Kenneth W. Ford has not worked on weapons since 1953. He has written his 10th book - a memoir called, "Building the H Bomb: A Personal History." After submitting the book for a security review, federal official ordered the 88-year-old academic to cut 10 percent (about 5,000 words) from his book, according to The New York Times.
Ford maintains that the information the federal officials wanted removed has already been disclosed by others. "They wanted to eviscerate the book," Ford told The New York Times. "My first thought was, 'This is so ridiculous I won't even respond.'"
For about six months, Ford went back and forth with federal officials until they reached a stalemate.
Typically, the official response to inquiries about sensitive but not declassified public information is "no comment," according to The New York Times, and anyone who deals with atomics must sign a nondisclosure agreement that threatens criminal punishment should the secrets be revealed.
When Ford started his research, a historian at the Department of Energy suggested that the manuscript should be submitted for review. After submitting his work, a federal official wrote to Ford and told him, "Our team is quite taken with your manuscript. However, some concerns have been identified," according to The New York Times.
Michael Kolbay, a classification officer at the agency, warned Ford via email that the "design nuances of a successful thermonuclear weapons program" would "encourage emerging proliferant programs," according to The New York Times. In other words, if Ford provides the blueprints, someone is going to build it.
After meeting with officials in September 2014, Ford emailed his reply to the officials, according to The New York Times, assuring them his book "contains nothing whatsoever whose dissemination could, by any stretch of the imagination, damage the United States or help a country that is trying to build a hydrogen bomb."
Andrew P. Weston-Dawkes, director of the agency's office of classification, wrote to Ford on Nov. 3, according to The New York Times, and reiterated that the panel had "identified portions that must be removed prior to publication." The 60 ordered cuts included individual sentences, clusters of paragraphs, endnotes and illustrations.
"Were I to follow all - or even most - of your suggestions, it would destroy the book," Ford wrote in a reply, according to The New York Times. In December, Ford conceded to a few minor changes, like changing "in fact" to "reportedly" when discussing explosive results of bomb tests.
In January, Ford and the feds reached an impasse and the publisher wanted its book.
"I don't want to strike a blow for humankind," Ford told The New York Times. "I just want to get my book published."
Ford book is already available in electronic form and will be in print soon.
Should Ford have submitted his book for review? Do you think including photos of the bomb in his book helps give the reader some context or does it break national security? Leave your comments in the comment section below.
