9/11 Gatekeeper Dr. Judy Wood's "SPACE BEAMS" Absurdity and Cultish Following

Author Topic: 9/11 Gatekeeper Dr. Judy Wood's "SPACE BEAMS" Absurdity and Cultish Following  (Read 39385 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline josephine

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 14
www.drjudywood.com  If you haven't gone to this web site, you are missing out on some good  satellite photos. Dr. Judy Wood holds a Ph.d in Materials Engineering.  This interesting thing she found out is that there was a hurricane heading for New York City on 911. She said this hurricane was out to sea for a long time before turning away from New York City on that day. Nothing was on the news about it. I don't know if it has any significance.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Andrew Johnson - 9/11 and the Energy Cover Up - United We Strike Radio - March 3, 2011 (51mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX-PAaEPaBI

Quote
Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/

Dr. Judy Wood's websites:
http://drjudywood.com/
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/

Dr. Judy Wood - Real 9/11 Truth Playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB

---

This is a United We Strike radio broadcast with Andrew Johnson from March 3, 2011.

Johnson discusses the issue of free energy and explains how this ties in with 9/11.

Johnson also explains the fact that Steven E. Jones was not only responsible for bringing disinformation about thermite into the so-called "9/11 truth movement" - and to shepherd people away from Dr. Wood's work which shows that directed energy weaponry was used on 9/11 - but Jones was also heavily involved in the Cold Fusion energy cover up back in 1989.

See also "The Price of Secrecy, The Consequences of Cover Up" by Andrew Johnson - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=322&Itemid=55

---

See also Dr. Judy Wood at New Horizons - Where Did the Towers Go - recorded at New Horizons, St Annes, UK, 24th Oct 2011
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufWggCESyDg
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4XDN9sY3GI

-----

There are many audios (including this one) in the archive section of Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/index.php?dir=&sort=date&order=desc

There are also previous interviews with Dr. Judy Wood on her website - http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/shows/

Andrew Johnson's book "9/11 - Finding the Truth" can be downloaded for free from here - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=238&Itemid=60

The individual articles from the book, as well as further articles written after the book, are also available from Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=1&id=1&Itemid=60

See for example "Meet the New Boss - Same as the old boss - The Perception Management of 9/11 Evidence" by Andrew Johnson, for an analysis of some of Jim Fetzer's behaviour - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=208&Itemid=60

Jim Fetzer and Steven E. Jones were the faces of the first major "9/11 truth" group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth. They had a very public disagreement and a ridiculous pantomime ensued, before Jones split from the group to create his own group; Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice. In hindsight, this was all part of the psychological operation of 9/11 perception management.

Incidentally, both 9/11 scholars groups chose to use an illuminated torch in their logos - http://st911.org/

-----

See also "Bombs Did Not Unravel the Towers" by Morgan Reynolds - http://nomoregames.net/2012/02/27/bombs-did-not-unravel-the-towers/

-----

Related videos:

Heavy Watergate - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB6DjR8zKMo

Rumsfeld & Directed Energy Weaponry - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr6Gl2zxm8w

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
See also

Russ Gerst on In Other News - Steven "Thermite" Jones & the Cold Fusion Scandal - December 12, 2011 (58mins 37s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk0R6pvfvL0
Quote
This is an interview with Russ Gerst, who has worked with Dr. Judy Wood, from December 12, 2011.
mp3 - http://www.mediafire.com/?nw599a2i37jk5un

Steven E. Jones was not only responsible for bringing disinformation about thermite into the so-called "9/11 truth movement" - and for shepherding people away from Dr. Wood's work which shows that directed energy weaponry was used on 9/11 - but Jones was also heavily involved in the Cold Fusion energy cover up back in 1989.

-----

Dr. Judy Wood's websites:
http://drjudywood.com/
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/

Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/

Dr. Judy Wood - Real 9/11 Truth Playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB

---

See also "The Price of Secrecy, The Consequences of Cover Up" by Andrew Johnson - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=322&Itemid=55

---

See also Dr. Judy Wood at New Horizons - Where Did the Towers Go - recorded at New Horizons, St Annes, UK, 24th Oct 2011
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufWggCESyDg
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4XDN9sY3GI

-----

There are many more audios in the archive section of Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/index.php?dir=&sort=date&order=desc

There are also previous interviews with Dr. Judy Wood on her website - http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/shows/

Andrew Johnson's book "9/11 - Finding the Truth" can be downloaded for free from here - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=238&Itemid=60

The individual articles from the book, as well as further articles written after the book, are also available from Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=1&id=1&Itemid=60

See for example "Meet the New Boss - Same as the old boss - The Perception Management of 9/11 Evidence" by Andrew Johnson, for an analysis of some of Jim Fetzer's behaviour - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=208&Itemid=60

Jim Fetzer and Steven E. Jones were the faces of the first major "9/11 truth" group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth.  They had a very public disagreement and a ridiculous pantomime ensued, before Jones split from the group to create his own group; Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice.  In hindsight, this was all part of the psychological operation of 9/11 perception management.

Incidentally, both 9/11 scholars groups chose to use an illuminated torch in their logos - http://st911.org/

-----

See also "Bombs Did Not Unravel the Towers" by Morgan Reynolds - http://nomoregames.net/2012/02/27/bombs-did-not-unravel-the-towers/

-----

Related videos:

Heavy Watergate - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB6DjR8zKMo

Rumsfeld & Directed Energy Weaponry - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr6Gl2zxm8w

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Spingola Speaks to Dr. Judy Wood and Jerry Leaphart - The 9/11 Court Cases - April 14th, 2011 (1hr 29mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzhmQGBa_Wk
Quote
Dr. Judy Wood's websites:
http://drjudywood.com/
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/

DQA-NIST RFC page - http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/NIST_RFC.html
(Data Quality Act challenges filed with the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  RFC = Request For Correction)

Qui Tam Case page - http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html

Whistleblower Information page - http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/short/whistleblower.html

Having put forward evidence for directed energy weaponry in a DQA Request For Correction, Dr. Wood's Qui Tam cases involved Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) and Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC, or a backwards CIA's), among others.  These companies have information about directed energy weaponry and may even know who the perpetrators of 9/11 were.

Rather than supporting these court cases and increasing the chances of getting the spokesmen for these companies on oath, the so-called "9/11 truth movement" completely ignored them.  Many people are still unaware that they took place.

Incidentally, Richard Gage's Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth group was started up in 2006, three weeks after Dr. Wood filed the Request For Correction.  This is discussed in another interview with Dr. Wood - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ2yLb_5SYo


Deanna Spingola's website - http://www.spingola.com/
Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/

Dr. Judy Wood - Real 9/11 Truth Playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB

---

This video is an interview by Deanna Spingola with Dr. Judy Wood and her attorney Jerry Leaphart from April 14th, 2011.

There are many audios (including this one) in the archive section of Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/index.php?dir=&sort=date&order=desc

---

See also Dr. Judy Wood at New Horizons - Where Did the Towers Go - recorded at New Horizons, St Annes, UK, 24th Oct 2011
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufWggCESyDg
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4XDN9sY3GI

-----

There are also previous interviews with Dr. Judy Wood on her website - http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/shows/

Andrew Johnson's book "9/11 - Finding the Truth" can be downloaded for free from here - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=238&Itemid=60

The individual articles are also available from Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=1&id=1&Itemid=60

-----

Here are the videos mentioned near the end of this interview:

Mark Jungworth's video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkC7GiWmzNo

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez Questions Gage - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir0vukXoWGU

See also:

Heavy Watergate - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB6DjR8zKMo

Rumsfeld & Directed Energy Weaponry - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr6Gl2zxm8w

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
What Happened to the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001 (2hrs)
http://vimeo.com/45759814

Quote
Dr. Judy Wood does a 2 hour Powerpoint presentation called "Where Did The Towers Go?" via Skype on the internet. The presentation uses a TV studio camera focused on a large white screen using an LCD projector. With this two way connection the host is running the Powerpoint presentation from his laptop computer getting directions from the guest, Dr. Judy Wood, via Skype on the internet, who is running the same Powerpoint presentation from her location. Using this procedure will reduce some of the video quality.

-----

See this thread for a discussion of the 9/11 court cases that failed due to lack of support from the 9/11 "truth movement" and due to the law being openly ignored, which the judge admitted.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
See also What Happened to the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001.
(2 hour Powerpoint presentation explaining the evidence on which the court cases were based.)

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Quote
Johnson discusses the issue of free energy and explains how this ties in with 9/11.

Ha Ha Ha

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Ha Ha Ha
Is there something specific that you disagree with?

If so, it would be helpful if you could articulate exactly what you disagree with because writing LOL doesn't provide any explanation at all.

Maybe you were unaware of Steven E. Jones' role covering up free energy via so-called Cold Fusion back in 1989.  Anyone who wants to know more about that can watch the documentary Heavy Watergate - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB6DjR8zKMo - which also features Dr. Eugene Mallove, who has since been murdered.  Mallove probably would have spoken out and told people about Steven E. Jones the minute Jones became involved in so-called 9/11 truth, but he couldn't because he was murdered.

Maybe you are unaware of the huge field effect created on 9/11 that was recorded by the Geophysical Institute Magnetometer Array (GIMA) of the University of Alaska.  The magnetometer readings reveal anomalous changes in the Earth's magnetic field at the exact moments that five key events were taking place in New York City on 9/11 i.e. the hole appearing in WTC 1, the hole appearing in WTC 2, WTC 1 "going poof", WTC 2 "going poof" and WTC 7 "going poof".  That's pretty difficult to laugh off, at least for someone who's being sincere.

-----

Anyway, there have been a couple more interviews with Andrew Johnson in recent days.  For anybody who's interested, here they are:

Andrew Johnson and Mel Ve on Freedom Central - 9/11 Truth Movement Control - September 9, 2012 (1hr 50mins) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVZn5eonoKc

Deanna Spingola Speaks to Andrew Johnson - September 11, 2012 - 11 Years On, The Cover-Up Continues (1hr 4mins) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxVzN4_0V9s

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Those magnetometer readings sound interesting, maybe you should do a thread on it.

There i no such thing as free energy.
Wake Up

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Those magnetometer readings sound interesting, maybe you should do a thread on it.
There's no point.  If people want to find out about it they can look here, or they can buy the book.  If people want to bury their heads in the sand and pretend it never happened, as many people do, there's not much I can do about that.


There i no such thing as free energy.
Yes there is.  Someone's ignorance of a given phenomena does not make that phenomena non-existent.

As already mentioned in this thread, Steven E. Jones was centrally involved in the cover-up of what he dubbed Cold Fusion in 1989.  Energy output was higher than input i.e. free energy.  Tesla wanted to give free energy to everybody on the planet around a century ago, and he didn't invent the scientific properties of the world and/or the universe.  In other words, it's a lot older than even Tesla.

The technology has been weaponised and was used on 9/11.  The fact that some people have not looked into it and are unaware of the field effects and the interference of different fields, and the documented evidence related to these effects, does not alter the objective existence of free energy technology.


Wake Up
Way ahead of you.


Again, was there anything specific that you disagreed with, other than your erroneous belief that free energy does not exist?

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Andrew Johnson with Richard D. Hall - 9/11 energy weapon & the cold fusion cover up

Part 1 - http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=122&part=1
Quote
We have covered the work of Dr. Judy Wood, whose detailed study into 9/11 proves the WTC towers were destroyed using an energy weapon. This is an established fact, not a theory. Analysis of the WTC site showed tritium was produced during the dustification process. Tritium is also produced in the process known as cold fusion. Could the reaction discovered by Pons and Fleischmann in 1989 be something similar to the reaction which caused steel to turn to dust during 9/11. The murder of Eugene Mallove in 2004, who exposed the cover up of cold fusion could be linked to 9/11, in that Mallove knew Prof. Steve Jones was involved in the cover up of Cold Fusion. This is the same Steve Jones who, in 2007, did not include proper reference to his thermite "research" when he and others submitted a "request for correction" to NIST regarding NIST's 9/11 technical reports.


See also Devices which may replace Earths fossil fuel technologies - Andrew Johnson
 
Part 1 - http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=123&part=1

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Its hard to see how a beam weapon would produce tritium. Maybe you could explain.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Someone seems to have edited a couple of earlier posts in this thread, changing worcesteradam's LOL to Ha Ha Ha.  What a strange thing to do.  Oh well, each to their own.

-----

Its hard to see how a beam weapon would produce tritium. Maybe you could explain.
What beam weapon?

Dr. Wood discusses the tritium levels in her book.  I don't have it with me at the moment but I can quote from it the next time I'm on the forum, probably in 2 or 3 weeks.

In that time, would you be willing to familiarise yourself with Dr. Wood's work?  Obviously you're not familiar with it now because you still seem to believe that it's about beam weapons, as opposed to what it's actually about i.e. directed energy weapons - energy that is directed and used as a weapon.  This misrepresentation has been around for 5 or 6 years now and has been corrected many times, yet still it persists.  It's as if people want to listen to other people's misrepresentations of Dr. Wood's work rather than look at it for themselves.

Have you read her book, or do you have any intention of reading it?

---

Dr. Judy Wood - Real 9/11 Truth Playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
... Dr. Wood discusses the tritium levels in her book.  I don't have it with me at the moment but I can quote from it the next time I'm on the forum, probably in 2 or 3 weeks.
Where Did the Towers Go? (p371-6)

A Comment About Cold Fusion (LENR, CANR)
(LENR = Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, CANR = Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions)

There exists a process which (1) produces excess energy, (2) causes transmutation of elements, (3) forms tritium, (4) generates a magnetic precipitate, (5) occurs at room temperature, and (6) does all this without producing radioactivity.  When first presented in 1989, cold fusion was quickly dismissed as junk science and the careers of those who discovered it were destroyed.  But on March 23, 2009, the 20th anniversary of the announcement by Pons and Fleischmann, the two were vindicated on network television.  The CBS show, 60 minutes, aired a show called “Cold Fusion Is Hot Again.” [83] The archive of this show, presented by Scott Pelley, “More Than Junk Science,” is also available. [84] An excellent survey article by Dr. Edmund Storms gives references to at least 34 studies [87] with positive results using the method of Pons and Fleischmann. [85, 86, 87]

Tritium at the WTC

Tritium was identified in samples taken from a WTC storm sewer and from the basement of WTC6 [88, 89] three days and ten days, respectively, after the 9/11 events.  Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen that is used in research, [90] fusion reactors, [91] and neutron generators. [92] The radioactive decay product of tritium is a low energy beta that cannot penetrate the outer dead layer of human skin.  Therefore, the main hazard associated with tritium is internal exposure from inhalation or ingestion. [92] Tritium is also used in watch faces and exit signs with chemicals (such as phosphor) that emit light in the presence of radiation.  Rifle sites have about 12mCi of tritium and exit signs contain “several curies of tritium.” [92]

The curie is a unit measure of an amount of radioactivity.  A curie (Ci) is the amount of a radioactive substance that has 3.7 x 10^10 decays per second, or 1 Becquerel (Bq). [93]

The WTC contained no exit signs with tritium, according to the group studying the tritium samples found at the WTC, [94, 95] They concluded that the tritium must have come from exit signs on the alleged two planes.  However, as the Idaho State University Tritium Information page states, “Signs often have several curies of tritium in them.  If the exit signs were severely damaged, HT gas might escape into the local area, but it should be dispersed by ventilation or wind quickly.” [96] So it does not plausible that all of the tritium in the four exit signs on the alleged planes made it into the groundwater of WTC6, especially when you consider that rain and fire hoses would have diluted it.  Yet there are researchers who have suggested that this tritium is a sign that the WTC was destroyed by “mini nukes.” [97]

In any case, let us consider this tritium data presented in the studies by Parekh et al [98] and Semkow et al [99] and its relative concentration.  Table 18 provides values of tritium reported at the WTC.  The values are provided in both units of Becquerel per liter (Bq/L) and Curie per liter (nCi/L) for convenience.  The samples were collected in the basement of WTC6, the building that had the middle portion missing.



A more comprehensive table of values is given in Table 28 (page 497) along with the acceptable limits set by various authorities for drinking water.  Again, these values are provided in both units for convenience.

The values of measured tritium at the WTC are plotted on a logarithmic scale in Figure 387 along with representative values from a variety of known causes, providing a visual comparison.

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, atmospheric nuclear bomb testing produced a considerable amount of atmospheric tritium that entered lakes and rivers through precipitation, producing high levels of tritium in the Great Lakes.  That is, nuclear explosions in the atmosphere contaminated the entire planet.



Figure 387.  Tritium values shown on logarithmic scale resulting from various situations.  Precipitation, [102, 103] Great Lakes, [104] WTC – 9/11, LENR, [105] Power-plant leaks. [106]

The first group (brown bars) on the left side of Figure 387 reflects the decrease in atmosphere nuclear detonations.  According to the USGS, Tritium decays spontaneously to helium-3 (3He) through ejection of a beta particle (essentially a high-energy electron).  The half-life of tritium is about 12.32 years. [107, 108]

The second group (green bars) shows the most recent tritium levels in the Great Lakes.  There are no nuclear power plants on Lake Superior, so it is a good indicator for “background levels” of tritium.  The middle group (yellow bars) are of tritium found at the WTC by Parekh, et al [109] and Semkow, et al. [110] These values measured at the WTC following the 9/11 event are about 50 times greater than background values.  Is this significant?  Let us compare these values with two other categories.

The forth group (blue bars) are values of tritium measured in the cell of a Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) experiment (also referred to as “cold fusion”).  Tritium in the LENR cell is about 50 times greater than what was seen at the WTC.  The fifth and final group (red bars) are values measured in groundwater following a leak from a nuclear power plant (“hot fusion”), which is the type of reaction in a “nuke” or “mini-nuke”.  These values are 360 times greater than LENR values, or about 18,000 times greater than the WTC values.

Values for contaminated drinking water, which are diluted by large bodies of water, are shown in category E of Table 28 (page 497).  A leak at the Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories caused tritium levels in Ottawa drinking water, 200 km (124 miles) down-river from the site, of 150 Bq/L.

Do you think they could have kept the Chernobyl disaster a secret?



A nuclear hot-fusion nuclear event (nukes, suitcase nukes, pocket nukes, mini-nukes, nano-nukes…) if even realistic, would have produced a noticeable seismic signal (see Table 4, page 79), but it would also have produced tremendous heat and radiation.  Although the tritium levels at the WTC were significantly above background levels, they were not high enough to be consistent with “a nuke.”

Consider what happened at Chernobyl in the early hours of April 26, 1986.  Figure 388b shows the remains of reactor 4 after it was destroyed by a steam explosion.  (Water and molten metal don’t mix well.) Although the damage was not caused by a nuclear explosion, radioactive fall-out from this accident was measured around the world, as shown in Figure 388a.  If a nuclear bomb had been used to destroy the WTC, radiation from it would have been detected around the world, and there also would have been a seismic signature.

A closer look at the fall-out patter from the Chernobyl disaster



And again, the order of magnitudes of tritium resulting from various processes suggest the same conclusion.  As shown in Table 19, the amount of tritium found in a sample from WTC6 is approximately 50 times the background level.  The tritium measured in a cold fusion cell is 50 times greater than that.  The amount of tritium found in groundwater from a leaky nuclear power plant is 360 times that in a cold-fusion cell, or 18,000 times what was measured in a sample from the WTC.





worcesteradam

  • Guest
Thankyou for your detailed post

There appears to be no attempt to explain the Tritium.
If the hypothesis is LENR, its very weak overall, though cant be ruled out.
Lack of an explanation is to be expected where a person is cautious and scientific, but like much of Judy Woods work,this leaves us none the wiser.

I am personally interested in the beam weapon hypothesis having discovered that they actually put the weapons up there

regards

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Thankyou for your detailed post
You're welcome.  Out of the hundreds of people who read this thread, I'm sure there will be some who actually want to know the truth, people who are willing and able to assess the evidence in an intellectually honest manner.

It's obvious from elsewhere on the internet that awareness of Dr. Wood's work and its significance is growing exponentially.


There appears to be no attempt to explain the Tritium.
That's an interesting interpretation.
Dr. Wood acknowledges the presence of tritium and shows that nukes and mini-nukes can be ruled out because the levels are far too low.  This is in addition to several other factors discussed throughout the book which conclusively prove that nukes and/or mini-nukes cannot possibly have been used to produce the effects seen on 9/11.

Dr. Wood also points out that LENR also produces thermite.  LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) was labelled Cold Fusion by Steven E. Jones, the man who was centrally involved in shepherding people away from the possibility of free energy in 1989, and has been centrally involved in shepherding people away from Dr. Wood's 9/11 research, largely by telling lies about it and by introducing disinformation about thermite.

The levels of tritium at the WTC were also too high for LENR, although obviously there are similarities between the effects of the directed energy weaponry used on 9/11 and the process of LENR, including production of tritium.  Obviously the presence of tritium is not what Dr. Wood uses to prove the use of directed energy weaponry.  The book is around 500 pages long, and there are several factors that are discussed in detail which conclusively prove the use of directed energy weaponry on 9/11.


If the hypothesis is LENR, its very weak overall, though cant be ruled out.
You're just asserting an opinion, which is fine, but you've already shown earlier in this thread that your opinion is based on an almost complete ignorance of Dr. Wood's work and other related issues.

Out of interest, what makes you think that such a hypothesis would be weak overall?  And what makes you think that it can't be ruled out?


Lack of an explanation is to be expected where a person is cautious and scientific,
This is a very strange statement.
Are you saying that you generally expect those using the scientific method to be incapable of explaining things?  Or does it apply only to those scientists who are also "cautious", and if so, what do you mean by cautious?  It seems to just mean not being in complete agreement with you, but that can't be what you mean, can it?


but like much of Judy Woods work,this leaves us none the wiser.
Anyone who has studied Dr. Wood's work knows that that isn't true.  So either you (still) haven't studied Dr. Wood's work, or you have studied it but you've chosen to make a false statement about it.

Here are a few things that Dr. Wood has pointed out on her website.  Obviously it's not true to say that Dr. Wood's work (or even much of it) "leaves us none the wiser":

Some of the principal evidence that must be explained:

1.  The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain by a free fall speed "collapse."
2.  They underwent mid-air pulverization and were turned to dust before they hit the ground.
3.  The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
4.  The rail lines, the tunnels and most of the rail cars had only light damage, if any.
5.  The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Bros. Road Runner and friends. There were reports that "The Gap" was looted.
6.  The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.
7.  The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up.
8.  The demolition of WTC7 was whisper quiet and the seismic signal was not significantly greater than background noise.
9.  The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
10.  The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
11.  One file cabinet with folder dividers survived.
12.  No toilets survived or even recognizable portions of one.
13.  Windows of nearby buildings had circular and other odd-shaped holes in them.
14.  In addition to the odd window damage, the marble facade was completely missing from around WFC1 and WFC2 entry, with no other apparent structural damage.
15.  Fuzzballs, evidence that the dust continued to break down and become finer and finer.
16.  Truckloads of dirt were hauled in and hauled out of the WTC site, a pattern that continues to this day.
17.  Fuming of the dirt pile. Fuming decreased when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat.
18.  Fuzzyblobs, a hazy cloud that appeared to be around material being destroyed.
19.  The Swiss-Cheese appearance of steel beams and glass.
20.  Evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation, as demonstrated by the near-instant rusting of affected steel.
21.  Weird fires. The appearance of fire, but without evidence of heating.
22.  Lack of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. No evidence of burned bodies.
23.  Columns were curled around a vertical axis like rolled-up carpets, where overloaded buckled beams should be bent around the horizontal axis.
24.  Office paper was densely spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often along side cars that appeared to be burning.
25.  Vertical round holes were cut into buildings 4, 5 and 6, and into Liberty street in front of Bankers Trust, and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6, plus a cylindrical arc was cut into Bankers Trust.
26.  All planes except top secret missions were ordered down until 10:31 a.m. (when only military flights were allowed to resume), after both towers were destroyed, and only two minutes (120 seconds) after WTC 1 had been destroyed.
27.  Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways, during the destruction of the Twin Towers.
28.  The order and method of destruction of each tower minimized damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings.
29.  More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it.
30.  Twin Tower control without damaging neighboring buildings, in fact all seriously damaged and destroyed buildings had a WTC prefix.
31.  The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared.
32.  For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume.
33.  The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings.
34.  The WTC7 rubble pile was too small for the total mass of the building and consisted of a lot of mud.
35.  Eyewitness testimony about toasted cars, instant disappearance of people by "unexplained" waves, a plane turning into a mid-air fireball, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions.
36.  Eyewitness testimony of Scott-pack explosions in fire trucks and fire trucks exploding that were parked near the WTC.
37.  There were many flipped cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex near trees with full foliage.
38.  Magnetometer readings in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the earth's magnetic field with each of the events at the WTC on 9/11.
39.  Hurricane Erin, located just off Long Island on 9/11/01, went virtually unreported in the days leading up to 9/11, including omission of this Hurricane on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean was shown on the map.
40.  Sillystring, the appearance of curious cork-screw trails.
41.  Uncanny similarities with the Hutchison Effect, where the Hutchison Effect exhibits all of the same phenomena listed above.

* Is it possible that such a technology exists? Since the invention of the microwave for cooking in 1945 and lasers in 1955*, commercial and military development of directed-energy technology has proceeded apace, so use of directed-energy technology is likely to exist -- and the data tells us it does exist.

-----

In addition, Dr. Wood has documented the following (and much more) which has been freely available on her main website for years:

Anomalies at the WTC and the Hutchison Effect

9/11 Weather Anomalies and Field Effects

Molecular Dissociation: from Dust to Dirt


I am personally interested in the beam weapon hypothesis having discovered that they actually put the weapons up there
As I pointed out earlier in this thread, Dr. Wood's work is not about beam weapons, no matter what anyone believes about "weapons up there".

Dr. Wood may have used the term "beam weapons" several years ago, but Steven E. Jones and others deliberately misrepresented this and encouraged people to believe that Dr. Wood meant "laser beams from space", which some people obviously still believe, having not studied Dr. Wood's work.

worcesteradam

  • Guest
As I pointed out earlier in this thread, Dr. Wood's work is not about beam weapons, no matter what anyone believes about "weapons up there".

Dr. Wood may have used the term "beam weapons" several years ago, but Steven E. Jones and others deliberately misrepresented this and encouraged people to believe that Dr. Wood meant "laser beams from space", which some people obviously still believe, having not studied Dr. Wood's work.

What else would beam weapons mean?

Does Judy offer any original hypothesis on the destruction of the WTC ?

Free Energy does not exist
LNER is not free energy
LNER is not accepted by the scientific community, that has nothing to do with Steven Jones. A thesis that is based on LNER is therefore weak.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Dr. Wood also points out that LENR also produces thermite.
This is not what I wrote.  I wrote that LENR also produces tritium.  This is the second time that somebody has edited my posts in this thread.

If Dr. Wood's work is as worthless as the so-called truth movement pretends it is, then why do people have to resort to actions like that?

-----

This is in addition to a post from worcesteradam in a different thread that I've just replied to.  I think it's worth re-posting here.  Hopefully it won't be tampered with:

One of the things she said was the Kingdome made a 2.3 on the richter scale when they blew it up and the World Trade Centre made 2.3 as well.

I was like WHAT. The WTC matches a known controlled demolition! Is this true?

Kind of strong evidence if it is.
And scientific.

So does anyone know?
Dr. Wood uses the controlled demolition of the Kingdome building as a comparison because the Twin Towers each had 30 times the gravitational potential energy as the Kingdome building, meaning that there would have been a much much higher measurement if there had been a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers.  You would expect the same size signal for a building with the same potential energy as the Kingdome building, or one thirtieth the potential energy of each tower, or less than 4 storeys of each 110 storey building.  This evidence, in addition to a variety of other kinds of evidence, conclusively proves that there was not a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers, and that the buildings did not collapse and did not slam to the ground.  That is not a theory, that is a fact.

To suggest that the evidence shows that there was a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers is disingenuous in the extreme.  It's actually quite shocking that somebody would be so casual about being that dishonest on a forum like this one, which is supposed to represent truth.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
What else would beam weapons mean?
If you really want to know what Dr. Judy Wood meant by the term, then it would be better to listen to what she says rather than just assume that you know what she meant by it:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/dew/StarWarsBeam7.html

Quote
Beam Weapons, Energy Weapons, and Directed Energy Weapons (DEW):

We have used the terms "beam-field weapons" and "directed energy weapons" to refer to unconventional weapons (exotic weapons) that are energy weapons. We broadly define DEW as Energy that is Directed and is used as a Weapon. The full range of these weapons is classified information, so we make no limits or distinction of categories within the realm of energy weapons, as doing so would imply specific knowledge of all that is available. In the following paragraph, we have listed some of the possibilities we are aware of.

Our critics have accused us of insisting that beam weapons did their damage from outer space, yet we make no claim about whether the directed energy weapon operated from a space-, air-, or ground-based platform. Nor do we make any claim about what wavelength(s) was used, what the source(s) of energy was, whether it involved interference of multiple beams, whether it involved sound waves, whether it involved sonoluminescence, whether it involved antimatter weapons, whether it involved scalar weapons, whether it was HAARP (more here and here), whether it involved a nuclear process (e.g. NDEW, more info), whether it involved conventional directed energy weapons (conDEW), whether it involved improvised directed energy weapons (iDEW), nor what kind of accelerator was used, nor do we claim to know what the serial numbers of the parts that were in the weapon(s).

What we do claim is that the evidence is consistent with the use of energy weapons that go well beyond the capabilities of conventional explosives and can be directed.


Does Judy offer any original hypothesis on the destruction of the WTC ?
Dr. Wood's 9/11 research is original, but it is not hypothetical.  It is a forensic analysis of all the available evidence which conclusively proves the use of directed energy weaponry on 9/11.


Free Energy does not exist
At this point I think we both know that it does.  But even if you really do still reamin ignorant of free energy, I'm not going to waste time arguing with you about it.  You might as well argue that the sun doesn't exist.

LNER is not free energy
LNER is one example of an energy system that gives out more that you need to put in, which is a form of free energy.


LNER is not accepted by the scientific community,
Firstly, I think you need to decide whether the opinion of "the scientific community" is important to you or not.
Secondly, maybe you didn't bother reading what I copied from Dr. Wood's book a few posts ago, but it included this:
Quote
When first presented in 1989, cold fusion was quickly dismissed as junk science and the careers of those who discovered it were destroyed.  But on March 23, 2009, the 20th anniversary of the announcement by Pons and Fleischmann, the two were vindicated on network television.  The CBS show, 60 minutes, aired a show called “Cold Fusion Is Hot Again.” [83] The archive of this show, presented by Scott Pelley, “More Than Junk Science,” is also available. [84] An excellent survey article by Dr. Edmund Storms gives references to at least 34 studies [87] with positive results using the method of Pons and Fleischmann.


that has nothing to do with Steven Jones.
Steven Jones was the central character in the creation of doubt within the scientific community and the general public about "cold fusion" (LENR).  This is documented fact - see Heavy Watergate for example - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB6DjR8zKMo

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Deanna Spingola interviews Dr. Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson and Dr. Eric Larsen (2hrs 14mins) -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4DZkdq9pQM

Quote
Dr. Judy Wood's websites:
http://drjudywood.com/
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/

Dr. Judy Wood - Real 9/11 Truth playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB

Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/

Deanna Spingola's website - http://www.spingola.com/

Eric Larsen's website - http://www.ericlarsen.net/
The Skull of Yorick: The Emptiness of American Thinking at a Time of Grave Peril - http://www.amazon.com/THE-SKULL-OF-YORICK-EMPTINESS/dp/0981989101/

---

This is an interview from June 7, 2012 on the Deanna Spingola Show, featuring Dr. Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson and Dr. Eric Larsen. They discuss various factors of the ongoing 9/11 cover up.
mp3 - http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/2012-06-07%20Deanna%20Spingola%20-%20Dr%20Eric%20Larsen%20-%20Dr%20Judy%20Wood%20-%20Andrew%20Johnson%20-%20911%20Cover%20Up.mp3

-----

See also Dr. Judy Wood at New Horizons - Where Did the Towers Go - recorded at New Horizons, St Annes, UK, 24th Oct 2011
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufWggCESyDg
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4XDN9sY3GI

-----

Here is Eric Larsen's article series "Dr. Judy Wood and the future of the earth":
Part I - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/5850
Part II - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/6166
Part III - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/6764
Part IV - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/7433
Part Five: Conclusion - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/8056

And here's a recent article by Andrew Johnson entitled "The Vancouver 911 'Hearings' - Encouraging Conjecture, Discouraging Certainty, Obscuring Known Truth" - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=350&Itemid=60

---

There are many audios (including this one) in the archive section of Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/index.php?dir=&sort=date&order=desc

There are also previous interviews with Dr. Judy Wood on her website - http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/shows/

Andrew Johnson's book "9/11 - Finding the Truth" can be downloaded for free from here - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=238&Itemid=60

The individual articles from the book, as well as further articles written after the book, are also available from Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=1&id=1&Itemid=60

See for example "The Price of Secrecy, The Consequences of Cover Up" by Andrew Johnson - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=322&Itemid=55

See also "Meet the New Boss - Same as the old boss - The Perception Management of 9/11 Evidence" by Andrew Johnson, for an analysis of some of Jim Fetzer's behaviour - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=208&Itemid=60

Jim Fetzer and Steven E. Jones were the faces of the first major "9/11 truth" group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth. They had a very public disagreement and a ridiculous pantomime ensued, before Jones split from the group to create his own group; Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice. In hindsight, this was all part of the psychological operation of 9/11 perception management.

Incidentally, both 9/11 scholars groups chose to use an illuminated torch in their logos - http://st911.org/

-----

See also "Bombs Did Not Unravel the Towers" by Morgan Reynolds - http://nomoregames.net/2012/02/27/bombs-did-not-unravel-the-towers/

-----

Related videos:

Heavy Watergate - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB6DjR8zKMo

Rumsfeld & Directed Energy Weaponry - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr6Gl2zxm8w

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
See also Dr. Judy Wood, Neil Kramer & Eric Larsen - Veritas Radio - 09-07-12 - 9/11 Discussion (1hr 8mins) -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2nM_TdHNRE
Quote
Dr. Judy Wood, Neil Kramer & Eric Larsen on Veritas Radio with Mel Fabregas. Recorded on September 7th, 2012.

Subscribe at:
http://www.veritasradio.com/


http://neilkramer.com/
http://www.drjudywood.com/
http://www.ericlarsen.net/about.html

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Dr. Judy Wood and the future of the earth: Part I
By Eric Larsen
Posted on May 10, 2012

Everyone knows what’s wrong with the poor remnant of news and analysis that the mainstream media still manages to provide—that it’s untrue, servile to its corporate masters, and intended to deceive rather than reveal.
 
But what about the alternative? What about the commentary, analysis, and editorializing that’s available mainly (or only) on the Internet, where the “free” worlds of speech and journalism still exist? How insightful are the writers there—and how reliable?
 
A few weeks ago in Truthout (March 23, 2012), William Rivers Pitt wrote “The Finger of Fate Upon You” in response to Occupy Wall Street’s celebration of its first half-year’s existence. OWS pulled together a gathering at Zuccotti Park—that was crushed by the cops.
 
How does the William Rivers Pitt essay hold up on the logic and reliability fronts?
 
Pitt opens his piece with a wide view, then narrows as he goes. He begins, in fact, with a withering recital of the horror, suffering, loss, victimization, penury, crime, torture, and death that the United States has visited upon itself and the world for the past decade—visitings that have earned and are still earning profits beyond telling for the criminals, racketeers, and vandals who planned them all in the first place.
 
Then, narrowing his focus, Pitt ends on a note of vibrant optimism. Turning to the Occupy Wall Street movement, he acknowledges the “extreme violence” that the protest met with last autumn and that it met with again at its half-year commemoration. Even so, he sends up a rallying cry. Only through OWS, only by keeping OWS alive, can we prevent the same criminals and villains as before from “[scaring] us back into the cowed submission that allowed this country to be plundered in an orgy of greed, fraud and state-sponsored for-profit murder abroad.”
 
The same thing isn’t going to happen again, he declares:

Never again. This is your time. This is our time. Let us show them what real American courage looks like, as we make for ourselves and our children the better country, and the better world, we know is possible.


And he ends with a three-paragraph imperative:

Right here.
 
Right now.
 
Occupy.



Many readers, I suspect, are likely to feel that Pitt has produced an eloquent, right-minded, even courageous piece. It strikes me differently. It fills me with dread.
 
Why? Well, there are two reasons. One is obvious, the other maybe less so.
 
The first reason is open and plain: The essay’s subject is awful, terrifying, immense, easily capable of causing dread. After all, Pitt is talking about nothing other than the loss of the republic, along with our attendant freedoms, dignities, and rights. He is talking about our national government having been replaced by bodies of criminality. He’s talking about the stealing in plain sight of our personal and national wealth by a tiny class of amoral and unaccountable oligarchs. And he’s talking about the committing of unending military crimes and atrocities against peoples and nations across large expanses of the globe.
 
These are dreadful things, the ones Pitt is talking about—more so when he adds in the domestic war, the one being waged against we the people:

Meanwhile, millions of Americans are sitting in their homes with an acid bath at work in their stomachs, fear just behind their faces, because their family is all around them, and they don’t want to let it show that the roof over their heads is hanging by a thread because the job just cut back hours and layoffs are imminent. A lot of people have stopped believing in the idea that hard work and dedication will carry them forward, because they are running as fast as they can just to stand still, and that’s if they’re lucky. A lot of people are going backwards, even as the richest among us enjoy record profits, obscene bonuses and tax breaks that would make Marie Antoinette blush into her cake.
 
If a family does have to go on relief, well, good luck after November, because even the hardest-working families that need help might have to live up to the Republican ideal, which in the world of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and Rick Santorum means there is no help, because real Americans don’t need help, but have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, whatever bootstraps are . . . and it really doesn’t matter in the end, because poor people don’t count anyway.



Who among us—that is, who among us if still in possession of mind, conscience, and human feeling—doesn’t feel dread in the face of such subjects as these?
 
Bad enough. But worse is coming.
 
Pitt’s intention, presumably, is to rally us. His aim is to unify us, via OWS, and thereby draw us into a position that will generate resistance against the crimes taking place inside our borders and out.
 
And so, you may well ask, just exactly how can such an aim such not be a good thing? How could it not be uplifting and encouraging instead of dread-causing?
 
For me, the answer is this: Pitt’s appeal, noble-sounding and grand with its echoes of history, is actually made from a position of such weakness that it makes me fear all the more the success of the crimes and criminals he is calling on us to defy.
 
Pitt sets out to rally hope, but he defeats it instead. Pitt issues a summons to the ramparts, but leaking through the cracks in his words is a message that pain, ruin, and defeat lie ahead.
 
Untrue? Can’t be so? Believe me, I devoutly wish it. But take a closer look.
 
When the recent OWS gathering took place in New York, “the movement was met with extreme violence almost from the moment it raised its head.” Pitt finds a productive side to this violence, however. Since just about everyone today carries some form of instant communication, including cell phone cameras, any “extreme violence” that the police commit will end up coming back to haunt them. “The police,” Pitt says, “have yet to catch on to the fact that everyone is a journalist in the 21st century, and their violent tactics no longer happen in the dark—and instead of dissuading people from joining in, their heavy-handed tactics will motivate them like never before.”
 
Maybe so. Maybe seeing protesters, live, on video, or in email snapshots, being clubbed, cuffed, chained, Tased, pepper-sprayed, beaten, and dragged off to jail will have the effect of causing still more protesters to come forward and join the movement, swelling the ranks. Yes. But then what?
 
I mean, what will happen next? By what reason should we assume that larger numbers of protesters will cause a fundamental, or, say, a structural, change in the situation, digital cameras or not? Yes, ever greater numbers of people being brutalized will probably cause a rhetorical change in the situation. It will cause a rise in the intensity of feeling (on both sides, remember), and will increase the numbers of sympathizers (but again, on both sides).
 
And so the same question: What happens then? Can we really hope, let alone believe, that protests in the manner and style of the 1960s or 1970s (or the 1910s or 1930s) can or will bring about political change when they’re undertaken in the 2010s, an age when criminals run the country, when they vie for its highest leadership, when the “battleground” in the “war on terror” has been extended so that it exists everywhere, so that anyone, whether in Zuccotti park or in their bathtub, can, if declared a terrorist-sympathizer, be tossed into jail for keeps, with no evidence, no counsel, no Habeas Corpus, no trial, no appeal, no nothing. Read all about it here, if you haven’t already.
 
Listen, my heart goes out to OWS. I went down to Zuccotti Park last September to join them, visit them, talk with them. I donated books to their library, new ones, worth around four hundred bucks (some of the many books the cops kindly tossed into the back of a dumpster). But what political effect can OWS hope to have? William Rivers Pitt himself seals the deal for their defeat when he writes, as I cited before:

If a family does have to go on relief, well, good luck after November, because even the hardest-working families that need help might have to live up to the Republican ideal, which in the world of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and Rick Santorum means there is no help, because real Americans don’t need help, but have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, whatever bootstraps are . . . and it really doesn’t matter in the end, because poor people don’t count anyway.


Does Pitt really think that that cautionary note will somehow not be carried over and reapplied by his readers when they come to the end of his piece and find him, like a matador with a red cape, tempting, teasing, luring, cajoling, daring them to do anything other than stream blindly into the open maw of patriotic gore?
 
Look at the long silk scarf of demagoguery he pulls out of his magician’s hat:

Never again. This is your time. This is our time. Let us show them what real American courage looks like, as we make for ourselves and our children the better country, and the better world, we know is possible.
 

“Never again,” he says, meaning that never again must “we” let them scare us back into the cowed submission that allowed this country to be plundered in an orgy of greed, fraud and state-sponsored for-profit murder abroad.
 
What’s wrong with this language that simultaneously castigates and implores? Well, for one thing, it posits something as being real that isn’t real at all. In the phrases “scare us” and “cowed submission,” what can Pitt be referring to if not 9/11? The implication is obvious: That now things are different than they were back in 2001; now nobody is going to be suckered into accepting tyranny and the loss of freedom, terrified into it by the single biggest display of terrorism in the country’s history.
 
Oh? Well, if there’s been a sea change in attitude toward and understanding of the facts and meanings of 9/11, then why isn’t OWS aimed at exposing and opposing that source of tyranny and wretchedness instead of exposing and opposing Wall Street as the source of tyranny and wretchedness?
 
The unhappy answer is that there has not been any such sea change in attitude or understanding toward or of 9/11, for reasons that I will discuss in detail later. In the meantime, there isn’t going to be a sea change any time soon in psychopaths and mental defectives like “Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and Rick Santorum,” whether or not any of them finds a way into in the “highest office.” They and those like them are complicit in a heist as big as any that the 1% has pulled off, namely the blackmail/buy-up of the Republican party and its repackaging as a monolithic and apolitical body with the brains, subtlety, depth, and flexibility of a fire hydrant. Take a look at Paul Krugman on the subject. Politics of compromise have been put on hold while absolutism holds sway.
 
“This is your time,” Pitt says to his readers, visions of 1968 dancing in his head. “This is our time.” What’s with this “your” and “our”? Does he mean we’re all in the ruins together? I wonder. “Let us show them what real American courage looks like,” he exhorts. Some may hear in his voice a principled and urgent plea to come forward and help save the nation. I don’t. It’s not a sound plan, this plan he says is the only one. The voice I hear is the carnival barker: “Step right up and up pass through the door, be the next one to be roughed up, taken down, beaten up, shot down, Tased, cuffed, locked up—and forgotten.”
 
It makes a person wonder which side Pitt is really working for. Sacrificing kids and grandmothers in the tens, hundreds, or thousands isn’t going to melt the monstrous heart of a Romney, a Dimon, a Blankfein, a Scott, a Clinton, or an Obama. It’s not going to get the National Defense Authorization Act sent back to committee for rewriting, let alone shredding. It’s not going to make the Patriot Act turn to ashes, or shut down Guantanamo, or bring about fair trials, or restore Jose Padilla’s sanity, or bring about acquittal for Bradley Manning, or. . . .
 
Whether you’re reading something on paper or reading something online, read it closely and read it carefully. There are serpent songs in America where you might least expect them. More next time.
 
Eric Larsen is the publisher and editor of The Oliver Arts & Open Press.

---

Part II - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/6166
Part III - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/6764
Part IV - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/7433
Part Five: Conclusion - http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/8056

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Moved almost immediately to "All Other News/Oddball Stuff".   ::)

What a good example of the ongoing cover-up of REAL 9/11 truth.  Whether people are participating in this cover-up wittingly or unwittingly, they are still responsible for their actions.  And their actions are helping the perpetrators of 9/11 and those who want to keep humanity enslaved by keeping free energy technology covered up.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Do We Have the Energy to Change the World?
Written for GlobalBEM 2012 Conference
Andrew Johnson -  ad.johnson@ntlworld.com
November 2012
 
Most people realise that our ability to access energy sources safely, responsibly and cheaply is fundamental to our (technological) progress as a society. Outside of publications and events like those being developed and organised by groups like the Breakthrough Energy Movement (BEM), a rather limited mindset is present. It is assumed that energy supplies are limited by certain factors – primarily the availability of fuel, or where energy is said to be “renewable”, then  it is limited by environmental factors such as the amount of solar radiation, amount of wind, water flow etc.

In my own lifetime, I have seen the various factors played off against each other – all set in what I call a “paradigm of scarcity”. A great many doom-laden forecasts have suggested that our technological progress will be arrested quite abruptly. In the period of about 2003-2005, for example, it again became fashionable to talk about “peak oil” – but talk of this seems to have “faded out” over the last few years.

The issues of energy and the environment are now fully woven together in the public mindset – because it has been “programmed” into people that the only way to get the majority of our energy is – essentially – by destroying the environment in some way. This then “causes” the existence of an environmental movement which at one time was just vocal in criticising the way energy is derived from fuel-based sources. Now, however, it sets government policy in many countries and forces certain controls to be placed on energy usage. However behind this “green mask” lies a darker agenda – one of control of our freedom. Without  a complete view of the “energy picture”, the “control agenda” appears sensible and benign, but when more obscure histories from the last 100 years or so are studied in depth, an insidious cover up can be observed.



Many people have discussed aspects of this cover up, but only a very small number of people, including myself, have connected this cover up to what has become known as “The War On Terror”. Indeed, others have appropriately re-used this cliché to describe that what we are involved in is a “A War on Terra” – i.e. that some group somewhere has co-opted us into helping us to destroy our own environment. In my presentation at BEM, I hope to illustrate clearly how this energy cover up is more far-reaching than most will discuss or acknowledge. In the 6 years (arguably longer) since Dr Judy Wood first connected the evidence seen in the aftermath of the events of 9/11 to energy phenomena, the number of people openly discussing this evidence is small. The number of people wishing to cover up knowledge of this (now obvious) link is much larger than I would have expected – and it seems that a comprehensive programme has been underway, for some time, which seemingly “rolls out” new personnel to help manage the cover up.

In 2003, I discovered the “Disclosure Project” (www.disclosureproject.org) and it confirmed 2 things or me. Firstly, the UFO cover up was real and secondly that there was a clear link between the UFO phenomenon and “breakthrough free energy”. The evidence indicates some groups appear to have access to advanced propulsion technology – which uses an “unconventional” energy source. Nick Cook’s book “The Hunt for Zero Point” discusses the links between free energy and anti-gravity through the work of people like Thomas Townsend Brown. In 2006, I became familiar with Dr Judy Wood’s investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Centre on 9/11 and this proved that some type of energy weapon was used to destroy most of the WTC complex on 9/11.  In late 2007 and early 2008, more information was discovered showing the connection between the effects seen in the WTC evidence and the work of Canadian Experimental Researcher John Hutchison (see www.thehutchisoneffect.com). This resulted in a ongoing character attacks against John Hutchison, Dr Judy Wood and to a lesser extent, myself. Weeks later, Dr Wood began to document the peculiarly synchronous presence and movement of Hurricane Erin near NYC with the events of 9/11 as they unfolded. So now, climate data were linked to the energy effects seen on 9/11 - primarily at the WTC.



At this point, the reason for the implementation of Steven E Jones as a “figure head” in the 9/11 Research Community had already become clear. However, with certain effects – such as transmutation of elements – being observed both in John Hutchison’s research and what Jones called “Cold Fusion” (more correctly called Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions – CANR, or Low Energy Nuclear Reactions  - LENR), it became even clearer – the cover up needed to be carefully managed.

So here we are, almost 5 years after all those links were all clearly established – and who is talking about them? I wonder if President Dwight Eisenhower tried to warn people about the likelihood of something like 9/11 being perpetrated. Grant Cameron’s archival Research at www.presidentialufo.com shows that it is extremely likely that  Ike was briefed on the UFO issue - at a high level. The USA’s secrecy apparatus was well established by the time Eisenhower left office in 1961 and so perhaps it was his fears about this which caused him to state

Quote
“The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes”.

He also said

Quote
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Who were the members of this “scientific-technological elite” he referred to? Perhaps some of them work for ARA and SAIC – two companies that were defendants in Dr Judy Wood’s Qui Tam case in 2007.

I have argued and pointed out that one of the main reasons that we do not have Free Energy technology in general use is because such technology has already been weaponised. However, few people will look at the evidence and even fewer will talk about it. For example, I have never heard Dr Steven Greer – who, as described earlier, was instrumental in linking together the energy cover up and UFO cover up speak or write, in any meaningful way about 9/11. Further, his own Free Energy initiatives (SEAS Power, AERO 2012 and Project Orion) when scrutinised carefully do not appear to “do what they say on the tin”. I found it very interesting to hear what Bruce De Palma - an inventor of another Free Energy Device – called the N-Machine, had to say about Free Energy and New Age Movements, before his death in 1997 (see: http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/brucedepalma.htm )

Quote
The CIA operates through various innocent looking fronts – to find out what people are thinking and what they’re inventing. Now, what’s more innocent than a benign institute – founded on transcendental principles to help New Age inventors bring free energy into the world?

In this case, he seems to be referring to the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) due to his experiences with the sixth man not to walk on the Moon, Edgar Mitchell.

So if we want widespread use of free energy, we must first realise the obstacles in our way. Some of these obstacles can only be discovered by careful analysis and documentation. As well as solving engineering problems, it must be realised there is some type of “system” or “programme” in operation which is influencing people in subtle and not so subtle ways. Can this system be circumvented?

So, do we have the energy to change the world? Yes, we do – and that has been demonstrated thousands of times in the last 100 years. It was most clearly demonstrated, however, in the destruction of the WTC on 9/11. So do we have the energy to make sure that everyone in the world knows this? At this point, it’s up to you and me to make sure “the job gets done”.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Andrew Johnson - The Control of Information - 911, Energy and Sequestered Technologies (1hr 51mins)
http://blip.tv/checktheevidence/andrew-johnson-the-control-of-information-911-energy-and-sequestered-technologies-6489020

---

The Taboo of Disclosure - Exopolitics Conference 2012 (1hr 25mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G__luSGw_A

In this presentation, Andrew Johnson will look at how the technology which caused the destruction of the WTC on 911 is central to the Disclosure process. The true nature of this secret, revealed by the research of Dr Judy Wood, is still "taboo" in much of the alternative research/disclosure community. We will look at why this issue is so important and how other researchers have either ignored, misrepresented or mischaracterised the significance of the available evidence -- and possible reasons as to why they have done this. The evidence itself has vast implications for all of us -- and the way it has been handled by the "Disclosure" movement also offers us important clues as to the agenda being followed by certain groups. Andrew Johnson presented "The Taboo Of Disclosure" on Saturday 4th August, 2012 at the 4th Annual British Exopolitics Expo in Liverpool.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Bases 12-1 Where Did The Towers Go Section One (56mins 49s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snOyTlenQ9o
Quote
This section concentrates on the research of Dr Judy Wood, and John Hutchison, by UK researcher Andrew Johnson, of check the evidence. Interviewed by Joanne Summerscales from The AMMACH Project. Introduced by an interview segment by Dave Starbuck of the late Dean Warwick alledgedly murdered on stage in at The Probe2006, so he could not reveal that US, UK and USSR military had "Infra Sound"weapons in the 1960s that could take out a 25 story block.
The fact the earth's Magnetic field took a sudden drop just before the 1st tower was hit is a major fact of concern.
Followed in Section 2 with ex British Policeman who's report stated the highest threat of terrorism came from inside the UK governmental strcuture and NOT from Arabs abroad.


AMMACH Reports with Dr Judy Wood One (54mins 34s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEk1gH1lFfo

AMMACH Reports with Dr Judy Wood Two (53mins 1s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MP6DyHO9CSU

More interviews/videos here.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Here are a few recent videos exposing the 9/11 psy-op that serves to obscure the fact that free energy technology is available, has already been weaponized and was used on 9/11:

911 - The Coverup Has Been More Damaging Than The Event -- Andrew Johnson w/ Pete Santilli (1hr 39mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0muJ_H5wfuo

Episode #310 -- Veterans Today Reporter Caught In Psy-Op; James Fetzer Involved In Massive Coverup (1hr 52mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO10gI4rWC0

Episode #310 - Aftershow Commentary With Dr. Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson, Mel Fabregas (40mins 51s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LKyDcFQqA8

Episode #311 - Truth Should Not Be Suppressed and Pursuing The Truth Should Not Be Demonized (1hr 56mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsBUhJEDb8U

Episode #317 - Dr. Judy Wood Takes Her 9-11 Case To The People; Cover-Up Stopped In It's Tracks (2hrs)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWGW9igi_xk

Episode #317 - Aftershow - Dr. Judy Wood Takes Her 9-11 Case To The People (1hr 10mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFu5efh24dM

Episode #321 - Former Bush Admin Official Dr. Morgan Reynolds Re-Energizes Effort To Expose 9-11 (1hr 59mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjwX4x0Tm-Y

"You Are Under A Psy-Op" -- Gordon Duff; Chief Editor For VeteransToday.com (1hr 13mins)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWR3iSkk_lI

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Here's Andrew Johnson's presentation at the British Constitution Group's 4th annual conference last November:

2-8 The State of Popular Science - The British Constitution Group's 4th Annual Conference 2012 (19mins 1s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsqDgourKfs
Quote
The British Constitution Group's 4th Annual Conference 2012 - Dr Michael Clark gives us a background to his experience, with an overview to the problem as he see it, with ' the state of popular science ' and, his new direction within the BCG as head of the science team and where we go from here to resolve such issue's as the energy crisis. Andrew Johnson of www.checktheevidence.com then further explores the possible reasons for our reduced energy generating capacity and technology suppression that could, if either developed or released, put an end to energy shortages globally.

All 8 presentations from the BCG's annual conference are in this thread.

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Neil Kramer on Dr. Judy Wood - Directed Energy Weaponry Was Used on 9/11 & We Can Have Free Energy (14mins 55s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9HTnVLByOs

Quote
Dr. Wood's website - http://drjudywood.com/
Where Did the Towers Go? (Dr. Wood's book) - http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/
Neil Kramer's website - http://neilkramer.com/
 
Dr. Judy Wood - REAL 9/11 Truth playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB
9/11 and the Suppression of Dr. Judy Wood's Work playlist - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRkDC7LzbiK04zF4Di_4g8n5lwkErgWlu
This is a clip from Neil Kramer's appearance on Veritas Radio from September 2, 2011 - http://www.veritasradio.com/guests/2011/09sep/VS-110902-nkramer.php
 
Hour 1 - http://public.manticore.com/VS-110902-nkramer-t6c.mp3
For hour 2 you have to subscribe - http://www.veritasradio.com/subscribe.html
 
Neil Kramer: "Anyone, in my view, who denies her research without taking a close look at it is either stupid or they're on the payroll. And that's a bold thing to say and I wouldn't usually bother to say something like that but I feel quite strongly about that. And I've seen her interviewed countless time, I've gone over her research at some length to say the least. I have seen numerous attempts to debunk this woman and they fail. And they fail because she is not dealing with anything other than what is there, right in front of our eyes. She's pretty on top of that ethos. She understands that that's the key to getting more people to look at what she's doing. And she definitely exposes the treachery and duplicity of some very influential factions in the 9/11 truth movement, and they just totally dismiss her work. And you cannot dismiss Dr. Judy Wood's work without being, as I said, either just plain bloody ignorant or completely compromised in some way. So I think it's very important."

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Dr Judy Wood at the Breakthrough Energy Movement conference, 2012 Holland (2hrs 25mins)
http://vimeo.com/57923364

Quote
Dr Judy Wood at the Breakthrough Energy Movement conference, 2012 Holland
 
Title: The dawn of a new age, evidence of breakthrough energy technology on 9/11
 
Speaker: Dr Judy Wood
Produced by: Globalbem
Country of origin: Holland
Language: English
 
For many years, we have heard that a “free-energy1 device is just around the corner,” but it never seems to come to fruition. Nikola Tesla wanted to give free energy to the world nearly 100 years ago but was afraid it would fall into the wrong hands and be used for destructive purposes. Well, that is no longer just a risk; it has already happened. However, until we understand just how powerful this technology is as well as how powerful the interests are that control it, we won’t see it in general use. We first need to respect what this technology can do, otherwise it would be like leaving a gun cabinet unlocked around children who do not know what guns can do. We also need the world to see what this technology has done. This technology was used to destroy the World Trade Center complex on 9/11/01 and was a demonstration of a new kind of free-energy technology in front of the entire world. As more people around the world recognize this, the less power the controlling interests will have. And if the entire world knows that free-energy technology exists, individuals can openly build their own devices and share their designs with others. It won’t be a secret!
 
BIO
Dr. Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division, and has served on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division. Dr. Wood received her B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering), M.S. Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics, 1983), and Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992).
 
official website : http://www.drjudywood.com/
other : http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Some of the partners of the breakthrough energy movement:

EXEMPLAR ZERO: invites and challenges all nations to demonstrate their stated obligations towards mitigating climate change

HUMANITAD:promotion of interfaith and intercultural tolerance and fellowship between all nations


The movement says:
"we recognize and support the important and growing role of conventional renewable energy technologies (wind, solar, biofuels, geothermal, hydroelectric, etc.)"

With one os the goals as:
"Initiating and acting as a facilitator for a global community, a reunion of humanity calling for the new energy paradigm"

worcesteradam

  • Guest
She has over 100 reviews of her book 'Where Did the Towers Go?' on Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_t

Where are they all coming from?

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Cult following?  Is that your way of saying that a lot of people have discovered the importance of Dr. Wood's forensic analysis of the data, which proves conclusively that directed energy weaponry was used on 9/11?

What's the difference between what you're doing and what Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity do?

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Some of the partners of the breakthrough energy movement:

EXEMPLAR ZERO: invites and challenges all nations to demonstrate their stated obligations towards mitigating climate change

HUMANITAD:promotion of interfaith and intercultural tolerance and fellowship between all nations


The movement says:
"we recognize and support the important and growing role of conventional renewable energy technologies (wind, solar, biofuels, geothermal, hydroelectric, etc.)"

With one os the goals as:
"Initiating and acting as a facilitator for a global community, a reunion of humanity calling for the new energy paradigm"
Can you pick any holes in Dr. Wood's work, rather than trying to pick holes in others who have nothing to do with Dr. Wood's work?
Actually, I think we all know the answer to that one already.

---

BTW, what do you make of what Neil Kramer said:

"Anyone, in my view, who denies her research without taking a close look at it is either stupid or they're on the payroll. And that's a bold thing to say and I wouldn't usually bother to say something like that but I feel quite strongly about that. And I've seen her interviewed countless time, I've gone over her research at some length to say the least. I have seen numerous attempts to debunk this woman and they fail. And they fail because she is not dealing with anything other than what is there, right in front of our eyes. She's pretty on top of that ethos. She understands that that's the key to getting more people to look at what she's doing. And she definitely exposes the treachery and duplicity of some very influential factions in the 9/11 truth movement, and they just totally dismiss her work. And you cannot dismiss Dr. Judy Wood's work without being, as I said, either just plain bloody ignorant or completely compromised in some way. So I think it's very important."

worcesteradam

  • Guest
I dont believe there is any treachery and duplicity in the 911 truth movement. Just different opinions.

I have reviewed Judy Woods stuff, but those reviews make me feel like i must have missed something

Im not interested in debunking her, only free energy

worcesteradam

  • Guest
maybe you can solve this mystery.
how did you become a Judy Wood fan? what were you into before Judy and where did you hear about her?

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
She has over 100 reviews of her book 'Where Did the Towers Go?' on Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_t

Where are they all coming from?

Useful idiots and Cyber Astroturfing

As for the merit of her case this, I shall summarize :

    "look at this weird photo..."
    "look at this other weird photo"
    ...
    "Therefore it can only have been a SciFi Weapon"


EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Cult following?  Is that your way of saying that a lot of people have discovered the importance of Dr. Wood's forensic analysis of the data, which proves conclusively that directed energy weaponry was used on 9/11?

What's the difference between what you're doing and what Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity do?

As for supporting Judy Wood it would be much simpler just to run up a white flag and have exactly the same effect.


Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
maybe you can solve this mystery.
how did you become a Judy Wood fan?
I wouldn't describe myself as a fan of Dr. Judy Wood.  That's obviously the sort of tabloid label that extremely disingenuous people would need to use in order to misrepresent the growing awareness of the importance of Dr. Wood's work.  It would be a sign of a pathetic kind of desperation, were anyone to use language like that.


what were you into before Judy and where did you hear about her?
I believed in controlled demolition because I was unaware of a lot of evidence that completely disproves it.  I discovered Dr. Wood's work a few years ago when somebody posted something about it on a forum.  There were people there who were very keen on me not looking at Dr. Wood's work for myself, people who told lies about what Dr. Wood's work is about and who engaged in a smear campaign in order to discourage people from looking into it.  The same thing happens on most forums.

The trouble is that when you actually study Dr. Wood's work then there is no doubt about any of it.  Dr. Wood's forensic analysis is conclusive proof of the use of directed free-energy technology on 9/11, no matter how much you insult her and/or people who have taken the time to study the work itself.

http://www.drjudywood.com
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com

Dr. Judy Wood - REAL 9/11 Truth - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB

Offline bovvered

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
Useful idiots and Cyber Astroturfing

As for the merit of her case this, I shall summarize :

    "look at this weird photo..."
    "look at this other weird photo"
    ...
    "Therefore it can only have been a SciFi Weapon"


There are some other issues you seem to have omitted:

the low seismic signal, the lack of debris, Hurrican Erin, the Hutchison Effect, the video footage of steel turning to dust, the magnetometer data, the continuation of the field effects long after 9/11, and dozens of other significant pieces of data.

I wonder why anybody would choose to do that.  Why would anybody summarize all of the different kinds of scientific data as "weird photos"?
Obviously that summary is not true at all, and is a deliberate misrepresentation of Dr. Wood's work.  I encourage people to find out for themselves that that summary is simply untrue.

http://www.drjudywood.com
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com

Dr. Judy Wood - REAL 9/11 Truth - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL199DDA6A5746CDFB