Dr. Judy Wood and John Lash - The quintessential talk on 9/11 - Part 2 of 2

Dr. Judy Wood - REAL 9/11 truth playlist - 9/11 - The New Hiroshima - Part 1 9/11 - The New Hiroshima - Part 2 Dr. Wood shows that the authorized “9/11 truth movement“ theory i.e. conventional controlled demolition, is not supported by the evidence. The seismic signal (as well as the visual evidence) shows that the Twin Towers did not actually collapse or hit the ground. The buildings actually turned to dust, including most of the steel, which can be seen on various clips. --- The “truth movement“ is part of the 9/11 operation, covering up the evidence and supplying the public with their leaders and their authorized theories. Steven E. Jones was involved in the Cold Fusion cover up in 1989 - “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.“ - Lenin This deception can only really be confirmed by studying the evidence for yourself, rather than relying on other people’s opinions (or misrepresentations/dismissals) of that evidence. --- Dr. Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson on TNS Radio, September 14th, 2010, discussing the World Trade Centre destruction and the “9/11 truth movement“ cover up. mp3 (2hours 39mins - 27.4 MB) - Andrew Johnson’s website - Partial transcript from here - AJ: [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth] was started [in 2006] at around the time that [Dr. Judy Wood] filed the Request For Correction - ... JW: [It was] 3 weeks later. AJ: ... We privately have discussed whether these two events were connected. But anyway this group ... proudly proclaim on their website that you can make a tax deductible donation to them now - so it’s essentially government affiliated. JW: But what that means is that they can’t lobby Congress for a new investigation. AJ: Well there you go. ... Anyway, I want to read out a little bit of the letter - - because there’s another chap we know called Abe [Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez]. And he joined the A&E for 9/11 truth group ... and signed their petition because if you sign the petition you are said to be a member. And he wrote to them and said to them “have you heard about the Dr. Wood research into the directed energy weapons? You should look into this.“ And they wrote back and said: “We decided to remove you from our list of petition signers because, whether you knew it or not, we have chosen to carefully limit the scope of our message to the collapse of the World Trade Center and the need for a new investigation that would specifically consider the use of explosives in bringing it down. Our message is displayed on our website in the petition and mission statement. The evidence supporting our message is also found on our website, which I am sure you have seen since you signed our petition. Your suggestion about contacting Judy Wood and engaging in a discussion [which is what Abe suggested] with her about her theories [careful choice of word from them there] about directed energy weapons and other things is a suggestion for action that is outside the scope of our message. We would lose more than we would again. If nothing else we would lose the time required to make such a contact and engage in a discussion / debate whose duration would be unknown. We are also well aware of Judy Wood and her theories. The reason we don’t support her or her theories is that they are outside the scope of our message.“ So you know, it goes on a bit after that but you can see they’ve got the scope of their message, but there’s no mention of evidence and there’s no mention of truth. And there’s no mention of the Qui Tam case - - for example, and how this has been put into a legal framework. So they’re basically happy to ignore all of that and lead all these other thousand members essentially down a blind alley. JW: But they were notified about the case going to the Supreme Court and one of the members emailed it to Richard Gage and his, you know, core agents there. And they were angry, wrote back and said we don’t want to ever hear about this again. AJ: Yeah that’s right. We’ve got this from somebody who’s involved in this group: “Marshall I am not interested in the topic of this email. Do not include me on any future emails.“ And this was in response to . JW: an announcement that it was going to the Supreme Court.