Welcome to The Truth News.Info
9/11 QUI TAM CASE
WILL HAVE ITS DAY IN COURT
Qui-Tam, NOTICE OF HEARING DATE
U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Hearing Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 10:00 a.m.
Thurgood Marshall U.S. Court House
40 Poley Square, New York, N.Y. 1007
Notice Dated: May 8, 2009, Wood v. Applied Research Associates, Inc.
Link to original pdf file here
Press Release, June 17, 2009
9/11 QUI TAM CASE
WILL HAVE ITS DAY IN COURT
23rd June 2009 – Manhattan, New York – The Qui Tam Case of Dr. Judy
Wood - Docket Number 08-3799-cv), DC Docket Number: 07-cv-3314 is to
have an Oral Hearing.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MPRLog (Press Release) – Jun 17, 2009 – In 2005, a number of reports were
issued by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) which were the
result of a study, mandated by congress, to "Determine why and how WTC 1 and
WTC 2 collapsed ...". In April 2007, Dr. Wood, with the help of a Connecticut
Attorney Jerry Leaphart, lodged a “Qui Tam” complaint against some of the
contractors employed by NIST. This complaint followed an earlier "Request For
Correction" (RFC) with regard to the same NIST WTC reports, establishing her as
the first to address the fact that this
report did not even contain an analysis
of the collapse of the WTC towers.
Dr. Wood’s original RFC defined how
NCSTAR1 is “fraudulent and
deceptive” because it does not address
the profound level of destruction of the
WTC towers that seemed to violate the
laws of physics. NIST denied Dr.
Wood’s RFC, admitting they did not
analyze the collapse. That is, the
spokesperson for NIST admitted that
they did not fulfil the mandate by
congress. (The title of the report is
“NIST NCSTAR 1 – Final Report on
the Collapse of the World Trade Center
Towers,” yet they did not analyze the
"collapse" or even determine if it
actually did collapse.) Dr. Wood's
subsequent appeal to NIST was also
denied, though the Qui Tam case -
against some of the contractors that
NIST employed - went forward.
In the original RFC, Dr. Wood stated that “NIST cannot make a statement that the
World Trade Center towers came down in ‘free fall’ on one hand”, and then say
“that doing so is a form of collapse.” Wood also stated that “Use of the
descriptive word ‘collapse’” is incorrect and points out that according to NIST’s
own data, their explanation of how the towers were “dustified” does not satisfy
the laws of Physics. Dr. Wood uses the word “dustify” because she has identified
a new phenomenon where the building was turned to dust - it was not vaporized
by high heat nor was it smashed by kinetic energy.
Tower Turns to Dust
She concludes from her study,that a new type of Directed Energy Weapon was used to destroy most of the WTC
buildings. This weapon appears to utilize “field effects” in its operation and so is
fundamentally different to known types of directed energy weapons such as lasers
and masers. Contrary to what Dr Wood’s critics say, her Qui Tam submissions do
not discuss the use of “ray beams from space”, but they focus on a number of
pieces of evidence which indicate the presence of field effects in and around the
WTC complex on 9/11.
Dr. Wood also points out that Applied Research Associates (ARA) – one of the
defendants in the Qui Tam action - were one of the contractors for the NCSTAR
reports and that they are a significant developer and manufacturer of Directed
Energy Weapons and/or components of same. This therefore would be one
example of where there was a “conflict of interest” in producing a truthful report.
Dr. Wood’s Qui Tam documents include a study of additional evidence to
illustrate that NIST’s contractors exhibited “willful blindness” when they
produced their part of the NCSTAR reports. For example, the contractors’ own
explanations did not address the fact that much of the steel in the towers turned to
dust before it reached the ground. Dr. Wood’s submissions include a study of
some of the effects seen in the aftermath of the WTC destruction (anomalous dust
effects, anomalous rusting) and anomalous effects seen on some of the surviving
WTC steel girders, pictures of which were included in the original NIST reports.
The girders are bent and deformed in unusual ways – and because the towers
turned to dust, the effects on the girders cannot be explained as being caused by a
“gravity-driven collapse”. In Dr. Wood’s submission, certain effects on metals
and on objects near the WTC are also considered – such as inverted or flipped
cars, and cars which are “toasted” – but show damage inconsistent with a hot fire.
Dr. Wood’s later research has also documented the presence of Hurricane Erin,
which was closest to NYC at about 8am on 9/11.
Watch as the massive beams turn to dust, from CNN footage on 911
Though Judge George Daniels initially dismissed Dr. Wood’s case in June 2008,
his ruling did not address the evidence that Dr. Wood’s Qui Tam case was based
on. A decision was therefore made to lodge an appeal and another round of
submissions took place. This appeal is now scheduled for oral argument on 23rd
June 2009, in the Ceremonial Courtroom (9th Floor), Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, Manhattan, New York City, and is
open to attendance by the general public.
For more information, please use the details below.
Jerry Leaphart, Jerry V. Leaphart & Assoc., P.C. 8 West Street, Suite 203
Danbury, CT 06810 phone - (203) 825-6265 , fax – (203) 825-6256,
Dr. Judy Wood/Qui Tam Case:
NIST’s filings of the RFC’s and responses can be found at:
Click Here To Comment