In Defense of Dr. Judy Wood

A listener to the Top Ten Smackdown With Jeff Long and Vyz wrote yesterday with an eloquent, well-reasoned response to our program, particularly focusing on what was said regarding Dr. Judy Wood. In the spirit of fairness, I am reposting the whole email here for your consideration.

I enjoyed the free wheeling discussion you had with Jeff Long and Vyz the other day (4/14/11) with the Top Ten Smackdown. Discerning observers (like most Vyz listeners and guests) have come to understand that the world is populated by media operatives, disinfo agents, greedy hucksters, flakes and whack jobs. So--it was very interesting to hear some of the back story and historical perspective from you guys about the managed breakdown / meltdown / hopeless muddle of the 911 “truth” and PAYtriot movements and of the controlling voices and personalities involved.

When all is said and done, what really happened on 9/11/01 still eludes us all. And I agree with you that nobody will ever be held accountable for this crime. Although we don’t know exactly what happened, or exactly who did it, there are a few things we can confidently say did NOT happen—such as the official government fairy tale. And we can definitely speculate based upon the best research—as to what DID happen. For example—the investigative research of Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis sheds a lot of light on the events at the Pentagon. I find their evidence of a fly-over to be quite compelling.

Similarly, for the events at the WTC I have followed the work of Dr. Wood for several years—mostly from her website, but more recently in reading her new book (Where did the Towers Go?), and find in her technical breakdown a lot of reasons why the popular WTC controlled demolition theories -- thermite, mini-nukes, etc, --are also not viable explanations. In addition, the evidence of the use of directed free energy technology Wood offers is interesting and compelling. Not a slam-dunk—but worth looking at, IMO.

I know you guys are not enamored of Wood, her presentation or her work, and I am not challenging you. It’s hard to know who’s who and what is going on anymore. You may be correct that she is putting out disinfo, knowingly or unknowingly. True, she isn’t a polished public speaker and yes she is skeptical that commercial passenger jets were used in the attacks on the trade centers. And she also did have early association with Morgan Reynolds and Jim Fetzer.

But--if you look at the way Wood has been mocked and vilified and her work managed, marginalized, mischaracterized (space beams) or ignored by the major 911 “truth” movement personalities, and also look at the fact that she is the only one of these guys who has put her money where her mouth is (with Request for Correction, Qui-Tam case, new book) it makes you wonder. Plus it definitely looks as if she was “handled” by Fetzer. Like Ranke’s information, Wood’s info is pretty much banned from major 9/11 sites. Finally—I have yet to find anybody taking her information apart point by point on technical grounds. It’s usually a non-technical dismissal: coma, Reynolds association, Fetzer association, Blacksburg VA association, deer in the headlights presentation, etc. Why not address the actual evidence?

So--long story short—-I am wondering if we are not throwing the baby out with the bath water here when it comes to Wood. Is it possible that her DEW information is pretty solid, and that explains why she was targeted by the likes of Fetzer et al? Could the demise of her info be part of just another plan to throw us off? An op to put the truth out there, then discredit the hell out of it? Or maybe it’s me who is missing something? I dunno. Your (polite) comments are welcomed.

On another completely weird note—I see that Wood’s work is now being heavily promoted by Richard Hoagland— first during his recent presentation at the Secret Space Program conference in Amsterdam, and then also on C2C with Noory and Jesse Ventura. This is an astonishing development on many levels, not the least of which is the sudden promotion of her work by gatekeepers of the PTB. What it means? I don't know yet....

Anyway—thanks again for a great discussion.