Thanks to everyone who voted. Our featured documentary is:
-
9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality (bitchute)
Since this was was my suggestion, and it's proving to be a somewhat controversial one, here's a "short" intro / justification for my wanting to bring it to people's attention:
This film could be described as an alternative documentary to the mainstream of 9/11 truth. It is not a replacement for a documentary such as “September 11: The New Pearl Harbor”, which I hold in high regard of and recommend that everyone should see.
However. "9/11 Alchemy" explores in depth anomalous evidence that NPH and other 9/11 documentaries don’t. It also considers some evidence that NPH does cover, but does not go into much depth by way of hazarding an explanation e.g. the technical impossibility of maneuvers made by the Boeing 757 / 767 planes on 9/11.
The possibility that advanced optical holographic projection was utilized on 9/11 is considered in this documentary, in light of the publicly available R&D documentation of the technology. R&D for this technology was well funded and sought-after as long as 30 years prior to 9/11, and is likely developed to a far higher standard than is known to the general public or commercially available, since the target market was military application. One early stated, seemingly realistic aim of using this tech in a military setting was to convince an enemy that an optical holographic projection of a plane was the real deal.
Also explored in the film is the strong evidence for the use of an exotic, directed-energy, black technology, based on “zero point” energy generation, to "dustify" the World Trade Centre buildings. This evidence is also documented in great detail in the book "Where Did The Towers Go?" by Dr. Judy Wood, a pdf of which is available for download in our wiki.
Since the latter technology produces similar effects to some of those seen during hurricanes/tornadoes, the strange behaviour of Hurricane Erin on 9/11 is addressed, and how the weather conditions over New York in the 24 hours prior to the morning of 9/11 could have been conducive to the use of this technology, and potentially contributed, by design.
For a basic operating outline of a smaller scale form of this technology, please see this brief explanation. What's described in that article was achieved with second hand, decommissioned Naval machinery and no more than domestic, mains electricity.
Another concern of the film is addressing the claims of certain 9/11 researchers. One might be mistaken in believing these would be comrades of those who seriously consider the possibility of that hidden technologies were used on 9/11. The researchers concerned make claims of camera trickery on the day, and claims of there being “no planes”.
However their claims do not hold up to scrutiny, as demonstrated in the film, and it must be seriously considered that their aim is to obscure, muddle or muddy the narrative for people who are seeking the truth. They are hostile to the proponents of the issues considered in this film.
If this is your first foray into 9/11 truth, this film may not be for you; it might be better to start with “September 11: A New Pearl Harbor”. However, the issues covered by this film should be of concern to anyone who has spent time looking into the truth of 9/11, even if they seem controversial, “bat-shit insane” or “woo” on the surface.
The people who have come to dominate the 9/11 truth movement actively censor mention of the issues covered in this film, and more often than not resort to ad hominem attack, among other logical fallacies, when dealing with these issues and with those who discuss them or are proponents of them. This was something I noticed years ago before I ever looked into the topics covered in this film properly; It concerned me and eventually led me to want to give a fair hearing to what was being unfairly suppressed.
It's scrutiny of the documentation and evidence that led people to hypothesize DEW originally. it was observed (over a couple of years) by Dr. Judy Wood, that affected sample objects and materials from experiments with directed energy (on a much smaller scale) were similar in many regards to documentation, reports and evidence from 9/11
It may not be an accurate analogy between a bigger & smaller hammer and DEW and explosives. Using the DEW could actually be the smaller, more discrete physical operation, especially if you already have access to the technology (I don't think this technology was developed specifically for this task.) If it is advanced enough, and it appears that it was/is:
Using it potentially required less effort than a conventional demolition, whereby the building is rigged with tons of explosives by a large team of expert workers, with careful, time-consuming co-ordination needed throughout the fit-out and on the day.
Using it potentially needed less people to be involved: no one needed to drag in and carefully rig the many tons of necessary explosives; no demolition crew needed to be paid and monitored to make sure they kept quiet (or murdered to keep them quiet); less people needed to know. The secrecy was already established, since the tech was developed in secret.
Using it also appears to have brought down the buildings far more efficiently and neatly (small rubble pile) than explosives ever could have, and largely preserved Lower Manhattan in the process.
If you want to push this insane argument you might want to prove the technology even exists. Good luck with that.
This shit was being used in grocery stores to sell bananas over a decade ago:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KjsT_s5eWhI
Everyone is well aware of the cuban embassy attacks:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havana_syndrome
How can you play so aggressively dumb over the existence of the technology much less its historical uses?
WTF are you retarded? This has nothing to do with holograms or laser beams from space.
These are both examples of DEWs you inbred moron, which are what you denied the existence of.
Using the one word "technology" isn't the best description, I've just been using it out of laziness. It's a range of effects resulting from intersecting fields of radio frequency, micro waves and static electricity. The various technologies used to create those fields obviously exist. And some how when mixed they can produce such effects on "solid" objects:
There are various videos (of differing, 80's- 90's video quality) of John Hutchinson's experiments online, such as this one of a block of iron. The room where the experiments take place is filled with equipment surrounding the test area producing the above mentioned fields.
Similar effects were seen on 9/11, but at a much larger scale.
Independent observers saw John's experiments, and filmed some of them for themselves. People these days tend to claim the videos were faked, but don't explain how they were faked. There was clearly a campaign to discredit him once his work started to become known. It wasn't difficult to achieve that since he is a kook, and not a "professional scientist".
He didn't invent or discover these effects though. As I stated earlier, he was trying to mimic the work Tesla did, and he did so completely independently, using de-commissioned, second-hand Naval equipment and machines that he repaired himself, and Tesla coils that he made.
HERE is a post I made on reddit a year ago that has as many video examples of his experiments as I could find online at the time. Be warned, the videos are from long before the days of high res.
LOL if those effects were real, there would be large scientific papers written about these principles. People would be able to replicate these experiments. Relying on this to explain how the towers fell ... lol. Good god man. This reminds me of the many fake free energy devices on youtube.
This is an assumption that observation doesn't support. There are indeed books and research papers written about these principles, on-going, but they had to/have to be done independently. The world of scientific research is controlled and corrupted by misanthropes with no ethics. Large scientific studies need funding and the support of large institutions, peer-review, journal publications etc. These are largely denied to any research that strays into this area. All work done in this area tends to be on the fringe and independently financed for that reason.
Not everyone is a misanthrope though, some just flatly deny the reality of what is captured on video, in Hutchison's experiments, on 9/11; Mostly because it contradicts the Gospel of Einstein and the teachings of other "Esteemed Elders". There has been a big brainwash on for a long time, through institutionalized education. Young minds taught from early on which direction they may go and which direction they may not. Certain things are deemed impossible based on assumption, and others deemed to be absolutely certain based on theory and hypothesis i.e. with no actual evidence, or even when there is only contradictory evidence!
I don't know why any one has faith in the scientific research world or assumes that big, paradigm shifting discoveries would be embraced. A study of history demonstrates that paradigm shifting discoveries are generally abhorrent to the scientific establishment.
The psychological block is also intentionally maintained and encouraged, probably by those groups who have been funding/developing/perfecting the use of field interference effects (and other black technologies):
How The Patent Office Suppresses Free Energy Technology
Another example of how the patent system is used to suppress, or steal, valuable or game changing technology or discoveries from private individuals or businesses: someone posted the other day how all social media is based on code stolen from a patent submission.
All this hinges on the unknown DEW being small enough, portable enough and discreet enough to be taken close enough to the location, used, and removed without being noticed, photographed etc.
A large team isn’t required to plant the explosives and they also have the benefit of setting this up weeks or months ahead of time and hiding charges in places requiring extra clearance, etc. Unless the DEW is flown around in a c-130 like a spectre gunship, getting it in and out seems rather complicated. We know the military has BUDS school, you’ve had marines trained in demo since ww2. It’s not inconceivable to me to send in a black ops team that’s done similar ops around the world to do the job in New York.
Hell I still wonder how a plane that supposedly flew mostly though the tower didn’t have enough momentum to cause the top to fall off in the direction of the plane travel and fall off leaving the top gone and the rest standing. Why free fall straight down?