WTC towers magic act

Be the 1st to vote.

The always clear headed Hoi Polloi on how the WTC twin towers may have been removed from view.

How very clear it is that fear of collapse was actually a slight of hand used to abandon the area prematurely. Since we know the timing of the TV show could have been anything, and we know people go where they are told to go by authorities but certainly go where they are told to go by authorities during times of danger, smoke screens were probably dropped on the scene as plentifully and as quickly as possible. When people on the street were told the towers were “collapsing”, this was the demolition preparation to make sure nobody would be caught in the collapse and people would be well away from the center. The peninsula was cleared and this is when they ran the lengthy stories about sending in fire engines, rescues, etc. etc. but I am sure as early as the first smoke screen they had already used fire department and military style heat detectors to pick up, identify and evacuate all signs of life in the area well in advance of the collapse.

Anyway, it goes without saying that they did their best to reduce the amount of deaths to the minimal but I think it is fairly certain the ultimate death toll could simply be zero given the possibility for it to be done under the correct circumstances.

What I am trying to say is that this show above all has made clear to me that it was shortly before the real collapses that they claimed the towers were collapsing. Why? Because it is the most logical way to use human animal behavior and the fear of death in a crowd to ensure everyone is far away from the collapse when it happens.

I think smoke screens went up immediately after the first pop, but smoke was also used to obscure the towers and simulate their early collapse from distant views, such as from New Jersey, and strategic crowds of onlookers were also placed at the best viewing locations to give false testimony to those who would venture from their TV sets and try to look to the physical channel rather than the broadcast channel.

Probably shortly after the moment we switched to “Pentagon attack” news, the towers were safely demolished and everyone was by this time glued to their televisions, because the attack had been widened beyond their visual scope. In other words, by drawing viewers from a local perspective to a super-local perspective, most people will default to our common simulation of the super-local, which is the immediacy of news. Hence, the “Pentagon attack” was the perfect time to perform the real demolitions in New York. When they switched back to the so-called second collapse soap opera, the towers were already gone, the area already evacuated, and the rest of the movie could be played in ease.

There were many ways to accomplish this magic act, but after what was said on this show sunk in last night, I think this is how they may have done it.

via Cluesforum.info.

metro.co.uk/2013/11/06/student…

12 thoughts on “WTC towers magic act

    1. Emmanuel

      Individuals attack Dr. Judy Wood and her supporters (i.e. those that have read her book and the evidence it contains) because they cannot attack the EVIDENCE she presents in her book. Whether they know it or not, they are promoting the fascist police state that Mr. Edward Joseph Snowden is warning us about and condemning all people to live as energy slaves. Our lives are dependent on the choices we make. We don’t have the luxury of unlimited choice so make your choices wisely. I have chosen REAL Truth and REAL Freedom. We are experiencing a war of minds and competing technologies. Is it irony or fate that the WTC was built by oil interests (Chase Manhattan Bank Chairman David Rockefeller and his brother, New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller) & destroyed by oil interests using a technology based on the work of Nikola Tesla which threatens their own existence. This is reminiscent of another technology conflict. Thomas Edison’s direct current (DC) verses Nikola Tesla’s alternating current (AC) which was know as the War of Currents for electric power distribution. Tesla won and Tesla will win again. All we have to do is win the war of minds. Remember, those who win the war write the history. Leave the herd and discover the truth on your own by reading Dr. Wood’s book and then give your copy to friends and family to read as I have done.

      After reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Charlie Pound of the U. K. produced the song WAKE UP THIS YOUR ALARM !

      WAKE UP THIS IS YOUR ALARM !
      music, lyrics, and vocals by Charlie Pound © 2012

      youtube.com/watch?v=E54TwifMzc…

      Verse 1:
      Where did the towers go? Away with the breeze that blows.
      And how much steel did they find? Could it be shipped in time?

      I don’t know I haven’t seen the receipt, but it doesn’t make sense to me!
      All those cars in a line, door handles and engines gone.

      I’d tell you if I could, but you need to ask Judy Wood.
      Before you accuse someone, you better make damn sure you know what was done!

      Chorus:
      Wake up! this is your alarm!
      Wake up!

      Verse 2:
      So while you’re sitting on the fence, why don’t you check the evidence?
      I’ll tell you something that you’ll learn, World Trade Center paper doesn’t burn.

      And how could those buildings fall, with a seismic impact so small?
      I know that something’s wrong, eight seconds the north tower’s gone.

      I’d tell you if I could, but you need to ask Judy Wood.
      Before you accuse someone you better make sure you know how it was done!

      Chorus:
      Wake up! this is your alarm!
      Wake up!

      Middle eight:
      You know it was 2001,
      here we are and we’re still arguing!

      Chorus:
      Wake up! this is your alarm!
      Wake up! this is your alarm!
      Wake up!
      Wake up!
      Wake up!

      “The towers didn’t burn up, nor did they slam to the ground. They turned into dust in mid air.”

      1. ab Post author

        Actually we are well past the deception that is Judy Wood. If you take the time to listen to the fakeologists on this site, you will see how we understand controlled opposition. Sadly, I did purchase the book and now realise it was based on fabricated imagery. All imagery in the 9/11 deception cannot be verified and would never be admissable in a court of law. There is no chain of custody. Judy Wood sells the same snake oil as Fetzer, and that is fear. I’m not buying.

        1. Emmanuel

          Having read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, what is the italicized and hyphenated word in the third line from the top of page 365?

          Dr. Wood is a qualified forensic scientist. It’s disturbing the number of people who believe that an opinion and an Internet connection makes them a qualified forensic scientist. If a qualified forensic scientist like Dr. Wood hasn’t hit the bullseye dead center, then why has she been the victim of relentless and vicious attacks?

          9/11 The EVIDENCE Theo Chalmers Interviews Dr Judy Wood From the One Step Beyond TV program of the 24th October 2011

          youtube.com/watch?v=0m3I72yBP-…

          ALL the EVIDENCE you need to tell you that 9/11 had NOTHING to do with “terrorists” and absolutely NOTHING to do with explosives of ANY kind. Watch the buildings turn to DUST as they fountain UP then down, thousands of vehicles for miles around and away from the towers SPONTANEOUSLY burst into flames and yet NOTHING else around them did, many flipped onto their roofs.

          Watch and see how the Earth’s Magnetic Field DROPPED at the EXACT moment of each “planes” impact and also at the EXACT moment that each of the three buildings “fell” – What about Hurricane Erin? – Strange how the US Government and Media were totally silent about this hurricane when they have reported every one before AND since 9/11 – See how this links to Free Energy and the Direct Energy Weapons used on 9/11 something that the powers in charge do not want you to know and who as a result have put out other false narratives such as “thermite” or “controlled demolition” – This interview, the videos and pictures shown plus Dr Woods book WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? shows that lot up for the utter nonsense that it is.

          I am one of the people who used to disbelieve what the government and media told us or LIED to us in other words and I believed that these buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. The amount of dust around that day made me question that though until I came across the work of Dr Judy Wood and her EVIDENCE proved to me that this was indeed a load of nonsense.

          Watch the video, buy her book as as Theo Chalmers states in the interview it is an amazing piece of research and EVIDENCE plus Dr Wood is the ONLY person to have taken her EVIDENCE all the way up the the Supreme Court – Why has NO-ONE else – this tell you a lot in itself. Dr Woods EVIDENCE proves how much the media is involved in all of this with not only the lies they were involved in putting out with regard to 9/11 but also their complete silence all through Dr Woods court cases against the US Government and the 20 US companies including the ones involved who make DIRECT ENERGY WEAPONS.

  1. Emmanuel

    This download is the Foreword and book review of “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” by Eric Larsen, Professor Emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice 1971 – 2006 (35 years), plus the Author’s Preface.

    http//www.checktheEVIDENCE.com/pdf/Where%20Did%20The%20Towers%20Go%20-%20Dr%20Judy%20Wood.pdf

    Is 2+3=5 a theory?

    As Dr. Eric Larsen stated:
    “The scientific method, as it came into being during the Enlightenment period, is a method of thought known as empiricism or as the empirical method. Under the terms of empiricism, all conclusions are, must, and can be drawn from observable evidence and from observable evidence only. Evidence must precede any and every conclusion to be drawn from it. Then, if sound logic governs in the relationship between evidence and the conclusion drawn from it, that conclusion will be irrefutable

    Scientists, as all know or should know, proceed in their thinking not according to belief or desired outcome but according solely and only to what the empirical evidence they have gathered, studied, and observed allows them to conclude or makes it inevitable for them to conclude.”

    This is why Dr. Wood’s work is irrefutable. She only presents evidence and an analysis of that evidence. There is no use for a theory in forensic science. Either you know something or you don’t. That is why those in charge of a cover up don’t want people to look at the evidence in Dr. Wood’s book. Dr. Wood does not ask you to believe her. She only wants you to believe yourself and think for yourself and look at the evidence yourself and not argue about opinions of theories of speculation of ideas… That is what keeps a cover up in place.

    On page 171 (the start of Chapter 9) of WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood there are several quotes at the top of that page from the first responders who survived in stairway B. Do you think those guys had been sitting on top of a nuke without having been cooked to death — if not blown apart? I wonder why they don’t remember having been cooked to death? LOL Nukes produce heat, and lots of it. So why didn’t this magical nuke burn paper or burn all of the folks in Stairway B who would have been right on top of it? Why didn’t this magical nuke leave a seismic signal? Why didn’t this magical nuke leave chemical identification? Why didn’t this magical nuke leave nuclear identification? Why doesn’t anyone remember having lost their vision from being “blinded by the light” from an exploding nuke? Why wasn’t there a steam explosion — resulting from a destroyed bathtub that keeps the Hudson river out? Why didn’t any nation around the world detect that a nuke had been set off?

    Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book can give at least 10 reasons that rule out the theory by “AE911trutherd” that welding material destroyed the WTC. How many can you list? Hint: the bottom of page 45, the top of page 171, the diagrams on page 81 and 84, the diagram at the bottom of page 11, and of course pages 122 to 127. The list is endless, actually.

    Better yet, go to any engineering professor or professional engineer and ask if the welding material, thermite, can turn a building into dust in mid air in 10 seconds – or if thermite can turn a building to powder in mid air. You might leave red-faced, but at least you will know you’ve been fleeced.

    Is 2+3=5 a theory?
    Is 2+3=6 also a theory?
    Is 2+3=7 also a theory?

    (sigh) I guess there are so many theories we will never know the answer to 2+3. We just need to move on….nothing to see here.

    That’s how “9/11trutherder’s” keep the cover-up in place. They work because people like to follow the herd. Herds are easy to control. Do you think that those who planned 9/11 did not know that?

    Dr. Wood is a qualified forensic scientist. It’s disturbing the number of people who believe that an opinion and an Internet connection makes them a qualified forensic scientist… LOL

    The order of crime solving is to determine

    1) WHAT happened, then

    2) HOW it happened (e.g., by 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 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.

    Be aware of the deception, distraction, and diversion going on, both intentional and otherwise, leading people to climb on to popular “theories” or “band wagons”. Truth is not established by popularity, although agenda-driven political campaigns are. So we need to establish a better way to sort through the information we find by improving our problem-solving skills.

    There are various groups on the internet lead by nefarious figures such as Richard Gage and Jim Fetzer, each with their own set of beliefs and objectives, promoting how it was done, or who did it or why they did it. But none of them have taken the first step of an investigation which is to determine what it is that was done, that is, to first determine WHAT happened. Until they have done that, they are merely speculating or theorizing or hypothesizing or guessing. This is essentially assuming what happened and then proving the assumptions through biased observations (i.e. “cherry-picking” data). Promoting beliefs distracts away from determining WHAT happened. This is why the order of problem solving is so important. Remember, you must first determine WHAT happened BEFORE you can determine HOW it happened and independent of knowing HOW it happened.

    Remember how a cover-up works. Get people to theorize and speculate about an imagined problem, then get them to argue opinions with others. Everyone will be arguing about opinions of speculations of theories of opinions of guesswork, and they’ll just go round and round and round and get nowhere. It is amazingly easy to keep a cover up in place! The only way out of that vicious cycle is to deal with the facts and only the facts (empirical evidence).

    By reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?, you know from the EVIDENCE that the Twin Towers turned to dust in mid-air never hitting the ground.

    >Bombs don’t do that.
    >Thermite does not do that.
    >Thermate does not do that.
    >Nano-enhanced thermite does not do that.
    >Nano-thermite does not do that.
    >New-and-improved super-duper mini-micro-nano thermite does not do that.
    >Firecrackers do not do that.
    >Fire does not do that.
    >Nukes do not do that.
    >Megga nukes do not do that.
    >Milli-nukes do not do that.
    >Mini-nukes do not do that.
    >Nano-nukes cannot do that.
    >A wrecking ball cannot do that.
    >A slingshot cannot do that.
    >Missiles cannot do that.

    We know this because we know those things above involve Kinetic Energy and we know that the “dustification” was done without Kinetic Energy. That is, “dustification” was not done with high heat nor with some other form of Kinetic Energy (wrecking ball, projectile, gravity collapse). The building was not cooked to death nor was it beaten to death. So Kinetic Energy Weapons (KEW) did not destroy the buildings. But we know that Energy was Directed somehow (and controlled within fairly precise boundaries) to cause the building to turn to dust in mid air. That is, some kind of (cold) Directed Energy Weapon (cDEW) had to have done this. Energy was directed and manipulated within the material such that it came apart without involving high heat and without having something fly through the air and hit it (bullets, missile, bombs, wrecking ball, a giant hammer, or many micro hammers…)

    If this technology can manipulate energy to do something like this, it can also be manipulated to provide us with “free energy” (i.e. “off the grid”). Simply by looking at the cover of Dr. Wood’s book you can realize there must be a technology that can do this. This is evidence that such technology does exist. This is evidence that a technology capable of providing “free energy” (“off the grid”) exists. The whole world witnessed this which means the whole world can know that “free-energy technology” exists. This realization will change the world. This is probably the biggest reason why there is so much effort spent misrepresenting, distorting, and suppressing Dr. Wood’s research.

    Our educational systems typically “teach the test” and it is usually a multiple-choice test. We are not taught very good problem-solving skills. So it is very easy to manipulate a population with poor problem-solving skills. Get them to focus on the HOW or the WHO and they will never be able to solve the problem. That is the secret. Look at how the official story was designed. We were told “Bin Laden did it.” But what was “it” that he did? And look at how the Truther Movement is managed. Well meaning people, looking for answers, are directed to focus on HOW or WHO (thermite did “it”, micro nukes did “it“, “it” was an inside job”). Truthers are also conditioned to attack anyone addressing Dr. Wood’s research and are told “she has a bogus theory” when Dr. Wood has no theory, only EVIDENCE. It keeps the well-meaning Truthers from looking at the EVIDENCE.

    Why? Look at what the EVIDENCE tells us. It tells us the truth.

    “Empirical evidence is the truth that theory must mimic.

    The empirical EVIDENCE tells us that the majority of the buildings turned into dust in mid air. Therefore, something that can do this (turn it into dust in mid air) must exist. That is the proof that it exists. It happened. You don’t need the serial numbers for the gizmo to know what happened. When “white man” first arrived on the American continent with firearms, indigenous people did not need to know the serial numbers of their weapons to know what they can do. They didn’t need to have seen such weapons in order to know that there exists a weapon that can fire a piece of metal fast enough to kill their brothers. Likewise, by the end of the day on August 6, 1945, the people living near Hiroshima, Japan, did not need to understand how a nuclear bomb works in order to know that there exists a technology that can produce enormous amounts of heat or to know that there exists a super-duper Kinetic Energy Weapon (KEW) that is capable of destroying an entire city.

    1. ArmunnRigh

      I think there’s a mishap in communication. To better illustrate it, let me put it this way:

      Look at the image attached to this comment and please say what is happening to the piano.
      Is it falling down the stairs? Is it hovering? Is it staying still?

      Whatever answer one might give to the above questions, and whatever additional explanations one might come up with as to why did the piano move and how it moved and what happened to the piano are absolutely irrelevant because the image is false, it is a drawing, a clipart, that is, it isn’t depicting a moment of true reality, but a moment of forged reality.

      In line with this, all images of the 9/11 event are false and therefore any explanation based upon them is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the buildings were there on 9/10 (apparently) and ceased to be there after 9/11. What happened to make them disappear? There is no credible data to provide an irrefutable answer.

      I hope this will clear up this communication problem.

      1. Emmanuel

        Obviously you have not read Dr. Wood’s book. Everyone I have loaned my copy to read knows the truth. The EVIDENCE contained in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? is not ALL visual. No one has refuted any of the work in Dr. Wood’s book. Debunking disinformation about Dr. Wood’s work does not debunk Dr. Wood’s work. What it does is demonstrate that you are unable to refute Dr. Wood’s work so you create disinformation about it to refute. This is defined as ODD (Obsessive Debunking Disorder). If you believe everything is false then you and this website must be false as well.

        9/11 Finding the Truth A Compilation of Articles by Andrew Johnson Focused around the research and evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Wood

        checktheevidence.com/pdf/9-11%…

        The “9/11 truther” community greeted Dr. Wood’s Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST (March 16, 2007) with scorn, despite her being the first person to confront NIST formally about their fraudulent report of the demise of the WTC towers. It was as if the fraud of the NIST report, a report whose integrity was absolutely essential if the official story were to be under-girded, was of no real interest to the wider 9/11 community. Dr. Wood’s federal qui tam case, filed 4/25/2007 against the contractors of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for science fraud also received virtually no notice or indication of interest other than ridicule from the “9/11 truther” community. Again, it was as if the federal case being brought by Dr. Wood against the NIST contractors for science fraud (in its Congressionally-mandated task that it determine how and why the WTC buildings were destroyed)-as if this entire and absolutely central question was of no real interest to the wider “9/11 truther” community. If the “9/11 truther” movement could ignore Dr. Wood’s case, the judges knew they could as well. That case, further, was itself improperly dismissed as those hearing it treated the case-incorrectly-as if it paralleled the views of the general “9/11 truther” movement. Those determining whether the case would be allowed to go forward incorrectly assumed, for example, that Dr. Wood (a) blamed the US military (which she does not); (b) they incorrectly assumed that Dr. Wood held the view that there was “substantial evidence that all the buildings collapsed from explosive devices” and that this view was “at the heart of the Wood. . . litigation.” (entirely incorrect); and (c) they incorrectly assumed that Dr. Wood claimed “that the towers were struck by high powered energy beams [from space]” (things that are not in any way her position). All of these issues were addressed, although to no avail, in the Motion for Reconsideration:

        drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/W…

        And now the case (due to the ridicule and lack of support from the “9/11 truther” community) has been denied a Writ of a Certiorari by the United States Supreme Court, meaning that the Court will not hear it or allow the factual evidence to be presented in a courtroom, and therefore that the case is dead. How can it be that this is not seen by the “9/11 truther” community as an exceedingly enormous defeat? Yet virtually no mention whatsoever of the Supreme Court’s rejection of the case has been forthcoming. It causes me to question the entire purpose of the “9/11 truther” movement. Anyone who reads the document submitted to the United States Supreme Court (available on Dr. Wood’s website) should be appalled by what has taken place. The Court of Appeals essentially stated in a footnote of its written decision that it knew that the law applied to Dr. Wood’s case, but that the court was ignoring the law in order to dismiss her case.

        In fact, the evidence of science fraud submitted by Dr. Wood is irrefutable. NIST itself admitted to Dr. Wood that its report was a fraud. And not one of the contractors hired by NIST denied her allegations. Then the Court of Appeals ignored the law in order to dismiss the case. What could conceivably explain the lack of interest or response by the “9/11 truther” community? This travesty of justice, the unfounded and prejudicial derailing of Dr. Wood’s case, should be of significant concern to the entire constitutional republic. If laws are ignored for ease of dismissing cases, then we are no longer living in a constitutional republic. However ancient they may be or firmly embedded in the nation’s founding documents, we are no longer living in a republic of laws but in a state where factions of any kind can usurp power through ignoring or pre-empting laws.

        I hope this will clear up this communication problem.

        1. ArmunnRigh

          This is going a bit around in circles, isn’t it?

          Are you saying that Dr. Judy Wood does not base her “towers-to-dust” theory on any visual evidence? Is it not the core of her theory that we can see the towers “dustifying”? I have been to her website in the past and have seen lots of visual evidence proving her point.

          For example, these videos:
          wheredidthetowersgo.com/media/

          Additionally, I have not attacked her, but merely indicated that her theory is based on something that is false, even though it looks real. Has Dr. Judy Wood, for example, watched “September Clues” to look for evidence of visual fakery? I have the impression she has, but I have no proof, so she might not have. She might even have watched it and thought it too difficult to accept. She might even be a very honest person who simply has not realized the depth of the charade.
          And no, I personally, as I can only speak for myself, do not think everything is false – only that which proves to be.

          Still, at least the website creator has bought the book and read it, so maybe ab can give you his review about the other non-visual evidence she presents?

          All that you say about the scientific method is all very nice and dandy – and is something I agree with – however, if the evidence has had any tampering it cannot be used to prove anything.

          Regarding the rest of what you’re selling, I’ve had my trial period, but returned it to the vendor and I’m not buying it anymore.

      2. Emmanuel

        Obviously you have not read Dr. Wood’s book. Everyone I have loaned my copy to read knows the truth. The EVIDENCE contained in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? is not ALL visual. No one has refuted any of the work in Dr. Wood’s book. Debunking disinformation about Dr. Wood’s work does not debunk Dr. Wood’s work. What it does is demonstrate that you are unable to refute Dr. Wood’s work so you create disinformation about it to refute. This is defined as ODD (Obsessive Debunking Disorder). If you believe everything is false then you and this website must be false as well.

        9/11 Finding the Truth A Compilation of Articles by Andrew Johnson Focused around the research and evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Wood

        checktheevidence.com/pdf/9-11%…

        The “9/11 truther” community greeted Dr. Wood’s Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST (March 16, 2007) with scorn, despite her being the first person to confront NIST formally about their fraudulent report of the demise of the WTC towers. It was as if the fraud of the NIST report, a report whose integrity was absolutely essential if the official story were to be under-girded, was of no real interest to the wider 9/11 community. Dr. Wood’s federal qui tam case, filed 4/25/2007 against the contractors of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for science fraud also received virtually no notice or indication of interest other than ridicule from the “9/11 truther” community. Again, it was as if the federal case being brought by Dr. Wood against the NIST contractors for science fraud (in its Congressionally-mandated task that it determine how and why the WTC buildings were destroyed)-as if this entire and absolutely central question was of no real interest to the wider “9/11 truther” community. If the “9/11 truther” movement could ignore Dr. Wood’s case, the judges knew they could as well. That case, further, was itself improperly dismissed as those hearing it treated the case-incorrectly-as if it paralleled the views of the general “9/11 truther” movement. Those determining whether the case would be allowed to go forward incorrectly assumed, for example, that Dr. Wood (a) blamed the US military (which she does not); (b) they incorrectly assumed that Dr. Wood held the view that there was “substantial evidence that all the buildings collapsed from explosive devices” and that this view was “at the heart of the Wood. . . litigation.” (entirely incorrect); and (c) they incorrectly assumed that Dr. Wood claimed “that the towers were struck by high powered energy beams [from space]” (things that are not in any way her position). All of these issues were addressed, although to no avail, in the Motion for Reconsideration:

        drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/W…

        And now the case (due to the ridicule and lack of support from the “9/11 truther” community) has been denied a Writ of a Certiorari by the United States Supreme Court, meaning that the Court will not hear it or allow the factual evidence to be presented in a courtroom, and therefore that the case is dead. How can it be that this is not seen by the “9/11 truther” community as an exceedingly enormous defeat? Yet virtually no mention whatsoever of the Supreme Court’s rejection of the case has been forthcoming. It causes me to question the entire purpose of the “9/11 truther” movement. Anyone who reads the document submitted to the United States Supreme Court (available on Dr. Wood’s website) should be appalled by what has taken place. The Court of Appeals essentially stated in a footnote of its written decision that it knew that the law applied to Dr. Wood’s case, but that the court was ignoring the law in order to dismiss her case.

        In fact, the evidence of science fraud submitted by Dr. Wood is irrefutable. NIST itself admitted to Dr. Wood that its report was a fraud. And not one of the contractors hired by NIST denied her allegations. Then the Court of Appeals ignored the law in order to dismiss the case. What could conceivably explain the lack of interest or response by the “9/11 truther” community? This travesty of justice, the unfounded and prejudicial derailing of Dr. Wood’s case, should be of significant concern to the entire constitutional republic. If laws are ignored for ease of dismissing cases, then we are no longer living in a constitutional republic. However ancient they may be or firmly embedded in the nation’s founding documents, we are no longer living in a republic of laws but in a state where factions of any kind can usurp power through ignoring or pre-empting laws.

        I hope this will clear up this communication problem.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.