The Existence of Energy Weapons

[Roadrunner]

Steadily accumulating evidence worldwide for the development by military of energy weapons. Here are some early evidences -

Source -

ttp://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam7.html#testing

Majid Al Ghezali - They used incredible weapons

Patrick Dillon - Experimental weapons?

Majid Al Ghezali Yes… Yes, I think. They shoot the bus. We saw the bus like a cloth, like a wet cloth. It seemed like a Volkswagen, a big bus like a Volkswagen.

This testimony was reported to American filmmaker Patrick Dillon a few weeks after the battle for the airport. The person interviewed, Majid al Ghezali, is a well-known and respected man in Baghdad, who is the first violinist in the city orchestra.
In addition to describing the battle, Majid al Ghezali wanted to show Patrick Dillon the site near the airport where this mysterious weapon was used, along with the traces of fused metal still visible, and the irregularly sized ditches where the cadavers were buried before they were exhumed.
We sought out Majid al Ghezali to hear more details of his story. We met up with him in Amman and he pointed out some inexplicable peculiarities on the bodies of the victims of the battle for the airport.

Majid Al Ghezali Just the head was burnt. In the other parts of the body there wasn’t anything.

Al Ghezali reported that he had seen three passengers in a car, all dead, with their faces and teeth burnt, their clothes intact, and no sign of projectiles.

Majid Al Ghezali There wasn’t any bullet. I saw their teeth, just the teeth, and they had no eyes, all of them, there was nothing on their bodies.

There were other inexplicable aspects: the terrain where the battle took place was dug up by the American military and replaced with other fresh earth; the bodies that were not hit by projectiles had shrunk to just slightly more than one meter in height.

Majid Al Ghezali Except the ones killed by the bullets, most of them became very small. I mean… like that… Something like that.

When we asked Majid what weapon he imagined had been used, he said that he had reached the conclusion that it must have been a laser weapon.

Majid Al Ghezali One year later we heard that they used an update technology, a unique one, like lasers.

We found another disturbing document on the use of mysterious weapons in Iraq, which referred to episodes that took place almost at the same time as those described by Majid al Ghezali.

Saad al Falluji They were 26 in the bus. About 20 of them had no head, the head had been cut, some of them had no arms or no legs. The only unwounded was the driver and really I don’t know how he reach our hospital, because one arm was on his side, one head just beside him. It was a very strange and horrible situation.
In the roof of the car there were parts of the body: intestines, brains, all parts of the body. It was a very very very miserable situation.

Geert Van Moorter (medical doctor working in Iraq during and after the war, as a volunteer for the belgiam NGO Medical Aid fot the Third World) Do you have idea with what kind of weapon the attacked the bus?

Saad al Falluji We don’t know with what kind of weapon they hit this bus.

Doctor n°2 It seems to be a new weapon

Saad al Falluji Yes, a new weapon

Doctor n°2 They are trying to do experiments on our civilians. Nobody could identify the type of this weapon.

We went to Belgium to find the filmmaker of this sequence, Geert Van Moorter, a doctor working as a volunteer in Iraq.

Geert Van Moorter This footage is taken at the General Teaching Hospital in Hilla, which is about 100 Km from Baghdad, and close to the historical site of Babylon. There I talked with the colleague doctor Saad al Falluji, which is the chief surgeon in that hospital.
Doctor al Falluji said me that the survivors that he operated said him that they did not hear any noise, so there was no explosion to hear, no metal fragments or shrapnels or bullets in their bodies, so they themselves were thinking of some strange kind of weapon which they did not know.

Let’s hear Dr. Saad el Falluji’s story about this in more detail.

Saad al Falluji This bus was very crowded, they were going from Hilla to Kifil, to find their families, but before they had arrived at the American checkpoint the villagers said to them “return back, return back”. When the bus tried to return back it was shot by the checkpoint.

Geert Van Moorter No gunshot wounds?

Saad al Falluji No, no, I don’t know what it was. We are here 10 surgeons and we couldn’t decide which was the weapon that hit this car.

Geert Van Moorter But inside the bodies you did not discover ordinary bullets?

Saad al Falluji We didn’t find bullets, but most of the passengers were dead, so they took them immediately to the refrigerator and we couldn’t dissect and see, but in those who were alive we didn’t find any kind of bullet. We didn’t find bullets in their bodyes.

Doctor n°2 Something cutting organs, cutting limbs, attacking the abdomen, attacking the neck and goes out.

Dr. Falluji also ended up speaking about a laser weapon....

Saad al Falluji I don’t think that the bombing, or the cluster bombs, or the laser weapons can bring democracy to our country.

As in any war, the war in Iraq, left us a dreadful gallery of horror - images of mutilations that not even doctors can explain. The witnesses referred to laser weapons, arms with mysterious effects. We do not know what kind of weapons could produce such terrible effects. We tried to learn more about it, by asking for interviews to members of companies manufacturing laser and microwave weapons. Yet, the US Defence Department prevented any information from being released to us. They also did not answer – up to the time the film was edited – the questions we had sent them in order to know weather or not experimental weapons had been tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We then reviewed the Pentagon’s media conferences released before the II Gulf War. Willingness to test new weapons emerged form the words of both the Defence Secretary and General Meyers. The questions from the media on direct energy and microwave weapons produced a certain amount of embarrassment.

American journalist Mr. Secretary, can I ask you a question about some of the technology that you're developing to fight the war on terrorists, specifically directed energy and high-powered microwave technology? Do you -- when do you envision that you can weaponize that type of technology?

Donald Rumsfeld Goodness, it is in -- for the most part, the kinds of things you're talking about are in varying early stages. (To the general.) Do you want to -- do you have anything you would add?

General Myers I don't think I would add much. It's -- I think they are in early stages and probably not ready for employment at this point.

Donald Rumsfeld in the normal order of things, when you invest in research and development and begin a developmental project, you don't have any intention or expectations that one would use it. On the other hand, the real world intervenes from time to time, and you reach in there and take something out that is still in a developmental stage, and you might use it. So the -- your question's not answerable. It is -- depends on what happens in the future and how well things move along the track and whether or not someone feels it's appropriate to reach into a development stage and see if something might be useful, as was the case with the unmanned aerial vehicles.

American journalist But you sound like you're willing to experiment with it.

General Myers Yeah, I think that's the point. And I think -- and it's -- and we have, I think, from the beginning of this conflict -- I think General Franks has been very open to looking at new things, if there are new things available, and has been willing to put them into the fight, even before they've been fully wrung out. And I think that's -- not referring to these particular cases of directed energy or high-powered microwaves, but sure. And we will continue to do that.

But what is meant by directed-energy and microwave weapons? We went to ask retired colonel John Alexander, former program director in one of the most important military research laboratories in the United States, Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Retired Colonel John B. Alexander The research and the concepts for directed energy weapons go back many decades. What is happening is that the technology has now advanced sufficiently that now we are starting to see these weapons becoming real.
There are several types of directed energy weapons and basically what they do is they’re known as “speed of light” because they shoot electrons very fast over very long distances. Lasers of course are in the light range, then there are microwave weapons that are operating at other frequencies, but basically they’re beam weapons, which is nothing physical that goes out, because they move electrons, while the kinetic weapons shoot big bullets to go out and physically hit and destroy something. These work because the energy is deposed on the target and causes some effect.

These images document one of the THEL tests. THEL stands for Tactical High Energy Laser. In the sequence, you can see the laser beam hit and destroy missiles and mortar rounds as they are about to hit the objective.
In this other test we see the laser beam identify and destroy two missiles at the same time.

It doesn’t make any noise and it’s invisible?

Retired Colonel John B. Alexander Some are visible, some are just outside… You have, you know, in the infrared range…
What’s emerging now are laser weapons where the effect is that that of the laser. They can be all burners, in what we call High Energy Lasers, because with the concentrated energy you can literally drill holes, you know, in the target.

Former Pentagon analyst William Arkin, who presently works as a journalist for the Washington Post, also confirms this revolutionary change from kinetic weapons to energy weapons.

William Arkin For thousands of years, the way in which you have killed someone is you have hit them with a sword, a sphere, an arrow, a bullet, a bomb. It’s kinetic, you’re killing them by hitting them. And now, all of the sudden, out of nowhere, you have a completely new physical principle being applied in killing people, in which they don’t know that they’re being killed because their skin and body is being heated by high power microwaves or they are being hit by a laser that would have an instantaneous effect.

There are other types of weapons made with lasers, such as the device we can see in this sequence. The target is not hit by a projectile, but rather by an impulse of energy that manages to bore through the armor of an armored car.
Excluding acoustic weapons, for the moment, the only sign of the use of energy weapons in a war scenario is a laser device known as Zeus. According to official Pentagon sources, military vehicles equipped with this laser device have been used in Afghanistan to explode mines. According to two reliable military information sites – Defense Tech and Defence Industry Daily - at least three such vehicles are being used in Iraq as well and some people report having seen them.

Geert Van Moorter When you showed me the picture of what you described that is a laser weapon, it reminded me that I was talking with some American soldiers, in August 2003, and there was some kind of box on their tank with a blue light like this. I recall it very well not because they said me what it was used for, but because I was teasing a translator, which was an Iraqi female, by telling her “look, with this kind of thing they can look through and see somebody without clothes”. That’s why I remind it, but I have seen for sure this kind of thing on that tank.

William Arkin is one of the American experts who follows the Pentagon activity most closely. So what does Arkin think about the possibility of the use of directed energy weapons in battle in Iraq?

William Arkin You know, there’s even some possibility that high power microwaves have been used experimentally. I think that the panic about IEDs, about Improvised Explosives Devices, has been so bad that if these things are sitting in the lab, I’m sure that they want to get them to Iraq to see whether they are effective. So I can imagine that there could be some, what we call, “black” use of these weapons, but not in any significant way, and certainly not in such a way that one would conclude that they’ve had any impact.

But let’s look at the Pentagon budget figures to see how important the outlay is for directed energy weapons.

William Arkin Right now you have about $50 million a year being spent for non-lethal weapons, you have about another $200 million or so being spent on High Power Microwaves, Active Denial type Systems, you’ve got probably another $100-200 million being spent on “secret”, “black” laser programs, and then you have the big lasers, the High Energy Lasers of the Air force and the other Tactical Lasers. So probably, when you add all of that up, you know the United States are probably spending $½ billion a year right now on directed energy weapons. This is a significant amount of money; this is the size of the Defence Budget of some countries in Europe.

You might think that energy weapons only pose a danger for the countries involved in a military conflict, but that’s not the case. One particular weapon called the Active Denial System – better known as the pain ray – has been built specifically for use in maintaining public order. Given its claim to be non-lethal and the suffering it produces, this weapon could become a very controversial one.

Retired Colonel John B. Alexander The Active Denial System is a Millimetre Wave System, operates at about 93 GHz. It sends out a beam for a very long distance, and what’s important about it is that when it hits the skin it penetrates only a very slight, for a few millimetres under the skin and it it’s the pain receptors and causes, you know, people to be adverse to the pain.
It hurts, it hurts a lot.
The tests that had been run they were to go for 3 seconds, each individual was given a kill switch and nobody made 3 seconds. The answer to the pain is extremely rapid, and you don’t have to do it very long, I mean, it gets your attention instantly.

To understand the consequences this new weapon could have for human rights we went to the Empire State Building in Manhattan, home of the offices of Human Rights Watch, one of the most important human rights organizations.

Marc Garlasco We can see the effects of a gun very easily and understand them, but when you cannot see the effect of a weapon because it is not visible and because the science is not very well understood because technology is so new, then it becomes a grieve concern that enrages the states for potential human rights violations and abuses. And that is something that we have to understand about the Active Denial System, that it exists to create pain and is very different in most other non-lethal weapons where the desire is either to immobilize someone or make it so that they cannot walk in the area. With the Active Denial System the main desire is pain, and we have to be very careful because in international law is very clear that devices created solely for the creation of pain can eventually lead to torture and are therefore illegal, and it’s very critical that the United States does a careful legal review of the Active Denial System and is open with their findings. To date they have not been open.

William Arkin Some people say “ooh acoustic weapons, or High Power Microwave weapons, the Active Denial System, we can use it for crowd control…”
What crowd control? What does that mean?
It pretends that anyone in the crowd is eighteen years old, and male and in good health, and we’re just going to shoot these microwaves or shoot these acoustic weapons on this crowd, and it’s going to be carefully calibrated at a power level, in the intensity and at a range to affect all these eighteen years old men in the crowd.
Well, what crowd is made up of just eighteen years old men?
Look at the Intifada, look at any riot in Iraq today: children, women, pregnant women, old people, and so the effect… the effect that you would need in order to have an impact on a healthy male, you target, would be too much for a child or a pregnant woman or an old person.

Marc Garlasco There’s been a lot of discussion also about the potential for eye damage. They have done some tests on the skin to show that is not harmful, but where is the eye test? And there are concerns raised by scientists about potential harm to the eyes. And we also have concerns about the effects to children, to the infirm, to the elderly… Why are they not producing the data? Why are they not sharing it with us?

As regards the use of the pain ray in the field of war, the military review Defence Industry Daily reports that three Sheriff vehicles were ordered at a price of about 31 million dollars, and that approval has been requested for another 14 vehicles by Brigadier General James Haggin, chief of staff of the multinational forces in Iraq.

Retired Colonel John B. Alexander In my view the next global conflict has already began and we don’t have an understanding of what that conflict looks like. Because of the issues of terrorism for instance the adversaries are going to be I think mixed in with civilian populations. We need weapons that allow us to be able to sort, minimize what they call “collateral casualties”. I think the battlefields are going to be in urban areas.

William Arkin If you look at the Active Denial System, or the High Power Microwaves, or the LRAD, the acoustic weapon, what you see is enthusiasm for those are being displayed by the Us Northern Command, which is the homeland defence command of the United States, or other counterterrorism organizations, which are looking at them like “oh well, maybe, in some special circumstances we can take these secret weapons, boutique weapons, you know, we have only 10 or 20 of them somewhere in a secret place and if we need them we can pull them out and use them in this kind of specialty warfare”. So ironically, even though the Americans would probably think “oh yeah, special new weapon, it would make sense because Iraq is such a mess and maybe we can do something to turn that corner in some way with the use of this weapon, the truth is that the only real way in which they, the military, sees the prospects for the deployment of these is in their domestic use. And you know quite well… that if the United States adopts these weapons for their domestic defence… Nato in Italy are not far behind…

[Stefan]

It's not "steadily accumulating evidence" - it's completly publicly known fact that military directed energy weapons exist - in varying levels of completion.

Why is this a controversy? Why did you post it here?

Because you are clearly trying to insinuate this equals evidence that the Twin Towers were destroyed by one perchance?

Look if I said to you

"My 9/11 theory is that the twin towers were destroyed by a gun"

You might respond

"There is no evidence any gun exists which could cause the destruction of the Twin Towers, neither is there any logical mechanism for it doing so if such a gun did exist"

You'd be right - how would you feel if I said in response:

"Ah but guns DO exist! Look at my evidence!" and put the DVD of commando on?

Might you bang your head against the wall like I am right now?

Proving the existence of DEW does NOTHING to prove that any DEW could destroy the Twin Towers, neither does it provide any evidence that one did.

OK?

[gruts]

I think the twin towers were brought down by a massive invisible holographic banana, and anyone who disagrees is an agent of misinformation who's being mindcontrolled by the perps, who are themselves just agents of the evil jesuit order....

I believe it so it must be true!

[chek]

[gruts]

it's conclusive proof that he's an agent of misinformation. case closed.

[Roadrunner]

Well, there is in fact overwhelmingly massive evidence that the Twin Towers were destroyed by energy weapons. A great deal of this evidence is photographic. It also consists of the fact that some 1400 vehicles were destroyed, though many of them parked far from the Twin Towers. Their destruction by any other means begs the question 'How, other than energy weapons, were these vehicles destroyed'. No answers ?

One only needs to watch the final moments of these Twin Towers.

So, although the exact energy weapon is not known (as has been stated so often, so repeatedly, by Judy Wood, myself, and many other 9/11 researchers) the effects that we see in the video and photographic evidence from Manhattan are conclusive. The Twin Towers WERE destroyed by energy weapons. Not by controlled demolition. Nor were 1400 cars and trucks destroyed by acts of controlled demolition. Care to suggest another explanation ???

I posted here on energy weapons because (as everyone agrees) these already exist of many kinds. That energy weapons were used at the WTC on 9/11/2001 is no longer a question. The real question is 'what sort of energy weapons were used to destroy these Twin Towers and these 1400 vehicles on 9/11/2001 in New York ?'.

[chek]

[Bushwacker]

Those 1400 cars were torched by New York youth gangs in the confusion, having been paid to do so by american auto manufacturers to assist their markets. They have been training to do so in the UK's larger cities for years, proof enough, surely?

[gruts]

sorry Bushy - but you have just proved that you are also an agent of misinformation by failing to accept the massive evidence for MIHB technology and it's proven role in the tragic events of 9/11. we already know that you are a deluded fool, but I had no idea that your delusions were as profound and tragic as this.

an exotech FCS stealth banana accounted for the towers and the cars!

case closed.

[Roadrunner]

OK Chek, let me make this simple.

'Other than energy weapons, what known cause have you to suggest for the destruction of some 1400 vehicles, many of them parked city blocks from the WTC on 9/11/2001' ?

Modified kerosene, perhaps ?

[gruts]

it's a shame that the admin of this forum allow shills and trolls to run amock whenever MIHB technology evidence is presented. open your eyes roadrunner and stop running away from the truth!

[Roadrunner]

So your suggestion for the destruction of some 1400 vehicles on that day is what ? Whatever you suggest, you must allow for the fact that no driver or pedestrian was burned by such causes.

Any suggestions ? Seriously ?

[John White]

[chek]

[Roadrunner]

Yes, right John.

And do you know of any similar case of such mass vehicle destruction at any time, anywhere, due to the effects of buildings falling city blocks away ?

[Roadrunner]

Chek,

It has been 'clearly shown' ? Where ?

[gruts]

[chek]

[Roadrunner]

John White asks for evidence of exploding vehicles - I can do better. Here is an eyewitness report to vehicles and also to planes in the area -

Here's one of many -

WORLD TRADE CENTER TASK FORCE INTERVIEW

EMT PATRICIA ONDROVIC

Interview Date: October 1, 2001

I guess that's North Park. It's a big green, grassy area, and there's nothing there. As I was running up here, two or three more cars exploded on me. They weren't near any buildings at that point, they were just parked on the street. The traffic guys hadn't gotten a chance to tow anything yet, cause this was all during the first hour I guess of this thing happening. So there were still cars parked on the street that were completely independent of that. Three cars blew up on me, stuff was being thrown. I went home all bruised that day. Thank God it was only bruises. I just ran into this park along with a bunch of other people, and stuff was still blowing up, I don't think I looked back, but you couldn't see anything, everything was just black. I was running and I was falling over people, cause people were crawling on the ground cause they couldn't see anymore. I just kept on running north. I could smell water, so I just kept on running towards the water, cause I knew that my coat was on fire, and I figured well, if I can see a boat over the water, I'm just gonna jump onto the boat and take that thing to Jersey, cause no one wants to blow up Jersey. Stuff is still blowing up behind me, as I'm running. I can hear stuff exploding. I could hear rumbling, the street under me was moving like I was in an earthquake. I've been in those, so I know what they feel like. It felt like an earthquake. There was no where safe to go. As I was running north in this park, and then I could start seeing again a little bit, and I just kept looking in the sky. Cause the captain was saying there's another plane heading in our direction, I was looking for another plane. I saw something in the sky, it was a plane, but it was way out. It looked like it was over Jersey or something, then it wasn't there anymore. I saw a small fireball, and it was gone. I saw two other planes. One came in one way, and the other came in the other way, and there was a plane in the middle that was way far off in the distance. Then [u]the plane in the middle just disappeared into a little fire ball. It looked like the size of a golf ball from where I could see it.[/u] And the other two planes veered off into opposite directions. I just kept on running north. About fifteen blocks later, I had no idea that that was just the first tower that had come down.

[chek]

[Roadrunner]

The connection to energy weapons being used is obvious, indisputable and plain. Read it again. You asked for evidence of parked cars exploding, right. There you have it.

But why bother ? It's clearly a waste of time. Other readers can read it. That's good enough.

[Stefan]

Well what you seem to be trying to do here is present us with evidence that cars were blown up with DEW, not the twin towers, and not doing such a great job at that.

Your guy is "one of many" -let's see the others please. I was familiar with that testimoney - and it's the only one I've ever read to mention cars exploding - I'm sure I've missed a few - could you post them here for us please?

It's interesting certainly, but given the ease with which you wave away pretty much everyone who claims to have been hit by explosions in the twin towers, you can hardly use a lone guy as grounds to leap into your capital letter jumpsuit and cry that the towers WERE destroyed by a DEW.

Neither is your claim that they were set on fire a long way from the WTC proved by their being photographed that far away - I imagine a lot of cars needed towing away and dumping elsewhere during the early rescue efforts and clean up - they could have been covered in smouldering debris for a few hours (hence their burns) before being moved.

You believe DEW did it, you really do? Great - now what you need to do is learn to keep your yap zipped until there is enough evidence to voice this claim without making a fool of yourself - I have PLENTY of my own little theories about 9/11 and other issues - I'm sure we all do - but without a suitable body of evidence they are only ever guesses; products of the imagination; stabs in the dark; the problem is that 9/11 "Researcher"s chosse to label them FACTS! and traipse around the internet making themselves look like tits.

[Roadrunner]

I have presented evidence that cars, parked well away from buildings, were exploding in large numbers around the time of the collapse of the South Tower. This evidence also includes reports of aircraft being consumed in to fireballs at the same time as the destruction of the vehicles mentioned by this person.

But what's the use ? You can do what you like with it. Others can form their own judgement. Fine.

[gruts]

so the building's coming down and huge quantities of debris - some of which is on fire - are crashing to the ground over a large area, presumably resulting in damage and more fires. there's nothing mysterious about the fact that a car might be set on fire and end up exploding.

it's not "evidence" for DEW - just your usual evidence-free speculation.

and btw - when I posted a selection of witness statements from the same set of accounts that this one comes from - from people who saw the second plane impact - you dismissed them all on the grounds that they were "not publically accountable".

so you can't simultaneously deny evidence of planes from these witnesses and then rely on evidence from the same source for your DEW fantasies.

unless, of course, you're a hypocrite as well as an idiot.

[Stefan]

Roadrunner,
You've presented a single, very strange, story - this would not stand up as evidence in a court of law - especially since you have produced no corroborating evidence, and it picking up things like planes turning into fireballs in the air which no other person or camera saw or filmed.

I'm not saying out of hand it's not true - I'm just saying if that is your "serious body of evidence" which makes you feel so sure of your position, I really think you need to readjust the peak on your gullability cap, it's blocking out your common sense as well as the sun.

Now please, if you'd stay with us for a second here - we have NUMEROUS, CORROBORATING stories of explosions within the twin towers, and these weren't just sounds they were force as well - people were hospitalised. In your version are all these people "shills" because their evidence suggests controlled demolition, while your one man - "smelling water" ran away from exploding cars while planes exploded in the air above - all experiences no one else seems to have shared with him?

[Roadrunner]

Nobody denies there were multiple explosions in the Twin Towers. Two of them created the fireballs, for example. There is huge evidence for other, secondary explosions. And yes, some were killed or injured by them. This is not disputed.

Nor is it disputed that 1400 vehicles were destroyed on the ground from causes that, at this time, beg an explanation. Here is the testimony of one person who saw some of them exploding, though she was, at the time, already far from the towers and the vehicles were parked (as she says) not near buildings.

There is no contradiction here. There is eyewitness evidence that these vehicles were being destroyed around the time of tower collapse.

Any visitor to DrJudyWood.com can see piles of evidence in support of the Twin Towers being destroyed by energy weapons. The effects that we see after destruction of these towers are entirely consistent with this thesis and they are NOT consistent with controlled demolition, neither in the last moments of the towers, nor in the destruction of these vehicles. Again, we do not know the exact sort of energy weapons. But we can say, with such evidence as we have, that the cause of these effects was a weapon or weapons which created these effects. That rules out acts of 'controlled demolition' as the principal cause of these towers being destroyed. It also rules out 'controlled demolition' as being the cause of the vehicle destruction, here witnessed on 9/11/2001.

So, in spite of many attempts to obscure the actual evidence, the facts are consistent. They indicate that energy weapons were the principal reason for these towers and these vehicles being destroyed.

[gruts]

Roadrunner - as usual you are creating fantasies with no actual evidence to support them.

and when I presented you with eyewitnesses who saw the second plane impact, from the same source as you have used to find this witness statement - you dismissed them as publically unaccountable fakes.

so how come they suddenly become real witnesses when you find a statement that your brain can twist into "evidence" for DEW?

you can't have it both ways.

[chek]

[Roadrunner]

Gruts,

Here is todays lesson.

You write -

You are creating fantasies with no actual evidence to support them. and when I presented you with eyewitnesses who saw the second plane impact, from the same source as you have used to find this witness statement - you dismissed them as publically unaccountable fakes.

so how come they suddenly become real witnesses when you find a statement that your brain can twist into "evidence" for DEW? you can't have it both ways.

Well Gruts, you see how easily a man like you can be a fool all your life ? Let me explain it to you.

In the first case, the evidence being presented here is from two separate things. The eyewitness evidence of planes (and please read this very carefully) IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE. IT IS NOT ABLE TO BE INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED. IT NEVER HAS BEEN. IN FACT, GRUTS, IN 6 YEARS (AS SAID NO LESS THAN 42 TIMES ON THIS FORUM) IT REMAINS TODAY AVAILABLE ONLY FROM SOURCES WHICH ARE UNACCOUNTABLE.

Which part of this message do you STILL not understand ?

Now, the other matter. The testimony of this emergency worker in Manhattan. Do YOU believe it's untrue, unreliable, etc in saying that she witnessed cars exploding far from buildings on 9/11 ? . If you believe it's true and reliable it CAN be admitted as evidence worthy of being believed. Right ?

Do you believe her testimony ? That's the issue. Right ? If you believe it, great. If you don't great.

But they are quite different issues.

[Dogsmilk]