Dear Dr. Michael Corbat, CEO of Citigroup, Dear Dr. James Forese, President of Citigroup, Dear members of the Board of Directors and the Executive board of Citigroup, Dear all,
I respectfully request Citigroup and anyone who publicly declare a mission of enabling growth and progress not to suppress the information on innovations beneficial to humanity using the improper accusation of “Harassment”, but support my inventions and address inconsistencies in science, implemented by influential scientists handling taxpayers and donation money, by firstly asking particle physics experts Andrew Lankford, Joel Butler and Nadia Pastrone, appointed by CERN Director General on February 2, 2017 to organize a scientific discussion/review of my 3D-Flow OPRA invention at CERN similar to the one organized for my previous 3D-Flow invention at Fermilab in 1993.
This is because 59 quotes from reputable industries prove the feasibility of my 3D-Flow OPRA invention replacing 4,000 electronic boards of CERN-CMS experiments (and boards of several other experiments at CERN) with 9 x 3D-Flow OPRA boards that would provide a staggering performance improvement at one thousandth the cost of the CMS system. As well as following a similar review of my 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) invention that should be organized by funding agencies such as NIH, NCI, etc., in lieu of funding the $15.5 million Explorer project which is less efficient, cannot save many lives and is over ten times more expensive than the 3D-CBS. My 3D-CBS invention can save over 50% of those who would undergo an effective 3D-CBS examination covering all organs of the body, detecting cancer at an early, curable stage, and requiring 1% of the radiation of current PET, at a lower examination cost, replacing several separate screening procedures such as mammograms, PAP-tests, colonoscopies, and PSAs, etc., more cost effectively.
Types of actions suppressing innovations to save lives and taxpayers’ money
Please consider science rather than relying only on “good luck” for you, your dear ones and your grandchildren not becoming premature victims of cancer.
On March 29, 2017, in a 50-minute phone call where I tried to explain the benefits of my invention to Citigroup agent Thomas, his dear ones and his grandchildren, Thomas concluded with actions suppressing my inventions and wishing me good luck without realizing that he was the one who needed “good luck” because he was not interested in being informed and supporting an advancement in science that would save over 50% of cancer deaths and reduce his taxpayer costs.
On April 3rd, 2017, I received a letter dated March 28, 2017 from the office of the president and CEO of Citigroup stating the same thing, suppressing inventions with a warning that any comment related to my medical research “…may be viewed as harassment”. (During the past six months I have received over 600 phone calls to my cell and home phone from Citigroup, including weekends. [sic] What should these actions be called? I have sent approximately 30 emails, 6 fax of more than 40 page each, 5 certified letters with more than 40 pages each explaining the benefits of my invention to everyone, including Citigroup employees and I have not received any comment or questions for clarifications. In my letters and email I have addressed your statements over the phone and in your letters).
I had received the same warning in a previous letter on August 31, 2016, and a threat over the phone by Ms. Jodi Lang from the office of the president to involve Citigroup Security. I immediately wrote Citigroup Security asking what was the wrong doing, referred to by Ms. Lang, in informing her and her colleagues at Citigroup about the benefits of my inventions, and asking what would be the punishment if I was to continue. I am still waiting for a reply from Citigroup Security about the punishments I would face.
Rather than actions suppressing innovations, the correct way to address inconsistencies in science, implemented by influential scientists handling taxpayers and donation money, is firstly that particle physics experts Andrew Lankford, Joel Butler and Nadia Pastrone, appointed by CERN Director General to organize a scientific discussion/review of my 3D-Flow OPRA invention at CERN, should take action swiftly. This is because 59 quotes from reputable industries prove the feasibility of my 3D-Flow OPRA invention replacing 4,000 electronic boards of CERN-CMS experiments (and boards of several other experiments at CERN) with 9 x 3D-Flow OPRA boards that would provide a staggering performance improvement at one thousandth the cost of the CMS system. As well as following a similar review of my 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) invention that should be organized by funding agencies such as NIH, NCI, etc., in lieu of funding the $15.5 million Explorer project which is less efficient, cannot save many lives and is over ten times more expensive than the 3D-CBS.
My 3D-CBS invention can save over 50% of those who would undergo an effective 3D-CBS examination covering all organs of the body, detecting cancer at an early, curable stage, and requiring 1% of the radiation of current PET, at a lower examination cost, replacing several separate screening procedures such as mammograms, PAP-tests, colonoscopies, and PSAs, etc., more cost effectively.
I trusted that if I had the opportunity to explain and compare my innovations with experts in the field, analytical and experimental results would convince the most skeptical scientist.
I could not anticipate that it would take so many months, even years, to have this public scientific discussion with my peers and that my scientific articles and presentations to conferences would have been boycotted since 1999.
I then spent a lot of my own money to attend conferences to explain my inventions to the chairmen and to the presidents of IEEE-NPSS, the world’s largest – 400,000-member – technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. However, no one could reverse the non-scientific rejection of my papers and funding because my opponents hid behind the anonymous peer-review system.
I could answer the objections from my opponents in a public scientific discussion at CERN that is spending taxpayer money on similar instrumentation, however Lankford, Butler and Pastrone seem to want to protect and cover up the mistakes of their colleagues.
As CERN public trust survived the mistakes of the scientists who claimed in 2011 to be measuring neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light, it will also survive other mistakes from some scientists who wasted taxpayer money and suppressed innovations. In fact, by implementing transparency in science, scientists who made mistakes will pay with their resignations as happened with the neutrino’s gaffe and CERN will gain more public trust rather than continuing to cover up mistakes of colleagues.
My compassion for the 8.2 million people who are dying every year from cancer, while knowing that millions could have been saved with my invention, has induced me to work with dedication for many years with zero income, also using my personal savings and $9,000 of my personal credit line with Citigroup to attend conferences and inform scientists in the field, etc. Since January 2016, Citigroup has charged me $4,692.40 in fees and interests. After I paid $3,700.48 between January and September 2016, Citigroup has extorted an additional $1,324.08 in fees and interest with over 600 phone calls made since November 2016. Now Citigroup has sent an invoice, in April 2017, for an additional $614, also increasing the debt by $134, even though no expenses have been charged to the card since September 2016. It is outrageous that no one at Citigroup understands that my inventions are benefitting them, that I am working to make a better future for them, their loved ones and grandchildren; instead of paying me for my hard work, they are charging me $4,692.40 in interests and fees and increasing my debt, during last month, by $134. When will this extortion end? Gen. 3, 19 states: “By the sweat of your face will you earn your food, until you return to the ground, as you were taken from it.” Where is Citigroup’s employees’ sweat for this $4,692.40? I have thousands of pages proving my hard work during the past years including hours of explaining the benefits of my inventions to Citigroup employees.
As the analysis of the Citigroup contingent situation in 2008 convinced the government to shoulder Citigroup’s losses and inject new capital of $306 billion, it would be appropriate for Citigroup to evaluate the contingent situation of its long-time suppression of my inventions and its refusal to respond to the objections from my opponents and to support my credit line with zero interest and fees until decision makers implement transparency in science to make the scientific truth for the benefit of humanity emerge.
This contingent case is not induced by economical losses in investment but is motivated by my compassion for cancer patients who die needlessly from cancer while millions of them could be saved with my inventions. This is dealing with thousands of dollars and not billions, similar to the situation described in Mt. 24-28 where a person who was forgiven a debt of 10,000 denarii did not forgive his fellow who owed him 100 denarii and “…seizing him by the throat, he said, ‘Pay what you owe’…” Considering that Citigroup Citi Treasury and Trade Solutions (TTS) intermediates more than $3 trillion in global transactions daily, has over $13 trillion assets under custody, about $377 billion in average liability balances, serves 99% of the world’s Fortune 100 companies and ~85% of the world’s Fortune 500 companies, the few thousand dollars would be a small percentage of the fees and interest charged on the $3 trillion daily transactions and would provide vital support to transparency in science that is beneficial to humanity.
Citigroup’s problems in understanding how my inventions could benefit them, their loved ones and grandchildren are not limited to them but are the problems of many people, including investigative journalists and decision makers in the field who have delayed for months and years the organization of the scientific discussion and review of my inventions that recently, on February 2, 2017, were also requested by CERN’s Director General. I spent several hours with concerned citizens Diana D’Amari and Darrel Johnson in DeSoto, Texas and answered their questions, which were typical of those of any taxpayers wanting the best service for their tax dollars.
To accelerate the transfer of these inventions to the bed of the patient and to save hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, I have provided these questions/answers to journalist Joshua C. Johnson from FDN, Focus Daily News of DeSoto, Texas, where I have been known for my scientific activity since I moved here in 1991 to join the Superconducting Super Collider project, and to the director and journalist, Mario Banchio of the weekly newspaper Corriere di Saluzzo in Italy in the area where I was born and where everyone has known of my activities for more than 50 years.
Both journalists, after kindly writing several articles in the paper copy of their newspapers, which reach only a small area, have started a weekly series in their online versions, reporting in a form understandable to their readers and enlightening the text with titles and figures. They request from me the questions and answers from Diana D’Amari and Darrel Johnson (and eventually from other readers) regarding my inventions and why I am not being funded and why they cannot receive benefits.
Journalists have better communication skills and can reach a wider audience than myself; therefore I provide the Q&A to the website http://blog.u2ec.org/wordpress/?p=1972 and I trusts that journalists from larger newspapers and investigative journalists will do the same thing, informing their readers taking the Q&A, adding titles, and asking myself for additional figures and questions to improve his explanation.
Because many people have been asking me to inform investigative journalists and major newspapers, I feel obliged to contact investigative journalists and ask them what information I should share with the public in the event they are not interested in informing the public about this suppression of my inventions that can advance science and save hundreds of millions of dollars in the biggest and most expensive experiment in the history of the planet and effectively reduce over 50% the mortality rate of the most deadly and costly calamity, cancer.
It would be appropriate for an investigative journalist to ask Mr. Joe Biden, head of the Cancer moonshot project who received $1.8 billion to eradicate cancer, Senator Jane Nelson who raised $3 billion to eradicate cancer and all other funding agencies, why they do not invite me to explain and compare, at the presence of authors of other projects, the higher potential of my inventions to save lives and reduce costs compared to other projects.
One common response by several investigative journalists that I contacted is that they are afraid of addressing the issue because they do not feel as knowledgeable in particle detection as a scientist from CERN. However, this is not the role and task required by an investigative journalist. I am reporting facts and documents that show violation of the rules of funding agencies, of abuse of power of some of their employees, violation of laws, violation of ethical conduct of a scientist who receives the public trust and is not acting in the interest of the public, etc. Investigative journalists can help the public interest just by asking questions of influential scientists who are handling taxpayers’ money and letting them be judged by their own answers.
I trust that you will react to any attempt to silence the dissemination of information of innovations beneficial to mankind from being examined, not just by the two letters from Citigroup dated August 31, 2017 and March 28, 2017, but by anyone who would attempt to intimidate with the accusation of “harassment”.
React strongly to the false accusation of “harassment” by taking action in informing everyone you know about innovations that are being suppressed for no scientific reason, that have been recognized as valuable by a formal, official scientific review by academia, industries and research centers and endorsed by top experts in the field who now seem to protect and cover up the mistakes of their colleagues.
This day of Good Friday is a moment when we should all reflect and have some compassion for the people who are needlessly suffering because innovations beneficial to them have been suppressed for many years and for the people who are struggling financially and see their tax money wasted while hundreds of millions of dollars could be saved.
Take action by forwarding this document to all your friends and people that you know who will fight for justice, sign the petition and support this cause as much as you can.
I trust to receive a letter from Dr. Corbat and Dr. Forese supporting my inventions for the benefit of all of us and help to address issues scientifically with the appropriate experts at CERN, NIH, NCI, and all those who raise funds to eradicate cancer such as Mr. Joe Biden, head of the Cancer moonshot project who received $1.8 billion to eradicate cancer, Texas State Senator Jane Nelson who raised $3 billion to eradicate cancer and all other funding agencies, asking them to invite me to explain and compare, at the presence of authors of other projects, the higher potential of my inventions to save lives and reduce costs compared to other projects.
Looking forward to receive your positive response or questions to clarify aspects of my inventions that you think might not be more advantageous in saving money and lives compared to other projects.
Message sent to:
From: United To End Cancer [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 11:56 PM
To: ‘James.A.Forese@citi.com’ <James.A.Forese@citi.com>; ‘Michael.L.Corbat@citi.com’ <Michael.L.Corbat@citi.com>; ‘Alberto.J.Verme@citi.com’ <Alberto.J.Verme@citi.com>; ‘Richard.Evans@citi.com’ <Richard.Evans@citi.com>; ‘Mary.McDowell@citi.com’ <Mary.McDowell@citi.com>; ‘Vikram.Pandit@citi.com’ <Vikram.Pandit@citi.com>; ‘Jane.Fraser@citi.com’ <Jane.Fraser@citi.com>; ‘John.C.Gerspach@citi.com’ <John.C.Gerspach@citi.com>; ‘Deepak.Sharma@citi.com’ <Deepak.Sharma@citi.com>; ‘Stephen.Volk@citi.com’ <Stephen.Volk@citi.com>; ‘Paco.Ybarra@citi.com’ <Paco.Ybarra@citi.com>; ‘Stephen.Bird@citi.com’ <Stephen.Bird@citi.com>; ‘Don.Callahan@citi.com’ <Don.Callahan@citi.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘citibusinessThankYou@info.citibank.com’ <citibusinessThankYou@info.citibank.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘citibusinessThankYou@info.citibank.com’ <citibusinessThankYou@info.citibank.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>
Cc: ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘President@rockfound.org’ <President@rockfound.org>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘The.Secretary@hq.doe.gov’ <The.Secretary@hq.doe.gov>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘Jim.Siegrist@science.doe.gov’ <Jim.Siegrist@science.doe.gov>; ‘IGHOTLINE@hq.doe.gov’ <IGHOTLINE@hq.doe.gov>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘Collinsf@od.nih.gov’ <Collinsf@od.nih.gov>; ‘Gretchen.Wood@nih.gov’ <Gretchen.Wood@nih.gov>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘Michael.Lauer@nih.gov’ <Michael.Lauer@nih.gov>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘LowyD@mail.nih.gov’ <LowyD@mail.nih.gov>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ’firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘Jonathan.Ungoed-Thomas@Sunday-Times.co.uk’ <Jonathan.Ungoed-Thomas@Sunday-Times.co.uk>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘Ben.Spencer@dailymail.co.uk’ <Ben.Spencer@dailymail.co.uk>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ’firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ <email@example.com>; ‘Crosetto Foundation for the Reduction of Cancer Deaths’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘Alberto Nerazzini’ <email@example.com>; ‘Red. Report’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: I respectfully request Citigroup and anyone who publicly declare a mission of enabling growth and progress not to suppress the information on innovations beneficial to humanity using the improper accusation of “Harassment”