What really happened on 9/11? What can the evidence tell us? Who is covering up the evidence, and why are they covering it up? This book attempts to give some answers to these questions and has been written by someone who has become deeply involved in research into what happened on 9/11. A study of the available evidence will challenge you and much of what you assumed to be true. "Now we are discovering that there is a highly-sophisticated black-ops weaponization of free energy technology and it was responsible for the bizarre, low-temperature pulverization of the Twin Towers. Dr. Judy Wood has pieced together the physical evidence and Andrew Johnson has highlighted who is working to silence or smear whom, as the powers that be rush to impede or at least contain the dissemination of these startling findings." - Conrado Salas Cano, M.S. in Physics ** NOTE: Book is sold at cost price and the cover price pays for printing - no money goes to the author or Dr Judy Wood. **
9/11 Finding the Truth shows there is more to the Truth about 9/11 than meets the eye. Like most people I kept watching the Towers "come down" at free fall speed & it did not sit right. Then I discovered
drjudywood.com & my eyes where opened. Andrew Johnson certainly achieves his objectives - which are to expose another level of intrigue beyond the official explanations of 9/11. Dr.Wood has set out what actually happened & provides a powerful case through her investigation presenting clear evidence. Her point is to establish WHAT happened before we can begin to explore any further. AJ exposes that many concerned with 9/11 are ignoring the most relevant facts & the hostility towards Dr.Wood by many "Gurus" of the truth movement leads to the conclusion that the "Truth Movement" itself has been hijacked by those who wish to hide the Truth from us. I was astounded by Dr. Wood's work & amazed that her evidence was being derided by so many. The Truthers are drawing the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside Job from an assumption that it was a controlled demolition. Dr.Wood demonstrates that this was not the case & I see no evidence to support the Demolition Theory only personal assaults on Dr.Wood & AJ . This book includes transcriptions of interviews with the Gurus of the "Truth Movement". One realises that setting it down on the page gives one a better chance to review. It is revealing that these respected Scientists are trying to "muddy the water" and create confusion in a most unscientific way. Hard not to think "Are these people really scientists." even "Are these people really Adults" Of particular relevance is the portion dealing with 9/11 Truther Ace Bakers attempts to discredit the "Hutchison Effect". Setting up a bogus video & dismissing all other criteria of a scientific experiment could have no meaning other than to cast doubt on the credibility of Ace Baker... The Hutchison Effect would not be taken seriously if it was just based on videos. That would be like saying Ghosts are real as we have video evidence of them or conversely that Ghosts can't be real because someone once faked a video. Bakers attitude seems unhinged yet what is astounding is that Jim Fetzer, a principal "Guru" of the "Truth movement", sees Bakers fake video as proof that the Hutchison effect is fake.
All of the work contained in this book confirms that something is very wrong within the Truth movement. Jim Fetzer's dismissal of the Hutchison Effect is crucial to understanding the meaning of the deception as the Hutchison Effect is central to an understanding of what went on on 9/11. Most are aware of the basic Tenets of the 9/11 truth movements "Inside Job" theory and it's implications. Dr.Wood's evidence reaches very different - perhaps graver conclusions. The extent of the distortions that AJ reveals show a very real problem within the "Truth Movement" & that perhaps the Whole world has been Hijacked by the perpetrators of this act. 9/11 Finding the Truth is an exciting read. It involves the reader in a very personal way. It was helpful also in demonstrating the skills of those who set out to discredit Dr.Wood's work and reputation. Part of the Book deals with an anonymous bet sent to AJ. It is uncomfortable to read and yet helpful in relation to dealing with a "disinfo" agent with a very high degree of training in Psychology.
In conclusion this book is immensely valuable to anyone who takes the Future of this planet seriously. It is obvious that 9/11/01 was the most significant day in the History of the "Modern World". It is not just an event in the past but an event of which the Truth is only just dawning.
PTW
If you've ever wondered why the "9/11 Truth" movement hasn't made more headway and why there's so much disagreement on how the crime was committed, here's your answer. Author, Andrew Johnson, introduces us to the work of former professor of mechanical engineering, Dr. Judy Wood, and inventor, John Hutchison, to reveal how free energy technology and weather manipulation was used to destroy the World Trade Center towers in mere seconds on 9/11/01. He then explains how many luminaries of the "9/11 Truth Movement" are leading devoted followers astray with false theories to disguise the true nature of the crime.
Through Johnson's compilation of articles we learn about Dr. Wood's lawsuit accusing NIST contractors, such as Applied Research Associates and Science Applications International Corp., of using Directed Energy Weapons to create the event now known as "9/11". We further discover how John Hutchison's 1979 "Hutchison Effect" invention was investigated by the Pentagon, Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and NASA and how it fits into this diabolical picture.
This was Bill Biggart's final photograph. He was killed when the second World Trade tower
collapsed on top of him. He was 53 years old. WHERE IS THE DEBRIS OF 110 STORIES? It looks like the buildings were DEMATERLIALIZED? http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0111/biggart21.htm
Johnson presents his evidence in a carefully-reasoned, dispassionate manner, inviting us to reassess everything we thought we knew about this world-changing event. As Dr. Wood explains it, "We stand today at the dawn of an entirely new age. Man has in his hands a method of disrupting the molecular basis for matter and the ability to split the earth in half on a moment's notice. (It gives the term, "scorched-earth policy" a new significance.) The technology that was demonstrated on 911 can split the earth in half or it can be used to allow ALL people to live happily ever after with free energy.
However, he who controls the energy, controls the people. Control of energy leads to destruction of the planet.
But we have a choice. And this choice is real. Live happily ever after or destroy the planet. This is why I have been studying the evidence of what happened on 9/11. This evidence is central to it all. 9/11 was a demonstration of a new technology; free energy. It can be used for good, but we need to make that choice and help others to as well.
We have a choice."
Kathy Roberts
Berkeley, CA
Steel disolves in mid air on the way down. Watch the VIDEOS and be amazed.
Many thanks to you Andrew for your fine work. If folks would simply investigate for themselves the excellent research of Dr. Judy Wood (
http://drjudywood.com/), they would have an understanding of what really happened on 9-11, as shocking as it may be. When we love the truth, we will not be deceived.
Onward!
Cathy Palmer
cathyjpalmer@yahoo.comAndrew Johnson has been working to self-publish a number of the articles posted on http://www.checktheevidence.com/ The result is a 300-page 6x9 book with a cover graphic design by Nick Buchanan. The cover price (the entirety of which goes to Lulu.com) is £6.55 - probably around $9 or $10. There is a button where you can download the whole thing for free though (partly why I decided to use lulu). Feel free to re-post this on blogs, websites etc.
| | |
| Figure D. Notice how straight the vertical holes were that cut down through WTC6.While there is abundance of aluminum cladding on the roofs of buildings 5 and 6, there is little or none in the holes.
(9/??/01) source ["Bullet Holes"] | Figure E. A view over the dome of WFC2 shows the damage to WTC6 in the center of the photo. To the left is the remains of WTC7. To the right is the remaining north wall of WTC1 which leans toward WTC6. |
| | |
Figure 40a. Car 2723 was toasted inside and out... and rusted.
(9/12?/01) Source
["Wax Job"] | Figure 40b. There is extensive damage to the front of car 2723, including no door handle on the driver's door. There is an unusual, unburned circular area on the rear door. Note the open trunk.
(9/12?/01) Source
["Waxed-Spot"] |
| | |
Figure 49. (after 9/11/01) source: [" Swiss-cheese truck"] | Figure 50.
(after 9/11/01) Source
["Century-21 Street Windows"] |
Figure 95. A toasted mail truck faces westward, parked behind the Postal building on the north side of Barclay Street. City Hall Park can be seen in the distance, across Church street. This damage does not appear to have been caused by a "normal" fire. There is no obvious sign of burned paper. The appearance of the back wheel area of the mail truck looks as if something radiated outward from the wheel. It is very unlikely this mail truck was hit by debris, unless this debris did not follow the laws of physics and made several right-angle turns along its path to the mail truck. Curiously, the mail truck parked behind it looks OK.The paper still has its color, indicating this filing cabinet did not shrivel due to conventional heat.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/h-effect/filingcabinet.htm For students progressing through academic studies and disciplines, one of
the key skills that is developed is the one of critical thinking. In order to
develop our understanding of a subject, we should question what we are
being told and, sometimes, how the information is being presented. Only
when we can answer questions we have about a subject to our satisfaction
can we say that we understand that subject. However, perhaps we should
pause and consider, can we usefully apply similar critical thinking skills
more widely?
For example, when considering daily news reports, how often do we stop
and think "How accurate is this information? What is the source?" or
"How has this or that conclusion been drawn?" "Is the information
complete?" There are two expressions that are pertinent to the thrust of
what I am saying: "Don't believe what you read in the papers!" and
"Never believe anything until it's been officially denied." The latter saying
is attributed to the writers of "Yes Minister", Jonathan Lynn & Antony
Jay.
In recent years I have found I have to apply critical thinking much more
widely to news reports, following a realisation I had, some time in 2004,
that the Official Story of the attacks on 9/11 could not be true. A video I
watched clearly showed how the World Trade Centre Towers in New
York could not have been destroyed solely as a result of jet impacts and
burning jet fuel. It seems strange to some people that anyone should
question any of the essential elements of the official story of 9/11, which
is now widely recognized as the trigger for the global "War on Terror" - a
basis for many significant elements of foreign policy, and even domestic
laws.
Discussing the topic of what really happened on 9/11 is not an easy task –
not least because of the trauma it caused for the people who were killed,
injured or affected by it. The profoundly troubling nature of the event
alone is a powerful deterrent to people who wish to re-examine the
official accounts of what happened, and question the conclusions the
official enquiries have drawn. To date, no criminal prosecutions have been
successfully brought against anyone – in relation to the crimes committed
on 9/11 or the crimes committed in its cover up.
As an event, 9/11 is mentioned almost daily in news reports, though in
reality we have not really had all that much analysis of what actually
happened. The "run up" to 9/11 has been the subject of a significant BBC
documentary series called The Power of Nightmares, which first aired in
2004. This BAFTA award winner, made by Adam Curtis, exposes the real
history of Al Qaida and concludes that stories of this group's ability to
commit acts of terrorism on a large scale have been grossly exaggerated, if
not completely fabricated.
In this book, readers who are unhappy with the official account and have
questions about how and why certain things happened on 9/11 should
find many threads to follow. These threads will lead them to a wider
understanding of what happened then, and those same threads may
ultimately lead them to an understanding of a much, much larger tapestry
of reality.
The articles herein are more concerned with the criminal cover up of
9/11, rather than trying to identify the real perpetrators of atrocities
committed on the day itself. Readers, therefore, who are comfortable with
the "Al Qaida did it" story need not read any further than this paragraph.
Scope of 9/11 Evidence Concerned
This work is mainly concerned with the evidence related to what
happened at the World Trade Centre Complex – as exposed through the
research (primarily) of Dr. Judy Wood. Therefore, matters related to what
happened at the Pentagon, at Shanksville and the details of what
happened to WTC 7 are not discussed here. It is therefore primarily
aspects of physical evidence that are covered (inasmuch as the very
presentation and most likely explanation of this physical evidence is what
has been the target of attacks on this research).
Who is Covering Up 9/11?
It is difficult to accept how deep and wide the cover up of 9/11 actually
is. The very magnitude of this cover up is enough to make many people
scoff, roll their eyes or utter a sentence including a phrase such as
"conspiracy theorist". Typically, they may then dismiss, deny or simply
ignore any evidence presented which proves the official story of 9/11
cannot be true. Some people, whilst acknowledging that the official story
cannot be true, then assume that not enough information is available to
say anything else with a sufficient degree of certainty.
However, we must remember that US Government bodies and private
contractors took public money to fund research which was supposed to
explain what happened on 9/11. As informed citizens, I think we should
try to be sure that what they are telling us in their official (and very
lengthy) reports is true.
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), was tasked with
analysing the cause of the destruction of WTC towers 1,2 and 7. When
studied objectively, their report for WTC 1 & 2 fails to answer how the
"pancake" collapse theory explains the evidence observed on the day –
such as the complete pulverisation of most of the towers - including
hundreds of steel girders – in about 10 seconds each. Readily available
photos also illustrate the glaring lack of any "pancakes" in the WTC
rubble pile.
Elements of the final NIST WTC reports have been the subject of a Legal
Challenge by Professors Morgan Reynolds (Emeritus, Texas A & M
University) and Professor of Mechanical Engineering Judy Wood
(formerly of Clemson University, South Carolina). Their challenge was
first made as a "Request for Correction" and then in two "Qui Tam"
cases. These cases, unsealed in 2007, outlined how, as it is framed, the
NIST study of the WTC collapse was fraudulent and deceptive. Indeed,
the very title of the main report "The Collapse of the World Trade Centre
Towers" is itself misleading, because the towers did not collapse, they
turned to dust.
How is it that the World's media chose to completely ignore Press
Releases, which described the initiation of legal cases against NIST's
contractors by two American Professors?
A Layered Cover Up
The bulk of these articles have been written in the period 2007-2009, in an
attempt to document the history of what may become known as the
"Second Layer" of the 9/11 Cover Up. The first layer of the 9/11 Cover
Up is the official and physically impossible "Al-Qaida-centred" fantasy,
accompanied by the significantly fraudulent NIST reports. The second
layer of the cover up includes supposedly more scientific analysis by some
researchers/scientists which suggests that bombs and/or thermite (or
some variant thereof) were placed in the WTC. A number of higher
profile "9/11 Sceptic" figures claim there is good evidence for the use of
thermite and/or bombs (but those same researchers have failed to
compile any of this evidence into a legal case against NIST or anyone
else). The same figures typically still go-along with the TV-reality of real
Boeing planes hitting the WTC towers, even though this story is
demonstrably impossible (largely because of Newton's third Law). The
difficulty for most people here is that it takes time to digest the evidence -
and undo the effects of years of media/TV programming. In my own
case, even though by about August 2004, I knew the official story of 9/11
was false, it was not until about 2 years later that I realised the plane
crashes at the WTC could not have been real (even though it seems that
something hit the WTC towers). Articles in this work discuss and explain
this conclusion more fully.
On the internet, I have posted a report detailing the previous 2 years of
campaigning efforts1 – completed before I realised there was an ongoing
effort to discourage and discredit certain threads of 9/11 research.
So, what is the truth? How do you find it? Can anything be proved? Well,
before becoming too philosophical, let me offer you something –
evidence. My own way of establishing what is true and what is not is to
constantly examine evidence – and try to re-evaluate my own conclusions
whenever new evidence appears (and at the same time, we must be wary
of falsified evidence and even the timing of its revelation). I might point
out that court cases, investigations etc. are sometimes re-opened and
appeals are initiated when new evidence comes to light.
The Importance of Establishing What Did Not
Happen on 9/11
By studying the evidence carefully, we can have a better chance of saying
with certainty what did not happen even if we cannot always say exactly
what did happen.
In some cases, laws of physics can be used to establish what can and cannot
have happened – we can check the consistency of a set of evidence. This
includes the use of things like the Law of Gravity – and also the
properties of materials (hardness/softness) and limits of their behaviour.
As well as evidence of physical events, witness testimony and behaviour is
also important. In relation to the development of 9/11 research, I have
tried to watch carefully for instances of "attacking the messenger" rather
than explaining the data, discouraging study of certain topics or evidence,
mis-direction, inconsistent or false statements, reluctance to answer
questions relating to evidence (when relevant). My goal in the majority of
this work is not necessarily to "judge" those people who are helping the
9/11 cover up. I am trying to illustrate how the "psychology of the cover
up" has unfolded and how subtle (and not so subtle) tactics are used to
influence people's views and conclusions.
Truth, Authority, Power and Corruption
Presentation, discussion and analysis of evidence is (or should be) the
guiding principle behind real scientific progress and discovery. It should
also be the guiding principle behind a fair legal/justice system. However,
it can be strongly argued that both these systems are only as fair and
honest as those who become figures of "authority" within them. When
people are given authority, they have power over others (by definition).
And therein is the rub – power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely. Perhaps it is true that only when some entities have absolute
power do operations like 9/11 – and its successful cover up – become
possible.
Education and "Academic Excellence"
It is said, by some, that going through the educational system hampers
one's ability to think freely (though this seems to be in contradiction to
the idea of being able to think critically) – perhaps this is due to the
process of being "spoon fed" information. Most students, especially in
their formative years, either implicitly assume the information is truthful
and/or valid, or they are chastised if they persistently question or
challenge the "prevailing view" about a topic. In higher (university level)
education, however, one is expected to be able to think freely – to
perform research, to analyse, compare and contrast information and to
draw conclusions. The problem is, perhaps, not so much the educational
system itself, but the interests it serves – and the institutionalisation of the
system itself, as well as the system of awards – both in the form of grants
and for "academic excellence" and the various prizes that are given.
Relying on sources of funding creates a vested interest and it was this that
President Eisenhower seemed to be referring to in his landmark 1961 final
address to the American Nation, before he left office. He said
Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes
virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. The prospect of domination of the
nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of
money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Also, winning awards tends to build up egos and it can constrain the
boundaries in which those award-winners feel comfortable operating –
and perhaps makes them less willing to challenge established paradigms. I
would argue this, therefore, makes them more dogmatic and unwilling to
review new evidence. Again, I would contend that President Eisenhower
wanted to highlight this issue in the same speech…
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we
must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself
become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
For this reason, I included audio segments of this speech at the beginning
of a presentation I compiled which summarises some of the main research
and evidence discussed in this collection of articles.
In all of this, my prime message and statement would be "Don't let
anyone give you your opinion – check and validate as much as you can
and continually question authority". Questions should be asked of both
recognized authorities (such as a scientific, governmental or nongovernmental
institutions) and of "unofficial authority" such as an
experienced researcher or research group, speaker or author.
I strongly contend that because no organised institution of any significant
size (such as the Church, The Legal System, any Major Government etc),
after over 7 years, has publicly spoken out to significantly disagree with
the official story of 9/11, it is clear the institutions cannot "handle" the
truth of what really happened on 9/11. Therefore, the future is in our
hands – yours and mine - we have the power to create and transform our
future – with every action we take and every word we say.
Now weep.
Earth's magnetic field:
