I'm so glad some people are finally seeing this all clearly.  Until I studied JFK and 911, I did not realize the degree to which all you have to do is KICK UP DUST on any issue, and human beings seem to be totally paralyzed, assuming that dust kicking is coming from sources they trust.  The truth of things is very simple as this author sees, but after this dust kicking, it is so hard to straighten most people's thinking out.  I just at random listen to Thom Hartman, George Noory, whatever , in the standard alternative media, and this confusion is so very evident listening to them.  I really dispise the architects of JFK and 911 for doing this, because they clearly understand what they are doing.  It is so anti-human and devious to the entire world's population.  

This is a very well done and comprehensive post ....hard to stop reading once you start. I was really liking it until I stepped in the DEW. I thought this was going to be the holy grail until I heard all that. I think my personal belief at this point is: 1.No Planes  2.combination of conventional explosives and/or thermate to make the cutouts. 3.jet fuel or diesel to create the black smoke ... maybe just plastic garbage or tires on the top floors.

4.thermate cutter charges to "prep" the towers in the minutes before "dustification" 5.underground directed nuke ...

rumbling,ground shake --- almost 95% x-rays, which might trigger other devices such as: 6.conventional

explosives (? top-down)  bm,bm,bm,bm,bm... or nano stuff sprayed under floor pans.    This is just my 2 cents worth to throw in the pot.  I may be wrong, but it seems

as though the DEWs can't account for strontium and such.  Tim Watts did an outstanding job on this, and I

thank him. I'm not sure why he buys into the exotic weapon thing though. We just need more people to offer

their ideas to figure this crazy thing out.  I know we're on the right track on the planes thing, but we need to

work out the demolition part before we go to print.   ideas, anyone?  ... tnx ...  Danny

Danny, I appreciate your reaction to this, but how do you know that exotic weapons were not used on the Twin Towers?  I may be skeptical, too, but I find it difficult, at this stage of investigation, to discount it.  Could you take a look at this study by Dwain Deets regarding WTC-7, which I have always believed was a classic "controlled demolition", and tell me what you think?  Do you appreciate his systematic approach toward the evidence?

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v212078178pCsjh6w?h1=Approaching+the+Puzz...

Energy that is Directed and used as a Weapon. Not too difficult to understand, really.

Not impressed.  Read half of it and skimmed rest.  Smells of the thermite gang to me, but with a few new twists.

Now DEWs and video fakery are blended in.

Would be very interested in Dr. Morgan Reynolds' take on this article.

I thought the idea that the Madrid buidling event may have been set up to be used to refute official-therory-questioners of 9-11 was quite interesting.  This fits in with Dr. Fetzer's "onion" hypothesis. 

Only mentions CFR affiliation as the basic "who did it" clue.  Been there, done that.  Very old stuff.  We need to recognize the Zionist, Mossad, Jewish revolutionary spirit connections.

This may be a nicely written and comprehensive article, but to me there is something fundamentally flawed about the reasoning.   I am  disappointed that Dr. Fetzer likes this article. 

I myself still think Chuck Boldwyn is right on with his hypothesis about a combo. thermite/mini nukes.

He also thinks Judy Wood 's DEW is total fantastic bunk, and I totally agree.  I will be floored if DEW turns out in the end to be the "winning H" in the stable of horses.

I am NOT saying that DEW weaponry is not used effectively by the military, it certainly is; anywhere from surgical attacks on tanks up to killing Paul Wellstone.  However, not on 911 for this reason:  the power sources from the DEW would not have been practical to turn the twin towers to dust in 10 seconds, nowhere near enough.  That is a whole different energy regime and took nukes to do the heavy lifting.  Plus I have other reasons we've discussed many times about the details of the physics.

"the power sources from the DEW would not have been practical to turn the twin towers to dust in 10 seconds"

And you know this how? I don't think this was powered by ConEd. Judy herself states that it could be a catalyzed nuclear reaction. Listen to Jim's interview with Chris Busby. (Uranium catalyzed fusion used in Fallujah.) I believe there is infinite energy in the vacuum, and this suppressed tech is the ability to tap into that energy. So the power source is a non issue. Thermite is a limited hangout. See http://911scholars.ning.com/video/where-did-the-towers-go-dr-judy-w... for very cogent answers to these issues.

Dr Fetzer: I appreciate Mr Deets approach to getting at a solution. It's a good way to double check your reasoning on the method used. It only takes one technology set to make a difference  (radionuclides), but you can still be sure you haven't forgotten something. The idea of keeping an open mind is always a

good idea. I'm with you on thinking bldg 7 was a classic demolition, with conventional explosives.  If he is saying bldg 7 was a nuclear device,

it's new to me.  I don't think there was a crater under bldg 7, like under 1 and 2.  It seems as though they have all kinds of new little micro-nukes, so who knows? Something pretty powerful chewed up bldg 7 for sure. It was

supposed to have been the strongest steel and concrete building ever built,  to support itself over the power sub-station. I need to do some more research on this bldg 7 nuke thing before I'm convinced. On being able to

discount exotic DEWs, I have trouble with where the power source for such a device would come from. If it is a

beam from the sky:  you would either have to direct the sun with a mirror type deal, focus HAARP on a very small spot, or set off a nuke in the sky to run a laser or something pointed down at the buildings.  I don't see any of that happening. Then there's the radionuclide thing to account for.  Mr Tahil and Dimitri Khalezov are on

the same page I think. I believe Columbia and UC Davis both reported radionuclides also.  I do think I'll order Dr

Wood's book,  because it looks very informative as to all the strange happenings that day. While I'm at it, I would like to say something about the rusted metal. If you use muriatic acid (hydrochloric acid) to clean steel

before painting, the steel will start rusting as soon as you wash it off and it dries.  You have to paint it pretty quick to stop the oxidation. The cars with the melted engines must have been exposed to chunks of thermate.

Either someone deposited it there in the middle of the commotion, or it fell off the towers.  The cars are a real

mystery to me. Missing door handles (maybe plastic?) ...  upside down car on fence either blast wave or forklift

 .....  thanks for your help  .....  Danny

Well, the comments here are excellent.  When I actually read this article, I will see if I agree or disagree.  So I hope Jeannon will not be too disappointed in me.  I liked the way it was set up, but that does not mean that I think he has it right. Shallel has pointed toward the most promising explanation with which I am familiar:  "New Bombs and War Crimes in Fallujah", Veterans Today.  Sorry I don't always real entire articles before posting.

Danny:"

 On being able to

discount exotic DEWs, I have trouble with where the power source for such a device would come from. If it is a

beam from the sky:  you would either have to direct the sun with a mirror type deal, focus HAARP on a very small spot, or set off a nuke in the sky to run a laser or something pointed down at the buildings.  I don't see any of that happening. "

you are right on.  That is the problem, the DEWs are good for relatively small scale operations, but not for large scale.  Recall the history of the debate in EE (electrical engineering) between Tesla and proponents of electrical power transmission by copper wire.  Tesla wanted to send power in the atmosphere via electromagnetic radiation but this was impractical.  To dustify the towers with DEW would not be practical for the reasons you cite plus power transmission via EM radiation is just too inefficient.

However, the military has gadzillions of exotic types of mini nukes they've classified and have been brewing up since 1943.  God knows those would have enough power, look what a big nuke did to Nagasaki.

I am certainly out of my depth in commenting on possible power sources for DEWs, however that never stopped me one little bit.

If I interepreted correctly and read between the lines correctly, Dr. Wood's information about Hurricane Erin might be a possible source of the energy.  She commented on a radio show one time that she could coneptualize a hurricane vortex as a Tesla coil.

Jeannon,

yes, I've heard about that.  However, the problem is, she did not develop this in a scientific manner.  What I'm saying is that a 10 year old could think of a correlation between any two things and say they are related.  To prove this, she would have to do much, much more work on it to establish the link between Hurricane Erin and 911.

I myself have a good hunch about what is going on with Judy Wood.  She is the master of the "data set", gathering the data in her book, the experts have lauded it.  However, the EXPLANATION is a totally different job, and she does not necessarily own the market on that at all.  She like everyone develops hypotheses, and hers I heard her say she did research earlier in life on reflection of light which led her to DEW.  I believe she then built this hunch up to a full blown H, but never adequately developed it.  She is now behaving badly and just trying to save face by twisting everything to fit her H instead of the other way around.  I believe both the Hurricane Erin and the Hutch stuff is in this category, she is just throwing it out there to see if people will buy it without developing it scientifically, I believe she is being intellectually dishonest now.

I think these remarks by Thoth II are right on the mark.  I was so impressed by the way this article was set up that, on the basis of reading its initial sections, I wanted to share it. Given the quality of the discussion it has generated, I think that was a very good idea.  I will be featuring a guy with a background in EE on Monday on "The Real Deal" and we are going to be discussing these very issues.  I will recommend that he review this thread before the show.  That can be heard on http://revereradio.net from 5-7 PM/CT on Monday, 9 January.

“He was an absolute genius,” Dennis Papadopoulos, a physicist at the University of Maryland, said in an interview. “He conceived of things in 1900 that it took us 50 or 60 years to understand. But he did not appreciate dissipation. You can’t start putting a lot of power” into an antenna and expect the energy to travel long distances without great diminution."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/science/05tesla.html?hp

Background article on Tesla's failed plan to beam electrical power over radio waves.

Tesla was a genius.  No doubt about that.  I understand the FBI or some government agency, upon his death, went in to his living place and stole everything.  I probably could find that article somewhere but won't look now. 

Supposedly one of the things that was taken from his hotel room was a notebook about a "death beam."

"

“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.” “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 can see where it may be possible for infinite free energy technology to exist and that "the government" has every interest in concealing that information.  I do not know if Tesla's material would be key to that technology but that seems plausible too.

I can also imagine that there are many physicists who are totally controlled by the powers that be and if they like breathing, they do not speak about certain things.

Shallel: While Energy of the Vacuum sounds cool, I don't buy it.  Thanks for turning me on to the Resonance

Project.  Gravity and a Unified Field Theory have been my hobby since the early eighties.  I started electronics in

the Air Farce as a 30454 Ground Radio Tech  .... I studied on my own and got a 1st Class FCC license,  worked several electronic tech jobs including TV repair, and wound up as TV broadcast Engineer and Field

Service for switcher manufacturer GVG.  I am basically mathematically illiterate past college algebra.  I think

the problem was ADD or something.  During a hiatus between jobs (Silicon Valley), I had time to ponder about

physics things for a little while. Thinking about how images propagate through space ... I realized how as you look at something in the distance the pixels have to stick together through space on their way to your eyes. I

also realized the farther off something is, the farther back in time you're seeing. I tried to figure how the pixels

could stick together though space, and came up with what I called my  "Ball Theory".  I realized if you take two

coins say,  and turn one against the other .... they go in opposite directions.  Like I say, I had a lot of time on my hands.  A little later,  I discovered that if you draw four circles in a square pattern and start turning one, half

turn the same way and half backwards.  By imagining a three-dimensional grid of these balls with a little "slip"

(electromagnetic field), you can see how an image might propagate through there.  Later on down the line, I got

to thinking about charges on the balls, and voila  ..... Draw four circles in a square pattern with a little space in

between  ....  add curved arrows inside circles to indicate spin  ....  call one direction positive if you like, and the other negative.  You will see that the four corners all attract each other (GRAVITY), and opposite corners

repel each other (anti-gravity).  You can turn any ball on any axis, and it affects all the other balls.  This works

for polarized light, as well as everything in physics  ....  I think.  I sort of lost interest in this sort of thing when

9/11 happened.  I can't do much else with what I've described without a PHD in physics and publishing, etc.

I hope someone else can figure out how to make anti-gravity cars and such. I never could figure out how to get

my "lifters" to work  .... ha   .....  I don't want to just tell my life story and distract our 9/11 quest, but I just wanted to explain why I don't believe in black holes or black wholes and zero-point energy.  I actually believe

more in white holes if anything.  I too look forward to Dr Fetzer's interview with the EE tonight.  I'll be gone for a

day, but will catch up when I get back.  Maybe it would be better taking this physics stuff somewhere else, so as not to distract attention.  My website is  "birdrop"  on StumbleUpon, where I have tried to explain my theory of life in less than 500 words  ....  ha  ....  cheers  .... Danny

Shallel: I would like to add that the definition of vacuum is lack of all matter  .... therefore no energy.   I believe all

that exist are space (place to put something) and energy.   A theoretical perfect vacuum would have to be void of

 energy of its own but allow energy of certain wavelengths to pass through it,without disturbing its nothingness.

Gravity means that if you go out in theoretical empty space with no mass anywhere, and turn loose two grains

of sand a distance apart without imparting any momentum on them  ....  and then sneak away without them

knowing ..... the mass of each grain attracts the other, and they will eventually clump together. All mass attracts all other mass. All energy attracts all other energy.  I'm sure you already knew that.  On the incandescence of the explosions in the towers,

possibly the light was obscured by the falling debris.  It looks to me like whole floor panels were falling, and turning to dust on the way down ....  blocking any view of the inside. I would like to see the infrared videos of the towers being turned to dust.  I suspect it would have looked like the 4th of July.

Hi Danny, I will look for your site, it sounds like you've had some interesting background. I worked prototyping large scale surveillance equipment, but didn't dig the corporate thing so I went on my own specializing in sound, video and digital lighting systems and acoustic design, (and repaired my share of TV's!) I also record and play music and do live sound mixing. I had the great opportunity to present Nassim at Walter Russell's former mansion. His understanding of "Wholeness" allowed him to come up with a universal scaling law, which is very elegant proof of the Unification of Physical Theory at all scales.

It is simple geometry to prove that there is infinite information in a bounded region of space as there are infinitely many discrete points. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzbIHiedESQ&feature=related [@ 12:00 minutes in]. This infinite information of the vacuum gives rise to infinite energy and infinite mass. Quantum physicists re-normalized an infinite quantity so their math wouldn't be made impossible by "nasty infinity". This explains the schism between macro physics and the quantum. In the volume contained in a proton there is more gravitational energy due to mass than the electrostatic repulsion of other protons. In classic quantum physics, the Strong Force is a created force set equal to the electrostatic repulsion, and thus explains the nucleus not flying apart, but the force is just a construct. The vacuum is seething with energy and information, which has instantaneous non local information about every  part of itself, the mulitiverse. Matter continually flips in and out of the vacuum, on the quantum scale as well as the macro, including superclusters and Universes. This explains "spooky action at a distance" and the particle/wave conundrum.  The Casimir Effect is one example of vacuum fluctuations, where longer wavelengths of the vacuum energy are filtered out between the plates  and incur a force pushing the plates together, as the longer wavelengths only push on the outer surfaces.  I hope you enjoy Haramein's videos - he explains it much better than I, and is quite entertaining. Jim's show today was very good - hopefully it will be posted soon!

Best, Shallel 

(PART 1) Nassim Haramein at the Rogue Valley Metaphysical Library. 2003.  :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79_HwQ-92f8

Shallel: Thanks for the introduction to Nassim Haramein. I've watched his videos one time,  and was really impressed with his graphics and presentation  ....  but I'm afraid I still have a little trouble with the vacuum stuff,

and I still believe in the cubic lattice instead of the Israeli flag for God sakes. I'll watch his stuff again when I get

back home.  The triad idea of classic packing theory runs into a problem when you think in terms of images

propagating through the matrix.  The cubic lattice allows for pixels to stay together in an orderly way, and for

images to cross each other on their journey through space.  For the Hubble to focus on a galaxy 14 billion

light years away, the pixels have to travel in lock-step, all propagating through the matrix at exactly the speed

of light .....  and arriving on the lens in the same arrangement as they left their source long before.  Anything else is distortion of some kind.  Einstein believed in bending space and keeping light straight.  Being electromagnetic, it makes more sense to let the sun's gravity bend the light and leave space (the grid) straight.

Danny,

I totally agree about energy of a vacuum, so called free energy.  It is very easy to throw ideas like those out there, but that is ATM (against the mainstream science) and must undergo much, much more research for us to take it seriously.  Which is why I am skeptical of Judy Wood and her Hurricane Erin/Hutch effect contributing to destruction of twin tower, she hasn't developed it.

I listened to the first 30 minutes of the show with the electrical engineer guest last evening on Dr. Fetzer's radio show.  I thought the guest did a great job of introducing his subject and explaining things on layman's terms.

However, I realized I would not be able to really understand this fully and decided not to listen to the whole show.  I am just wondering if that EE basically supported Dr. Wood's ideas.  I do know he was very complimentary of her book at the beginning of the show.

I would basically agree with Thoth and his observations, but I would comment that no one, not Dr. Wood, not Dr. Jones, no one, has promulgated a true scientific hypothesis.  I know we use the words hypothesis and theory loosely on one level, but that in science, they have a much stricter meaning.  From my vantage point, there is not enough solid true evidence, not just data, to be able to formulate a true scientific hypothesis.

I am disappointed in both Dr. Wood's as well as Dr. Jones' manner of communicating their ideas.  I could use various words to descibe their communications, but generally would say that they have not been completely transparent and forthright.

Jeannon,

I completely agree.  However, in the case of Chuck Boldwyn, I assure you he HAS made solid scientific links between the data and his hypothesis.  He has a full scientific poster board on this forum somewhere.  It is not a final theory , of course, but the most promising H in my opinion.  Sometimes the data set is a bit short, mainly because the perps of course made sure they either demolished or faked most of it.