On Tuesday evening, I attended an event in Birmingham organised by ’Truth Juice’. These folks are an ever growing group of truth enthusiasts who hold regular talks by noted researchers on a variety of subjects across numerous venues in the UK. I was looking forward to this particular event because it hosted a talk by Andrew Johnson, who was discussing his ongoing investigation into 9/11 and the possibility of the more unconventional means used to perpetrate the event.
It would also be an interesting night for several other reasons. For the first time, I would be going with a truth ‘novice’! My friend had only recently become aware of the possibility that 9/11 was something other than the illusion perpetuated in the mainstream, after hearing me talk on the subject. Secondly, I would also get a nice surprise when I found out that Dr Judy Wood (author of the seminal investigative work, “Where Did The Towers Go?”) had attended, unannounced, and would also be doing a presentation.
The fact that 2 experienced researchers were now effectively fitting the time slot of one, meant that the event became slightly rushed at times. I was a little disappointed as I had to go to work at midnight and this resulted in my missing the closing minutes of Andrew’s Q & A session with the audience. I was also looking forward to a lengthy talk by Andrew, which had to be compressed a little to account for time. This is not to detract from the event though! Despite the breakneck speed (I was scribbling notes like the clappers!), Andrew was still as thorough as ever and he apologised to the audience, about the speed on several occasions. It also allowed for Dr Wood to speak as well, which I was pleased about and would have been impossible, otherwise…
For those who don’t know, the work of Andrew Johnson and Dr Judy Wood (in relation to 9/11) considers the very strong possibility that some form of directed (and ultimately, weaponised) Free Energy Technology was utilised to destroy the buildings in World Trade Centre Plaza on September 11, 2001.
Dr Wood kicked off proceedings with an hour long talk about the evidence relating to the destruction of the towers, beginning with a focus on the millions of tons of debris (or lack thereof) that should have remained. The audience were shown footage of the dust patterns, the upward “lathering” effect, the ground fumes (which many call smoke from heat or fires) that were in the immediate vicinity of very wet vehicle tracks, the unburned paper and trees phenomenon, the “glowing Cheetos” (as she called them) that sat atop unburned paper and the strange ‘slicing’ effect that had totally removed parts of buildings and, yet, left the adjoining sections seemingly untouched. Dr Wood stated that the term ‘pile’, at Ground Zero, was misleading and should be, more appropriately, renamed “the leftovers”.
Next came some interesting facts about the location of WTC Plaza: bedrock, located 70 feet below the water table. The area also has something called the “Bathtub Wall”, which prevents the flooding of New York. It is strange to note that on 9/11, the “Bathtub Wall” suffered insignificant damage; inconsistent with the level it should have sustained if buildings of this size had ‘collapsed’. It was also interesting to note that the tunnels under the Hudson remained dry after they had been pumped of excess water. Wouldn’t they have sustained, at least, some cracks and leaks?
The focus then came on to the seismic readings on 9/11. Seismographs measure something called a P-Wave (which precedes the main shock wave) during most Earthquakes or events which would produce a readable tremor. The destruction of the towers apparently produced readings absent a P-Wave. The readings were also inconsistent with an event of that magnitude. WTC 7 only measured 0.6, WTC 1 was the equivalent of a 20 storey building collapse and WTC 2 was the equivalent of a 16 storey building. Dr Wood also presented some in depth analytical data showing that a building collapse of that size should have taken at least 31 seconds.
At this point, proceedings were interrupted briefly by somebody smashing a glass at the back of the room! Somebody at the back complained that they couldn’t hear Dr Wood and accused her of mumbling when she turned to face the projector screen. Whilst I appreciate people wanting to hear clearly (the microphone system was unfortunately down, so both speakers had to manage without), I felt it was disrespectful to called Dr Wood a ‘mumbler’. I will come to this individual shortly.
Things quickly settled and proceeded onto the subject of the infamous ‘scorched’ and ‘rusted’ cars. Dr Wood acknowledged the debate over the towing of cars to locations much farther away from Ground Zero. She said that whilst this may be the case for many vehicles, it is not the case for all of them. She also pointed out the missing door latches on several vehicles and the eyewitness accounts of cars along West Broadway, that seemed to suddenly and inexplicably “spontaneously combust”. She also looked at the “Rolled Up Carpet” effect, the buckling of the tower’s outer wall cladding that should have occurred, but didn’t and the twisting and buckling effect on many of the steel girders.
Dr Wood then discussed the behaviour of Hurricane Erin (that was due to make landfall on the morning of 9/11) and it’s abrupt change of direction. We were presented with several pieces of weather report footage that totally omitted Hurricane Erin from the weather maps, audio of a CBS weather anchor saying that the weather was “as nice as can be” and a bizarre commentary from a news anchor (after 9/11) saying, “If only a hurricane had hit on 9/11! The attacks may never have happened!”.
The final segment, the principles of ‘field effect’ and, specifically, The Hutchison Effect was analysed. I am no scientist, so some of this difficult to explain. However, Hutchison’s work is well documented on the internet and extensive overviews of the Effect can be studied on both Andrew Johnson and Dr Judy Wood’s websites. The links for which are in the left hand ‘Links’ column and at the end of this post.
Dr Wood closed the talk with the rhetorical question: “where did the towers go?!”. Some bright spark at the back of the audience shouted, “China!”. Dr Wood wittily replied, “Yeah! The upper atmosphere of China!!”.
Dr Wood did a one on one Q & A session to speed up proceedings, by allowing others to go and get another drink, go to the loo, have a cigarette (my vice!), etc. Whilst outside having a smoke and chatting to my novice friend, I overheard a couple talking about the chap who had made the ‘mumbling’ remark. They remarked that this was the same individual who, not only broke the glass, but also made the “China” witticism. Shortly after, said chap came outside, with what was presumably his partner and said, “I don’t know why I’m listening to this!”. She replied, “Well why don’t you go home and complain to yourself, while I stay here and listen!”. At least somebody in the relationship had an open mind…
Next up, Andrew Johnson began his talk about the various aspects of the notion of “Cover Ups” and the specific relationship with 9/11. I got the impression (I apologise if I’m wrong, Andrew!) that Andrew had picked up on the odd voices of dissent in the audience. He said, (re: the subject at hand) “If you think we’re lying, all the information is there… you can even email me!”. He pointed to the various areas of research and where to look for it. This aspect of the attempts by certain individuals to debunk and discredit the Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) and ‘No Planes’ research, was also a component of his presentation.
Andrew Johnson pointed out a very important aspect of truth research and is something that I also try very hard to stay true to in my research: “Evidence is key before drawing conclusions”. Any such issues should be treated as akin to a “Forensic Investigation”. He pointed out the work of Dr Morgan Reynolds: far too much to discuss here so, please, investigate. Andrew launched into some mathematical equations for calculating the various aspects freefall time and speed, etc. Whoosh, over my head! Jotted them down and checked them out with a mathematician friend today. They are sound, by the way, but if you want to understand them more fully, please visit Andrew’s website or contact him.
Following this was a fascinating dissection of the concept of the “Illusion Of Truth”. Perception is everything. He cited numerous examples throughout history, where perception is key. The Iraqi incubator babies incident was given as a very good example. The witness to this, who incidentally was cited endlessly in the MSN (and testified before the US Congress) as a simple nurse, turned out to be nothing of the kind and was in fact, the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US and who was part of the PR firm Hill & Knowlton.. Who were believed to have been hired to create a ploy as a pretext (or excuse) for the first war in Iraq.
He also cited various examples such as The Project For The New American Century (“a new Pearl Harbour”) and Operation Northwoods, although he did raise some questions of validity regarding the Northwoods documents. Finally, this section covered the Zapruder film and inconsistencies between the locations of fatal wounds to JFK in the film and the wound locations in the autopsy photographs, suggesting that one or the other is fake. Andrew also highlighted the movements of eye witnesses (in the Zapruder film) which seem to defy the laws of physics. It would seem that there is a clear indication here, that the film has been tampered with (i.e.: re-edited). This prompted an “Oh My God!” and look of amazement from my novice friend. Result!
Andrew then discussed the notion of the ‘No Planes’ perspective and the controversial debate regarding the use of ‘Holograms’. He looked at various pieces of footage of the ‘plane impacts’ and raised questions regarding the large ‘exit’ explosion… something that should have been confined to the ‘impact’ zone. It is strange that upon ‘impact’, the plane seems to disappear into the building completely, before any reaction or damage occurs. It does seem that there is almost certainly a delayed ‘fireball’ effect. There is also the issue of a plane which is substantially constructed from carbon fibre and aluminium… could this penetrate 3 inch steel girders, let alone the rest of the buildings?! He pointed out that many have said, “Well it was the speed of the plane… 500 mph is pretty fast”. However, he noted that 700ft above sea level, a plane can only travel, at most, 300 mph because the air is thicker. The plane would have literally shaken itself apart. Despite this, there were no bits of the plane breaking off before ‘impact’….
He also discussed the dispersal and damage pattern of fuselage sections and the landing gear, which don’t seem to match the damage that a plane (hitting these buildings in the way they did) would have sustained.
Andrew played an audio section of a phone call between Michael Herzakhani (who captured key footage of the impact) and Canadian researcher Jeff Hill, where Hill asked Herzakhani to confirm that he shot the footage. “You have to call CNN”, he says. “They have all the rights to the video, I can’t even talk about it…sorry”.
As time was against him, things sped up and I tried to make notes as quickly as possible. Further discussion included: Edna Cinton viewed in the hole… no heat or flames, contradictions in the Black Box story, No serial numbers of any plane parts at WTC have ever been published and the various eyewitness accounts: some hearing a plane but not seeing it and others, vice versa. It was interesting that 2 witnesses that stood right next to each, totally contradicted each other’s account of the second plane. He also posed the notion that maybe the numerous exercises taking place on 9/11 have been woven into (possibly the source of) the ‘official’ accounts of the events of 9/11.
The talk then moved onto the apparent attempts by many 9/11 (and non 9/11) researchers to distance themselves from, discredit and even debunk the work of Dr Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson and anyone else who follows a similar line of investigation. Andrew explained how he was invited to be a member of 9/11 Scholars For Truth and that he did get involved for a while. He cited people like Steven Jones, who he assumed was a genuine individual. He felt it was of the utmost importance to educate people about 9/11, this being the original perspective of the cause. He eventually realised that a key component of the cause was also discerning the possible cause, but found that more and more, this seemed increasingly unimportant to some. Andrews says, “I was being used to put out disinformation. I trusted these people”.
He now believes that the focus of the cause has become exclusively: Thermite, Thermate, Space Thermite, Nano Thermite, Paint on Thermite, etc., yet, “No one wants to analyse it for fear of exposing the flaws… (People are) being trained to think about this and this alone: Thermite”. He cited various individuals involved in the movement who once supported Dr Wood and now lambaste her work. He also referred to John Moffet who said about Dr Wood, “She is not a scientist, she is a crackpot… she does not follow the basic tenets of science”. This seems an unusual remark given that Dr Wood’s research is almost exclusively scientific in principle and she has more letters after her name than I’ve got fingers and toes!… That’s a slight exaggeration, of course!
Andrew briefly discussed the Qui Tam cases, highlighting that NIST have been sued twice for fraud relating to Data Quality Act (DQA) and the issue of correcting fraudulent documentation. As was pointed out, NIST and contractors have had extensive involvement with Directed Energy Research and Development projects. Bit of a coincidence me thinks! Several other companies of note (of a similar nature) include Applied Research Associates, Boeing, Lockheed Martin (of which Norman Mineta was Vice President, prior to joining the Commerce Department) and SAIC. If you’re not in the know, please look into them. Andrew also pointed out the interesting inclusion of a plane in Architects and Engineers For 9/11 logo…
The talk rounded off with a quote from Lenin: “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves”. Andrew made it clear that he didn’t want people to just believe him. “I want you to check the evidence. Think for yourself and use your initiative”. Wise words to anybody looking for the truth…
My novice friend was disappointed that the latter end of the talk became centred around the attempts by some to debunk the DEW / No Planes perspective. As I explained, if somebody was continually discrediting your work in order to create a wholly inclusive perspective (that is incidentally difficult to prove), wouldn’t you want to expose it? My friend said “In an ideal world, the evidence I’ve seen tonight should speak for itself”. “Sadly, we don’t live in an ideal world”, I said.
This seemed to be reinforced in the closing Q and A. When asked about the ‘molten metal’, Andrew said, “we don’t know what it was”. Some donkey in the audience (I’m not as magnanimous as Andrew, sadly!) said, “it looks like Thermite to me!”. Andrew wisely replied, “It might be, it might not… we don’t know”. From my perspective, I believe that “The beginning of wisdom is… I don’t know”.
Some have unfairly said that proponents of the DEW perspective are aggressive, rude and unwilling to listen. I’m beginning to think that is an apt description of those who oppose the DEW perspective. Both Dr Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson were accommodating, polite and friendly to everybody that attended, even the nay-sayers. They really went out of their way to give the audience a thorough and thought provoking night.
As an aside, I must stress that I don’t believe that the DEW debunkers are indicative of the entire Truth movement. In fact experience has shown me that the majority are often open to alternative perspectives. Sadly though, it is the minority that are influencing the movement and, as a result unfairly influencing some in the larger community.
I must also thank those who organised the event, for making me welcome and for the tea and cakes! They did a great job and I really hope that Truth Juice is around for a long time to come.
I had a chance to natter with Andrew before his talk, about various, serious and amusing, aspects of our work. We chatted about Project Pegasus (of all things!) and he told me that I could become a life time member of Project Pegasus for only $100!!: http://www.projectpegasus.net/lifetime_membership
He knows of my blog, that I would be covering it in this post and if he didn’t mind this. He said, “I know where you live so if you write anything bad, I’ll come round and kick your arse!”
I hope I’ve dodged the bullet!!
- Andrew Johnson's website - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php
- His book "9/11 - Finding The Truth" - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=238&Itemid=60
- Dr Judy Wood's website - http://drjudywood.com/
- Her Book "Where Did The Towers Go?" - http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/
- You can also view a version of this presentation from earlier this year - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psESV3Nfsdk (slides not that clear)
The Truth Seeker’s Guide.
(P.S. Andrew has read my post and said my
arse is safe - in fact he offered to send me a nice cushion to sit on!!)