I guess my title was too long. It should read:
"The bottom line is that 9/11 was a demonstration of an invention that is astonishingly different than mere thermite."
Here is the surprising truth about the 9/11 "Truth" Movement. Judy wood, having a much more accurate and more complete accounting of what happened 20 years ago, is being censored by Wiki and other media shills - AND the supposedly objective 9/11 "Truth" Movement.
If you are more interested in the actual findings of Dr. Wood than the censorship of them just scroll down 3/4ths of the way down.
The bottom line is that 9/11 was a demonstration of an invention that is astonishingly different than mere thermite.
----

Dr. Judy Wood
sonSrtodpec 0 g9550h51am5hhm,3lml2mr0t1gc53a5g50ltl51lM9l2a3 ·
'Real whistleblowers don't show up on your evening news.'
One of the primary reasons the large body of evidence from 9/11 has not gotten the attention it https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=108890969175538&set=a.108769095854392.12444.108768449187790&type=1&permPage=1
Photo #1 is a screen shot showing the Wikipedia page I had created about Dr. Judy Wood, shortly after it was deleted (it was deleted within 12 hours of being created).
Why was I quickly censored when I tried to create a Dr. Judy Wood Wikipedia page using her long list of 20+ peer-reviewed engineering publications? Why was I quickly censored when I tried to add Dr. Judy Wood’s name and website to the ‘9/11 Truth Movement’ Wikipedia page? Why are Dr. David Ray Griffin (Philosophy of Religion and Theology professor) and many other less-qualified "researchers" mentioned multiple times on the ‘9/11 Truth Movement’ Wikipedia page, yet I wasn't even allowed to add one sentence about Dr. Judy Wood (Materials Science Engineer) or the large body of evidence from 9/11 she has assembled? Below is an insightful comment that one of the opposing moderators made to me in a private chat after my Dr. Judy Wood article was deleted:
“I would give Judy Woods [sic] a rest, seriously. Your own credibility over the topic has put her and you on the radar of a number of people and even if you came up with really good references from the NYTimes or Bloomberg you wouldn't be able to create the article anyways - the name is has [sic] been blocked for a while. If you really want to pursue it then I'd suggest creating a private page of your own to develop it. Nobody would fiddle with it and you can craft it until its acceptable. I could help you there. But the comments of the others are still very valid.--Hooperbloob (talk) 03:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)”
When I tried to appeal the decision, a small group of Wikipedia moderators controlled the discussion and told me that if I appealed it again my account would be locked. According to Wikipedia policy, deletion-appeal discussions were to remain open for public comment and review for 5-7 days before a final decision is made, but my appeal was given a final decision by a small group of rude Wikipedia moderators within 12 hours of the onset of my appeal, and the discussion was prematurely closed. After some reading, I realized this was a violation of Wikipedia's own policy, so I appealed the decision again, and my account was locked as a result.
You can read all the details and see actual screen shots of my Wikipedia incident here: http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php...
2. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=451248698273095...
Photo #2 discusses my censorship by 'Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth' (AE911Truth), a prominent 9/11 "Truth" organization. In Spring of 2010 during my first year of medical school, I messaged Richard Gage of AE911Truth to ask him if he knew about the large sum of important physical evidence that Dr. Judy Wood has discovered, and as a result, I was silently banned from AE911Truth, despite the fact that I have donated over $100 dollars to Richard Gage and his organization over the course of my ~1 year membership. As of the morning of March 4th 2010, my name was removed from the AE911Truth petition and my profile was deleted, so it appears that my account has been fully banned from the group simply for sharing evidence with Richard Gage in one private email. It is important to point out that I did not post any information about Dr. Judy Wood in my AE911Truth profile. I had only recently discovered Dr. Judy Wood, and soon after that I decided to send Mr. Gage the single email to ask him for his opinion about the evidence Dr. Wood has discovered. The spontaneous banning of a well-behaved AE911Truth supporter and donor is very concerning to me, because I have not done anything wrong by asking Richard Gage if he is aware of the large sum of empirical evidence Dr. Judy Wood has gathered, yet AE911Truth has banned me simply for trying to help without ever replying to my email. Furthermore, soon after I began posting on internet blogs and forums about what AE911Truth had done to me, it was then that I finally received a reply, from AE911Truth 'Volunteer Coordinator' Mark Graham, offering me a refund of my past donations because an AE911Truth member had noticed I was publicly sharing my story.
"The bottom line is that 9/11 was a demonstration of an invention that is astonishingly different than mere thermite."
Here is the surprising truth about the 9/11 "Truth" Movement. Judy wood, having a much more accurate and more complete accounting of what happened 20 years ago, is being censored by Wiki and other media shills - AND the supposedly objective 9/11 "Truth" Movement.
If you are more interested in the actual findings of Dr. Wood than the censorship of them just scroll down 3/4ths of the way down.
The bottom line is that 9/11 was a demonstration of an invention that is astonishingly different than mere thermite.
----

Dr. Judy Wood
sonSrtodpec 0 g9550h51am5hhm,3lml2mr0t1gc53a5g50ltl51lM9l2a3 ·
'Real whistleblowers don't show up on your evening news.'
One of the primary reasons the large body of evidence from 9/11 has not gotten the attention it https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=108890969175538&set=a.108769095854392.12444.108768449187790&type=1&permPage=1
Photo #1 is a screen shot showing the Wikipedia page I had created about Dr. Judy Wood, shortly after it was deleted (it was deleted within 12 hours of being created).
Why was I quickly censored when I tried to create a Dr. Judy Wood Wikipedia page using her long list of 20+ peer-reviewed engineering publications? Why was I quickly censored when I tried to add Dr. Judy Wood’s name and website to the ‘9/11 Truth Movement’ Wikipedia page? Why are Dr. David Ray Griffin (Philosophy of Religion and Theology professor) and many other less-qualified "researchers" mentioned multiple times on the ‘9/11 Truth Movement’ Wikipedia page, yet I wasn't even allowed to add one sentence about Dr. Judy Wood (Materials Science Engineer) or the large body of evidence from 9/11 she has assembled? Below is an insightful comment that one of the opposing moderators made to me in a private chat after my Dr. Judy Wood article was deleted:
“I would give Judy Woods [sic] a rest, seriously. Your own credibility over the topic has put her and you on the radar of a number of people and even if you came up with really good references from the NYTimes or Bloomberg you wouldn't be able to create the article anyways - the name is has [sic] been blocked for a while. If you really want to pursue it then I'd suggest creating a private page of your own to develop it. Nobody would fiddle with it and you can craft it until its acceptable. I could help you there. But the comments of the others are still very valid.--Hooperbloob (talk) 03:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)”
When I tried to appeal the decision, a small group of Wikipedia moderators controlled the discussion and told me that if I appealed it again my account would be locked. According to Wikipedia policy, deletion-appeal discussions were to remain open for public comment and review for 5-7 days before a final decision is made, but my appeal was given a final decision by a small group of rude Wikipedia moderators within 12 hours of the onset of my appeal, and the discussion was prematurely closed. After some reading, I realized this was a violation of Wikipedia's own policy, so I appealed the decision again, and my account was locked as a result.
You can read all the details and see actual screen shots of my Wikipedia incident here: http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php...
2. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=451248698273095...
Photo #2 discusses my censorship by 'Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth' (AE911Truth), a prominent 9/11 "Truth" organization. In Spring of 2010 during my first year of medical school, I messaged Richard Gage of AE911Truth to ask him if he knew about the large sum of important physical evidence that Dr. Judy Wood has discovered, and as a result, I was silently banned from AE911Truth, despite the fact that I have donated over $100 dollars to Richard Gage and his organization over the course of my ~1 year membership. As of the morning of March 4th 2010, my name was removed from the AE911Truth petition and my profile was deleted, so it appears that my account has been fully banned from the group simply for sharing evidence with Richard Gage in one private email. It is important to point out that I did not post any information about Dr. Judy Wood in my AE911Truth profile. I had only recently discovered Dr. Judy Wood, and soon after that I decided to send Mr. Gage the single email to ask him for his opinion about the evidence Dr. Wood has discovered. The spontaneous banning of a well-behaved AE911Truth supporter and donor is very concerning to me, because I have not done anything wrong by asking Richard Gage if he is aware of the large sum of empirical evidence Dr. Judy Wood has gathered, yet AE911Truth has banned me simply for trying to help without ever replying to my email. Furthermore, soon after I began posting on internet blogs and forums about what AE911Truth had done to me, it was then that I finally received a reply, from AE911Truth 'Volunteer Coordinator' Mark Graham, offering me a refund of my past donations because an AE911Truth member had noticed I was publicly sharing my story.
Last edited: