Posted by wavydome
(here)
Posted by EYES WIDE OPEN
(here)
Posted by ponda
(here)
EYES WIDE OPEN said:
Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.
I take it that you are assuming that the 'supreme court' is beyond reproach,not corrupted and can't make flawed decisions.
Of course I dont. Of course they are corrupt. I am just a realaist.
She went to court with no evidence. What did she expect? Even the fairest court in the land would have to do the same.
If you go to court you need hard physical evidence. We have that in nanothermite. We have the witnesses to testify regarding explosions. We have thousands of architects to back up the hard evidence of nanothermite in the dust and repsonders lungs. This is the way to go.
Besides which, everythign that judy claims is evidence of space weapons can be explianed usinf nanothermite.
¤=[Post Update]=¤
Posted by onawah
(here)
I have not listened yet to the interview from Sunday (I will get back to you when I have), but I did listen to the other recent ones.
One of the biggest problems seems to be that there are powerful people in the 911 Truth movement who are not willing to give Judy Wood's theories the credit they deserve because it makes them look foolish, the same kind of academic competitive jealousy that is behind so many coverups.
.
Niles harrit who wrote the thermite paper has publicly asked Judy Wood to talk to him and show him some hard evidence. He is still waiting.
Hello there,
Granted, there is protocol. The issues here are broader than current protocol and that is the cog in this cycle of justice: Authoritarian protocol recognizes only currently funded protocol.
Dr Wood's work is a rare sort of engineering bravery which dares probe protocol itself. This is the problem with engineering truth. Authoritarian protocols are naturally blind to advanced technology or more advanced engineering.
Let Niles Herrit show that thermite tech is the only way to produce thermite like particles, (or whatever he terms the evident particles). Chances are that more advanced science will show that such particles can be produced by means other than thermite. For example some sort of energy manifestation as yet to be freely shared by a more responsible civilization of people. Our current protocols hold us rigidly in a court stale mate. Clever, those instigators, eh? They have a lot of decoys and stuck-protocols to stall the courts. Except maybe not the following one...
Web Quote: "Susan Lindauer is a former U.S. Intelligence Asset who covered anti-terrorism at the Iraqi Embassy in New York from 1996 up to the invasion. Independent sources have confirmed that she gave advance warning about the 9/11 attack. She also started talks for the Lockerbie Trial with Libyan diplomats. Shortly after requesting to testify before Congress about successful elements of Pre-War Intelligence, Susan became one of the first non-Arab Americans arrested on the Patriot Act as an “Iraqi Agent.” She was accused of warning her second cousin, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Secretary of State Colin Powell that War with Iraq would have catastrophic consequences. Gratis of the Patriot Act, her indictment was loaded with “secret charges” and “secret evidence.” She was subjected to one year in prison on Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas without a trial or hearing, and threatened with indefinite detention and forcible drugging to shut her up. After five years of indictment without a conviction or guilty plea, the Justice Department dismissed all charges five days before President Obama’s inauguration." Google galore
Let us not dig deeply into protocols of courts of law. This area is more arcane than engineering protocol of today.
9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks