Dr. Judy Wood's Book: Where Did The Towers Go?

[PookztA]

Dr. Judy Wood’s book is finally out!

Check it out here: www.wheredidthetowersgo.com

This book is of vast importance - the most detailed and illustrative study of what happened to the WTC buildings - and a look at the nature and some of the possible history behind the technology which was used to turn more than 90% of those buildings to microspheric iron-rich dust.

See what people are saying about the book here: http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/comments

Here is a promotional trailer, which you can share with others if you wish:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcLqdwr1Dsw

The cost for this 500-page, hardcover, full-color book is only $39.95, which is nothing considering how important this book is and how much my school text books of similar size cost.

Please support the book in some way, shape or form - even if only by forwarding or re-posting this message.

Thanks for reading this if you did!


Best wishes,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

[Daniel Elliott]

Great news Abe. I hope to be getting a copy within the next few weeks.

I think the first book will affirm a lot of what we've covered already and a whole lot more. She gave an interesting interview on Red Ice Creations recently.

I can't wait for her second book. Sould be very interesting.

[Andrew.]

Oh, look

http://forums.ukcolumn.org/showthread.php?tid=3082

The same site that exposes David Icke with http://davidickedebunked.com/

but then promotes Alan Watt (which the film at the end also exposes)

That forum also has 3 new members, although I've been told that many can't register there.

[Marigold]

[Daniel Elliott]

Ditto.

[Andrew.]

[PookztA]

no problem on sharing the news, i just found out and ordered my copy the other day very excited to have my own hard cover copy of the massive data base of evidence Dr. Wood has put together.

Best wishes everyone,

-Abe

[Marigold]

[Andrew.]

[Marigold]

I've just finished watching Zeitgeist 3 The Addendum. I agree with everything that Peter Joseph and the Venus Project says, but it's not that much different from what David Icke is saying.
In his latest book he calls for a system without money and he says religion is causing division. So why undermine someone who wants the same thing...is it because Ickey refers to Reptilian's which makes him sound fantastical!

I don't go with what the producer of davidickedebunked.com is saying at all because Ickey is helping to wake people up, just like Zeitgeist is.

[Andrew.]

[Marigold]

The solution which is offered by The Venus Project in Zeitgeist is to have a resource-based economy utilising technology as best possible on a global scale. The montary system is the cause of scarcity and depravation and as a result of this we have crime.
The use of free energy through tidal, wave, wind, solar power and geothermal for example is ideal as there will be no need for fossil fuels, which I agree are damaging to the environment.

Geothermal energy has an almost limitless energy supply and is very powerful. So utilisation of the above can only be a good thing for a future global population as there is no scarcity. There will be no elites...including corporate elites (hopefully).
What's wrong with that?

[Andrew.]

[Marigold]

I'm watching this right now for another perspective:

Link

[Andrew.]

[Marigold]

Look, I don't have an issue with you and Fish's belief in God and the Bible, (although I did make a remark about Bible bashers the other day as I was peeved at the judgmental comments about David Shayler even though you barely know him aside from some of his videos).

If you feel happy spiritually then great, but practice what you believe and search your own souls for the acceptance of a many and varied race that is the human (barring of course those who corrupt and murder like the NWO). Until you have accepted this you'll forever be throwing stones from glasshouses. I am constantly maturing spiritually and learning everyday and have a long way to go, but am no position to judge someone I barely know.
I mean look what David Shayler did, he publically exposed the crimes of MI6 and was jailed for it. How many people have the guts to do that! Plus, there was the good work of Annie Machon and the release of her Spies, Lies and Whistleblowers book. But, because a man dresses in the clothes of the opposite gender he is castigated.
Get over it folks, there's a NWO to expose which should be where are energies are focused now...on the streets of our cities and towns and getting vocal, passing out DVD's and waking folks up.
No time for keyboard heroes any longer.

[Andrew.]

[Marigold]

I have no agenda nor am I pushing theosophy of any sort, but I feel that what David Icke is saying is mostly right. That's my personal belief.

[Andrew.]

[PookztA]

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:38:01 -0500
To: Alan Miller
From: Eric Larsen
Subject: AN OPEN LETTER TO "PATRIOTS QUESTION 9/11.com"
Cc: Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. James Fetzer, Richard Gage, Kevin Ryan


PREFATORY NOTE TO ALAN MILLER:

I composed this letter almost a year ago but held off sending it in the hopes that, by waiting, I could send it on the occasion of the publication of Dr. Wood's book, Where Did the Towers Go? (http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/) That occasion has now arrived at last. Dr. Wood's book has been published and is now available to readers the world around, making this the real moment of truth. The question now, for every person in any way associated with the 9/11 movement, is whether that person is in fact interested in exposing the truth or, on the other hand, in continuing to cover it up. The publication of Dr. Wood's book is a momentous event, an event of incalculable importance to the entire world. It is time, now, for me to send you this letter.
Eric Larsen
February 17, 2011



March 1, 2010



Dear Alan Miller,

I've noticed that Dr. Judy Wood isn't any longer listed or cited on "Patriots Question 9/11." Why is this? I know that earlier she was on the list of professors as well as the list of engineers. What happened?

In my own view, Dr. Wood's being omitted is like dropping Shakespeare from an anthology of Elizabethan literature. Alone among the most highly visible of 9/11 analysts, Dr. Wood is the one truth-seeker who sticks precisely and only with one thing, and that one thing is the truth about what physically happened on 9/11 insofar as it can be known through the scientific study of all-not some, but all-of the available empirical, observable evidence that pertains solely to the "what" of what happened on that day. Dr. Wood purposely stays clear of any forays into politics, innuendo, guesswork, or supposition. She will have nothing whatsoever to do with the question of "who 'did' it." That question, in her view, is meaningless until the scientifically true "what" of what happened is known. This "what" is what she sets out-successfully-to show. That is, she does not say that "9/11 was an inside job" because that fact has not been scientifically established. Her focus is solely on the empirical, measurable, and observable study of evidence of any relevant kind-from analysis, measurement, and study of the "remains" of the WTC buildings through analysis of the seismic record of that day's events, study of anomalies in the earth's magnetic field at the times of the destructions, and even study of the field effects of the massive hurricane off the east coast of the U.S. on that day (and especially of that storm's field effects in relation to the enormous high pressure cell that was simultaneously approaching NYC from the west).

Dr. Wood's study, research, and analysis reveal, among many other things, that the WTC buildings did not collapse, explode, or implode, but that they DISAPPEARED into dust. Multitudes of evidence prove her case, but that hasn't kept 9/11 pseudo-truth seekers from ridiculing her by smear, innuendo, name-calling, neglect, and disinformation in whatever ways they are able. With courage, strength, and a scientifically-based factuality, Dr. Wood has experienced more malicious contumely, more smears and fraudulent attacks than any other single member of the scientific, political, philosophical, or historical 9/11 truth-seeking community. Yet Dr. Wood has continued to stand up for the truth. Those who "choose" not to accept the evidence-based conclusions of Dr. Wood's studies, or who, perhaps, are either afraid OR "afraid" to accept them, take the fool's option of ridiculing them, or, equally often, of most, most blatantly ignoring both those results AND Dr. Wood's efforts in determining them. The 9/11 truth community greeted Dr. Wood's Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST (March 16, 2007) with scorn, despite her being the first person to confront NIST formally about their fraudulent report of the demise of the WTC towers. It was as if the fraud of the NIST report, a report whose integrity was absolutely essential if the official story were to be undergirded, was of no real interest to the wider 9/11 community.

Dr. Wood's federal qui tam case, filed 4/25/2007 against the contractors of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for science fraud also received virtually no notice or indication of interest other than ridicule from the 9/11 truth community. Again, it was as if the federal case being brought by Dr. Wood against the NIST contractors for science fraud (in its Congressionally-mandated task that it determine how and why the WTC buildings were destroyed)-as if this entire and absolutely central question was of no real interest to the wider 9/11 truth community. That case, further, was itself improperly dismissed as those hearing it treated the case-incorrectly-as if it paralleled the views of the general 9/11 truth movement. Those determining whether the case would be allowed to go forward incorrectly assumed, for example, that Dr. Wood (a) blamed the US military (which she does not); (b) they incorrectly assumed that Dr. Wood held the view that there was "substantial evidence that all three buildings collapsed from explosive devices" and that this view was "at the heart of the Wood. . . litigation." (entirely incorrect); and (c) they incorrectly assumed that Dr. Wood claimed "that the towers were struck by high powered energy beams [from space]" (things that are not in any way her position). All of these issues were addressed, although to no avail, in the Motion for Reconsideration: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Wood_motion_reconsider.shtml

And now the case-due who knows how much to the ridicule and lack of support from the truth community-has been denied a Writ of a Certiorari by the United States Supreme Court, meaning that the Court will not hear it or allow the factual evidence to be presented in a courtroom, and therefore that the case is dead. How can it be that this is not seen by the 9/11 truth community as an exceedingly enormous defeat? Yet virtually no mention whatsoever of the Supreme Court's rejection of the case has been forthcoming. It causes me to question the entire purpose of the "9/11 truth movement" (as well as the purpose of your Patriots Question 9/11 website). Anyone who read the document submitted to the United States Supreme Court (available on Dr. Wood's website) should be appalled by what has taken place. The Court of Appeals essentially stated in a footnote of its written decision that it knew that the law applied to Dr. Wood's case, but that the court was ignoring the law in order to dismiss her case.

In fact, the evidence of science fraud submitted by Dr. Wood is irrefutable. NIST itself admitted to Dr. Wood that its report was a fraud. And not one of the contractors hired by NIST denied her allegations. Then the Court of Appeals ignored the law in order to dismiss the case. What could conceivably explain the lack of interest or response by the 9/11 community? This travesty of justice, the unfounded and prejudicial derailing of Dr. Wood's case, should be of significant concern to the entire constitutional republic. If laws are ignored for ease of dismissing cases, then we are no longer living in a constitutional republic. We are living no longer in a republic of laws, but in a state where factions of any kind can usurp power through ignoring or pre-empting laws, however ancient they may be, or however firmly embedded in the nation's founding documents.

Dr. Wood filed her federal qui tam case in April 2007. Since that time the "9/11 truth movement" has grown, with your own Patriots Question 9/11 website now reporting "1,060+ Engineers and Architects." Especially in light of the collection of so many engineers and architects, I find it troubling that, to this day, Dr. Wood is the only engineer, architect, or person of any profession to have filed a federal qui tam case challenging the science fraud in NIST's report of what destroyed the WTC towers. Those who truly wanted "a new and independent investigation" into what caused the destruction of the WTC should have enthusiastically supported what she did. Such as federal case as she attempted to bring WOULD ITSELF HAVE RESULTED IN a new investigation. There it was, a genuine opportunity for achieving what so many people have been claiming all along to want above all. But now the opportunity has been destroyed by the essentially unaccountable court system as well as the lack of interest in accountability by the so called "truth movement." All those who scorned Dr. Wood's work and failed so notably to support her qui tam case may have done so at the expense of this nation.

Wood sacrificed her career when she spoke out about 9/11. But instead of praising her heroism, many in the "official-truth movement" have accused her of being an agent or "COINTELPRO" or disinformation agent. Such accusations can easily be dispelled by noting that it is a crime to defraud the government and it is treason if done so by a government agent (see the Smith-Mundt Act). A government agent submitting disinformation to another government agency would amount to the government attacking itself in a psychological operation. Perhaps this explains why no one has submitted "thermite evidence" to NIST. Perhaps this explains why no one has submitted "thermite evidence" in a federal qui tam case.

Along these same lines, it is powerfully notable that only after the Supreme Court denied the case in which Dr. Wood included as evidence the aerial photographs of the towers being destroyed on 9/11 were these photographs "newly released" with the claim that they had never before been seen. In truth, not only were they a part both of Dr. Wood's RFC and her qui tam case, and not only had they already been posted on her web site for FOUR YEARS, but when she prepared the legal documents in early 2007, she gave the images to Jim Fetzer to be used for a photo section in his book-only to have him give credit for them not to Dr. Wood herself but to someone else. An even worse example of the distortion the "truth movement" is capable of, Dr. Fetzer, with the "new" release of the aerial images, treated them publically as images being seen by him for the first time.

I have never met Dr. Wood, but I have been aware of her work and have corresponded with her for many years. For the past six of those years, she has been working on a book, due out this year, that will present her work and its results in totality. I know the book very well, since-in consideration of my qualifications as essayist, writer, novelist and author, retired professor of writing, publisher, editor, and 9/11 truth-seeker myself-I have edited it in its entirety two times, once chapter by chapter and then again when the book was pulled together into its entirety. In my own view, Dr. Wood's book will prove, in a great number of ways, to be very possibly the most important book yet to have been published in the 21st century.

So strongly do I feel about the extraordinary importance of Dr. Wood's research, and about its incalculable superiority to the research-and the "conclusions"-of any and all others in the 9/11 truth movement, that if she isn't reinstated on the "Patriots for 9/11 Truth" site in acknowledgment of what she has done for this country, I will ask you-and in fact ask you here and now, should Dr. Wood not be reinstated-also to remove me, my picture, my biography, and my 9/11-related comments from the site entirely. Those who do not support Dr. Wood's work are not patriots. It may be concluded that those who do not support Dr. Wood's work have an unpatriotic agenda that I do not want to be associated with.

My best to you, and my gratitude for your attention,
Eric Larsen
http://www.ericlarsen.info
http://www.oliveropenpress.com

[Micpsi]

So, MR Larsen, anyone who finds fault with second-rate research that prefers wild fantasies (DEW/space beams) to more plausible mechanisms for the destruction of the WTC towers is not a patriot, eh?

McArthurism entering the 9/11 truth movement, I see. Indistinguishable from a neo-con who thinks anyone questioning the official account of 9/11 is unpatriotic.

"The more things change, the more they remain the same".

[Daniel Elliott]

Abe,

Great to see you flustering Richard Gage with a copy of Dr Wood's book in hand at the recent presentation of A/E half truths. Well done.

[Micpsi]

[fish5133]

Architects and Engineers response to Dr Woods DEW theory

http://ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/505-ae911truth-faq-6 -whats-your-assessment-of-the-directed-energy-weapon-dew-hypothesis.ht ml