« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »

Florida Judicial/Court Corruption Cont.: re: Mark Adams' Hearing of Nov. 28

Dear Juan:

I am sorry that I have been out of touch for so long.  I have been very busy preparing for my motion to dismiss and my trial by the Florida Bar on December 1 and 2.

My motion to dismiss the baseless criminal contempt charge brought against me by the Battaglia firm and Judge Crockett Farnell is set to be heard before Judge Robert Beach on Monday, November 28, 2005 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 14 or 16 on the 3rd Floor of the Pinellas County Criminal Justice
Center located at 14250 49th Street North in Clearwater, Florida 33762.

Attached is my Memorandum of Law which points out that I never should have been charged with contempt.  I will be representing myself at this hearing as my attorney bowed to his partners’ wishes and withdrew from my case last week.

My wife, Lisa Adams who is a citizen journalist member of the Tampa Bay Independent Media Center and the Tampa Bay Community Network has submitted a request to videotape this hearing, but even though the law requires the judge to grant her request, Judge Beach has refused to do so twice.

Your coverage of my case ha attracted a lot of interest.  I have heard from many people as a result of it.  In fact, an attorney/journalist, Jennifer Van Bergen contacted me just yesterday to express her interest in covering my case.

If you want to see whether Judge Robert Beach wants to comment on my case or his refusals to permit camera coverage of it, you can reach Judge Beach's assistant, Missy at 727-464-6440. She is Judge Gross' assistant, but also handles Judge Beach's calendar. He might have some time to talk before my hearing tomorrow morning.

If you want to see whether Ron Stuart, Public Information Officer for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, can schedule an interview with Judge Beach, Chief Judge David Demers, or Judge Crockett Farnell or whether he has any explanation regarding why camera coverage of my case was allowed by Judge
Demers but not by Judge Beach, you can reach him at 727-453-7176.

Thank you again for your efforts to inform the public and promote justice.

Sincerely,

Mark A. Adams, Esquire

___

Memo in Support of Motion to Reconsider Order to Show Cause (PDF)

Memo re Motion to Reconsider Order to Show Cause (Word .doc)

___

Some further refs: judicial / LEO,. corruption in Pinellas Pasco County,. Florida - 8 7 6 1 2
3
4 5

___

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

___

Mark Adams
to me
More options   4:10 pm (7 minutes ago)

Dear Juan:

Judge Beach dismissed the charges against me.  I will send more info after
the Bar trial.  Thank you again for your efforts to inform the public and
expose injustice.

Sincerely,

Mark

>From: pc93 <pc9323@gmail.com>
>To: Mark Adams <markadamsjdmba@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: Battaglia vs Mark Adams Hearing 11/28
>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:42:51 -0500

>
>Let me know how it went. I have posted anent the below on Teknosis ->
>http://tekgnosis.typepad.com

November 29, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball - Case Not Closed

Re:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10184957/site/newsweek

Bush/Cheney,. should be behind bars indefinately.

Wake up America.

November 23, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Brigham Young University Professor: WTC Towers Collapsed By Controlled Demolition

Physics Professor from conservative Brigham Young
University says that he believes explosives were
used to collapse the WTC towers on 9/11.
 

http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_314234334.html

  
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635160132,00.html


Please write to both these media outlets and compliment
them on running this story. They covered the story
with, I think, the perfect balance of skepticism and
respect -- and without the false balance of having to
go interview someone who disagrees. I wonder if they
tried and failed to find a physics professor who would
go on record disagreeing!?

Gregg

___


cryptome.org


*Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse? *
By Steven E. Jones


http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html


___




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

BYU Professor Has Plenty of Company in the Academic Community, Including 60 Faculty Members from Two Utah Universities who Concur a Controlled Demolition Most Likely Brought Down the WTC and Further Investigation Is Needed
 
Professor Steven E. Jones is another in the long line of conservatives in the political and academic world joining the 9/11 truth movement and asking to open up further investigations on the true cause of 9/11.
 
13 Nov 2005
By Greg Szymanski   

 

The BYU physics professor who believes the WTC collapsed from a controlled demolition isn’t alone in the academic community, as a group of more than 60 colleagues from two universities also agreed with Professor Steven E. Jones’ conclusions.

 

Jones told the Arctic Beacon Saturday in a telephone conversation from

Provo

,

Utah

, he first presented his explosive conclusions at Brigham Young University (BYU) on September 22, to 60 people from the BYU and Utah Valley State College faculties, including professors of Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Geology, Mathematics and Psychology.

 

After presently scientific arguments in favor of the controlled demolition theory, Jones said everyone in attendance from all backgrounds, conservative and liberal, were in total agreement further investigation was needed.
 
 
 

 

“I was quite surprised how my conclusions were received,” said Jones, adding he plans to give two continue telling the public how he came to his startling conclusions essentially ripping apart the official government story that jet fuel brought down the towers, including Building 7.

 

“In fact, after I researched how Building 7 fell, I am certain there existed pre-positioned explosives to bring down the three buildings.”

 

Jones added that the contingent of faculty members at the September seminar were all in agreement that the government needed to “come clean” and release more that 6,900 photographs and close to 7,000 segments of video footage, now being held from independent investigation by the FBI and other agencies.
 
 
 

 

Since day one, the Bush administration has safely guarded much of the 9/11evidence, including the WTC steel hauled away by FEMA and eye-witness testimony of basement explosions censored by the 9/11 Commission and the state sponsored press, as well as discrediting many other scientists or academics like Jones who have disagreed with the official story. 

 

“We are calling for the release of all the data, including the videos and photos, in order that a cross-disciplinary, preferably international team of scientists and engineers can reach an independent conclusion,” said Jones, adding all 60 professors in attendance agreed with this course of action.

 

“Since I decided to come forward with my findings, I have found the people in the 9/11 community very supportive and helpful. I hope my contribution will one day help get at the truth of what really happened and specifically how the towers collapsed.”
 
 
 

 

Jones’ theory on the way the towers collapsed was presented in a 9,000 word formal paper already approved for publication in an upcoming academic journal. The following is a partial explanation of how and why he came to his conclusions that the WTC most likely collapsed due to pre-positioned explosives. He writes:

 

“In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the

Twin

Towers

were brought down, not just by damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

 

“I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings.  And I present evidence for the explosive-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the

US

government.
 
 
 

 

And the reasoning behind his conclusions can be summed up as follows:

 

• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" — and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."
 
 
 
      • No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

 

      • WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . .
 
How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.
 
 
 

 

      • With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since the

U.S.

government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

 

      • Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

 

      • Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.
 
 
 

 

      • Molten metal found in the debris of the

World

Trade

Center

may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

 

      • Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

 

Jones will also be appearing on Greg Szymanski’s radio show called “The Investigative Journal” on the Republic Broadcasting Network at www.rbnlive.com on Monday at 12 noon central time.

 

For Jones’ full report go to www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.

___

 Theologian Says Controlled Demolition is Now a Fact,

Not a Theory



From Kevin Barrett, Coordinator MUJCA-NET

Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance For 911


Case For WTC Tower Demolition Sealed

By David Ray Griffin

10-21-5


Theologian Says Controlled Demolition is Now a Fact,

Not a Theory



From Kevin Barrett, Coordinator MUJCA-NET

Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance For 911


In two speeches to overflow crowds in New York last weekend, notable theologian David Ray Griffin argued that recently revealed evidence seals the case that the Twin Towers and WTC-7 were destroyed by controlled demolition with explosives. Despite the many enduring mysteries of the 9/11 attacks, Dr. Griffin concluded, "It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."

On Oct. 15th and 16th, New Yorkers filled two venues to hear the prominent theologian and author of two books on 9/11 give a presentation entitled "The Destruction of the Trade Towers: A Christian Theologian Speaks Out."  Dr. Griffin has continued to blaze a trail of courage, leading where most media and elected officials have feared to tread.

His presentation went straight to the core of one of the most powerful indictments of the official story, the collapse of the towers and WTC 7.

Dr. Griffin included excerpts from the firemen's tapes which were recently released as a result of a prolonged court battle led by victim's families represented by attorney Norman Siegel and reported in the NY Times. He also included statements by many witnesses. These sources gave ample testimony giving evidence of explosions going off in the buildings. A 12-minute film was shown for the audiences, who saw for themselves the undeniable evidence for controlled demolition.

Dr. Griffin listed ten characteristics of the collapses which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being struck by planes or the ensuing fires. He explained (1) the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse. (2) They fell straight into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell-(3) a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns.

(4) The towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and (5) nothing about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication of causing the kind of  damage that would be necessary to trigger even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall speed.

(6) The massive core columns--the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report--were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, (7) just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire.

(8) There was a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized, and (9) no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to explain how so much of the buildings' concrete was rendered into extremely fine dust. (10) The debris was ejected horizontally several hundred feet in huge fan-shaped plumes stretching in all directions, with telltale "squibs" following the path of the explosives downward.

These are all facts that have been avoided by mainstream and even most of the alternative media. Again, these are characteristics of the kind of controlled demolitions that news people and firefighters were describing on the morning of 9/11. Those multiple first-person descriptions of controlled demolition were hidden away for almost four years by the City of New York until a lawsuit finally forced the city to release them. Dr. Griffin's study of these accounts has led him beyond his earlier questioning of the official story of the collapses, to his above-quoted conclusion: The destruction of the three WTC buildings with explosives by US government terrorists is no longer a hypothesis, but a fact that has  been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

It's important to note that Dr. Griffin is one of many prominent intellectuals--including the likes of Gore Vidal, Howard including the likes of Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn, Peter Dale Scott, Richard Falk, Paul Craig Roberts, Morgan Reynolds and Peter Phillips--who have seen through the major discrepancies of the official explanation ever risen to challenge it. These brave individuals represent the tip of an ever-growing iceberg of discreet 9/11 skeptics.

Indeed, 9/11 skepticism appears to be almost universal among intellectuals who have examined the evidence, since there has not yet been a single serious attempt to refute the case developed by Dr. Griffin and such like-minded thinkers as Nafeez Ahmed and Mike Ruppert.

As for the general public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians  (63%, Toronto Star, May 2004) agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01. How, then, can the mainstream US media continue to  ignore the story of the 21st century? Perhaps the best answer was given by Dr. Griffin himself in the conclusion of his talk, and is worth quoting at length: "The evidence for this conclusion (that 9/11 was an inside job) has thus far has been largely ignored by the mainstream press, perhaps under the guise of obeying President Bush's advice not to tolerate 'outrageous conspiracy theories.' We have seen, however, that it is the theory that is the outrageous one, because it is violently contradicted by numerous facts, including some basic laws of physics.

"There is, of course, another reason why the mainstream press has not pointed out these contradictions. As a recent letter said: " 'The number of contradictions in the official version of . . . 9/11 is so overwhelming that . . . it simply cannot be believed. Yet . . . the official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of rejecting it is too disturbing: that we are subject to a government conspiracy of "X-Files" proportions and insidiousness.'

"The implications are indeed disturbing. Many people who know or at least suspect the truth about 9/11 probably believe that revealing it would be so disturbing to the American psyche, the American form of governmental stability that it is better to pretend to believe the official version. I would suggest, however, that any merit this argument may have has been overcome by more recent events and realizations.

"Far more devastating to the American psyche, the American form of government, and the world as a whole will be the continued rule of those who brought us 9/11, because the values reflected in that horrendous event have been reflected in the Bush administration's lies to justify the attack on Iraq, its disregard for environmental science and the Bill of Rights, its criminal negligence both before and after Katrina, and now its apparent plan not only to weaponize space but also to authorize the use of nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike.

"In light of this situation and the facts discussed in this lecture---as well as dozens of more problems in the official account of 9/11 discussed elsewhere---I call on the New York Times to take the lead in finally exposing to the American people and the world the truth about 9/11.

"Taking the lead on such a story will, of course, involve enormous risks. But if there is any news organization with the power, the prestige, and the credibility to break this story, it is the Times. It performed yeoman service in getting the 9/11 oral histories released. But now the welfare of our republic and perhaps even the survival of our civilization depend on getting the truth about 9/11 exposed. I am calling on the Times to rise to the occasion."

Dr. Griffin's speech given at the University of Wisconsin earlier this year, entitled "9/11 and the American Empire," was broadcast twice on C-SPAN. In late September Dr. Griffin was asked to give expert testimony as sponsored by Cynthia McKinney and the Congressional Black Caucus investigating the 9/11 Commission Report. He is currently Professor Emeritus at Claremont College in California.

This weekend's events were sponsored by NY911truth.org, WBAI and the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance for 9/11 Truth: http://mujca.com.

Kevin Barrett, Coordinator, MUJCA-NET

(END) about 9/11 exposed. I am calling on the Times to rise to the occasion."

Dr. Griffin's speech given at the University of Wisconsin earlier this year, entitled "9/11 and the American Empire," was broadcast twice on C-SPAN. In late September Dr. Griffin was asked to give expert testimony as sponsored by Cynthia McKinney and the Congressional Black Caucus investigating the 9/11 Commission Report. He is currently Professor Emeritus at Claremont College in California.

This weekend's events were sponsored by NY911truth.org, WBAI and the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance for 9/11 Truth: http://mujca.com.

Kevin Barrett, Coordinator, MUJCA-NET

(END)

November 15, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack