It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quite interesting interview with Dr, Judy Wood on Coast to Coast on 911 and the death of Osama Bin L

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
only in your fantasy world dave.
edit on 6-5-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)


Now, is that becuase you're one of the people who believe I'm a secret gov't disinformation agent sent here to lie to you, or is it because Joel Meyerowizt has a suspiciously Jewish sounding name and therefore you think he must be an agent for the Jewish World order?

Conspiracy people have more "truths behind the 9/11 attack" than there are grains of sand on a beach, so you'll have to forgive me if I forget which one you were.




posted on May, 6 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
So your reaction to me accusing you of being only interested in promoting your idea of the truth, rather than in the facts presented by firefighters architects pilots, officers etc. is to accuse me of being only interested in promoting my idea of the truth rather than the "facts" presented by you.


No, my reaction is that I genuinely want to know why, if you claim you're only out to learn the truth behind the 9/11 attack, you conspiracy people consistantly emply double standards and selective amnesia to promote one idea over the other? You conspiracy people recite withnesses saying "they heard explosions in the WTC" on the tenet that eyewitness accounts are gospel, but when eyewitnesses say "they saw a passenger jet hit the pentagon" you go back on your word and accuse them of being secret agents.

The same goes for Judy Wood- you conspiracy people are constantly using the propaganda of "PHDs and professionals say there were controlled demelitions" but when a PHD and professional comes along and says there were energy weapons, you spontaneously forget how PHDs are experts in everything and you argue over it as if Woods insulted your mother.

If you're denying that you're blatantly using a double standard to prormote what you yourselves want to believe, you will be lying.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by spacevisitor
What kind of planes do you think hit the Twin Towers, those claimed hijacked planes with those civilians on board or some specially adapted remotely controlled planes so to say, which I believe?


It could be either, but I don't see the relevance to the topic at hand.


Well, regarding to find out the truth about what really happened on 911, I do not stick that much to the topic at hand, and because you did join the discussion the serious way you did in my opinion, I am just curious about your personal view about all those things, nothing more.
Therefore, I just wonder myself that when you are convinced [as I do] that the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were brought down with the assistance of explosives [controlled demolition] it must have been a inside job, right, so I did assume therefore that you also did not buy the official explanation that those Twin Towers were attacked by those claimed hijacked planes with those civilians on board.
Thats why I was curious/interested to your opinion.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Well the no plane theory isnt something I looked into. If you recall a conversation we had, I was the one who said that orders must have been given from the inside for flight 77 to make his way unhindered off course for 40+ minutes untill it strucked the pentagon. I go by what academia and whitnesses on the subject say. It takes selective amnesia and a good deal of fantasy to prop the official conspiracy theory as much as any other conspiracy theory revolving around 911. Maybe it turns out one of the official conspiracy theories is true, lasers from outer space, random damage causing buildings to implode, explode.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   
So let me get this straight now, the debunkers for the OS are saying that all Truthers believe in Judy Wood delusional laser beam fantasy that doesn’t stand up to any real science. I find it really amusing that a few of these debunkers in here think all Truthers are below the average intelligent. Goes to prove that a few debunkers cannot think logically or rationally. Looks to me they have no evidence to support their erroneous claims against all the Truthers.
Fact is Truthers do not believe in the hogwash that Judy Woods invented and no scientist supports her lunacy report either.


edit on 6-5-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
Fact is Truthers do not believe in the hogwash that Judy Woods invented and no scientist supports her lunacy report either.


Could be, but the fact is that you cannot rule out the very real possibility that such weapons exist.
I posted some links to such kind of information about that here.

reply to post by spacevisitor
 


So you cannot rule out that possibility despite it is in my opinion absolutely impossible to ever prove that such a weapon was used then.
But regarding your saying that no scientist supports her lunacy report, what do you think of these scientists then who support the theory that the Towers and WTC7 were as it seems brought down by explosive materials?


Petition
We, the members of Scientists for 9/11 Truth, challenge the official account of the events of September 11, 2001. In particular, we challenge the official account of the destruction of the World Trade Center provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), acting under the Bush-Cheney administration’s Department of Commerce. According to NIST’s reports, the Twin Towers were destroyed solely by the impact of the airliners combined with the effects of the ensuing fires, and WTC 7 was brought down by fire alone.
Besides questioning the accuracy of these reports by NIST, we also question their scientific integrity. We do so primarily because of NIST’s refusal to seriously consider the possibility that explosive materials of any type may have been involved in the destruction of the WTC Towers and WTC 7. That explosives were involved is indicated by several lines of evidence, including:

• The manner in which the buildings collapsed: too fast, too symmetrical, and too uniform to be caused by heat from random fires.
• The collapse of WTC 7 at free-fall acceleration for over 2 seconds (more than 100 feet), indicating that the columns below were providing zero resistance.
• Testimonies by dozens of credible witnesses that explosions were going off in the buildings.
• Observation of temperatures in the rubble that were higher, and of far longer duration, than can be accounted for by normal fires.
• Observation of anomalous particles in the WTC dust that indicate the use of explosives or pyrotechnics.


www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

So what is your opinion about that then may I ask?

edit on 7/5/11 by spacevisitor because: made a correction



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


My opinion is the two WTC 1 & 2 were taken down by out of control demolition and WTC 7 was taken down by a perfectly control demolition. The first two were for Shock and Ah for the media.
Read some of the technical paper written on the subject by the experts.
www.ae911truth.org...
No space beam took these WTC down. Anyone who believe that, wants to be ignorant.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


My opinion is the two WTC 1 & 2 were taken down by out of control demolition and WTC 7 was taken down by a perfectly control demolition. The first two were for Shock and Ah for the media.
Read some of the technical paper written on the subject by the experts.
www.ae911truth.org...
No space beam took these WTC down. Anyone who believe that, wants to be ignorant.



Oke, thanks for your reply, I go see the link because this is the first time I heard that the two WTC 1 & 2 were taken down by out of control demolition.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:44 AM
link   
I think that despite Judy Woods theory is been ridiculed as being nothing more than hogwash, pure lunacy and not even supported by all/most the scientists in the public domain there could be nevertheless more truth to her theory then meets the eye.
When I look to all this information it is my opinion very well possible that such weapons already exist and even could already have been placed in space for quite some time now.

I received the links to the videos from a friend today.

This is for instance what weapons expert, Dr. James Frasier said about Radiofrequency Weapons at 1:05 minutes in this CNN video from 1985.


"And some think that these could be the forerunners of a new type of Directed Energy Weapon, part of a family of weapons which operate in the radiofrequency segment of the electromagnetic spectrum. and are thus referred to as radiofrequency weapons." Weapons expert, Dr. James Frasier (sp?) is then asked if radiofrequency weapons "could be the wildcard in the ongoing arms race,"

He says, "You could have tremendous amounts of radiative power. What you did with that power that is a matter of engineering, design, and what your goal is."



Van: wwwtotalitaerde | Gemaakt op: 4 mei 2010 Radiofrequency Weapons 1, CNN 1985





Van: wwwtotalitaerde | Gemaakt op: 4 mei 2010 Radiofrequency Weapons 2, CNN 1985




Also very interesting is what Tom Bearden says here at 2:15 in part 3


Van: wwwtotalitaerde | Gemaakt op: 4 mei 2010 Radiofrequency Weapons 3, CNN 1985




To think that only the Soviet Union back then did have already those kinds of weapons and the USA did not while they could have playing around with Tesla’s knowledge decades earlier is in my opinion very naive.

Because it must not be forgotten that Tesla was busy with this kind of technology even far before 1985 and that all his work was confiscated by the FBI right after he died in 1943.


Directed-energy weapon
Later in life, Tesla made remarkable claims concerning a "teleforce" weapon. The press called it a "peace ray" or death ray. In total, the components and methods included:
• An apparatus for producing manifestations of energy in free air instead of in a high vacuum as in the past. This, according to Tesla in 1934, was accomplished.
• A mechanism for generating tremendous electrical force. This, according to Tesla, was also accomplished.
• A means of intensifying and amplifying the force developed by the second mechanism.
• A new method for producing a tremendous electrical repelling force. This would be the projector, or gun, of the invention.

At the time of his death, Tesla had been working on the Teleforce weapon, or 'death ray,'.
After the FBI was contacted by the War Department, his papers were declared to be top secret.
The personal effects were sequestered on the advice of presidential advisers; J. Edgar Hoover declared the case most secret, because of the nature of Tesla's inventions and patents.
One document stated that "[he] is reported to have some 80 trunks in different places containing transcripts and plans having to do with his experiments".
Altogether, in Tesla's effects, there were the contents of his safe, two truckloads of papers and apparati from his hotel, another 75 packing crates and trunks in a storage facility, and another 80 large storage trunks in another storage facility.
The Navy and several "federal officials" spent two days microfilming some of the stuff at the Office of Alien Properties storage facility in 1943, and that was it, until Oct., 1945


en.wikipedia.org...

Then looking also at the information about such weapons on zorgon’s really marvelous site, full of very interesting stuff. www.thelivingmoon.com...

Such as;

Weapons in Space - The State of the Art.

www.thelivingmoon.com...

Introducing the Particle-Beam Weapon

www.thelivingmoon.com...

Secret Space Craft and Space Stations

www.thelivingmoon.com...

Then this also very interesting information about Antimatter Weapons.


Excerpt from antimatter weapons.

"These two characteristics are still valid today and entirely justify the interest in antimatter. The first, is that the release of usable energy per unit mass is greater in annihilation than in any other nuclear reaction. One proton-antiproton annihilation releases 300 times more energy than a fission or fusion reaction. The second, is that when antimatter is brought in the proximity of matter, annihilation starts by itself, without the need of a critical mass as in fission, and without the ignition energy needed in fusion."



Excerpt from Air Force pursuing antimatter weapons

The U.S. Air Force is quietly spending millions of dollars investigating ways to use a radical power source -- antimatter, the eerie "mirror" of ordinary matter -- in future weapons.
Program was touted publicly, then came official gag order
Keay Davidson, Chronicle Science Writer
Monday, October 4, 2004

"The energy from colliding positrons and antielectrons "is 10 billion times ... that of high explosive," Edwards explained in his March speech. Moreover, 1 gram of antimatter, about 1/25th of an ounce, would equal "23 space shuttle fuel tanks of energy." Thus "positron energy conversion," as he called it, would be a "revolutionary energy source" of interest to those who wage war.

It almost defies belief, the amount of explosive force available in a speck of antimatter -- even a speck that is too small to see. For example: One millionth of a gram of positrons contain as much energy as 37.8 kilograms (83 pounds) of TNT, according to Edwards' March speech. A simple calculation, then, shows that about 50-millionths of a gram could generate a blast equal to the explosion (roughly 4,000 pounds of TNT, according to the FBI) at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995. "

"I think," he said, "we need to get off this planet, because I'm afraid we're going to destroy it."

edit on 9/5/11 by spacevisitor because: Made some corrections and did some adding



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Well the no plane theory isnt something I looked into. If you recall a conversation we had, I was the one who said that orders must have been given from the inside for flight 77 to make his way unhindered off course for 40+ minutes untill it strucked the pentagon. I go by what academia and whitnesses on the subject say. It takes selective amnesia and a good deal of fantasy to prop the official conspiracy theory as much as any other conspiracy theory revolving around 911. Maybe it turns out one of the official conspiracy theories is true, lasers from outer space, random damage causing buildings to implode, explode.


You've just contradicted yourself. First you say that you go by what eyewitnesses on the subject say, but it's those very eyewitnesses who give us the picture of what happened on 9/11. For one Barbara Olson and Renee May called out to report the plane had been hijacked by terrorists, and for another hordes of eyewitnesses specifically saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon. Plus, independent photographers and journalists photographed the Pentagon lawn being covered in scrap metal.

Up until now you conspiracy people have made for yourselves a cottage industry of accusing everyone and their goldfish of being secret disinformation agents, and not because you actually have any evidence they're secret agents. It's because they're saying things you don't want to believe are true so out of desperation you come up with any childish excuse you can find to discredit them. When Mohammed Atta's girlfriend says the guy was such a sociopath that he didmembered her kittens after an argument, I have no reason not to believe her...and plenty of reasons why I shouldn't believe you and your conspiracy daydreams.

So tell me, once and for all, are Barbara Olson and Renee May legitimate eyewitnesses or are they secret agents? The only one suffering selective amnesia here are you and your fellow conspiracy theorists.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Well the no plane theory isnt something I looked into. If you recall a conversation we had, I was the one who said that orders must have been given from the inside for flight 77 to make his way unhindered off course for 40+ minutes untill it strucked the pentagon. I go by what academia and whitnesses on the subject say. It takes selective amnesia and a good deal of fantasy to prop the official conspiracy theory as much as any other conspiracy theory revolving around 911. Maybe it turns out one of the official conspiracy theories is true, lasers from outer space, random damage causing buildings to implode, explode.


You've just contradicted yourself. First you say that you go by what eyewitnesses on the subject say, but it's those very eyewitnesses who give us the picture of what happened on 9/11. For one Barbara Olson and Renee May called out to report the plane had been hijacked by terrorists, and for another hordes of eyewitnesses specifically saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon. Plus, independent photographers and journalists photographed the Pentagon lawn being covered in scrap metal.


All photos I have seen indicate you are exaggerating to suit your debunked case that a commercial jet hit the Pentagon. There were but a few small pieces of metal scattered about.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Up until now you conspiracy people have made for yourselves a cottage industry of accusing everyone and their goldfish of being secret disinformation agents, and not because you actually have any evidence they're secret agents.

Another silly exaggeration that totally distorts the position of 99% 9/11 truthers.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
It's because they're saying things you don't want to believe are true so out of desperation you come up with any childish excuse you can find to discredit them. When Mohammed Atta's girlfriend says the guy was such a sociopath that he didmembered her kittens after an argument, I have no reason not to believe her...and plenty of reasons why I shouldn't believe you and your conspiracy daydreams.

Nor would most 9/11 truthers disbelieve her. Trying to argue otherwise as you do is simply setting up straw man arguments for you to demolish.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
So tell me, once and for all, are Barbara Olson and Renee May legitimate eyewitnesses or are they secret agents? The only one suffering selective amnesia here are you and your fellow conspiracy theorists.


Answer: in the first case: neither. Just a tool used by her lying Neocon husband who claimed to have had a conversation with her by telephone that the FBI now say was a call NEVER CONNECTED.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Perhaps interesting to some, I personally did eventually always believe that controlled demolitions were finally responsible for the collapsing of the Twin Towers and WTC 7, but the more I look into this, the more I also get the strong impression that it could not have been done by a controlled demolition only, there must have been something else used to bring them down [completely pulverized] the way they did.
I did find this video due digging for more information about that.

It is former Gov. Jesse Ventura who thinks that the towers did not felt due controlled demolition, thermite, mini nukes, etc.

He said,

there was something else in plain there Alex, there was a weapon in plain that day, that I do not even know what it is, I can acquainted it to be as a microwave.



Geüpload door VeritasShow op 10 mei 2011
On May 10, 2011, Alex Jones interviewed former Gov. Jesse Ventura. During the interview they discussed Osama bin Laden, 9/11, and the evolving police state. Recently, Gov. Ventura received a copy of Dr. Judy Wood's book "Where Did The Towers Go?".
It is obvious that Gov. Ventura has read the book and this audio clip is proof that his views have shifted.
He does not think that the towers felt due to controlled demolition, thermite, mini nukes, etc. Listen to this short audio clip for the proof.


Gov. Jesse Ventura talks about Dr. Judy Wood's work on The Alex Jones Show



edit on 13/5/11 by spacevisitor because: made a correction



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor
there must have been something else used to bring them down [completely pulverized] the way they did.

You do realize that those towers were a quarter-mile of steel inside and out? Do you have any idea of how heavy those steel columns and steel perimeter sections weighed? Of course most everything would be pulverized. Then there's the added pulverization from the explosives that blew the buildings and people to tiny pieces.

That had nothing to do with any imaginary space beam weapons.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by spacevisitor
there must have been something else used to bring them down [completely pulverized] the way they did.


You do realize that those towers were a quarter-mile of steel inside and out? Do you have any idea of how heavy those steel columns and steel perimeter sections weighed? Of course most everything would be pulverized.


Thanks for mentioning that.
Yes, I do realize that very well, and it is especially because those towers were supported by a quarter-mile of steel inside and out where under those heavy steel columns why I more and more get the impression that another weapon must have been used.
Because such huge steel columns alone were sheer due their size and strength almost indestructible.
Do you find it not very suspicious then that even they and all those other steel parts were completely pulverized also?


Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Then there's the added pulverization from the explosives that blew the buildings and people to tiny pieces.


It is assumed that the explosives which were used were very special ones in order to cut those massive steel supporting columns in such a way that those supporting columns would lose their strength to support the building any longer and it would collapse.
So they cannot have been responsible in my opinion for blowing up the buildings and people and everything else that there was in all those offices into those tiny pieces.


Originally posted by _BoneZ_
That had nothing to do with any imaginary space beam weapons.


I think it has much more to do with it then meets the eye.

edit on 14/5/11 by spacevisitor because: Made some corrections and did some adding



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
This Dr Wood has the balls to come up with something interesting....many Phd would consider it proffesional suicide to bring thought and theories like hers to the public domain.

And I think she is on to something. There is enough debris left so rule out complete dustification, as she calls it. If I look at the pictures of groundzero I see a lot of steel but not so much bricks or concrete. Maybe it was the combination of termite for the steel and the energy weapon for the non-metals. I mean...there is no computer or paper product to be found on the 'crime'scene.

I am making a bit of a leap here but I always thought that the cropcircle phenomenon has something to do with some particle/energy weapon hanging in space....programed to make fine works of art on the surface of the Earth. Maybe it is the same device but with other energy settings and programming ofcourse.

Dr Wood makes an other good point. You can not rule such a weapon out because you do not know of its excistance. If it is public knowledge that there are energy weapons capable of dustifying complete buildings than we are finshed debating that possibillity. Such a secret weapon is on the other hand a great tool for the psychopaths using it........they can perhaps steer the blame away towards natural causes (an earthquake) orin some cases make a some guilable people think an alien extraterrestial presence is responsible.

When she started to mention Hutchinson my (intellectual!!) sexual attraction for Dr Wood went suddently from hard to limb shrimp. That doesn't mean that everything she says is suddently BS. IMO, people who think in such narrow classifications shouldn't think at all.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   
I am interested in the view and thoughts of others here regarding what you think is happening during the last moments during the collapse of one of the Twin Towers with that still standing steel construction there?

Here is what I see happening.
There is no doubt in my mind that that still standing steel construction is been turned completely into dust, rather than "collapse".

So when you look to these pictures and video, what do you see is happening?











You can see the video clip here.

www.drjudywood.com...

www.drjudywood.com...



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
So tell me, once and for all, are Barbara Olson and Renee May legitimate eyewitnesses or are they secret agents? The only one suffering selective amnesia here are you and your fellow conspiracy theorists.


Answer: in the first case: neither. Just a tool used by her lying Neocon husband who claimed to have had a conversation with her by telephone that the FBI now say was a call NEVER CONNECTED.


They also say there were several connected calls and calls from Barbara Olson were substantiated by AT & T operators, a secretary in the DoJ who took the calls, and an assistant in Olson's office. He didn't take these calls directly so were the others lying too ?

And Renee May's parents ? Were they lying about getting a call from their daughter ? They phoned American Airlines to report the call while AA 77 was still in the air.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor
Do you find it not very suspicious then that even they and all those other steel parts were completely pulverized also?

Nope, because I've never seen any evidence of pulverized steel. And neither have you or Judy or anyone else.



Originally posted by spacevisitor
It is assumed that the explosives which were used were very special ones

The explosives used in all three WTC buildings were the same used in any other conventional controlled demolition.



Originally posted by spacevisitor
So when you look to these pictures and video, what do you see is happening?

Anyone and everyone can see that spire going straight down and the dust that was on it hangs in the air and blows away. This has been discussed ad-nauseum on this forum. You're only seeing what you want to see.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Oh, sigh...


The explosives used in all three WTC buildings....


There were no planted "explosives" in any of the WTC buildings.

That is just nonsense, and you know it! I mean....you guys should at least pick ONE story, and stick to it....

Oh, and "Judy Wood"?? LOL...



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I was so tired last night I fell asleep during the show a while back LF8 told me where to go on youtube to listen into the shows I dont know if you can still do that .. but I will listen to your vid clip in a bit ..be back later



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join