Judy Wood’s Script

wordpress analytics

Below is the script that the Judy Wood Cult members must stick to. It’s from an email I got from Thomas Potter last year. You will be subjected to propaganda from this script if you interact with any members of the Wood Cult. This is just a heads up to all of the unsuspecting 9/11 researchers out there who haven’t encountered The Wood Cult yet.

The textbook, WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph. D., is not about a conspiracy theory or a theory at all. It is a 540 page textbook about factual evidence, empirical evidence that reveals the truth in a way that is undeniable to anyone who reads it. Dr. Wood’s textbook has not been refuted by anyone, nor can it be. Those that choose to focus on hearsay, speculation, conspiracy theories, or unqualified opinions while ignoring irrefutable factual evidence by avoiding it is what keeps a cover-up in place. Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of “9/11 Truthers” verses “The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory” while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence.

It wasn’t poor construction, jet fuel, demolition charges of any type, missiles or planes, mini-nukes, or super-duper-micro-mini-nano-thermite that turned two quarter mile high buildings with a combined weight of over a million tons into microscopic dust particles in mid-air taking less than 10 seconds each. There were over 100 floors in each tower. Try clapping your hands 100 times in 10 seconds.

The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or “belief”. Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying. By reading Dr. Wood’s research and collection of evidence as compiled in her textbook the truth is known, so there is no need to “Re-investigate 9/11”. If you want unity, then seek the truth by reading her textbook. If you were assigned to do a book report, would you read the book or rely on rumors, conjecture, and uninformed opinions from other people? This isn’t about beliefs, it is about evidence.

Now those that have read her textbook know the truth. Those covering it up should be held accountable. After all, it is the cover up that has enabled what has transpired since 9/11, not what happened on 9/11. So the cover up of 9/11 has been a far worse crime than 9/11 itself. Remember, the truth is known and is knowable. What should be done about those covering it up? Should they face a firing squad or spend life in prison?

Sincerely,
Thomas Potter

WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?
Hardcover: 540 pages
Publisher: The New Investigation (September 11, 2010)
Language: English
ISBN-10:
0615412564
ISBN-13:
978-0-615-41256-6
LCCN:
2090916516
Images and Diagrams: over 860 full color
Shipping Weight: 3.5 pounds
Product Dimensions: 10.25 x 7.25 x 1.4 inches
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/buy/

WorldCat Listing
http://www.worldcat.org/title/where-did-the-towers-go-evidence-of-directed-free-energy-technology-on-911/oclc/704874500

On 9/11 over a half mile of vertical building height, containing nearly 150 football fields of floor space, was reduced to a near-level field of dust and debris, where rescue workers walked horizontally or rappelled into empty caverns to look for survivors. How was this possible given the standard laws of engineering and physics? The 9/11 Commission Report bypassed this central issue, as did the report of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Contrary to its stated objective of determining ‘why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed,’ the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) made the stunning admission that it did not investigate how the towers fell. Neither the standard view that the Twin Towers collapsed from fire nor the standard opposition view that they were intentionally detonated by thermite explosives explains the evidence, nor do they follow the laws of engineering and physics. Dr. Wood left Clemson to research the 9/11 conundrum full time, and she has focused her research strictly on physical evidence and scientific principles. WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? provides an understandable, credible, and photo-enhanced summary of Dr. Wood’s disturbing findings, which resulted in her lawsuit against the contractors of the NIST report.

Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photomechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry.

She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers in her areas of expertise.

In the time since 9/11/01, she has applied her expertise in materials science, image analysis and interferometry, to a forensic study of over 40,000 images, hundreds of video clips and a large volume of witness testimony pertaining to the destruction of the WTC complex. Dr. Wood has conducted a comprehensive forensic investigation of what physically happened to the World Trade Center site on 9/11. And, based on her analysis of the evidence she gathered, in 2007, she filed a federal qui tam case for science fraud against the contractors who contributed to the official NIST report about the destruction of the WTC. This case was filed in the US Supreme Court in Dec 2009. To this day, Dr. Wood’s investigation is the only comprehensive forensic investigation in the public domain.

Please find below an October 2011 two hour interview with Dr. Judy Wood from the One Step Beyond TV show with Theo Chalmers on SKY 200 in the U.K. and a book review by Eric Larsen, novelist and Emeritus Professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, The City University of New York.

One Step Beyond with Dr. Judy Wood
http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2011/11/judy-woods-where-did-towers-go.html

Where Did The Towers Go? – Evidence Of Directed Free-Energy Technology On 9/11 – Book Review by Eric Larsen Ph.D.
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/reviews/13984-where-did-the-towers-go-evidence-of-directed-free-energy-technology-on-911-book-review-by-eric-larsen-phd.html

by Eric Larsen Ph.D.
What a complete, unmitigated disaster 9/11 and the ten awful years following it have been—ten years of murder, crime, lawlessness, deceit, stupidity, and blindness that are only now meliorated, at long last, by the publication of Dr. Judy Wood’s unique, revelatory, and unequivocally welcome book, Where Did the Towers Go? The Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11.
Where Did the Towers Go? is a work that offers a starting point from which those who genuinely want to do it can begin, first, to rein in and then, perhaps, even end the wanton criminality and destructiveness of a set of American policies that took as their justification and starting point the horrific events of September 11, 2001.
As everyone knows, 9/11 has been “the justification and starting point” for all manner of destruction, loss, crime, and horror. Without 9/11, there would have been no “Patriot Act,” no abuse of FISA and stripping away of privacy rights, no Military Commissions Act of 2006 with its setting aside of Habeas Corpus, no implementation of Northcom and deployment of our own military forces on domestic American soil (for use against who, you might ask?), and no trashing of Bill of Rights and Constitutional guarantees, no programmatic and precedent-setting weakening and eliminating of right and guarantees so that the very concepts of “citizenship” and “freedom” have been emptied out to the point where setting up concentration camps inside the U.S. is now legal and not a one of us would have any recourse whatsoever if it were decided that we should be thrown into a cell in one of them and forgotten forever.[1]
Without 9/11, there would never have been any fake and opportunistic “Global War on Terror,” would never have been Guantanamo as we know it now, never have been official programs of torture or fake demonizing of Islam in order to justify wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Somalia, or to justify overt plans for the murder of U.S. citizens living in places like, say, Yemen.
There’s more, much more. The complete list of atrocities, crimes, and inhumanities triggered by or justified by 9/11 could fill whole chapters, even books. By using 9/11 as propaganda—by using it as trigger, excuse, justification, or catalyst—the U.S. has betrayed itself, its principles, and its people, and has made itself the world’s most dangerous enemy of all mankind and also of Earth herself.
How can it conceivably be, given these facts, that we, a nation of people who presumably have minds of our own—how can it be that we have done nothing to stop this hideous parade of monstrosities and horrors? In the Foreword to Dr. Wood’s book, I wrote:
It is now almost a decade since 9/11 took place, and in all that time no unassailable, permanent, or, in pragmatic terms, politically influential progress has been made in determining exactly and irrefutably what took place on that day—or what did not take place.
We—that is, we the potential resistance or opposition to U.S. criminal policy—have been spinning our wheels for a complete decade. There are a lot of reasons for this wheel-spinning, including various programs of very skillful and extraordinarily devious cover-up after cover-up after cover-up of the central question of what did happen on 9/11. For, as long as that central question remains unanswered, or for as long as that question can be caused to remain obfuscated, blurred, muddled-up, in doubt—as long as that situation continues, the wheels will continue to spin and people won’t quite know what to do. Dr. Wood is very well aware of this fact. Her own way of putting it is that before accusing someone of a crime, you’ve got to know what crime they committed. In her Author’s Preface, she writes:

You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with. If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it.

That kind of clear, cool, commonsense logic is rare among the many who for ten years have talked a very great deal about 9/11, although it’s obvious that in Dr. Wood such good sense resides in abundance. Here’s the opening of her Author’s Preface:
For the record, I do not believe that our government is responsible for executing the events of 9/11/01—nor do I believe that our government is not responsible for executing the events of 9/11/01. This is not a case of belief [Dr. Wood’s emphasis]. This is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence.
Yes. To say that George did not do X hardly means that Al did do X. Even worse is to imagine that someone’s belief that George did or didn’t do X has any necessary relationship to the truth or the fact of the matter at all. Dr. Wood will have none of this substitution of “belief” for “thinking.” She is a scientist, and a very highly educated one, with “a B.S. in Civil Engineering, an M.S. in Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), and a Ph.D. in Materials Engineering Science” (again from my Foreword). Scientists, as all know or should know, proceed in their thinking not according to belief or desired outcome but according solely and only to what the empirical evidence they have gathered, studied, and observed allows them to conclude or makes it inevitable for them to conclude.

This means also that in undertaking a “forensic study of the evidence” left behind after the 9/11 disaster, if that study is to be scientifically valid, the researcher must analyze and study not some of the available evidence, not most of the available evidence, but all of the available evidence.
To my knowledge, no one other than Dr. Wood has done this. She alone has persisted unflaggingly in her study of all available concrete, empirical evidence, has assiduously avoided any and all argument about 9/11 that may be based on politics, desire, belief, emotion, or pre-set theory but instead has stuck indefatigably, solely—and, I must say, courageously—with the gathering of and the forensic analysis of all the evidence left behind after the 9/11 events.
No wonder it has taken Dr. Wood a considerable time to complete her enormous task of, first, finding and gathering every last shred of available evidence, then of organizing her findings, and after that preparing the entirety in book form—in a volume of 500 pages that contains not just the exhaustive primary text itself but many, many hundreds of photographs, maps, drawings, graphs, charts, illustrations, explanatory passages, not to mention powerfully relevant—and revelatory—historical scientific background material (chapter 17, “the Tesla-Hutchison effect”) and even a “Glossary and Supplemental Information” section that includes, among much else, the terms Dr. Wood has invented or adapted in order to describe in as connotation-free a way as possible the unusual and unfamiliar phenomena she has observed—words like “Cheetos,” “Donuts,” “Lather,” “Fuzzballs,” “Sillystring,” “Toasted Cars,” “Weird Fires”—but that also includes highly technical plates and charts such as “Melting and Boiling Temperatures for Selected Elements” and “Tritium Values,” these being relevant to Dr. Wood’s discussion of the molecular dissociation of materials that, as she proves, took place during the apparently chaotic but in actuality diabolically precise destruction that took place on 9/11.
What emerges, for the reader, from all of this? What emerges is a lucid, clear, riveting, thorough, spell-binding, page-turning, eye-opening description and analysis of that terrible day—Dr. Wood has referred to it as the “new Hiroshima”—when the fearsomely destructive power of directed-energy in weaponized form was demonstrated to the world, and when, at the same time and however bitterly and ironically, the liberating promise of free energy as a means by which both Earth and all humanity might be saved from certain destruction was also demonstrated for everyone in the world to see.

And just what, then, will readers find upon buying, opening, and reading Where Did the Towers Go? They will find an immensely informative, engaging, detailed, thorough, and humane portrayal of the events of 9/11. They will find the telling of a calamitous, hideous, and horrifying story that, thanks to the clear eye and conscientious mind (and enormous heart) of the teller, is made a testament of homage to all those who suffered and died while at the same time remaining a scientific and forensic descriptive analysis of what actually happened that day: That day when directed-energy weaponry was brought to bear on the World Trade Center buildings, destroying them completely while at the same time leaving almost no rubble, producing no high temperatures of the kind conventionally associated with explosives on the one hand or molten materials on the other, and leaving behind a surreal aftermath of tumbled and overturned firetrucks, scorched cars, missing engine blocks, hundreds of thousands of sheets of unburned office paper floating down to rest, still unburned, amidst flames that have little or no heat of the kind that is produced by oxidization, and an absence of the seismic shock that would be expected from “collapse” at free-fall speed of buildings weighing many hundreds of thousands of tons, including the North Tower, South Tower, World Trade Center Seven, and other WTC buildings that underwent destruction.
In the story of 9/11 as told by Dr. Wood, everything is observed, analyzed, and evaluated for exactly what it is, and therefore almost nothing is the way we have been told it was. Readers will find for themselves Dr. Wood’s proof that the extremely minimal amount of rubble (the hurried shipping of mass amounts of steel to China is a falsehood and red herring) left behind after the disappearance of the towers indicates that the vast tonnage of these enormous buildings never did reach the ground but instead, through a process of molecular dissociation (Glossary: “Molecules separate or even repel each other”), the buildings’ mass was turned to dust in a shorter time than would have been required for that same mass, in solid form, to have reached earth.
The seismic evidence, fastidiously laid out for the reader in prose, charts, graphs, and maps, shows the same reality: Even were WTC1 and WTC2 actually to have “collapsed” at free-fall speed (a speed that physics proves unattainable but that’s used by Dr. Wood for argument’s sake), they would have required a minimum of ten seconds for that process to be completed, whereas no seismic signal from weight hitting the ground exists for more than eight seconds, while in the case of the 47-story WTC7, which disappeared with equivalent speed, there is even less seismic disturbance recorded, bordering on none.
Dr. Wood is a highly gifted observer of multitudinous varieties of evidence—manifestations of evidence that she looks at for what they are, not for what others may have suggested, said, hinted, or believed they are. Here are the opening five sentences of Dr. Wood’s Introduction:
On 9/11, I realized that what was being seen and heard on television was contradictory and appeared to violate the laws of physics. I remember watching the TV in the faculty conference room. The TV kept playing the same film over and over, showing what appeared to be a building unraveling like a sweater. I had never seen a building unravel like a sweater, and I tried to imagine what was going on that might make it look that way. Certainly the time it took the building to go away did not make sense.
This is the same independent, thoughtful observer who has studied literally thousands upon thousands of images from 9/11, noticing things that others might miss entirely. On the broad expanse of ground zero, for example, “believed” to have had a lake of molten steel underneath it, Dr. Wood notices rubber hoses lying around, and puddles of water, the hoses not melting, the water not boiling or even steaming. Workers are seen walking around on this same expanse—and they are not being cooked like fricassees.
Again and again, Dr. Wood looks at images and finds in them revelatory and notable details. In “Weird Fires” (Chapter 13), most of us see flaming vehicles, but Dr. Wood notices, just above the “fire,” a tree with green leaves that are un-burnt, unaffected, un-scorched, and unseared, another indication that this “fire” or these “flames” were without high heat. In “Toasted Cars” (Chapter 11), most of us see only the dreadfully scorched interior of an automobile, but Dr. Wood notices the un-“burnt” window-trim. Or most of us see only the “toasted interior of car 2723,” not noticing the curious fact of the many small circular holes that have been created in the metal floor of the car, almost like holes caused by birdshot, but similar in shape to the curiously circular holes in the broken window-glass of buildings across the street from WTC1 And WTC2.
Time and time and time again Dr. Wood sees things for us that are right in front of our eyes but unnoticed. Among the most moving examples of this gifted vision may be Dr. Wood’s seeing more than the rest of us do in the images of “jumpers” from WTC1 and WTC2 before those buildings “went away.” This is in the book’s third chapter, called “The ‘Jumpers’” and sub-titled “It Was Like Raining People.” It opens this way:
Among the most horrific images from 9/11 is that of “The Falling Man,” who came to represent the many people who fell to their death that day. These people are often referred to as “jumpers,” but did they all, in fact, jump? And if they did, why did they do it? Once again, the question requires a closer look and examination.
Dr. Wood continues:
Looking at these images can be difficult. It was too difficult for me until I realized that these people are communicating to us. They want us to hear them and they want their stories told. Once I realized this, I could not look away, for I had made them a promise to look at what they were trying to tell us. In this chapter I attempt to fulfill my promise to them.
And fulfill that promise indeed she does. This chapter of Where Did the Towers Go? should be reprinted in every journal, magazine, and newspaper across the country and throughout the world, so immense is its sensitivity, so humane its sympathy, and so extraordinary its descriptive power. Many of the “jumpers,” Dr. Wood observes, seem to be trying to take off their clothes, sometimes even as they are already in free-fall toward the street below. It may be, she suggests, that they are in a reflexive reaction against a pain comparable to that experienced by inadvertently placing one’s hand on a hot burner. One’s response in that case is instinctive and wholly involuntary, like people’s responses when they are hit by “active denial” micro-wave weaponry, which may quite possibly have been akin to the “directed energy” force those in the towers were being subjected to when they became what we now call “jumpers.”
Dr. Wood, however, never does and never will make any conclusion regarding the “jumpers” or anything else that’s in excess of what the empirical evidence simultaneously causes and allows her to make. A prominent motif in the book is the statement that “Empirical evidence is the truth that theory must mimic,” said by Dr. Wood to have been “A powerful statement by someone who has taught me well.”
Certainly so. Dr. Wood makes no assertion beyond what the available evidence can cause or allow her to make—and yet her observations about the jumpers are among the most intensely fascinating and moving sections of a book that, throughout, will surprise readers by its poignancy and emotional power, all the while impeccably honoring the strictness and necessity of its scientific, forensic, empirical method.

It’s not easy to close a discussion of a book as rich, broad, significant, timely, and revelatory as Where Did the Towers Go? The range of research reflected in the book is immense, the power of its conclusions equally so. Dr. Wood does nothing less than show us that a source of power—power reaped from energy already existing in the world around us, what is called “free energy”—does indeed exist, has a long scientific history, and can be used either for monumentally destructive purposes, as it was on 9/11, or for peaceful, non-polluting, life-enhancing and earth-preserving purposes of the kind envisioned by one of its earliest interpreters, Nikola Tesla (1856-1943).
Probably nothing has resulted in more calumny, derision, misrepresentation, and programmatic smearing of Dr. Wood than this central element of her research. Even the ever-dubious Wikipedia gets in on the act, declaring that “in pseudoscience” the term “free energy,” as in the phrase “free energy suppression,” refers to “a conspiracy theory that advanced energy technologies are being suppressed by special interest groups.”
Every intelligent, attentive, and open-minded reader of Dr. Wood’s paradigm-changing book, however, will quickly discover that Wikipedia and those akin to it are the tendentious and devious pretenders, while Dr. Wood brings to this part of her subject the open eyes and mind, the objectivity and steadiness of view, not to mention the courage, that mark her here as being, once again, the true, observing scientist.
One of the most commanding sections of Where Did the Towers Go? is its seventeenth chapter, “The Tesla-Hutchison Effect.” The thoroughness and clarity of that chapter, the immense detail of it, not to mention its close analysis of enormous numbers of pieces of evidence—these characteristics, along with the historical background that the chapter provides, make it the foundation stone for every other part of Where Did the Towers Go?
I won’t duplicate the entire argument of the Tesla-Hutchison chapter, or summarize it, or even try to. The case is there for all who are interested—for everyone—to see. The observable evidence is there, examples both of the curious results achieved by the Canadian experimenter and researcher himself—John Hutchison, for whom the effect is named—and examples of the great number of parallel results that are observable in materials left behind after the destruction of 9/11. Dr. Wood assembles and organizes these examples, and then she guides the reader through descriptive explanations of what her eye saw but that the reader’s eye may have missed: The close detail, for example, of fissured metal, peeled beams, or materials ruptured from the inside.
In Table 15, on page 349, Dr. Wood provides a list of “Characteristics of the Hutchison Effect and the WTC remains.” I won’t re-create the whole list, but, among others, it contains the following:
Slow Bending of Metals, Shredded Metal Structures, Fractured Metal Structures, Peeling appearance, Fusion of Dissimilar Materials, Thinning and Rapid Aging, Lift or Disruption, Toasted-Looking Metal, Circular holes in material, Rounded Holes in Glass, Lather, Fuming, Transmutation, Weird Fires, Melting Without Heat, Metal Luminance Without Heat
For reasons doubtless best known to them, those who have placed themselves in opposition to Dr. Wood’s research and work—and now in some cases in opposition to the unmolested public circulation of Where Did the Towers Go?—have often chosen this segment aspect of her studies as a target for smear and calumniation. John Hutchison, perhaps because he holds no academic affiliation, has been attacked as a quack and showman, although if such were really the case I find it curious why the military both of Canada and the U.S. would have shown such interest in his work as they have or why researchers would have attempted—sometimes successfully—to repeat his experiments.
The suppression of breakthroughs in the exploration and mastery of free energy has a long history, beginning with Nikola Tesla himself, whose transmitting tower in Shoreham, New York, built (1901-1905) with financial support from J. P. Morgan, “was planned to be the first broadcast system, transmitting both signals and power without wires to any point on the globe” (http://www.teslasociety.com/biography.htm). The effort ended poorly. “Because of a dispute between Morgan and Tesla as to the final use of the tower. . . Morgan withdrew his funds. The financier’s classic comment was, ‘If anyone can draw on the power, where do we put the meter?’” (same source)
Near the same time as the construction of Tesla’s Wardenclyffe Laboratory and transmitting tower on Long Island, George Piggott, in his own laboratory, achieved the levitation of small silver balls (Where Did the Towers Go? p. 352), while Edward Leedskalnin, “a Latvian emigrant. . . known for his unusual understanding of the interaction between magnetism and gravity,”
single-handedly built the home he called Coral Castle, in Florida City, cutting and moving limestone pieces weighing up to 35 tons using simple tools and a chain hoist that could not in “real” terms support such a load. (Where Did the Towers Go? .p. 352)
In 1953, another inventor and experimenter, Thomas Townsend Brown (1905-1985), proposed that a consortium of major universities and research institutes join together in what was to be called “Project Winterhaven,” the purpose being to continue “Research on the Control of Gravitation.” “In exploring the ‘electro-gravitic couple,’ Brown had already brought about the levitation of materials in his own experimentation, but he was convinced there was much more to be learned about the process he had begun to control,” a process that he “felt certain. . . would make possible enormous advances not only in communication but also and more notably in propulsion.” In his proposal for the project, he wrote:
It is believed by the sponsors of Project WINTERHAVEN that the technical development of the electrogravitic reaction would usher in a new age of speed and power and of revolutionary new methods of transportation and communication. Theoretical considerations would predict that. . . top limits of speed may be raised far beyond those of jet propulsion or rocket drive, with possibilities eventually of approaching the speed of light in “free space.” The motor which may be forthcoming will be essentially soundless, vibrationless and heatless. (Where Did the Towers Go?, pp. 355-356)
It is impossible for any reader today, especially one who was also alive in 1953, in the time of the newly-accelerating and ever-accelerating corporatizing of America, to be surprised that so promising an exploration of a non-polluting and renewable energy source as Project Winterhaven represented would in fact have come to no fruition, or that Thomas Townsend Brown would have ended his life in relative obscurity.
Oil-for-profit interests ruled and reigned in 1953, just as we all know they still do—providing reason for scientists, writers, and researchers like Dr. Judy Wood and John Hutchison to be maligned, sidelined, and made ignorable by smokescreen, trickery, and deceit. And yet at the same time as the Earth-rapists’ do all they can to kill off public awareness of free energy and to smear and tamp down socially-conscious research into it, there are others who are ever so eager to find out everything they can about it and to carry on secret programs of research into it. Who? Well, the militaries of the world, for one.
And so we have the schizoid situation of seeing, on the one hand, organized calumniation and programs of deceit aimed at figures like Dr. Judy Wood and John Hutchison for exploring the free-energy tradition of Nikola Tesla, while, on the other hand, we have the demonstration, on 9/11, for all the world to see, of just exactly how horrendously destructive weaponized forms of directed free-energy can be.
The inescapable conclusion is that those who are dictators and controllers of the world have galloped ahead in their work of weaponizing free energy while those seeking, in the tradition of Tesla, to explore the benefits of free energy for humanity are ridiculed, silenced, and persecuted.
It is time to bring this piece of writing to an end. It is time for a conclusion. And I conclude that any intelligent, interested, and open-minded reader of Where Did the Towers Go? will come away from the experience of that reading with something of extraordinary value. Another passage from my Foreword:
Those who read Dr. Wood’s book fairly, openly, and thoroughly will take away with them the gift of knowing once and for all what happened on 9/11. They will take away the gift of knowing that they have at last been shown the truth clearly and plainly, no matter how different this truth may be from what they have been told for many years by supposedly higher authorities, from the government itself on through newspapers, journalists, progressive radio programs and commentators, even figures from the “9/11 truth movement.” Dr. Wood’s book will give all those who read it carefully a solid foundation for the courage to believe not what they may have been told by one authority or another on any level and for many years, but to believe instead what their own minds, their own eyes, and their own reason tell them: That is, scientific truth as revealed through close forensic study of all of the evidence that has been left behind. As Dr. Wood says again and again, she arrives at truth through the study of evidence. The truth is not what anyone, no matter who they are, might say it is. To the place where the evidence leads, and to that place alone—that is where the truth is.
Readers of Dr. Wood’s book will see for themselves evidence of levitation (overturned firetrucks and automobiles, testimony from people again and again that they were lifted up, transported thirty feet or sixty feet, then let down again); will see for themselves evidence of the absence of heat on 9/11 (unburned paper; the EMS worker whose coat, sneakers, and hair caught on fire as she ran but who had no injuries beyond bumps and bruises the next morning); evidence of molecular dissociation (automobile engine blocks simply missing); evidence of the alteration, including the liquification, of materials without the heating of materials (writes Dr. Wood: “Things that are hot glow, but not everything that glows is hot”); and evidence again and again that the weight of the WTC buildings never did hit the ground (the reinforced cement “bathtub” that ringed the below-water-level WTC complex remained almost entirely unharmed—and yet after 9/11 the mere rolling over it of heavy machinery endangered the integrity of the cement ring, this while the unimaginable “weight” of all the great towers had not harmed it).
The examples are immense in number and in impact, as readers will find. Again, from my Foreword:
Let us make a list of the things that Dr. Wood proves in Where Did the Towers Go?—proves not just beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt whatsoever:
1) That the “official” or “government” explanation for the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11 is, scientifically, false through and through.
2) That the WTC buildings were not destroyed by heat generated from burning jet fuel or from the conventional “burning” of any other substance or substances.
3) That the WTC buildings were not destroyed by mini-nuclear weaponry.
4) That the WTC buildings were not destroyed by conventional explosives of any kind, be they TNT, C4 or RDX, nor were they destroyed by welding materials such as thermite, thermate, or “nano-thermite.”
5) That there was in fact no high heat at all involved either in bringing about the destruction of the buildings or generated by the destruction of them.
And yet once more:
And now let us turn to what Dr. Wood proves beyond any reasonable doubt.
She proves that the kinds of evidence left behind after the destruction—including “fires” that emit no heat and have no apparent source (“Weird Fires”); glowing steel beams and molten metal, neither of them emitting high heat; the levitation and flipping of extremely heavy objects, including automobiles and other vehicles; patterns of scorching that cannot have been caused by conventional “fire” (“Toasted Cars”); the sudden exploding of objects, people, vehicles, and steel tanks; the near-complete absence of rubble after the towers’ destruction, but instead the presence of entire buildings’-worth of dust, both airborne and heavier-than-air (“Dustification”)—Dr. Wood proves that these and other kinds of evidence cannot have been created by conventional oxygen-fed fire, by conventional explosives, or by nuclear fission. At the same time, however, she shows that all of them are in keeping with the patterns and traits of directed-energy power, of force-fields directed into interference with one another in ways following the scientific logic of Nikola Tesla’s thought and experimentation—and in ways also paralleling the work of contemporary Canadian scientist and experimenter John Hutchison, who, following Tesla’s lead, has for many years produced again and again and again “the Hutchison effect,” creating results that include weird fires (having no apparent fuel); the bending, splintering, or fissuring of bars and rods of heavy metal; the coring-out, from inside, of thick metal rods; and the repeated levitation of objects.

There are important things that I haven’t mentioned—the presence and bizarre behavior of Hurricane Erin offshore in the Atlantic Ocean in the days preceding 9/11 and on the day itself (why didn’t news and weather reports so much as mention the presence of this massive, Category 3 hurricane just offshore?); the recording of thunder at all three of the major NYC airports on 9/11, a clear-blue-skied day of “perfect” weather; the presence of an enormous high-pressure cell approaching the New York City area from the west; the dramatic fluctuations in the earth’s magnetic field at key moments in the destruction of the WTC buildings, as recorded by six Alaskan magnetometer data sites.
Dr. Wood’s book is of an almost indescribable importance. Her research has been denigrated and accused as incomplete, and now her book is being denigrated and accused as incomplete, for failure to identify (and, as Dr. Wood says, “give the serial number of”) the precise, specific, exact “weapon” that was used on 9/11 “as well as the social security numbers of all who were involved.” But as Dr. Wood writes,
Empirical evidence is the truth that theory must mimic. I have repeated this statement several times in this book because its importance cannot be over emphasized. In today’s culture of over simplification and standardized multiple-choice testing, many have an impulse to name a known technology (e.g. thermite, TNT, RDX, nukes, progressive collapse, HAARP, scalar weapons, torsion physics, Nazi Bell, etc.) instead of looking at the evidence that the use of one technology or another has left behind. …
Some people feel they are being more scientific when they use the name of a known technology to describe unknown phenomena, but the opposite is true. Such an approach omits evidence that does not fit any known technology. For some people, the term “HAARP” or the term “scalar weapons” or the term “Nazi Bell” is used as a catch-all weapon that can be blamed for whatever evidence needs to be explained, like the ultimate “boogieman,” and without their even knowing what these weapons can do. Furthermore, if the full capabilities are classified information, they would not be publicly known. And a weapon that could produce all of the effects we saw on 9/11 would certainly not be in the public domain, no matter whose weapon it was. For these reasons, I have tried to focus on the phenomena, not on a trendy name of a particular technology. The evidence must come before the theory. It is understanding what the technology can do that matters, not the name of it. For these reasons, I have resisted the impulse to name a known technology and instead have focused on the physical evidence. There will likely be those who will not be as successful in resisting the impulse to put a name of a known technology on the producer of this evidence. This naming, however, will only serve to pull a veil of mystery over it.
Clearly, we have been lied to for an entire decade in regard to the truth of 9/11. Just as clearly, the “9/11 truth movement” has revealed itself to be as much a part of the cover-up as it is of anything else. At the same time, knowing what really did happen on 9/11 is the only way—is the essential first step—toward any significant taking of positions or any significant political action.
9/11 was an enormity—an event greater in its importance and in the vastness of its result than was the sinking of the Maine, than were the manipulations that brought about Pearl Harbor, or than were the falsifications that led to the Tonkin Bay Resolution. 9/11 was the faked “attack” that “justified” the “Global War on Terror,” that “justified” the demonization of Islam, that “justified” war in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, and elsewhere, and that “justified” the reduction of the United States from a free republic into a police state, albeit, perhaps, not yet an entirely realized one.
I wrote that “Where Did the Towers Go? is a work, assuming that its content and message are properly and fairly heeded, that offers a starting point from which those who genuinely want to do it can begin, first, to rein in and then, perhaps, even end the wanton criminality and destructiveness of a set of American policies that took as their justification and starting point the horrific events of September 11, 2001.”
In our world, science and politics may be inextricable from one another. Dr. Judy Wood has shown us, scientifically, the full extent and the obscene measure of the enormous lie that was 9/11. It is now up to all of us to study the lesson she has offered us, since without having learned that lesson, it will not be possible to know how to take the next steps toward the freeing of humanity from the half-visible tyranny that now marches it toward its destruction.
Emeritus professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY, Eric Larsen is founding Publisher and Editor of The Oliver Arts & Open Press. His most recent book is The Skull of Yorick: The Emptiness of American Thinking at a Time of Grave Peril—Studies in the Cover-up of 9/11.
[1] “Consider where we’ve come. Torture is legal. The stripping of habeas corpus is legal, not just for outlanders but for citizens. With the Bushiscti’s change of the Insurrection Act, and with that change’s attendant weakening of Posse Comitatus—Treblinka would now be legal in America. Treblinka is now legal in America.” From my book, The Skull of Yorick, chapter 4, “The Aftermath of the Great Crime of 9/11: America Aids in the Staging of its Own Murder,” page 24 (from The Oliver Arts & Open Press).

__________________________

Below is a list of some of the principal data involved with the destruction of the World Trade Center complex that must be explained. What I find intriguing is point 39, Hurricane Erin.

1 The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain by a free fall speed “collapse.”

2 They underwent mid-air pulverization (dustification) 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.

Hurricane Erin is covered in Chapter 18 (pages 395-412) of WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood.

This is the introduction to the chapter:

“It was a beautiful early-autumn morning in New York City. September 11, 2001, started out calm, with pleasant temperatures and crystalline blue skies. Some had taken time to do early morning errands. But very few of those people, in fact very few among the entire population of New York City, knew that a massive hurricane was located at that very same time just off the shore of Long Island. That storm was Hurricane Erin, as seen in Figure 411:”

Why was Hurricane Erin traveling straight for NYC from September 3rd-11th 2001, yet it was not reported on by any major media broadcast in that area? Most people are totally unaware that Hurricane Erin came closest to New York City and reached its largest size on 9/11. Hurricane Erin was slightly larger than Hurricane Katrina (i.e. Kinetic Energy as measured by Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index*), and hurricanes rarely head straight for NYC, so why wasn’t it reported on by any major corporate media station? Furthermore, why was Hurricane Erin still not reported on when it reached its closest point to NYC on the morning of September 11th, just before it diverted from its straight-line trajectory by suddenly turning and heading out to sea? How were meteorologists absolutely certain that this hurricane would make a sharp right-hand turn away from New York City? Not only is New York City near sea level, but so is most of Long Island. Evacuation from those areas would be a mammoth undertaking and could not be organized at a moment’s notice and yet the public remained uninformed. The data shows that Erin slowed down as it approached New York City and then remained almost stationary during the morning of 9/11. Immediately after the World Trade Center complex was attacked, Erin began to move away from New York City. Coincidentally, Hurricane Erin was studied more than any other hurricane had been studied before, and more was learned from it than had been learned from any hurricane before it.

NASA Makes A Heated 3-D Look Into Hurricane Erin’s Eye
Hurricane Erin raced across the North Atlantic and along the eastern seaboard in September 2001. She was used as an experiment for a study to improve hurricane tracking and intensity predictions, allowing meteorologists to provide more accurate and timely warnings to the public.

The mission originated from the Naval Air Station in Jacksonville, Fla. The mission united researchers from 10 universities, five NASA centers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. CAMEX-4 is a series of field research investigations to study tropical cyclones — storms commonly known as hurricanes.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051007090048.htm

Mission Summary – Hurricane Erin
http://web.archive.org/web/20040116023331/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/HFP2001/Mission_Sum_010910H.pdf

9/11 Morning Weather Reports | NYC Not Warned of Approaching Hurricane Erin
http://www.youtube.com/v/1xWjdYnpxUg

*The accumulated cyclone energy index (ACE) for Hurricane Erin was HIGHER than the ACE index for Hurricane Katrina. This subject is covered in Chapter 18, section E, page 405 of WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?

Accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) is a measure used by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to express the activity of individual tropical cyclones and entire tropical cyclone seasons, particularly the North Atlantic hurricane season. It uses an approximation of the energy used by a tropical system over its lifetime and is calculated every six-hour period. Kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity, and by adding together the energy per some interval of time, the accumulated energy is found. As the duration of a storm increases, more values are summed and the ACE also increases such that longer-duration storms may accumulate a larger ACE than more-powerful storms of lesser duration.

To buy bulk volumes of WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? send an email to: book@wheredidthetowersgo.com

“Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.”

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

14 thoughts on “Judy Wood’s Script

  1. I just listened to part of your recent Fetzer broadcast. I’ve learned a lot from him, and he’s led me to sources like you. I have also read Dr. Wood’s book and listened to hours of her lectures. I do not understand why there is such a kerfuffle among you save perhaps that awful word, “ego.”

    I don’t have a problem with Dr. Wood being right or wrong in her pursuits, nor with her refusal to draw conclusions unsupported by evidence. She is too soon into the profess to have anything but hypothesis, and we may never get beyond that. We are, after all, dealing with professional criminals who are expert in psy op. We may never know enough to have a theory. But I read everything I can.

    So why not admit that you, Wood and Fetzer are on the same train headed the same direction, and work with one another instead of this divisive stuff. Dr. Wood appears to me to be shy, withdrawn, socially awkward. Dr. Fetzer is boisterous and assertive. They don’t mix, but his attacks on her are unwarranted if they share objectives. And if my take on her personality is correct, a risky bet, then his personality will drive hers to withdrawal. Perhaps that’s why she is reticent in dealing with him.

    Her followers are a cult? That is the nature of followers. That is people. So what? She didn’t make them that way. I like ornithology and birding, a fun pastime, but there is a group called “Audubon” who do the same thing – argue and lecture and take all of the curiosity out of the pursuit. Those kinds of people are everywhere. That’s all self-gratification, and of no import.

    And anyway, they got away with it. It’s 11 years later, and the resultant wars are still ongoing, the underlying justification the crime committed that day. Perhaps it’s time to simplify and get on with the business of trying to restore some sanity to an already-insane country even on that day.

    Here’s what works for me when I discuss this with beleivers: The video of the plane hitting the south tower violates Newton’s Third Law, and therefore cannot have happened. That is one true thing. What that plane did on that video is physically impossible.

    Therefore, the video is fake. If the video is fake, so too is the idea that planes were hijacked. (No plane = no hijackers. If there were no hijackers, then this was not an Arab conspiracy, as Osama and the hijackers are the only Arab link. If there was no plane and no Arab hijackers, then o attacks on the Arab world are unjustified aggression. f this the cease, our leadership has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, the worst offense to come out of Nuremberg, aggressive war. They are therefe culpable under our own and international law.

    We may never know how ti was done. They got away with it. But if we can demonstrate one true thing, perhaps experts in the field of international law can bring a case at the Hague for prosecution of our official at that time and currently engaged in aggressive war. The Nuremberg punishment was death. They are certainly worthy of that sentence.

    • “So why not admit that you, Wood and Fetzer are on the same train headed the same direction, and work with one another instead of this divisive stuff.” We’ve tried Mark. We’ve tried to bury the hatchet with them. Wood and The Cult are having none of it. Judy Wood works for the other side – the folks that brought you 9/11. A lot of well-meaning folks like yourself read her book and think that there might be something to it. You don’t see the attacks and intimidation tactics they employ behind the scenes. They are NOT a research group. It IS a cult. And when we refer to “the Cult” we’re talking about people like Andrew Johnson, Emmanuel Goldstein, Thomas Potter and Pete Santilli. ALL they do is attack other researchers. They have no theory to advance, Judy will NEVER name names and they are not interested in an exchange of ideas. You either buy into her spiel 100% AS IS or face the wrath of Judy. What you see in the above script is pretty much ALL they will discuss. She’s a gatekeeper most likely working for the intel community.

      There is plenty of evidence that nukes were used on 9/11 to destroy the WTC buildings. The mini-nuke theory will eventually gain prominence but it may take a few more years for that to happen.

      You are 100% right that there were no hijackers. I’m not a plane expert by any stretch but we know that no commercial airliners hit ANY of the targets on 9/11. What exactly did happen is still up for debate.

      • As a citizen, my job is to try to understand events and hold leaders accountable. But 9/11 presents a massive challenge in this area, as I am a non-scientist and am therefore not qualified to judge evidence. For that reason, I decided to look for one true thing, and that is the obvious CGI and violation of Newton’s Third Law in the videos we were shown of planes hitting the towers.

        So I will never know exactly how they pulled this off. I just know that they got away with it. And because of that one true thing, I know that many others thing MUST be false.

        As a citizen, I also have to decide who is trying to inform me, and who is involved in other activities such as misleading or obfuscating, or creation of division and internal turmoil.

        I am not a follower, not a “cult” member. Dr. Wood specifically suggests that people have to think for themselves, and not be blind followers. She offers advice in how to spot “ops” in this game. Inherent in her presentation is a refusal to be part of “9/11 Truth” and all that entails, as the movement is infested with ops and agents provocateur and blind followers.

        The thing is to decide who is real and who is not, and I have to judge the tree by its fruit, and it is here that I am most troubled: You and Prof. Fetzer are shrill in your criticism of Dr. Wood though she has done no harm.

        You say her cult following is only out to divide, and yet this is what you are doing. Based on that evidence, I tentatively want to distrust you and Dr. F, rely on Dr. W for evidence, but most importantly, move on! They got away with it.

        At Nuremburg they did not try to analyze the process by which German generals decided to engage in aggressive war. They did not weigh the bombs or try to advance a theory of Nazi complicity. They did not try to measure the caliber of ordnance. They merely judged the outcome and hanged the bastards. We had our own bastards that should have been toe-twitching too, but that is not my issue.

        Move Forward! They committed a crime and a few pieces of solid evidence are enough to satisfy me on that subject. They got away with it. We only need to convince our fellow citizens of that one thing, and for that, only a few pieces of evidence are necessary. You guys appear to be in the angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin business. Maybe someday we’ll have better details, but the perps here are on to new and better crimes. Your movement is sideways, and not useful, in my humble opinion.

        It’s interesting for sure. I loves me a good mystery too. And honestly, with all due respect. I am but a citizen trying to make my way.

      • Mark if you take a physics based approach to 9/11 research then you will eventually come to accept the mini/micro nuke theory. The dust and water samples from Ground Zero prove fission and fusion. 9/11 was a nuclear event. The evidence is in. You just need to study it. Read the articles posted on this blog and you’ll get up to speed in short order.

        If you start touting or even entertaining the mini-nuke theory publicly you WILL be attacked by Judy Wood and her Cult of attack dogs. They started berating and intimidating me and I’ve had enough. I’m not going to sit back and take it I’m going to expose these guys. They’re not a research group and if you follow them for any length of time that will become apparent.

  2. Honestly, I’ve not encountered her followers. I’ve only watched her videos and read her book, and I’m not threatened by any of it. It may well be as you say, or as she says, or a combination, but I resist the notion that I must choose. I’ll continue to read you and Dr. F as well, and try to keep using my brain as best I can. Could be that you’re all doing good work.

      • I’ve come to suspect that “9/11 Truth” itself is a clever blind alley designed to keep people in perpetual suspension, not knowing what is up or down or around, constantly befuddled by false leaders and infighting. When I see someone like Dr. Wood, unassuming, self-published, unwilling to speculate beyond evidence, come under attack, I want to suspect the attackers as being something less than genuine. I also want to restrain my own impulses, and remember that in a hall of mirrors there is no way of telling what is true except by persistence and passage of time.

        I first encountered you via Fetzer, whom I’ve come more to dislike than distrust. I cannot bear to listen to him much, as I know when one of his sentences starts where that sentence will end, five minutes hence. But I also note that he is vicious in his attacks on Dr. Wood, and for no apparent reason, as they should be comrades in arms. Who cares if they differ on specifics? We are all in pursuit of truth. But he has taken her on as a cause. Couple that with the notion that becomes stronger as I listen to him that he is just not that bright, despite his self-proclamations, and we either have a fool or a dissembler. Since you largely echo him, I suspect (we can never know) that you are merely another blind alley.

        And what does it matter? For all of her original work, Wood is no “Truther,” and is looking beyond 9/11 itself, as she knows (as do I) that there is no reaching the American public. If that is the objective of all of this, it is a fool’s errand. There’s got to be a bigger reason to pursue truth, and she may have hit on it when she says that we should focus on this new energy source. That’s the best that can come of it. 9/11 happened. They got away with it.

        I’ve decided not to trust you, Mr. Fox, thinking that you, like Fetzer, are either unable to focus on the big picture, or are willingly setting people against one another.

      • Well Mark I don’t care if you trust me or not. Do your homework; it’s not a matter of trust. Judy Wood is totally full of shit no matter how you slice it. I got tired of being a punching bag so I’m going after her now. There is no joining forces with Judy Wood’s cult (unless you buy their BS lock, stock and barrel). They work for the other side. You can’t be for 9/11 Truth AND Judy Wood. She’ll even tell you that.

        I have it on good authority that the CIA wrote her book. The writing style of the material on her website is similar to Eric Larsen who wrote the above script. Ask Judy if she actually wrote her book.

        You’ll figure out Judy is a gatekeeper and a distraction soon enough. People are catching on to her scam.

  3. Hall of mirrors, puzzle palace. She wants to move on, finds little use In the juggling. Fetzer more than once has jumped to unfounded conclusions, and is quick to attack. Judge a tree by its fruit. I judge that you andFetzer are either dupes or ops. One thing for sure, you are ot moving forward. Just between you and me, they got away with it. That part is over. The American people will not change their minds. This was one hell of a scam.

    • You certainly sound like you’ll fit good with the Cult. I haven’t given up on bringing the perps to justice. All 9/11 researchers need to keep this little formula in mind: massive explosions + radioactive fallout = nuclear bombs. If you are unable to grasp that concept then you’re a dipshit Mark.

      • “Dipshit?” That’s your studied conclusion? It is telling how little prodding it takes here to reduce you to schoolyard volcabulary. I listened to Pete Santilli having the same effect on Fetzer. He reduced the man to a Java the Hut bowl of quivering obscenity.

        You stand or fall on your merits without regard to anyone else. You and I are non-scientists, and so must be cautious. Your high level of certainty is a matter of concern, but I must ask why you think it so important that we believe your theory over anyone else’s. Honest inquiry examines all evidence and discounts one hypothesis over another due to hard data, and without emotion. Your words to me are an appeal to support your point of view while engaging in personal denigration of another based on obfuscation, or elevation of some evidence in an attempt to cloud other evidence – it’s a psychological manipulation. Since you were so quickly reduced to obscenity, the rather sophisticated psychological ploy seems beyond your capability. This would make you a tool.

        I do not trust you at this point based on your attempts not to win your case by evidence, but rather by character assassination.

      • Yes you are a dipshit. If you can’t read Prager’s PowerPoint or mine that has OVERWHELMING evidence for fission and fusion then don’t waste my time. And you got some balls calling me an op. You’re full of it Mark.

        Judy denies explosions as she stands in front of a video of the North Tower exploding in every direction and a mushroom cloud rising behind her. She’s a gatekeeper. Judy will NEVER name any names of the perps because SHE WORKS FOR THE PERPS! Email her and ask her who was was behind 9/11.

        You’re either a Wood groupie or a total chump. I don’t care either way. I don’t have time to babysit people that can’t read USGS or DOE reports.

        Massive explosions + radioactive fallout = nuclear bombs. If you deny nukes you’re either clueless or working for the other side.

Comments are closed.