Energy budget and molecular dissociation of the World Trade Center (WTC) by Independent scientist Leuren Moret
BERKELEY, CA - Sound science is the only approach to understanding what happened at the WTC on 911. The energy budget of molecular dissociation required to "disappear" two tall buildings as they collapsed is the answer to what happened on 911 at the WTC. Until the energy budget is addressed, which would be required to turn two buildings into nanoparticles (which are invisible and are permanently suspended in the atmosphere), the discussion continues to be based on bathtub chemistry and steam engine physics which will never give any answers to the sophisticated and exotic energy technologies now available for "special projects". Steven Jones told me in Vancouver at the 911 conference that his particle samples came from within 25' of the WTC buildings. Well anyone knows the settling velocity of particles is related to size, and nanoparticles have such a small settling velocity that motion of air particles keeps them permanently suspended - therefore Jones samples are the BIG CHUNKS and the huge volume of nanoparticles produced simply disappeared into thin air. He didn't even sample them because it requires extremely sophisticated equipment such as charged plates to collect them on... filters don't do it. The investigator must have an advanced background in nanoparticle physics and quantum dynamics... and that is the key to what happened at the WTC on 911.
I am a Livermore lab whistleblower. I watched directed energy beam experiments being conducted in the atmosphere, from the laser facility at LLNL in the middle of the night, from my house in Livermore when I was working at LLNL. Until space weapons capabilities and HAARP are taken into consideration to explain the molecular dissociation (into nanoparticles) of two very large buildings, as well as the 4th generation nukes that were used to break down the structural integrity of the buildings, then the answers are coming from a noisy room of opinions. Opinions are not science. No one has explained the presence of levels of uranium, tritium, and the presence of deuterium in the air monitoring conducted and reported by Dr. Thomas Cahill for 5 months after 911 at the WTC - which began after Oct. 5. He reported the highest concentration of metals and nanoparticles ever measured in US air samples. The question is, why did the Dept. of Energy (Steven Jones
former employer at Los Alamos nuke lab) ask Dr. Cahill to voluntarily do air monitoring specifically AFTER Oct. 5, and why did DOE want that air monitoring done for 5 months. Cahill received no funding for a very expensive and extended study.
What we know from the Israeli bombing of Lebanon with 5000 US depleted uranium bunker busters, is that the bomb craters also had deuterium and high levels of U235 present as well as very high radiation reported for the first 3 weeks which dropped off quickly because it was neutron activation products. The 4th generation nukes that the US stuck into the bunker busters are the size of matchboxes I was told by Dr. Chris Busby who had the bomb crater samples tested at the British govt. radiation lab. So that takes it back to the time gap from Sept. 11 to Oct. 5 when DOE did not want air sampling data collected. Why?
The energy budget required to destroy the integrity of the structure and the molecular dissociation of two huge buildings has to be the focus of any investigation of 911 at the WTC. So far it has not been considered.
BIO of Leuren Moret:
http://peaceinspace.blogs.com/nuclear_free_zone/2007/05/leuren_moret_bi.html
CANADA: Transcript of Judy Woods Interview with Richard Syrett
Fri Sept 19, 2008 on CFRB 1010 AM Radio’s - The Richard Syrett Show
Richard Syrett: Judy Wood who is a very controversial person in the 9-11 truth movement.
She’s been sort of looked at as sort of the straw man in terms of being sort of way out there on
what some might (not myself), what some might call the lunatic fringe in terms of her theories in what might have brought down the Twin Towers. She believes it was Starwars type technology, as Starwars as an SDI, as Starwars as a particle beam, a beam energy laser type device .
Speaker # 2 (Spkr 2): Wow.
RS: that brought down the Twin Towers. She will join us in the first hour of the show, in the first half really. In the second half, Matthew Connolly who is an assistant professor at Columbia University will be here to talk about the myth of overpopulation and the struggle to control world population for all the wrong reasons.
(Skip some introductory dialog.)
RS: This is the Richard Syrett show on News Talk 1010 CFRB.
(Skip some unrelated dialog)
RS: Now, first off. A very compelling and controversial 90 minutes, I can assure you.
When I first came back to CFRB, every Monday night I did a show dedicated to 9-11, and for various reasons, I didn’t have Dr. Judy Wood on the program on any of those Mondays. I talked to Jim Hoffman, I talked to James Fetzer, I talked to Barry Zwicker, Alex Jones, of course, Jim Marrs why didn’t I talk to Judy Wood, and I think maybe I was a little bit afraid of what she had to say because in some quarters for those who cling to the official narrative of 9-11 that’s been force fed to us like pabulum, Dr. Judy Wood presents them with somewhat of a straw man’s argument. She’s held out there as
being way out there on the lunatic fringe. Did you see what Dr. Judy Wood said last night. The Twin Towers were brought down by some sort of Star Wars technology.’ Ha ha ha. And then I talked to people
like John Hutchison, the founder of the Hutchison Effect. And I talked to former TV weatherman, Scott Stephens, who has dedicated his life investigating extreme bizarre weather anomalies and scalar technology. I talked to Joseph Farrow, author of Secrets of the Unified Field. And suddenly what Dr.20Judy Wood has to say doesn’t seem so out there, and I’m delighted to have her on the program and I’m thrilled that she agreed to come on. Dr. Judy Wood, welcome to the Richard Syrett Show, NewsTalk 1010, CFRB.
Dr. Judy Wood (JW): Thank you very much for having me.
RS: In that rather laborious introduction the idea that you’re obviously, I’m guessing,
are cognizant of the fact that some perceive you, maybe some even in the 9-11 truth movement are afraid of you because of what you have to say. For them, let’s face it, it’s far more easier to digest the fact that let’s say Steven Jones is correct, you know, that there were prepositioned precision cutter charges placed in the World Trade Center towers rather than this, you know, hocus pocus world of directed energy weapons.
Is that an accurate assessment, that you’ve been sort of pigeon holed that way by both sides, those in the truth movement and those outside it?
JW: Yeah, but I don’t pay a lot of attention to that. I’m just looking for the truth and
looking for what caused this horrendous event. It’s a pretty amazing event that happened.
No matter which way you look at it, to have seven buildings go poof that day.
RS: And we should. I failed to mention your credentials and they are significant.
A mechanical engineer with research interests in experimental stress analysis,
structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. You’re a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics, co-founded that organization’s Biological and Systems Materials division, and you are currently serving on that organization’s composite materials technical division. And let’s plug the web site as well, www.DrJudyWood.com.
RS: All right. We’ve got that out of the way.
What is a directed energy weapon?
JW: Well, my definition of it is energy that is directed and used as a weapon.
RS: It’s that simple.
JW: Yes, that’s my definition. And I use a very generalized definition because we don’t know what this gizmo is.
We don’t what the name of it is. It needs a category, and it’s not a kinetic energy device. In other words, something doesn’t go boom with chunks going flying. Something doesn’t physically do something by contacting it. Energy is involved here.
RS: And when we come back because we’re going to break here a moment when we come back, I’ll get you to explain I guess what the telltale signs were for you when you looked at the images, the video, the stills, or the eyewitness testimony. What were the telltale signs that told you a, this wasn’t brought down by planes, b, they weren’t brought down as Steven Jones contends – prepositioned cutter charges.
Judy Wood, Doctor Judy Wood, on the Richard Syrett Show. Stay with us on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
RS: Dr. Judy wood is with us. This mechanical engineer believes that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by a directed energy weapon, whatever that might mean. Now before I get you to tell us what the telltale signs were, Judy, the fingerprint here.. what is it your contention that Building 7 as well as the north and south Towers were brought down in this manner?
JW: Yes, and I just submitted some comments to NIST about that. Some pretty incriminating things.
RS: You are involved currently in a federal suit against NIST, are you?
JW: Correct. On their reports for Towers 1 and 2 well, the contractors for their reports for Towers 1 and 2.
RS: All right. Now, let’s delve in to the actual evidence here. When you looked the images, the videos, the photographs, you heard the testimony what led you to believe that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by a directed energy weapon and not commercial aircraft or, as Steven Jones contends, some prepositioned cutter charges?
JW: Well first, let’s observe. The building. It went away. There wasn’t enough rubble pile left. In a regular controlled demolition, bombs in the building I call it, you end up with a rubble pile with chunks, big chunks, little chunks, in-between size chunks. You don’t end up with just solid powder. And also, there is heat involved with that, and I saw no evidence of heat anywhere.
Paper unburned. I think we all remember paper all over Manhattan.
RS: Yes.
JW: Tons of it. This is bizarre. It is next to a car that appears to be burning, but the paper is not burning.
RS: Even with the initial blast, would not some paper be jettisoned out of the windows in advance of the flames, before the flames would have a chance to consume them? I don’t know. I’m not an engineer.
JW: Right. If paper shot out the window, how much paper can there be? We didn’t really see paper snowing out the window for the amount we see all over the place.
RS: All right.
JW: But, yes. It did get tossed out some of it
RS: So in the absence of charred or the absence of heat
JW: didn’t see heat you just see a rubble pile at ground level the rescue workers had to walk horizontally or rappel down into empty caverns.
RS: Yes, if the pancake theory were correct, and the idea that one floor collapsed on another and the increasing weight you know you would have like a stack of records for those who still remember vinyl. You used to be able to stack four or five records on a player and if they were all to collapse, you would have a pile four or five records high. But you’re right, we didn’t see huge chunks.
We saw as if the actual building, each floor, before it was allowed to collapse upon the next, was merely pulverized, pulverized into this powder.
JW: Right. And you could see it happening mid-air. You see the steel I call them wheat chex, those prefab three-column-wide, three fourths tall sections of the outer walls.
They’re flying through the air and they never hit the ground. It’s like they dissolve or melt like ice cream on the way down. They just turn in to dust. They trail dust, and there’s no big thuds. And that actually was another clue. The ground shook for less than 8 seconds.
RS: Okay. Why is that significant?
JW: It takes 9.22 seconds to drop a ball of the roof and have it hit the pavement down below.
RS: Okay. That’s yeah that’s pure Newtonian physics, right?
JW: Right.
RS: Freefall speed.
JW: Right, but the ground only shook for 8 seconds or less.
RS: You mean the building collapsed in 8 seconds?
JW: The ground shook.
RS: Okay. I’m not sure why that is significant.
JW: Well, I’m not saying it collapsed. It went away.
RS: Ah. Okay. I see what you’re
JW: It went poof. It went away.
RS: The evidence that the ground did not shake for more than 8 seconds according
to the Columbia University seismology lab. And that seems pretty bizarre, you know,
for this quarter mile tall building.
RS: So let’s assume you say it went away if it were to have collapse,
it would had to have collapse certainly in no less than freefall speed,
which would be remarkable in itself, and that’s 9.2 seconds, but actually the ground only shook for 8.8 seconds, which is greater than freefall speed. You’re saying that according to Newtonian laws, that is absolutely physically impossible.
JW: If it were to collapse in that amount of time.
RS: Yes, it were to have collapsed. Yes.
JW: But you know that powder doesn’t make a thud when it hits.
RS: Oh, I see what you’re saying. Ah. Yes. Okay.
JW: So the upper floors maybe they were one hundred percent turned to powder,
and so it was the lower floors where actually anything hit the ground. If you look around the adjacent buildings,
you don’t see any I call them stab wounds you know, pieces of projectiles going through windows and so forth above the eighteenth floor. Out of 110 stories, you only have falling debris hitting buildings up to the eighteenth floor.
RS: So is it possible that the first 18 floors were brought down by cutter charges and the remaining floors were brought down by directed energy. Is that what you are suggesting?
JW: No, I don’t think you know why worry about starting a fire under water when you don’t need to it just makes it harder. It’s not impossible; it just makes the job harder because you have more unknowns than you need. If you’re using one thing, why use something else?
RS: Understood. Let me take a time out here. We’ve got news waiting at the bottom of the hour. Dr. Judy Wood is with us and we are continuing to discuss whether or not a direct energy weapon was responsible for the North, South and Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex. The Richard Syrett Show on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
BREAK
RS: Dr. Judy Wood is with us. She believes that directed energy weapons were responsible for bringing down
the north and south Towers plus Building 7 on 9-11. Let’s go back to our discussion, Judy, some of the telltale signs. You mentioned lack of heat. We had plumes of paper being ejected from windows, landing on the street and none of them were on fire or burning. We have the lack of scarring around the World Trade Center complex, that is, you know, large projectiles being thrown out of the building and then impacting, you know, the other buildings, surrounding buildings, above the eighteenth floor.
JW: And there’s the seismograph information. The ground didn’t shake for more than 8 seconds. Even more so, the impact it made was equivalent to the bottom 20 stories of Tower 1 and the bottom 16 stories of Tower 2.
RS: So in other words, as you say, the top 90 plus floors simply disappeared, went away.
JW: Right.
RS: Okay. Any other telltale signs before we move on.
JW: Yes, there are the toasted cars. I call them toasted cars. They’re toasted as in their history’, not necessarily cooked. I use unique terms when I don’t know the exact phenomenon and don’t want to bias my observations. I just assign a name. Okay. Toasted cars. They’re totaled. They’re toast.
RS: Okay.
JW: They looked scorched and there’s paper next to them that is not burning. The cars are glowing.
And whatever it is, it seems to like engine blocks more than the sides of a car. It like door handles. So if you showed me a car from a regular car fire and a car from 9-11, I could tell the difference.
RS: It likes door handles and engine blocks but not necessa rily the skin of the car.
JW: Right.
RS: That’s interesting. All right.
JW: And it also removes the windshields. There’s absolutely not a trace of windshields left.
RS: It melts them?
JW: Well, they’re just gone. Maybe they turned to dust.
RS: Okay
JW: Like the marble facade in front on WFC 1, 2, and 3. Those are the buildings on the west side of the street.
All the marble just disappeared off the facade.
RS: It just disappeared.
JW: Yes, it’s gone, just the marble.
RS: Was it pulverized or you mean there’s no accounting for it whatsoever? No trace of even powder?
JW: I don’t know if powder was there or not. You look at the pictures and all that facade is gone. Just the marble facade, not the rest of the building.
RS: Okay.
JW: And also the windows. There are circular holes, the windows. And I think we all know you throw a baseball through a window, it doesn’t make a round hole.
RS: No, it just breaks the entire pane of glass or it leaves a jagged top or bottom or some portion of
JW: a spider web looking thing.
RS: Okay. Circular holes where?
JW: In adjacent buildings across the street.
RS: Okay, that’s interesting.
JW: In WFC buildings, there are round holes.
RS: A lot of them? Dozens? Hundreds?
JW: Yes. Breakage is kind of strange. Or if the building had double pane windows,
one of the panes was gone, but the other pane wasn’t.
RS: All right. This is all very interesting and it is perplexing these phenomena that you’re talking about, but how does that in your mind add up to directed energy?
JW: Well, lots of __?____waves do that to windows. But if you look at one more. I guess there are two ah ha moments. One was this cop car over on FDR Drive. With my background in interferometry, the pattern I saw on the car reminded me of constructed or destructed interference.
RS: Okay. Those are very big words and someone who got through basically grade 11 science First of all, your back ground in interferometry ?
JW: Interferometry.
RS: Interferometry. What is that?
JW: Interfering beams of lights. If you interfere two coherent beams of light, you get walls of constructive and=2 0destructive interference. __?__In space, you have light / dark, light / dark, and then sinusoidal shades in between.
RS: So the pattern on the squad car on FDR drive shows you what?
JW: That it was something that would be explained by interferometry where it looks toasted one place and one millimeter to the right it’s in pristine condition with a new wax job.
RS: Okay.
JW: it’s things like that that wouldn’t exist in a regular car fire.
RS: No, I wouldn’t think so as a lay person. All right. Another break awaits.
BREAK
RS: Directed energy weapons. Was such a device used to bring town the World Trade Center towers, Building 7, the north and south Towers. Dr. Judy Wood, a mechanical engineer, believes it happened just that way. Now the only question for me is, because for many of you listening now, you may be thinking wow, you know what, this is getting too far out there. We’re talking about what is it - Star Wars. Come on now.’
But the only question that we need to answer really is - Is this technology possible and does somebody possess it, and everything else falls in line from there?’
And before we get to that, what kind of energy source are we looking at here that would be able to do something like this. Pulverizing some 200 floors plus Building 7, we haven’t accounted for that 200 floors into a fine dust? What kind of energy source? What kind of power would be needed, Dr. Judy Wood?
JW: It’s the kind of power, the kind of effect, not the magnitude of it. One more feature that was really ground breaking for me, pun intended maybe, is that when the dust fell, it was coarse, it landed, and then began breaking down further, and became so fine it started wafting up.
JS: How do you know that?
JW: Pictures. Fifteen minutes after Tower 1 went poof, just north of Tower, you’re up wind, you see a clear blue sky and the dust has landed, but then now you see stuff start to come up. That fine of dust could not have landed already.
RS: Ah. Interesting. So it fell to the ground in a coarse manner and then continued to break down once it hit the ground.
JW: Right. So that’s a really weird process. It’s not like you put an energy beam and fry it. That’s the biggest misconception.
RS: Ah. Have you seen anything like this before?
JW: Yes, and I think you have too. I started looking for what could cause this and I came upon the work of John Hutchison
RS: Yes.
JW: and he does this on a very small scale, just goofing around, not, definitely not anything in terms of weapons. But the U.S. government has entered his lab and videotaped it for four months in 1983, I believe.
RS: Yes, the Hutchison Effect for those who are not aware we’ve had John on the show many times. He was unceremoniously removed from his apartment / lab in, I guess, New Westminster, British Columbia. Was he stumbled upon some sort of effect that could bend metal bars, that could levitate heavy objects, all at essentially the flip of a switch? Using well I guess, his lab looks like a Nicola Tesla garage sale So what do you mean that you’ve see this with John Hutchison’s Effect.
JW: He is of course well known for levitation, and if you look around the World Trade Center, you see flipped cars next to trees that are fully covered with leaves.
RS: That’s not possible?
JW: It’s pretty strange to see cars in the right place, just upside down. It was quite a few of those and if it was a big gust of wind, I don’t think it would have tossed cars over without, you know, at least scarring them up some.
RS: Ah. Understood.
JW: It just looks like they’re parked upside down.
RS: Oh, 20I see. They’re perfectly pristine but they’re upside down.
JW: Right. There is one of them where its underside looks like it’s from the showroom floor. It looks like a brand new car.
RS: Interesting. Okay
JW: It was the upside down cars that were in good shape, and the cars that were right side up were toasted. And there was something that caught my eye in reading up about John Hutchison’s work is that you get lift or disruption. In other words, the molecules either can come apart or they tear themselves apart.
RS: Those are the two effects that he reported using when he engaged his device
JW: This is what others have reported about his work. The disruption meaning that the metal, you know, starts doing something funny.
RS: It either bends or I think in some cases, yes, it became rubbery or very brittle and just smashed apart.
JW: Right.
RS: Okay. So you saw traces of this at the crime scene, so to speak?
JW: All of the various phenomena, I listed at the crime scene I had done that first,
and then I found Hutchison’s work and said oh my gosh it’s just a one-to-one correlation.’ And so there’s an article about that on my web site where it’s comparing, you know, my photos from Ground Zero and then John’s stuff. It’s a one-to-one match.
RS: DrJudyWood.com DrJudyWood.com Okay, so you say again it’s not necessarily that the amount of power behind such a device, it’s the type of device or weapon itself. So what are we talking here then?
JW: Well, field effects.
RS: Field effects, as in the unified field’?
JW: Yes.
RS: Ah.
JW: There are various types of fields that can interfere and if you look at what John Hutchison does, it’s different kind of fields that he interferes.
RS: All right. We need to take another time out. We’ll come back and one again
we just talked about the unified field with Joseph Farrow we may be
heading back down to some familiar territory here, and this is getting very very interesting.
If you got a line, please hold on to it. I will warn you it will probably be
right after the news at eleven o’clock, and if you haven’t jumped on board,
please do so (416) 872-1010, StarTalk Star 8255 toll-free from out of town 1-800 -561 CFRB ,
the Richard Syrett Show along with Dr. Judy Wood. Stay with us on NewsTalk 1010.
BREAK
RS: Welcome back. Dr. Judy Wood is with us. It is her theory that the Twin Towers and
Building 7 were brought down by a directed energy weapon, not prepositioned cutter charges, as Steven Jones contends or using thermite. Let’s work in a call because we’re coming up on the news at the top of the hour and I want to get some input here from people. What do you think of what Dr. Judy Wood is saying? Jim is in Toronto.
Good evening, welcome to News Talk 1010.
Caller Jim in Toronto: Good evening Richard and to Judy. Judy, I saw a documentary on military hardware, modern versions of hardware which is absolutely fantastic,
and what you’re talking about was in the actual documentary, and they had an aircraft on remote control flying and they fired this weapon. Now you only see the left side, or the right side of the individual, the army person doing the testing, and it just broke the aircraft in pieces. They did the same thing on a missile that was just on the launch. It did the same thing. It broke in pieces. What puzzles me is what you’re saying there it sounds like they must have had it set up inside and outside in the third building20that went down, just to eliminate the evidence of what was going on, which comes to what you’re talking about.
JW: Well, I am saying that there are field effects. There’s interference of different energy forms in that region, not necessarily something fired from like a gun.
RS: Are we talking again about Einstein’s Unified Field theory, some aspect of that?
JW: Yes, and the fields that John Hutchison interferes there’s something very similar to that that was present in New York City, in the area on 9-11.
RS: Now when you say interferes you mean as in the old Scott Stephens,
the former weather man from Poncatello, Idaho, who is now with WeatherWars.info
says just like in Ghostbusters don’t cross the beams. You cross the beams and that creates interference waves?
JW: Right, depends on what types of beams, at what angles and what strengths and so forth. Yes, it’s interfering different beams will do something extraordinary.
RS: So this technology this is just not theoretical I mean Einstein was talking about this, what, a hundred years ago. I know that people like Nicola Tesla sort of picked up on it and others. But you’re saying that this is not theoretical.
They have harnessed this technology and they have weaponized it. Do we know this for a fact?
JW: Well, I know that the technology exists because I saw it. Now John Hutchison but again, John Hutchison never would use it as a weapon.
RS: And obviously at a much smaller scale so somebody must have perfected it.
JW: Now to supersize it, we need a huge Tesla Coil.
RS: All right. We will supersize it when we come back. We’ve got news at the top of the hour.
Dr. Judy Wood stays with us. Now DrJudyWood.com is the web site and we’ll also
tell you how you can get involved in perhaps demanding a new 9-11 investigation.
That and much more in my conversation with Dr. Judy Wood when the Richard Syrett Show continues.
Stay with us here on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
BREAK
RS: Right now, we continue to speak with Dr. Judy Wood, mechanical engineer,
with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, and optical methods. We’re talking about the possibility that directed energy weapons brought down the Twin Towers on 9-11.
Interesting quote here sent to me by a listener. It’s incredibly apropos so I’ll share it with you now. This death beam, Dr. Tesla said, will operate silently but effectively
at distances as far as a telescope could see an object on the ground and as far as the curvature of the earth would permit it. It will be invisible and will leave no marks behind it beyond evidence of destruction. An army of one million dead annihilated in an instant, he said, would never reveal, could not reveal even under the most powerful microscope just what catastrophe had caused its destruction. I thank you to Amy for sending that in. Dr. Judy Wood, we’re talking about a Tesla type death beam in your estimation?
JW: I don’t know about a death beam, but an energy field of some sort and about supersizing it.
RS: Yes. Tesla coils. We’ve seen the Tesla coils for those who have looked at pictures
of John Hutchison’s former lab in British Columbia. He had Tesla Coils. So we’re talking about very large Tesla coils.
JW: Well, if you look at a big Tesla coil, it’s got this big donut-shaped thing on the top and then a column with wires wrapped around it going up to it. It looks very much like the structure of a hurricane.
RS: Yes.
JW: Did you know that there was a very large hurricane right outside of New York City on 9-11?
RS: I had not heard that.
JW: It was known to be even bigger than Katrina and was aimed right for New York City. For four days, it was going northwest, past Bermuda, heading straight for New York City, stopped right outside of New York City on the morning of 9-11, made a U turn, headed out of town that afternoon.
RS: All right. That’s interesting. Hurricanes don’t normally come anywhere near that vicinity.
JW: And for no one to have been told. I’ve got the snapshots from the morning news.
They show that area of the ocean, but it doesn’t show this, you know,
this big pinwheel that should be out there.
RS: I missed that report. Where did you get that report, that there was
a hurricane headed for New York on the morning of 9-11?
JW: I was looking at the plume, the nature of the plume, and decided I wanted some, you know, some better pictures from up above, and went looking for weather satellite images, and oh my gosh, what is this thing?’
RS: How far off shore?
JW: Oh, well, the outer bands were at the end of Long Island and on Cape Cod.
RS: And this was, you’re saying, was what have you had a meteorologist look at it
to determine are we talking about Category 5, 4?
JW: It was a 3 the day before, and it had been downgraded but it spread out,
like a figure skater puts their arms out and they slow down. It had spread out to, you know, five and a fourth miles in diameter.
RS: Is that the fingerprint. Is that the fingerprint of the energy weapon?
JW: Well, I believe it’s part of it. Did you know there was thunder reported at JFK airport, Newark airport, and LaGuardia airport? All sides, you know, of Manhattan.
RS: Thunder?
JW: Thunder. And
RS: And I’m guessing if I think back to that day that it was a pretty clear day.
JW: Right. It was dry thunder.
RS: And those reports come from?
JW: The National Weather Service.
RS: They reported thunder?
JW: Yes, I’m sorry, those were airport reports.
RS: Okay.
JW: the individual airports.
RS: All right. So you add these things up I mean, a hurricane 500 miles off shore
JW: no, 500 miles in diameter
RS: Oh, sorry, 500 miles in diameter
JW: It was about 500 miles off shore, the eye of it, but, you know the outer bands, but the field effects reach outside of the outer bands.
RS: Okay.
JW: We can sense a storm coming, especially people with arthritis, they feel it.
RS: Sure.
JW: They sense the field effects. So the fact that there is thunder in the vicinity all around Manhattan,
that was enough to say that there are field effects there.
RS: Now, the hurricane that was offshore, would that be as a result of the activation of this directed energy weapon or ?
JW: I believe it was part of it. It’s the big Tesla coil.
RS: Does that mean that it was coming from that direction?
JW: I believe that the hurricane, however it was there, and I believe it was manufactured,
that it was creating part of the field.
RS: The hurricane was creating part of the field?
JW: Yes, the field effect from the hurricane were part of the field.
RS: So then how but a hurricane is a huge storm and
how would that be directed on three buildings within the World Trade Center complex?
JW: Like when John Hutchison does his work, he interferes different types of energy fields.
RS: Okay.
JW: And if you have exquisite control you know, you have several different energy fields interfering, and then you can get a trigger beam that will set it off in a particular place.
RS: A trigger beam
JW: Yes, a trigger beam, you know, the field effects within an area and
then they need just one last little component, and then, boom, there goes something,
or, I believe the _______?building?__ was disintegrated over time..
RS: like taking a magnet and focusing the sun’s rays on a particular location?
JW: Or any catalyst. ..? . a catalyst that’s already there.
You’re thinking ?....potentially between two plates. You know, it’s ready to arc and
you just one little something in between and boom, there goes the arc.
RS: This again, not theoretical. You’ve seen it in a smaller scale in Hutchison’s lab,
but is it possible that someone would have this technology on such a large scale? Is it technically possible?
JW: Well, if this thing was designed if they, you know, however that hurricane got there,
and the fact that we weren’t told about this hurricane had the potential of, you know,
large storm surges, and if it goes right outside New York City and parks there.
Manhattan is what, twenty feet about the water table
RS: Yes.
JW: It’s going to get flood out. Aren’t you going to tell people they need to evacuate in case the hurricane comes ashore?
RS: Right.
JW: So that to me, you know, confirms that there is some kind of weather control,
to be so confident that you don’t need to alert people.
RS: Have you talked to Scott Stephens about this? Do you know Scott Stephens?
JW: No. I know of him.
RS: WeatherWars.info I mean he’s talking about just exactly this using, I guess, scalar technology. Is that the appropriate term here? Scalar?
JW: It could be. I’m not that familiar with exactly how they make these hurricanes,
but they’re too organized and I think there’s something about the eye the pentagon shape?
RS: Yes, that’s exactly right. He talks about the geometric patterns within these storms.
I mean he basically delivered his last weather cast in Pocotello Idaho back in 2005.
Once he woke up to what was going on and what kind of technology they had, and now he just sees, again, the telltale signs of manufactured weather everywhere. I mean not just the big things he says they’re not just doing the big things. They’re doing everything.
RS: You ought to check my website. The Erinseries. Hurricane Erin was the name of it. E R I N. It goes there just like it went up to a chalk line. Stops, makes a U turn and then heads back out of town.
RS: DrJudyWood.com All Right.
One final time, I’ll come back and talk a little bit more about, this is absolutely mind blowing.
Directed energy weapons. Did they bring down the Twin Towers.
Back with more of the Richard Syrett Show, NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
BREAK
RS: When Carlos Allende was crossing the Atlantic on his way to Algiers in October of 1943, he and at least a thousand men witnessed the USS Eldridge become invisible to the human eye, not to radar, to the human eye. That was the source of the legend of the Philadelphia Experiment, also known as Project Rainbow. Now, think of it, if they could do that in 1943, and we’re not talking about the rumors of teleportation let’s assume that didn’t happen, but if it simply became invisible to the human eye If they could do that in 1943, my word, what kind of technology do they have 65 years later? It would be mind boggling. I don’t think our imagination could even fathom what the powers that be have.
Do they have a directed energy weapon utilizing giant Tesla coils to create hurricanes and
also make the Twin Towers disappear? Dr. Judy Wood says so.
Let’s grab a quick call before we say goodnight to Judy and Jim in Otobico. Welcome to NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
Caller Jim in Otobico: Hi Richard. How are you guys doing? Another phenomenal show.
RS: Thank you
Caller Jim: Richard, I’m just curious your guest from about a week ago and you’re the gentleman was talking about 9-11 and he was talking about the fact that the towers were shut down by Marvin Bush’s security firm on the 8th and the 9th, and there are two questions I have, really. One, do you think this igniter, I guess, could be potentially set up in those two days when the buildings were shut down and completely in their control with no access by anybody else? And also, if so, what was the size or the category size of this hurricane that was offshore at New York? I’ll take the answer offline.
RS: All right. Thank you, Jim. Judy?
JW: The hurricane was a Category 3 but it had been downgraded that morning because it slowed down, but it was bigger for the overall energy, you know, larger area. One other thing I’d like to mention is there’s an abrupt shift in the earth’s magnetic field with each of the events on 9-11, a build-up, a change in the magnetometer readings, and an abrupt change of direction of those curves. That’s kind of interesting too.
RS: And that’s probably worthy of another half an hour which we don’t have.
I do want to give you a little bit of time to talk about on DrJudyWood.com,
sort of a clarion call for people interested in launching another 9-11 investigation.
I know there are those up here in Canada that would like to see that, but what are you trying to do down in the States?
JW: Well, I am conducting an investigation and I’ve taken legal action as well.
RS: You’re taking this to court?
JW: Yes, well the contractors for NIST who helped in the cover up of this horrendous crime, and some of these contractors are manufacturers of directed energy weapons.
RS: And how do you know that.
JW: It’s on their websites
RS: Ah.
JW: Their test facilities, their, you know, warehouse.
RS: How can people help you?
JW: Gee, write to me and ask. Let it be known what’s going on.
RS: All right, but in terms of your legal case, this is costing money, I’m guessing.
JW: Yes. Yes.
RS: Who’s helping you with that?
JW: Nobody so far. Well, a couple of people have, small scale, but yes anything would be very helpful there.
RS: So again, it’s DrJudyWood.com.
JW: And at the top of that web page, there is about the legal case and if you go to that page, there’s a data entry thing where you can email that way or contact me.
RS: All right, and when is that legal case supposed to happen?
JW: Well, it’s ongoing. There are different activities happening in it right now.
RS: All right. Listen, I know that you’ll probably be in the midst of it later next month.
That’s why we had you on tonight. I thank you for your time.
I’m hoping that we can talk again=2 0before Christmas and get maybe some details in how this case is going. I wish the best of luck. You’re a brave woman. This information is absolutely mind blowing and not easily dismissed
JW: Thanks.)
VIEW/COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE:
There are a lot of photos on Judy's website, many of which are astonishing. I don't think her ideas can be easily dismissed, especially in light of the facts about the lack of debris left at Ground Zero after the collapses, and the near total disintegration of the buildings into dust.
Many credible people reported explosions, so I believe it was a combination of planted explosives and exotic weaponry that completed the destruction. Hurricane creation and control? That's pretty incredible stuff, but I'm keeping an open mind.
I recommend visiting Judy's website, it's a bit daunting but there's a lot there to see and read. From what I've learned, she is very brave, and has sacrificed much to unearth the truth.
Posted by: Art D. | November 19, 2008 at 01:45 PM
The key point here is the correspondence between characteristics of the Hutchison Effect and WTC Evidence.
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/
Additionally the presence and role of Hurricane Erin cannot be ignored.
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/
Dr Wood's diligent research has uncovered all this evidence and she is the one who has made the connection.
The involvement of HAARP is of less interest, as we have few specifics of the effects it causes (unlike the Hutchison Effect). Was HAARP involved on 9/11? Who knows - but I very much doubt something so well-known had any significant role in the destruction of the WTC itself.
Posted by: Andrew Johnson | December 16, 2008 at 12:46 AM