, in which Ryan said he was speaking for himself only, not on behalf of UL or his laboratory. The recipient, Gayle, is deputy chief of the Metallurgy Division of the NIST. “The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel,” Ryan noted in his rather lengthy letter, referring to the results of performance tests on models of the floor assemblies used in the Twin Towers, as he described it. In the letter, Ryan refutes Dr. Hyman Brown from the WTC construction crew, who claims that the WTC buildings collapsed “due to fires at 2,000 [degrees] F melting the steel.” Ryan also noted that a newspaper, which he did not name, commented on Brown by saying, “Just-released preliminary findings from a National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the World Trade Center Collapse support Brown’s theory.” Ryan pointed out in his letter that the steel components would have had to have been exposed to temperatures around 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for several hours. “And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3,000 F. Why Brown would imply that 2,000 F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.” Referring to the summer 2003 results of Gayle’s own published metallurgical tests, Ryan noted that “weak steel” was virtually ruled out at that time as a “contributing factor in the collapse.” Ryan wrote to Gayle: “Your comments suggest that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500 degrees (250 C), which is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.” However, Gayle later released additional findings that, according to Ryan, “seem to ignore” the 2003 results. Ryan pointed out that the summary of the new findings “states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your findings make clear that ‘most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250 C.’ To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1,100 C. However, this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural collapse.” In the letter to Gayle, Ryan added: “This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, I’m sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone briefly burning fires in those towers. That fact should be of great concern to all Americans. Alternatively, the contention that this steel did fail at temperatures around 250 C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9-11 were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be a great concern to my company.” Noting that the events of 9-11 “are the emotional driving force behind the War on Terror,” and that the WTC collapse “is at the crux of the story of 9-11,” Ryan told Gayle: “My feeling is that your metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux.” Ryan summarized, “Either you can make sense of what really happened to those buildings, and communicate this quickly, or we all face the same destruction and despair that come from global decisions based on disinformation and ‘chatter.’ . . . Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.” The 911Truth.org News Service, quoting a Nov. 12 New York Times report, noted that “the NIST team under Gayle is planning to hold some of its deliberations in secret” and that some 9-11 victims were considering filing a lawsuit “to force the agency to open the meetings to the public.” The NIST investigation was started in 2002 after lobbying by the Skyscraper Safety Campaign, created by Monica Gabrielle and Sally Regenhard, both of whom lost family members on Sept. 11, 2001. UL media spokesman Paul Baker had not returned two phone messages as this story went to press. An unattributed UL-linked comment in the above-mentioned Nov. 22 South Bend Tribune story denied that UL ever certified the materials for building the WTC. However, Ryan stated in his letter: “. . . [T]he company I work for certified the steel components used in the construction of the WTC buildings.”
2 say they found 9/11 'black boxes' Two men who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center claim they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners that struck the towers on 9/11 - contradicting the official account. Both the independent 9/11 Commission and federal authorities insist that none of the four devices - a cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) from the two planes - was ever found. But New York City Firefighter Nicholas DeMasi has written in a book self-published by Ground Zero workers that he took federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and located three of the four. His account is backed by a well-known Ground Zero volunteer. Their story raises the question of a cover-up at Ground Zero - although's it's not clear why the government would want to keep the discovery under wraps. A footnote to this summer's 9/11 Commission Report states: "The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and United 175" - the two planes that hit the Trade Center - "were not found." FBI spokesman Jim Margolin and Frank Gribbon of the FDNY said this week they are certain the devices weren't recovered. The "black boxes" - actually orange - could have provided valuable information about how the 9/11 attacks were pulled off. The cockpit voice recorder, which captures the last 30 minutes of a doomed flight on a tape loop, would have captured the hijackers' voices and any radio transmissions. The flight data recorder records key data such as airspeed, heading and altitude. They are built to survive an impact of 3,400 Gs and a fire of 1,100 degrees Celsius for one hour, somewhat higher than estimates of the World Trade Center blaze. "I can't recall another domestic case in which we did not recover the recorders," Ted Lopatkiewicz, spokesman for the National Transportation Safety Board, told CBS News in 2002. However, officials said little of the jets was recovered. DeMasi, with now-defunct Engine Company 261, told his story in a 2003 book published by a group that calls itself Trauma Recovery Assistance for Children. He said he donated 4 ATVs to the cleanup and became known as "the ATV Guy." "At one point, I was asked to take federal agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes...," he wrote. "We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV... "There were a total of four black boxes. We found three." Efforts to locate and interview DeMasi, now said to be with the FDNY's Marine Unit, were not successful. But his account was verified by another member of the TRAC Team, recovery site volunteer Mike Bellone. He said he didn't go out with FBI agents on the ATV but observed their search. At one point, Bellone said he observed them with a red-orange, charred device with two white stripes. Pictures on the NTSB Web site show the devices are orange with two white stripes. "There was the one that I saw, and two others were recovered in different locations - but I wasn't there for the other two," Bellone said. He said the FBI agents left with the boxes. Bellone has been criticized for his handling of TRAC finances and for wearing an official uniform when he's only an honorary fireman - but those allegations came after DeMasi's account.
Kelly 'could not have died' from knife wound, paramedics claim Key points • Paramedics believe wounds unlikely as cause of death due to lack of blood • Medical situation complicated by opiate drugs and blood condition in victim • Thames Valley Police have no intention of re-opening the case Key quote I just think it is incredibly unlikely that he died from the wrist wound we saw. There just wasn’t a lot of blood. When someone cuts an artery, whether accidentally or intentionally, the blood pumps everywhere." - VANESSA HUNT, PARAMEDIC Story in full POLICE have rejected calls to re-open the inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, the government weapons expert, after two paramedics who found him at the scene of his death said he could not have died from self-inflicted knife wounds. Dave Bartlett and Vanessa Hunt, both ambulance workers, yesterday spoke out for the first time since the Hutton Inquiry, which concluded that Dr Kelly had committed suicide and died of wounds to the ulnar artery in his left wrist. The paramedics disputed the findings of the investigation, claiming there was not enough blood at the scene to merit the official conclusions. They had raised the same concerns while giving evidence to the inquiry last year. Dr Kelly was found dead in July 2003 shortly after being named as the source of a BBC story which claimed that the government had "sexed-up" a dossier on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. His body was discovered at Harrowdown Hill woods, Oxfordshire, prompting the government to appoint Lord Hutton to conduct an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the scientist’s death. In his report, published in January this year, Lord Hutton concluded that Dr Kelly, 59, had killed himself by cutting his left wrist after taking co-proxamol painkillers, adding that there was no evidence whatsoever that any third party had been involved. But Ms Hunt, a paramedic with more than ten years’ experience, said yesterday that shortly after arriving at the scene of Dr Kelly’s death she concluded he had not died by slashing his wrists. She said: "I just think it is incredibly unlikely that he died from the wrist wound we saw. There just wasn’t a lot of blood. When someone cuts an artery, whether accidentally or intentionally, the blood pumps everywhere." She added: "When we arrived on the scene there was no gaping wound, there wasn’t a puddle of blood around. There was a little bit of blood on the nettles to the left of his left arm. But there was no real blood on the body of the shirt. "If you manage to cut a wrist and catch an artery you would get a spraying of blood, regardless of whether it’s an accident. Because of the nature of an arterial cut, you get a pumping action. I would certainly expect a lot more blood on his clothing, on his shirt. "If you choose to cut your wrists, you don’t worry about getting blood on your clothes. I didn’t see any blood on his right hand. If he used his right hand to cut his wrist, you would expect some spray," the paramedic said. Ms Hunt’s claims were backed yesterday by a number of prominent experts, including Dr Bill McQuillan, a former consultant at Edinburgh’s Royal Infirmary, who for 20 years has dealt with hundreds of wrist accidents. "I have never seen one death resulting from cutting an ulnar artery," Dr McQuillan said. "I can’t see how he would lose more than a pint of blood by cutting the ulnar." But despite growing doubts about the case, other forensic experts remain "satisfied" with Lord Hutton’s verdict. According to Dr Bob Van Hegan, a consultant pathologist, the paramedics’ assessment of the manner in which Dr Kelly died was purely speculative. He said: "I don’t see the discrepancies. People will sometimes set out to kill themselves and die of another cause." Dr Hagen said there were "three factors operating" which could have contributed to the scientist’s death, in addition to the wrist wound. He pointed out that Dr Kelly’s coronary arteries were in a poor condition and that he suffered from a vascular disease and had taken an opiate drug. In March this year the Oxfordshire coroner, Nicholas Gardiner, decided not to reconvene the inquest into Dr Kelly’s death after it was adjourned while Lord Hutton held his inquiry. But in the wake of Lord Hutton’s verdict, Mr Gardiner, who himself examined Dr Kelly’s body, said he had received "substantial correspondence from people believing they had relevant evidence" regarding the scientist’s death. Among the points they made was that Lord Hutton was a judge, not an expert coroner, and that he did not have the power to compel witnesses to attend. A spokesman for Thames Valley Police said yesterday that they had no intention of re-opening the case. He said: "We are fully satisfied with the outcome of the investigation into David Kelly’s death. The inquiry and the coroner agreed with our findings."
The second report is from Inforwars.com, which I'm sorry to day is not a reliable source of information so I will not take any part of it seriously. The first however is thought provoking, cause a friend of mine who is also a metalurgist says that there was something fishy about the steel inside the WTC melting.
Well do a quick search and you will see that the story is not exclusive to infowars.com. Well, in the same way that i would be 'insulted' if a blind person told me i looked ugly.
One reason that I believe that the Government might really have withheld black box tapes is because they didn't want the country hearing the terrorist screaming "ALLAH AKABAR" as they slammed the planes into the buildings. The American Government genuinely feared a backlash against Muslims that would have rivaled the abuses of Japanese/Americans after Pearl Harbor. Either that, or they didn't want us hear that the suicide pilots sounded like they were from Boston. :lol: Probably the "Allah" thing. Barry
Rampant Insider Selling Raises Red Flags - AP Reports Major Corporate Execs, Including Some From the Homebuilding Industry Are Dumping Stocks - Serious Predictor of a Coming Crash
I'd link the story about the CIA agent being forced to quit for not forging documents about WMD's in Iraq but I be lazy yo.
Speaking of blind men and ugliness...good to see the back of David Blunkett... Liberty is on the line Saturday December 18, 2004 The Guardian It is of first importance for the rule of law in a democracy that the decisions of the highest court are accepted by both the executive and the legislature ([Judges' verdict on terror laws provokes constitutional crisis, December 16). The law lords' judgment, which will become a milestone in the long struggle for human rights, can be adhered to in a number of ways that respect the presumption of innocence and the right of every person to a fair trial. In Northern Ireland, for instance, there were the single-judge Diplock courts, and trials held in camera. Release under close surveillance is another option. To permit indefinite detention, coupled with the isolation of the detained person from friends and family over years, is to destroy the very structure of human rights and justice we claim to defend. Shirley Williams House of Lords If David Blunkett hadn't resigned on Wednesday, would he have had to resign on Thursday when the law lords savaged his anti-terrorism legislation? Their judgment is his true legacy - this story is no longer about visas and affairs, but about a Labour home secretary who attacks perhaps the most basic tenet of British law and of democracy itself, habeas corpus - the right of the individual not to be detained without charge or trial. Lord Bingham, in his judgment, reminds us that "the appellants were able to draw on the long libertarian tradition of English law dating back to Chapter 39 of Magna Carta 1215, giving effect in the ancient remedy of habeas corpus". This is a fundamental keystone of democracy and the British legal tradition. The significance of this ruling is that the government is still subject to the law of the land - that this is still, for the moment, a state based on the rule of law and not the arbitrary rule of government. Jane Mayes Geoffrey Clapp solicitors I am deeply disturbed by the apparent determination of the Home Office not to bow to the ruling of the highest court and to take no immediate action to remedy the illegal detention by either releasing the detainees or charging and bringing them to trial. The concept of indefinite detention without trial is abhorrent, inhumane and contrary to a fundamental principle underlying the rule of law which has been established since the great landmark cases of the 18th century. If it is ever justified, it can only be when there is a genuine national emergency where the threat is to the very life of the nation. I do not underestimate the power of terrorists to kill and destroy, but the judges were plainly correct to say that there was then no national emergency which could, in law, justify opting out of article 5 of the European convention on human rights. The act was part of a politics of fear which is damaging the US and must not be allowed to damage us here in the UK. As the judges said, our responses to the terrorist threats we face must be proportionate. Our civil liberties, which David Blunkett took so lightly, took centuries to establish and we must be utterly vigilant against current attempts to diminish them. If the Home Office does not either charge or release the detainees, a most serious constitutional crisis must result from the precedent of defiance thus created. (Prof) John Rear University of Northumbria The British government's refusal to accept the law lords' strong and unequivocal ruling on indefinite detention without trial speaks volumes about Tony Blair and Jack Straw. In their eagerness to emulate the aggressive and authoritarian practices of George Bush, Blair and Straw reject the very traditions that have long defined and sustained the common law, and not just in Britain. What sort of message will this send to the Ukrainians, Iraqis, Uzbeks and Burmese? Michael Byers University of British Columbia U.K. Criminal Justice weblog
Pentagon: Rumsfeld misspoke on Flight 93 crash WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A comment Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld made during a Christmas Eve address to U.S. troops in Baghdad has sparked new conspiracy theories about the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In the speech, Rumsfeld made a passing reference to United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to stop al Qaeda hijackers. But in his remarks, Rumsfeld referred to the "the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania." A Pentagon spokesman insisted that Rumsfeld simply misspoke, but Internet conspiracy theorists seized on the reference to the plane having been shot down.
from the Underwriters Lab official reply - "Ryan was fired, Baker said, because he "expressed his own opinions as though they were institutional opinions and beliefs of UL." The lying ____. You know it was a cover up. Right? Barry
Area man stirs debate on WTC collapse South Bend firm's lab director fired after questioning federal probe Ryan's statements have generated interest on many Web sites, including some advocating sharp scrutiny of the federal government's WTC probe. Ryan copied his e-mail to David Ray Griffin, author of "The New Pearl Harbor," and to Catherine Austin Fitts, a board member of 911Truth.org -- a Web site organized by citizens who believe the government is covering up the true cause of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. One day later, Griffin requested and received permission to distribute Ryan's letter to other parties. An official from 911Truth.org called Ryan to confirm his authorship. They said Ryan made it clear he is speaking for himself only, not on behalf of his laboratory or the company, but that others at UL were aware of his action. The letter was published Nov. 11 on the Web site septembereleventh.org, site of the 9/11 Visibility Project. On Tuesday, organizers of the 911Truth.org Web site noted Ryan had been fired. In his letter, Ryan appeared confident in his statements about the WTC's fire protection levels. "You may know that there are a number of current and former government employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know the truth," he told the institute's Gayle. "Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel." UL moved immediately to discredit Ryan. The company said Ryan "was not involved in that work and was not associated in any way with UL's Fire Protection Division, which conducted testing at NIST's request." The company said it "fully supports NIST's ongoing efforts to investigate the WTC tragedy. We regret any confusion that Mr. Ryan's letter has caused 9/11 survivors, victims' families and their friends." "We prefer to base our conclusions, and NIST would say the same, on science rather than speculation," Baker said. "We anxiously await the outcome of the NIST investigation." Organizers of 911Truth.org came to Ryan's defense Thursday, although they couldn't persuade him to speak publicly. "He just saw too many contradictions, and it set off his sense of what was the right thing to do," said David Kubiak, 911Truth.org's executive director. "It's unfortunate for the country, and it's particularly tragic for him, but inspiring as hell." "The way things are working in the country right now," Kubiak added, "it's only going to be citizens like this who take their professional knowledge and sense of personal integrity, and put it ahead of the strange status quo, that we will see truth and justice out of the system."
Former US attorney general joins Saddam defence team Julian Borger in Washington Thursday December 30, 2004 The Guardian Ramsey Clark, a former US attorney general, has joined Saddam Hussein's legal team to contest before a special tribunal charges of committing wholesale atrocities, it was announced yesterday. Mr Clark, who led the justice department under President Lyndon Johnson, flew on Tuesday to Amman, Jordan, where the 20-strong international defence team is based. A spokesman for the team, Ziad Khassawneh, said his arrival "honours and inspires us". The defence team already includes one American lawyer, Curtis Doebbler, and a former French foreign minister, Roland Dumas. Mr Clark has been an outspoken voice on the American left since leaving government in 1969 and joining the movement against the Vietnam war. He has also been involved in the defence of Slobodan Milosevic, the former Yugoslav leader. In Amman this week, Mr Clark said: "In international law, anyone accused of crime has the right to be tried by a competent, independent and impartial court, and there can be no fair trial without those qualities. "The special court in Iraq was created by the Iraqi governing council, which is nothing more than a creation of the US military occupation."
Quote from article in reference - "A Pentagon spokesman insisted that Rumsfeld simply misspoke, but Internet conspiracy theorists seized on the reference to the plane having been shot down." 1, If the US orchestrated the hijacking and attacks, why shoot the plane down before it hit anything? 2. If the plane was shot down, doesn't that tend to prove that it was hijacked as stated and was a threat to the US, and the US defended itself? DUH? Barry
Well, i agree with you, in some part anyway. I don't think the article proves anything one way or the other....but should still be taken into consideration in light of the overwhelming deluge of highly anomalous or conflicting data where everything that government does is concerned, whether it be from their highly unconventional means of election to their rather convenient (to be frank) 'war on terror'... And who knows why they would do that, there are more than the two possible scenarios that could be construed from the information, you know...
one thing comes to mind.. if the plane was shot down then the whole "let's roll" hero story is called into doubt.. another inconsistency to add to the tally
Lets all remember that the "lets roll" hero story was started by a distraught wife, and then grew legs on the internet. The "Government" had nothing to do with this "hero story." It is probably a great exaggeration, and I think most Americans know that. What are we supposed to do? Call the poor widow and tell her to get it right? I'll let you and Nursey do that. Barry
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0842373195/102-6731102-0288921?v=glance http://www.strategic-air-command.com/gallery/enduring_freedom/lets-roll1.htm http://www.letsroll911.org/ 1st 3 oudda google
