From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2008-04-06 16:06:01
Why did Jim Fetzer threaten Dr. Judy Wood’s Reputation? www.checktheevidence… 9/11 and The Hutchison Effect – Handling the Truth Some people have now observed that the 9/11 Truth Movement is being directed and controlled, in order that only a certain amount information is revealed at a certain time, and in a certain way. I first began to understand how this seemed to be happening during the break up of the original Scholars for 9/11 Truth Group in about Feb 2007. More recently, I feel I have, with the help of others, been able to document another significant instance of the attempted control of 9-11 related information. In completing this documentation, I have been somewhat concerned that I may be accused of some type of ad hominem attack against those whose statements and actions I am documenting. I feel somewhat similar about writing this article, for the same reasons. Weighed against this, I feel that certain truths need to be told in order that people have a chance to understand how the mechanics of the control of information related to 9/11 – and the energy cover up are operating. In short, I have now come the conclusion that, when trying to get to the truth, the history, behaviour and psychology of those presenting or discussing evidence has to be carefully considered. In this article, I will present evidence concerning the latest attempts to cover up one of the central secrets of the 9/11 Black Operation. That secret, I strongly contend, is this: free energy technology, related to Hutchison Effect technology was used to destroy the majority of the WTC complex. Free Energy technology is a catch all term to describe a kind of technology that can be used to “get out more energy than you put in” (i.e. you apparently get the energy for free). Mainstream science rejects this idea on its face, because it is said it breaks the laws of thermodynamics. (When looked at from a different perspective, however, this seems to be incorrect it is known the energy is real, but assumed it is too difficult to construct technology to use or extract it to do useful work.) Cold fusion is one example where many, many experiments show a small input energy can result, in certain circumstances, in a large energy output. (See www.lenr-canr.org) Some of the effects observed in John Hutchisons experiments are apparently the result of an output of very high energy levels, and yet his input energy is small only a few kilowatts at maximum. (This is the energy required to operate a kettle to boil water). In December 2007, Dr. Judy Wood posted her study of the very striking similarity of experimental characteristics of the Hutchison Effect to a number of pieces of evidence at the WTC. Dr. Wood and I were given an opportunity to discuss this issue on Ambrose Lanes We Ourselves show in January 2008 and on our second appearance, John Hutchison joined the discussion. Following this radio show appearance, two of the people associated with the 911 Scholars group Prof Jim Fetzer (the founder) and Ace Baker (not a listed member of the Scholars group, but a regular guest on Fetzers radio show) – when challenged, began to behave differently towards Dr. Wood and I at least in relation to the Hutchison Effect study. I attempted to document this change in behaviour in the articles linked above. Following the actions of Baker and Fetzer, I asked that my name be deleted from the 911 Scholars list. In the articles linked above, I documented the very strong reaction of Fetzer and Baker they both (essentially) agreed that John Hutchison was a fraud and in saying this, ignored and considerable amount of evidence which suggested, beyond reasonable doubt, that John Hutchisons work was valid. It is interesting to note that there was an apparent change in strategy by Fetzer – sometime in February 2008 from apparent support of Dr. Woods study to his support of Bakers pernicious debunking tactics. Good Cop? On Feb 5th 2008, Jim Fetzer sent Dr. Wood an e-mail which had come from one of his contacts which included these paragraphs. This contact was enthusing about Dr. Woods research: I’ve been meaning to write to you on a number of issues, not least your collaboration with my dear friend, Dr. _________, which I was instrumental in bringing about and for which he is very grateful. In particular for “having opened their minds to the work of Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds as well as your own“.
and Hi ______, You’ve been right about Judy Wood, I have been studying the website and I had to update mine, this is of such importance that I have c.e.r.n. people and international physicists on the edge of their seats and today I will have a meeting with one of them. We we might just nail the evidence soon. Thanks!!! (It should be noted that Jim Fetzer has not posted any of his own original 9/11 research in the way Dr. Wood has, though he has other research posted on the possible involvement of directed energy weapons in the death of Senator Paul Wellstone). From reading these forwarded messages, it seemed that people at CERN were interested in Dr. Woods research. This seemed, on its face, like a very positive development much of the research at CERN concerns Energy Phenomena of one type or another. However, these messages were never followed up with anything more substantive and were therefore quickly forgotten about especially once the Ace Baker campaign was underway. The next few e-mail exchanges centred around Ace Bakers fake video debunking attempt, but on 26th Feb 2008, Ace Baker announced he would be appearing on Jim Fetzers show. Dr. Wood thought this was rather an odd way to do things that Fetzer was going to get someone else to talk about Dr. Woods research with Fetzer before Dr. Wood did. Dr. Wood therefore e-mailed Fetzer and several others in a small group to say this much. It was an especially odd way of doing things because Ace Baker, as it was known by this time, had already circulated a false story that he had bought equipment on e-bay to reproduce the effect, but he then he made and posted a fake video to apparently reproduce a very limited number of the effects seen in John Hutchisons own work. Additionally, unlike Dr. Wood, Baker had no real relevant qualifications. Fetzer soon replied. This Doesnt Look Right to Me
On Feb 27th 2008, Jim Fetzer sent Dr. Wood an e-mail expressing concern that she had notified several others of the group that she was being critical that Ace Baker would be going on Jim Fetzers show to discuss the Hutchison Effect: Just between us, why didn’t you send me a personal note when you noticed what you perceived to be a problem? What’s going on there? I find that a bit odd. And you and John already appeared with Morgan to discuss the H-effect, so what’s the deal if Ace is doing something with it? I admit I have been sicker than a dog with stomach flu and simply tried to solve what you took to be a problem, but if you couldn’t come on Wednesday anyway and have already discussed it with Morgan, why is it such a big deal? No one holds your work is greater esteem than do I. Give me a break, OK? One point here is that John Hutchison had not yet appeared with Dr. Morgan Reynolds on the Dynamic Duo show though he had planned to, it never happened. Why did Fetzer ask Judy to give him a break? Once the Ace Baker broadcast and associated blog entries were complete, it seemed quite clear that a full-scale debunking exercise was underway, and this therefore seemed to justify Dr. Woods earlier concern. Bad Cop On Mar 3rd 2008, shortly after Judy Wood and John Hutchisons broadcast on the Dynamic Duo, Jim Fetzer sent another e-mail to Dr. Wood. The tone of this message was rather different to previous messages he had sent. Just between us, if Judy were to back off her relations with Hutchinson, whom I consider to be a fraud, I think her standing can be salvaged. Whether she is willing to do that, I have no idea. But this is certainly an option that is available to her. We all make mistakes and have misplaced enthusiasm. But my opinion is that–absence physical explanations of the kind I asked of him at the time on the air–he is most unlikely to contribute to our/her success. Here, Fetzer suggests Dr. Wood should not continue her association with John Hutchison. The reason given here is not based on any evidence – it is that Fetzer considers John to be a fraud. Fetzer specifies no particular evidence, merely that John could not explain his phenomenon. However, this statement by Fetzer is not 100% accurate John did provide a basic explanation of his phenomenon during the broadcast, and it was thus: OK. I dont normally go into theories too much I have my own personal theory that its affected on a subatomic level, but Rene Louis Vallee and Andrei Sakharov brought up some interesting reports, along with many others, on what happens here and we found that the RF fields are not the cause or the electrostatics its something that happens after that. They seem to join or [be] combined in space and time to cause a[n] other effect which happens to be like a shielding of the gravity pull basically the reverse of gravity and you see things lift off. Things go in a translational motion as well as
if not, metals seem to start bending and twisting and pulling into different patterns and shapes. We also found it affects the background radiation, to quite an extent where you get a couple of counts per minute. John then names several scientists who have evaluated the phenomenon and several of them have posted reports (see www.drjudywood.com/a…) If John Hutchison was a fraud, why did he agree to come on Fetzers radio show (no fee is paid), where he could, in theory, be exposed as a fraud? Recently, part of the interview with Fetzer and Hutchison was transcribed for us by someone. One section makes particularly interesting reading: Hutchison: Well, my education is — I flunked my coloring book and blocks. Im self-taught, and Ive been involved in many applications in engineering and research and one of them happened to be in to Nicola Tesla, which I was able to replicate a lot of his experiments. And pushing it beyond the envelope there, we managed to cause levitation of objects and also the destruction of objects, as its called. And it gained interest in to the U.S. military back in 1983, which they did a lot of experiments and tests with it. Fetzer: So you grew up in Canada? Why does Fetzer ask about Johns upbringing rather than the interest of the US military in his experiments? At this point, Fetzer knew that US Defence Contractors such as SAIC and ARA were defendants in the Qui Tam Cases of Drs. Wood and Reynolds, so why doesnt Fetzer have an interest in what John has to say about the Militarys work with John? (Fetzer does not discuss this at all in the rest of the programme.)
Fetzer Ignores Evidence Again, as documented previously, Fetzer wilfully ignores the strong correspondence between the WTC evidence and fully documented effects seen in John Hutchisons experiments bent horseshoe beams, spontaneous cold fires, levitation, transmutation of materials and ongoing effects. How can Fetzer threaten Dr. Judy Woods reputation? What gives him the right to do so? What gives him grounds for using this sort of language when Dr. Woods association with Fetzer is completely informal she is not an employee, nor does Fetzer have any agreed method of working with her. Therefore, what on earth compels him to talk about salvaging her reputation? Can this e-mail can therefore be perceived as some kind of thinly-veiled threat? Another peculiar aspect of the message is that, rather than starting a new message, or replying to one from Dr. Wood, Fetzer had forwarded an article from the Washington Post entitled The New Art of War. He also changed the subject line of the message. Why did he include this article in the message to Dr. Wood which was also copied to Jerry Leaphart and Dr. Morgan Reynolds? Why did it include a very long list of recipients, to which the original forwarded message was sent (this list included Steven E Jones and others)? The New Art of War article begins as follows: If there were any doubts that the United States is preparing for war in space and cyberspace, testimony before the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee last week would have wiped them away. According to Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, head of U.S. Strategic Command, “our adversaries understand our dependence upon space-based capabilities, and we must be ready to detect, track, characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any threat to our space infrastructure.” Although space threats have received much attention in the past, it was the possibility of cyberspace warfare that was given new emphasis at the hearing. Was Fetzer giving some coded indication that Dr. Wood exposing the truth about what destroyed the WTC is a “threat to the USs space infrastructure? Was he somehow indicating Dr. Woods exposure of this evidence could be treated as an act of Cyber Terrorism? Is it a possibility that Fetzer is actually going along with the unfolding agenda – for tighter global control of ordinary people, whilst at the same time pretending he is working to prevent its implementation? Also, if Fetzer truly thinks Dr. Wood had something wrong in her Hutchison Effect study, why didn’t he address this on his radio show, as he went through the JJ pages? (Fetzer raised no points of criticism during the broadcast). Before sending this message, Fetzer had no specific argument with anything John Hutchison or Judy Wood had said he merely thought there was a possibility of fraud. This is true with almost every controversial issue and the only way to resolve it is by considering the widest possible range of pertinent evidence. Questions and Speculations I find the above developments of some concern, both for what they are, and the additional questions they raise. It was puzzling to receive initial communications from CERN via Fetzer apparently supportive of Dr. Woods new research research that had been publicly discussed several weeks earlier. How does Fetzer know people at CERN? Why didnt any of these people contact Dr. Wood directly? Why was the communication routed through Fetzer? What then caused the switch to a tone which was more sinister, mentioning the idea that Judys reputation can be salvaged even though no evidence had been presented to show that her study was somehow invalid? Is it possible that psychological tactics were in use by Fetzer? Perhaps he hoped that Dr. Wood would be very enthusiastic about CERNs apparent interest and pursue this angle in preference to some other one (such as work on the Qui Tam cases). One possibility is that CERN would not want any information relating to free energy technology to become widely known. They are large benefactors from energy related research: CERN, with an annual budget of more than EURO 600 million and more than 6000 regular users working in 500 institutes in 50 different countries…. The Hutchison Effect and Cold Fusion hold the potential to produce limitless, cheap, free energy with relatively simple equipment, compared to what is used at places like CERN. At CERN, however, things like hot fusion are (unsurprisingly) promoted within the organisation. So they, too, like the Military Industrial Complex have a very strong vested interest in keeping all this information out of public view or in the realm of the incredible. As Dr. Wood did not express any specific interest in the CERN contact, did Fetzer then change his strategy from Good Cop to Bad Cop hoping that she would react to a more threatening posture? Please consider the evidence and draw your own conclusions. E-mails E-mail 1 From: firstname.lastname@example.org To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org…, Jsleaphart@cs.com Cc: email@example.com Subject: Fwd: exciting developments! X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/5698/Tue Feb 5 11:24:00 2008 on mxv2.d.umn.edu X-Virus-Status: Clean Content-Type: text/plain; DelSp=”Yes”; format=”flowed” Content-Disposition: inline Or this one? —– Forwarded message from —– Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:41:15 +0100 From: Reply-To: Subject: exciting developments! To: firstname.lastname@example.org Hello Jim, I’ve been meaning to write to you on a number of issues, not least your collaboration with my dear friend, Dr. _________, which I was instrumental in bringing about and for which he is very grateful. In particular for “having opened their minds to the work of Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds as well as your own”. He has written to me with a number of ideas about the possibility of organizing a meeting with you, Thierry Meyssan (who has been totally ostracized and has had to expatriate from France where his life was in danger) and other interested people … perhaps in Geneva where I live! And now, in light of these developments (see emails below) the idea of Geneva would make a lot of sense! Let me explain! ______ is a well-connected and high-powered person who is entirely dedicated to 9/11 truth. As you will see, also thanks to my constant advocacy, the Judy Wood “penny” has finally also dropped for him in a big way. The physicists he is referring to are from CERN public.web.cern.ch/P…, one of the biggest and most prestigious research centers in the world right here in Geneva. I’ll be following these developments very closely since, should these people decide to go public, this might lead to a major breakthrough. In the meantime, you may just wish to let Judy know that she is making “waves”. In addition, I’ve created an association “Le 11 septembre en question” (9/11 in question which is a play on words) and we are organizing our first major event on February 28th with the screening of Oil, Smoke and Mirrors with Daniele Ganser and Marc Chesney (good job it’s got an s in the middle! we tease him about that all the time!) as speakers. Daniele you already know, of course, and Marc you can find on patriotsquestion911. See presentation attached but please make a discreet use of it since Daniele is still being very cautious! So, things are moving fast and should be swinging in the right direction. All the best, —– Original Message —– From To: Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:44 AM Subject: Re: ____ ( you were right) Judy Wood Hi ____, Hey … this is such great news! Thank you for having listened and for helping to draw attention to Judy’s revolutionary findings! If the people you are talking about get hooked on this and are willing to speak out … this might break into something really big. Please keep me posted on every single development. We have a new association “Le 11 septembre en question”; I’ll be forwarding the promotional material for the 28th of February any day. Things are moving fast so let’s get together asap … also to discuss your new website. Un abrazo, ___ Original Message —– To: ______ From: __________ Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 8:54 AM Subject: ( you were right) Judy Wood Hi ______, You’ve been right about Judy Wood, I have been studying the website and I had to update mine, this is of such importance that I have c.e.r.n. people and international physicists on the edge of their seats and today I will have a meeting with one of them. We we might just nail the evidence soon. Thanks!!! E-mail 2 —–Original Message—– From: Judy Wood [mailto:email@example.com] Sent: 27 February 2008 00:35 To: johnhutchison; firstname.lastname@example.org; jamesfetzerfetzer@ya… Cc: Morgan Reynolds; Ace Baker; Jerry Leaphart; Andrew Johnson; Russ Gerst; Steve Goodale Subject: Re: Will be on Dynamic Duo Tomorrow It’s Thursday. This is the first I’ve learned that Fetzer is having Ace on to talk about the Hutchison Effect. That’s pretty weird. I don’t know what Fetzer is doing. Why would he have Ace introduce someone else’s work? Why? E-mail 3 Envelope-to: email@example.com Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 06:15:31 -0600 From: firstname.lastname@example.org To: Judy Wood