New York Port Authority Accused of Construction Graft.

9/11 Truther claims spray-on flame retardants were "not needed" - lawsuit planned.

(BNN - May 6, 2007 - New York City) - Another lawsuit may be added to the a number already filed by members of the 9/11 Truth Movement against government agencies and businesses.

J. "Spanky" Sparkette today accused the New York Port Authority of a kickback scheme during the original construction of the World Trade Center Towers. Sparkette is New York Divisional Vice President of Communications for the 9/11 Truth Movement.

According to Sparkette spray-on flame retardants were used to coat floor trusses and other exposed steel beams when "it is a well known fact that fire cannot melt nor soften steel."

The final NIST report on the collapse of the World Trade Center towers attributed the impact forces of the 767s knocking off the flame retardants from the floor trusses as a significant cause of the trusses' weakening from fire and the towers' eventual collapses. Asbestos was banned from use in flame retardants in 1971 when the towers were still under construction, having reached the 64th floor. Other materials were substituted for the remaining floors.

"Why do you think they banned asbestos? Clearly, the Port Authority of New York was profiting from this blatant abuse of the public trust," Sparkette claimed.

A spokesperson for the Port Authority of New York expressed disbelief. "You mean these kooks think flame retardents have no purpose?"

Discriminatory Language Charges Leveled Against NIST

Scholars, 9/11 families "hurt" by NIST Final Report facts - demands for factual language change - "Correction of the WTC Report Would Serve a Useful Purpose."

(BNN - April 11, 2007 - New York, NY) - Buoyed by the national crucifiction of Don Imus to "raise awareness and sensitivity to 'hurtful' language," a group of 9/11 families and scholars has petitioned NIST to change the factual language of its report on the destruction of the World Trade Center complex.

"If NIST, through the WTC Report, has given inaccurate, unreliable information about the destruction of the WTC Towers, the implications would stretch across the entire architectural, political and social landscape," the petition reads.

Petitioners charged that NIST discriminated against "...detailed computer simulations using less severe damage estimates."

According to petitioners, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, the petition reveals appropriate sensitivity to NIST discriminatory factual conclusions:

"Requesters hereby request that NIST revise the WTC Report to remove any bias towards finding that the impact of jet airliners plus the resulting fires were the only cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers."
...
"Requesters hereby further request that NIST revise the WTC Report so that the scientific information presented therein is accurate and reliable in compliance with the 'objectivity' information quality standards for scientific information."
...
" Requesters further request that NIST revise the WTC Report so that the information presented therein is 'useful' in that it is 'helpful, beneficial, or serviceable to its intended users' in accordance with applicable information quality standards."

Taking a cue from the personal statements of Rutgers University female basketball team players in the Imus flap yesterday, petitioners included statements on how they were individually affected by "NIST’s Information Quality Standards Violations."

"Scholars are affected by the scientifically flawed WTC Report because it is a group actively engaged in researching the attacks of 9/11, and its research has been severely hindered by NIST’s publication of the WTC Report."

NIST issued a statement late Wednesday stating that "NIST has been careful to avoid any discrimatory factual language in its reports and no comment will be issued pending a detailed review of the language and meaning of the petition."