The Ongoing Perception Management of 9/11 Evidence and Research
Andrew Johnson, Dec 31st 2008
Audio Clips and Podcasts used in this article fall under the terms of “Fair Use”, being used to educate and inform readers/listeners, rather than being used for profit or personal gain.
Alfred Webre at Madison, Wisconsin Conference “Science and Politics of 9/11 – What’s Controversial and What’s Not” Aug 4/5 2007
Alfred Webre (AW) speaking with Leuren Moret (LM) on Sofia Smallstorm’s “Expansion” RBN Internet Radio Broadcast, 14 Nov 2008
In the last few months, I have written about how I think that key figures in what might be called the 9/11 Official Truth movement seem to be involved in a mixture of “cover up” and “muddle up” regarding the discussion of and general conclusions about the most important 9/11-related evidence of all – the Hutchison Effect evidence and that related to Hurricane Erin. One other author has also written about some general problems with the 9/11 Official Truth Movement. In the table below, I have linked my own articles and included summaries of the questions they focus on:
What has caused the sudden rush to try to debunk John Hutchison? Why was Ace Baker trying to suggest the Hutchison Effect was not real and had no relevance to 9/11?
Is there anything wrong with Prof Jim Fetzer’s Logic? Why did he support the debunking tactics of Ace Baker and describe this author (Andrew Johnson ) as “childish”? Was he justified in doing so?
Why does the 9/11 Official Truth Movement rarely mention Dr. Wood’s or Dr. Reynolds Qui Tam Cases against NIST’s contractors?
What was the real motive behind Ace Baker’s "Hutchison Effect Challenge"? If John Hutchison was a fraud, why did a team from Los Alamos National Labs spend 4 months with him in 1983? Was there an increased effort to discredit John Hutchison in the summer of 2008?
Why did Jim Fetzer repeatedly misquote portions Dr. Wood’s research? Why did he have no problem with Ace Baker sending Dr. Wood hate mail but then get upset when this author asked him to provide evidence that this author had sent hate mail to Ace Baker?
In writing these articles, I will frequently mention the concept of “Free Energy” – which means being able to extract useful energy from the environment, or from within materials themselves – without “burning” in either a chemical or nuclear sense. Nikola Tesla called it “radiant energy” (as he proposed it was present everywhere – as sunlight is on a clear day). Others call it “vacuum energy” or “zero point energy” or even, perhaps, “orgone energy”. Mainstream science usually states that “zero point energy” cannot be “extracted” and made to do useful work because that would violate certain laws of physics. Experimental evidence does call this conclusion into question, however.
Having written these articles, I conclude some of the people involved seem to have had 3 main objectives:
1) To try to tarnish or discredit the reputation of Dr. Judy Wood, as a means of drawing attention away from the evidence she has discussed in her comprehensive pictorial studies posted at www.drjudywood.com/
2) To prevent people from making the connection between 9/11 and Free Energy technology and the use of weather control technology on that same day.
3) To play down or ignore Dr. Wood’s Qui Tam case against NIST’s contractors, some of whom (SAIC, ARA and Boeing) just happen to be involved in directed energy weapons research, assembly or manufacture.
For example, on the 7th Anniversary of 9/11, Jim Fetzer appeared on the Richard Syrett CFRB (Toronto) talk radio show to discuss 9/11 research developments.
www.checktheevidence… Fetzer – 911 Research – Richard Syrett CFRB – 11 Sep 2008.mp3
Fetzer mentioned none of the profound studies mentioned above, preferring instead to mention a new book by David Ray Griffin.
However, despite efforts to obfuscate, discredit and muddle up discussion of 9/11, Hurricane Erin and the Hutchison Effect, more people are still becoming aware that this information is “out there”, not least because of Dr. Wood’s appearance on several regular and reasonably well known non-internet radio programmes such as those of Rollye James and Richard Syrett. It is worth noting that Dr. Wood appeared on the Richard Syrett Show one week after Jim Fetzer – and at that time, Richard Syrett seemed particularly surprised to learn from Dr. Wood of the proximity of Hurricane Erin to NYC on 9/11.
The New Chapter
So, let us now turn to what seems to be a “new chapter” in this “ongoing saga” of the marginalisation of what, it can be strongly argued, is the most important and comprehensive 9/11 research that has been made public. The latest tactic seems to be to blame HAARP for the destruction of the World Trade Centre Complex and simply pretend that Dr. Judy Wood – and half of the research she has completed – does not exist. As you will see from the media linked above, this tactic seems to have “come into play” sometime between August 2007 and November 2008, although further evidence narrows this period to between April and November 2008.
At this point, it should be noted that in the Press Release I posted to introduce Dr. Wood’s Hurricane Erin Study and her associated presentations, I specifically stated:
The two “main players” in this new chapter are Alfred Webre an International Lawyer, peace and environmental activist, prominent in the naissant field of Exopolitics, and Leuren Moret – a Geoscientist who has travelled the world to discuss and expose the dangers of radioactive contamination caused by the use of Depleted Uranium in modern artillery shells. With this starting point, it seems hard to imagine how two such people would play a role in actively covering up the links between 9/11, Free Energy technology and Weather Control.
Exopolitics and Depleted Uranium
I first came across Alfred Webre in 2004 or 2005 when I found out about his involvement in the controversial field of Exopolitics. He wrote about this in his book Exopolitics: Politics, Government, and Law in the Universe. A number of people shun him for his involvement in the field of Exopolitics, but my own views on this subject area may be substantially different to those of some people reading this article, so I leave you to explore other sections of www.checktheevidence… to find some reasons why I say this.
I became aware of Leuren Moret’s work as a result of seeing a film called “Beyond Treason”, and later I heard her speak as a guest on Jim Fetzer’s Dynamic Duo programme in June 2007 .
I had also communicated with Alfred Webre some time in 2007 following my cursory involvement with the case of UK Hacker Gary McKinnon. Here, I was glad to learn that Alfred Webre seemed to be trying to help with Gary’s case, by getting several people in the exopolitics community to make a joint statement in support of Gary.
How could these 2 people possibly become negatively involved in the matter of Dr. Judy Wood’s 9/11 research, in the manner which is described here? As I write this, I am again feeling very uncomfortable with what the evidence has shown me.
Madison Conference, Aug 4th – 5th, 2007
Both Alfred Webre and Leuren Moret attended Dr. Judy Wood’s presentation at the Madison Conference, Aug 4th – 5th, 2007, which was organised by Kevin Barrett and Jim Fetzer. At the conference, also, Leuren Moret gave a presentation about Depleted Uranium and Alfred Webre gave a presentation about false flag operations and the setting up of an international war crimes tribunal.
As already shown above, Leuren Moret agreed, because of the physical evidence shown in Dr. Judy Wood’s Madison presentation, that something very unusual happened at the World Trade Centre. It is worth re-iterating that, at the time of the Madison Conference, Dr. Wood had only stated that some kind of Directed Energy Weapon had been used to destroy most of the WTC complex – she had not yet made the connection, through a study of the evidence, to either the Hutchison Effect nor had she considered the role of field effects associated with Hurricane Erin, which was present over the Atlantic ocean, closest to NYC on 9/11/01.
During his Madison presentation, Alfred Webre discusses the problems we, as people, currently have and possible ways we can solve them. In relation to environmental problems, he said:
We shall see the relevance of his statement later in the article.
From Exposure to Cover-up, From Clarity to “Muddle-up”
I opened this article with two media clips, the second being recorded approximately 15 months after the first. Why did Alfred Webre “champion” the name of Dr. Judy Wood in August 2007, then instruct that it not to be mentioned in November 2008? What had changed in that intervening period? My conclusion is that it is to do with the association of Free Energy technology and the events of 9/11.
14th Feb 2008 / April 2008
On 14th Feb 2008, Alfred Webre, at his own home, interviewed Dr. Judy Wood and John Hutchison to discuss the relationship between their respective research. The interview included a discussion of specific physical evidence relating to 9/11. These matters were discussed in an interview, which was over 1 hour long, although Dr. Wood and John Hutchison spent a little longer speaking with Alfred Webre.
In the interview, Alfred Webre introduces Dr. Wood and John Hutchison as “two very distinguished guests” and then reads out basic biographical information. He said that they “will discuss that photographic and video evidence suggests that the world trade centre towers were destroyed using directed energy weapons.” He then reads segments from the Press Release about Dr. Wood’s Hutchison Effect/911 study, which I posted on 30th Jan 2008. Webre reads these statements
However, Webre omits, at that point the words, “to effects seen in John Hutchison’s ongoing experiments,” as it clearly states in the press release.
He repeats that he had the pleasure of attending Dr. Judy Wood’s Madison presentation in August 2007 and he described it as “like attending a college seminar because [Dr. Wood is] indeed a university professor”.
During the interview, Alfred Webre was told of the connection between Hutchison Effect evidence and the effects seen at and near the World Trade Centre on 9/11. Webre even acknowledges that the Weaponised Free Energy Technology should be disclosed and used for Peaceful Purposes, thus:
www.checktheevidence… Webre – Technology should be disclosed – Co-Op Radio – 14 Feb 2008-32kbps.mp3
At the 33:30 mark, Dr. Wood says:
Alfred Webre says “yes” and Dr. Wood continues, “…so we know it’s possible.” Webre says “right”.
At around 44:25 in the long recording linked above, Dr. Wood suggests “an amazing technology was used [on 9/11]” and Webre says “yes”. Webre also appears to agree when Dr. Wood suggests that the technology could be used for good things – he states that her suggestion is a “very profound statement”. Webre then suggests (around 45:30) that behind the black budget projects there are these
He says “whatever technology did this should be disclosed”. John Hutchison also expresses his wish for the technology to be disclosed and that his method of “doing this” is to appear in TV documentaries about the subject and talk about his work and experiments.
Further, Webre suggested that Wood and Hutchison submit a paper to the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) about their findings.
This whole interview is analysed in more detail in an appendix to this article.
It is worth noting, at this point, that on Monday 10th March 2008, Alfred Webre had Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth as a guest on his Co-Op radio broadcast. The Richard Gage interview is mentioned, because some severe problems with the type of evidence he has been involved in promoting can easily be discovered.
Strangely, though the Wood/Hutchison interview was recorded in Feb 2008, it was not broadcast until April 2008 – on the day before a TV interview with Richard Gage was broadcast in the Vancouver Area.
14th November 2008 – “Expansion” on RBN with Sofia Smallstorm
The next development in this story took place a few months later when, on November 14th 2008, Alfred Webre and Leuren Moret appeared on Sofia Smallstorm’s “Expansion” programme on RBN (Internet). (This followed an earlier appearance by Webre on 31st October 2008, where Webre discussed the HAARP array.) Though there are many points of interest in this programme, the key segment from Nov 14th programme is repeated here for emphasis:
Leuren Moret is introduced as a Geoscientist and she states she once worked at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories (though it is not made clear what her duties there were). Alfred Webre is introduced as an “international lawyer”. (It can be noted therefore, that neither speaker shares technical qualifications equivalent to those of Dr. Judy Wood).
At 43:40, she describes the Aug 2007 Madison Conference as “the most important 9/11 Conference that has happened”. At 44:40, she then describes the 13+ hour DVD as being available and notes that
Leuren Moret then goes on to say:
Sofia then asks Leuren Moret to explain the term “energy budget” and asks
to which LM responds (45:50)
She then states that the buildings “turn to dust” – “going up in smoke” and she describes they were “basically being vaporised”. She states
At this point, even though Webre had already discussed aspects of the energy question and 9/11 with Dr. Wood and John Hutchison some 9 months earlier, he does not mention any of this. It is worth remembering that at the time, he seemed very interested:
Late in the discussion, Leuren Moret brings up the subject of the Minnesota Bridge Collapse and then states at 67:32 in the interview:
We will see why this is noteworthy when a later broadcast with Alfred Webre and Leuren Moret on Co-Op (on November 17th) is discussed.
I highlight other “interesting” details in November 14th interview later, in an appendix to this article, but here I will list some points and questions.
Questions about Energy, Questions about Evidence
- In the interview, why is Leuren Moret so focused on “the energy budget” for what happened at the WTC?
- HAARP is a disclosed facility and its energy budget should be known or able to be known – in relatively specific terms. Leuren Moret does not give any figures for HAARP’s power consumption, nor does she attempt to quantify the energy used to destroy the WTC. She quotes no figures – at all. One figure that could have been quoted, even if there was a reason to suggest it was wildly inaccurate, was 3 megawatts – as stated on this page – www.gi.alaska.edu/Sc… . Why didn’t Leuren Moret discuss these figures and, for example, dispute them?
- Moret states that she has done research, but she, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, does not appear to have a website – she does not give the address of a website where her research can be found – it is therefore apparently not available for public scrutiny.
- If HAARP was used to destroy the WTC, wouldn’t someone from the HAARP facility know this? If Moret thinks they would not know this, then why didn’t she describe or suggest how or why HAARP’s operation on 9/11 was covered up?
- Moret provides no evidence that HAARP was operational on 9/11, nor does she even describe any process by which she might have attempted to collect or discover this information.
- Moret states that she is a “Geoscientist”, but does not state why her particular expertise or knowledge qualifies her to be certain that HAARP was used on 9/11 to destroy the WTC.
- Why does Leuren Moret not comment on Alfred Webre’s instruction to her to “not mention Dr. Judy Wood”? (e.g. “Sorry Alfred, I am not sure why you are asking me not to mention Dr. Judy Wood?”)
- Why does Sofia not comment on the interaction between Alfred Webre and Leuren Moret and why does she not ask why Dr. Judy Wood “should not be mentioned” – when Sofia knows full-well that this is all a discussion of the evidence collected by Dr. Wood herself.
- Why has Moret only now started to say that HAARP was responsible for the destruction of the WTC on 9/11? Not only did she see Dr. Wood’s Madison presentation over 1 year earlier, she said she worked at Livermore Labs in the 1990’s and knew that HAARP was developed there. Why wasn’t she talking about HAARP and 9/11 months or even years ago?
- Leuren Moret seems to mix up laser technology and HAARP. She says that she witnessed a demonstration of the Shiva laser – but she does not describe any links at all between this project and HAARP. Indeed, lasers and HAARP are totally different systems and technologies – HAARP uses an array of antennae which generate Radio Frequency emissions whereas LASERs use a crystal or other source of radiation and generate a coherent, focused emission of energy. Is Leuren Moret confused about this, or is she trying to confuse the audience?
- Why doesn’t Webre mention any aspects of his discussion with Dr. Judy Wood and John Hutchison from the February 2008 interview? This is especially curious in view of the fact that he suggested during the interview then that they submit papers to the IEEE about their research. In February 2008, he also made comments relating specifically to weaponised free energy technology.
- If Moret is sure that HAARP destroyed the WTC, then why, approximately 66 minutes into the broadcast (linked above) does she state that she considers that mini-nukes could have been used (because of radioactive isotope traces found at the WTC site)? Why bring this up? (We now have the suggestion of Lasers, HAARP and Micronukes in this one broadcast.)
- If Moret is sure that HAARP destroyed the WTC, why didn’t she propose some action in relation to this conclusion or “proof”? For example, Dr. Wood has compiled her evidence into a Qui Tam case against NIST’s contractors. All speakers were aware of this too – why didn’t they discuss it, or some alternative action?
November 17th 2008, Co-Op Radio Broadcast with Alfred Webre
The date listed above is probably correct, though I could not establish with certainty whether this broadcast took place on the 10th or 17th of November. This programme contains a very similar discussion to that given on Sofia’s “Expansion” programme on the 14th of November, though there are some differences. One of the key ones is at 52:57, when Moret says:
This is a very peculiar description of the event – why is Dr. Judy Wood not mentioned this time? Only a few days ago, Leuren Moret seemed quite comfortable mentioning her name. Also, earlier in this broadcast, we did not hear Alfred Webre instructing Leuren Moret not to mention Dr. Wood’s name. Why was Dr. Wood’s name not mentioned? Was this a “dress rehearsal” for the next broadcast?
Webre ends the broadcast saying
It is true that an overview of the presentation can be found on this page peaceinspace.blogs.c… . However, no reference links to Dr. Wood’s research are included in the list of evidence itself. Lower down, the page includes these words:
Why is this information right at the bottom of the programme listing and not at the top? Does Moret or Webre think “overlap” is a fair term to describe the way in which the evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Wood and some of it posted for over 2 years on her website(s) was taken and discussed by Moret for almost 3 hours (1 hour on 17th Nov, referenced above, and 2 hours on Sofia’s broadcast on the 21st Nov, referenced below) without any reference or credit to Dr. Wood? Is Alfred Webre trying to “duck responsibility” for being party to the copying of Dr. Wood’s research and trying to “offload the burden” onto Leuren Moret? Is he not capable of showing where all the points of evidence in the list were originally posted? If this was taking place in the sphere of conventional publication of materials – such as that related to music, literature, inventions or patents wouldn’t lawyers get involved with this sort of thing? Alfred Webre is described as an international lawyer so isn’t it amazing that he does not seem to have considered the ethics of this situation? Did he have a realisation of what he has condoned and participated in during this broadcast and in this web posting? Was his objective even to create a situation where Dr. Wood tried to further matters related to copying of material and ideas? It looks like this matter did not concern Alfred Webre at all, because a few days later, he completed a similar broadcast with Leuren Moret – and Sofia Smallstorm.
21st November 2008 – “Expansion” on RBN with Sofia Smallstorm
On November 21st 2008, Alfred Webre and Leuren Moret again appeared on Sofia Smallstorm’s “Expansion” programme on RBN (Internet). The first 40 minutes, or so, of the programme is taken up with a discussion about the nature of the soul and aspects of how it is different to the physical body – and how parts of it may be electromagnetic in nature. Whilst this area is very interesting, and some of what Alfred Webre says I would agree with, this is an extremely speculative area and not one I wish to associate in any direct way with the study of 9/11 and the very important evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Wood over the last few years.
At 40:06 Webre then mentions HAARP again and links HAARP to 9/11. He introduces Leuren Moret (who has not yet joined the discussion) thus:
Alfred Webre does not reference Moret’s previous inclusion of “Micronukes” in this part of the description, nor the “Laser demonstration” Moret said that she witnessed at Livermore Labs.
Sofia then says:
At about 44:20 Moret says:
Two large problems soon become apparent in the ensuing presentation (almost a monologue by Leuren Moret). The first is that Leuren Moret uses no science or analysis to directly or even indirectly link the points of evidence she discusses to any of the disclosed or suspected capabilities of the HAARP array.
The second problem is that the detailed catalogue of evidence she recounts is, without exception, the list compiled by Dr. Judy Wood, one to two years before the airdate of this broadcast. It is referenced without any mention of Dr. Wood’s name, website, or any of the additional studies she has compiled which have built on this evidence. To me, the strategy being employed here entirely fits with the concept of (a) muddling the evidence (b) attempting to “take ownership” of the research of Dr. Judy Wood and link it to something which it does not “fit” – at all.
Further details of this interview are examined in the appendix, but here, I will list, along with approximate time codes, the points of 9/11 evidence that Leuren Moret discusses. To understand the full significance of this, the following links need to be reviewed:
- Dr. Wood’s Madison Presentation – Part 1 and Part 2
- Dr. Wood’s “Star Wars Directed Energy Beam Weapon” Series
- Dr. Wood’s WTC Dirt Series
Says of the destruction of 1 of the WTC towers that it… “It just looks like a drinking fountain of dust…”
24 foot Circular holes evidence of beam weapon (refers again to Livermore 1990 demonstration again and says HAARP was developed there starting in 1976 with the Russians)
60 foot hole in Liberty street.
Dust stops and goes up – indicates molecular dissociation
Unburned paper, then toasted cars
Missing door handles in cars and missing engine blocks, paint effects.
She has discussed melted or missing metal and unburned paper and then she says “what in the world physically happened that could create phenomenon like this? And I don’t have an answer, I don’t know what happened.” I thought she said it was HAARP…?
“Instant Rust” appearing.
Warner Brother figures and PATH train almost undamaged in WTC basements.
Detail on Cahill dust study. Moret then makes some comments on Cahill’s dust study and includes reference to the same paragraph posted on a page of Dr. Wood’s Erin Series
Scrubbing the streets and dump trucks and dirt piles getting higher.
Fuming without fires, boots, molecular dissociation of material.
Doctors reaction to “missing bodies”.
Reports that William Rodriguez is a friend of hers and that he reported there were no fires in the building (however, Rodriguez did report explosions in the basement).
Moret states “iron rusts, steel does not rust” (technically not correct), she mentions USGS dust study not being trustworthy due to exclusion of sampling sites. References 1 micron dust particle size and states that it takes “huge amounts of energy” to create dust like this – this is not what Dr. Wood stated
States that photos have been altered and that this has affected the colour of the dust seen, but she does not give specific details.
Comparison of demolition of Seattle dome.
Lathering up of WTC 1,2 and 7 before collapse “it was probably the beam weapon or some kind of a physical process happening that was necessary for the beam to work properly.”
“they were already preparing building 7 before building 2 went down”
Moret says: “I’d just like to read a comment – this came off a forum on the internet, so there’s no author” she then reads Steve Warran’s quote, as used in Dr. Judy Wood’s Madison presentation – where she credited the author on her slide – as Dr. Wood does on her Website.
In all of this discussion neither Alfred Webre, nor Sofia Smallstorm make any mention of Dr. Judy Wood, her Madison presentation or her Website – let alone the later research about the Hutchison Effect and Hurricane Erin, which provides a far greater evidence-base to determine what actually happened on 9/11.
Why do neither Webre or Sofia, who both know that this is Dr. Wood’s research – and have both been made fully aware of the later research, make any comments whatsoever? What’s wrong with this picture?
So, again, what verifiable evidence is missing from this discussion? In considering this presentation and what it excludes, can we conclude that the cover up and muddle up is still in progress?
Sofia closes the programme saying:
Again, there is no mention of the most profound and fundamental evidence that Dr. Wood has uncovered since August 2007. In relation to the Moret’s conclusion that HAARP played a big part in the events of 9/11, it can be asked:
- What evidence did Moret supply that HAARP was responsible for the destruction of the WTC towers?
- What specific characteristics of HAARP did Moret describe that made her draw the conclusion HAARP was employed?
For example, Dr. Wood’s study matches specific Hutchison Effect characteristics (bending of metals without high heat, levitation, rapid rusting of steel) to specific evidence at the World Trade Centre. Leuren Moret did no such thing! She simply listed Dr. Wood’s evidence and then said “HAARP did this.” How on earth can Sofia and Alfred Webre have failed to comment in any way on a presentation which was so weakly founded and so obviously copied? I leave the reader to make up their own mind.
Is this a Heist? Is this a Cover Up?
I repeat the question – why was Dr. Judy Wood’s name or Website not mentioned at any point, by Webre, Moret or Sofia on the latter November 2008 broadcasts? Could this be seen, due to the amount of evidence presented and its important nature, to be an attempt to keep it all covered up?
My conclusion is that the Hutchison Effect and Hurricane Erin are the most important aspects of the studies completed by Dr. Wood – as these are the topics that almost no other 9/11 researchers will candidly discuss. I would strongly contend that, by repeatedly mentioning HAARP when they should “know better” and completely excluding any discussion of the Hutchison Effect and Erin the studies posted by Dr. Wood, Leuren Moret and Alfred Webre have decided to deliberately participate in the same “muddle up” of 9/11 research and evidence. Some will say “oh – it’s just a disagreement over evidence and they’re entitled to their own opinion and conclusion” – each person is, of course, free for themselves to have this view if they wish, but the catalogue of evidence I have presented here forces me to vehemently disagree with such a view.
Sofia’s failure to mention Dr. Wood’s work – when she has been advised about the Hutchison Effect and Hurricane Erin studies also tells me something. (Sofia also herself interviewed Dr. Wood on 10th March 2007. If you listen to the Dr. Wood/Sofia interview, they did, indeed, discuss things like the WTC dust, and the lack of material, the problems with the molten metal stories, straight vertical holes in the buildings and the street.) Sofia has also seen Dr. Wood’s Madison August 2007 presentation – which contains all the evidence that Leuren Moret went through. Why then, in the interview with Moret and Webre, did not Sofia (or Webre) comment at all about this? Was it simply that she was afraid of “creating conflict” with her guests? In view of the fact that Leuren Moret was happy to mention Dr. Judy Wood’s name on the 14th and did not do so on the 21st, this explanation does not seem satisfactory. Therefore, is Sofia a willing participant in the “muddle up”? Or did she just “not notice” what was going on in her radio broadcasts?
Dr. Judy Wood E-mails Alfred Webre and Leuren Moret
In an attempt to determine why Leuren Moret did not make sufficient attribution to Dr. Wood at the appropriate points, Dr. Wood e-mailed her and she further requested that specific attribution be made to her research in the future. Leuren Moret responded saying:
As you will hear if you listen to the interview, and can see from the transcribed segments, on the 14th of November RBN broadcast, the phone interview continued even after Leuren Moret had mentioned Dr. Wood’s name several times.
Remembering the Goal
Let’s remember the goal of studies like Dr. Wood’s – it’s to establish what happened by examining the most evidence and then tying the explanation to known phenomena. Point for point, Dr. Wood’s studies and general conclusions explain the evidence more completely than any other study that is publicly available. Is Sofia relying on popularity rather than the best match of evidence to explanations? Or should we all simply “vote for truth” on these issues (as so many people seem to be doing)?
The Reality of Free Energy Technology
In relation specifically to free energy technology, why did Alfred Webre, at the Madison Conference in his presentation on 05 Aug 2007 (in relation to solving global problems), say this
…and then say this to Dr. Judy Wood and John Hutchison on 14th Feb 2008:
Later in the same interview/discussion he says:
So why would he completely omit any discussion of free energy technology and the Hutchison Effect in his November radio interviews/discussions? What changed between February 2008 and November 2008?
Having considered and analysed the evidence here, I can only sensibly draw the following conclusions. These conclusions will not be popular in some quarters.
- There has been a deliberate and co-ordinated attempt to marginalise or even cut out Dr. Judy Wood’s name from the discussion of 9/11 evidence and research.
- There has been a deliberate attempt to cover up and/or muddle up the specific nature or characteristics of the Directed Energy Weapon or Weapons which were used on 9/11, by excluding discussion of John Hutchison’s experiments in relation to key 9/11 evidence.
- There has been a deliberate attempt to cover up and/or muddle up the evidence which strongly indicates a link between free energy technology or technologies which work, have been weaponised and used on 9/11. An example of this was when Leuren Moret kept referring to “the Energy Budget” and several times referred to “large” or “huge amounts” of energy being required to cause dustification and molecular dissociation of the materials from which the WTC was constructed.
- There is a great reluctance to discuss specific legal action in relation to 9/11 – especially Dr. Wood’s Qui Tam case against NIST’s contractors.
- In this matter, people that should “know better” have gone beyond any reasonable point where one might consider they just “disagree” with Dr. Judy Wood or “do not understand” what she has “put on the table”.
So, how will the “average person” know how to discern which Scientist is being truthful? How will they discern which scientist is discussing the most powerful and most complete set of evidence and drawing the most accurate conclusions?
To re-emphasise, I conclude that all the evidence documented above strongly suggests or even proves that there is a wish to cover up knowledge of Hurricane Erin’s presence on 9/11 and its likely role in the field matrix which was in place in NYC on that day. I also, therefore, additionally conclude these things:
- Advanced Directed Energy Weapon technology was used on 9/11 to destroy most of the WTC complex – as Dr. Wood has been saying since September 2006 (when her “beam weapon” study was first posted).
- This technology exploits “free energy” in a way similar to that discovered by John Hutchison – as Dr. Wood has been saying since about January 2008.
More importantly, what will you conclude?
Appendix – Further Notes ON and Transcriptions oF Audio Presentations
Here I include further notes and transcriptions I compiled on the audio presentations relevant to this article.
Leuren Moret – Madison – 5th Aug 2007
Leuren Moret says:
“I worked in 2 nuclear weapons laboratories – I had no idea what I was doing there – I’m a geoscientist – it was just a job. A I worked at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab from 1989 – 1991. And I had absolutely no idea what a nuclear bomb was – it was just something they made there…..
In 1991 I became a whistleblower at Livermore and I survived the Karen Silkwood experience.
Moret talks about culture of death in the Nuclear Weapons research and then she talks about Ghandi. She
talks about Hawaii who may start a DU bill. She mentions how people around the world are interested in 9/11 and that she went to Oct 2006 Tokyo conference. She said they’re crazy about 9/11 in Italy.
She shows a video of herself on Hawaii news in relation to the apparent use DU there by the US Military (for training or testing purposes).
She infers Alfred Webre gave her “legal information”. She says “don’t ask me how this happened … I never plan anything.”
On 9/11, Moret says she called Janette Sherman 12 miles down-wind from Pentagon – Janet said radiation levels were elevated, but Moret showed no graphs of radiation or evidence of DU at the pentagon.
Moret she says she got involved in 9/11 and found that there are many players who want to “keep people focused on the WTC”. She mentions someone in the EPA by the name of Bellingham who apparently said that the Pentagon site was contaminated with radiation (probably from DU).
At 65:05 Moret states that The Pentagon is the Achilles heel of 9/11 [Applause] – because there’s no one else involved there except the military. She says Doug Rokke supplied photos of Pentagon to her – they agreed DU was in a cruise missile which hit the pentagon.
She references Patriot Act and the encroaching Police State and says 9/11 was about Oil and Resources and to establish a military presence in Central Asia.
Alfred Webre – Madison Aug 05 2007
Alfred Webre talks about the “Alien Invasion False flag”. He mentions the role of the City of London and other entities, as well as the “depopulation agenda”. He mentions Dr. Wood’s presentation regarding Directed Energy Weapons at least 3 times.
He references Minneapolis bridge being taken down with a Directed Energy Weapon. Webre refers to and demonstrates understanding of various laws relating to constitution.
He asks the question “How do we get out of this mess?” and says, as part of his answer:
He refers to space based weapons and talks about War Crimes tribunal.
He mentions of calling for a Truth amnesty process when he was to speak at the X-Conference in Washington DC on 14th Sept 2007.
Leuren Moret Speaks in the Q & A After Webre’s Talk
Leuren Moret recounts the experience of witness the laser demonstration.
“I was an Amber beam 25 feet across going straight up into the sky and I said “what is that” and [the student] said “oh they’re making a star” with a laser beam – making a star – and what I realised when I saw Judy Wood’s presentation this evening is that that could’ve been the prototype for whatever the weapon was that they used at the world trade centre. And they kept all air traffic away from that beam for a 5-mile radius”
How is this truly relevant to Dr. Wood’s presentation?
Webre’s Co-Op Radio Show with John Hutchison and Dr. Judy Wood
This was recorded Feb 14th Feb but not broadcast until April 2008.
The original audio file that was posted was very large – over 90 MBs for a recording of 1 hour 7 minutes – it was sampled at 192 kbps. Other broadcasts were on his blog were sampled at 32 kbps – making them approximately 15 mbs in size (i.e. much easier to download). The audio was also difficult to listen to, with Webre and John Hutchison’s voices being fairly quiet and Dr. Wood’s voice being much louder. I therefore used dynamic range compression on the audio, once I found that it had been posted and Alfred Webre posted a link to the version which I processed and down-sampled to 32kbps to make it easier to download.
As far as I am aware, when it was broadcast on air (in April) in a 1-hour slot on Co-Op radio, the last few minutes was simply cut, with no closing remarks or suitable editing.
They commence by discussing the “boat video” and the instances of spontaneous combustion it shows.
Alfred Webre does cover a number of the key points of evidence, such as the buildings turning to dust. He does not really ask any detailed questions about things like the levitation or the transmutation of material (steel turning into iron and then rusting), though he observes it is “like a form of alchemy”. Webre remains fairly quiet when Dr. Wood compares the rusting observed in the aftermath of the WTC with that observed in one of John Hutchison’s stainless steel samples.
Around the 28-minute mark, John Hutchison describes the relatively low power levels used in his experiments (from 75 watts to approximately 2 kilowatts), and Webre acknowledges that this is a very significant finding. Webre mentions that he had spoken to a professional electrical engineer who had said it would require an enormous amount of energy to “poof” the WTC buildings.
John Hutchison then gives a general overview of his understanding of how the Casimir force and the Weak Nuclear force in
So the energy issue has been discussed with and presented before Webre and he has acknowledged the significance of John Hutchison’s findings.
Dr. Wood discusses the apparent temperature drop in some instances – where people described the WTC cloud as slightly cooler than the ambient temperature (rarely do they describe it as “burning hot”) and John Hutchison confirms that in some cases, his own metal samples appear to be cool, immediately following one of his experiments. Webre acknowledges this aspect is “fascinating”.
He does mention the legal challenge to NIST
Around the 41:50 mark, Webre says
(Dr. Wood then alludes to the time it takes to compose such papers and Webre seems to acknowledge this.)
At 43:00 Webre says
Dr. Wood adds “proof of concept” and Webre repeats this phrase. Webre acknowledges that this brings in a “whole new standard of expression” to the audiences for this material. He describes types of audiences such as a public audience, a judicial audience, a legislative audience, a research audience. And then he says, perhaps light-heartedly, “Gee, when are you guys going to make your first TV documentary?”.
Around 44:25, Dr. Wood suggests “an amazing technology was used [on 9/11]” and Webre says “yes”. Webre also appears to agree when Dr. Wood suggests that the technology could be used for good things – he says that her suggestion is a “very profound statement”. Webre then suggests (around 45:30) that behind the black budget projects there are these “advanced technologies which have been developed at taxpayer expense which are for weapons applications, which could as easily be applied to new energy applications that would be to the benefit of the biosphere.” He says “whatever technology did this should be disclosed”. John Hutchison also expresses his wish for the technology to be disclosed and that his method of doing this is to appear in TV documentaries about the subject.
Later at around 53:40, Dr. Wood revisits the issue of “weird fires”, but Webre makes no comments in this segment.
Dr. Wood and Webre then discuss (at around the 57:00 mark) the ongoing effects at Ground Zero and Dr. Wood discusses how she got a sort throat on a recent trip to New York and she considered this to be in part caused by the ongoing effects at Ground Zero.
At 60:15, Webre says “In a way, the attack is still continuing because the process is still continuing” and he agrees when Dr. Wood says this has got to be a “health risk”. He said that he felt this was also relevant at his appearance at a 9/11 anniversary conference in 2007 where there was a discussion about the refusal of government at all levels to compensate first responders and residents for damages to health caused by 9/11.
At the end of the interview, Webre says “This hour has gone by so quickly and I hope that you’ll come back and visit us again” and Dr. Wood says she would “love to”.
Expansion 14th November 2008
On 14th November 2008, Alfred Webre appeared with Leuren Moret on Sofia’s radio show “Expansion” on the RBN.
Sofia then states that she has invited her guests to discuss HAARP in relation to 9/11 and Leuren Moret states that she wishes to ask “who benefited” from 9/11. At 5:50 Moret says she wants to look at “where it happened – the Pentagon, The World Trade Centre and Shanksville and then how… that’s where you have to look at the science of molecular dissociation and the… energy budget required.”
Moret then says she concludes from various comments that “it was pretty clear it was the US, the UK and Israel – all 3 of these entities were involved in almost every aspect of 9/11”. Around 9:10 Moret mentions London bankers, but does not name specific individuals only “the London Bankers – the international bankers – the Rothschilds as the public and the oligarchs in the United States”.
At 24:54 Moret says that the strike on the Pentagon is tied into HAARP because the Navy have command and control of HAARP and it was one of their intelligence offices that was hit. (However, she states that it was a missile that hit the Pentagon, partly according to information she’d received from Major Doug Rokke)
At 43:40, she describes the Madison Conference as the most important 9/11 Conference that has happened. At 44:40, she then describes the 13+ hour DVD as being available and notes that “Judy Wood’s presentation is the key to understanding how they carried out the destruction of the World Trade Centre Buildings.” She then goes on to say “It involves Science – it involves the energy budget required to basically powder[ise] those buildings – huge buildings and the energy required to cause molecular dissociation of steel beams and concrete…”
Sofia then asks Leuren Moret to explain the term “energy budget” and asks “how much energy does it take?”, to which LM responds (45:50) “Well, huge amounts of energy – much more than chemical explosives would release.” She then mentions the buildings turning to dust, going up in smoke and also basically being “vaporised”. She states “this requires very sophisticated beam weapons – huge amounts of energy.”
At this point, even though Webre had already discussed aspects of the energy question and 9/11 with Dr. Wood and John Hutchison some 9 months earlier , he does not mention this. It is worth remembering that at the time, he seemed very interested:
At the 48:00 mark, Sofia re-states her interest in the “energy budget”, but also does not bring up the Hutchison Effect – which I had advised her about in e-mails sent in August 2008, which she had acknowledged receipt of. LM then discusses with Sofia the ideas of “Pancake Collapse” and Controlled Demolition and the associated energy budget – but neither of them brings up the relationship to the Hutchison Effect. LM mentions how Dr. Wood’s presentation used various photographs to demonstrate there “was no collapse” of the WTC towers – but she incorrectly states the buildings “went up in smoke”.
Sofia then asks (51:34) if there is
Sadly, Moret misquotes and muddles Dr. Wood’s presentation – in which Dr. Wood notes the colouration of the smoke, but does not state that its colour was altered, nor does she state that the building was “vaporised”.
Sofia mentions how Thermite was introduced into 9/11 research by Steven E Jones, but then Moret asks Alfred Webre into the conversation “because now we’re going into HAARP and molecular dissociation and the energy budget”. Webre then states he wants Moret to finish her presentation before he comments. He states that he thought the discussion had got caught up in “the semantics”.
Moret then states it was the intelligence agencies from the USA, UK and Israel that carried out 9/11.
…just run through 5 minutes why you think HAARP was the instrument that caused the molecular dissociation and the controlled … disappearance of the World Trade Centre.
Well, it was really Judy Wood’s presentation which had the physical evidence and the photos which are not available – they haven’t been …
Without… without referring to Judy Wood – in your own words – why do you think HAARP caused it?
There were some… first of all where was that building rubble that should’ve been 35 stories high? Those were 500,000 ton buildings – that just basically went up in smoke… they just disappeared. And I know as a Geoscientist that a tremendous amount of energy was needed to basically vaporise or dustify those buildings and I observed in Livermore, as a Livermore staff Scientist – in the middle of the night – a demonstration of laser beam weapons, so I have actually seen a demonstration … by Livermore – which is where HAARP was developed secretly in collaboration with the Soviet Union beginning in 1976, so I know the weapons exist, I know the applications – I have observed them and looking at the World Trade Centre destruction – as a geoscientist – I know that the keys to understanding what happened at the World Trade Centre are the energy budget needed to molecularly dissociate those two buildings. That’s exactly what the physical mechanism was that was used to destroy those buildings.
Moret does not distinguish between the beam weapon she states she witnessed and the fact that HAARP is described as a “phased array” and an “ionospheric heater” in the actual specifications which are available on its website.
At 59:20, Sofia asks Moret if she knows how Dr. Wood got access to photos that were not in the public domain. Moret then speculates that Dr. Wood went to conferences where “government representatives” were showing photos. She suggests Dr. Wood went to “NIST hearings” and “probably to the library of congress and went through their collections online”.
Strangely, neither Sofia nor Leuren Moret actually think to ask Dr. Wood herself this question and neither do they refer to or visit her Website, where the majority of photos are referenced anyway.
At approx. 60:40 Sofia states that Dr. Wood
At 60:45, Webre states to Moret
Moret then says
(Why is Webre asking Moret to describe this – it sounds like he has some information in front of him, so why can’t he discuss it?) At the time of writing googling “leuren moret HAARP” brings up only links to Alfred Webre’s blog, and a few other blogs. Leuren Moret does not appear to have her own Website (unlike Dr. Judy Wood) and therefore I am not sure where she has “shown of instances where HAARP has been used in environmental warfare”
Also listen for the unusual reference to the Alfred P Murrah (APM) Building being destroyed by HAARP. At 63:25, Moret states
It is worth noting that HAARP is not a space weapon – it is a ground-based array in Alaska – but Moret is not given a chance to clarify or correct this statement –
Moret then states that because of radioactive isotope traces at both the WTC and the APM building, she considers that mini-nukes could have been used and states that high levels of Uranium were found at the WTC site, but does not reference any specific data sources.
Sofia then brings up (at approx 66:00) the subject of the Minesota Bridge collapse and Webre comments that it happened on the eve of the Madison Conference and that he had seen it from the air.
Moret then states 67:32:
Interestingly, starting around 69:50 Webre states that one of his classmates at Yale was John Ashcroft whom he met in Washington DC following an appearance Webre made at the X-Conference. Webre stated that he had a conversation with Ashcroft (whom, according to Webre, some may have described as “the arch-demon”) which was very civilised and that they came out of polarities into a “spirit of truth and reconciliation”. Webre suggested that this may be where the future in all this would lie (and I don’t disagree with this – but it does require people to be truthful).
Interestingly, at around 63:55 Webre states:
77:00 Webre states that he became involved in “public interest counter intelligence” (which he states earlier in the interview is his elaborate name for researching ‘conspiracy theories’) on Nov 22nd 1963 as he was a member of the board of members of the Assassination Information Bureau.
At 79:05 Webre states
At 80:00, Webre states:
and then he goes into a discussion of the Kennedy Assassination. This does not really add anything to the discussion of how HAARP was used to destroy the WTC – which was what the topic of conversation was meant to be.
Webre then discusses how “the book is going to be closed on 9/11” with the change of US presidential administration, though he acknowledges that “it can’t be forgotten about” when Sofia mentions “the larger picture.”
Are they interested in exactly what happened? Why have they discussed so little specific evidence – no specific documents.
Webre then suggests at 85:40
Webre clearly thinks HAARP is a formidable weapon. Sofia does not really pick up on any of the statements Webre makes nor does she ask him to substantiate them with evidence or clarification.
Expansions 21st November 2008
After the first 40 minutes, Webre links HAARP to 9/11 again and asks Leuren Moret:
Alfred Webre does not reference Moret’s previous inclusion of “Micronukes” in this part of the description. Sofia then says
At about 44:20 Moret says
Moret references the Seismic data from 9/11 and how it does not show the sort of signal expected by the 2 buildings coming down. She references the kinetic energy that would have been liberated as the building came down and states at 44:39:
This represents a subtle change to the question “Where did the building go?” i.e. Moret references the expected energy of impact of the material before referencing what happened to the material itself. (The lack of material is the more obvious problem, once video and photo evidence is studied carefully.)
At 44:53 Moret says:
She talks about the energy required to break the bonds and how this would be much greater than the kinetic energy involved in constructing the building (i.e. much greater than the energy released by a gravity-driven collapse) and she re-iterates the energy discrepancy.
Moret says at approx 49:47
Moret then mentions the paucity of debris and then she says
Moret fails to mention the Banker’s Trust building, its repair and subsequent dismantling.
She mentions the laser project called Shiva at Livermore – brief research I completed on this suggested that this was something used as part of Fusion research project rather than it being a weapon of some kind, although I would admit that with “black projects”, the picture is never clear. Nevertheless, why is Moret bringing this into the discussion without more evidence? What, according to Moret, did the damage at the WTC – a laser or HAARP – or both?
At 55:25 Moret starts to list the evidence compiled by Dr. Wood. After the break, at 66:35 Sofia says
Moret then makes some comments on Cahill’s dust study and includes reference to the same paragraph posted on a page of Dr. Wood’s Erin Series . She then lists more of the evidence compiled by Dr. Wood without crediting Dr. Wood.
Note: HAARP isn’t a beam weapon – it’s a phased array of antennae! It is unclear if it has a weapons application. No contribution from Webre.
Sofia closes saying
Webre and Moret on Co-Op Radio, November 10th or 17th 2008
Moret speaks continuously for over 15 minutes about “whodunnit” and references an article by General Ivashov – “International terrorism does not exist” (I agree with the thrust of this)
At 20:52 Webre states:
The Chambers English Dictionary (1996, CD-ROM edition) defines Geoscience as:
However, no one makes it clear what Moret’s area of expertise is, but Wikipedia states:
Does this qualify her to speak with authority on the details of how HAARP destroyed the WTC?
At 23:00 she repeats that she is looking at “The energy budget” and the molecular dissociation and the energy required to make this happen. Mentions kinetic energy issues (potential energy converted back to energy).
At 33:05 she talks about spontaneously combusting cars again and says
At 34:40 Webre says:
35:43 Webre continues:
At 44:47 Moret states
At 47:23 she refers to USGS describing WTC beams as iron (as Dr. Wood did in her Madison presentation). At 52:57 Moret says:
Moret doesn’t say HAARP was responsible for the destruction of the bridge. At 56:20 Moret again incorrectly states that Steve Warran’s quote is “anonymous”.
She then “breaks into” the quote saying:
Moret then continues with the quote thus:
At 60:19 Webre states:
Moret reads a quote from Richard Cooke regarding the control of world affairs by bankers
Then Moret simply adds:
Webre responds with “exactly”. Then he ends the broadcast saying
Audio Links for Interviews referenced in this article
In Chronological Order:
E-mails between Dr. Judy Wood and Leuren Moret
From: Dr. Judy Wood
Subject: COOPRADIO.ORG: ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE USE OF HAARP AND BEAM WEAPONS
Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 10:11 AM
Dear Alfred and Leuren,
The referenced presentation relied heavily on materials that are copyrighted, as noted in my website and as noted in the actual content of the Madison presentation, attended by both of you in the month of August, 2007. The materials are intended for ‘fair use’ by others and I certainly do not object to such use. What I do object to is the use of the materials without attribution of the source. Will you please contact both your email list and Coopradio.org and issue an attribution statement stating as follows:
"The materials presented are based largely on the work of Dr. Judy Wood and, in particular, upon a presentation of hers entitled "The New Hiroshima," originally presented at Madison, Wisconsin on August 4, 2007. The copyrighted presentations can be found here:
as well as in the material from her site, drjudywood.com ."
I also request that any future presentation that relies on that material or other work of mine should also contain a proper disclosure of source.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in these requests.
Dr. Judy Wood
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:24:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Leuren Moret <email@example.com…>
Subject: Re: COOPRADIO.ORG: ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE USE OF HAARP AND BEAM WEAPONS
Dear Judy – Because I believe your information presented at Madison is one of the most important ones ever presented on 911, I have made every attempt to widely circulate awareness about your information. I don’t need to steal anyone else’s information, this is something quite different, it’s actually a strategy to get your information out. I am aware of extensive harrassment and bashing that you have been subjected to, and I know all about it because it happens to me all the time, especially on the HAARP interviews I have already done prior to the one you are writing about.
I have done a previous interview on "HAARP and 911" with Alfred on another station in November, fully acknowledging your information and contribution. As soon as I mentioned your name in the interview as the starting point for my comments – the electricity was cut off in my house and the phone line went dead. Any time your name is mentioned in interviews, the same thing happens. The host for the program I mentioned is "Sofia" on Republic Radio, and she also turned on me and started viciously attacking after I made her shut up while I presented the information without interrupting me in a second interview because the first one was disrupted by turning off my electricity in the middle of the interview. She also tried to ask a series of distracting and disinfo questions which would have blocked my presentation on the air of the 911 evidence that HAARP and/or beam weapons were used.
My presentation is quite different from yours, because you have never suggested that HAARP or beam weapons were used at the WTC as far as I know. I have never heard any of your other presentations or seen your copyrighted material so I am unaware that you tied 911 to HAARP if you did in previous material.
Did you contribute a chapter to Jim Fetzers 911 book he is putting together from our conference?
I think you like me are being heavily censored everywhere. The other HAARP interviews I have done are broadly dispersed across the internet, and there is a great deal of interest in them. I do not copyright my material because I want people to use it and write about it so that the correct information gets to the public. I give it to the public as a public service.