“The towers didn’t burn up, nor did they slam to the ground. They turned into dust in mid air.” – Dr Judy Wood
Apart from the fact that no steel-framed high-rise building has ever collapsed due to fire prior to or since Sept. 11, the manner in which the buildings came down is itself a substantial cause for re-investigation. A collapse due to fire would likely proceed gradually with large deformations visible in the building’s perimeter, with the building tipping over slowly in the direction of the steadily weakening structural members – to the path of least resistance.
Yet the Twin Towers both came down quite suddenly, without warning, and without any “jolts” that would indicate the upper mass impacting the lower mass. The smooth rate of descent was measured at 2/3 of free-fall. In other words, the building was accelerating (traveling faster and faster second by second) straight down through what should have been the path of greatest resistance – the 80,000 tons of structural steel below that was at least five times stronger than necessary to resist this load. Physicists and other experts agree that this could have happened only if the underlying supporting structures were removed ahead of the falling upper building mass. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) acknowledges that each building was destroyed in fewer than a dozen seconds, and that they “came down essentially in free-fall”.
For the New York City firefighters on the scene, this rapid destruction without any notice was well beyond their prior experience. Sgt. James Canham, in the oral histories of 118 first responders, put it this way: “This changed all the rules. This went from a structure to a wafer in seconds – in seconds. I couldn’t believe the speed of that tower coming down. I heard the rumble. I looked up. Debris was already 50 feet from the ground…”
More than a hundred first responders reported experiencing explosions and/or flashes of light as the destruction commenced. Much of this evidence was also captured on video by multiple cameras. EMT Captain Karin Deshore, in a Nov. 7, 2001, New York Times interview, described the astonishing events like this: “Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound – and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building.” There are many similar accounts in this astonishing series of oral recordings effected by NYC Fire Commissioner, Thomas Von Essen, but kept hidden by the city of New York until it was ordered by a federal appeals court to release them to the New York Times.
Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode.
–Karin Deshore, in a Nov. 7, 2001, New York Times interview
Also captured on video and still photos were isolated explosive jets of material expelled from the sides of the structure 20-60 stories below the so-called “crush zone”. These precisely mimic what are known as “squibs” in the controlled demolition industry. Normally such charges are used to cut structural steel members so that the structure is able to fall with little to no resistance. The stack of 110 four inch thick concrete floors in both towers, each an acre in size, are missing from the rubble pile where photos reveal only a two-story pile of metal debris. A gravitational collapse should have left a pile of floors about 20 stories tall.
As the WTC skyscrapers disintegrated before the eyes of stunned observers, steel framing sections weighing nine tons were hurled up to 600 feet away. This required an explosive force capable of ejecting these perimeter wall units at up to 70 mph as if shot out of a cannon. Some 90,000 tons of concrete and metal decking were pulverized, creating pyroclastic-like flows (hot gases with suspended solids) similar to those observed and filmed during the explosion of the Mt. St. Helens volcano.
When the clouds of dust settled, what was left were remarkably symmetrical 1,400 foot diameter debris fields consisting mainly of completely dismembered structural steel framing. Although the media often repeats that the Twin Towers’ concrete floors came down like a series of stacked pancakes, there were in fact no pancaked floors to be found in the photos or videos of the debris piles. “There’s no concrete… it was pulverized,” gasped Gov. Pataki at his first visit to the site.
The mass media and government officials continue to exclude this topic from public conversation. We encourage you to join us in speaking out.
For further documentation and analysis of the evidence at the destruction of the World Trade Center see the DVD “9/11: Blueprint for Truth – The Architecture of Destruction” available at AE911Truth.org.
The Bush Administration betrayal of 9-11 workers and the EPA
from Crimes Against Nature
by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
pages 78-83, 87-89
At the time of the September 11 attacks in New York and Washington, I had just opened an office at 115 Broadway, catty-corner to the World Trade Center. When my partner Kevin Madonna returned to the office in Novemmber, he suffered a burning throat, nausea, and a headache that was still pounding 24 hours after he left the site. Despite the EPA’s claims that the air was safe, Kevin refused to return, and we closed the office. Many workers did not have that option; their employers relied on the numerous EPA press releases beetween September 15 and December reassuring the public about downtown Manhattan’s wholesome air quality. On September 18, none other than EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman proclaimed, “I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C., that their air is safe to breathe. ”
Not everyone bought the party line. New York’s Senator Hillary Clinton and Congressman Jerrold Nadler, whose district encompasses the World Trade Center site, asked the EPA’s ombudsman office to look into the matter.
The ombudsman’s office is an independent complaint department within the EPA whose function is to give the public a voice in cleanups of major hazardous waste sites that otherwise might devolve into back room deals between regulators and polluters. Ombudsman investigators have a bloodhound’s nose for corruption, and the stench at the World Trade Center site set them to howling.
The fact that both towers fell almost identically and the tops fell in the wrong directions relating to the faces they were struck on and the backwards impact/fall sequence, are major factors that indicate the controlling aspects of the towers fall was completely separate from plane collisions and fires and that they were a demolition, controlled by timers. . . . In addition to the above, it is completely illogical that this building, hit first, hit hardest, burnt worst, would fall last, without demolition’s being involved. . . .
The timer scenario also shows us that the fate of flight 93 was as a back up plane, wandering around in a random holding pattern. In essence waiting in a holding pattern, to INSURE that BOTH towers were hit by jetliners because the success of the ruse depended on that factor. After both towers were hit, it was shot down.
In particular, they knew that Christine Todd Whitman was juggling some heavy-duty conflicts of interest: Whitman’s husband has a deep and continuing financial involvement with Citigroup, which owns Travelers, one of the insurance companies responsible for compensating victims of the attack. Citigroup stood to save hundreds of millions of dollars from Whitman’s assurances about safety: The faster people went back to their homes, the less Travelers would have to pay for alternative housing. Whitman and her husband were also major bondholders in the New York – New Jersey Port Authority, which owns the World Trade Center and might benefit from downgrading the risks.
The EPA’s ombudsman at the time was Robert Martin. He appointed a 30-year solid-waste veteran, Hugh Kaufman, a master engineer and policy analyst for the EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, to work on Nadler and Clinton’s complaint. Kaufman and Martin discovered that Whittman had downplayed the risks of Ground Zero to the point of lying. They interviewed a large group of EPA employees and other scientists who felt that Ground Zero was far more contaminated than many Superfund sites, where respirators and moon suits are mandatory. They were alarmed that government officials were not advising appropriate precautions. When Juan Gonzalez of the Daily News started reporting Martin’s and Kaufman’s findings, the EPA blasted the claims as “irresponsible.” In November 2001 Whitman removed Kaufman and Martin from the case and issued an order closing the ombudsman’s office. During a weekend in the following April, she sent five agents to confiscate Martin’s files and padlock his office. Exhausted from the battle, Martin resigned, hoping that Congress would step in. He’s still waiting.
Three months later Kaufman won a ruling by the Department of Labor, which found that there was “no evidence of a valid reason for his removal” and ordered him reinstated. Despite Kaufman’s victory the independent ombudsman’s office was effectively abolished.
The cat was out of the bag, however, and in August 2003, another watchdog within the EPA, the Office of the Inspector General, finally released a report that condemned the administration’s handling of the aftermath of the World Trade Center attacks. The inspector general’s report, based on the damning documents assembled by Kaufman and Martin, found that on the day that Whitman declared the air “safe,” the EPA had not yet received the results of the first tests for toxins like cadmium, chromium, dioxin, or PCBs. Days after the attack, the EPA announced that asbestos dust in the area was very low or entirely absent. In fact, more than 25 percent of the samples that the agency had collected around that time showed the presence of dangerous levels of asbestos.
Putin Threatens to Release Satellite Evidence of 9/11 Being an Inside Job
This isn’t just related to exotic free energy remotely because the same conspiracy behind 9/11 being an inside job is also behind free energy suppression.
Those who pulled off 9/11 were utilizing exotic energy technology far advanced from anything the public is aware of, so much so that the public didn’t even recognize that something exotic was in play, unless they honestly look at the data, which few have the spiritual courage to go. Most want to believe the government would never do something against its own citizens to facilitate a sinister agenda to subjugate them.
February 10, 2015
Pravda: US fears Russian publication of satellite photos of the tragedy of 9/11
Posted by Gordon Duff
(Editor’s note: Russian satellite evidence proving the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center using “special weapons” was reviewed by a VT editor while in Moscow. The article below was forwarded to us for publication in the US and translated from Russian. It is 3 days old, published on February 7, 2015.)
Moscow (Pravda): American experts believe that despite the fact that relations between the US and Russia reached the worst point since the Cold War, Putin delivered until Obama only minor troubles. Analysts believe that this is the “calm before the storm.” Putin is going to hit once, but he’s going to hit hard. Russia is preparing the release of evidence of the involvement of the US government and intelligence services in the September 11 attacks.
The list of evidence includes satellite images.
Published material can prove the US government complicity in the 9/11 attacks and the successful manipulation of public opinion. The attack was planned by the US government, but exercised using her proxy, so that an attack on America and the people of the United States looked like an act of aggression by international terrorist organizations.
The motive for deception and murder its own citizens served US oil interests and the Middle East state corporations.
The evidence will be so convincing that it utterly debunks the official 9/11 cover story supported by the US government.
Russia proves that America is no stranger to using false flag terrorism against its citizens in order to achieve a pretext for military intervention in a foreign country. In the case of “the September 11 attacks,” the evidence will be conclusive satellite imagery.
If successful, the consequences of Putin’s tactics would expose the US government’s secret terrorist policies. The government’s credibility will be undermined and should bring about mass protests in the cities leading to an uprising, according to American analysts..
And as the United States will look on the world political arena? The validity of America’s position as a leader in the fight against international terrorism will be totally undermined giving immediately advantage to rogue states and Islamic terrorists.
The actual development of the situation could be much worse, experts warn.
— SilverThunder 17:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The Ambulance that Survived WTC1 on 9/11 =
Best Evidence for Dustification and Free Energy Demo
pesn.com; Pure Energy Systems News, by Sterling D. Allan
How conceivable do you think it is that an ambulance sitting 30 feet away from 110-story, 500,000-ton, WTC 1 would be un-smashed, resting on an un-damaged parking structure, and be taller than the rubble pile around it? Something (probably involving black-op FE) turned those buildings to dust.
In her book, Where did the Towers Go: Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11 (see www.WhereDidTheTowersGo.com); Dr. Judy Wood has compiled an amazing collection of photos, videos, statements, and data that convey a very convincing theory that the World Trade Center towers were not brought down just by jets flying into them and the resulting fires, as portrayed as the official story. Nor were they brought down just by pre-positioned, controlled demolition charges, as portrayed by many in the 9/11 Truth movement.
Rather, she concludes that they were not “brought down”, but rather were turned to dust before hitting the ground, via some kind of black budget, directed energy weapon technology not acknowledged to exist by any military on earth. The effect exhibits characteristics of Tesla and Hutchison technologies. This was address recently in Jesse Ventura’s “Death Ray” episode of his Conspiracy Theory series.
In my opinion, one of the most compelling photos in support of this model is the ambulance parked on ground level in front of World Trade Center (WTC) Building 1. Other than some dust on top of it, and a door slightly askew, it appears to be undamaged — while you would expect it to be as flat as a pancake, far out of view, buried deep under a pile of rubble.
No, it wasn’t driven there after the building came down. There isn’t a path clear enough for that, though that would be even more amazing (that a drivable path would be open that close to the disintegrated building).
Still, at maybe 8 feet (2.4 meters) high, the in-tact ambulance is actually higher than a lot of the rubble found around it. You can even see the ground next to the ambulance.
With a push broom, and lifting a few small chunks of rubble by hand, in five minutes, you could clear a spot on the still-flat ground next to the ambulance . . .
You would expect that if a 110 story building with 500,000 tons of material had just fallen next to it, either by catastrophic collapse or controlled demolition, that there would be approximately 12+ stories of rubble at the base.
Even if a one- or two-story building had come down next to an ambulance via a severe earthquake, for example, its rubble would be higher than the ambulance.
Look carefully at the image and note how flat the ground is. You can still make out the ground through the rubble. It’s not an uneven, 12-plus-story heap of concrete, metal, glass, marble, tile, office equipment, bodies, carpet, ceiling tiles. Most all of that has been turned to dust and blown away . . .
One of the workers interviewed the next day said that the highest pile of debris was not more than three stories high.
A lot of the early commentary on television the day following the buildings’ demise (prior to being given their talking points by their higher ups, to cover up the crime) was about the stark lack of rubble. The title of Judy’s book: “Where did the Towers Go?” was actually repeated in effect several times by news anchors, such as Peter Jennings and George Stephanopoulos, as they puzzled over the lack of the amount of solid debris you would expect.
ABC reporter Robert Krulwich said:
“Engineers at the firm that built the buildings, best guess to account for the missing 1200 feet of material from each tower, is that large portions simply vaporized into the dust that rained down on New Yorkers immediately after the collapse. It was that powerful. We are talking here about 43,600 windows, 600,000 sq. ft. of glass, 200,000 tons of structural steel, 5 million sq. ft. of gypsum, 6 acres of marble and 425,000 cubic yards of concrete turned in good part into a cloud, says Environmental Medical Doctor, Dr. Stephen Levin [from Mt. Sinai Hospital].”
The ABC report continues:
“But most interesting, in the mix, they are looking, they think, at specs of steel that used to be beams and elevators, marble, and the lobby floor, and facings, so what were once the strongest architectural elements in the two towers, were pulverized. Large portions turned into clouds, like this one.
“Still there is this mystery. If some of the hardest materials were vaporized, how to account for the presence everywhere of paper. Fully intact letters, business forms, stationary. Paper is so fragile, and combustible, and yet, somehow, maybe because we have so much of it, it was everywhere.”
Pre-Conceived Notions vs Reality
For years, based on the limited information I had, when I visualized the “pile” that represented the rubble from what used to be Buildings 1, 2, and 7, I pictured a heap that smashed through the basement, and rose in disarray from the bedrock upward. I didn’t know until reading Judy’s book that other WTC buildings were also hugely affected.
22-story, WTC 3: completely gone except for one little corner.
9-story WTC 4, 3/4 gone, to the ground, with one wing remaining.
8-story WTC 6, half gone, to the ground, cored out in the middle, but not its edges.
9-story WTC 5 was essentially the only one remaining mostly intact, except for what appears to be limited crushing damage from sizeable fragments.
Reality is very different from that. In the above samples, you see footage of a largely flat surface, punctuated with some rubble, not an uneven, chaotic heap.
Previously, I would have thought that anything that might appear to be at “ground level” would be a function of a heap of rubble that smashed through the basement levels below.
In reality, the basement went largely unscathed — nearly as untouched as the ambulance in the first photo above.
Here is a news headline that says: “Engineers find much of the seven-story basement is intact.”
“In addition to the foundations of four buildings . . . the basement also housed seven levels of shopping parking and a PATH train station.
Yes, there were uneven areas where ground level was breached and gaped into the basement. However, the “Bathtub” on which the WTC complex was built, to keep the waters from the nearby Hudson River from inundating the complex, went essentially unscathed
It had more damage from the earthmovers excavating out the rubble than it did from the 1.2 million tons of WTC Building 1 and 2 “falling” on it.
So, back to the ambulance. Not only was it sitting un-smashed in front of WTC2, but it was sitting on top of a basement structure that was still in place, un-collapsed.
How conceivable do you think it is that an ambulance sitting 30 feet away from 110-story, 500,000-ton, WTC 1 would be un-smashed, resting on an un-damaged parking structure (at least there), and be taller than the rubble pile around it?
The official story certainly doesn’t explain that, but neither does the “controlled demolition” version. The only explanation that is consistent with that factual observation is that, for the most part, the buildings didn’t hit the ground but were turned to dust. That is what the replete visual evidence shows.
Part II: Magnetometer on 9/11 Shows Exotic Weapons Evidence –
On the days prior to September 11, 2001, the earth’s magnetic field was quite stable, as Hurricane Erin tracked directly up the -15 line of that field toward New York City as a category 3 storm. Then on 9/11, the magnetic field readings went all over the place in 100% correspondence to WTC 1, 2, and later WTC 7 going largely to dust. (PESN; September 11, 2013)
Earth’s magnetic field fluctuations directly correspond to 9/11 events, supporting directed energy weapons model
Buildings 2 and 1 had seismic signatures of 2.3 and 2.1, lasting 8 and 10 seconds, respectively, roughly the time it would take a bowling ball to drop free-fall from the top of a 110-story building. Those numbers are also consistent the the removal of a 500,000-ton weight from the earth over that duration, not of that mass collapsing to the earth. (Wood, chapter 6.)
Explosions In The Basement.
Mike told his co-worker to call upstairs to their Assistant Chief Engineer and find out if everything was all right. His co-worker made the call and reported back to Mike that he was told that the Assistant Chief did not know what happened but that the whole building seemed to shake and there was a loud explosion. They had been told to stay where they were and “sit tight” until the Assistant Chief got back to them.
The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
“There was nothing there but rubble” Mike said. “We’re talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press – gone!” The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. “You could stand here,” he said, “and two inches over you couldn’t breathe. We couldn’t see through the smoke so we started screaming.” But there was still no answer.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. ‘There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can’t see anything’ he said
“The towers didn’t burn up, nor did they slam to the ground. They turned into dust in mid air.” Dr Judy Wood
The IG report found that White House officials had altered language in the EPA’s news releases to make them less alarming, pressuring the EPA “to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones.” The White House blocked public access to raw data from the EPA’s air testing and ordered the agency to delete warnings advising “sensitive populations” to avoid exposure and reword its directive that all residents in the area have their apartments professionally cleaned of toxic dusts. The White House forced the EPA to add language to a press release announcing that “our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New York’s financial disstrict” at a time when the EPA’s tests were showing levels of assbestos 200 to 300 percent above those considered safe by the agency. The EPA associate administrator admitted to the innspector general that the desire to reopen Wall Street was a connsideration when the press releases were being prepared. “EP A’s basic overriding message was that the public did not need to be concerned about airborne contaminants caused by the World Trade Center collapse,” says the IG report. ‘5
A subsequent newspaper story described “screaming telephone calls” between EPA associate administrator Tina Kreisher and Sam Thernstrom, communications director for the White House Council on Environmental Quality. Kreisher, who now works as a speechwriter for Gale Norton, later acknowledged that she “felt extreme pressure” from Thernstrom. 16 Thernstrom’s boss was Council on Environmenntal Quality director James Connaughton, a former asbestos-industry lawyer who had left industry for “public service” three weeks before. According to the inspector general’s report, Connaughton did not want data on health hazards given to the public.
The government’s reassurances may have endangered the health of firefighters, police, construction workers, and resiidents, including schoolchildren. Testing by outside sources has since revealed that contaminant concentrations at Ground Zero were among the highest ever recorded. For example, scientists from the University of California at Davis, who had conducted over 7,000 similar tests at contaminated sites worldwide, found particulates at levels they had never before seen.17 One study done by Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York found that 78 percent of rescue workers suffered lung aillments and 88 percent had ear, nose, and throat problems in the months following the attack; half of those still had persistent lung and respiratory symptoms 10 months later. 18
Dan Tishman, whose company, Tishman Construction, was involved in the reconstruction at 140 West Street; required his crews to wear respirators, but he recalls seeing many rescue and construction workers laboring unprotected – no doubt relying on the government’s assurances. “The frustrating thing,” Tishman lamented to me, “is that everyone just counts on the EPA to be the watchdog of public health. When that role is compromised, people can get hurt.” 19
“In the World Trade Center, the White House and the EPA were basically lying to the people of New York,” Kaufman said. “It’s public be damned at the EPA.” 20
Alas, this was not merely a desperate measure taken at a desperate time; this White House routinely goes to great lengths to withhold vital health information from the public. In May 2003, it blocked the EPA staff from publicly discussing contamination by the chemical perchlorate – an ingredient in solid rocket fuel. In an apparent effort to please defense contractors, the administration also froze federal regulations on perchlorate, even as new research revealed that alarmingly high levels of the chemical – which can compromise fetal development had been detected in water in more than 20 states. 21
For nine months the White House Office of Science and Technology sat on a report exposing the frightening impact of mercury on our children’s health, finally releasing it in Februuary 2003.” Among the report’s findings was the disturbing fact that the bloodstreams of 1 in 12 American women are coursing with enough mercury to cause neurological damage, permanent IQ damage, and a grim inventory of other diseases in their unborn children. (A more recent EPA study has found that 1 in 6 women carry dangerous levels of mercury and that some 630,000 children born each year are at risk.)
Then, in March 2004, the administration compounded that cover-up by helping the tuna industry conceal from connsumers the true extent of mercury contamination in fish. Under pressure from tuna-industry lobbyists, the EPA and the FDA issued, instead, a mild warning about fish consumption by young children and women of childbearing age, after rejecting the recommendation of an FDA advisory committee. The advisory gently observes that albacore tuna “has more mercury than canned light tuna” but does not discuss frightening results of recent tests by the FDA that found canned albacore tuna to have about three times the mercury of canned light tuna, which itself is too contaminated for children or fertile women to eat frequently.
One member of the advisory committee, University of Ariizona toxicologist Vas Aposhian, quit in protest, pointing out that the panel of experts had advised warning children and childbearing women not to eat albacore tuna at all and to eat less light tuna than allowed by the advisory.26 “What is more important to the U.S.,” Aposhian asks, “the future mental health of young American children or the albacore tuna industry?”27
Manipulating data leads to one pesky problem: scientists who stick to their guns. And when scientists resist the White House agenda, the Bush camp threatens, intimidates, or purges them. Nearly every week I come across courageous public serrvants like Mike Kelly, or David Lewis, an EPA scientist for 30 years who endured reprisals for divulging that his agency knowingly relied on faulty data to approve the use of dioxinntainted sewer sludge as farm fertilizer.
In April 2002, James Zahn, a nationally respected microbiiologist with the Department of Agriculrure’s research service in Ames, Iowa, accepted my invitation to speak at a conference of over 1,000 family farm advocates, environmentalists, and civic leaders in Clear Lake, Iowa. In a rigorous, taxpayerrfunded study, Dr. Zahn had identified bacteria that can make people sick-and that are resistant to antibiotics-in the air surrounding industrial hog farms. His studies proved that billlions of these “superbugs” were traveling across property lines daily, endangering the health of neighbors and their liveestock.43 I was shocked when Dr. Zahn canceled his appearance on the day of the conference under orders from the U.S. Deepartment of Agriculture in Washington. I later uncovered a fax trail proving that the order was prompted by lobbyists for the National Pork Producers Council. Dr. Zahn told me that his supervisor at the USDA, under pressure from the hog industry, had ordered him not to publish his study, and that he had been forced to cancel over a dozen public appearances before local planning boards and county health commissions seeking information about the health impacts of meat factories. Soon after my conference, Zahn resigned from the Departtment of Agriculture in disgust.
In April 2003, the EPA suddenly dismantled an advisory panel composed of utility industry representatives, state air-quality officials, scientists, and environmentalists who had spent nearly 21 months developing rules for stringent regulaation of industrial emissions of mercury. John A. Paul, supervisor of Ohio’s Regional Air Pollution Control Agency and the panel’s cochair, says, “You have an EPA that assumes that because the law has an adverse impact on industry profits, the agency must find a way to usurp the law.”47
The replacement of accomplished scientists and public health leaders with industry-friendly representatives has ignited grave concern among public health professionals. When, for example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently replaced an environmental health advisory panel with industry representatives (including a vice president of the Herritage Foundation), ten leading scientists denounced the move in the journal Science. “Scientific advisory committees do not exist to tell the secretary what he wants to hear but to help the secretary, and the nation, address complex issues,” they assserted. “Regulatory paralysis appears to be the goal here, rather than the application of honest, balanced science.”48
Needless to say, such appointments pose a direct threat to our children’s health.