Direct Link to Latest News


9-11 "Terrorists" Used Secret Technology

January 15, 2012


Dr Judy Wood's book will change the world.
  It is easy to see from her photographic evidence
 that nothing about that day matches our
 limited understanding of the laws of physics.

by "John Henderson"  P.Eng

We know much about that day.  We know about the deaths.  We know about the controversy surrounding the official story and actual evidence.  We know how our society changed abruptly. 

What is interesting to me, as an engineer with over 20 years experience and having conducted countless forensic investigations, is how few people can see 1.2 million tons of concrete (3 buildings in total) turned to powder in 8 seconds and not wonder where all that energy came from. 

Where is the seismic data showing what happens to the earth when a 500,000 ton pile of steel and concrete falls to the ground at near free fall speeds?  We actually have bench marks to draw from on this topic because many large buildings have been collapsed--so we know what is suppose to happen.

Most engineers know that the study of blowing things up is a mature area of research.  There is lots of data.  Many men love blowing things up.  We can calculated the velocities of a shock wave from photos; we can calculate the energy needed to create the kind of event that took place on 911.

The problem is that using conventional physics and trying to fit the known data from that day into these models doesn't work.  No one has been able to do it! And no one has tried harder than NIST who have considerable resources to throw at this problem.

Dr Judy Wood is the only person to present a rigorous examination of the evidence.  She has written the most important book of this century on the topic ("Where Did the Towers Go?"). 

Finding insignificant flaws in some the data on her web site doesn't disprove the gnawing problem that there was virtually nothing left of the towers within seconds of the start of the catastrophic failures.

9-11 It is impossible to go into all of the evidence here.  I could but her web site ( ) is easy to find and easy to follow.  She has done countless interviews.  No one has yet to refute one piece of evidence given in her recent book.  People have undertaken ad hominem attacks, but that just proves that they don't have anything to say about the evidence.


Here is a small sample of the unexplainable characteristics of the WTC collapse, taken from Judy's site:

The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain by a free fall speed "collapse."

They underwent mid-air pulverization (dustification) and were turned to dust before they hit the ground.

The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on a comparison with the Seattle King Dome controlled demolition.

The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up.

The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.

The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.

One file cabinet with folder dividers survived. No toilets survived or even recognizable portions of one.

Windows of nearby buildings had circular and other odd-shaped holes in them.

Evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation, as demonstrated by the near-instant rusting of affected steel.

Weird fires. The appearance of fire, but without evidence of heating.

Lack of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. No evidence of burned bodies.

Office paper was densely spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often along side cars that appeared to be burning.

Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways, during the destruction of the Twin Towers.


I know John Huchtison, who Dr Judy Wood based some of her research on.  I have held is test specimens in my hand.  I don't know of one single engineer who could draw a free body diagram show how metal bars failed in his lab.  As a thought experiment, try to tell me how you jam a wooden pencil through a steel bar.

Dr Judy Wood's book will change the world.  It is easy to see from her photographic evidence that nothing about that day matches our limited understanding of the laws of physics.  This means something extraordinary to the planet.  It means that a technology exists and is being used at this time in a very destructive way, which is different from anything we have seen before.  Imagine, if we used this knowledge in a constructive way.


Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "9-11 "Terrorists" Used Secret Technology "

RD said (January 20, 2012):

After the expose on Dr. Judy Wood's book "Where did the Towers Go" your standing with me expanded. NO ONE is talking about that book. I treat my copy like The Holy Grail. Its content isn't something you can speak of easily, especially to the majority of sports addicted imbeciles I'm surrounded by nor the consumer driven females of which my wife proudly proclaims to be. It's like you're on to something secret and you know that power is being used now. The aerial pics of the supposed "bombing" of sites in Iran approximately a month ago looked suspiciously absent any divots and reminded me of a DEW attack.

Howard Lewis said (January 18, 2012):

Please do not humor Judy Woods with her 'research' and 'analysis' of the NYC WTC 9-11 crime scene. My father was one on the engineers-preliminary contract personnel securing the bid for Skilling and Associates until an event made him drop out. We did, however receive update blue print packages every two months or so. This event including discovery that the developers planned to set up a computerized demolition system in the WTCs over 50 stories. Including the basements, these were WTC I,II and 7. The smaller ones were loaded just before detonation on 9-11-2001.

I have known of this since 1969. Some sort of explosive mixed in with the paint(the painters DID NOT KNOW). A large number of explosive experts and other chemists have determined thermite, thermate, and nanothermate present in dust and other residues throughout Manhattan Island. Other laboratories have proven, from dust and residue analysis, that at least one fission device went off at the WTCs that morning. I agree. At least one. This is not hypothesis nor conspiracy theory. After informing me of what "these pigs are doing" back in 1969, my father ordered me to scour the Seattle public library and the University of Washington libraries until I found something confirming his statements. I did. And I found two articles. I then went public, as my father ordered me to, and shot my mouth off about the preset, without implicating my father as the leak. This is not theory. I was there. They pelted me with rocks and garbage. The Sears tower also made print and was the last over 50 story skyscraper built in the U.S. It presently is loaded with a demolition system and is ready to go. A brief video was available of them setting up locallized electric fields in the street being spray painted . I saw this film during this time.

Anonymous said (January 17, 2012):

Henry - I'm writing about Judy Wood and 9/11. You should visit Tom Bearden's site He's a physicist who has worked with the Defense Dept. for many years and he writes about free energy weapons. We've got 'em the Russians have and so do many other countries like Israel, Britain, France, Brazil etc. They are many varied and truly astounding in their power and capability.

For instance Bearden says that Khrushchev's boast in the early '60's that they had incredible weapons, capable of destroying the earth if we're not careful. He wasn't blowing smoke, they got 'em.

Bearden gives many examples, there's one that's particularly relevant here. Weapons based on Dirac's theory of how the universe is constituted. In short. it is constantly being made and re-made at a fantastic rate from the (what I call) the 4th dimension. This is where particles come from during the conversion of energy to matter e.g. "pair formation". Anyway according to Dirac if the world is being constantly re-formed then it is possible to "unhappen" anything - like concrete, steel, or people. Apparently a "de-happening weapon" can be programmed to unhappen just about anything.

There's another story going around about how all cars within a few blocks lost their door handles and side-view mirrors and anything else with high quality steel. The bodies of the cars were not affected. I've also seen a youtube video where an antenna on the top of a tow just disappears into the air, there's no explosion no movement other than the antenna slowly dissolving. Check out Tom Bearden.

Max said (January 16, 2012):

read Dr. Wood's book and made a note of the evidence that she presents and that all conspiracy theories must address in order to be contenders. A glaring issue is that mainstream 9/11 theories also ignore much of it. If it were wrong, expose the error and correct it. But to ignore evidence and not address it? That's were we clue in to how much of it has validity.

As for the link to Dr. Gregory Jenkins, readers should look into his background. His area of research and project involvement align with some of things that he tries to discredit Dr. Wood on. He wasn't impartial. His ambush interview on Dr. Wood wasn't convincing, particularly if the transcript is reviewed.

Although Dr. Wood did not set out to, she debunk's Dmitri Khalezov's premise of deep underground nukes at the WTC. First of all, the demolitions of the towers happened top-down, not bottom-up as an underground nuke would suggest. Secondly, seismic measurements do not support the energy waves that a deep underground nuke would send off. Thirdly, the near-pristine bathtub also proves that destructive energy did not blast from the bottom to the top.

Where I deviate from Dr. Wood is that she hints that free energy, such as would be available from hurricane Erin, which is itself a weather news conspiracy to not report it on 9/11. My speculation on this is that the hurricane was needed for two reasons. Reason #1 was to give favorable cloud-cover (e.g., none) and wind conditions for this made for video-fakery event. Reason #2 was that if something had gone horribly wrong, HAARP could turn Erin back into land and clean up more left-over evidence.

Still, the energy questions raised by Dr. Wood are indeed valid, which is why I was championing milli-nukes for a few years. Dr. Wood convinced me that destructive milli-nukes were not involved. Too hard to limit and control the energy output; too many dead-give away signs.

However, milli-nuclear generators (or cold-fusion generators) to send energy through the building's wiring (or through bad-ass power distribution cables run down the elevator shafts) to the DEW devices would account for many things, including the radiation measurements, 1st responder ailments, EMP side-effects, and of course the energy needed for pulverization. DEW devices acted like microwave ovens; they excited residual water molecules in targeted content such that such molecules would instantly turn to steam, whose rapidly expanding volume-space tore apart (e.g., dustified) whatever was it the DEW beam's path.

Dr. Wood was crafty in drawing few conclusions, but in offering many pieces of evidence that may or may not fit together. Others will connect those dots if applicable.

All disinformation requires a solid foundation of truth in order to get traction. Thus, if Dr. Wood's work is deemed disinformation, we are still tasked with mining the nuggets of truth from that foundation before discarding any disinfo remnants.

Jeff Besant (author) said (January 16, 2012):

I have response to WW.

Dear WW,

I am familiar with Dr. Greg Jenkins. In fact, I quite enjoyed the interview he conducted with Dr. Judy Wood in 2007 when he ran from the room (

However, we don’t need to make this more complex than it is. Imagine what would happen to a concrete encased steel beam, wrapped in burning jet fuel, with burning wooden desk strapped to it if you dropped it 1,300 feet. I don’t think I can envision a scenario where this would turn to powder before it hit the ground (or even after it hit the ground). May be you can. If so, you can explain to me. Because I am pretty sure that there would be sizable pieces of concrete and steel laying on the ground. It wouldn’t be powder!

WW said (January 16, 2012):

Nothing about that day matches Judy Wood's limited understanding of the laws of physics.

If you don't read this PDF before you post anymore on this subject:

RD said (January 16, 2012):

Woods' book covers everything, from eye-witnesses to hurricane Erin. I BELIEVE HER.

Joseph said (January 16, 2012):

I have read Dr. Wood's book. It is astutely scientific, factually accurate, and thoroughly researched. The languages of mathematics, physics, and engineering are not subject to interpretation or opinion. Let Richard Gage, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and all other 9/11 truth seekers approach Dr. Wood's work on the same scientific level it is offered, instead of trying to cover over facts with unsupported opinions and theories. Science is the path to truth; vanity stands in the way.

C said (January 16, 2012):

How did all that steel and concrete vanish so as to leave such a meager seismic impact upon collapse? Another interesting question: Where was the stench of decaying flesh in the days and weeks following 9/11? Close to 3000 dead should have caused a nauseating pall spreading throughout ground zero and it's imediate vicinity, yet clean up workers toiled for months without the aid of gasmasks.

These questions, among other interesting items and theories, have been discussed on the "Let's Roll" forum. One theory is that both towers were essentially gutted and ready to go for demolition prior to 9/11, which to tell the truth makes sense, considering that standard procedure of demolition companies has always been to empty the structure of as many contents as possible so as to minimize flying projectiles, minimize the resulting debris pile, and last but not least, to keep the building from falling outside the planned demoltion perimeter.

And how many people know that alleged North Tower plane, American Airlines Flight 11, had on board as passengers the wife of Anthony Perkins of Psycho fame, and a man called David Angell, the creator of the hit TV show "Frazier" along with his wife? Quite a special flight this Oh, did I mention that Seth McFarlane creator of the hit FOX cartoon Family Guy (each episode loaded with degenerate humor) just missed the flight due to sleeping late with a hangover? You really cannot make this stuff up.

Here is a link to the Mark Bingham discussion thread for anyone interested -

Dan said (January 16, 2012):

It wasn't complicated. It was planned at least 40 years before 2001. The WTC was a David and Nelson Rockefeller project from day one in 1961. The buildings were loaded and wired for demolition during construction. It's real simple. They got away with it because they controlled the narrative, and they still do to this day.

There's nothing mysterious here. Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth). The organization cites evidence that the official FEMA and NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) reports provide incomplete and contradictory accounts of the towers’ destruction. AE911Truth points in particular to the destruction of the third skyscraper, World Trade Center 7, a 47-story building which was not hit by an aircraft, yet came down in pure free-fall acceleration for at least 100 feet according to the official government engineering investigation (NIST), and in the exact manner of a classic controlled demolition. The implications are startling. The group bases its conclusions solely on forensic evidence and does not speculate as to who may have planted the explosives. (See my footnote)

AE911Truth’s conclusions are shared by thousands of scientists; senior-level military, intelligence and government officials; pilots and aviation professionals; firefighters; scholars and university professors; 9/11 survivors and their family members; and other professionals around the world

9/11 Blueprint for Truth presented by Architect Richard Gage, AIA
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth)
1:59:38 - 4 years ago

(, ,,

[Footnote] In 1961 David Rockefeller proposed that the Port Authority build a World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan. At the time the governors of both New York and New Jersey had to approve the project, and New Jersey Governor Robert B. Meyner refused. After Meyner was replaced by Richard J. Hughes, the deal was sewn up by 1966 under Rockefeller owned mayor of New York City,. John Lindsay. The deal bankrupted Manhattan in the 70's, incidentally. New York City was the first 'bailout' by the Federal taxpayer in 1975 by President Gerald Ford...who had chosen Nelson Rockefeller as his unelected Vice President.
The location and design of the WTC brought objections from the American Institute of Architects as a monstrosity of 'Urban Renewal' poor planning. It's been suggested by skyscraper construction professionals that structures were pre-wired for future demolition when they were built - as that is a common practice in skyscrapers built after the Seagram's building.

9/11 - Worlds Largest Controlled Demolition

RG said (January 16, 2012):

I feel Dr. Judy Wood's DEW theory to be a mixture of truth and lies. Though no one can say for sure, there is a Russian nuclear officer Dmitri Khalezov who's theory about no planes, underground nuclear explosions beneath the twin towers and a soviet Granit missile carrying a nuclear warhead hitting the pentagon is more realistic.

No time to address specifics but I say there were NO PLANES, the TV was FAKED, there are NO reliable eye-witnesses to the planes. TV fakery has been working well since the faked apollo moon landings, it's what they do, TV is fake. Tv is in the business of being fake and projecting fake, selling us on an idea that helps their agenda, be it advertisers or governments.
There were NO holograms, NO 'directed energy', No haarp.

Dmitri Khalezov's free ebook can be seen here and the interview can be viewed here



Whether a directed energy weapon, or a nuclear weapon was used, clearly it was an advance on box cutters, and was technology unavailable to bin Laden and his Merry Band of Men.


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at