Regardless of where one stands on the 9/11 debate, the complete, sudden destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the very least qualifies as an unprecedented engineering event.
As such they merited an exhaustive, unhurried study of the forensic evidence by scientists and engineers worldwide.
This did not happen, and instead the key evidence which might have told the story — the structural steel — was scooped up and sent to China and India on ships in record time. 99.5 percent of the steel was then melted, after being sold at a bargain rate of $120 per ton, rather than the going market rate of at least $150 for especially high-grade steel.
Therefore to this day we do not know all that we could know about the destruction of the Towers. The government's contention that the evidence was examined by FBI agents as it was trucked into Fresh Kills landfill, its first destination after removal from Ground Zero, and pieces picked out which warranted further examination as “evidence,” is a joke. In criminal law, and in scientific investigation, all evidence is equally important, as one never knows which piece might ultimately provide the key to the puzzle.
The national standard recognized by the US Department of Justice in the investigation of crimes involving the destruction of buildings by fire and other means is the National Fire Protection Association Document 921, “Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations” (“NFPA 921.”) The NFPA 921 states at section 14.3, under “Preservation of the Fire Scene and Physical Evidence,” that “the entire fire scene should be considered physical evidence and should be protected and preserved." In the event that evidence must be moved, section 184.108.40.206 states “Physical evidence should be thoroughly documented before it is moved...The investigator should strive to maintain a list of all evidence removed and of who removed it.”
The law is severe on destruction of evidence at a crime scene. It is a felony in all 50 states. It can even presume guilt under some statutes, that is, be taken as evidence that the party is complicit in the crime the evidence is associated with. Rudy Giuliani was Mayor of New York on 9/11 and clearly ordered the destruction of the steel evidence, over the loud objections of family members and fire science professors, including Professor Glen Corbett of city University of New York.
Fire Engineering Magazine wrote in January of 2002:
“For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China”
The case against Giuliani for destruction of evidence after 9/11 is open-and-shut.
Rethink911.org billboard in Dallas.
Contracts were granted to four companies — Tully Construction, Bovis International, AMEC, and Turner-Plaza. Ground Zero was divided into four zones: Sacramento, Mobile, Portland, and Baltimore — to manage the removal of the steel to Fresh Kills and from there to New York and New Jersey scrap metal companies, which then sold the bulk of it to Baosteel Group in China.
The contracts were signed under the contracting authority of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, unilaterally as emergency contracting procedures allowed. The city department charged with the work was the Department of Design and Construction. In a lawsuit over work at Ground Zero, US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein confirms these facts, writing under the heading “Factual Background”:
"The City also engaged private contractors for the recovery effort. On September 15, 2001, FEMA confirmed that contracts could be awarded without need for competitive bidding under the emergency conditions existing after September 11. (Pls.’ J.A. Vol. 4, Ex. 53.) Requirements for competitive bidding having been waived, and pursuant to the Declarations of Emergency issued at the City, State and Federal levels, the [Department of Design and Construction ] engaged Bovis Lend Lease, AMEC Construction Management, Tully Construction Company, and Turner Construction Company to “provide the work necessary for removal and demolition services.”
Therefore the action — the approval of the contracts by Giuliani, signed on his authority by DDC Commissioner Ken Holden — establishes the clear link to Giuliani, and as a unilateral decision, only Giuliani.
The defenses to felony destruction of evidence are lack of knowledge, and intent. As a former federal prosecutor, Giuliani does not have much to hope for from these. With fire science professors and structural engineers begging him to stop the shipment of the steel out of US jurisdiction, to China, it would require positive, clearly thought-out action for him to continue over their loud and even politically costly objections.
Firefighters at Ground Zero were already outraged at the speed with which Giuliani moved the operation into a “scoop and dump” phase, with little regard for firefighters' and other human remains. The firefighters later lambasted Giuliani for running "like a coward" when things got hot on the day of 9/11.
Giuliani plowed ahead with the destruction. More importantly, as a federal prosecutor, Giuliani understood full well the law on the destruction of evidence.
What purpose would it serve to prosecute Giuliani, who is slated to speak at the Hanover Club in NYC on November 5th? In the event of any other future disaster, authorities at the scene would be put on notice that they must follow the law, which would result in better investigations and lessons learned. To this day, skyscrapers are not one iota safer from a similar attack, since the ability to reconstruct the crime has been lost. Spokesmen for the official investigation laughably said that computer simulations were adequate. So now we can throw out most physical evidence at a murder scene, save the overtime from dozens or hundreds of technicians in clean suits combing through every bush and brick, and determine what happened by watching a computer game.
But anyone with even a modicum of first semester programming knows the professor's favorite saying, when it comes to making predictions according to data in a computer model: "GIGO" (Garbage In, Garbage Out.) In a building collapse the best raw data is the steel.
For skeptics of the official story who believe the buildings were brought down by demolition, the prospects get even more delicious. The penalty under 18 U.S.C. § 1519 for felony destruction of evidence at a crime scene is up to 20 years. Thus, for those who do not buy the official story (and I am one of them), the prospect of doing 20 years might loosen Rudy's lips. This is the first step in solving any conspiracy, be it the Mafia or a treasonous cabal. Either Rudy decided to do this on his own, or someone ordered him to.
NYC Firefighters: Rudy "ran like a coward" on 9/11
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com