Kevin Ryan

Corbett Report Talks To Kevin Ryan

Thanks to RLMcGee for sending this:

James Corbett speaks to Kevin Ryan about the Toronto Hearings:

http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-366-kevin-ryan/

An excerpt from that interview will also be played in the next episode of my podcast (#197) which will be released Saturday August 27th which will deal with various 9/11 10th anniversary events.

Kevin Ryan on NPR, Thursday at 10 am ET, vs. Popular Mechanics, Johnathan Kay!

Photobucket

Kevin Ryan will be on NPR Thursday, August 25th, at 10 am ET (7 am PST). Unfortunately they have recently reduced his air time from one hour down to 10-minutes. He will be the only 9/11 skeptic on this 2-hour show about 9/11 skeptics. Instead, they will have Jim Meigs from Popular Mechanics and Johnathan Kay starting at 10 am ET. The show is called 'On Point.' http://onpoint.wbur.org

Call-in number: 1-800-423-8255

Audio Archive:
Stream: http://www.wbur.org/media-player?url=http://onpoint.wbur.org/2011/08/25/conspiracy-theories-and-the-sept-11-terrorist-atta...
Download: http://audio.wbur.org/storage/2011/08/onpoint_0825_2.mp3

Questions for Richard Clarke on COG, the UAE, and BCCI

From: http://digwithin.net/2011/08/20/clarke/

Posted on by ultruth

The author is indebted to the good people at History Commons for their “Complete 9/11 Timeline.”  If a reference is not evident below, it can probably be found there.

A recent interview with former “Counterterrorism Czar,” Richard Clarke, is making a splash in the alternative media.[1]  In this interview, Clarke speculates about CIA malfeasance related to the pre-9/11 monitoring of two alleged September 11 hijackers.  This interview is somewhat interesting due to Clarke’s vague suggestion that the CIA had courted 9/11 suspects as sources, but it is far more interesting for what was not said with regard to Clarke’s personal history and associations.

Why the NIST report on the WTC towers is false

Here's a new video in which The NIST World Trade Center report for the Twin Towers is examined and shown to be false and unscientific.

Uploaded by DK1Ryan on Aug 14, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8wOXv2gAKg

Bob Coen, who made the film "Anthrax War," has also launched a new site that is in preparation for his new film.
http://www.secretsofthedust.com/launch.html

The BBC to take another shot at 9/11 Truth

http://digwithin.net/2011/08/01/the-bbc-to-take-another-shot-at-911-truth/

Three years ago, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) put out another episode in its ongoing “Conspiracy Files” series of programs. This series has covered many issues of public concern about government reports on inexplicable events, including the Lockerbie bombing, the 7/07 London bombing, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the mysterious death of microbiologist David Kelly.  In every single case, the BBC program concludes that there was nothing to worry about, that the official reports are correct, and that citizens should just go about their business and trust the government.

The 2008 episode was a second such program covering the events of 9/11, this one focused specifically on World Trade Center (WTC) building 7.  It was entitled “The Third Tower” and surprised millions of people around the world by stating that the mystery surrounding the collapse of that 47-story building, which fell into its own footprint in 7 seconds, had finally been solved.  The BBC told us that the US government investigators would soon put all our minds to rest regarding this inexplicable event.  That was far from the truth, however, as this earlier blog post makes clear.

In 2008, I had the opportunity to view a re-run of this program on the internet.  After doing so, I wrote to the program’s producer, Mike Rudin, offering suggestions for improvement prior to the revision of the program for world-wide consumption. The letter I wrote is below. Rudin must have been impressed as he asked to speak with me on the phone and we did so later for about 30-minutes. Basically, he is a very nice propagandist who is not willing to address the facts or correct his mistakes.

This year, for the tenth anniversary, the BBC and Mike Rudin are planning another episode on 9/11. Unfortunately, it is not expected to be an apology for the BBC’s promotion of war and societal destruction through promotion of the official conspiracy theories. Instead, word on the street is that BBC will attempt to smear and discredit professor Niels Harrit, whose paper on nanothermite found in the WTC dust has gone unanswered in the mainstream scientific literature for two and a half years. BBC has interviewed at least one known disinformation specialist for the purpose, and has once again declined my offer to help. 

Why the Planes Were Not Intercepted on 9/11: The Wall Street Lawyer and the Special Ops Hijack Coordinator

Of the many unanswered questions about the attacks of September 11, one of the most important is: Why were none of the four planes intercepted?  A rough answer is that the failure of the US air defenses can be traced to a number of factors and people.  There were policy changes, facility changes, and personnel changes that had recently been made, and there were highly coincidental military exercises that were occurring on that day.  But some of the most startling facts about the air defense failures have to do with the utter failure of communications between the agencies responsible for protecting the nation.  At the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), two people stood out in this failed chain of communications.  One was a lawyer on his first day at the job, and another was a Special Operations Commander who was never held responsible for his critical role, or even questioned about it.

The 9/11 Commission wrote in its report that – “On 9/11, the defense of U.S. airspace depended on close interaction between two federal agencies: the FAA and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).”[1]

According to the Commission, this interaction began with air traffic controllers (ATCs) at the relevant regional FAA control centers, which on 9/11 included Boston, New York, Cleveland, and Indianapolis.  In the event of a hijacking, these ATCs were expected to “notify their supervisors, who in turn would inform management all the way up to FAA headquarters.  Headquarters had a hijack coordinator, who was the director of the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security or his or her designate. “ 

Energetic Materials as a Potential Cause of the 9/11 First Responder Illnesses

by Kevin Ryan

Foreign Policy Journal
February 4, 2011

9/11 First Responders

The tragedy at the World Trade Center (WTC) on September 11th, 2001 continues to affect many thousands of first responders who sacrificed their own health while restoring lower Manhattan and attempting to recover survivors and victims’ remains.  Recently, H.R. 847, otherwise known as the James Zadroga Bill, was signed by President Obama in an effort to provide services and compensation for those whose health was compromised through exposure to the toxic dust and gases at Ground Zero.  However, these first responders also need help to understand how their illnesses originated so that improvements in treatment can be made.  In response to this need, concerned citizens should consider the possible correlation between evidence for energetic materials at the WTC and the environmental exposures which appear to have caused so many illnesses in the first responders.

Why Robert Parry is right about 9/11 Truth

Jan 30th 2011

By Kevin Ryan

Nothing moves through the path of most resistance, and certainly not the human mind.  A recent article written by journalist Robert Parry has provided another good example of this long-standing fact.   In that article, Parry exhibits an astonishing lack of knowledge about the truth movement and the questions posed by honest 9/11 skeptics as he attempts to publicly denigrate those questions and people.  The well-respected journalist Parry provides excellent examples, throughout his article, of how normally reasoned and well-researched professionals can suddenly turn into people who cannot deal with facts or evidence.  Unfortunately, Parry’s comments are correct in one sense as demonstrated by another article published in response to his.  For some people, the 9/11 truth movement is a parlor game.

Colorado Public Television Channel 12 December 4th Broadcast of Loose Change

Here is the video from the historic broadcast of Loose Change: 9-11 An American Coup on Colorado Public Television Channel 12 on December 4, 2010. Featured in-studio guest is 9-11 whistleblower Kevin Ryan and members of Colorado 9-11 Visibility manning the phones.

www.cpt12.org
www.colorado911visibility.org


Kevin Ryan and Shari Bernson of Colorado Public Television interviewed

Trevor Carey of Denver Late Night on KLZ 560 am in Denver Colorado welcome 9-11 Whistleblower Kevin Ryan and Shari Bernson, Membership Director/Executive Producer at Colorado Public Television to talk about the December 4th airing of Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup.
http://visibility911.com/media/?p=1342

George Flynn and Words of Freedom welcome 9-11 Whistleblower Kevin Ryan and Shari Bernson, Membership Director/Executive Producer at Colorado Public Television to talk about the December 4th airing of Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup.
http://visibility911.com/media/?p=1335

Evidence for Informed Trading on the Attacks of September 11

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/11/18/evidence-for-informed-trading-on-the-attacks-of-september-11/3/
by Kevin Ryan
November 18, 2010

Just after September 11th 2001, many governments began investigations into possible insider trading related to the terrorist attacks of that day.  Such investigations were initiated by the governments of Belgium, Cyprus, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Monte Carlo, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United States, and others.  Although the investigators were clearly concerned about insider trading, and considerable evidence did exist, none of the investigations resulted in a single indictment.  That’s because the people identified as having been involved in the suspicious trades were seen as unlikely to have been associated with those alleged to have committed the 9/11 crimes.

This is an example of the circular logic often used by those who created the official explanations for 9/11.  The reasoning goes like this: if we assume that we know who the perpetrators were (i.e. the popular version of “al Qaeda”) and those who were involved in the trades did not appear to be connected to those assumed perpetrators, then insider trading did not occur.

Visibility 911: A dozen Questons about Flight 77 from Kevin Ryan

working link: https://web.archive.org/web/20101023112411/http://visibility911.com/kevinryan/2010/10/a-dozen-questions-about-flight-77-an...

original link:  http://visibility911.com/kevinryan/2010/10/a-dozen-questions-about-flight-77-and-the-pentagon-that-might-lead-to-justice/

A dozen questions about Flight 77 and the Pentagon that might lead to justice, and one that won’t

There are many questions to be answered about the events at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.    Here are a dozen such questions that, if answered, might help to bring about justice.

  1. Exactly how was Flight 77 hijacked, considering, among other things, that the alleged hijackers were said to be identified as security risks (possibly linked to al Qaeda) when they tried to board, and were not physically imposing (all 5 and a half feet tall or less, and slender in build)?[1]
  2. How was the nation’s air defense system disabled on 9/11, and how could anything have hit the Pentagon approximately 80 minutes after the first plane was known to be hijacked?
  3. Why was Dick Cheney tracking Flight 77?[2]
  4. Why were explosive experts, who had a history of covering-up the OKC bombing and have since been accused of obstructing other investigations, hired to write the FEMA report? (Mete Sozen and Paul Mlakar).[3],[4]
  5. Why did the roof of the Pentagon collapse 30 minutes after impact, giving additional evidence for the use of explosives?   Note:  The use of explosives at the Pentagon seems to be in agreement with the use of a large plane, which would have had little penetrating power.
  6. Why was AMEC, the company that had just finished refurbishing Wedge 1 of the Pentagon, hired to lead the clean-up effort at Ground Zero?[5]
  7. Why did the NTSB not make public reports on any of the planes as is the normal procedure?[6]
  8. Why did none of the planes squawk the hijack code?
  9. Why was the official explanation for alleged phone calls made by Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olsen changed several times, and ultimately how could Ted Olsen’s story make any sense?[7]
  10. Why did high-ranking Pentagon officials cancel travel plans for the morning of September 11 “…apparently because of security concerns.”?[8]
  11. How could Hani Hanjour still have successfully piloted Flight 77 given his poor qualifications?[9]
  12. Why are those interested in The Pentagon not intently reviewing documents released by the FAA and 9/11 Commission that reveal startling questions about the aircraft and events of that day?[10]

Why are these questions NOT being pursued by independent investigators?  That’s because the attention of many potential investigators has been hijacked by the much less useful question of “What hit the Pentagon.”  This is certainly the favorite subject of intentional disruptors and official story supporters.

We Need to Continue to Seek the Truth About 9/11

http://visibility911.com/kevinryan/2010/08/guest-column-announcing-sept-4-event-with-laurie-manwell-graeme-macqueen/

We need to continue to seek the truth about 9/11
Bloomington Herald-Times, Agust 8, 2010
This guest column is by Kevin Ryan, a member of the 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington.

Over the past three years, a group of concerned Bloomington citizens has worked to raise the public consciousness about the need for 9/11 truth. These folks are sometimes called “conspiracy theorists” because they do not believe the official version of events. Once people get by their initial reactions to 9/11 questioning, however, much can be learned in the process.

To begin with, we all understand the definition of a conspiracy to be a secret plan, among two or more people, to commit a crime. Yet when faced with emotionally charged events like 9/11, many of us pretend that the definition of the word has changed.

How True . . . How Very True

Updated: the original Youtube video was censored shortly after I posted it, a year go.
Better rip it if you want to keep it, because it isn't available anywhere else.

Benjamin Netanyahu said, in 2001:

"I know what America is, America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won't get in the way."

Keeping that in mind, let's take Netanyahu's wise words to heart, as voiced in this speech:

Video highlights of lectures presented by Steven E. Jones, Ph.D. and Kevin R. Ryan in 2009.

60 minutes of highlights presented by Steven E. Jones, Ph.D. and Kevin R. Ryan in 2009.

Dr. Jones is a well published professor of physics, and Mr. Ryan was previously employed by Underwriters Laboratories (UL).

They describe some of the findings they have published in peer reviewed scientific papers.

They argue that scientific evidence refutes the official conclusion by the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) that explosives were not involved in the collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on September 11, 2001.

This video can be downloaded at

http://www.archive.org/details/WorldTradeCenterDemolitionLecturesByJonesAndRyan

RSS