This is the blog of Kevin Ryan.
Kevin is a chemistry laboratory manager. Through his work as Site Manager for the environmental testing division of Underwriters Laboratories (UL), he began to investigate the tragedy of September 11th, 2001. Ryan was fired by UL, in 2004, for publicly asking questions about UL’s testing of the structural materials used to construct the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings as well as UL’s involvement in the WTC investigation being conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Since 2006, Ryan has been the co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies, and has been a founding member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice and the 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington. He also served as a board director at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Ryan has co-authored several books and numerous peer-reviewed scientific articles on the subject, and has given public presentations around the country. He continues to do research into the crimes of 9/11 in order to help people come to a better understanding.
More information can be found at ULTruth.com. Kevin can be contacted at kncryan[at]msn.com.
Kevin, As usual, clear, concise, just-the-facts in plain English. While reading this post describing the changing rationales (lies), the notion of constructing a “lie line” [timeline] struck me. One effect of the shifting rationals is that the public gets confused hearing so many conflicting claims which results a kind of paralysis unless one stays on top of the story which very few people do. I think simple, literal timelines, such as you constructed here, are very effective in promoting understanding of the bullet point facts and – importantly – the progression and relationships from one event to the next. Timelines are very effective in exposing “cui bono” events and relationships around 9/11 and its aftermath. Thank you.
Dear Kevin
At last, I had time to check out your new blog.
I really like it. Cool. Congratulations.
Got to get myself something like it some day.
As to the essays, you’ve had my comments already.
Many regards
Niels
Very nice site. You have a unique set of talents and insights to bring to the table in this effort.
–David Chandler
Thank you for staying on the hunt for truth. Someday the story will be told, and it will be people like you who help put all the pieces together…
How was it possible that everything was setup to blow up the twin towers ?
This is the question I hear all the time , and the answer is much simpeler than you might think.
I am a Dutch electrotechical engeneer and have worked in construction and renovation of factories and large office buildings.
The truth is we , as a technical crew, could walk in and out with our locked steel tool carts 3x3x6 feet, without people even looking at us , most of the time totaly ignored like we were invisible..
We were “just” the builders, the working people …
On the floors we were working was no security, and when we needed to be on technical floors or tecnical rooms we just got the keys , no questions asked.
The security passes we were issued by the contractor gave us acces to almost any space because we were the electricians and that is outside the knowledge of most office workers ..
I tell you, in these tool carts we could have smuggled in bombs , explosives, bags of thermite desguised a concrete , I think even a nuclear bomb , have you ever seen one for real ? I don’t.. and I bet the people working there have also no clue what this would look like..
diguise it as something electronic and it can be a testing device, like a portable radar for looking up cracks in the concrete ….
Believe me ,it is childs play to rig a building with explosives , under the cover of building maintainance and you have all the time in the world , especially because there is always some technical maintainence or renovation going on in large office buildings..
I wish there were more people like you. We need them.
I’ve recently seen footage of a phantom f-4 hitting a reinforced concrete wall, upon impact the plane is basically turned to powder, the wall is undamaged. I have heard that the pentagon was made of similar walls; yet the impact left a large hole and massive damage. I must assume that the fighter jet was made of stronger materials than a passenger plane but, it also had less mass. This seems very important. however, I am not a physicists and can make no more than an assumption. I have not heard any real argument upon this subject, only conjecture.
Also, thank you
Mr. Ryan,
I am currently working on a documentary on 9/11 based heavily on your work on the connections L. Paul Bremmer had regarding 9/11 attacks. In my research, I have found numerous patents that Lawrence Livermore holds on these materials relating to the ignition of Nanoengineered explosives, which cites specifically a patent held by Regents of the University of California on nanoengineered explosives, US5505799. The Komatsu patent commonly referred to re: Bremmer seems to describe a process requiring pressured gas to maintain a plasma arc. I just thought the aforementioned patents were a little more interesting considering that gas tubing would be difficult to insulate and protect from uncontrolled fires. Your thoughts on this?
I am not aware of your mentioning these specific patents previously, and apologize if you have and I missed. Thank you for your great work!
Excellent website, with one exception. Whenever I use it, it severely bogs down my computer system or Web browser (Firefox and always kept current), or both. It might be only the Web browser, for CPU usage doesn’t seem to be adversely affected, based on a small monitoring application that I always have running in order to be able to see what the CPU usage of this Core 2 Quad PC is. So, I guess it’s only the Web browser that’s badly affected.
Speed badly degrades. But, I’m not a Webmaster, …, so this is about all I can say for my own experiences with this website or blog. I use many other websites and there isn’t a speed problem. WarIsAcrime.org might be a bit slow, but nothing like this website or blog. This one is extraordinarily long to load pages. And writing comments is also rather slow. Responsiveness, iow, is problematic; very.