Highlighting Directed Energy Weapons may prevent Iran war

[andrewwatson]

That is how serious this issue is.

I received this in an email yesterday. I have asked the author for permission to print it, which he has given me.

He is somebody I respect, as do a good many others.

I should like here to postulate that were it not for DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONRY theory emerging as a likely source of the destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center, IRAN's nuclear facilities likely would have been attacked already.

Mind you, they still might be attacked; but the exposure of the use of DEW on WTC may well be the single most important reason why no such attack has occurred as yet simply because the aftermath of such an attack would bear too much resemblance to what ground zero looked like.

Picture this, an overhead view of one of Iran's nuclear sites:




If DEW were used there, the likely outcome would be a subsequent photograph that contained what? DUSTIFICATION, HOLES, TOASTED CARS and LITTLE DAMAGE to any nearby non-targeted structures. In other words, it would look like the remnants of the attack on WTC.

Because Judy has focused our attention on what ground zero actually looked like and what the attack actually looked like as it was taking place, and coupled that with DEW, any plans to use DEW on IRAN or elsewhere might well have been set back.

Judy has brought to the forefront of 9/11 Truth consciousness the effects of a DEW attack. If any such attack on Iran were to occur, the fact that Americans were killed by the same process might well filter down to the level of public awareness.

What then?

The inability to answer that last question might be the single most important reason why use of DEW is being postponed.

Needless to say, with that kind of consideration out in the open, we can see why, for good reason, the effort to discredit Judy Wood has reached fever pitch. And the effort will fail; all the moreso if we start using the information available to us a little more openly.

[andrewwatson]

Coincidence? My line went just as I was posting this.

And stayed off for half an hour.

Andrew W

[marky 54]

what a dilemma.

on one hand we dont want a war especially when nuclear things are involved, but on the other hand if it did happen could be the proof to make beams more likely in alot of peoples minds even after the judy wood incident. i think we would all rather opt for no war but the problem with beams at the towers is nothing to compare it to if it is possible for beam weapons to do what happened at the towers.