Title: 911 What Happened - Not How It Happened - Dr Judy Wood Source:
[None] URL Source:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gFW-sZrmSs Published:Nov 16, 2012 Author:Judy Wood Post Date:2012-11-16 10:10:44 by Horse Keywords:None Views:2624 Comments:115
That woman is a total nutcase that could have had a hand in the murder of one of her students. She is being used by disinfo agents to discredit 9/11 truth.
She is being used by disinfo agents to discredit 9/11 truth.
I'm getting REALLY sick and tired of this entire 9/11 thing, and I've been a vocal critic of the government lies since before I even signed up here on 4um half a decade ago.
The disinfo, and the effects it has on unsuspecting readers, has been amazing. They have more power over the general public than those who present facts and actual truth.
So why should I care, when apparently, many of those who proclaim themselves "truthers" don't?
So why should I care, when apparently, many of those who proclaim themselves "truthers" don't?
Real Truthers ALWAYS CARE. Always. We can not give up, we do not forget, we get to the bottom of things and we share what we learn and you can take it or leave it.
Getting to know the truth is about setting ourselves free.
We share the information that others maybe free as well.
Real Truthers ALWAYS CARE. Always. We can not give up, we do not forget, we get to the bottom of things and we share what we learn and you can take it or leave it.
Each and every time I have attempted to present facts when conversing with you in regards to the 9/11 attacks, you have attacked me with a barrage of profantities and insults, along with wild claims with no basis in fact.
Seems to me if you actually cared about what the TRUTH was, you wouldn't behave in that manner.
Since you must have guessed by now I had bozo'd you, apparently you thought you'd play the nice guy in speaking to my handle, trying to score some "points". You're just the gift that keeps on giving.
#36. To: FormerLurker, lod, GreyLmist, wudidiz, RickyJ, horse, itistoolate, christine, all, Ping, pang walla walla bing bang. (#30)
Each and every time I have attempted to present facts when conversing with you in regards to the 9/11 attacks, you have attacked me with a barrage of profantities and insults, along with wild claims with no basis in fact.
Seems to me if you actually cared about what the TRUTH was, you wouldn't behave in that manner.
Since you must have guessed by now I had bozo'd you, apparently you thought you'd play the nice guy in speaking to my handle, trying to score some "points". You're just the gift that keeps on giving.
FormerLurker,
That is the weirdest.... weakest... lamest attempt at a conversation twist and guilt redirection.
I have no clue nor interest in what you do with your settings.
In fact I am tired of addressing you because when ever we converse the subject always seems to stray from 911 and into personal nit pickings. And While I can quote where I have said I was mistaken and what not...whats the point?
Instead of making this about me and you or you vrs the world or any other nonesense thing, instead , how about we talk about what we know.... and what this thread is about.
We know we have all kinds of DEW weapons. D.A.P.A.R. doesn't make wicker baskets. It makes military advancements. It is completely possible DEW weapons were used. They existed at that time... nothing being put forward in this interview was fringe. Ms, Woods even stressed avoiding speculation and grounding our conclusions in what can be proven by peer reviewed... PEER REVIEWED.
Peer Review Definition Dec 26, 2005 ... Peer review is the evaluation of creative work or performance by other people in the same field in order to maintain or enhance the quality
So we can see she is not afraid of having her worked double checked and debunked.
To do that though FIRST you must know exactly what it is we are talking about...what the fruits of her labour has been, in said peer review paper.
If you have issue with her findings the point out her work exactly and speak up on what your exact boggle is with her work. And I stress "her" here because I am not wanting to know about the work of others by comparisons. I am familer(sp) with other peoples research. Specifically , if you find flaw in Woods work , I would like to keep it about her work and where you find any issue in it...
Name me ONE which can bring down a 110 story skyscraper.
Just one? I have the internet at my disposal. I could name dozens upon dozens in both practical and plausible to the theoretical yet applicable...
High intensity Laser,microwave resonance, perhaps a micro kinetic pellet...I mean, how much do you know about coil guns? Or DEW weapons in general? Are you intimate with the wide range of subject matter and what is in use?
Now, you brought up my miss spelling of D.A.R.P.A. . Was their a reason you did not use proper punctuation of the acronym? Not to split hairs here but this was the exact kind of nit pick bull shit I spoke to earlier. Everyone knew what I meant even you...but only you sought to call it out as if it were a relevant point. Our grammar and minor mistakes their in and of, is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Ms. Judy Woods and her interview here and her work. Try not to detract by distraction but rather , help us stick with the topic at hand. Please.
I'll try hard too.
:)
As for their being no reason for DEW weapons being involved.... well... that is kinda what this interview is about.. and her work... and this whole entire topic that is being discussed.... and you still have not spoken to any flaw or failing you find in her work. You offer alternative theories and that is all well and good but you do not cite what you find to be incorrect , point by point.
Soooooooo.........
Did you wanna talk about her interview and what she suggests?
High intensity Laser,microwave resonance, perhaps a micro kinetic pellet...I mean, how much do you know about coil guns? Or DEW weapons in general? Are you intimate with the wide range of subject matter and what is in use?
You think a laser wouldn't be visible if it were powerful enough to heat up a building sufficiently to cause it to instantly fall into itself? You're confusing Star Trek phasers with what a real laser is. It's simply amplified light, and it simply heats things up. We have NOTHING which can bring down a building, in fact, it's hard enough to heat up a missile in order to destroy it.
Such beams are NOT powerful enough in the atmosphere to do any significant damage except for objects at a very short range.
Ok, so it wasn't a laser.
Microwave resonance? Fancy word for microwave heating effects, where here, we are talking more about anti-personel or (non lethal) weapons designed for combat or riot situations.
Micro kinetic pellet? A hyper-velocity pellet might go through a battleship, but it pretty much just makes a clean hole. It certainly did not nor could it have brought down the WTC.
So can you find any sort of "directed energy weapon" which COULD bring down the WTC?
Whatever directed energy weapon they could come up with still wouldn't fit the available evidence since there were survivors of the WTC collapse. Any directed energy weapon that would turn concrete and steel beams into dust surely would have killed any humans as well.
Any directed energy weapon that would turn concrete and steel beams into dust surely would have killed any humans as well.
There are other factors which eliminates directed energy weapons as well.
One such item is that any sort of weapon powerful enough to disintegrate a skyscraper would need MASSIVE amounts of power, and would most likely be MASSIVE in size. Where would such a weapon be fired from, and where it would it get its energy?
Another is the matter of how would such a weapon be selective in its destructive power, where not only would it not ALSO destroy objects and structures in back of its target, but that it would be able to focus its energy on EXACTLY where it needed to be in order to cause a sequential top down collapse, progressing downwards as the collapse took place.
If we had such weapons, we would be using them right now against any nation that the elites wanted to attack. It would be more devastating than the nuclear bomb, and such unbalanced power would most assuredly result in a global conflict of unmatched proportion.
If we had such weapons, we would be using them right now against any nation that the elites wanted to attack. It would be more devastating than the nuclear bomb, and such unbalanced power would most assuredly result in a global conflict of unmatched proportion.
You keep presuming that such weapons would have to be ours rather than a foreign attacker's but there's no reason for us to go back again to square one and re-establish the obvious fact that America isn't the only country with Directed Energy/WMD technology. We don't need to play parlor guessing games about what's in America's secret arsenals and the secret arsenals of others that can topple your Jonesian-model, which has never logically explained what happened that day anyway. It's already been discussed elsewhere in this 4um at length that the evidence indicates something involving electromagnetism -- perhaps even micro/mini nukes.
We know that there were surivors in Japan within the atomic blast zones. Apparently, you want us to believe that wouldn't be the case on 9/11 with a smaller nuke of some sort or with Directed Energy weaponry either but somehow they would survive being flash-fried by a nano- thermite/thermate explosion -- because it was actually a very low to no-flash form of thermite/thermate that didn't produce much light or heat, just "pancake powder"?? The so-called pancaking powder flew up and outward as the buildings came down. That tells us that there wasn't the weight crashing down that would be required to pulverize the structures.
9/11 was an Act of War against us, not some campfire-story fashion show that has to be reduced to conformity with a short-stack of thermitic flap- jacks, syrupy molten metal, and remote controlled butter-planes on the side to suit your group. Just for kicks, you might want to explain how crashing and exploding planes wouldn't severely damage the sequencing of a preset controlled demolition or immediately trigger a C4Thermitic one.
It's already been discussed elsewhere in this 4um at length that the evidence indicates something involving electromagnetism -- perhaps even micro/mini nukes.
So now you think radio waves brought down the towers? Explain to me how a radio wave brought down a 110 story building. As far as any sort of nuke, that has been eliminated due to the facts I present further below, which I have also previously presented on other threads.
We know that there were surivors in Japan within the atomic blast zones.
Oh really? Go find ANY reference on the Internet which exists that states there were survivors at Ground Zero in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The temperature turns as hot as that of the Sun, so go find me some people who survived several millions degrees of heat, besides being dosed with levels of radiation which would instantly kill them.
Apparently, you want us to believe that wouldn't be the case on 9/11 with a smaller nuke either of some sort
You were selling neutron bombs earlier, then once you figured out they emit WAY more radiation than coventional nuclear devices, and would have killed people in surrounding areas instantly with lethal radiation, you decided to move to the "micro-nuke" idea.
What part of sequential failure do you not understand? For one, a nuclear device would ONLY have blown out the immediate area of detonation, it would not have resulted in a top down collapse, floor by floor, of the structure.
A bright burst would have been visible, and there would have been an instant pulverization of surrounding structure, most likely in a spherical pattern.
or with Directed Energy weaponry either
Again, point out what sort of weapon would cause a sequential floor by floor collapse at near free fall speed. Where would it be fired from, and where would it get its energy?
Find ANY sort of DEW technology online that could cause a sequential failure to occur...
but somehow they would survive being flash-fried by a nano- thermite/thermate explosion -- because it was actually a very low to no-flash form of thermite/thermate that didn't produce much light or heat, just "pancake powder"??
Do you know what an EXPLOSIVE is? Have you ever seen conventional explosives used to bring down a structure? Conventional explosives produce tremendously high pressure, pulverizing anything in their blast radius. Larger bursts produce the sort of pulverization witnessed in the WTC collapse.
Advanced explosives composed of nano-thermite would most likely provide not only much higher pressures than conventional explosives, but also would be fine tunable in terms of detonation speed depending on their particle size.
The so-called pancaking powder flew up and outward as the buildings came down. That tells us that there wasn't the weight crashing down that would be required to pulverize the structures.
With the underlying floors having their support links destroyed by explosives sequentially, there would be little or no resistance to the collapsing mass of debris coming from above. As the air between the floors was instantly compressed to extremely high pressure by the sudden compression of space between the collapsing mass and the floor below, enhanced by the explosive high pressure coming from the explosives themselves, debris was ejected outwards at explosive speeds.
As the debris fell, a huge void of air was formed above the collapsing mass, causing air to rush in from all directions to fill that void. That air contained clouds of dust and drifted upwards once the air in the void had returned back to normal pressure.
9/11 was an Act of War against us, not some campfire-story fashion show that has to be reduced to conformity with a short-stack of thermitic flap- jacks, syrupy molten metal, and remote controlled butter-planes on the side to suit your group.
You're trying to dismiss known facts as if they didn't exist. Planes DID impact the towers, since there is not ONE person who has come forward stating that they had a clear view of the impact area and saw no plane, but did witness an explosion.
The entrance holes were there, and there WAS smoke rising from the damaged areas.
Remote controlled aircraft crashing into the towers is a much more likely sceneraio than relying on Captain Kirk and the starship Enterprise firing a controlled phaser blast from Earth orbit.
Just for kicks, you might want to explain how crashing and exploding planes wouldn't severely damage the sequencing of a preset controlled demolition or immediately trigger a C4Thermitic one.
For one, if the planes were flown remotely, it'd be known EXACTLY where they would impact.
It would not be difficult to avoid placing explosives in the area of planned impact.
Me: It's already been discussed elsewhere in this 4um at length that the evidence indicates something involving electromagnetism -- perhaps even micro/mini nukes.
You: So now you think radio waves brought down the towers? Explain to me how a radio wave brought down a 110 story building.
Don't confuse me with Steven Jones. He thinks radio waves triggered thermitics to bring down 110 story buildings:
According to one of Steven Earl Jones' audios "thermate can be painted on" (and then "touched off" by some radio-controlled mechanism . The Great Professor does not explain whether you use a brush, or a roller, for the paint job - and is a bit 'light' on details of any 'radio control" mechanism to trigger off this 'toshing'. The point is this: It has to work. It has to work exactly, no 'messing' It has to work accurately, otherwise the building will topple. We should all be very grateful that former Professor Jones does not actually work in the Controlled Demolitions industry - and merely confines himself to making absurd statements about it)
You were selling neutron bombs earlier,
No, I wasn't. Now you're confusing me with other posters.
You claimed that it is possible to destroy a 110 story skyscaper using "electromagnetism", while hopping all over "direct energy beams".
In case you didn't know, a "beam" of electromagnetism is a high frequency radio wave known as a microwave beam (radar for instance).
I said that the evidence -- burned cars, unburned paper -- indicates something involving electromagnetism. Questioning Directed Energy isn't hopping all over anything. I don't think you have all the correct answers so I'm surely not going to stop questioning because you think that you do and act as if it shouldn't be discussed or not before a specific type is silently sensed.
Pic caption: The phenomena associated with lightning (left) and magnets (right) are both caused by electromagnetism, one of the four fundamental forces of nature.
Different frequencies of oscillation give rise to the different forms of electromagnetic radiation, from radio waves at the lowest frequencies, to visible light at intermediate frequencies, to gamma rays at the highest frequencies.
Is there anything you don't want to argue about?
Maybe you've heard of a puzzle on the grounds of CIA HQ at Langley: Kryptos. I tried to decipher the unsolved section years ago and, in the process, I saw a 9/11 pattern in the frequencies of the letters, even though it was there since 11-3-1990. I suspect the reason that last section is harder to solve than the previous 3 is because there could be a skip-sequence between some phrases that switches to a different decoding method. The reason I'm mentioning it is because the 2nd section was reported as solved before that sculpture happened onto my radar screen, so to speak, and it reads:
IT WAS TOTALLY INVISIBLE HOWS THAT POSSIBLE ? THEY USED THE EARTHS MAGNETIC FIELD X THE INFORMATION WAS GATHERED AND TRANSMITTED UNDERGRUUND TO AN UNKNOWN LOCATION X DOES LANGLEY KNOW ABOUT THIS ? THEY SHOULD ITS BURIED OUT THERE SOMEWHERE X WHO KNOWS THE EXACT LOCATION ? ONLY WW THIS WAS HIS LAST MESSAGE X THIRTY EIGHT DEGREES FIFTY SEVEN MINUTES SIX POINT FIVE SECONDS NORTH SEVENTY SEVEN DEGREES EIGHT MINUTES FORTY FOUR SECONDS WEST X LAYER TWO
Speaking of underground locations, I was watching part of a documentary recently about New York from a series called, "Underground Cities", iirc. The railroad there was secret and cars were secretly transported on elevators -- one was FDR's. I thought it was quite interesting and wouldn't rule out that something destructive might have been directed from underground on 9/11.
I said that the evidence -- burned cars, unburned paper -- indicates something involving electromagnetism.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Other than heating effects as seen in microwave ovens, or as in some "non- lethal" battlefield microwave devices, WTF do you think is so magical about radio waves that it can disintegrate a 110 story building?
Huh?
To you, actual evidence found in the debris, as in NANO-THERMITE, is incapable of heating anything up, whereas ficticious weapons such as phaser beams from an orbitting space ship make perfect sense.
Me: I said that the evidence -- burned cars, unburned paper -- indicates something involving electromagnetism.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Other than heating effects as seen in microwave ovens, or as in some "non- lethal" battlefield microwave devices, WTF do you think is so magical about radio waves that it can disintegrate a 110 story building?
Huh?
To you, actual evidence found in the debris, as in NANO-THERMITE, is incapable of heating anything up, whereas ficticious weapons such as phaser beams from an orbitting space ship make perfect sense.
Are you trying to convince me that you're just a heckling noisemaker? You don't have to try so much.
Did you even read the excerpts from the Electromagnetism Wikipedia link? I don't thinks so. See if you can grasp this paraphrasing this time: Radio waves are low frequency electromagnetism. Gamma rays are high frequency electromagnetism. That does not mean that gamma rays are radio waves, nor are radio waves synonymous with the intermediate frequency range.
Who says there was actual evidence of nano-thermite in the debris? Jones doesn't count as reliable source. What he claims as evidence of that is what's bizarre and appears fictitious. Does he pay you to be his assistant? Are you aware that America isn't the only country that has nano-thermite?
Try slowing down and counting to 10 or 110 before you hit send again so that you can give your automatic writings a bit more thought. This stormy transmission fell flatter than a WTC pancake on my grading scale.
Try to find ANY radio wave capable of causing molecular disintegration on a scale required to bring down a 110 story building. In fact, find me ANY electromagnetic wave or beam weapon capable of bringing down ANY building.
And I'm not talking about what you see in science fiction movies.