 |
 |
|
Advice Regarding the Smoke Detector Fraud
Citrus Heights, CA
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
AN ENGINEERS ADVICE
TO THOSE WHO RECENTLY DISCOVERED
THE IONIZATION TYPE "SMOKE" DETECTOR IS A FRAUD
FIGHT FIRE BEFORE IT STARTS (THEY SAID)
The full page ad in the Fire Journal of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) dated July, 1969 advised the fire chiefs throughout the United States that there was a new kind of smoke detector being marketed. This magical device would virtually guarantee a fire safe home. No longer would there be those desperate rushes to a blazing home with children trapped within and the mother outside screaming for someone to save them. No, this was a magical detector that would warn of a potential fire even as the combustible material was being heated toward combustion, but before the flames or smoke appeared. The fire officials throughout America were thrilled.
The July 1969 ad said in bold letters, "FIGHT FIRE the easy way, before it starts. Six smoke detector brands were listed on that ad including Kidde and Gamewell. The 1972 ad within the NFPA Fire Journal promoting the Honeywell smoke detector assured the fire chiefs that: "Honeywell helps detect fires before they start. The new detectors see 'unseen' particles of combustion . . . in fire's incipient stage. The stage where you can do something about it . . . before smoke, flames and heat build up. Before sprinklers activated" Many ads of this nature, claiming the ionization device would sound an alarm before smoke or flames appeared, ran within the NFPA publication from 1965 until 1977.
The fire chiefs were mightily impressed. Not only did the fire chiefs begin to promote this magical device, they convinced legislators throughout America to mandate the installation of these devices in homes.
THE ADS WERE PERFORMANCE LIES
There was one little problem with this magical detector however. The ads that appeared within the NFPA Fire Journal from 1965 until 1972 were performance lies . . . flat out lies. But the mission was accomplished; a phony smoke detector became the fire code mandated fire detector throughout America. Competing smoke and fire detectors were essentially thrown into the trash bin by law.
THE 1974-76 DUNES TESTS EXPOSED THE PERFORMANCE LIES
During 1976 I studied a research report on field (not laboratory) fire tests called the Dunes Tests. The field tests were conducted under the management of an Underwriters Laboratory engineer named Richard Bukowski. The tests revealed the ionization device, on average during smoldering type fires sounded an alarm more than one hour after ignition. And, with regard to the flaming type fires, the performance ads were proven to be the outright lies relative this most dangerous type fire as well. No longer was it a question as to whether the device would sound before smoke or flames appeared. The new concern was how many would be killed by fire before that proven-to-be-defective device would sound a warning.
THE FRAUD WAS CONCEALED
The Dunes Tests confirmed that the ionization type so called "smoke" detector was a fraud. The manufacturers had deliberately lied about the performance capabilities of their devices to capture the multi-billion dollar market for home fire detectors. Finally, about 14 years after the performance lies were first disseminated in the NFPA publication the true performance capabilities of the device were confirmed with federally funded research. But there was a hitch. Underwriters' Laboratories had been testing and "listing" the device, and the UL Logo appeared on the device. To every fire chief in the country the UL Label meant that the lab had tested the device and approved it. The obvious implication was that UL had determined the performance ads (that had been appearing in fire publications for years) were valid. After all, the testing at UL would have determined whether or not the device performed as advertised. If it failed to perform so dramatically in field tests surely the failure modes would have revealed themselves during the laboratory testing. And, surely UL would not have allowed the manufacturers to lie to the fire chiefs and claim it performed if it did not. This would make UL part and parcel of a fraud, if UL concealed the performance lies. So the fire officials nationally had every reason to believe the ionization devices they were promoting were "supper fast and reliable smoke detectors".
A CONSPIRACY RESULTING IN MURDER
The manufacturers of the ionization device had been lying about its performance capabilities. But, Underwriters' Laboratories was testing and "certifying" the device. Therefore the implication was that the performance claims were true. To claim that the detector would sound a warning for all fire categories, from incipient smoldering to blazing hot, and for the claims to be proven false would mean that the manufacturers were defrauding the public via the fire chiefs. That would be a felony. If the device failed to warn in a timely manner and deaths occurred, that would be a deaths resulting from a felony. He who commits a felony that results in one or more deaths can be charged with murder. All who participated in the felony could be charged with murder. So, the problem that developed during the Dunes Tests, as the device consistently failed to perform as claimed, was that a case for felony murder was developing. This was not a pretty picture.
The engineer in charge of the Dunes Tests was Richard Bukowski, a fire protection engineer employed by Underwriters Laboratory. Mr. Bukowski oversaw the preparation of a report on the Dunes Tests. The report was a white-wash. It was a cover-up and more. It was a conspiracy to conceal a conspiracy that had already claimed thousands of lives. No doubt Mr. Bukowski and the management of UL assumed the dishonesty regarding the smoke detector approvals and the ensuing fire deaths could be covered up because the fire protection establishment had a long history of getting away with rigging tests and manipulating the marketplace for fire protection products. But they did not factor me into the equation. I studied the Dunes Test report, realized the report was a cover up of a deadly fraud and in 1976 I distributed my report nationally to fire chiefs and fire protection engineers. I named it, The Smoke Detector Fraud. That initiated events that may finally be bringing justice to the thousands of victims of perhaps the deadliest fraud ever pulled off in the United States.
THE NEW INVESTIGATIONS
Within the past five years, largely due to the Australian organization, The World Fire Safety Foundation, this fraud has been dragged out of the closet anew, so to speak. Now there have been new fire tests and/or investigations into this fraud in Vermont, Indiana, Tennessee, Ohio, Texas, Massachusetts, Australia and New Zealand. The exposures are growing. But those who are lately discovering the nature of this fraud (that has caused an estimated 75,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of injures) have been pulling their punches when the public needs the full truth.
I am thinking specifically of a recent video that reports on testing in Indiana where the phony ionization device was subjected to killing levels of smoke and toxic gases. But the ionization devices failed to sound. Within this video a spokes person for Underwriters Laboratories (who obviously has little if any knowledge of the technicalities of the ionization device) repeatedly claimed that a smoke detector "certified" by UL would indeed warn when the smoke was at a dangerous level. But he had no clue as to why the device did not warn when the smoke was clearly excessive during the Indiana tests.
The Indiana fire test program was excellent and the video was powerful and educational. However, the reluctance to name UL officials as willing conspirators involved in an incredibly deadly fraud was very apparent. The "punches" were pulled. The explanation within the video for the different results (Laboratory testing vs. the recent field tests) was that laboratory testing and field testing can produce different results. This was a cop out. As an engineer who is well aware of the UL testing of the ionization device I would be more than willing to testify in a court of law that both test programs, the Indiana field tests and the Underwriters' Laboratories, actually produced essentially the same results relative the ability of the device to respond to a low heat smoky fire. Both test programs confirmed that the device is essentially useless as a real smoke detector. The difference is that those who ran the Indiana tests are telling the truth and the engineers who did the UL testing were experienced liars. And, not only were they convincing liars they knew how to correct unsatisfactory tests by rigging the tests to deceive the fire chiefs and the public. The falsification of fire testing to help sell defective products was nothing new to UL. Fire regulatory corruption is dated back to at least 1895 when the insurance industry created the NFPA to rig a sprinkler code to limit the sprinkler installations. The insurers needed fires. Fire is the business of the fire business.
NEW RESEARCHERS ARE NOT YET UP TO SPEED
What the Indiana fire testers are not yet aware of is that the UL test program for the ionization device was also rigged to hide the fact that this phony "smoke" detector also is a deadly device when the fire originates or converts to flaming. The UL test program, for example, allows the smoke obscuration during the flaming fire tests to go as high as 37 percent (light reduction per foot). The IAFC fire tests some years earlier produced the conclusion that a smoke density above 4 percent likely would cause a person to fear to travel the exit route to safety.
The UL fire tests allow smoke from a flaming fire to rise to as much as 9 times deadly. UL engineers knew this was wrong. I told them that the testing was fraudulent years ago. Indeed I can produce a 1977 Business Week magazine article on smoke detectors where George Saunders, UL Engineering Manager, admitted the tests were inadequate and promised to correct the testing. It never happened. But, presumably the testing was profitable.
As for testing for the thick smoke created by smoldering fires, at first UL tested only in the smoke box. This was the equivalent of testing for a fire in a foot locker with the detector also inside the foot locker. This test was irrelevant to real fire conditions. Then, following the Dunes Tests (where the field tests confirmed that the ionization device was essentially useless for warning of smoldering fires) UL had a choice. UL officials could warn the public that the device was defective and stop the wanton killing of the children. Or they could go back to the lab and develop a phony fire test, a "cover-up" type test, designed to deceive the fire chiefs and convince them that the problems had been solved. So, to "prove" the device (that does not detect real smoke actually does detect real smoke) UL engineers created a phony "smoldering fire test". Ponderosa pine sticks are placed on a hot plate and heated to a temperature of about 700 degrees F. At that temperature, slightly below the autoignition point, dense smoke is created that is capable of causing the device to sound. But, Ponderosa Pine wood grilled at 700 degrees F. does not create the same type smoke as a cigarette on a sofa cushion in the family room. The hot smoldering wood creates billions of near atomic size particles per cubic inch and this will be able to trip the device. So, not only did the UL engineers lie about the early results of their lab tests but when the truth was emerging, a new and phony smoke test was developed to further confuse and neutralize the fire chiefs.
THERE IS A DUTY OF CARE TO P[ROTECT THE PUBLIC
I do not blame the fire chiefs near as much as I blame the engineers and fire scientists for the fraud continuing after the Dunes Tests confirmed the device was phony. True, Bukowski and the UL team lied about the results of the Dunes Tests. But I provided a great abundance of evidence confirming that the device failed the tests.
The average time for the ionization device to sound during the Dunes Tests (when there were smoldering fires) exceeded one hour. This was one of many facts I revealed to the fire engineers. So, the engineers had an abundance of evidence of the defective nature of the ionization device; both related to flaming and smoldering fires. The evidence of fraud and endangerment I provided to my fellow engineers could have been checked out if there were any doubts. Engineers have a "duty of care" to protect the public. To have evidence that a fraud was killing thousands of innocent children and then to help cover-up the fraud was criminal. But it was expedient to not talk about it because the NFPA/UL/Insurance Industry system harmed those who disputed the official policies. So, as far back as 1976, the fire engineers knew that the device was phony. But they were not only reluctant to buck the system, many eagerly helped sell the deceptions.
AMATEUR RESEARCHERS HAVE ACCOMPLISHED MORE THAN THE PROFESSIONALS
I also say that it is BS when it is claimed that the recent tests done with real detectors in real homes with real smoke were not scientific. That testing was indeed scientific because it was valid testing with valid results. The testing that was NOT scientific were those that were fraudulent, such as the Dunes Tests and the UL lab tests. Those who do honest testing and produce valid results are the real scientists.
The video in question cites the tests at Texas A & M University as being "real" science. But the Indiana tests are scientific too. They simply provide the necessary truth with less instrumentation and less political correctness. Science is truth and truth is science. What I like about the Indiana testing is that those who discovered the truth are now doing all they can to correct the evil, and to save the children who will burn tomorrow if corrections are not made. I went to Texas A & M during the early 1990s and provided all the evidence of fraud to that school that I had. This was the initiation of the testing at that school. The early tests which were conducted by the head of the Architectural Department were a mess. The report produced was almost as phony as the Dunes Report. Later, when the head of the engineering department took over the testing the program became valid and useful. However, the results apparently have been disseminated only to those who are within the fire regulatory system. Apparently those who were privy to the Texas fire tests and reports have generally ignored the results. If there was any organized and determined effort to warn the public of the endangerment, especially to the children, I am not aware of it. So, although the Indiana testing lacked some of the trappings of "science" I say the follow up by the Indiana test people, including the media, has been far more effective. My only complaints are two:
1. The tests from Indiana still have not revealed the inability of the ionization device to provide an adequate warning of the flaming type fire.
2. There is a reluctance to accept the fact that UL knew that the ionization device was dangerously defective and concealed the defects, presumably to receive payments from those who were selling the device.
However, the total contribution to society by those who conducted and publicized the fire tests in Indiana cannot be overly stated. This is part of a major movement toward honesty within the fire regulatory system. And, if honesty prevails the result could be more than a 90 percent reduction in fire deaths because the technology to virtually eliminate the fire problem has been available, but denied the public, for decades.
THE VICTIMS ARE ENTITLED TO JUSTICE
Here's a final thought for those who now know that the so called smoke detector is defective and has been declared a "killer of children" by a New York State Court of Law. Not long ago a child molester by the name of John Couey kidnapped a small girl, raped her multiple times and finally buried her while still alive and trapped inside of garbage bags. The reporters when discussing this horrible crime left no adjectives unused. John Couey was no doubt mentally defective. On the other hand, those who sold and certified a defective smoke detector with generous use of performance lies were well dressed, well educated and well paid business men and engineering professionals. These men (and they were very predominately men) had no excuse for their criminal acts except greed.
Whereas Couey inflicted ultimate damage on one girl the ghouls who put phony smoke detectors into at least 80 million U.S. homes caused deaths and horrible injuries beyond counting. For more than four decades there has been a well organized cover-up of this fraud. The marketing, the advertising, the testing and the cover-up were not by error. This long period of corruption with deadly results required constant employment of deceptions and lies. A fraud of this magnitude needed tending to keep the fraud concealed. The reality is those who engineered this fraud were a thousand times more deadly than John Couey. Those who criticize me for speaking the truth about these criminals of the fire game, are either ignorant of the magnitude of the damage done or part of the problem. I will leave it this way. If I was a judge and I could order the execution of only one, John Couey or Richard Bukowski, it would be Bukowski who would be hung.
EVIL WINS WHEN GOOD PEOPLE DO NOTHING.
www.TheWorldFireSafetyFoundation.org • www.Firecrusade.com
www.AmericasHolocaust.org
RICHARD M. PATTON, FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER
AUTHOR, THE AMERICAN HOME IS A FIRE TRAP
THE CRUSADE AGAINST FIRE DEATHS
rmpatton@surewest.net
TO THOSE WHO RECENTLY DISCOVERED
THE IONIZATION TYPE "SMOKE" DETECTOR IS A FRAUD
FIGHT FIRE BEFORE IT STARTS (THEY SAID)
The full page ad in the Fire Journal of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) dated July, 1969 advised the fire chiefs throughout the United States that there was a new kind of smoke detector being marketed. This magical device would virtually guarantee a fire safe home. No longer would there be those desperate rushes to a blazing home with children trapped within and the mother outside screaming for someone to save them. No, this was a magical detector that would warn of a potential fire even as the combustible material was being heated toward combustion, but before the flames or smoke appeared. The fire officials throughout America were thrilled.
The July 1969 ad said in bold letters, "FIGHT FIRE the easy way, before it starts. Six smoke detector brands were listed on that ad including Kidde and Gamewell. The 1972 ad within the NFPA Fire Journal promoting the Honeywell smoke detector assured the fire chiefs that: "Honeywell helps detect fires before they start. The new detectors see 'unseen' particles of combustion . . . in fire's incipient stage. The stage where you can do something about it . . . before smoke, flames and heat build up. Before sprinklers activated" Many ads of this nature, claiming the ionization device would sound an alarm before smoke or flames appeared, ran within the NFPA publication from 1965 until 1977.
The fire chiefs were mightily impressed. Not only did the fire chiefs begin to promote this magical device, they convinced legislators throughout America to mandate the installation of these devices in homes.
THE ADS WERE PERFORMANCE LIES
There was one little problem with this magical detector however. The ads that appeared within the NFPA Fire Journal from 1965 until 1972 were performance lies . . . flat out lies. But the mission was accomplished; a phony smoke detector became the fire code mandated fire detector throughout America. Competing smoke and fire detectors were essentially thrown into the trash bin by law.
THE 1974-76 DUNES TESTS EXPOSED THE PERFORMANCE LIES
During 1976 I studied a research report on field (not laboratory) fire tests called the Dunes Tests. The field tests were conducted under the management of an Underwriters Laboratory engineer named Richard Bukowski. The tests revealed the ionization device, on average during smoldering type fires sounded an alarm more than one hour after ignition. And, with regard to the flaming type fires, the performance ads were proven to be the outright lies relative this most dangerous type fire as well. No longer was it a question as to whether the device would sound before smoke or flames appeared. The new concern was how many would be killed by fire before that proven-to-be-defective device would sound a warning.
THE FRAUD WAS CONCEALED
The Dunes Tests confirmed that the ionization type so called "smoke" detector was a fraud. The manufacturers had deliberately lied about the performance capabilities of their devices to capture the multi-billion dollar market for home fire detectors. Finally, about 14 years after the performance lies were first disseminated in the NFPA publication the true performance capabilities of the device were confirmed with federally funded research. But there was a hitch. Underwriters' Laboratories had been testing and "listing" the device, and the UL Logo appeared on the device. To every fire chief in the country the UL Label meant that the lab had tested the device and approved it. The obvious implication was that UL had determined the performance ads (that had been appearing in fire publications for years) were valid. After all, the testing at UL would have determined whether or not the device performed as advertised. If it failed to perform so dramatically in field tests surely the failure modes would have revealed themselves during the laboratory testing. And, surely UL would not have allowed the manufacturers to lie to the fire chiefs and claim it performed if it did not. This would make UL part and parcel of a fraud, if UL concealed the performance lies. So the fire officials nationally had every reason to believe the ionization devices they were promoting were "supper fast and reliable smoke detectors".
A CONSPIRACY RESULTING IN MURDER
The manufacturers of the ionization device had been lying about its performance capabilities. But, Underwriters' Laboratories was testing and "certifying" the device. Therefore the implication was that the performance claims were true. To claim that the detector would sound a warning for all fire categories, from incipient smoldering to blazing hot, and for the claims to be proven false would mean that the manufacturers were defrauding the public via the fire chiefs. That would be a felony. If the device failed to warn in a timely manner and deaths occurred, that would be a deaths resulting from a felony. He who commits a felony that results in one or more deaths can be charged with murder. All who participated in the felony could be charged with murder. So, the problem that developed during the Dunes Tests, as the device consistently failed to perform as claimed, was that a case for felony murder was developing. This was not a pretty picture.
The engineer in charge of the Dunes Tests was Richard Bukowski, a fire protection engineer employed by Underwriters Laboratory. Mr. Bukowski oversaw the preparation of a report on the Dunes Tests. The report was a white-wash. It was a cover-up and more. It was a conspiracy to conceal a conspiracy that had already claimed thousands of lives. No doubt Mr. Bukowski and the management of UL assumed the dishonesty regarding the smoke detector approvals and the ensuing fire deaths could be covered up because the fire protection establishment had a long history of getting away with rigging tests and manipulating the marketplace for fire protection products. But they did not factor me into the equation. I studied the Dunes Test report, realized the report was a cover up of a deadly fraud and in 1976 I distributed my report nationally to fire chiefs and fire protection engineers. I named it, The Smoke Detector Fraud. That initiated events that may finally be bringing justice to the thousands of victims of perhaps the deadliest fraud ever pulled off in the United States.
THE NEW INVESTIGATIONS
Within the past five years, largely due to the Australian organization, The World Fire Safety Foundation, this fraud has been dragged out of the closet anew, so to speak. Now there have been new fire tests and/or investigations into this fraud in Vermont, Indiana, Tennessee, Ohio, Texas, Massachusetts, Australia and New Zealand. The exposures are growing. But those who are lately discovering the nature of this fraud (that has caused an estimated 75,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of injures) have been pulling their punches when the public needs the full truth.
I am thinking specifically of a recent video that reports on testing in Indiana where the phony ionization device was subjected to killing levels of smoke and toxic gases. But the ionization devices failed to sound. Within this video a spokes person for Underwriters Laboratories (who obviously has little if any knowledge of the technicalities of the ionization device) repeatedly claimed that a smoke detector "certified" by UL would indeed warn when the smoke was at a dangerous level. But he had no clue as to why the device did not warn when the smoke was clearly excessive during the Indiana tests.
The Indiana fire test program was excellent and the video was powerful and educational. However, the reluctance to name UL officials as willing conspirators involved in an incredibly deadly fraud was very apparent. The "punches" were pulled. The explanation within the video for the different results (Laboratory testing vs. the recent field tests) was that laboratory testing and field testing can produce different results. This was a cop out. As an engineer who is well aware of the UL testing of the ionization device I would be more than willing to testify in a court of law that both test programs, the Indiana field tests and the Underwriters' Laboratories, actually produced essentially the same results relative the ability of the device to respond to a low heat smoky fire. Both test programs confirmed that the device is essentially useless as a real smoke detector. The difference is that those who ran the Indiana tests are telling the truth and the engineers who did the UL testing were experienced liars. And, not only were they convincing liars they knew how to correct unsatisfactory tests by rigging the tests to deceive the fire chiefs and the public. The falsification of fire testing to help sell defective products was nothing new to UL. Fire regulatory corruption is dated back to at least 1895 when the insurance industry created the NFPA to rig a sprinkler code to limit the sprinkler installations. The insurers needed fires. Fire is the business of the fire business.
NEW RESEARCHERS ARE NOT YET UP TO SPEED
What the Indiana fire testers are not yet aware of is that the UL test program for the ionization device was also rigged to hide the fact that this phony "smoke" detector also is a deadly device when the fire originates or converts to flaming. The UL test program, for example, allows the smoke obscuration during the flaming fire tests to go as high as 37 percent (light reduction per foot). The IAFC fire tests some years earlier produced the conclusion that a smoke density above 4 percent likely would cause a person to fear to travel the exit route to safety.
The UL fire tests allow smoke from a flaming fire to rise to as much as 9 times deadly. UL engineers knew this was wrong. I told them that the testing was fraudulent years ago. Indeed I can produce a 1977 Business Week magazine article on smoke detectors where George Saunders, UL Engineering Manager, admitted the tests were inadequate and promised to correct the testing. It never happened. But, presumably the testing was profitable.
As for testing for the thick smoke created by smoldering fires, at first UL tested only in the smoke box. This was the equivalent of testing for a fire in a foot locker with the detector also inside the foot locker. This test was irrelevant to real fire conditions. Then, following the Dunes Tests (where the field tests confirmed that the ionization device was essentially useless for warning of smoldering fires) UL had a choice. UL officials could warn the public that the device was defective and stop the wanton killing of the children. Or they could go back to the lab and develop a phony fire test, a "cover-up" type test, designed to deceive the fire chiefs and convince them that the problems had been solved. So, to "prove" the device (that does not detect real smoke actually does detect real smoke) UL engineers created a phony "smoldering fire test". Ponderosa pine sticks are placed on a hot plate and heated to a temperature of about 700 degrees F. At that temperature, slightly below the autoignition point, dense smoke is created that is capable of causing the device to sound. But, Ponderosa Pine wood grilled at 700 degrees F. does not create the same type smoke as a cigarette on a sofa cushion in the family room. The hot smoldering wood creates billions of near atomic size particles per cubic inch and this will be able to trip the device. So, not only did the UL engineers lie about the early results of their lab tests but when the truth was emerging, a new and phony smoke test was developed to further confuse and neutralize the fire chiefs.
THERE IS A DUTY OF CARE TO P[ROTECT THE PUBLIC
I do not blame the fire chiefs near as much as I blame the engineers and fire scientists for the fraud continuing after the Dunes Tests confirmed the device was phony. True, Bukowski and the UL team lied about the results of the Dunes Tests. But I provided a great abundance of evidence confirming that the device failed the tests.
The average time for the ionization device to sound during the Dunes Tests (when there were smoldering fires) exceeded one hour. This was one of many facts I revealed to the fire engineers. So, the engineers had an abundance of evidence of the defective nature of the ionization device; both related to flaming and smoldering fires. The evidence of fraud and endangerment I provided to my fellow engineers could have been checked out if there were any doubts. Engineers have a "duty of care" to protect the public. To have evidence that a fraud was killing thousands of innocent children and then to help cover-up the fraud was criminal. But it was expedient to not talk about it because the NFPA/UL/Insurance Industry system harmed those who disputed the official policies. So, as far back as 1976, the fire engineers knew that the device was phony. But they were not only reluctant to buck the system, many eagerly helped sell the deceptions.
AMATEUR RESEARCHERS HAVE ACCOMPLISHED MORE THAN THE PROFESSIONALS
I also say that it is BS when it is claimed that the recent tests done with real detectors in real homes with real smoke were not scientific. That testing was indeed scientific because it was valid testing with valid results. The testing that was NOT scientific were those that were fraudulent, such as the Dunes Tests and the UL lab tests. Those who do honest testing and produce valid results are the real scientists.
The video in question cites the tests at Texas A & M University as being "real" science. But the Indiana tests are scientific too. They simply provide the necessary truth with less instrumentation and less political correctness. Science is truth and truth is science. What I like about the Indiana testing is that those who discovered the truth are now doing all they can to correct the evil, and to save the children who will burn tomorrow if corrections are not made. I went to Texas A & M during the early 1990s and provided all the evidence of fraud to that school that I had. This was the initiation of the testing at that school. The early tests which were conducted by the head of the Architectural Department were a mess. The report produced was almost as phony as the Dunes Report. Later, when the head of the engineering department took over the testing the program became valid and useful. However, the results apparently have been disseminated only to those who are within the fire regulatory system. Apparently those who were privy to the Texas fire tests and reports have generally ignored the results. If there was any organized and determined effort to warn the public of the endangerment, especially to the children, I am not aware of it. So, although the Indiana testing lacked some of the trappings of "science" I say the follow up by the Indiana test people, including the media, has been far more effective. My only complaints are two:
1. The tests from Indiana still have not revealed the inability of the ionization device to provide an adequate warning of the flaming type fire.
2. There is a reluctance to accept the fact that UL knew that the ionization device was dangerously defective and concealed the defects, presumably to receive payments from those who were selling the device.
However, the total contribution to society by those who conducted and publicized the fire tests in Indiana cannot be overly stated. This is part of a major movement toward honesty within the fire regulatory system. And, if honesty prevails the result could be more than a 90 percent reduction in fire deaths because the technology to virtually eliminate the fire problem has been available, but denied the public, for decades.
THE VICTIMS ARE ENTITLED TO JUSTICE
Here's a final thought for those who now know that the so called smoke detector is defective and has been declared a "killer of children" by a New York State Court of Law. Not long ago a child molester by the name of John Couey kidnapped a small girl, raped her multiple times and finally buried her while still alive and trapped inside of garbage bags. The reporters when discussing this horrible crime left no adjectives unused. John Couey was no doubt mentally defective. On the other hand, those who sold and certified a defective smoke detector with generous use of performance lies were well dressed, well educated and well paid business men and engineering professionals. These men (and they were very predominately men) had no excuse for their criminal acts except greed.
Whereas Couey inflicted ultimate damage on one girl the ghouls who put phony smoke detectors into at least 80 million U.S. homes caused deaths and horrible injuries beyond counting. For more than four decades there has been a well organized cover-up of this fraud. The marketing, the advertising, the testing and the cover-up were not by error. This long period of corruption with deadly results required constant employment of deceptions and lies. A fraud of this magnitude needed tending to keep the fraud concealed. The reality is those who engineered this fraud were a thousand times more deadly than John Couey. Those who criticize me for speaking the truth about these criminals of the fire game, are either ignorant of the magnitude of the damage done or part of the problem. I will leave it this way. If I was a judge and I could order the execution of only one, John Couey or Richard Bukowski, it would be Bukowski who would be hung.
EVIL WINS WHEN GOOD PEOPLE DO NOTHING.
www.TheWorldFireSafetyFoundation.org • www.Firecrusade.com
www.AmericasHolocaust.org
RICHARD M. PATTON, FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER
AUTHOR, THE AMERICAN HOME IS A FIRE TRAP
THE CRUSADE AGAINST FIRE DEATHS
rmpatton@surewest.net
Richard M Patton
President
Crusade Against Fire Deaths, Inc.
Citrus Heights, CA
916-721-7700
| Book Title: | |
 |
Order |
 |
Contact Richard M Patton |
 |
Ask a question with InterviewNetSM |