Francis - Why are you even uploading the audio, when it's been pointed out that you're basing all your assumptions about Dr Wood's evidence she presented, on the opinions of proven COINTELPRO agents, especially when you've not bothered to go through the work she's presented?
So, outsource your thinking to other people instead of looking at the evidence yourself.
It's intellectually lazy. Then you want to pretend you're some sort of researcher?
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Yes, COVID taught you well it seems - As soon as someone has a different opinion, shut it down, because it might threaten your world view and at worst, you might just learn something new.
My good wo/man, no intention to “shut [you] down”. Merely concerned about your blood pressure that must be going through the roof every time someone addresses 9/11 points you so vehemently don’t agree with. And on Francis’s Substack that seems inevitable at this stage. You don’t *have* to stay. You choose to.
I scanned it. Its a compilation of clips. I have no idea that ur not a bot. How you think that proves it im not sure. You cannot name ONE single thing that O'Neill has said or written that is not based in fact - And this is your problem. We certainly list specifics (easily debunked with the forensic data) and address them in detail. That you cannot do that speaks vols for all of you.
Judy Wood is one of the most maligned researchers in the world, because her research points towards scientific truths with global revolutionary implications - Prof David A. Hughes
The most telling thing abt Hughes' article is that it does not attempt to hammer home any of Wood's arguments and show why they're correct. He defers to them with platitudes like "If it were not significant people would not expend energy debunking it" -the nonsense that never goes away because people like him perpetuate it. Like Wood, Hughes is incapable of defending her DEW central thesis ["Directed Energy Weapons use electromagnetic energy - typically in the form of high-powered microwaves, lasers, or particle beams. These weapons focus energy onto specific targets. They can operate in different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, from radio frequencies to visible light to higher-energy beams."]
With a straight face and literally nothing else (hear Wood in her own words in the interview she did with Dr Jenkins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=280s) he & Wood pretend anyone should take them seriously. But no, you should buy the book and cite it in your rebuttals of untenable nonsense) You can tell how strong the idea is by how 'effectively' they argue in favor of it.
A weapon they cannot name. That, so far as anyone knows, does not exist. That they cannot so much describe a mechanism for the 'dustification' process that supposedly turned the core structures into powder. This mysterious weapon somehow blew-up the towers from within even though even though it was (supposedly) fired at the towers ["possibly from low earth orbit" Wood] from an outside position.
You'll love the presentation he did - He's dropped the paywall just for you...
Judy Wood is one of the most maligned researchers in the world, because her research points towards scientific truths with global revolutionary implications - – Prof David A. Hughes
Francis - Why are you even uploading the audio, when it's been pointed out that you're basing all your assumptions about Dr Wood's evidence she presented, on the opinions of proven COINTELPRO agents, especially when you've not bothered to go through the work she's presented?
So, outsource your thinking to other people instead of looking at the evidence yourself.
It's intellectually lazy. Then you want to pretend you're some sort of researcher?
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Here is a 20-minute video that most can follow: https://rumble.com/v5jnndx-understanding-the-911-evidence.html
Reply to Francis O'Neill
Susceptible to Camp 2 (mainstream alternative) propaganda regarding "9/11," O'Neill has made himself the unwitting instrument of its propagation
Article: https://dhughes.substack.com/p/reply-to-francis-oneill
The last time I disagreed with a Substack author, I made sure to cancel my subscription…
Yes, COVID taught you well it seems - As soon as someone has a different opinion, shut it down, because it might threaten your world view and at worst, you might just learn something new.
My good wo/man, no intention to “shut [you] down”. Merely concerned about your blood pressure that must be going through the roof every time someone addresses 9/11 points you so vehemently don’t agree with. And on Francis’s Substack that seems inevitable at this stage. You don’t *have* to stay. You choose to.
My blood pressure is fine. Too many people like ol Francis are just stuck believing bullshit…
This article lays it out for any person that can actually think and discern between truth and fiction…
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Shocking to see you here lol
It’s going to be even shocking for you, when you see me here…
Link: https://rumble.com/v55uzab-the-pirate-truth-podcast-with-911-revisionist.html
I scanned it. Its a compilation of clips. I have no idea that ur not a bot. How you think that proves it im not sure. You cannot name ONE single thing that O'Neill has said or written that is not based in fact - And this is your problem. We certainly list specifics (easily debunked with the forensic data) and address them in detail. That you cannot do that speaks vols for all of you.
LOL - Everything pushed by the COINTELPRO agents like Jones, gage and architects for an engineered truth has thoroughly been debunked.
Maybe y'all need to read some articles posted after 2007.
What happens in time cannot change after the fact. You must realize this. So, what gives?
Don't make me laugh, proving how disingenuous you are, being stuck in 2007.
Thank you for uploading the audio on this. I didn’t have time to read it this time but was glad for a read through on my way home today.
This presentation is actually a lot better...
Judy Wood is one of the most maligned researchers in the world, because her research points towards scientific truths with global revolutionary implications - Prof David A. Hughes
Presentation: https://dhughes.substack.com/p/in-defence-of-judy-wood
The most telling thing abt Hughes' article is that it does not attempt to hammer home any of Wood's arguments and show why they're correct. He defers to them with platitudes like "If it were not significant people would not expend energy debunking it" -the nonsense that never goes away because people like him perpetuate it. Like Wood, Hughes is incapable of defending her DEW central thesis ["Directed Energy Weapons use electromagnetic energy - typically in the form of high-powered microwaves, lasers, or particle beams. These weapons focus energy onto specific targets. They can operate in different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, from radio frequencies to visible light to higher-energy beams."]
With a straight face and literally nothing else (hear Wood in her own words in the interview she did with Dr Jenkins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=280s) he & Wood pretend anyone should take them seriously. But no, you should buy the book and cite it in your rebuttals of untenable nonsense) You can tell how strong the idea is by how 'effectively' they argue in favor of it.
A weapon they cannot name. That, so far as anyone knows, does not exist. That they cannot so much describe a mechanism for the 'dustification' process that supposedly turned the core structures into powder. This mysterious weapon somehow blew-up the towers from within even though even though it was (supposedly) fired at the towers ["possibly from low earth orbit" Wood] from an outside position.
O, but Prof Hughes actually has.
You'll love the presentation he did - He's dropped the paywall just for you...
Judy Wood is one of the most maligned researchers in the world, because her research points towards scientific truths with global revolutionary implications - – Prof David A. Hughes
Presentation: https://dhughes.substack.com/p/in-defence-of-judy-wood
Dr Greg Jenkins’ “Directed Debunking Energy” and Dr Judy Wood
Scholarly Questions and Inquiry, or Badgering, Misrepresentation and Harassment?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/dr-greg-jenkins-directed-debunking