It’s so tiresome to have yet another wave of 9/11 pollution to contend with, as if there weren’t already more than enough disinformation turds in the information punchbowl. Making 9/11 movies must have become lucrative again. Thanks for staying the true course, Mr Revisionist!
I’m a keen admirer of Dr Wood’s work, even if I’ve never settled into full conviction that she’s 100% correct. I will, however, always hold anyone citing the late, great Elias Davidsson’s “Hacking America’s Mind on 9/11” to be a proper seeker after the truth, irrespective of whether I concur with their positions on all the old bones of contention.
Tucker should have read Davidsson’s book to understand some critical lines of evidence before throwing his hat in the ring. Of course he should also have read Dr Wood’s tome — a unique compendium of photographs and data with which any serious mind must grapple before it can begin to engage with the subject matter.
I don’t think Ryan is very well read in the literature, which is hard to excuse given the length of time he’s been looking at 9/11.
Same goes for Brad Zerbo, the creator of CODEX 9/11 - I have reached out to him on Telegram, e-mail and DM's on X, yet he ignores one and won't ever correct the mistakes made in this docci.
Decoding "CODEX 9/11"
A great wake up call for normies, but lacking in research diligence for seasoned researchers. A great opportunity wasted.
I read that there is a new bible produced every year since Gutenberg printing press in 1500's. Direct payoff not likely great. My conspiratorial mind considers Cardinal Woolsey's LEARNING AGAINST LEARNING, or what we now call 'information overload', as strategy of diluting truth. Brevity is key, every word, action must tell.
My reservations concern not the physics, per se, but the sheer scale of the system that would need to have been deployed on 9/11. Even that I don’t dismiss as impossible. But wielding such a weapon system on 9/11 would require enormous confidence of a successful operation. Both towers had to be eliminated, for numerous reasons — partial results would leave a big bag full of trouble. To be so confident of flawless results presupposes extensive prior testing of the weapon — and at scale. While one might point to the Manhattan Project as a model of secret development and revelation through first conspicuous use, the novel 9/11 technology was unveiled before the world and absolutely had to accomplish the intended objectives on first public use. There was less visibility for use of the atomic bombs — failure to detonate wouldn’t cause complete operational failure. What might have been the consequences of towers still standing at the end of the day? Something tells me that prior testing of such a weapon at scale ought to have left traces that would have been observed and remarked upon. Other than that nagging question, Dr Wood’s arguments are persuasive.
Hey Robert, so I just bought Woods' book and am only 100 pages in, so forgive me if I don't know what I'm talking about. But your reservation that directed energy couldn't have been used because it would be too risky, that they'd mess up- I mean couldn't the same be said for bombs in the building or nukes?
And they DID mess up, in that all the physical evidence points to a technology that pulverizes matter. That was right in front of our faces and it's our fault we didn't pay attention to it! The freakin foot of dust around the complex and pieces of paper everywhere- if I had paid better attention in science class I would have known something was off- no way paper goes unburned in a supposed fire that somehow makes 2 100 story buildings go poof, plus 5 other buildings (still not there in the book yet.)
They messed up with their energy weapon in the car park- loads of evidence that whatever caused the unusual damage was NOT a method we understand, because damage doesn't look like this! You have scorched exteriors and complete intact car seats, upholstery untouched. This is evidence of some kind of unknown tech. Nothing we know of would do this!
They messed up with explaining the lack of debris, lack of seismic impact, the shitty plane hologram and the ridiculous story that a plane for the first time ever sliced through matter instead of being sliced BY matter...
I would argue their 9/11 psychological operations were so advanced and sophisticated that THAT is why all this evidence was ignored/pushed aside by so many. They messed up/failed to cover up a lot of physical evidence. Unfortunately most people are used to ignoring physical evidence in favor of someone else's "already thought out" narrative, so all these screw ups were essentially ignored.
Yes - I’m familiar with the documentary. It’s been a good few years since I watched it though. I’ll certainly read your articles - I can’t promise that I’ve read everything on your Substack. Thanks!
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.
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
"They hate us for our freedoms" seems likely accurate. The "They" is in question. ERIC777 youtube showed Jesuit control of Raytheon, maker of DEW. Jesuit motto: "go forth, set the world on fire". Jesuits literally exist to "counter" the Protestant Reformation. America is largely Protestant. To my mind, that trail to "They" is self-evident.
6 out of 9 SCOTUS judges are Catholic .. that's 66.7% which is close enough to the 66.6% for government (and gematrial) work (interesting breakdown appears on conspira.org site) .. not to veer too wildly off-course, but that harkens to the supposed tilt of the supposed globe, 23.4 degrees (from 90 degrees) leaving 66.6 degrees LOL. Total CoinciDunce, no doubt!
I honestly don't see the value of taking down the brilliant expository research of Ryan Dawson or anyone who exposes the deep state and manages to get it past the state-sponsored censorship machine. Maybe its a way to get 911Revisionist's important work to those like me @EllenCorley who is trying to get all of this evidence presented to an official court of law along with my team of volunteers at TruthActionProject.org which I would like 9/11 Revisionist to join with me on Tuesday's at 7 Eastern by going to TruthActionProject.org and registering on the Events tap.
<<I would argue that Ryan takes the attention away from the NIST subcontractors and the technology used on 9/11, that can free us from this false scarcity world we live in.>>
PREACH. That false scarcity narrative is exactly what makes Dr Woods' research so important.
Also, I gave Dawson a listen a couple years ago, and he devolved quickly into the "Jews bad" narrative. Very lazy analysis.
Excellent article, thank you so much! I found you thanks to your comment on Kit Klarenberg's substack. By analysing other topics, I have also noticed what a huge army of digital foot-soldiers produces the chaos in narratives! It is so precious to find someone who looks at evidence with forensic accuracy. That's the right path to the truth. Thank you for your effort and persistence!
Hopefully this helps you to push back against the mountain of disinformation that is still being shared daily.
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
It’s so tiresome to have yet another wave of 9/11 pollution to contend with, as if there weren’t already more than enough disinformation turds in the information punchbowl. Making 9/11 movies must have become lucrative again. Thanks for staying the true course, Mr Revisionist!
I’m a keen admirer of Dr Wood’s work, even if I’ve never settled into full conviction that she’s 100% correct. I will, however, always hold anyone citing the late, great Elias Davidsson’s “Hacking America’s Mind on 9/11” to be a proper seeker after the truth, irrespective of whether I concur with their positions on all the old bones of contention.
Tucker should have read Davidsson’s book to understand some critical lines of evidence before throwing his hat in the ring. Of course he should also have read Dr Wood’s tome — a unique compendium of photographs and data with which any serious mind must grapple before it can begin to engage with the subject matter.
I don’t think Ryan is very well read in the literature, which is hard to excuse given the length of time he’s been looking at 9/11.
Indeed - Ryan should know better.
Same goes for Brad Zerbo, the creator of CODEX 9/11 - I have reached out to him on Telegram, e-mail and DM's on X, yet he ignores one and won't ever correct the mistakes made in this docci.
Decoding "CODEX 9/11"
A great wake up call for normies, but lacking in research diligence for seasoned researchers. A great opportunity wasted.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/decoding-codex-911
By the way, what reservations do you have with the empirical evidence presented by Dr Wood?
I read that there is a new bible produced every year since Gutenberg printing press in 1500's. Direct payoff not likely great. My conspiratorial mind considers Cardinal Woolsey's LEARNING AGAINST LEARNING, or what we now call 'information overload', as strategy of diluting truth. Brevity is key, every word, action must tell.
My reservations concern not the physics, per se, but the sheer scale of the system that would need to have been deployed on 9/11. Even that I don’t dismiss as impossible. But wielding such a weapon system on 9/11 would require enormous confidence of a successful operation. Both towers had to be eliminated, for numerous reasons — partial results would leave a big bag full of trouble. To be so confident of flawless results presupposes extensive prior testing of the weapon — and at scale. While one might point to the Manhattan Project as a model of secret development and revelation through first conspicuous use, the novel 9/11 technology was unveiled before the world and absolutely had to accomplish the intended objectives on first public use. There was less visibility for use of the atomic bombs — failure to detonate wouldn’t cause complete operational failure. What might have been the consequences of towers still standing at the end of the day? Something tells me that prior testing of such a weapon at scale ought to have left traces that would have been observed and remarked upon. Other than that nagging question, Dr Wood’s arguments are persuasive.
O, there are enough examples of prior testing, albeit not 100% confirmed, but one can see the similarities in the effects.
Have you watched the documentary - 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality?
Then, give these articles a read through.
Tesla, the Military Industrial Complex Weapon Technology & 9/11
What did Tesla have available for the MIC in 1943?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-tesla-and-the-military-industrial
Note the 1985 clip of Lt Col Tom E. Bearden on CNN, talking about RF weaponry, in the following article;
Secret Super Weapons and Sept 11, 2001
Scalar, Electromagnetics, RF Weapons and Weather modification
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/us-army-col-tom-bearden-ret
Secret Super Weapons, UFO's & 9/11
Scalar Waves, Electromagnetics, RF Weapons and Magnetic Electro Gravitic Nuclear Reactions
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/secret-super-weapons-ufos-and-911
Hey Robert, so I just bought Woods' book and am only 100 pages in, so forgive me if I don't know what I'm talking about. But your reservation that directed energy couldn't have been used because it would be too risky, that they'd mess up- I mean couldn't the same be said for bombs in the building or nukes?
And they DID mess up, in that all the physical evidence points to a technology that pulverizes matter. That was right in front of our faces and it's our fault we didn't pay attention to it! The freakin foot of dust around the complex and pieces of paper everywhere- if I had paid better attention in science class I would have known something was off- no way paper goes unburned in a supposed fire that somehow makes 2 100 story buildings go poof, plus 5 other buildings (still not there in the book yet.)
They messed up with their energy weapon in the car park- loads of evidence that whatever caused the unusual damage was NOT a method we understand, because damage doesn't look like this! You have scorched exteriors and complete intact car seats, upholstery untouched. This is evidence of some kind of unknown tech. Nothing we know of would do this!
They messed up with explaining the lack of debris, lack of seismic impact, the shitty plane hologram and the ridiculous story that a plane for the first time ever sliced through matter instead of being sliced BY matter...
I would argue their 9/11 psychological operations were so advanced and sophisticated that THAT is why all this evidence was ignored/pushed aside by so many. They messed up/failed to cover up a lot of physical evidence. Unfortunately most people are used to ignoring physical evidence in favor of someone else's "already thought out" narrative, so all these screw ups were essentially ignored.
Yes - I’m familiar with the documentary. It’s been a good few years since I watched it though. I’ll certainly read your articles - I can’t promise that I’ve read everything on your Substack. Thanks!
I suggest you watch 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality again...
There are three documentaries in the series.
9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality - https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
9/11 Alchemy: Free Energy & Free Thinking - https://rumble.com/v4iysuh-911-alchemy-free-energy-and-free-thinking.html
9/11 Alchemy: A Big Idea - https://rumble.com/v4irvwr-911-alchemy-a-big-idea.html
I know I have written numerous articles, thus giving you a quick three article cheat sheet.
Look forward to reading your comments in the comment sections of the articles.
How many of my articles have you actually read?
Listened to any of my interviews?
Here - 7 minutes, give it a quick listening to, as we discuss the 9/11 Israel distraction.
Link: https://x.com/i/status/1987828366305550462
Then work through this article: The Israeli Art Students, Gelatin & E-Team PSYOP
It's a wonderful distraction for the intellectually lazy.
Article and video: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-israeli-art-students-gelatin
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.
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-facts-that-hurt-peoples-feelings
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Dr Reynolds' case was for the fraudulent plane impact reports: https://nomoregames.net/2011/06/12/request-for-correction-by-nist-for-its-invalid-wtc-jetliner-animations-and-analyses/
Dr Wood's case was for the destruction at the WTC complex: https://www.drjudywood.com/wp/court-case-qui-tam/
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/david-hughes-on-the-importance-of
Looking forward to reading your comments after doing the deep dive.
A last piece of homework that will challenge everything you think to be true, regarding 9/11…
Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
You’re more than welcome to.
Liars for Truth... brilliant title for the mugs hots but terrible at the same time
"They hate us for our freedoms" seems likely accurate. The "They" is in question. ERIC777 youtube showed Jesuit control of Raytheon, maker of DEW. Jesuit motto: "go forth, set the world on fire". Jesuits literally exist to "counter" the Protestant Reformation. America is largely Protestant. To my mind, that trail to "They" is self-evident.
6 out of 9 SCOTUS judges are Catholic .. that's 66.7% which is close enough to the 66.6% for government (and gematrial) work (interesting breakdown appears on conspira.org site) .. not to veer too wildly off-course, but that harkens to the supposed tilt of the supposed globe, 23.4 degrees (from 90 degrees) leaving 66.6 degrees LOL. Total CoinciDunce, no doubt!
Who's they? .. thanks for the link to the excellent eric.
Best place to start is with the NST subcontractors, who started with the cover-up on day 1. They are all part of a big club.
D.E.P.S. - Directed Energy Professional Society
You'll be surprised to hear who the members are.
Read the article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/deps-the-directed-energy-professional
That is a good article. Another source like DEPS is DSIAC.DTIC.MIL
Thanks for the resource.
Good old Zion Fraudson, apparently he likes asian tweens if rumours are to be believed hence his japanese home.
I honestly don't see the value of taking down the brilliant expository research of Ryan Dawson or anyone who exposes the deep state and manages to get it past the state-sponsored censorship machine. Maybe its a way to get 911Revisionist's important work to those like me @EllenCorley who is trying to get all of this evidence presented to an official court of law along with my team of volunteers at TruthActionProject.org which I would like 9/11 Revisionist to join with me on Tuesday's at 7 Eastern by going to TruthActionProject.org and registering on the Events tap.
Ellen, with all due respect - Your comments and requests are in line with a bot.
I have emailed you numerous times, as you requested, you are still to respond to them.
You have contacted me in DM, wherein I again gave you my email address.
Let's have people learn about TAP;
TAP Dancing Away From 9/11 Truth?
The only way to get to truth is to take ACTION!
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/tap-dancing-away-from-911-truth
perhaps we should:
Bring Forward The Reality That The Official Story is that:
'WE DO NOT YET KNOW WHO DID 9/11?'
According To '911 Commission' Chairman!
;-)
<<I would argue that Ryan takes the attention away from the NIST subcontractors and the technology used on 9/11, that can free us from this false scarcity world we live in.>>
PREACH. That false scarcity narrative is exactly what makes Dr Woods' research so important.
Also, I gave Dawson a listen a couple years ago, and he devolved quickly into the "Jews bad" narrative. Very lazy analysis.
Thank you!!
Besides the 13 or so Globi Families … the THEY are and always have been … muppets / puppets / pirates
Excellent article, thank you so much! I found you thanks to your comment on Kit Klarenberg's substack. By analysing other topics, I have also noticed what a huge army of digital foot-soldiers produces the chaos in narratives! It is so precious to find someone who looks at evidence with forensic accuracy. That's the right path to the truth. Thank you for your effort and persistence!
Thank you for the kind words of support.
Hopefully this helps you to push back against the mountain of disinformation that is still being shared daily.
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/david-hughes-on-the-importance-of