Deep Politics Forum

Full Version: Dr. Judy Wood's Book 'Where Did The Towers Go?'
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
While aware of Woods work and theories for a long time, I had not purchased her quite expensive book until a few days ago when I found an as new copy for a low price. While I don't accept all of her theories, I'm open to some of the others and are a new way of looking at what happened. She definitely poses some logical problems with other alternative scenarios [alternative to the official version] - and points out events that can not yet be explained by the official version nor any of the standard alternative '911 Truth' versions of events at the WTC. However, the best part of the book are the photos - and for that alone I think it is worth adding to any 911 library. While many of the photos we've seen before on the internet, no other book has so many clear photos, and even some I've never seen before that are important. Her unique way of looking at what happened, even if I don't agree with all of it and dislike her inventions of terms for visual features repeatedly seen, the book belongs IMO in any 911 library. I think you'll find yourself looking again and again at the photos and some VERY interesting witness and first responder accounts verbatim that are not so easily available and rarely in print. The transcribed verbal accounts make clear that what happened was even stranger than most realize. I still think nano-thermite was used to bring the buildings down. Wood does not. Despite that, there are many other anomalies to be explained that nano-thermite has a difficult time in explaining for some events and phenomenon. I think that nano-thermite was not the only means used to demolish the towers and that Wood's questions, if not her proposed answers, make the book worth is price and weight. No other book deals with the very very strange 'rain' of persons who jumped to their deaths [hundreds of them] - and from places not yet consumed by fire and many too far away from the building to make sense - others looking as if they had not jumped, but were pulled or pushed out by forces unknown. It is a large book on very heavy and good paper, about 600 pages with lots of photos - some you've never seen; also lots of eye witness testimony - some you've not heard. I found my copy at a used bookstore in London for a good price. The new price is still rather high. Wood was fired from her University teaching job for her work on 911 and had been rather quiet recently. It will proudly stand in my growing library of better 911 reference books for sure. The last part on the Hutchinson effect, which she believes explains much or all of what happened is a bit esoteric science, but I have studied the work of Hutchinson and is not to be taken lightly. He was an electronic and physics genius living in Canada. He had a home laboratory which was raided by the RCMP and all his equipment seized. His ideas and theories are somewhat related to the work of Tesla. He too is now very silent or silenced. I don't find any of the parts of the book I personally don't find convincing totally out of the realm of possibility nor making the book any less valuable. A lot of very weird technologies were used on that day - most state-of-the-art and classified and then covered-up.
Judy Wood has studied 9/11 with an open mind and sharp eyes and has reached surprising conclusions. Her book is important. The top down destruction of Towers 1 and 2 can not be explained by controlled demolition I think.
Ivan De Mey Wrote:Judy Wood has studied 9/11 with an open mind and sharp eyes and has reached surprising conclusions. Her book is important. The top down destruction of Towers 1 and 2 can not be explained by controlled demolition I think.

I agree that she has looked at the event and subevents of 911 WTC 'collapses' in a unique way and come to surprising and disturbing questions that can not simply be dismissed as strange. They demand answers and a complete answer IMO is not yet provided. I think that certain types of controlled demolition with nanothermite can explain most of what happened, but it has a difficult time in explaining all that happened. I think there may have been multiple modalities of weaponry used. The biggest problem I see for her suggestion/hinting as to what happened is where such a weapon or weapons could have been fired from and where in the world such power could have been made available! I agree her book and analysis are very important, and in thinking outside of the box she has brought up questions that demand answers from other doubters of the official version of 911 - from those who posit a different version of the events. One thing is for sure...911 was a magic show on a GRAND scale and what was apparently seen and what we were told to believe and think we saw was not what happened nor did it in any way cover how it happened. The official version was a fabricated and knowing lie of ENORMOUS proportions and with horrible consequences that are with us to this very day and will be unless and until the Big Lie is fully exposed and those behind it brought to justice.
Has anyone ever documented the existence of a DEW that could destroy huge buildings like WTC buildings?
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Has anyone ever documented the existence of a DEW that could destroy huge buildings like WTC buildings?

No. If they exist at that power level it is kept secret. It is known that such devices for experimental purposes exist and that they have tried to develop weapons of this type, but to date officially none exist of any great power and I've not even heard of anyone claiming to have seen the effects of them or the weapons themselves beyond some programs that can apparently intercept and destroy missiles, tanks, persons, etc. The closest hint of anything along those lines were some of the speculation of what would be necessary for the 'Starwars' Program under Reagan and after - but the power needed to take out a missile or satellite in outer space is much much less than a building. Microwave and laser systems do exist that can focus on a small object and heat it up and thus destroy it. The largest admitted targets for directed energy weapons are missiles and planes [which one only has to destroy any small part of by heating/ablation to completely destroy/disable the object].

The power and size of such a weapon against the WTC towers is to me mind-boggling, and the holes seen in WTC 5 and 6 would almost have had to have come from directly above. If such weaponry existed, the use of conventional weapons would for the most part no longer be needed, except that they might still be cheaper. 911 and especially at the WTC remains unique in the difficulty to explain what happened and how it was made to happen. I can think of no other example worldwide that even comes close.

Some laser systems have been developed to destroy missiles etc. They are classified as to their range and power, but even if they work [as they are said to] to destroy a missile, that is perhaps one 10,000,000th the mass and energy needed to pulverize WTC sized buildings. This is why I think only nanothermite [and quite a lot of it] could do the bulk of the pulverization and destruction. However, that alone does not explain some anomalous things that happened on that day....... Each main tower weighed half a million TONS - and they were turned into fine dust with the exception of some of the larger steel beams. Doing the math, to pulverize all that, and almost instantly, takes a huge huge huge amount of energy. The energy calculations have been done, but I don't have them at my fingertips now. For sure, gravitational potential energy was insufficient by a very long shot - making the 'official version' not worth another thought.

Another problem with directed energy weaponry on 911 would be how to target only some of the WTC buildings, as the surrounding building were for the most part unscathed or only minimally damaged. Some were not damaged at all other than some small amount of broken windows. Yet another problem with DEW is what is known as 'blooming' - they become defocused or blocked by dust [they need clean air or better no air to operate well]. Obviously, once the towers began to explode there was a hell of a lot of dust that would block any such weapon targeting lower levels to make what we saw.

Wood is positing use of the Hutchinson effect - which to my thinking is a real effect and a very strange one at that [by normal standards](although MUCH fraudulent claims and videos on this are also to be found). However, as far as is publicly known this effect has only been demonstrated in small laboratory sized demonstrations. How one would scale that up to destroying one and a half million tons in ten seconds is beyond me. Also, the Hutchinson effect is strongest on electrically conductive materials such as metal and the WTC towers were mostly cement, furniture, drywall, etc. The % of metal can be calculated [I've seen the numbers and again don't have them with me], but are [I'm guessing here] maybe 15% or less by mass - and with the exception of the other facing of aluminum, hidden deep inside the building. The strongest evidence Wood makes for something beyond nanothermite are the huge vertical holes in smaller WTC buildings, the strange destruction patterns of cars in the area, the seeming disintegration in flight of falling pieces of the towers, the disappearance of the top section of one tower that detached and started to fall over, the shortness of the seismic event, the general lack of noise that should have been produced, and the huge number of persons who jumped or were thrown out of the buildings to their deaths. In these points she really has raised questions that even nanothermite advocates are hard-pressed to explain fully. The official version can't even begin to address any of those. It was one strange event for sure - but most people are totally unaware of this fact. In completely different ways, equally strange physical events happened at the Pentagon and Shanksville. Again, the official version can be totally dismissed.
I was never able to find an affordable copy of this book either, and I do find her theory a bit far-fetched, but thanks for the review.
Tracy Riddle Wrote:I was never able to find an affordable copy of this book either, and I do find her theory a bit far-fetched, but thanks for the review.

The book is expensive. I found a used copy for a somewhat reasonable price and am I glad I did. Whether you buy her theories or not, she has photos no one else has published! Also, she brings up some very good questions that have to be answered if the 'standard' 911-truth model is to hold up - and that is not a bad thing. I don't personally buy all of her sub-theories [she has several, not one], but I believe on some she is on the right track and has found clear evidence that can NOT be explained with any standard theory now. Even if she is not right, the fact she has found evidence that needs a theory/causality to explain it is important. So much of the physical evidence was removed quickly to destroy it as evidence. But using photos and some eye witness statements she makes some very very interesting points. If you ever come across a reasonably priced used copy, I'd grab it. You will not be sorry.
Here is download links for Andrew Johnson's compilation of articles. It is focusced around the research and evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Woods.
It is free of charge, from Andrew Johnsons website

Kindle format:
epub format:

The book is called '9/11 Finding the truth'
Really worth reading, no matter if you are a sceptic, or not..

What Reviewers Have Said :

"An excellent piece of research by an Open University Associate Lecturer! I hope it is
read by the many scientists, who think it normal that steel frame buildings simply turn
to dust and vanish. We live in dangerous times when anyone asking honest questions is
called a conspiracy nut,' or an Enemy of the State.' Let the evidence quietly persuade
us all to Its conclusion, rather than the media domineer us to its misrepresentation. As
Robert Owen once said the truth, openly stated, is omnipotent.'"
-Nick Buchanan, BA(Hons), Cert. Ed., NLP Master

"Andrew Johnson is rapidly becoming the man when it comes down to unravelling what
really happened in New York City and Washington DC on that monolithic,
traumatic date of September 11, 2001. Several researchers have already thankfully
taken us to the brink of winning "round one" of the combat against the cover-up,
amply showing that it was an inside job. It "only" remains for the mainstream media to
take notice and carry the story. But now we are discovering that there is actually a
"round two" to the combat, a second tier in the cover-up: the realization that a highly￾sophisticated black-ops weaponization of free energy technology, intimately involving
something very similar to the Hutchison effect, was responsible for the bizarre, low￾temperature pulverization of the Twin Towers. Dr. Judy Wood has pieced together the
physical evidence and Andrew Johnson has highlighted who is working to silence or
smear whom, as the powers that be rush to impede or at least contain the dissemination
of these startling findings. Hence I am very glad to see Andrew's very meritorious web
articles now compiled and edited in this handy book for your investigative pleasure. Pass
the word and we will put an end to the global police techno-state, whose only power, as
Adam Curtis aptly said in his BBC documentary, is the power of (manufactured)
- Conrado Salas Cano, M.S. in Physics

Historically, news media have covered up conspiracies (like self-inflicted mass murder)
by their own governments. (Always to protect the power structure of the ruling elite.
Also, the truth reveals too much about the destructive capacity of their agents.)
However, 9/11 has another very important aspect. It is the secret advanced
physics/technology used by their agents! Thanks to Andrew Johnson and Dr. Judy
Wood, we now understand why they must prevent us from realizing the existence of this
secret physics/technology.
- Daniel Johnson, USA - Wisconsin
Here is a new video on YouTube based on Dr. Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson's work (Part 1 of 4):