Luckily it’s not a math textbook and you’ll see just how much pictorial evidence there is to help one see what we weren’t being shown by the government or the 9/11 “truth” movement, that just cannot be explained by jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes…
Also, download Andrew Johnson’s two free e-books and give them a read over the holiday season…
The other day I got into an argument in a bar about what happened on 9/11 and I felt for the couple I was talking to because there was a time when I too believed the "official" story. How many times have people heard this: "I saw the airplane hit the building... on tv..." or something along those lines. How best do I explain it? I thought of this - use yandex.com search engine and look up "Computer Generated Images CGI" + "hologram technology" + "directed energy weapons DEW" + Judy Woods outstanding book "Where Did The Towers Go?"
The couple also got mad at me when I told them Michelle Obama is a dude, but that's a story for another time.
I wanted to use that famous movie line "You can't handle the truth..." Jack Nicholson
My mind is still open about whether or not drone jets or CGI entered the Towers. My question, I hope you can answer, is that if it was CGI, how was the jet engine noise generated so that people on the ground, line the Naudet Brothers filming a FDNY drill that day, hear it enough to cause them to look up? I’ve not yet received an answer to that question. Drones were to be used during Operation Northwoods.
Otherwise, I can’t recall the page, but in the book, Women At Ground Zero, a NYPD officer worked in the makeshift morgue, receiving body parts, and one of them was that of a stewardess’ torso with her hands tied behind her back. What would explain that, I wonder?
Another body part logged that day was that of a male officer’s hand with his service pistol still in it. Gruesome reading at best.
Then you'll come to the irrefutable conclusion and realisation of what people saw in the sky on 9/11 and what transpired at Shanksville AND the PentaCON.
There is a MASSIVE body of work done the last 14 years on the "planes" issue by Mark Conlon, aka 9/11 Planes Research that you should check out on his substack and a lot of his research is contained in the documentary, 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality - Watch it and realise the bamboozle.
His substack: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/ and two articles and a podcast with him to start off with, after you've watched 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality.
Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.
The order of crime solving is to determine
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.
You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.
You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.
If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it (they hate us for our freedoms); before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.
Many people have speculated as to who committed the crimes of 9/11 and/or how they did so. But without addressing what happened, speculation of this kind is nothing more than conspiracy theory, a phrase that also describes the 19 bad guys with box cutters story we were given before noon on 9/11/01.
Dr Wood’s research is not speculation and she’s been the closest to getting to the bottom of the who dunnit.
Dr Wood did a forensics investigation of what happened to the WTC complex on 9/11/01.
She does not address who did it, nor am I concerned with that question right now.
Before issues of that kind can be addressed, we must first determine what happened.
By definition, research that is purely empirical cannot be about and has nothing to do with conspiracy theory of any kind.
The fact that others (in the mainstream media, the alternative media, and the so-called 9/11 truth movement) promote various theories about 9/11 is irrelevant to Dr Wood’s research. On the other hand, to determine what happened, we must address all of the available evidence.
Anyone declaring who did what or how they did it before they have determined what was done is merely promoting either speculation or propaganda.
The popular chant, “9/11 was an inside job,” is, scientifically speaking, no different from the chant that “19 bad guys with box cutters did it.” Neither one is the result of a scientific investigation supported by evidence that would be admissible in court.
Neither identifies what crime was committed or how it was committed.
There are a lot of coincidences with regards to the build-up, on the day and the days after 9/11. There are suspects as to who might have had some sort of involvement in the events of 9/11, but for now it’s all they are. Suspects.
Dr Wood sued 23 NIST subcontractors who were tasked with security and clean up at ground zero. These companies also helped write reports that made up the scientifically flawed, 10 000 NIST report.
Two of the main defendants in the case were ARA and SAIC, who specialise in psychological warfare, weather manipulation and directed energy weapons, DEW.
If Dr Wood’s 2009 US Supreme Court Case wasn’t railroaded by the judge, she would have been able to depose these 23 companies and in so doing, would have been closer to determining exactly HOW and then we’d get a lot closer to WHO and WHY.
But we can have our suspects for now, but we need hard evidence to convict.
Its a given, airliners do NOT simply penetrate walls "like a hot knife through butter"
the "B movie special effect" of the alleged FLT175 penetrating the south wall of the South Tower. - - This info constitutes absolute PROOF that the media & politicians LIED about what allegedly happened . . therefore we have all the raw material we need to get this case into court.
Please then apply yourself to writing Richard Gage, architects for an engineered truth, the International Center for 9/11 Justice, suppression’s Piers Robinson, also a co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, Ted Walter, David Chandler, Wayne Coste, Gene Laratonda (host of the weekly 9/11 “War Room”), Boston 9/11, Colorado 9/11, Captain Dan Hanley, Aidan Monaghan, Kevin Ryan, Oliver Caron-Mason that are now trying to sell the bogus remote controlled plane disinformation in 2024 and all the other idiots out there also trying to sell CGI video fakery….
Truly heartbreaking…
In 1999 I spent 6 months in Durango Colorado and shared a house with a native American Indian and he told me stories that really angered me.
What struck me was the hate for “the white man” still.
He also took me to a pow wow and I could immerse myself with their culture and traditions.
It was really something…
Thank you for sharing.
Love and blessings to you as well...
I will relay it to my close friend, who is the main author of the 9/11 Reality Series.
Thank you for reading, watching and caring.
So glad you got your hands on a copy!
Don’t worry, I also didn’t do that well in math.
Luckily it’s not a math textbook and you’ll see just how much pictorial evidence there is to help one see what we weren’t being shown by the government or the 9/11 “truth” movement, that just cannot be explained by jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes…
Also, download Andrew Johnson’s two free e-books and give them a read over the holiday season…
1. 9/11 Finding the Truth - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf
2. 9/11 Holding the Truth - http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/911%20Holding%20The%20Truth%20-Andrew%20Johnson%20-%202017.pdf
The other day I got into an argument in a bar about what happened on 9/11 and I felt for the couple I was talking to because there was a time when I too believed the "official" story. How many times have people heard this: "I saw the airplane hit the building... on tv..." or something along those lines. How best do I explain it? I thought of this - use yandex.com search engine and look up "Computer Generated Images CGI" + "hologram technology" + "directed energy weapons DEW" + Judy Woods outstanding book "Where Did The Towers Go?"
The couple also got mad at me when I told them Michelle Obama is a dude, but that's a story for another time.
I wanted to use that famous movie line "You can't handle the truth..." Jack Nicholson
Then don’t you dare send them a link to watch - 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
Or have them read this article:
Daniel Fulton: 9/11 Second Plane Disappearing Wing Photograph
An Independent Investigation
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/daniel-fulton-911-second-plane-disappearing
You mean Big Mike?
My mind is still open about whether or not drone jets or CGI entered the Towers. My question, I hope you can answer, is that if it was CGI, how was the jet engine noise generated so that people on the ground, line the Naudet Brothers filming a FDNY drill that day, hear it enough to cause them to look up? I’ve not yet received an answer to that question. Drones were to be used during Operation Northwoods.
Otherwise, I can’t recall the page, but in the book, Women At Ground Zero, a NYPD officer worked in the makeshift morgue, receiving body parts, and one of them was that of a stewardess’ torso with her hands tied behind her back. What would explain that, I wonder?
Another body part logged that day was that of a male officer’s hand with his service pistol still in it. Gruesome reading at best.
Ok, I'll have to give you some homework on the "plane" issue...
You really need to have a look and watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
Then you'll come to the irrefutable conclusion and realisation of what people saw in the sky on 9/11 and what transpired at Shanksville AND the PentaCON.
There is a MASSIVE body of work done the last 14 years on the "planes" issue by Mark Conlon, aka 9/11 Planes Research that you should check out on his substack and a lot of his research is contained in the documentary, 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality - Watch it and realise the bamboozle.
His substack: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/ and two articles and a podcast with him to start off with, after you've watched 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality.
Illusion of Reality and the 9/11 Planes
Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11?
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/illusion-of-reality-and-the-911-planes
9/11 Planes: 3D VIPT vs Video Fakery and CGI
Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11?
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/911-planes-3d-volumetric-image-projection
Podcast with Jerm Warfare: https://www.jermwarfare.com/mark-conlon-on-there-being-no-planes-on-9-11/
The answers in your last section will clearly show the beginning of what actually happened, and likely go a long way towards who and all of the why.
Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.
The order of crime solving is to determine
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.
You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.
You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.
If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it (they hate us for our freedoms); before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.
Many people have speculated as to who committed the crimes of 9/11 and/or how they did so. But without addressing what happened, speculation of this kind is nothing more than conspiracy theory, a phrase that also describes the 19 bad guys with box cutters story we were given before noon on 9/11/01.
Dr Wood’s research is not speculation and she’s been the closest to getting to the bottom of the who dunnit.
Dr Wood did a forensics investigation of what happened to the WTC complex on 9/11/01.
She does not address who did it, nor am I concerned with that question right now.
Before issues of that kind can be addressed, we must first determine what happened.
By definition, research that is purely empirical cannot be about and has nothing to do with conspiracy theory of any kind.
The fact that others (in the mainstream media, the alternative media, and the so-called 9/11 truth movement) promote various theories about 9/11 is irrelevant to Dr Wood’s research. On the other hand, to determine what happened, we must address all of the available evidence.
Anyone declaring who did what or how they did it before they have determined what was done is merely promoting either speculation or propaganda.
The popular chant, “9/11 was an inside job,” is, scientifically speaking, no different from the chant that “19 bad guys with box cutters did it.” Neither one is the result of a scientific investigation supported by evidence that would be admissible in court.
Neither identifies what crime was committed or how it was committed.
There are a lot of coincidences with regards to the build-up, on the day and the days after 9/11. There are suspects as to who might have had some sort of involvement in the events of 9/11, but for now it’s all they are. Suspects.
Dr Wood sued 23 NIST subcontractors who were tasked with security and clean up at ground zero. These companies also helped write reports that made up the scientifically flawed, 10 000 NIST report.
Two of the main defendants in the case were ARA and SAIC, who specialise in psychological warfare, weather manipulation and directed energy weapons, DEW.
If Dr Wood’s 2009 US Supreme Court Case wasn’t railroaded by the judge, she would have been able to depose these 23 companies and in so doing, would have been closer to determining exactly HOW and then we’d get a lot closer to WHO and WHY.
But we can have our suspects for now, but we need hard evidence to convict.
Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go?
Link: https://www.checktheevidence.com/wordpress/product/where-did-the-towers-go-by-dr-judy-wood/
https://alexkrainer.substack.com/p/are-they-planning-a-false-flag-event
Are they planning a false flag event in London?
Very nearly all of London's Webcams went dark in early September. Why?
They may bypass the next pandemic and go straight for the nuclear option.
Radiation is on the list with marburg and ebola and will trigger a public health emergency.
Interesting - Thank you for sharing
If you are on twitter/X please spread this information and link. The way to stop it is for the knowledge of its planning to leak out.
Its a given, airliners do NOT simply penetrate walls "like a hot knife through butter"
the "B movie special effect" of the alleged FLT175 penetrating the south wall of the South Tower. - - This info constitutes absolute PROOF that the media & politicians LIED about what allegedly happened . . therefore we have all the raw material we need to get this case into court.
Please then apply yourself to writing Richard Gage, architects for an engineered truth, the International Center for 9/11 Justice, suppression’s Piers Robinson, also a co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, Ted Walter, David Chandler, Wayne Coste, Gene Laratonda (host of the weekly 9/11 “War Room”), Boston 9/11, Colorado 9/11, Captain Dan Hanley, Aidan Monaghan, Kevin Ryan, Oliver Caron-Mason that are now trying to sell the bogus remote controlled plane disinformation in 2024 and all the other idiots out there also trying to sell CGI video fakery….
Going in Search of Planes in NYC on 9/11
Revisiting 1st Responders’ Accounts
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/going-in-search-of-planes-in-nyc