AMERICAS HOLOCAUST

Report No1

BETRAYAL
It has been incredibly deadly and deviously concealed. It is the calculated and criminal destruction of lives and property by fire. It could be classified as the work of the ultimate arsonist. But it is really the works of those we trusted to protect us. It is perhaps the deadliest betrayal in American history. THE ENORMITY OF FIRE To comprehend the enormity of the betrayal, first the public must reali e the ma!nitude of the destruction. "ere is how a federal a!ency describes it# The U.S. fire problem, o ! per "!pi#! b!$i$, i$ o e of #he %or$# i #he i &'$#ri!l %orl&. To p'# #hi$ i "o #e(#, #he ! '!l lo$$e$ from floo&$, h'rri"! e$, #or !&oe$, e!r#h)'!*e$ ! & o#her !#'r!l &i$!$#er$ "ombi e& i #he U i#e& S#!#e$ !+er!,e -'$# ! fr!"#io of #ho$e from fire$..
$ire in the %nited &tates', 1(th )dition, $ederal )mer!ency *ana!ement A!ency +a!e 1, ,ct -../

+erhaps the sin!le most important thin! that the public can be tau!ht re!ardin! the threat of fire to human life in America is this# There !re #%o "!#!,orie$. of people #h!# fire imp!"#$. The/ !re0 C!#e,or/ 12 The +i"#im$. C!#e,or/ 32 Tho$e %ho profi# from fire or o#her%i$e be efi# from fire. THE RE4ULATORS ARE THE 5ILLERS The fundamental cause of most fire deaths in the %nited &tates over the past one hundred plus years was corruption within the fire re!ulatory system. &peakin! plainly, human life has been secondary to the profits from fire. Two or!ani ations at the heart of the fire re!ulatory system, the National $ire +rotection Association 0N$+A1 and %nderwriters' 2aboratories 0%21 have betrayed the public and are lar!ely responsible for the hundreds of thousands of fire deaths and in3uries over the past decades. And yes, I reali e that this claim will be met with cries of indi!nation by the ma3ority of those who work within the fire services and businesses of fire. But, for all those who 4uestion the premise of this report, all that is needed for the awful truth to emer!e is to !o to this web site# %%%.The6orl&FireS!fe#/Fo' &!#io .or,. 5o there and you will find the answers to why defective, indeed phony, smoke detectors have been installed within at least 6. million homes in the %nited &tates and millions more overseas. Those who will falsify research, advertise performance lies year after year, promote defective devices to be installed in a baby's nursery and hide the real causes of the fire deaths even as the children are bein! buried, have a mentality that can 3ustify anythin!. A NEAR 177 8ERCENT SOLUTION TO FIRE 9ENIE9 A report by T &eddon 7uke, +resident of &tar &prinkler 8orporation, dated 19:9, is attached. 7uke cited the performance data re!ardin! an electrically supervised sprinkler system. A supervised system will automatically send a si!nal to a nearby fire department, usually via a privately operated central monitorin! station. The reli!bili#/ of ! mo i#ore& $pri *ler %!$ ::.;< per"e #. ;hat this means is that there was a solution to the fire problem within buildin!s that was e<tremely close to a 1.. percent !uarantee of fire control and no fire deaths. 8onsider that= If a cure for cancer was discovered by medical scientists and then a decision was made to severely ration that solution, allowin! it to be applied to perhaps only two percent of those who needed it, would that be any worse than preventin! the public access to the 99.6> percent cure for fire? ;ould those medical people who denied the cancer cure to the public be any less evil than those who erected code barriers to the installation of sprinklers? The bottom

Page1

line is that almost every fire death and in3ury that has occurred for many decades, both before and after 19:9, could have been easily prevented. But corrupt or!ani ations and people that /o' #r'$#e& prevented it. OR4ANI=E9 CORRU8TION BE4AN 6ITH THE NF8A I would put the date of birth of an or!ani ed and cleverly structured criminali ation of the fire re!ulatory system as 169:. That was when a !roup of New )n!land insurance or!ani ations created the National $ire +rotection Association 0N$+A1. The National $ire +rotection Association has !rown to become known as the most important fire safety or!ani ation in the world. As such, it is considered by most fire safety professional to be beyond criticism. "ence, it may not be easy to convince the public that nearly all fire deaths and destruction occurrin! in America today, and much of it in forei!n nations, is the end result of this or!ani ation. "owever, I say that the N$+A has ma3ored in betrayal and I have the evidence to confirm that conclusion. Indeed, if it were not for the corruption the fire problem would not be causin! more dama!e than the floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, earth4uakes and other natural disasters. INSURERS NEE9E9 FIRE LOSSES &o that the reader will understand the ways that the re!ulatory system was corrupted I will e<plain how and why the N$+A was first created, how it increased its powers and how it attracted thousands of businesses that profited from fire to help them do their dirty work. The New )n!land fire insurers founded the N$+A to create codes, which were then enacted into laws by city and state le!islation. B'#, #he prim!r/ i #ere$# of #he i $'rer$ %!$ #o profi# from fire, o# #o elimi !#e fire. $ire was and is the business of the fire insurers. ;ithout fire there would be no fire insurers. The public, however, does not need fires and would not need fire insurance e<cept there are fires. $ire is !ood to the insurers, but very bad for the public. INSURERS HA9 A SURE THIN4 &mall properties such as homes could be insured knowin! that only so many would burn each year. "ome insurance was not that different from life insurance@ actuarial tables 4uite accurately predicted the number of deathsA homes that would burn each year. Therefore the annual loss could be calculated by the underwriters. All that was needed was to mathematically calculate the e<pected total loss and set the rates so that for every dollar Bo'#. to pay losses perhaps two dollars comin! Bi . would be about ri!ht. It was a neat business, the insurers were a money transfer operation@ transferrin! money from all the insured to those who suffered losses. $or every dollar into the insurin! system the ratin! of the underwriters !uaranteed that fewer dollars would flow out. The insurers also had some special strate!ies for protectin! their businesses. They e<cluded covera!e for losses that could be of a catastrophic nature. $or e<ample, a flood could simultaneously destroy many thousands of homes. A loss that lar!e could bankrupt insurers. &o risks that could result in catastrophic losses were e<cluded. That's the same concept as a casino settin! the ma<imum si e of a wa!er. As further protection, the insurers created reinsurance markets so that a portion of the covera!e on an e<tremely hi!h valued property could be passed on to others. This allowed a company of limited capacity to insure a property of any si e and spread share the risk with others. Incidentally, I helped &ea!ram 7istillers create a captive insurance company in the Bahamas and I twice traveled to 2ondon to help ne!otiate reinsurance markets with 2loyds for the captive. CATASTRO8HIC LOSSES 6ERE A THREAT TO INSURERS 7urin! the late 16th century as the industrial revolution pro!ressed, the factories and industrial operations !rew in si e and comple<ity with that new and dan!erous tool called electricity. )lectricity made manpower increasin!ly productive. But it also introduced fire ha ardous conditions never before e<perienced. The 16.. cate!ory industrial plants not only burned, they burned much too fre4uently. And, what the insurers were ill prepared to cope with was that the loss of but one se!ment of an industrial operation could stop the entire production for up to a year or lon!er. 2ose a bottlin! facility, for e<ample,

Page1

and it could re4uire many months to build a new bottlin! buildin! and !et delivery of the necessary machinery. The replacement cost for the buildin! and machinery mi!ht be five million dollars but the loss of sales durin! the non productive period mi!ht be :. million dollars. The insurers were in bi! trouble. If they set the rates sky hi!h, the plant mana!ers could not afford insurance. If the rates were lowered the insurers faced the risk of loss payouts e<ceedin! the premiums. The plant mana!ers also had a problem. They did not want compensation for a burned out plant, they wanted to continue to manufacture and make profits. 6HEN ONE 4ALLON IS BETTER THAN A HUN9RE9 THOUSAN9 American in!enuity always finds a solution when one is needed. The solution to the lar!e industrial property fire risk was the fire sprinkler system. The industrialists discovered that when sprinkler systems were installed their properties did not burn. &ure fires continued to occur, but no sooner than the fire !rew lar!e enou!h to put about -.. de!rees $. at the ceilin!, water spray came from above. $ire has a nemeses and it is water spray. ;hen water is applied to a fire in hundreds of thousands of small droplets the heat absorption is ama in!. As a !eneral rule fire will not burn at low temperature. 2ow temperature for a fire may be :.. de!rees $. ;ater chan!es to steam at -1- de!rees. "ence, when water meets fire, fire dies. O e ,!llo of %!#er promp#l/ !pplie& m! '!ll/ b/ ! fo, o>>le or ? ,!llo $ b/ !'#om!#i" $pri *ler m!/ e)'!l ! h' &re& #ho'$! & ,!llo $ of %!#er if fire h!$ ! e(#r! fi+e mi '#e$ #o ,ro%. 8'##i , i# ! o#her %!/, if ,!llo $ !re #he me!$'re, ! $pri *ler i #he "eili , i$ ! h' &re& #ime$ more effi"ie # #h! ! firefi,h#er lo"!#e& i ! fireho'$e ! mile or #e !%!/. 6ITHIN THE BUIL9IN4 8ROTECTION 6AS THE SOLUTION By the end of the 19th century the fire insurance system was advancin! to the point where the fire risk of a property could be reduced by 99 percent simply by installin! some pipe at the ceilin! and installin! sprinkler heads perhaps 1. feet apart. %nfortunately for the insurance underwriters, the fire sprinkler system was becomin! so efficient there was a dan!er that the %i#hi @#he@b'il&i ,C solution to fire had the potential to eliminate the fire problem alto!ether. This would be bad news for the insurers, for the firefi!hters and for thousands of other businesses that sold fire related products, includin! fire rated construction materials. $ire was a monster creator of profits and !overnment e<penditures. The possible elimination of fire was a fearful idea for those who profited from fire. IN9USTRIALISTS BY8ASSE9 THE INSURERS The industrialists be!an to benefit very well from the sprinkler technolo!y. Althou!h a fire in a sprinklered buildin! mi!ht cause some minor dama!e, to an industrial operation that was no worry. &o, the property mana!ers be!an to wonder why they should continue to pay the profit makin! insurers for protectin! them from the dramatically reduced potential for loss when sprinklers were installed. The wily plant owners be!an to form their own insurance cooperatives called *utuals. The idea was that all members of a mutual insurer would pay a modest fee into the kitty at the be!innin! of the insurin! year. Then after the small payouts for small losses, if any, the kitty would be divided up at the end of the insurin! year. This plan had the potential to reduce the cost of insurance from say D1.... per one hundred dollars of insured value to below 1. cents per hundred dollars of value. The savin!s were often in the fantastic ran!e. S8RIN5LERS 6ERE A THREAT TO THE 8ROFITS So, #he e% problem #he i $'rer$ f!"e& !# #he e & of #he 1:#h "e #'r/ %!$ #h!# #he e!rl/ fire $pri *ler $/$#em %!$ #oo &!r effe"#i+e, e+e i i#$ e(i$#i , "r'&e $#!,e of &e+elopme #. No doubt, the %nderwriters were complainin! to each other, 5od help us if they make that system any better. 6i#ho'# fire$ #here %o'l& be o fire i $'r! "e. And what really !ave the underwriter sleepless ni!hts was the possibility that the system that was desi!ned to protect the lar!e industrial properties would be reE

Page1

desi!ned to protect buildin!s of all si es and all occupancies. If #he p'bli" be,! #o "o $i&er #he $pri *ler $/$#em !$ ! pro#e"#or of h'm! life. #here %o'l& be e ormo'$ pre$$'re #o re&e$i, i# #o pro#e"# home$, ho$pi#!l$, $"hool$, ho#el$ ! & b'il&i ,$ of li*e *i &. I'll say this about the insurers@ they can reco!ni e a risk to their profits when they see one. THE ANTI@S8RIN5LER CAM8AI4N The clever underwriters in New )n!land, where the industrial plants were lar!ely located, came up with a plan. $orm an or!ani ation that would create a standard for sprinkler system desi!n. 8all it the National $ire +rotection Association 0N$+A1. 8reate a code for the desi!n of the sprinkler system that would lock the system into hu!e water demands, lar!e steel pipe mainly in the > inch to 1. inch si es and include other restrictions so that it would be economically impossible to use that system to protect small properties 0say homes1 and compartmented properties 0say hotels, schools, apartment houses, hospitals, hi!h rise office buildin!s and virtually all nonEfactory buildin!s where a fire could occur1. Also, the insurers concluded that the public must be educated to know that fire sprinklers were for property protection only. Tell the people that the smoke would kill the occupants before the sprinkler opened. Tell the people that the water would create steam and the occupants would be scalded on the way to the e<its. 8onvince all buildin! owners that the water dama!e would be !reater than the fire dama!e. )specially convince the architects and builders that sprinkler systems were much too u!ly to be installed in pretty buildin!s. ,f course, the N$+A created code, dominated by representatives of the insurance industry@ !uarantee that the installed sprinklers system would be as u!ly as sin. Nearly everyone believed that the insurance a!ents were the fire e<perts and that what they said was the truth. NF8A BETRAYE9 THE 8EO8LE Not surprisin!ly, the N$+A &prinkler code was specifically oriented to prevent the installation of sprinklers within those buildin!s that constituted the main profit areas of the insurers, especially the family dwellin!. The dwellin!s were numerous 0desirable spread of risk1, very profitable and the home owner had no political power or savvy of insurance schemes. The home owner was ripe for the pluckin! and therefore, under no circumstances, would !ffor&!ble and reli!ble sprinklers systems be allowed in homes. As stated, the system was promoted as a protector of property only, o# per#i e # for pro#e"#i , li+e$. Therefore, preventin! sprinklers from bein! installed in homes was not considered to be murder by omission because, after all, Bsprinklers would not protect lifeC 0or so the lo!ic went1. This lo!ic was indoctrinated into fire department officials, who were not technical people. Therefore fire officials believed what the N$+AA%2 Btechnical e<pertsC were tellin! them. S8RIN5LER TECHNOLO4Y 9ORMANT FOR A7 YEARS The insurers also established %nderwriters' 2aboratories to create laboratory testin! standards for sprinklers. %2 ea!erly 3oined the N$+A operation of preventin! the evolution of sprinklers to protect dwellin!s, apartment buildin!s and compartmented buildin!s. By creatin! standards and test pro!rams that prevented innovation, the status 4uo prevailed. Firtually no si!nificant chan!e occurred in sprinkler system desi!n and application for a period of about G. years. ,nly after I forced chan!e did any chan!e occur, and even then the chan!e was the minimum that they could !et away with. STRATE4IES TO 8REBENT S8RIN5LERS FOR LIFE SAFETY "ere is one e<ample amon! the hundreds of how the %2 testin! and certification procedures for sprinklers locked the system into restrictions that prevented chan!e and advancements that would allow a more universal application of the protective system. ,n pa!es -- and -( of the %2 standard for BAutomatic Sprinklers for Fire-Protection ServiceC the spray pattern for the sprinkler was defined. Re!ulation Number 1.9 on pa!e -( stated that Bthe water distribution pattern for a standard sprinkler shall not e<ceed a 1>Efoot diameter circular area / feet below the sprinkler deflector.C This limited the si e of

Page1

the area that could be wetted by one sprinkler. If a sprinkler was desi!ned to cover a wider area it would not pass the %2 test pro!ram. This restriction on the area of covera!e 3ustified the N$+A &prinkler 8ode No. 1( limitation on the si e of a room to be covered by one sprinkler to 1: by 1: feet. Thus, if a room was 1> by 1> feet, four sprinklers would be re4uired at nearly four times the cost. Anyone who e<amines the confi!uration of hotels, motels, and similar compartmented buildin!s will discover this rule represented an enormously e<cessive cost to protect compartmented buildin!s includin! homes. And this was but one improper restriction amon! a !reat many. 7urin! the 19>.s my research proved that a -. by -. foot room could be be##er protected 0with hi!her orifice pressure and an improved density and distribution1 than the narrow pattern sprinkler would protect a lesser si ed room. Another of the many re!ulations aimed at ma!nifyin! the sprinkler installation costs was the re4uirement that a sprinkler in a closet would be re4uired to dischar!e the same amount of water as a sprinkler coverin! --: s4uare feet of room space. That is why I was able to reduce installation costs by as much as 9. percent with hydraulic en!ineerin! and common sense. A :7 8ERCENT RE9UCTION IN S8RIN5LER COSTS As an e<ample of how devious the N$+AA%2 re!ulations were 0and mainly still are1 I cite the Hansas 8ity, Hansas hospital where I desi!ned a 2ife &afety &prinkler &ystem coverin! 1.- million s4uare feet. An N$+A desi!n system for the basement only was bid at D-.66 per s4uare feet. At the time usually only basements in hospitals were sprinklered because such fires were unusually dan!erous for firefi!hters. 0%nfortunately, the same lo!ic, that it is e<tremely dan!erous to be on floors above a fire in a hi!h rise was not applied to the tenants on the upper floors of hi!h rises.1 I was contacted by the hospital desi!n team because it was discovered, after construction started, that there would be a ten million dollar cost overErun. I desi!ned a life safety system for the entire hospital that was then bid by a sprinkler contractor for appro<imately (: cents a s4uare foot, about a 9. percent cost reduction per foot from the N$+A desi!n. Then, because the entire hospital would be sprinkler protected the re4uired fireproofin! was reduced from four hours to three and the total cost of the entire hospital was reduced by more than : million dollars. The truth is that proper en!ineerin! of the sprinkler system is accomplished, not only will the price of the protective system drop dramatically but the entire cost of construction can be reduced by 1. percent and more. FIRE EN4INEERS HEL8 NF8A RESTRICT S8RIN5LERS After I desi!ned the Hansas 8ity hospital system and the results were so positive, I believed that my fellow fire protection en!ineers would flock to my support and demand that better en!ineered systems be allowed everywhere. "owever, the cost reduction for the system, and especially the dramatic reduction in construction costs had the opposite effect. Reduced costs were not what the people who controlled the codes wanted. They wanted ma<imum profits from the fire problem. And the en!ineers knew where the money was. The en!ineerin! association I belon!ed to, the &ociety of $ire +rotection )n!ineers 0&$+)1 would not even publish the article written by me and the &tate Architect of Hansas. $inally, the American "ospital Association covered the story in their Hospitals ma!a ine. This illustrates the seriousness of the conflict between those who profit from fire 0and create codes to ma!nify their profits1 on the one hand and the desire to protect life from fire on the other hand. The full story of the Hansas 8ity "ospital installation, as published in the Hospitals ma!a ine dated $ebruary 1, 19GG is available upon re4uest. 5ILL FIRE CUIC5 OR IT 6ILL 5ILL YOU $ire is like a ti!er. ;hen first born it cannot kill and it is easy to kill it. "owever, allow that ti!erAfire to !row lar!e and then it is hard to kill, but easy for it to kill you. The !rowth time for a fire in a buildin! that initiates flamin! 0as opposed to smolderin!1 is often only four or five minutes. Then it becomes a 4uick and ferocious killer. Thus, when fire starts, apply water spray to it within the first three or four minutes, preferably the first two minutes, or watch out E it will !et you. Now compare the time to

Page1

apply water by sprinkler vs. the firefi!hter. The fire services usually claim that the Bresponse timeC is five minutes or less. But that is from the time of the alarm soundin! at the station until the first truck reaches the immediate area of the burnin! property. The real time for a rescue of someone trapped within, however, is from the first flicker of flame until discovery, the phone call to 911, the relay to the nearby station, the travel time, waitin! for the train to pass, the locatin! of the hydrant, the layin! out and char!in! of the hose lines and the entry of the buildin! behind the protection of the water fo!. That true Brescue timeC is more like ten minutes to a half hour or more. MA5IN4 SURE OCCU8ANTS 9O NOT USE 6ATER ON FIRE The above comparison of the time of fire's !rowth and the value of %i#hi @#he@home protective systems is an e<planation of why the Bfire e<pertsC immediately set out to kill the first residential fire detection code ever published. I was the chairman that first ever code to protect life in a home. ;e recommended that the e<tremely reliable heat detectors be installed in every room with a few smoke detectors as the secondary protection. There was !ood reason to do so. The fact is that the !reat ma3ority of fire deaths are caused by flamin! fires, not smolderin! fires. 8ontrary information was later disseminated to 3ustify the removal of the heat detectors from the code so that the phony smoke detector would be the only protection promoted for the home. This would further !uarantee that a hi!h percenta!e of home fires would not be controlled by the occupants@ thus the services of the remote firefi!hters would be re4uired. If the occupants of a home were protected with a fire detection system as reliable as the sprinkler system, and if there was a small hose with fo! no le at the ready, an alerted occupant would be able to !rab the hose, open the 4uick openin! valve and apply water spray probably in less than two minutes of the first flame appearin!. &pray aimed directly at a small fire could be even more efficient than spray from a ceilin! sprinkler. &pray no les are certified as safe for firefi!hters on e4uipment at volta!es as hi!h as a hundred thousand and more. &o they can be used in a home. But, for decades the home occupants have been advised that water spray cannot be used in a home because of the 11. volt power. FE9ERAL RESEARCH FALSIFIE9 TO SELL 9EFECTIBE 9ETECTORS This combination automaticEmanual protective system could be almost as reliable as a fully automatic sprinkler system, and far easier to install in an already constructed home. &o, this threat to the status 4uo was swiftly attacked. Incredibly corrupt BresearchC, financed by the federal !overnment but with a %2 en!ineer in char!e was ri!!ed to provide the desired answers. Althou!h the ioni ation type smoke detector proved to be incredibly unreliable durin! the testin!, the en!ineers filled the report with technical inaccuracies and outri!ht lies. These blatant falsifications of a federal research pro3ect B3ustifiedC the elimination of the reliable detectors 0heat detectors1 and the substitution of a phony BsmokeC detector that is not capable of detectin! real 0visible1 smoke. Ies, N$+AA%2 traded a reliable fire detection system that would have dramatically reduced fire deaths in already constructed homes, for a BsmokeC detector that doesn't detect smoke. Anyone who believes the ioni ation device is not a fraud and a killer need only !o to the web site of the ;orld $ire &afety $oundation and the truth will become apparent. THE NF8ADUL COMBINE CONTROLS THE MAR5ETS The N$+AA%2 re!ulatory system learned well from the insurance e<ecutives. The insurers tau!ht them how to structure codes and certifications to !ain control of the markets. Both the insurers and the fire inspectors were enforcin! the N$+A codes and checkin! manufactured products and systems for %2 labels, and declarin! the non compliers as bein! unsatisfactory and dan!erous. In time it became impossible to sell products and systems within the American marketplace without the approvals of the controllers. American businessmen found they had to cooperate with the controllers or their wares would not sell. And those that won the certifications early found that often they could prevent competitors from !ainin! the certifications, thus limitin! competition. A better system or product that would especially

Page1

reduce fire losses had a particularly difficult time !ainin! approvals. An e<ample was the use of copper or plastic piped for sprinklers and better en!ineered systems. These nonE!overnment re!ulations that became laws provided the N$+A A%2 enormous powers. Those businesses that placed their representatives on the N$+A code writin! committees and were also able to help define the %2 testin! procedures could structure a market to benefit their own wares. But the people suffered !reatly. HOMES 8RO9UCE :? 8ERCENT OF THE FIRE 9EATHS ;hen one e<amines the fire codes and policies of the fire re!ulatory system, it becomes apparent that the primary orientation has been to fi!ht hu!e outEofEcontrol fires with massive e4uipment, a !reat abundance of manpower, enormously costly e4uipment and un!odly amounts of water. 8ontrol of the early fire has received almost concern and the best manual fire control tool, a small hose with spray no le has essentially been barred from the marketplace. 8ode restrictions have kept at least 99 percent of homes, %here :? per"e # of #he b'il&i , fire "!'$e& &e!#h$ o""'r, devoid of sprinklers. Instead of a real effort to detect and control the early fire, the N$+A has disseminated !ratuitous advice, much of it of an asinine nature such as promotin! the idea that one can safely crawl out of a fire. %nder many fire conditions the smoke is dense at the floor level and none<istent at head hei!ht. ;ould it not have been a thousand times better to provide smoke detectors that are actually capable of detectin! real 0visible1 smoke? ;ith honest fire detectors in the home 0smoke and heat1 there would be ample warnin! so that the occupants could walk out instead of crawlin! out, or even put out the fire. To those who say that the public would not purchase ade4uate protection@ I $!/ $#op l/i , #o #he p'bli", $#op "re!#i , "o&e b!rrier$ #o #he be$# pro#e"#io , #ell #he people #he #r'#h ! & le# #hem &e"i&e %h!# #he/ %ill b'/. MUR9ER BY CO9E This is my first report on America's "olocaust. It has caused fire deaths and serious in3uries into the millions and property dama!e beyond countin! into the billions. The re!li#/ i$ #h!# fire i Ameri"! i$ prob!bl/ ! h' &re& #ime$ more &e!&l/ #h! i# $ho'l& be. I have mainly covered the be!innin! of the "olocaust and the roles of the N$+AA%2 fire re!ulatory system, includin! the ways by which the fire sprinkler system and a reliable fire detection system for homes were prevented from developin! as affordable and universal systems for protectin! human life. The primary method to ,'!r! #ee a hi!h burn rate in America was to prevent the development of B6i#hi @The@B'il&i ,C protective systems. The fire Be<pertsC knew that so lon! as the fire suppression system was located a mile or ten away from where the fire ori!inated, deadly fires would continue, and these deaths would intimidate the public and buildin! owners to buy what was bein! sold, includin! but not limited to hi!h priced insurance. $ire involves thousand of re!ulations and codes, hundreds of billions of dollars in sales and e<penditures and an enormous panorama of products and systems BcertifiedC by %2, at a price of course. Interestin!ly, the No. 1 fire starter in the home is %2 BapprovedC products and systems. This report is but a piece of the whole. There is a holocaust happenin! in this country. It is a people manufactured HOLOCAUST. I $!/ i# i$ ! m!$$i+e le+el of m'r&er b/ "o&e. There's more to come. EBIL 6INS 6HEN 4OO9 8EO8LE 9O NOTHIN4.

%%%.The6orl&FireS!fe#/Fo' &!#io .or, E %%%.Fire"r'$!&e."om

RICHAR9 M. 8ATTON, FIRE 8ROTECTION EN4INEER AUTHOR, THE AMERICAN HOME IS A FIRE TRAP +resident of# THE CRUSA9E A4AINST FIRE 9EATHS, INC. 8OST OFFICE BOF 1:< CITRUS HEI4HTS, CA :?<11 8HONE :1< A31 AA77 rmpatton@surewest.net

Page1