Stew Peters recently dropped his documentary "Occupied" and the 9/11 coverage in the documentary needs some more context for those that have not looked into the events on 9/11 all that deep.
At your suggestion, I read Dr Wood's fantastic book, could not put it down. The photographic evidence she presents is irrefutable. The towers were Dustified by some as yet defined DEW.
I have not seen Stew Peters' work, but it seems that you for some reason doubt that there was a supranational group that instigated this high tech false flag monstrosity described by Dr. Wood. Someone did it. Lots of people have been studying that side, which for some reason you think must be suspended until the exact technological method of destruction can be proven. Really?
OK. JFK was killed by a bullet fired from a gun. Now, then, who, and WHY must be answered.
I recommend Laurent Guyenot's JFK-9/11 for the most cogent explanation. here are 2 important videos of his to watch:
Let me remind you again, to an edited explanation as per Dr Judy Wood...
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.
A small compilation I put together, 1h 15 minutes, that might have some people open their eyes and wake up from the psy-op which was 9/11.
Well, the fact that he had Andrew Johnson on twice (2023 and 2024, on Sept 11), talking about the tech involved, the cover-up of NIST, the 23 NIST subcontractors and the 9/11 "truth" movement - Same goes for Ken O' Keefe (who also has a copy of Dr Wood's book, handed to him by Andrew Johnson) and them both never pointing a finger to the US MIC's hand in all of this, raises red flags for me as well...
The link to "wheredidthetowersgo" is dead.
Judy Wood is instead found at https://www.drjudywood.com/towers/
At your suggestion, I read Dr Wood's fantastic book, could not put it down. The photographic evidence she presents is irrefutable. The towers were Dustified by some as yet defined DEW.
I have not seen Stew Peters' work, but it seems that you for some reason doubt that there was a supranational group that instigated this high tech false flag monstrosity described by Dr. Wood. Someone did it. Lots of people have been studying that side, which for some reason you think must be suspended until the exact technological method of destruction can be proven. Really?
OK. JFK was killed by a bullet fired from a gun. Now, then, who, and WHY must be answered.
I recommend Laurent Guyenot's JFK-9/11 for the most cogent explanation. here are 2 important videos of his to watch:
https://rumble.com/v5355qm-911-and-israels-great-game-laurent-guyenot-2022.html
https://rumble.com/v55t6rn-israel-and-the-assassinations-of-the-kennedy-brothers-laurent-guynot-2018.html
A good idea to check these out before you sign on to the latest Israeli plan for world war.
Let me remind you again, to an edited explanation as per Dr Judy Wood...
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.
A small compilation I put together, 1h 15 minutes, that might have some people open their eyes and wake up from the psy-op which was 9/11.
Sept 11, 2001: Power Patterns & Identification
Link: https://rumble.com/v485iu3-sept-11-2001-power-patterns-and-identification.html
Yes, as we all are aware, there tend to be two realities: The truth and the untruth.
Blessings ~ Keep up the good work. With love, & thanks.
Judy Wood, thanks for the recommendation, cheers FF
You might want to give this podcast interview a listening to...
Link: https://www.jermwarfare.social/p/911-revisionism-evidence
Stew Peters is a fucking idiot and maybe a fed.
Well, the fact that he had Andrew Johnson on twice (2023 and 2024, on Sept 11), talking about the tech involved, the cover-up of NIST, the 23 NIST subcontractors and the 9/11 "truth" movement - Same goes for Ken O' Keefe (who also has a copy of Dr Wood's book, handed to him by Andrew Johnson) and them both never pointing a finger to the US MIC's hand in all of this, raises red flags for me as well...
Thank you and bless you for all of your long hours and hard work!
Blessings ~