By Bill Willers for Veterans Today with additional materials
In 2011, Scientists for 9/11 Truth sent a letter to Dr. Francesca Grifo, Director of the Scientific Integrity Program of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), along with information and materials countering the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) account of the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC7). The scientists requested UCS attention to the issue. The letter, shown below (without signatories listed), was signed by 42 scientists from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Poland, Sweden, Australia, Denmark, France, Germany and South Africa. The letter went unanswered. Not long thereafter, Dr. Grifo took a position with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), her title being that of Scientific Integrity Official.
The UCS has been around since 1969 and is considered by a significant segment of the population to be an indicator of issues of scientific importance. It’s failure to confront an issue that much of the scientific community has shown to be serious scientific fraud within elements of the U.S. Government is certain to be interpreted by much of the public as acceptance of the official account. Some who are familiar with the issue have expressed the view that continued silence on a matter of such significance amounts to a lie of omission.
In early September of this year, researchers at the University of Alaska Institute of Northern Engineering released the result of their four-year study of the collapse of WTC7. Briefly, their findings counter the claim by NIST that office fires brought the building down. The research team is providing a two-month period in which comments on the study can be made. WTC7 can be seen as the cork in the bottle of manifold lies inherent in the official explanation of the attacks on the World Trade Center. If the truth surrounding WTC7 can be brought out into the light of day, it would serve to open many doors onto the larger issue of 9/11.
First in the list of goals of the UCS, as declared 50 years ago in its Founding Document, was to “initiate a critical and continuing examination of governmental policy in areas where science and technology are of actual or potential significance.” The UCS has been silent too long on the issue of 9/11 generally, and the Alaska study has provided an opportunity for the organization to function as intended and to take a strong stand on the destruction of WTC7.
Scientists for 9/11 Truth
P.O. Box 1848
Keene, NH 03431
January 19, 2011
Director, Scientific Integrity Program
Union of Concerned Scientists
Two Brattle Sq.
Cambridge, MA 02138-3780
Dear Dr. Grifo:
Re: Violations of Scientific Guidelines by NIST
In response to the recent Scientific Integrity Directive (12/17/10) issued by John P. Holdren, Assistant of the President for Science and Technology, we have written to Dr. Holdren, and enclose a copy of our letter for your inspection.
We are a group of scientists who seek an independent, scientific investigation of the events of September 11, 2001 (9/11) with subpoena power.
We are aware of the efforts of UCS, in response to political interference in federal government science, to push for reforms, and we thank you for those efforts. Regarding 9/11, we note your concern about air safety at Ground Zero and the EPA’s false assurances to the public at the time. There is growing evidence that as a result of government interference that suppressed scientific information, many thousands of first responders and others are now sick and dying.
We wish to draw your attention to an even greater violation of scientific integrity on the part of government officials, in this case the federal scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The NIST investigation of the building “collapses” in New York City on 9/11 are fraught with scientific malfeasance. This malfeasance is contributing to ongoing government behavior affecting the lives of millions, and causing hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths, as well as environmental pollution resulting, for example, from the use of depleted uranium in weaponry in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We are heartened to read on your website that “…UCS will advise and oversee the progress of federal departments and agencies, which are charged with putting the [scientific integrity] directive in place.” We urge you and your scientists to examine the work of independent scientists who have studied the events of 9/11, in particular the building destructions at the World Trade Center (WTC). There is growing awareness among the public worldwide that the official story of these destructions is false, and that the buildings were actually brought down by some form of controlled demolition.
As part of your overseer function, we propose that you recommend that the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (S.372) be extended to protect not only federal employees, but also those who work for companies and institutions that are under contract to the federal government or that receive funding from the government, for example, by way of the National Science Foundation. Here are three examples of retaliation:
Kevin Ryan was formerly Site Manager for Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories (UL). My Ryan, a chemist and laboratory manager, was fired by UL in 2004 for publicly questioning the report being drafted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the World Trade Center Investigation. His original questions, which have become increasingly important over time, remain unanswered by UL or NIST.
Steven Earl Jones is an American physicist known mainly for his work on muon-catalyzed fusion. In 2006, amid controversy concerning his work on the collapse of the World Trade Center, he was relieved of his teaching duties and placed on paid leave from Brigham Young University.
William Woodward, a professor of psychology at the University of New Hampshire was subjected to harsh public criticism and calls for dismissal by State legislators, the Governor, and by a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire for mentioning and questioning the official story of 9/11 in his classroom.
We are sending under separate cover reading and viewing materials that have also been provided to Dr. Holdren. In the name of humanity, and in the spirit of scientific enquiry, we urge you to consider these materials carefully. Much is at stake here for our country, the planet, and the future of its people.
We would very much appreciate a response within a month, that is, by February 19.
Submitted by Heinz Pommer with Jeff Prager to Veterans Today
Introduction by Gordon Duff with Ian Greenhalgh and Jeff Smith (Nuclear weapons designer/particle physicist)
The material here is overwhelming, hours of lectures and dozens of detailed slides. This is not an easy read. It is another piece of irrevocable proof regarding 9/11 and the use of nuclear weapons and, on its own, worth much more than just scanning or flipping through.
Architects and engineers say planes don’t knock down skyscrapers. Nuclear physicists say only atomic bombs can turn out this kind of heat and damage. The real investigators who were silenced by a grand jury and a wealth of threats said it was a conspiracy and named lots of names, some expected, some not.
Now an independent physicist has proven the work done by the original investigators who were silenced and much new work as well. His modeling and detail is breathtaking.
We were recently introduced to the work of Germany physicist Heinz Pommer. I chose to contact him. His work deeply parallels work done by the US Department of Energy and IAEA which was censored and suppressed so that the fake 9/11 report could be published and blame put on Iraq and Afghanistan.
Unlike Pommer’s work (aided by Jeff Prager), the VT team included some of those involved in the ill fated original investigation. Working from different data, to an extent, both teams have ended up with nearly identical results. https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/09/25/the-secret-history-of-9-11/
VT knows the who, how and when from official sources. Pommer (and Prager), however, have taken their portion a step further and have produced what the original team would have presented to congress and the president, had they been allowed, of the proofs of nuclear weapons and their effects. Their work is identical to the secret work by the DOE and Sandia National Labs but adds much as well.
Included are video presentations sent by Pommer to me and his PDF slides. This material has been submitted to the US team and we will get their comments.
6.3 Demon’s trap 9/11
Your mind is not your consciousness. Your consciousness is your state or quality of awareness of your existence, of being a person.
Your mind, however, can be hijacked and controlled. Your thoughts can be guided to this and that, and finally your mind might simply play the role of an uneducated dog. It barks a lot: “be aware, intruders!”
If your mind is bent the right way (in the sense of the perpetrators of 9/11) you will accept nothing except the fairy tale of Osama bin Laden. Then your mind and your thoughts will clutch and grasp to the last straws, in order to save your world view. It will accept nothing, least of all an offending truth.
Truth, however, is important. So, lets start this subchapter rendering homage to one great defender of the truth, Saint Augustine of Hippo.
Augustine of Hippo (354 – 430 AD)
Saint Augustine of Hippo from Numidia (a Roman province on the North African Coast) was in a certain sense an extremist, whose position could be condensed in the phrase:
“Better to fall with the truth than to stand with the lie.”
He knew Rome well, as he would recognize Rome in modern western society in his splendor and cruelty. Victory at all costs. The truth does not matter, the triumph of the lie is omnipresent and masked – if at all – by the cosy word “illusion”.
To understand the essence of truth – love of God’s creation by all beings – he also studied the lie, defining how these two antipodes reveal themselves in human society.
The next pages show 25 steps in which the destruction process of the South Tower and the processes in the ground are sketched. These sketches did offend many people and were harshly criticized as “fantasy sketches”, or even as a “dangerous effort to deceive the public”.
However, these sketches should be regarded only as a playful approach in an effort to understand a physical process and to calculate a more precise model afterwards. They don’t pretend being “The Truth”. For a conscious person, there is nothing offensive in them. Even if your mind tells you so.
Step 1: Opening of the building at a height of 350 m
Fig. 6-21 Scheme(modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 2: Connection of the nuclear chimney (ignition of small explosives)
Fig. 6-22 Scheme (modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 3: Weakening of the building structure through radiation (embrittlement)
Fig. 6-23 Scheme (modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 4: Weakening of the building structure through small explosives (statics)
Fig. 6-24 Scheme (modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 5: Weakening of the building structure through melting (radiation)
Fig. 6-25 Scheme (modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 6: Nuclear fizzle/neutron flash in the tower
Fig. 6-26 Scheme (modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 7: Impact of the explosion, start of the eruption
Hard Xray radiation in the Harfountain nozzle in the tower chamber
Fig. 6-27 Scheme (modified): http://www.deepexcavation.com/uploads/case_studies/WTC_TimesPhoto_Edited_1small.JPG
Step 8: Evaporation of the building core by the plasma needle (approx. 8,000 °C)
The bill (Reauthorization 2015)
In 2015, the Congress passed and President Obama signed the reauthorization of the James Zadroga Act. It provided an additional 4.6 billion dollars in funding for its mission.
The bill (9/11 Victims Compensation Fund reauthorization 2019, until … 2090)
According to a Congressional Budget Office estimate, paying out the outstanding claims and future claims would cost $10.2 billion over the next decade.
The bill does not appropriate a specific amount of money to process victims’ compensation claims, instead appropriating “such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2019 and each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2090.”