THIS HAS BEEN UPDATED 26JUL07 WITH NEW EMAILS AT BOTTOM AND A LINK TO THE "PARAMETERS" FOR THE NIST INVESTIGATION ALONG WITH GIVING CREDIT TO DR ED WARD FOR HIS VALUABLE RESEARCH, WHICH I MISTAKENLY DID NOT DO IN MY ORIGINAL EMAIL TO NIST...
My question to you Mr Newman is...
How are you going to explain away facts so obvious that to cover them up is in itself an act pure cowardice and deserves severe
UL Executive Speaks Out On WTC Study 911Truth.org 11-14-4
"The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel."
From Kevin R. Ryan
Site Manager of the Environmental Health Laboratories
South Bend, Indiana
(Company site - www.ehl.cc)
A division of Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
(Company site - www.ul.com)
To Frank Gayle
Deputy Chief of the Metallurgy Division
Material Science and Engineering Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
NIST and the World Trade Center at wtc.nist.gov
Dr. Gayle biography wtc.nist.gov/pi/wtc_profiles.asp?lastname=gayle
From: Kevin R Ryan/SBN/ULI
To: frank.gayle@nist.gov
Date: 11/11/2004
Dr. Gayle,
Having recently reviewed your team's report of 10/19/04, I felt the need to contact you directly.
As I'm sure you know, the company I work for certified the steel components used in the construction of the WTC buildings. In requesting information from both our CEO and Fire Protection business manager last year, I learned that they did not agree on the essential aspects of the story, except for one thing - that the samples we certified met all requirements. They suggested we all be patient and understand that UL was working with your team, and that tests would continue through this year. I'm aware of UL's attempts to help, including performing tests on models of the floor assemblies. But the results of these tests appear to indicate that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel.
There continues to be a number of "experts" making public claims about how the WTC buildings fell. One such person, Dr. Hyman Brown from the WTC construction crew, claims that the buildings collapsed due to fires at 2000F melting the steel (1). He states "What caused the building to collapse is the airplane fuel ? burning at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The steel in that five-floor area melts." Additionally, the newspaper that quotes him says "Just-released preliminary findings from a National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the World Trade Center collapse support Brown's theory."
We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F 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 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.
The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to clear things up (3), and support your team's August 2003 update as detailed by the Associated Press (4), in which you were ready to "rule out weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse". The evaluation of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very straightforward, and you noted that the samples available were adequate for the investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.
However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed bits of the building's steel core to "soften and buckle"(5). Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your findings make clear that "most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250C". To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C (6). However, this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were be able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural collapse.
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 the 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 250C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11 were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of great concern to my company.
There is no question that the events of 9/11 are the emotional driving force behind the War on Terror. And the issue of the WTC collapse is at the crux of the story of 9/11. My feeling is that your metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux. 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".
Thanks for your efforts to determine what happened on that day. You may know that there are a number of other current and former government employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know the truth. I've copied one of these people on this message as a sign of respect and support. I believe your work could also be a nucleus of fact around which the truth, and thereby global peace and justice, can grow again. Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.
[Note: The letter is followed in the e-mail by a standard UL message footer]
-- For more information about UL, its Marks, and its services for EMC, quality registrations and product certifications for global markets, please access our web sites at http://www.ul.com and http://www.ulc.ca, or contact your local sales representative.
November 12:
An executive of the company that certified the steel used in the construction of the World Trade Center has questioned the common theory that fuel fires caused its collapse, in a letter yesterday to the head of the government team that has spent two years studying how the trade center was built and why it fell.
The author of the letter, Kevin Ryan, is site manager at Environmental Health Laboratories in South Bend, Indiana, a division of Underwriters Laboratories, the product-compliance and testing giant. Because UL certified the WTC steel for its ability to withstand fires, its performance on September 11 is obviously of concern to the company.
Ryan sent his letter to Frank Gayle, deputy chief of the Metallurgy Division at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). He later forwarded it in an e-mail to David Ray Griffin, author of the New Pearl Harbor, and Catherine Austin Fitts, who is a member of the 911Truth.org board.
Griffin asked for and received permission to forward the letter for Web distribution. 911Truth.org called Ryan today to confirm his authorship.
The letter raises disturbing questions, pointing out that the steel in the towers tested up to its certified standard (i.e., it should have easily withstood the fuel fires without buckling).
A chemist by profession, Ryan said he is acting in the hope of receiving a public response from Gayle. Given the impact of September 11 on events around the world, Ryan said, everyone needs to know the full truth of what really happened on that day. He added that he considers Gayle to be a good scientist and an honest person.
A draft of the government agency's final report on the WTC collapse is due in January.
The New York Times reports today that the NIST team is planning to hold some of its deliberations in secret. "The announcement has been sharply protested by advocates for families of the 9/11 victims, who said they were considering a lawsuit to force the agency to open the meetings to the public," the Times writes.
As the Times notes, the NIST investigation was started in 2002 after lobbying by, among others, the Skyscraper Safety Campaign, an organization created by Monica Gabrielle and Sally Regenhard, both of whom lost family on September 11.
Gabrielle told the Times that NIST should have "one job, and one job only - to find out the truth of what happened to those buildings and to report to the public about it. You don't owe industry, the Port Authority or federal agencies anything. You owe it to the public - the truth, no matter where it goes." (See www.nytimes.com)
On seeing this research from UL, I am pushing for transparent*, fully public meetings/hearings on the structure/physical evidence related to the deterioration of the towers into their foundations -these meetings conducted by the NIST, the gov division under the DeptCommerce, under the Executive Branch, aka - "The White House".
Rather than be immutable or mysterious about this research on the (Bethlehem Steel produced) steel in the towers, I found this important information to those who have the interest to understand the truth about what happened at the WTC on 9/11/01.
I owned stock in Bethlehem Steel before it was driven into bankruptcy and liquidated. I knew it had made the i-beams and girders for the WTC, and found it annoying when the under-informed would attempt to convince me that we dont/didnt even make steel strong enough to support construction like the towers, and that steel strong enough for construction like the WTC comes/came from Japan. Au contraire! A look at the remaining steel while at the site also speaks otherwise.
This government is to answer to the American people. I see no reason for secrecy when the people in the government are looking for 'transparency' from everything else. Our privacy is under invasion and the government wants opaque secrecy?
Comment From Scott T Davis 11-14-4
Dear Jeff,
I want to ask all Americans - who have just read this article which has such overwhelming statistical information exposing the World Trade Center cover-up - to take just a minute and e-mail the article to their Senators, Congressional Representatives and all media outlets.
All the e-mail information we need to expose the coverup is right on the main page of your web site.
We as Americans are held accountable for our actions by government everyday. It's well past time we hold the people we employ to represent us equally as accountable.
My question to you is...How are you going to explain away facts so obvious that to cover them up is in itself pure cowardice and deserves severe punishment? As I said in my first communication, you are in a very precarious position indeed!!!
A BRIEF STUDY ON TEMPERATURE, STEEL, MELTING, KEROSENE (aka Jet Fuel)
AND
LARRY SILVERSTIEN'S BUILDINGS (aka WTC 1,2,7)
THAT HAVE A TENDANCY TOWARD
RATHER EXPLOSIVE COLLAPSE!!
Reference map
The Persistent Hot spots:
Thermal images from September 16, 2001 WTC 7 closest to top of image.
Hot Spots from the AVRIS Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) Sensor Sept 16, 2001 indexed A&B are WTC7 Larger 254 KB image
Table 1 Thermal Hot Spot Data (Again, A&B are WTC7)
Location
Temperature
Area
Hot Spot
N Latitude
W Longitude
(Kelvin)
% FOV
sq meter
A
40o 42' 47.18"
74o 00' 41.43"
1000
15
0.56
B
40o 42' 47.14"
74o 00' 43.53"
830
2
0.08
C
40o 42' 42.89"
74o 00' 48.88"
900
20
0.8
D
40o 42' 41.99"
74o 00' 46.94"
790
20
0.8
E
40o 42' 40.58"
74o 00' 50.15"
710
10
0.4
F
40o 42' 38.74"
74o 00' 46.70"
700
10
0.4
G
40o 42' 39.94"
74o 00' 45.37"
1020
1
0.04
H
40o 42' 38.60"
74o 00' 43.51"
820
2
0.08
Positions are in degrees-minutes-decimal seconds, datum WGS84. Position accuracy is estimated to be approximately +/- 6 meters (18 feet).
AND, HOW DO YOU GET A 30' DEEP CRATER
UNDER A MELTING BUILDING???
WTC 7 - 47 stories tall - debris pile 7 stories. The New York times has a crude interactive map placing the crater depth at -30 feet. According to the official story, beams from WTC 1 collapsed the building. However, the collapse did not make a debris pile. It made a debris hole.
I TRULY DON'T BELIEVE THESE HEATERS ARE RUNNING A TEMPERATURE EVEN APPROACHING 1000 DEGREES KELVIN (1300+ DEGREES FARENHEIT) DO YOU???
I THINK THE RATHER THIN WIRE MESH
AND INEXPERNSIVE METAL
ON THESE HEATERS WOULD PROBABLY MELT
BEFORE THE WTC BUILDINGS' ASTM E119 UL CERTIFIED STEEL WOULD!!!
(The time temperature curves for the ASTM E119 standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000 degrees farenheit for several hours) FULL ARTICLE BELOW...
OH, AND THAT'S RIGHT...NO AIRPLANE HIT WTC #7!!!
UL Executive Speaks Out On WTC Study 911Truth.org 11-14-4
"The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel."
From Kevin R. Ryan
Site Manager of the Environmental Health Laboratories
South Bend, Indiana
(Company site - www.ehl.cc)
A division of Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
(Company site - www.ul.com)
To Frank Gayle
Deputy Chief of the Metallurgy Division
Material Science and Engineering Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
NIST and the World Trade Center at wtc.nist.gov
Dr. Gayle biography wtc.nist.gov/pi/wtc_profiles.asp?lastname=gayle
From: Kevin R Ryan/SBN/ULI
To: frank.gayle@nist.gov
Date: 11/11/2004
Dr. Gayle,
Having recently reviewed your team's report of 10/19/04, I felt the need to contact you directly.
As I'm sure you know, the company I work for certified the steel components used in the construction of the WTC buildings. In requesting information from both our CEO and Fire Protection business manager last year, I learned that they did not agree on the essential aspects of the story, except for one thing - that the samples we certified met all requirements. They suggested we all be patient and understand that UL was working with your team, and that tests would continue through this year. I'm aware of UL's attempts to help, including performing tests on models of the floor assemblies. But the results of these tests appear to indicate that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel.
There continues to be a number of "experts" making public claims about how the WTC buildings fell. One such person, Dr. Hyman Brown from the WTC construction crew, claims that the buildings collapsed due to fires at 2000F melting the steel (1). He states "What caused the building to collapse is the airplane fuel ? burning at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The steel in that five-floor area melts." Additionally, the newspaper that quotes him says "Just-released preliminary findings from a National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the World Trade Center collapse support Brown's theory."
We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F 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 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.
The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to clear things up (3), and support your team's August 2003 update as detailed by the Associated Press (4), in which you were ready to "rule out weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse". The evaluation of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very straightforward, and you noted that the samples available were adequate for the investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.
However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed bits of the building's steel core to "soften and buckle"(5). Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your findings make clear that "most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250C". To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C (6). However, this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were be able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural collapse.
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 the 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 250C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11 were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of great concern to my company.
There is no question that the events of 9/11 are the emotional driving force behind the War on Terror. And the issue of the WTC collapse is at the crux of the story of 9/11. My feeling is that your metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux. 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".
Thanks for your efforts to determine what happened on that day. You may know that there are a number of other current and former government employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know the truth. I've copied one of these people on this message as a sign of respect and support. I believe your work could also be a nucleus of fact around which the truth, and thereby global peace and justice, can grow again. Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.
[Note: The letter is followed in the e-mail by a standard UL message footer]
-- For more information about UL, its Marks, and its services for EMC, quality registrations and product certifications for global markets, please access our web sites at http://www.ul.com and http://www.ulc.ca, or contact your local sales representative.
November 12:
An executive of the company that certified the steel used in the construction of the World Trade Center has questioned the common theory that fuel fires caused its collapse, in a letter yesterday to the head of the government team that has spent two years studying how the trade center was built and why it fell.
The author of the letter, Kevin Ryan, is site manager at Environmental Health Laboratories in South Bend, Indiana, a division of Underwriters Laboratories, the product-compliance and testing giant. Because UL certified the WTC steel for its ability to withstand fires, its performance on September 11 is obviously of concern to the company.
Ryan sent his letter to Frank Gayle, deputy chief of the Metallurgy Division at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). He later forwarded it in an e-mail to David Ray Griffin, author of the New Pearl Harbor, and Catherine Austin Fitts, who is a member of the 911Truth.org board.
Griffin asked for and received permission to forward the letter for Web distribution. 911Truth.org called Ryan today to confirm his authorship.
The letter raises disturbing questions, pointing out that the steel in the towers tested up to its certified standard (i.e., it should have easily withstood the fuel fires without buckling).
A chemist by profession, Ryan said he is acting in the hope of receiving a public response from Gayle. Given the impact of September 11 on events around the world, Ryan said, everyone needs to know the full truth of what really happened on that day. He added that he considers Gayle to be a good scientist and an honest person.
A draft of the government agency's final report on the WTC collapse is due in January.
The New York Times reports today that the NIST team is planning to hold some of its deliberations in secret. "The announcement has been sharply protested by advocates for families of the 9/11 victims, who said they were considering a lawsuit to force the agency to open the meetings to the public," the Times writes.
As the Times notes, the NIST investigation was started in 2002 after lobbying by, among others, the Skyscraper Safety Campaign, an organization created by Monica Gabrielle and Sally Regenhard, both of whom lost family on September 11.
Gabrielle told the Times that NIST should have "one job, and one job only - to find out the truth of what happened to those buildings and to report to the public about it. You don't owe industry, the Port Authority or federal agencies anything. You owe it to the public - the truth, no matter where it goes." (See www.nytimes.com)
On seeing this research from UL, I am pushing for transparent*, fully public meetings/hearings on the structure/physical evidence related to the deterioration of the towers into their foundations -these meetings conducted by the NIST, the gov division under the DeptCommerce, under the Executive Branch, aka - "The White House".
Rather than be immutable or mysterious about this research on the (Bethlehem Steel produced) steel in the towers, I found this important information to those who have the interest to understand the truth about what happened at the WTC on 9/11/01.
I owned stock in Bethlehem Steel before it was driven into bankruptcy and liquidated. I knew it had made the i-beams and girders for the WTC, and found it annoying when the under-informed would attempt to convince me that we dont/didnt even make steel strong enough to support construction like the towers, and that steel strong enough for construction like the WTC comes/came from Japan. Au contraire! A look at the remaining steel while at the site also speaks otherwise.
This government is to answer to the American people. I see no reason for secrecy when the people in the government are looking for 'transparency' from everything else. Our privacy is under invasion and the government wants opaque secrecy?
Comment From Scott T Davis 11-14-4
Dear Jeff,
I want to ask all Americans - who have just read this article which has such overwhelming statistical information exposing the World Trade Center cover-up - to take just a minute and e-mail the article to their Senators, Congressional Representatives and all media outlets.
All the e-mail information we need to expose the coverup is right on the main page of your web site.
We as Americans are held accountable for our actions by government everyday. It's well past time we hold the people we employ to represent us equally as accountable.
Scooter Libby's Pardon and 9/11 Scooter Libby's pardon begs the question of what he would have talked about had he been truly faced with prison. Whatever it was, it was important enough for Bush to grant Libby a last-second reprieve so he wouldn't have to go to jail. I thought back to something I had tripped upon a while ago, something that involved Libby, which happened on September 10, 2001, the day before the twin towers were struck.
On the CNN site, in a timeline available from this page, I found this stunning entry:
SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 A CIA plan to strike at al Qaeda in Afghanistan, including support for the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, is given to the White House. Sen. Dianne Feinstein asks for a meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney. The California Democrat is told that Cheney's staff would need six months to prepare for a meeting. When I read this, I was stunned on two levels.
First, read that again. The CIA was going to do BEFORE 9/11 exactly what it did AFTER 9/11 - strike at al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Since we hadn't been attacked yet, 9/11 provided a nifty justification for this plan.
But second, Feinstein is a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a group that works closely with intelligence agencies and--ostensibly--provides oversight of intelligence activities. (I say ostensibly because the committee does not know of, and therefore has no option to approve or disapprove all intelligence activities). How could it be that, as the 9/11 Commission report states, when the "system was blinking red" on a possible terrorist attack on the country, and ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee comes to say hey, something serious is afoot and we need to talk, the VP's office could blow off Feinstein by saying they couldn't review her plans for six months?
Curious, I called Senator Feinstein's office and asked, is it normal for the VP to blow off a meeting with Senator Feinstein for six months? The four people I spoke to in her office all said and did the same thing. They said no, that's not usual, what is this about? I said this is about the Senator's 9/10 visit to Cheney, the day before 9/11. At this, each staffer got nervous and transferred me to the next person. None of them would even confirm that this conversation had transpired, but in the end, I found it on a press release on Feinstein's senate site:
I was deeply concerned as to whether our house was in order to prevent a terrorist attack. My work on the Intelligence Committee and as chair of the Technology and Terrorism Subcommittee had given me a sense of foreboding for some time. I had no specific data leading to a possible attack. In fact, I was so concerned that I contacted Vice President Cheney's office that same month to urge that he restructure our counter-terrorism and homeland defense programs to ensure better accountability and prevent important intelligence information from slipping through the cracks.
Despite repeated efforts by myself and staff, the White House did not address my request. I followed this up last September 2001 before the attacks and was told by 'Scooter' Libby that it might be another six months before he would be able to review the material. I told him I did not believe we had six months to wait.
This just begs the question. Did Scooter Libby know what was going to happen? Did he know just how busy they really would be over the next six months due to the coming attack the next day? It's hard not to see that as a possibility. I was particularly interested that it was I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby who put Feinstein off. Libby was one of the co-signers to the seminal document, "Rebuilding America's Defenses," from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). In contrast to JFK's call that we seek a true peaceful co-existence with other countries, rather than a "pax Americana," the PNAC report calls for just that - ensuring a pax Americana. This is the same report that said,
...the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor. That quote gave rise to the notion that perhaps 9/11 was made or allowed to happen by the government as an excuse to get us back into a war. We know now that the administration tried hard to make that war one in Iraq, despite the fact that no evidence from 9/11 linked Iraq to the attack in any way. And the CIA already had plans to strike Afghanistan (as the CNN site showed) so instead we made a great show of taking down the Taliban, even as we let Osama Bin Laden slip through our fingers at Tora Bora.
We had pinpointed OBL's location by radio. We could absolutely have picked him up. Several friends of mine in the black ops world have told me repeatedly that we've known were OBL was at all times. A man in Hollywood was approached by a CIA operative to do a documentary of the secret tailing of OBL. So it's not like we can't find him.
And if we weren't picking him up, why? Could it be because ties between his actions and those of our intelligence community might raise disturbing questions about 9/11? An intelligence asset told me of a friend of his that had just come back from handing OBL a wad of cash. "For attacking us, or so he wouldn't attack us again," I asked, but got (predictably) no response.
We know now too that not only were there no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, but, as the Downing Street Memo tells us, that Team Bush knew there were no weapons, and were deliberately falsifying intelligence to justify an attack on Iraq anyway.
When Ambassador Joe Wilson tried to tell us intelligence was being falsified to justify the march to Iraq, what happened? Scooter Libby talked to Judith Miller of the New York Times about the fact that Valerie Plame, Wilson's wife, was a covert CIA operative. Six days later, Robert Novak reveals this fact in a column that essentially broke the law by revealing the identity of a covert source.
I believe that Libby's blowing off of Feinstein on the 10th should be investigated. Why did he tell her it would be six months before they could review her proposal when such a timeframe was utterly out of keeping re a request from a high profile Senator to the Vice President? I can't help but wonder if the pardon is intended, in part, to keep Libby silent on that point.
posted by Real History Lisa at 1:10 PM - Permanent Link -
A team of scientists and engineers at the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that is investigating the collapse of New York City's World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) building expects to release its draft report for public comment by the end of the year. WTC 7 was a 47-story office building adjacent to the WTC towers (WTC 1 and 2) that collapsed following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. WTC 7 collapsed later that afternoon.
NIST's investigation of WTC 7 includes an extremely complex analysis that incorporates detailed information about the building's structure and construction, as well as data about fires, damage sustained from falling WTC 1 debris and other technical factors to determine its probable collapse sequence.
"We are proceeding as quickly as possible while rigorously testing and evaluating a wide range of scenarios to reach the most definitive conclusion possible," said Shyam Sunder, WTC lead investigator for NIST. "The WTC 7 investigation is in some respects just as challenging, if not more so, than the study of the towers. However, the current study does benefit greatly from the significant technological advances achieved and lessons learned from our work on the towers."
The NIST investigation team initially worked simultaneously on both the WTC towers and WTC 7 collapses. In June 2004, the team shifted to full-time study of the towers to develop needed simulation methods and other research tools and to expedite completion of the WTC towers report. Work resumed on the WTC 7 study in October 2005.
The current NIST working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 is described in the June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (Volume 1, page 17, as well as Appendix L), as follows:
An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;
Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, as the large floor bays were unable to redistribute the loads, bringing down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and
Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7, that were much thicker than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.
Updated information with the specific date for the public release of the NIST team's draft report will be posted on the WTC investigation Web site, http://wtc.nist.gov/.
James Fetzer PhD OpEdNews.com www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_james_fe_070701_nist_exploring_9_2f11_.htm July 2, 2007
...In its latest press release (29 June 2007), NIST acknowledges that NIST is "considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse and led to WTC-7's structural failure"...
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) appears to be moving in the direction of a "conspiracy theory" about the destruction of WTC-7 on 9/11 just as a new witness has emerged reporting extensive destruction inside the building many hours before it would be demolished. According to James Fetzer, the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, these turns of events provide further confirmation for the conclusion that WTC-7 was brought down by a controlled demolition at 5:20 PM/ET. "Anyone who googles WTC-7 will see an event that looks exactly like a controlled demolition, just as Peter Jennings and Dan Rather reported at the time. That is why this event makes NIST so uncomfortable."
WTC-7, a 47-story building also known as the Soloman Brothers Building, collapsed about 7 hours after the Twin Towers were demolished. It was hit by no jet aircraft and had no jet-fuel based fires. "It did have a few modest fires, which could have been easily controlled but were allowed to burn," Fetzer said. "Remarkably, the fire alarm system in WTC-7 was turned off at 6:47 AM/ET and placed on 'TEST' status for a period of eight hours." In its latest press release (29 June 2007), NIST acknowledges that NIST is "considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse . . . (and) led to (WTC-7's) structural failure."
A new eyewitness inside WTC-7 on the morning of 9/11, heard explosions before either of the Twin Towers collapsed. He was summoned to the Office of Emergency Management Operating Center (OEMOC), also known as "Rudy's Bunker," on the 23rd floor of the building. The center had been especially prepared for the Mayor and other officials to gather in case of a terrorist attack or other emergency. Some have wondered why Giuliani did not go to the OEMOC but instead remained some distance from the World Trade Center. This witness, who testified at official hearings and whose identity will be revealed in the general-theater-release version of "Loose Change," has information that sheds light on this and other questions about WTC-7.
Rolf Lindgren, former Vice-Chair of the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin and independent scholar of the events of 9/11, transcribed the testimony and edited it for clarity of English. The complete transcript is below. The witness went to WTC-7 after the first plane struck the North Tower and before the second hit the South Tower. When he arrived at the 23rd floor, he found half-eaten sandwiches and still-steaming coffee. He made some phone calls and was told to leave "right away." Someone ran into the Center and led him to a stairwell. "When we reached the 6th floor, the landing that we were standing on gave way; there was an explosion and the landing gave way." He had to climb back up to the 8th floor to find a way out. When he got to the lobby, "the lobby was totally destroyed. It looked like King Kong had come through and stepped on it.. And it was so destroyed I didn't know where I was . . . (and) they had to take me out through a hole in the wall, . . . a hole that I believe the fire department made to get me out."
WTC-7 has been widely regarded within the 9/11 research community as the most blatant of all "smoking guns" that disprove the official account. According to David Ray Griffin, a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and the movement's leading representative, the building showed all the characteristics of a controlled demolition: an abrupt, complete, and total collapse at freefall speed, which was perfectly symmetrical and into its own foundation, as he has explained in his latest book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking (2007). "The 'blast events' this witness is describing are not 'hypothetical," Fetzer observed, "but actual. Only actual events can bring about effects. So it's a bit labored for NIST to say it's considering whether 'hypothetical' blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. They could not. That requires real blast events."
The witness, who was interviewed by Dylan Avery (with audio clips played on Alex Jones' and on Dylan's shows), has expressed his puzzlement over the destruction of the building. "Well, I'm just confused about one thing and one thing only," he said, "why World Trade Center 7 went down in the first place? I'm very confused about that. I know what I heard; I heard explosions. The explanation I got was it was the fuel oil tank. I'm an old boiler guy. If it was the fuel oil tank, it would have been one side of the building." But the collapse was symmetrical. "There was a large tank of diesel in the building," Fetzer said, "but diesel burns at a low temperature and diesel is not explosive. It cannot have brought about this collapse."
Anyone who has watched the building come down appreciates that it has all of the characteristics of a controlled demolition. Even James Glanz, a reporter for The New York Times, admitted in an early story (29 November 2001) that the collapse of WTC-7 is even more perplexing than is the destruction of the Twin Towers, because no reinforced, steel structure high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire in the history of structural engineering. "Indeed, no steel structure high-rise collapsed due to fire before 9/11 nor after 9/11 - nor, if our research is correct, on 9/11," Fetzer said. "None of these fires burned long enough or hot enough to cause steel to weaken, much less melt. It must be embarrassing for the scientists at the NIST to defend these ridiculous theories."
Lindgren, who has extensive experience with press releases, added, "Friday afternoon is the best time of the week for the government to bury unpleasant news. Since NIST insists it has found 'no evidence' of a controlled demolition, it must not consider the videos of WCT-7's collapse as 'evidence,' because they leave no room for doubt. The fires in Building 7 provide a good cover story to hide the fact that powerful explosives brought it down." He is also not impressed with Giuliani's excuse for not going to his command center, which is that another plane could have been headed for it. "But if another plane was headed toward the World Trade Center, then he should have directed that the firemen be removed from all the buildings, which he did not do." (See here).
There were other oddities related to WTC-7, including Larry Silverstein reporting (during a PBS interview) that he had suggested to the fire commander that the best thing to do might be to "pull it" (where, he said, "They made the decision to pull, and we watched the building come down") and the BBC broadcast of a report of the collapse of "the Solomon Brothers Building" at least 23 minutes before the event would actually occur. "This was stunning," Fetzer said, "because you could see WTC-7 in the background over her left shoulder as she reported its collapse. It is hard to imagine a more revealing demonstration of the entanglement of the intelligence agencies, the administration, and the mass media. And a 'terrorism drill' was scheduled for the next day." The PBS interview and the BBC report are archived on the Scholars site at 911scholars.org.
"If Rosie O'Donnell had talked about 'blast events initiating the collapse of WTC-7", Fetzer said, "she would have been labeled a 'conspiracy theorist.' But then the official government account of 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacking four commercial airlines, outfoxing the most sophisticated air defense system in the world to perpetrate these atrocities under the control of a guy in a cave in Afghanistan is only the most 'outrageous' conspiracy theory of them all. I guess we should be grateful that NIST is moving inch by inch toward a more adequate explanation of what actually happened on 9/11, which bears no relationship at all to what we have been told. Given the cumulative evidence, we are not 'conspiracy theorists' but 'conspiracy realists.'"
WTC 7 Eyewitness Testimony Transcribed by Rolf Lindgren (edited for clarity with notes): Go to http://911scholars.org/ and click on "Press Releases" at the top.
ABOUT HALLIBURTON LOGCAP Military Contract Halliburton' s largest government contract is with the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Under the contract, known as "LOGCAP" (or Logistics Civilian Augmentation Program), Halliburton is responsible for providing supplies and services to the military on a global basis. Some of the typical civil logistics carried out under the contract are the construction of military housing for the troops, transporting food and supplies to military bases and serving food at military cafeterias.
The military has always used private contractors to carry out civil logistics, but not to a great extent. In 1985, the military created LOGCAP with the purpose of privatizing more of the duties involved in civil logistics. The military first used LOGCAP in 1988 to construct and maintain two petroleum pipeline systems in Southwest Asia in support of contingency operations. But most of the military's civil logistics activities were still not privatized.
It was Dick Cheney, as defense secretary in 1992, who spearheaded the movement to privatize most of the military's civil logistics activities. Under the direction of Secretary Cheney, the Pentagon paid $9 million to Halliburton' s subsidiary, KBR, to conduct a study to determine whether private companies like itself should handle all of the military's civil logistics. KBR's classified study concluded that greater privatization of logistics was in the government's best interest. Shortly thereafter, on August 3, 1992, Secretary Cheney awarded the first comprehensive LOGCAP contract to KBR. The Washington Post reported "The Pentagon chose [KBR] to carry out the study and subsequently selected the company to implement its own plan." Three years later, in 1995, Halliburton hired Cheney as its CEO.
In 1997, two years after Cheney became CEO of Halliburton, KBR's LOGCAP contract was not renewed and the government alleged the company engaged in fraudulent billing practices. The independent auditing arm of Congress, the GAO, had criticized KBR's performance during America's war in the Balkans. GAO said KBR's cost-overruns in the Balkans inflated the original contract price by 32 percent. After KBR was effectively fired by the Army in 1997, the LOGCAP contract was awarded to Halliburton competitor DynCorp. But, after Cheney became vice president in 2001, DynCorp was fired and KBR was re-awarded the contract.
Today, 90 percent of KBR's work under LOGCAP is being done in Iraq. Over 24,000 Halliburton employees and subcontract workers are employed to carryout LOGCAP in the Iraq-Kuwait region.
Halliburton' s revenue from LOGCAP increased from $320 million in the second quarter of 2003 to over $2 billion in the fourth quarter of 2003. As of May 2004, the federal government had spent nearly $5 billion on LOGCAP since KBR became the sole contractor in 2001. The original value of LOGCAP in Iraq was estimated at over $4 billion, but the value of the contract is now over $8 billion and could reach $18 billion. These values can change as war conditions change. The $8 billion figure for Iraq does not include KBR's LOGCAP business in dozens of other countries around the globe, including Guantanimo Bay, Cuba, where it constructed the prisons used to house prisoners from Afghanistan.
KBR also performs duties under a second military contract called "Restore Iraqi Oil" (RIO). This contract, valued at $1.2 billion, is unrelated to LOGCAP. Under RIO, KBR is repairing Iraq's dilapidated oil industry in the southern part of the country.
In the 12 months following the fall of Saddam Hussein, KBR had built 64 dining facilities in Iraq and Kuwait, served more than 40 million meals to troops, washed more than a million bundles of laundry, collected over 1.5 million cubic meters of trash and delivered more than 8 million bags of mail.
KBR has more than 700 trucks in the region for delivering supplies to the U.S. military.
In the 13 months following President Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech, thirty Halliburton' s employees and subcontract workers in the Iraq-Kuwait region had been killed by violent ambushes orchestrated by Iraqi insurgents. The workers had been performing duties under the LOGCAP contract.
More Information
Reuters: Halliburton' s role in Iraq -- from meals to oil Congressman Henry Waxman website devoted to criticizing Halliburton contracts Statement of Congressman Waxman on Iraq contracts LOGCAP official website GAO report on Halliburton' s LOGCAP contract in Bosnia GAO abstract of report on Halliburton' s LOGCAP contract in Bosnia Washington Post: Halliburton' s Deals Greater Than Thought World Policy Institute: New Data Shows How Contractors Are Cashing In On War On Terror Iraq reconstruction contracts awarded by the U.S. government LOGCAP task orders from 2001 thru Spring 2003 (Microsoft Excel Format)
The globalization of electronic election theft by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman May 11, 2007
From Ohio and California to Scotland and France, the disputes surrounding electronic voting machines have gone truly global.
E-voting machines have already been extensively studied and condemned by a wide range of expert committees, commissions and colleges, including the General Accountability Office, the Carter-Baker Commission, Johns Hopkins University, Princeton University, Stanford University and others. Rigging of a recount in Cleveland has resulted in two felony convictions. The failures of e-voting machines have been the subject of numerous documentary films, including the aptly titled HBO special "Hacking Democracy."
Now the secretaries of state in Ohio and California are subjecting e-voting to still more official review. Ohio's Jennifer Brunner has announced she'll seek bids to conduct independent studies of both touch-screen machines, which record votes electronically, and optical scanners, which tabulate paper ballots electronically.
Brunner has already removed the entire board of elections of Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) in part because of a major fiasco caused by new electronic machines in the state's 2006 primary election. Voting rights activists vehemently opposed the $20 million purchase, but it was rammed through by Board Chair Robert Bennett and Executive Director Michael Vu.
The machines then caused long reporting delays. Vu resigned under pressure from the board. Bennett then resigned---along with the rest of the board---under pressure from Brunner. Bennett chairs the Ohio Republican Party, works closely with White House advisor Karl Rove, and was instrumental in delivering Ohio's decisive votes to George W. Bush in the 2004 presidential election. Two felony convictions have so far arisen from what prosecutors call a "rigged" recount that occurred that year in Cleveland, under Bennett's supervision.
The specifics of Brunner's investigation, which she wants done by September, are not yet public. But the newly elected Democrat says she intends to "fill in the gaps" on studies of Diebold, ES&S and Hart InterCivic machines whose vote tallies were key to giving Bush a second term. The conservative Columbus Dispatch has already predicted that the results of the investigation "likely will disappoint conspiracy theorists."
California's new Secretary of State Deborah Bowen will begin her study May 14, and wants it done by late July. An interagency agreement with the University of California will use three "top-to-bottom review teams" with about seven people each to inspect documents, previous studies, computer source code and a penetration attack to test system security. Cost is estimated at $1.8 million to be covered by system vendors and the Help America Vote Act. Systems from Diebold, ES&S, HartIntercivic, Sequoia and InkaVote of Los Angeles will be examined.
Other states are also re-evaluating their electronic voting systems, and fierce controversy is raging nationwide over a federal bill from Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ) which institutes certain voting reforms but allows the use of electronic machines to continue.
Now the issue has spread worldwide. Widespread cries of theft and fraud erupted in Ukraine, just before the US 2004 election. A forced re-vote ousted the "official" winner.
In Mexico, leftists contend the recent presidential election there was stolen just as Bush did it in the US, with some of the same personnel pulling it off.
Now similar cries are coming from Scotland and France. May 3 elections in Scotland using new electronic counting systems resulted in as many as 100,000 votes being classed as "spoilt papers." (About 90,000 such ballots from Ohio 2004 remain uncounted to this day).
Complex methods of tabulating and weighting the Scottish votes yielded "chaos." Several vote counts were suspended. In some races the tally of rejected ballots was greater than some candidates' winning margin. "This is a temporary interruption to one small aspect of the overall process," says a spokeswoman for DRS, the company responsible for the vote counting technology.
The language in France has not been so polite. A watershed presidential election has just been won by Nicolas Sarkozy, a blunt right-wing Reagan-Bush- style extremist over the socialist Segolene Royal. Sarkozy is a hard-edged authoritarian whose intense anti-immigrant rhetoric matches his support for the American war in Iraq and his avowed intent to slash France's social service system, including a public health program widely considered among the best in the world.
Like the balloting in Ukraine, the US, Scotland and Mexico, Sarkozy's victory was marred by angry, widespread complaints about dubious vote counts whose discrepancies always seem to favor the rightist candidate. Throughout France, the cry has arisen that the conservatives have done to Segolene Royal what Bush/Rove did to John Kerry.
In the not-so-distant past, other elections were engineered by George H.W. Bush, head of the Central Intelligence Agency and father of the current White House resident. During the Reagan-Bush presidencies, in the Philippines, Nicaragua, El Salvador and other key third world nations, expected leftist triumphs somehow morphed into rightist coups. "CIA destabilizations are nothing new," said former CIA station chief and Medal of Merit winner John Stockwell in 1987. "Guatemala in 1954, Brazil, Ghana, Chile, the Congo, Iran, Panama, Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Uruguay---the CIA organized the overthrow of constitutional democracy."
The recent trend to privatizing vote counts, with corporations claiming "proprietary rights" to keep their hardware and software covert, has added a new dimension to an old tradition. The recent "e-victories" in the US and France have significantly tipped to the right the global balance among the major powers. So while Ohio and California conduct their studies of electronic voting, the whole world will be watching.
-- Bob Fitrakis's forthcoming book, THE FITRAKIS FILES: COPS, COVERUPS AND CORRUPTION, is at http://www.freepress.org/, where this article first appeared. Harvey Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030, is at http://www.solartopia.org/.
Here's another plea to come join us Sunday evening for an informative presentation on the events of Sept.11th, by the eminent theologian David Ray Griffin, in concert with Ed Asner. Michael Beckwith and Michelle Phillips are attending. We especially invite the disbelievers and skeptics, and the caring, trusting individuals whose world view abhors the thought that our government could have deliberately staged the attacks of Sept.11th. Count ME as one of those. I was initially shocked to tears when first told. But only one viewing of footage was necessary to make me realize that this inconcievable revelation was, in fact, TRUE.
Now, three years later, the amount of damning footage and the solidity of the evidence only mounts, along with the numbers of government and military whistleblowers, pilots, architects, engineers, and physicists who have come out on this issue. It is time to look at the evidence and decide for yourself. David Ray Griffin is not a rabid politico. He is the ultimate objective thinker and research analyst who only looks at the facts.
It is hard to accept the preposterous since we Americans have always believed that as a nation we stood for a higher good. That is probably true for the mass of individuals. They say that most human beings do enjoy doing good. It's a natural innate pleasure. But now we are surrounded by entities whose real moral code is better known as the bottom line. Corporations now run our lives, directly if we work for them, or indirectly in every aspect of our lives. They as companies, officially enjoy the rights of an individual, but what an individual! In the film, Corporation, they were shown on average to have the profile of a sociopath--exploitive, greedy, lacking loyalty, etc, etc. And they force their staff to work for the stockholders even when it goes against their conscience.
Now if we accept the fact that a handful of high powered individuals who are beholden to corporations run our government & media and directly control the movement of money in the world, you realize that these sociopathic entities are not concerned about citizens of their own or any country, and are capable of anything. Look what 9/11 has bought them. A privatized corporate war. Companies who don't have to abide by the rules of war because they're not soldiers! Once you start putting all the pieces together, it starts to become miserably CLEAR. Yes, you might want to stop reading right here-- but we CAN work together to make a stand.
Have any of you watched the music video of the song "What if They Cared?" by a band called Nickelback? What a powerful message. Footage and subtitles highlighting three examples of individuals who affected mass change: Betty Williams who got a Nobel Peace Prize in 1976 for starting little then huge marches to take a stand against the strife in Ireland; the Brit who took pity on a jailed student in Portugal and started what eventually became Amnesty International. Then they profile Nelson Mandela, and end with the words of Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
WE don't just wallow in the details of THAT DAY. We look to the future and what we CAN DO. Come join us Sunday night.
Immanuel Presbyterian Church (a gorgeous structure!) 3300 Wilshire at Berendo, 2 blks west of Vermont 6 pm S15 donation, no one turned away
*********************************************************************** This just came through from Ken Reiner, the 90 yr old entrepreneur who has donated almost $100,000 to the many 9/11 conferences around the country and has contributed to this event.
"Happy July 4th! As we all know a set of criminals has taken possession of this nation and are destroying it's proud heritage of being the first democracy in the world, which fact we will be celebrating tomorrow. Election after election has been framed ever since the year 2,000, when a president of the nation was, for the first time in our history, unconstitutionally appointed by a right wing Supreme Court, the same court that used the 14th Amendment which gave rights of citizenship to public corporations. That act, never officially votedupon but recognized every year since 1886 by all later Supreme courts has turned the rulers of the nation from We The People to We the Corporations, which in turn created the unholy mess we are in today. On 9/11/01 a false, dramatic,hideous act like none other in all of history occurred which murdered 3,000 innocent humans. Through a false story alleging Arab perpetrators, they effectively enabled the administration of this country to engage in a war more violent than any prior war and in the space of just a few years established this great peace loving nation as the most feared and hated nation in the world! That phenomenal attack which destroyed three of the world's steel structures allegedly as a result of airplanes piloted by Arabs striking only two of them has now been shown to have been a well planned-in-advance, and militarily executed set of implosions the details of which were never investigated even to the extent an automobile accident would have been. A number of very concerned and very brave citizens of this country have joined together with scientists, engineers and architects to examine the evidence already in the public's possession of what really happened on that fateful day. This has been used by the criminals today in power to attack other people around the world for the corporate profits and the oil they seek in order to control commerce and humanity internationally.
The website www.911truth.org is the foremost authoritative website of these citizens and scholars and has links to many others. One of the best displays, September+11+revisited shows what really happened, from videos taken on the very day, 9/11/01, before false and exaggerated claims about Arab hijackers, and all sorts of phony spin and lies, like the "Iraq-wmd" lies, were spun to confuse and terrorize the people of this nation. And of course the Anthrax-in-the-mail scare, addressed to Democratic Party leaders played no small role in getting Congress to jump into a war first against Afghanistan (planned long before 9/11/01, records reveal) and next against Iraq, and soon to be against Iran if the top criminals in power are not impeached immediately. Click on the link below to see the real truth and how it differs from the phony "911 Commission Report" the US Government published which ignores virtually every important fact we now know occurred on 9/11.
In that connection a very timely event is taking place in Los Angeles this Sunday evening (see the attachment above). The greatest authority on the fallacies of the government's story of what happened, David Ray Griffin, a renowned scholar and author of the book A New Pearl Harbor, will be meeting with Ed Asner and a number of others, possibly some Hollywood celebrities, several of whom have already voiced their refusal to accept the government stories, attempting to get a true investigation of the event opened up in the courts of this nation so as to locate the criminals who participated in this monstrous, criminal fraud and see that they are put away forever; and certainly before they are able to pull off another such action which they will then blame on Iran or Russia or North Korea, or any other country we want to attack for their resources. For let me assure you, the criminals that perpetrated and/or collaborated in the shielding of the perpetrators of 9/11 are right here in this nation NOW and the refusal of the government to allow a bona fide exposure of, and criminal investigation of them frees them to do even greater harm the next time! Clearly as a direct result of that one incident we have lost the independence many people will be mistakenly celebrating on this 4th of July. We cannot restore this nation to independence of the corporate world without exposing the entire cast of characters acting as their lobbyists, legislators, executives and even jurists that have replaced the British Corporations we fought against in achieving our independence in 1776 with American public corporations to control and commandeer we the people as in days of yore. Wake up America, we have very little time before the damage corporations have done to our climate, our air, our water, our food and most of all to our minds will be irreversible. I reckon if we don't change from a corporate owned world to a human owned world within 5 years at most, the end of our freedom and justice will be irreversible and only the title "democracy" will apply to the USA. Ken
Toledo 9/11 Truth Street Action, July 4th, Downtown in front of COSI at 5 PM
The Toledo 9/11 Truth July 4th street action was a big success. We got on TV twice, on local affiliates Fox, and NBC. I was interviewed and got on TV, on Fox believe it or not, someone recorded it, should be able to get it on the site pretty soon. The help from the media was an unexpected pleasant surprise, we got the 9/11 message out in broadcast force. I did send them all a press release, 2 out of 6 responded, not too bad really, but well it was a slow news day. I will have to send a thank you note to Fox, and NBC, they were very cordial.
We talked to a ton of people, handing out literature, and DVDs, I was bull horning continuously, belting out "9/11 was an inside job, the USA has been overthrown. Come on people let's defend our constitution" and stuff like that.
We had lots of positive encounters with very few negative. Everyone involved, 10 of us, all deemed it a great success. We are eager to do some more street action, at summer festivals and where ever lots of people are gathering. Not a word, or even a scowl from the cops, they noticed us, but said nothing.
I learned from the Fox reporter that a neo-nazi group was in town, never saw anything of them. The last time they came to town a large riot took place that got National News Coverage. We were able to stear clear of riots and naional news coverage.
Send this page
Be first to comment | 
Share it! (Social Bookmarks) | 
Add as favorite (0) | Views: 131
