Letter sent to 78 UK Military Leaders

22 Mear Drive, Borrowash, Derbyshire, DE72 3QW, Tel: 01332 674271

Re: The Fake War on Terror, Obsolete Threat of Nuclear Weapons and Common Purpose

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to present information to you for urgent review. My mailing to you has been motivated by the knowledge that the official stories of events on September 11, 2001 and the events of July 7, 2005 are bogus – in ways only a few people seem willing to examine in any detail.  I would contend that this knowledge is important to our very survival, impinging as it does on political, technological and even environmental matters.

Since 2004, I have been involved in ongoing research and campaigning with regard to what happened on 9/11. I have even had ancillary involvement in US-based legal action relating to the 9/11 cover up. During the same period (2004-present), in the UK, we have seen an increasing number of laws relating to terrorism either created or amended and “hardened”.  This has essentially resulted in the removal of habeas corpus and a general erosion of certain civil liberties. The consequences for our freedom are already far greater than any small illusory group of Muslim fundamentalists could ever have created. Thankfully, there are an increasing number of people who are beginning to wonder just what is going on in the world – and they are beginning to look at the “bigger picture”. Perhaps you even fall into that category yourself, in certain respects.

My background is in Software Engineering, although I did a joint degree in Physics and Computer Science and I currently work as an assessor and part-time tutor for the [Contact Me Ref-1]. You would likely not believe me if I said to you that in studying the 9/11 evidence and cover up, Dr. Judy Wood – a US-based former Professor of Mechanical Engineering – and others have come to the conclusion that some type of Directed Energy Weapon was used to destroy the WTC complex. The evidence is so conclusive that much of it has been submitted in legal challenges to the National Institute of Standards in Technology (NIST) in the USA. By late 2004, I had already calculated the time of freefall for an object dropped from the top of the WTC towers and found that the towers came down in almost that same time – about 9 or 10 seconds. It still took me sometime to see what really happened to the towers – they underwent an almost complete powderisation of most of the steel of which they were made (a total of 283 columns – each approximately 1360 feet in length). In 2007, I got to know Dr. Judy Wood, and became involved in her attempts to sue NIST’s contractors for fraud. In January 2008 we visited New York together, where I filmed ongoing “hosing down” operations at the site of the WTC. NIST (The National Institute for Standards in Technology) were tasked with producing 1000’s of pages of reports to explain the “collapse” of the WTC towers. They used external contractors. It turns out that at least 3 of these contractors are involved in the development of Directed Energy Weapons technology (SAIC, ARA and Boeing). Funnily enough, Dr. Wood, in preparing her case against the contractors, had already come to the conclusion that a Directed Energy Weapon of some unknown type had been used to destroy most of the WTC complex. All the evidence she had compiled, and copies of the legal documents she has submitted are posted online for anyone to review (see www.drjudywood.com/).

Later, Dr. Wood’s research uncovered the presence of Hurricane Erin – a Category 5 storm – which was closest to NYC at about 8am on 9/11/01 – this is not a coincidence. All this information was sent to the BBC and all UK media outlets. Without exception, they have remained silent on the legal case and on the issue of Hurricane Erin. In January 2008, I advised Dr. Wood not to agree to an interview with BBC producer Mike Rudin who asked her to have a “quick chat” in relation to the documentary he produced called The Third Tower, which aired on the BBC earlier this year and was repeated more recently. I asked Mike Rudin to make sure Radio 2 News Bulletins included the news that NIST’s contractors had been sued for fraud by Dr. Wood and Dr. Morgan Reynolds. He said he was not able to do this. When I said to him that the BBC was promoting a fake war on terror and asked him if he could produce any evidence that it was genuine, he was either unwilling or unable to do so – he did not even argue that the War on Terror was genuine. (Adam Curtis’ important BAFTA award winning documentary series, the Power of Nightmares provides plenty of evidence that any threat from the mythical Al Qaida “sleeper cells” is either grossly exaggerated or entirely fabricated.) The correspondence with Rudin is posted on my website and therefore may help you to understand why you have not heard about this matter – and this page has received 1 or 2 interesting visitors.

Dr. Wood and I have concluded that the weapon used to “dustify” the twin towers and destroy WTC 7 uses some type “field effect” technology – similar to that discovered by Canadian inventor and researcher John Hutchison. For over 20 years, Hutchison has been performing experiments that have “jellified” and in some cases even “dustified” metal samples and he was even visited in 1983 by Colonel John Alexander and a team from Los Alamos National Labs (LANL – where much of the work on the Atomic Bomb was done). Hutchison’s work has also been discussed in the Pentagon.

It is our contention that the correspondence of evidence between “Hutchison Effects” and those seen at the WTC (tinyurl.com/911hestu…) lead strongly to a conclusion that shows that black technology was used on 9/11 – and this evidence and conclusion has been submitted in Dr Wood’s Qui Tam Case filings. These documents include an affidavit from John Hutchison. This technology makes that of nuclear weapons essentially obsolete – as it turned most of two 110-story buildings (and a vast proportion of their contents) to powder in about 20 seconds – with little or no production of heat. This also indicates a different type of physics at work – one which allows us to exploit “free energy” in a similar way to that discovered and demonstrated by Nikola Tesla in the early 20th Century (and, essentially, suppressed ever since). The straight-line path and timing of Hurricane Erin both strongly indicate the use of Weather Control technology on 9/11 too (tinyurl.com/911erins…). Clearly, this moves us into a new territory – which many or even most people would dismiss as fantasy. This is therefore the main reason that you should not take my statements at “face value” – you must research and investigate for yourself, and review the available evidence. This is precisely what I have done and it is why I have written this letter to you (and many others). The truth of 9/11 (and 7/7) – and the fact that this truth has been successfully covered up for 7 years – forms part of a larger picture.

Another part of this picture seems to have been exposed during a recent incident in Liverpool and it is primarily this that has renewed my wish to write to all UK Police Chiefs and as many senior military people as I can find addresses for. 

A disturbing incident took place on Church Street in Liverpool on the 11th of October 2008.  I have already written to the police Chief Constable of Merseyside police to express my dismay at learning of events where, as we can clearly see from the video record (google it), that it was a completely peaceful situation – basically people walking around, just talking, discussing “the state of the world” and officers casually walk in and seize property from legal and pre-authorised street stalls!  This is yet another instance of peaceful protest being either disrupted or banned by inappropriate policing.


This type of “policing” seems to be part of a worrying trend both in the UK and the USA. (A few days ago, in the USA, a 54-year old woman was tasered for being in the wrong seat at a Madison football game – google for the video of this incident. A few days ago, a man was tasered by California Police (Mendocino) for getting agitated when the police did little or nothing to save his drowning father (google for the video). What is happening to our society?

It is my sincere hope that at some point, tremendously difficult though it can be, you will realise that all this nonsense about terrorism (which is likely what much of the police action mentioned above was somehow, some way – vaguely, probably, potentially related to) is soon going to be fully exposed. For example, we have a video clip of Sir Ian Blair saying  "If London could survive the Blitz, it can survive four miserable bombers like this…. I’m not saying there are four bombers…. four miserable events like this." And there is much other incriminating evidence that shows the 7/7 bombings were not the work of mythical “home grown” Muslim fundamentalists. For example, the train that the suicide bombers were supposed to have caught was cancelled, Bruce Lait described how he saw no one with a rucksack – nor did he see a bag where the bomb was supposed to have been. Peter Power of Visor Consultants stated that he was running a simulation of bombs going off at the exact same stations where the actual events took place – at the exact same time. I could go on.

For the moment, I want to discuss the link to Common Purpose – Cressida Dick, the senior officer described as the "decision maker" on the day that Jean Charles de Menezes was killed, is a Common Purpose graduate. It is my understanding that a number of other senior police figures and some military people have undergone common purpose training. According to Wikipedia, “Common Purpose UK is an influential educational charity delivering a range of leadership training programmes to decision-makers drawn from all sectors of society.” Common purpose’s own website makes it less clear whether it is a charity, a trust or a company. One somewhat troubling statement found on their “about” page is:

“Common Purpose programmes produce people who lead beyond their authority and can produce change beyond their direct circle of control.”

Does this sound like they are encouraging people to trample over the authority of others? It sounds to me like something akin to megalomania. Indeed, Brian Gerrish has documented a number of examples of Common Purpose Graduates behaving in a way which could be described as being like megalomania. A response to an enquiry about Cumbria County Council’s use of Common Purpose training contained this:

The information is specific to the courses held by Common Purpose. It details the content and structure of the training provided by Common Purpose. If this information were disclosed to competitors, this could allow others to emulate their programme style, undermining its ability to provide unique leadership training. It would therefore be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of Common Purpose.

(This was in response to an FOI request about how Common Purpose training was being used). Why does a charity have commercial interest? Are charities now in competition with one another? Surely CP’s aims are purely altruistic if they are a charity? I trust that you will consider carefully the evidence presented by Brian Gerrish (and others) as to what the real agenda behind Common Purpose is (and some military leaders are also Common Purpose Graduates.)

I have enclosed a couple of leaflets, and I encourage you to study and research the topics that they cover (as well as Common Purpose – see www.cpexposed.com). You may then realise (as I have) that “you’ve been had” and someone is lying to you – and to the rest of us. Look at what is really going on in the world – if you want a future, that is. Feel free to copy the leaflets, which I have posted on the Web for easy download (www.checktheevidence…)  I also encourage you to try and identify the aircraft that are regularly leaving persistent trails (“chemtrails”) in our skies. Officials tell me they are “regular aircraft” – but why do they leave grids, and why is the CAA unable to give me any flight information for these flights? There are many questions I have in relation to this issue too.

As a summary, I will say that there are quite a few people have become aware of the information laid out here before you. This number is not decreasing. At some point, you will need to deal with the very fundamental issues set out here – and you will either do it by serving the people above you or by serving the people below you. Therefore, in the final analysis, I hope you will ask yourself whom are you (and your colleagues) serving? I hope you can answer that question comfortably enough to sleep at night.

Yours Most Sincerely,


Andrew Johnson

Related articles...

Comments are closed.