 |
Add to My Group
9/11 Qui Tam Jurisdictional Challenges Filed - 2/29/08
By RuGBYZHG (about the author) Page 3 of 5 page(s)
Plaintiffs have responded to the jurisdictional challenges to their Qui Tam Lawsuits pending in NYC Federal Court. Jurisdictional challenges are now all but fully briefed and await court decision. BODY: On February 29, 2008, a nearly complete set of opposition briefs and affidavits were filed in U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, by the attorney for Dr. Judy Wood in the case entitled Dr. Judy Wood ex rel. USA vs. Applied Research Associates, Inc. et al. 1:07cv3314 (Hon. George B. Daniels, Judge). That filing comes one month after the filing of opposition briefs and affidavits involving a very similar jurisdictional challenge in the case entitled Dr. Morgan Reynolds ex rel. USA vs. Science Applications International Corp. et al. 1:07cv4612, also pending before Judge Daniels and involving the same defendants.
A complete list of defendants is contained in the docket report maintained by the court. Some defendants have been released from the case based on their not having received compensation for their part in NCSTAR 1.
In Wood v ARA, evidence confirming that the annihilation and pulverization in approximately 10 seconds for each of the Twin Towers could not possibly have been caused by supposed jetliner impacts and kerosene (jet fuel is kerosene) is being put forth and demonstrated in detail by Dr. Judy Wood, plaintiff-relator in Wood v ARA.
Reynolds v SAIC presents and relies on evidence that 767 wide-body jetliners could not have done what video images depict. Evidence of false imagery includes:
767 jetliners appearing to attain the velocity of 540 mph at 1000ft or less above sea level;
767 jetliners, made of aluminum, seeming to penetrate solid structural steel from nose to tail, wing-tip to wing-tip, without exploding, without slowing, without degrading or crumpling, leaving plane silhouette imprints and without the overwhelmingly, deafening sound of a jetliner at full throttle being present. Moreover, the explosion is seen in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Few of the depicted characteristics, as seen in the videos of the event, are physically possible, according to claims made in documents filed in the Reynolds case.
ARA and SAIC and other defendants, including, by way of example, Ramon Gilsanz, who as mentioned in the NY Times article published February 23, 2008, seek dismissal of the cases on jurisdictional and other grounds. Some defendants also challenge the cases as being frivolous and seek attorneys’ fees for that reason.
The plaintiffs in the cases, Dr. Wood and Dr. Reynolds, have submitted opposition papers to the motions to dismiss arguing that the court has jurisdiction and that the cases are otherwise valid and should be allowed to proceed to the next stage. If the court rules that it has jurisdiction, then normally the next stage would require the defendants to file answers to the cases and to allow the cases to proceed to the "discovery" phase, meaning the exchange of information and evidence. If the court rules it does not have jurisdiction and does so in a way that dismisses the complaints peremptorily, then, in that event, the motions claiming the cases are frivolous might have to be addressed. No prediction of outcomes of litigation is made, but media are invited to view the public court filings made by both sides in these cases. They are available at the court's website. https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/ShowIndex.pl
The brief and affidavits filed by Dr. Wood point to an ongoing danger in that Ground Zero is still contaminated with the aftereffects of the use of directed energy weaponry. According to the documents filed by Dr. Wood, the weapons used to destroy the Twin Towers are a new technology and affect the destruction of materials at the molecular level, which accounts for the near instantaneous disappearance of the towers. The results of 9/11 appear to be a non-self-quenching reaction.
The long-lasting appearance of spontaneous puffs of what were billed as smoke at GZ, but which is not smoke, is consistent with that reaction.
The puffs are not smoke according to Dr. Wood but are, instead, a form of fuming associated with molecular dissociation. Evidence of molecular dissociation includes toxicity, excessive rusting, materials instability and other physical anomalies that Dr. Wood has demonstrated to be present at GZ up to, and including, this year, 2008.
Dr. Wood, a materials-engineering scientist whose expertise is experimental mechanics, has called upon the scientific community in America to take heed of the evidence and to treat the matter scientifically. The scientific community is not being called upon to rubber stamp Dr. Wood’s claims, but they are being called upon to examine the obvious deviations from scientific methodology evident in the official findings.
http://physicalevidenceof911.home.mchsi.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
by Frank Rich
$25.95
Lowest New Price $3.50
Number of pages: 352
Publisher: Penguin Press HC, The
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
$20.00
Lowest New Price $10.46
Number of pages: 480
Publisher: Olive Branch Press
by Phil Mole
$9.95
Number of pages: 29
Publisher: Thomson Gale
| 9 comments |
|
More Information
Both ARA and SAIC are Silver-Level Sponsors of the Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS). Click here for more on ARA and SAIC. DEPS, founded in 1999, put out their first newsletter one year before 9/11. The 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 cover up, and the 9/11 "truth movement" were orchestrated by people associated with directed energy weapons and the media: by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 477 comments [34 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:35:45 PM  (0+)
|
|
Even More Information...
*Directed Energy Weapon Sponsors and Department of Defense Contractors by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 477 comments [34 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:59:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Corrected Link to WTC Task Force Interviews
by RuGBYZHG (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 27 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:21:14 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Correction to my correction
by RuGBYZHG (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 27 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:27:30 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Proper Embed
by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 477 comments [34 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:27:49 PM (0+)
|
|
parts of the problem
Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds and CB Brooklyn are all part of the problem of getting to the truth of the events of911. They assert outlandish ideas and thus thow the truth movement into arguing among itself rather than arguing with the authorities. The facts are simple and clearly show that explosives were used to bring down the towers. And that is a fact regardless of whether or not real planes hit the towers. Evidence of the residues of thermite has been found. Thermite may be incendiary or explosive depending on its formulation. There is other evidence of explosives which does not fit with an energy beam. See the papers in the Journal of 9/11 Studies by gravity32 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 217 comments [66 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:33:33 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: People With Limited Thinking Often Don't See It.
There is no evidence of thermite/thermate. If Steven Jones had such smoking gun proof, he would have brought a lawsuit forward just as Drs Wood and Reynolds have. Even if Jones were too chicken to file an actual lawsuit, still he would have mentioned thermite/thermate in the Request for Correction his team filed with NIST, again, like Drs Wood/Reynolds have with directed energy weapons and TV-Fakery. Obviously Jones has no evidence of thermite. Even if he did, it would not be traceable since thermite is purchasable on Ebay. And since Bush already blamed explosives on Al Qaeda as seen in this video (didn't Bill Clinton do this too, recently?), it’s obvious what the perps plans are. Besides, a read through my articles (linked in my first comment above) show Steven Jones to be a plant to distract people from the directed energy weapon and TV-Fakery evidence. A plant who also discredited free energy research in the 1980s. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 477 comments [34 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Thursday, Mar 13, 2008 at 7:48:50 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Just WHO is Gravity32?
May we know his real name? May we know when he has filed his Qui Tam (or similar) case and stood by his evidence? May we seean article about his court filings? Or is he just making empty, meaningless disparaging posts in a last ditch effort to convince others that the Jones crew have some viable evidence to work with? Or are his arguments as empty as the WTC site was of debris by 11am on 9/11/01? by Andrew Johnson (2 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 99 comments [6 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Mar 13, 2008 at 5:17:43 PM (0+)
|
|
Best of Luck...
And thanks! Blessings to All, "The American People" by Sha Llel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 93 comments) on Thursday, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:41:16 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0) Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
