Show #15: No Ordinary Inside Job: The 9/11 Psy-Ops

[Guardian]

However, I've viewed Dr. Woods' presentation, and she asks a critically important question about the 9/11 events: What caused the World Trade Center twin towers to fall and *turn into dust* in NYC on 9/11?

Dr. Woo isn't asking any questions at all. She's come up with a THEORY and is presenting it as fact, then she and her pet Marine, Dr. SemperFido, attack anyone who doesn't agree with her. That's not science, that's ego with an agenda.

I was going to mention Other-Dimensional possibilities, but I brought up nanotech instead because we have actual proof that Russia has used Nanotechnology to create what was called "the world's most powerful bomb" that wasn't Nuclear...and that's just what they admitted to YEARS ago. Israel has one of the largest nanotech research programs in the world and they were the first to openly admit they intended to use nanotech in weapons.

These are provable facts, but her followers immediately went off anyway...and she never did answer my question, how she decided her unprovable theory was right, and everyone elses unprovable theories are false?

Do I think Nanotech was what brought down the towers? I have absolutely no idea, because all the "evidence" available comes from third parties....something she only seems to acknowledge when it suits her. We've basically got a some videos and pictures that show the Towers collapse, government reports, witnesses, etc. So how can she be so sure she's right, and everyone else is wrong, when we're all looking at the same "evidence"?

My favorite part was where she claimed the various reports of extremely high temperatures where absolutely false, but the seismic reports are absolutely true... when they're all coming from basically the same sources. That's just funny.

While we have a TON of evidence that proves a bunch of guys with box cutters did NOT do this, we simply do not have the evidence to show, with anything even remotely resembling certainty, how the destruction was actually accomplished.

She hasn't changed since she first arrived on the 9-11 scene, and I STILL think she's a disinfo agent.

 

[Niall]

I'm listening to the whole thing again, both to find where I think she said it could have been done by a "Lone Person" and to hear Lisa's part, but I've figured out why this woman bugs me so much. I'm only at the beginning, but she's already claiming absolutes.

How can someone with a PhD have ANY absolutes regarding anything in this world? There could be Beings sharing this space with us, or who can enter our space, who could have done 9-11 with the power of their minds...or whatever they call what they think with, IF they even "think" like we think thinking is?

Interesting also that she insisted on being addressed as "Doctor" and Ark, on the other hand, prefers to be just "Ark" to everyone.

I agree. She consistently repeated "it's about the evidence", but it sure seemed like a gross display of self importance. Perhaps it is due to all of the ridicule of her work, or maybe something else entirely. One thing came to mind, though. If she really was correct in her assessment that it was a directed energy weapon, would the PTB really just let her go around telling people that?

She has appeared on TruTV's Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura. TruTV is owned by Turner Broadcasting, a Time Warner Company.

Not sure how well that jives with her admonitions to not associate with 'conspiracy' terminology of any kind when conducting this kind of research...

 

[Joe]

I tried to warn you, Joe.

I know, though it wasn't only my decision Lisa.

 

[Laura]

Mods, will you move the Pete Santilli discussion to it's own thread so we can stick to Judy's book here?

I just want to say this: Judy's book is probably one of the best collections of evidence out there and that is probably why she has a coterie of "handlers" collected around her - to try to make sure that her work gets sidelined. It's really sad because we had planned for her to present her work, we had Ark on hand to give some physics support, but she was so primed to be attacked by someone in the background in her life, that no one could get a word in edgewise and give her the support she deserves. And then, that Pete Santilli guy comes along and really makes her look bad, not to mention the "fan-antics."

But so goes the 9-11 Truth Movement.

 

[AndrewJohnson]

I was kind of shocked to learn what had transpired on the SOTT broadcast - bearing in mind what SOTT is supposed to be doing.

Forum Threads like this are rather common on the internet, so I am just "dropping by" to offer any genuine readers some additional information which should, if you study it, help to understand a fuller picture of what is going on. It's quite complicated, but that is because of what is at stake, as I think Pete Santilli alluded to above.

_http://tinyurl.com/911ftb

Ebook and audiobook free. DVD's at cost price (about $3 to ship to the USA)

I generally don't post on forums, due to the large amount of "anonymous irrelevance" which pervades them. For me, anyone who doesn't use their real name reduces any "informational" or intellectual value of their posts to almost zero. So this applies on almost the entirity of this thread (with the exception of myself and Mr Pete Santilli).

Have fun "digging the hole" - you don't seem to be aware of how many people have realised what the truth is - and are beginning to realise the vastness of operation to keep the truth covered up. Try not to become an unwitting part of it (I did, in 2006 - but eventually I worked out how and why).

 

[Niall]

I better understand why certain former Cass forum members were so vociferously promoting Dr. Wood's work and accusing SOTT.net and this forum of "deliberately avoiding her work" and "actively promoting disproven theories." Her most vocal supporters do all seem to share this extraordinarily persistent conviction that they are right and everybody else is wrong. It's understandable to a degree in most people, who eventually learn and grow beyond that stage... but if you don't keep an eye on those horses, ouch! watch how quickly obsession turns to pathology and the original body of valuable work succumbs to entropy and becomes a caricature of itself.

As older SOTT.net readers will remember, we've always thought that the missing Boeing at the Pentagon was the weak spot in the perpetrators' armor. We mentioned it briefly last night, and I think that that is still the case and is the reason why one billion people have viewed the Pentagon Strike video. There was no Boeing at the Pentagon; it couldn't get any simpler than that for dismissing the official version and rapidly concluding that a cover-up took place!

Then there's the 'ABCs' of false-flag psy-ops:

a.) A drill was going on simultaneously, simulating the exact same scenario, that a passenger jet would crash into the WTC. In addition, NORAD was ordered to stand down.
b.) Overwhelming evidence of foreknowledge that directly contradicts official statements to the contrary (this abounds in the case of 9/11 - e.g. significant and unusual movements in the United Airlines share price in the run-up to the event). Condie Rice et al LIED when they said there was no way the Bush administration could have known - their intelligence switchboards were lighting up all over the place that something was about to go down.
c.) Historical context, including past precedent: The FBI organized the 1993 WTC bombing (that's the domestic pathocratic element) and PNAC called for "a new Pearl Harbor" (the Israeli connection) that would enjoin US and Israeli imperial ambitions.

ADDED!

d.) COINTELPRO kicks into high gear to discredit evidence and theories that are on the right track

We could do another show on 9/11, where we talk about these things, the hundreds of Israeli spies arrested across the US during and shortly after 9/11 and speculate on the extent to which this was a 'conspiracy led by people' or the result of ramified networks of pathologicals that are programmed to work together - unconsciously - as individual cogs in a greater machine.

Up next week, however, is Dr. Colin Ross, leading psychiatrist and mind control expert. (Don't worry though, he's one of the good guys!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP9W7qsWtlM

 

[AndrewJohnson]

Edit: Lisa Giuliani and Laura are also identifiable. I wonder if Lisa Giuliani has read WDTTG? Whether the has, or not, I hope she will read some of 911FTT (audio version also available on that link above).

 

[Laura]

I wonder why it is that when Lisa comes out to talk about 9-11, the trolls and disinfo types just go bonkers? I mean, I don't even talk about it much anymore because I have other fish to fry, but when I did talk about it, I got the whammo too.

Pete Santilli made the remark above: "Lisa Giuliani gets all her information from emails sent by Scholars for 9-11 Truth? "

I'd like to know where the person he represents: Judy Wood, gets her information? I mean, it's not like she was part of a forensic team that was given access to the site and materials. Nobody was. All that was available were photos, testimony, speculations, etc. In short, ANY 9-11 researcher is only an "armchair researcher" at the end of the day. So why are Lisa's speculations on the wider scene so controversial? Further, why does Judy Wood promote that "free energy" nonsense in the title of her book which does not produce a single shred of evidence about "free energy"? Why has she started using buzz words like "Tesla" and "Leedskalnin" which were not originally part of her very pragmatic work?

The bottom line seems to be that both Lisa and SOTT point in the direction of a psychopathic consortium that includes rogue elements of the US government and Israel/MOSSAD and that seems to be the sticking point, the reason for the attack. So I think we can deduce from that element that Santilli and gang are Zionist shills. And since the discussion did go in that direction last night on the show, we can further speculate that this is the reason for today's slam-basting.

Interesting, as always.

 

[Niall]

you were there in the background putting on the psychological pressure, "handling" your mark.

That makes sense. He certainly threw me for a loop at the beginning of the show when we were trying to establish contact on the line with Dr. Wood. Then this male voice answered. I thought it was Dr. Wood's secretary!

 

[Niall]

I was kind of shocked to learn what had transpired on the SOTT broadcast - bearing in mind what SOTT is supposed to be doing.

Hi Andrew,

Why were you shocked, or what shocked you?

Also, what is it that SOTT.net is supposed to be doing that you feel it is not doing?

 

[Laura]

I was kind of shocked to learn what had transpired on the SOTT broadcast - bearing in mind what SOTT is supposed to be doing.

Hi Andrew,

Why were you shocked, or what shocked you?

Also, what is it that SOTT.net is supposed to be doing that you feel it is not doing?

Yes, I'm curious too. Did you "learn" or did you actually LISTEN???? You might want to listen.

 

[ark]

Further, why does Judy Wood promote that "free energy" nonsense in the title of her book which does not produce a single shred of evidence about "free energy"?

Unscientific. It justifies the statement "Her book contains unscientific speculations." May be this was done on purpose.

 

[Laura]

Another thing that bugs me about Judy's approach, guided by her handlers: her insistence that one go no further than just saying that some kind of interesting energy was used on 9-11, that one should not try to figure out "whodunnit" or the implications.

Well, as Lisa pointed out last night, Iraq was destroyed as a result of 9-11, Americans lost their freedom and are now living in a fascist police state, Israel has murdered more Palestinians, and people are dying every day because of this lie.

I mean, what kind of conscienceless creatures attack someone for expressing human empathy for all the suffering that has followed from 9-11?

The fact that DOCTOR Woods and her handler, Pete Santilli, do not care one whit about those things puts them in an extraordinary category of individuals who accept all that 9-11 led to as "the way things need to be" including the murder of tens of thousands of innocent people.

If Judy and gang are not using their knowledge to address those issues, they have blood on their hands too.

 

[Scottie]

you were there in the background putting on the psychological pressure, "handling" your mark.

That makes sense. He certainly threw me for a loop at the beginning of the show when we were trying to establish contact on the line with Dr. Wood. Then this male voice answered. I thought it was Dr. Wood's secretary!

That is an interesting "coincidence", yes?

I just want to say this: Judy's book is probably one of the best collections of evidence out there and that is probably why she has a coterie of "handlers" collected around her - to try to make sure that her work gets sidelined. It's really sad because we had planned for her to present her work, we had Ark on hand to give some physics support, but she was so primed to be attacked by someone in the background in her life, that no one could get a word in edgewise and give her the support she deserves. And then, that Pete Santilli guy comes along and really makes her look bad, not to mention the "fan-antics."

If you listen to the show again, you can clearly hear Joe trying to calm her down repeatedly and convey to her that Ark was not intended to be an "ambush". But obviously, for Woods' supporters, Judy being on a radio show with a scientist can only mean one thing: she's under attack! Never mind that she started the show off with a less-than-friendly tone, along with Pete "I invented the internet" Santilli just happening to call in at the right time and basically saying, "Hi, I'm Pete, you're wrong, and this is my radio show now, which is why I'm not going to promote my own radio show here. Oh wait, I just did!"

Yep, this is why the so-called "9/11 Truth Movement" won't get ANYWHERE, EVER.

 

[Scottie]

Further, why does Judy Wood promote that "free energy" nonsense in the title of her book which does not produce a single shred of evidence about "free energy"?

This is exactly what I'm wondering. I mean, why write such a great, down-to-earth analysis, and why be so, "That's an assumption! I know I know I know!" and then include in the title of the book "free energy"?

Well, to sell copies and get people interested, maybe. But that seems like the last thing that Judy would pick, given the work contained in the book.