Open Letter To:
HM King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden
AND
Nobel Foundation Directors & Members:
CC: as per addressees & general
From: Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
November 23, 2016
Re: 2016 Nobel Prizes, Physics & Economics – defective theories wrongly awarded NP prizes – systemic & systematic dishonesty within Karolinska Institute, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Nobel Foundation.
HM King Carl actively participating in presenting prizes for Economic WMDs → aiding&abetting corpOrgCrime -> Economy Terrorism → a Terrorist
Your Majesty
I once again draw your attention to my long-standing & ongoing R&D proofs that disproves centuries-old Physics & Economics theories (www.cdadd.com, ) Linked In Chris Addington -> Opticks (wrongly attributed to Newton) are wrong hence e≠mc2; & various other defective theories to which you have been regularly kept informed
Academic Institutions globally, including Karolinska Institute, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Nobel Foundation, are purposefully promoting grossly defective theories such that corporates are able to hide fraudulent scams behind a veneer of false respectability → corporate Organised Crime → aggregating to Economy Terrorism.
Your Majesty has been long informed of these realities by me – yet you continue to actively present Nobel Prizes to defective 'science' theories - consequently it can only be construed that you are not simply an unwitting passive Terrorist – but a fully-conscious active Terrorist.
Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
Open Letter To:
HM King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden
AND
Nobel Foundation Directors & Members:
Chairman Dr Marcus Storch - Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Deputy Chairman, Gunnar Öquist, Professor, Secretary General of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Members
Sohlman, Michael, Executive Director
Engdahl, Horace, Professor, Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy
Jörnvall, Hans, Professor, Secretary of the Nobel Assembly and of the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine at Karolinska Institutet
Wallenberg, Jacob, Chairman of the Board of Investor AB
Mjøs, Ole D., Professor Dr. Med, University of Tromsø
Deputy Members
Gräslund, Astrid, Professor in Biophysics, Secretary of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry
Sundqvist, Bo, Professor and President, Uppsala University, Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
CC: as per addressees & general
From: Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
November 18, 2014
Re:
More evidence of defective science wrongly awarded Nobel Prizes – a need for distancing from & review of past NP Awards
Snell's Law – further & singular proof of opticks errors
PS: Channel 5, Twin Towers - The Missing Evidence, Monday November 3, 2014:
Your Majesty
Recent appalling incidences of fundamentalists/extremists beheading captives have had substantial media coverage, including that of pleas from respective family members for mercy from the fundamentalist captors to their captives.
These pleas for mercy have fallen on deaf ears.
I have regularly kept the Nobel Foundation, Swedish Academy of Sciences & Academia in general, informed of concrete evidence that disproves Newton's Opticks & disproves other sciences including by Einstein & Hubble, and that proves numerous Nobel Prize winning Physics & Economics models are defective.
I have submitted pleas for a review of past Nobel Prize Awards and for current Awards to also be reviewed.
These pleas have fallen on deaf ears.
It is clear that the grossly defective science models awarded NP prizes are largely causal of gross socio-economic catastrophes that cause global disparities, frustrations, and anger that leads to the kind of fundamentalist/extremist violence we have been witnessing.
We cannot expect those fundamentalists angered to show mercy if we do not likewise display similar qualities with the fundamentally defective science that is causing the gross disparities which generates that anger & violence.
The ostracising of Vladimir Putin by the other G20 leasers at the Leader's Summit in Australia belies the reality that both Putin and the remaining G19 leaders are all wrong, but in different directions – they are all wrong because the underlying sciences, upon which their policies are based, are wrong – the science is wrong because Nobel Prizes are being awarded to wrong science.
I therefore once again respectfully request Your Majesty to fully distance yourself from the Nobel Prize Awards until such time as a full & proper transparent review of the various grossly defective economics & physics models wrongly awarded Nobel Prizes has been completed & reasonable Governance instilled therein, and all as intended by Alfred Nobel.
This request merely seeks to disempower, NOT behead, the heads that are distorting science.
_________
There are further proofs that Newton's Opticks, as well as the attribution of frequency to light, are both wrong:
Classical observations & experiments of Snell's law state that light transmitted through a glass cube causes light to be 'refracted' (appear bent) – experimentation reveals that the 'refraction' angle is non-proportional to the incident angle; that the ratio of the sines of incident to refracted angle for any two mediums is a constant ratio; that the emergent light beam is parallel to the incident light beam.
All of this can be verified by observation & experiment and is classical school/undergraduate physics.
But, all this does not prove that frequency is attributable to light – in fact the opposite is the case; vis: Snell's law CONCRETELY proves that frequency cannot be attributable to light.
Consider:
A regular glass cube is homogeneous (we can confirm this by observing that regular features are undistorted), hence the glass has linear and proportional properties i.e. we observe regular shapes through the glass & without the glass.
Scientists argue that the rainbow patterns 'split' out from white light by a prism, that the colours are a frequency spectrum and that the light is bent according to the different frequencies; that any light colour is a fixed constant frequency within that frequency spectrum, and each frequency is bent to a different but constant angle, hence the frequency spectrum is linear and is proportional relative to the glass cube.
Therefore, for any linear & proportional system experiencing a linear & proportional input, the throughput light AND the output light will both also be proportional.
BUT, we observe from Snell's experiments & law that the refracted throughput light is NON-PROPORTIONAL, i.e. the 'refracted' ray internal-angle to the cube does NOT change proportionally to the incident-angle of light at the glass cube surface; and since we can readily observe that the glass is homogeneous hence produces proportionality, it can only mean that the light itself is acting NON-PROPORTIONALLY, hence, again, this contradicts the historical claim of frequency attribution, hence light cannot have frequency attribution.
Also, for a claimed fixed constant frequency, for each colour, producing a constant bend ('refraction') it would mean that light would be bent proportionally but with constant 'refraction' offset – which would still yield a proportional response to incidence-angle, which means that the sines ratio would not be a constant – i.e. again, a contradiction if we accept frequency attribution. Example: assume a colour 'refracts' to an angle of say 5 degrees, the ratio of incident to 'refracted' yields: sin 0/sin (0+5) which does not produce the same ratio as, for e.g., sin 45/sin(45+5) –> therefore frequency attribution does not produce a constant ratio, hence light colours cannot be frequency related pertaining to a particular 'refracted' angle.
And, as previously explained, if colours of different frequencies bent at different angles then coloured objects would appear distorted when viewed through glass, even our eyes.
Further: as I have demonstrated: light & energy are transmitted through transmission lobes (as measured with e.g. radio/radar transmissions), a main forward lobe & two sets of twin side-band lobes; these are discrete lobes having symmetry but non-proportionality - it follows that the reason we see non-proportional responses in Snell's experiments is because of the non-proportional side-band lobes of the transmission phenomena that has been realised (through experimentation & measurement)
Further explanation on this dynamic will be dealt with in a separate paper, the purpose herein being to draw attention to the gross errors with previous & current Nobel Prize winning physics & economics models – but, it is clear that light is not 'refracted' but that a complex dynamic of decreasing side-band transmission through the glass coupled with partial & increasing (with increasing incident angle) subtraction of the side-bands of the incident ray due to reflection of the incident ray on the glass surface, and until total reflection occurs.
Again, it follows that Edwin Hubble was wrong to use frequency & Doppler to claim receding stars, which wrongly 'proved' Einstein's Energy (& later Relativity) theories → and wrongly yielded: expanding universe (alternative interpretation of Hubble's observations can explain why we see stars as we do, and as Hubble did but wrongly interpreted, but this is left for schoolchildren to solve), hence Einstein was wrong, and Higgs Bosun is also wrong, and much/most/all of CERN's claims are also wrong.
It cannot be ruled out that with all the long-running dishonesties & deceptions that CERN are not simply producing computer generated graphics to portray their claimed proton collisions – for, since an ether MUST exist, there being no adequate proof of non-ether, and that everything is held together & functions as a consequence of that ether, then it is impossible for a composite component (the eye) of & held together by that ether to observe fundamental component of that ether that gives the eye existence – this is like the eye seeing by itself alone its own eye in every minute detail, which is an impossibility because the eye is the receptor not the 'computer'.
It is also important to note that the aforegoing proof re Snell's Law is a singularly independent/separate proof that light is not frequency based, and is independent of my earlier proofs.
It follows that much science is wrong, that many physics models awarded Nobel Prizes are also wrong.
It follows from these errors that mathematics has become distorted which has also greatly impacted on economics models; and many economics models awarded Nobel Prizes are also wrong.
Consequently a full & proper transparent review is needed for at least the physics & economics Nobel Prizes previously awarded – a brief scan of the models for the 2014 economics & physics Nobel Prizes will quickly reveal that these models are also wrong, and that they also do not conform to Alfred Nobel's Terms of Will.
And it is largely the grossly defective economics models that are causing immense socio-economic disparities around the world, causing anger & generating irrational violence → fundamentalism & extremism.
Western Governments/Parliaments and Leaders are refusing to educate their people with these new sciences – hence people are purposefully misinformed, hence cannot make informed decisions regarding elections → hence elections are not democratic → hence Governments/Parliaments are illegitimate. As we see with the USA mid-terms recently.
Unreasonable western governments/parliaments are ignoring the Reason of new science in preference for unreasonable, old and defective science; hence their policies are irrational.
____________
It is up to rational people to correct their own incorrect behaviour, which is causal of irrational fundamental behaviour in others, because those irrationalised & fundamentalised have lost sight of the rational & reasonable.
Therefore, I again,respectfully request that Your Majesty distances fully from the Nobel Foundation & Prize awards until such time as a full & proper transparent review has been completed & reasonable Governance instilled therein.
Yours Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
PS
Channel 5, Twin Towers - The Missing Evidence, Monday November 3, 2014:
This programme presented a theory that aluminium from the planes combined with water, heat & other components caused a massive explosion resulting in the Towers collapses.
This theory is not argued as such, other than to observe that bulk water thrown into any massive fire will result in an explosive reaction due to the 'instantaneous' vaporisation of the water & contraction of materials.
However; assuming such an explosion due to aluminium etc. occurred at the localised points of plane impact areas of the Towers, this kind of explosion does not explain the absence of transfer-of-momentum dynamics for a natural collapse for the remaining & much greater Towers sections below the impact points, which lower areas were not subject to aluminium or other damage.
A natural collapse would result in visible reduction in velocity of falling sections above whilst material from sections below gained velocity so as to be thrown outwards – this is the natural effect of momentum-transfer dynamics.
BUT, there was no reduction in velocity on any sections of the Towers – therefore additional high impulse, explosive, forces were needed to clear the impedances of the lower sections thus allowing the upper sections to continue falling unimpeded; and this process would have had to have occurred sequentially all the way to the bottom of the Towers.
Explosive forces, sequentially detonated is by definition: IMPLOSION!
It follows that two distinctly separate events occurred: 1. the planes flown into the Towers, 2. the implosion of the Towers.
The implosion of the Towers required pre-planning & pre-placement of the explosives.
The fact that the planes flew into the Towers shortly prior to the implosions, on all balances-of-probabilities, means that whoever planned the implosions knew-of, or also pre-planned, the planes flying into the Towers –> the implosions required inside-knowledge & inside-cooperation.
Channel 5 dishonestly deflected attention from implosion explanations by emotively attributing this suggestion to the 'Government' – such an emotive deflection essentially pre-judges so as to deflect attention from the true facts that a natural collapse could not have been the explanation, whereas implosions are the only explanation – Nature's Laws cannot be defied, additional explosive & sequential forces were needed to remove the impedances of the lower Towers' sections.
The owner of the Towers Larry Silverstein is not investigated, he is culpable at least on gross Governance negligence/dereliction pertaining to the Towers management & security– the FBI refuse to investigate the Twin Towers implosions.
The absence of transfer-of-momentum dynamics for a natural collapse is the DEFINITIVE proof of implosion.
BP/Deepwater Horizon was another sabotage event.
UCLA Berkeley, Centre for Catastrophic Risk Management; Professor Bob Bea was instrumental in presenting defective science in both the Twin Towers implosions and the BP/Deepwater sabotage.
_____
Open Letter To:
His Majesty King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden
AND
Nobel Foundation Directors & Members:
Chairman Dr Marcus Storch - Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Deputy Chairman, Gunnar Öquist, Professor, Secretary General of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Members
Sohlman, Michael, Executive Director
Engdahl, Horace, Professor, Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy
Jörnvall, Hans, Professor, Secretary of the Nobel Assembly and of the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine at Karolinska Institutet
Wallenberg, Jacob, Chairman of the Board of Investor AB
Mjøs, Ole D., Professor Dr. Med, University of Tromsø
Deputy Members
Gräslund, Astrid, Professor in Biophysics, Secretary of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry
Sundqvist, Bo, Professor and President, Uppsala University, Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
OBJECTIONS & APPEAL - Nobel Physics & Economics Prizes 2012
Your Majesty
I refer to previous correspondences concerning the Nobel Foundation & Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and the awarding of Nobel Prizes which you personally hand to winners.
It has previously been amply demonstrated that the Terms Of Alfred Nobel’s Terms of Will are not complied with by RSAS & NF. Nor do the processes that NF & RSAS adopt to select recipients conform to Good Governance or fairness.
It has been amply demonstrated since my first communication in 2007 that the various economics models previously awarded NP prizes have not brought about economic stability or progress toward same; in fact they have aided greater instability & injustices, and have been part causal of the global economy meltdown.
The Physics NP prizes have not been awarded to those works that have made greatest benefit for mankind; in fact many, including the 2012, are based upon defective Newton Opticks understandings.
The process for selecting recipients violates good Governance. It is important to understand that science greatly impacts upon social development; consequently societies have a right to observe fairness, procedurally & substantively, in the selection of NP prize winners. This is not being done.
Constitutional Monarchies have an important constructive role to play in society, but this is undermined by acceptance of Governance violations which will adversely affect societies perceptions of retaining monarchies, which will further undermine social mores.
I point out the my R&D in both physics & economics far outstrips the works by the 2012 recipients (whose works are old works, and hence do not comply with the ToW requirements) - my R&D demonstrates over 350 years of defective physics from Newton, through Michelson-Morley, Einstein, Hubble, Hawking, etc. - e does NOT equal m c squared - further, that the works awarded the 2012 NP prize are also defective (which can be deduced by simply looking through a prism).
I therefore respectfully request that your Majesty either withdraw from the presenting of the 2012 Prizes or obtain an undertaking from NF & RSAS to undertake a transparent selection process for the 2012 & future prizes.
I also call upon the 2012 recipients for Physics & Economics to withdraw their acceptances on the grounds that my works far outstrip theirs - this is not to say that other works have not surpassed my own works as there has been no Governance compliance, no transparent process, by which societies can determine this.
Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,
Open Letter To:
His Majesty King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden
AND
Nobel Foundation Directors & Members:
Chairman Dr Marcus Storch - Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Deputy Chairman, Gunnar Öquist, Professor, Secretary General of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Members
Sohlman, Michael, Executive Director
Engdahl, Horace, Professor, Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy
Jörnvall, Hans, Professor, Secretary of the Nobel Assembly and of the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine at Karolinska Institutet
Wallenberg, Jacob, Chairman of the Board of Investor AB
Mjøs, Ole D., Professor Dr. Med, University of Tromsø
Deputy Members
Gräslund, Astrid, Professor in Biophysics, Secretary of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry
Sundqvist, Bo, Professor and President, Uppsala University, Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
AND
2008 Nobel Prize winners
Physics: Yoichiro Nambu, Makoto Kobayashi, Toshihide Maskawa,
Economics: Paul Krugman,
CC:
2008 Nobel Prize Winners:
Chemistry: Roger Y. Tsien, Martin Chalfie, Osamu Shimomura,
Medicine: Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, Harald zur Hausen, Luc Montagnier,
Literature: Jean-Marie Gustave Le Clézio,
Peace: Martti Ahtisaari,
His Majesty King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden
Your Majesty
I refer to the attached document ‘Economist’s Inexact Models Exactly Defective 10 (Nobel Prize Hijacked 3, Paul Krugman)
This document & other papers at my website (www.cdadd.com) sets out concrete proofs concerning the gross errors of both the 2008 Economics & Physics Prizes being awarded to the addressed recipients.
Last year I communicated to Your Majesty the gross defectiveness of past Nobel Prize wining papers but to date nothing has been done by the Directors of the Nobel Foundation.
The Nobel Foundation & Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences are in collusion & Governance is non-existent. It is creating an inbreeding of deformed & defective science models which models are wrongly used by governments & corporates. These grossly defective models are the front behind which massive global frauds are perpetrated which are causal of the GLOBAL ECONOMY MELTDOWN.
In light of the evidence in the attached and at my website I respectfully request that Your Majesty fully-distances from the Nobel Foundation & Prize Ceremonies until such time as the Nobel Foundation has been appointed with new Directors & Members having integrity & independence.
Yours Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
Nobel Foundation Directors & Members:
The evidence in the attached document & at my website conclusively show that you have purposefully & totally eroded, for fraudulent purposes, the integrity & honour that should be attributed to the Nobel Foundation.
I demand that you all resign your posts and hand temporary Executive Powers to the President/Chief Justice & Justices of the International Courts for purposes of appointment of new directors having independence & integrity.
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
2008 Nobel Prize winners
Physics: Yoichiro Nambu, Makoto Kobayashi, Toshihide Maskawa,
The evidence in the attached document & at my website shows conclusively that:
The foundation of your research for the Physics Nobel Prize is based upon theories, and not on discoveries/inventions as required by Alfred Nobel’s will. Further that your works, individually or collectively, do not meet the ‘most worthy’, or confer the greatest benefit on mankind’ criteria as required in the Terms-of-Will.
Nor do they fulfil the necessary technical correctness - the foundation of your work, that light particles travel at speed c, is invalid; and high-order & non-linear mathematical models alone do not prove the existence of that which you seek to prove.
I respectfully request that you all decline your Nobel awards to avoid further embarrassment to the good name of Alfred Nobel & to His Majesty King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden.
Economics: Paul Krugman,
The evidence in the attached document & at my website conclusively prove that your paper does not comply with Alfred Nobel’s Terms-of-Will in that it is not work of the PRECEEDING YEAR, but nearly 30 years old. The 2009 paper cited is invalid as it has not yet been published for review. Your model does not comply with the ‘most worthy’, or ‘confer the greatest benefit on mankind’ criteria as is required.
Your paper is grossly defective from a technical perspective – of which only a few, but critical, issues have been addressed in the attached document.
I respectfully request that you decline your Nobel award to avoid further embarrassment to the good name of Alfred Nobel & to His Majesty King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden.
Yours Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
(Under enforced exile from South Africa due to ANC government’s oppressive XDR-nazi system and oppressive economic isolation by corporate & academic worlds.
Also under severe economic oppression due to Ireland & UK government dishonesty.
XDR = Extreme Democracy Resistant.)
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,
To: HM King Carl XVI Gustaf
From: Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
December 6, 2007
Re: 2007 Sveriges Bank Prize in Economic Science in Memory of Alfred Nobel (Nobel ‘Economics’ Prize)
Your Majesty
I refer to previous correspondences sent to Nobel Foundation, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and joint-winners of the 2007 Nobel ‘Economics’ Prize.
I respectfully draw Your Majesty’s attention to the extreme seriousness of the defective economic ‘science’ models that have been rewarded over the past years by the RSAS.
The proofs that I have submitted, even though not addressing all aspects, nonetheless show without doubt that the works/models by the 2007 joint-winners do not meet the criteria of Alfred Nobel’s Terms of Will.
Further, and more importantly, they are scientifically defective because the models have not been correctly tested, nor correctly engineered, to give them scientific credibility.
The correspondences shows that the joint-winners have refused to provide credible proofs of their work having been correctly applied, yet my work (viewable at my website) categorically proves that defective ‘economics’ models have been used to give a false credibility fronting to fraudulent business models, and also that the 2007 joint-winners work is entirely defective.
(see www.cdadd.com; papers such as Annuities in Retirement, Mastermind of Organised Crime, Interest Rates & Loans, Economic Momentum, CHAMSA Economics for Prosperity, Poverty Disparity Unfair Rules, etc.)
It is entirely incorrect that the 2007 award should not be reviewed through an Appeal Process. To not do so would be a case of perpetuating fraudulence & dishonesty to the people.
The dynamics of ‘western’ societies have changed markedly over the past few centuries to greater ‘empowerment’ of increasingly educated peoples. It is, I respectfully contend, that the dynamics of Majestic Persons must also change, and pro-actively so.
Historically the position of Majesty was held in awe & reverence. Awe was a term of fear, Reverence a term of respect; thus respect through fear.
This held, to varying tenuous degrees, until the French revolution which brought about change with massive destruction to not only France but Europe as well.
In the latter days of the 20th Century the death of Princess Diana again brought to attention the fragility of Majestic Persons by HM Queen Elizabeth II being seen as ‘cold & withdrawn’ until later when she heeded the call of the people. Her Majesty certainly acted, but reactively not pro-actively, and it had serious consequences in perceptions.
I respectfully contend that the circumstances of the 2007 Nobel ‘Economics’ Prize is placing Your Majesty in a similar potentially serious position due to the fact that Your Majesty personally hands the awards to the recipient prize-winners.
Yet, from the proofs I have submitted - and proofs that have NOT been countered by the prize-winners themselves, nor by the RSAS, nor by the Nobel Foundation – it is clear that the joint-winners works/models are not worthy of the prize (not in terms of Alfred Nobel’s Will, nor in terms of scientific credibility); but Your Majesty is nonetheless being expected to personally hand the awards to the 2007 joint-winners.
This is tantamount to Your Majesty being called upon to deceive the people.
Your Majesty, I respectfully stress that the people have been deceived for decades by defective & fraudulent economic/business/finance models and that it is time for honesty & transparency because these defective models are impoverishing/enslaving lesser developed nations as well as causing hardships in developed nations.
I respectfully request Your Majesty’s attention to pro-actively putting a stop to these wrongs, and to pursuing right to be engaged.
I sincerely thank Your Majesty for time given in this regard.
Yours Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.