The New York Times’ 9/11 Propaganda

The New York Times led the propaganda behind 9/11 and the 9/11 Wars. It did so by ignoring many of the most relevant facts, by promoting false official accounts, and by belittling those who questioned the 9/11 events. The Times eventually offered a weak public apology for its uncritical support of the Bush Administration’s obviously bogus Iraq War justifications. However, it has yet to apologize for its role in selling the official account of 9/11, a story built on just as many falsehoods. Instead, the newspaper continues to propagandize about the attacks while putting down Americans who seek the truth about what happened.

The New York “newspaper of record” has published many articles that promote official explanations for the events of 9/11. These have included support for the Pancake Theory, the diesel fuel theory for WTC 7, claims based on the torture testimony of an alleged top al Qaeda leader, and accounts of NORAD notification and response to the hijackings. Since then, U.S. authorities have said that none of those explanations were true. However, the Times never expressed regret for reporting the misleading information.

tta53Instead, the Times continued to sell every different official explanation. When a new government theory for destruction of the WTC was put forth, it was immediately promoted. The newspaper never reported any critical analysis of the official accounts, despite the fact that all of them, including the final reports for the Twin Towers and WTC 7, have been proven to be wrong.

When the fourth story arose for how the North American air defenses failed, the one that said U.S. military officers had spent three years giving “false testimony,” the Times pushed it as fact. Its article on the subject simply closed the matter with the statement that “someone will still have to explain why the military, with far greater resources and more time for investigation, could not come up with the real story until the 9/11 commission forced it to admit the truth.” The idea that military officers might have started out telling the truth, thereby leaving very sensitive questions to be answered, and that the 9/11 Commission was now being false, apparently never occurred to the editors.

Meanwhile, the newspaper has made considerable efforts to belittle Americans who question the official account of 9/11.

In June 2006, the Times published a snarky account of a grassroots conference of 9/11 investigators. The article focused on sensational descriptions of the participants, including what it called “a long­haired fellow named hummux who, on and off, lived in a cave for 15 years.’’ The fact that Dr. hummux was a PhD physicist who had worked on the Strategic Defense Initiative for 20 years was not mentioned. The Times simply distorted his experience living with a Native American tribe and falsely stated that he had lived in a cave. No mention was made of serious, undisputed facts that were presented at the conference.

A few months later, at the fifth anniversary of 9/11, the Times published another propaganda article in support of the politically timed reports from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The article began by declaring that those who questioned 9/11 were “an angry minority,” while minimizing a national Scripps Howard poll, published just a month earlier. The poll showed that “More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East.” That is, the number of Americans who thought that federal officials were behind the attacks (36%) was on par with the percentage of Americans who had voted for the president. Yet the Times inferred that it was only a small fraction of the population who questioned 911.

The September 2006 article promoted one Brent Blanchard as a demolition expert, implying that his recent essay refuted any suggestions that the WTC buildings were demolished. As I told the reporter Jim Dwyer, when he interviewed me for the article, “Mr. Blanchard may be a good photographer, but the uninformative bluster that fills the first two and a half pages of this piece, and a good deal throughout the paper, shows that he is not a good writer.” The fact that Blanchard was only a photographer and not a demolition expert was not mentioned by Dwyer, nor was my point-by-point refutation of Blanchard’s limited arguments. Instead, Dwyer purposefully ignored the evidence and ended his article with another quote from Blanchard.

More recently, perhaps in response to another large billboard posted right outside the Times offices, the newspaper has renewed its 9/11 propaganda efforts. In one new article, reporter Mark Leibovich wonders “why is it good to tell the truth but bad to be a ‘Truther’.” Leibovich turns to former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer for support. Of course, the article does not refer to Fleischer’s curious behavior on the morning of 9/11, which stands among the unresolved questions. Instead, Fleischer’s input is that he uses the term “truther” as an epithet (read “truth nigger”), “floating a notion and letting it hang there to absorb sinister connotations.” Leibovich goes on to portray 9/11 questioning as just another form of ridiculous “trutherism” that is “stranger than fiction.“

Leibovich and his colleagues at the Times continue to suggest that they are unaware of the many incredible facts about 9/11 that call out for critical investigation. At this point, however, that level of ignorance is not believable and the Times’ track record shows that it will never take an honest and objective approach to the events of 9/11. As one former Times reporter stated, the paper’s slogan that it provides all the news ‘fit to print’ really means that it provides all the news that’s fit to serve the powerful. And as long as the needs of the powerful differ from the needs of the people, the truth will be something that is unavailable at the New York Times.

Kevin Ryan blogs at Dig Within.


This entry was posted in Politics / World News and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Marv Sannes

    Two weeks ago the NY Times had the Russian bombing 7 Syrian hospitals. The number began with a lone guy calling himself the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” who does his observing from London. The story began with one hospital and 13 deaths, grew quickly to 3, then 4, and the Times prints 7 hospitals. I think the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, legalizing propaganda has turned our press into paid spokespeople for political policy. I also think the groundswell of 9/11 doubt spurred this Act’s changes to protect these bastards – I haven’t read it but I’ll bet a dollar to a donut the Act is retroactive and protects the Times, et. al. for the behavior covering the events of 9/11 and the subsequent wars.

    • Jerry Gillespie

      NY Times and other notable news media have always manipulated public sentiment, reactions and yes, even violence. Their direct manipulation has created wars, created Presidents and have destroyed Presidents. The Press can with a twist of a few seemingly supportive words turns an act that should be respectful to an act of utter shame.

      The news media ultimately fall back on the “protecting the sources” they have so successfully against reasonable questions authenticate their source. There are situations that do require the identity of a resource. but not all.

      Where once newspapers united the colonies with truth, the press realized the power over the public. In controlling what the “people know” allows public manipulation for goo or bad. Unfortunately, what is good for the press is money and conflict. That being said, the news medias often sensationalizes insignificant events, omit pertinent information and creates news from nothing….. just to cause a conflict to increase profit.

      Blindly accepting editorials, talking heads on TV and Radio programs and articles from reporters without question is the greatest enemy to our nation, freedom and our Constitution. They have created the ever increasing rift US politics. Such a rift will, by nature, continue to expand until there is a complete separation.

    • Demonocracy

      I think the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, legalizing propaganda
      has turned our press into paid spokespeople for political policy.”

      Why isn’t this ever mentioned in articles dealing with the control and manipulation of media and the recent legalization of the governments use of propaganda against the American people? Doesn’t this somewhat violate the 1st amendments freedom of the press clause?

      The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act does not stop at local news, it expands to all sources offering ‘information,’ including (and not limited to):

      social media
      socíal netwørks

      This also means that the government can create “sock puppets,” (term used in internet espionage). Sock puppets are generated to impersonate private citizens, thus disguising affiliations related to government or corporate agendas.

      Because of this, sock puppets can release false information in whatever form the general public uses. (facebook, twitter, reddit, wordpress, youtbe etc.)

      The new law would give sweeping powers to the government
      to push television, radio, newspaper, and social media onto the U.S.
      public. “It removes the protection for Americans,” says a
      Pentagon official who is concerned about the law. “It removes
      oversight from the people who want to put out this information. There
      are no checks and balances. No one knows if the information is
      accurate, partially accurate, or entirely false.”

  • whole2th

    Most call the deceptions and cover-up by mass media ‘treason’. Racketeering laws (RICO) apply–including extraordinary investigation/interrogation to further expose the criminal syndicate; SEIZURE OF ASSETS, and in the case of the obvious ‘fifth column’ infiltration, trial by military tribunal. “Freedom of the press” does not encompass criminal racketeering by a fifth column to conduct a coup over the U.S. and its foreign policies.

  • andy

    Since the sincerely earnest Kevin Ryan is too dense to figure out that the FDNY isn’t lying about Building 7 how can he get up on his high chair and attack anyone for their opinion on 9/11?

    Being lined up with cement heads like Alex Jones and Luke Rinkydinkski on the assertion that Larry Silverstein admitted blowing up #7 is no feather in anybody’s cap.Maybe Mr. Ryan needs a long vacation at a 9/11 rehab clinic alongside Richard Gage.

    • tomotou

      whose payroll are you on? must be the disinfo merchants that feed the NY Times gravy train. Instead of whirling around some nonsensical criticisms of the identification of 3 NYC towers brought down by demolition, you resort to a few cheap words that point to no evidence for the reasons these towers were demolished – two pulverized, the other falling into its’ own footprint.

      • andy

        Idiot.#7 most assuredly did not fall into it’s footprint.

        See link above,which literally pulverizes your stupid,lying cult.

        I bet you think Larry confessed,too.

    • Yodamoo

      FDNY has gone on video and said they were being told that Building 7 was “about to be brought down.” FDNY has said on video that they “heard a countdown” before the demolition. FDNY has said on video that they saw “molten steel flowing like lava.” FDNY has said on video that many people were killed by explosives in the basement and lobby BEFORE any plane hit. You can find all these videos quite easily on Youtube. FDNY didn’t say what you think it said.

      • andy

        Senor Wrong,the FDNY knew the building was going to collapse,not be demolished.A policeman made a clumsy error in the run up to the collapse.A collapse they were preparing for hours.Hence,a perimeter was created by ‘pulling back’.
        McPadden,the guy who claims he heard a countdown was NOT FDNY and was clearly lying.
        FDNY did NOT say that “many people were killed by explosives in the basement and lobby…”.
        Two firemen are on video talking about molten metal.Was that steel? Highly doubtful.

        Willie Rodriguez was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission and said nothing then that he now says.Hmmmm….

        See the link above for some overdue clarification.

  • tomotou

    the NY Times is not worth reading. It’s not even satisfactory for toilet paper. The NY Times is just one of the biggest mouthpieces for US foreign policy, US imperial wars of choice and is more a source of disinfo and ignoring blatantly obvious facts that do not support the US govt. position in its’ pursuit of the PNAC doctrine. I’d never read anything from the Times – you could give me a free subscription and I wouldn’t take it cause I want sources of truth – not lies, disinfo, distortions or avoiding real news that would expose the crimes of the US govt. – particulary the CIA, State, Pentagon and White House.

    • andy

      As opposed to the sterling silver,rock ribbed truth coming out of the Controlled Demolition Cult’s cracked brain trust.
      You’d pay these nutjobs money for their flashy,ludicrous and thoroughly debunked DVD’s but wouldn’t read the Times for free.
      That truly is rich!

  • Emmanuel Goldstein

    And the NY Times didn’t even print one word about the ONLY forensic investigation into the events of 9/11 by a qualified forensic scientist with over four decades of experience…

    Wake up sheeple. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Big Brother only has as much power as you grant him. Independent thought is powerful. After reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Charlie Pound of the U. K. produced the song WAKE UP THIS YOUR ALARM! Unless you enjoy being fleeced, leave the opinion herd and read Dr. Wood’s book too. It has been over 14 years since a secret technology was used to create terror and mass murder for the sake of imperialism and hegemony based on a fiat money system in its death throes. What are we as a people left with? A published scientific forensic investigation that concludes a type of Directed Energy that was used as a weapon “dustified” the World Trade Center complex and a group of shadowy people determined to suppress that evidence by any means. This is the sad reality that we live in. Wake up!
    © 2012 Music, Lyrics, & Vocals by Charlie Pound

    Before you can charge someone with a crime, you have to know what crime was committed. Should a death be ruled a homicide by gunshot, there better be a bullet hole in the body…

    The order of crime solving, that one must first identify:

    1) WHAT happened before determining
    2) HOW “it” happened…before one can determine
    3) WHO did “it” or
    4) WHY they did “it.”

    Since writing her book, Dr. Wood has come to understand more clearly how cover-ups work. People are encouraged to skip step #1 and begin arguing about step #2. In order to argue about HOW “it” happened, people are left to IMAGINE what “it” was that happened. From then on, they are only addressing an imaginary problem, not a real problem. And they can never ever solve the real problem unless they begin with step #1, which defines WHAT the problem is they need to solve. So skipping to step #3 is a useless path that leads you nowhere. See how easy a cover-up works! 😉


    Other examples of Directed Energy (not necessarily used as a weapon) are radio waves, cell phone signals, TV remote control signals, wireless internet signals…etc.

    Those who want to cover up the evidence of what happen often falsely claim that Dr. Wood is talking about a specific weapon and a specific location of it (e.g. laser beam from outer space, or “spacebeams”). This disinformation campaign was initiated by Steven Jones on 11/11/2006 in a presentation he gave in California (available in the internet archives), telling his audience that “Judy Woods (Dr. Wood) says it’s a laser or maser from space” while showing how difficult it is to hold his hand like a beam from space. Not only does Dr. Wood NOT SAY THAT, she actually RULES THAT OUT. The mechanism of destruction of a laser beam would be from heat and produce a bright and blinding light. But we know the buildings were not cooked to death. The term Directed Energy is used because energy is directed to do something different then it normally does and it is directed to do this within a certain geographic zone. [As a mental example, think of directing the binding energy of matter to repel instead of attract. A solid object would turn to atomic-sized dust. Direct this to happen within the WTC complex and not across the street.]

    At the end of Chapter 20 in Dr. Wood’s book, she explains why playing “name the weapon” game is counterproductive. Name dropping trendy terms is not synonymous with understanding. The easiest example is HAARP. The full capabilities are classified. But people often name-drop the trendy term to APPEAR to know something. A tongue-in-cheek definition of HAARP stands for High Amplitude Advancement of Real Propaganda. They are just substituting “HAARP” for “Bin Laden.”

    In Dr. Wood’s book, the closest she comes to “naming a weapon” is merely describing what it creates: magnetic-electrogravitic-nuclear reactions (page 365). But as soon as someone starts talking about a name, people will stop looking at the evidence which is another form of a cover up.

    Early on, Steven Jones created a website he called “The Journal of Nine Eleven Studies” or J.O.N.E.S. It is referred to as a “peer-reviewed journal” but the only peer-reviewing was to screen out true scientific work and post what he wanted his followers to believe. For the first two years, it was primarily used to promote disinformation about Dr. Wood’s work. For example, Jones recruited a patent attorney for the oil and gas industry (James Gourley) to write hit pieces on Dr. Wood, refuting “ray beams from outer space.” This convinced his readers that “Judy Woods” must be talking about “ray beams from outer space” and that “such nonsense has been refuted.” Refuting false propaganda about Dr. Wood’s work does not refute Dr. Wood’s work — yet it creates the belief in the average person that Dr. Wood’s work has been refuted.

    Steven Jones and Greg Jenkins also claimed that it would take more than five times the world’s energy to destroy the WTC towers. Does that mean their thermite came from off planet or “outer space”? LOL Steven Jones used to ridicule Dr. Wood during his talks saying that “Judy Woods needs to make calculations to see if it is even possible to turn the buildings to dust”. But any reputable scientist knows that calculations are not a part of observing empirical evidence. What are the calculations for, to prove the buildings are still there or if the buildings are gone? Why not just look? No assumptions needed with empirical evidence.

    The bottom line is that no one has refuted anything in Dr. Wood’s book nor can they. They only refute their own false propaganda about her book, not her book. Other detractors claim that “she hasn’t identified the weapon that was used so she’s got nothing.” To the contrary. The evidence is PROOF that there exists a technology that can do what was done. It happened. That is, the fact that the buildings mostly turned to dust in mid-air shows that there exists a weapon that can turn buildings into dust in mid-air. It happened.

    The sub-title of the book, “Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11” indicates that the book contains evidence of what happened on 9/11 and it is indeed evidence that a technology exists that can do what was done. But this technology does not have to be used for evil purposes. It can be used to provide free-energy to the world much to the demise of the oil and gas industry. That is, Dr. Wood is noting that the same technology that was used for evil can also be used for good. It’s a silver lining in the dark cloud… while also trying to stimulate thought about “what are we doing here? learning new ways to kill or to live”?

    “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” -Dr. Carl Sagan (1934-1996)

    (Dr. Wood provides extraordinary, overwhelming, and conclusive evidence.)

    by Dr. William L. Baker*

    “The effects can vary in the type of damage mechanism (e.g., blast/fragment, thermal, or ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE [c-DEW: been there, done that]) as well as the magnitude of the energy deposited on the target so that it will be just enough to defeat the target while minimizing collateral damage.”

    “Scientists will have to overcome technological hurdles, such as the production and storage of antimatter, the ability to propagate sensory information, OR THE ABILITY TO HARNESS AND EXTRACT ENERGY FROM THE ENVIRONMENT [Hurricane Erin 2001: been there, done that], before these sciencefiction concepts will become reality.”

    *Dr. William L. Baker retired on 1/2/10 as the Chief Scientist of the Directed Energy Directorate, Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. With an annual budget of more than $300 million, the directorate is responsible for all of the Air Force research and development of lasers, high-power microwave and advanced optical technologies. The directorate conducts advanced technology research to support major applications such as airborne lasers, large optical systems for space situational awareness, airborne high-power microwaves, long-range non-lethal weapons and improvised explosive device defeat. The Chief Scientist is the directorate’s primary adviser on scientific and technical matters and the primary authority for the technical content and quality of the science and technology portfolio.

    Dr. Baker was born in Columbus, Ohio. He received his doctorate in nuclear physics from The Ohio State University in 1969 and served four years on active duty in the Air Force as a nuclear research officer. In 1973 he became a civilian scientist at the Air Force Weapons Laboratory where he performed and led high-energy plasma and pulse power research to develop new techniques to simulate nuclear weapon effects. His work in directed energy weapon technology began with high-energy particle beam weapons. Dr. Baker led a joint effort to develop a unique accelerator and used it to demonstrate stable beam propagation in open air. He then created and led the Air Force high-power microwave weapon technology program. As Chief Scientist, he led research and development on high-energy laser weapons technology and the application of advanced optics to space situational awareness. He is a nationally recognized contributor and leader across the entire spectrum of directed energy technologies. He has been president of the Directed Energy Professional Society for the past two years.

    Dr. Baker has written more than 50 publications in nuclear physics, plasma physics, pulsed power and directed energy.

    • andy

      Make believe the FDNY wasn’t there,ignore their testimonies,stir in some trendy chemical amusement aids,plug in the DVD player,blow your hard earned dollars on a gigantic,insane science fiction book by a Nutty Professor and blast off on your little terribly exciting adventure.

      Doctor Who?

      • Emmanuel Goldstein

        Ridicule is easy. Read what the 9/11 rescue workers were quoted as saying in Dr. Judy Wood’s collection of empirical evidence.

        • andy

          Youse make ridicule easy.Why don’t you ad-lib a couple of Aunt Crazy’s FDNY citations in support of her nonsense.

          • Emmanuel Goldstein

            Why do you ridicule 9/11 recuse workers? Those who are worthy and willing to know the truth will read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood.


          • andy

            Another piece of sterling advice from Worthy,Willing and Gullible,Esq.

          • Emmanuel Goldstein

            By continuing to ridicule me you are covering up the evidence and are aiding and abetting those who used this technology for their own self-serving interests. Anyone who has read Dr. Wood’s book knows this. I read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? in February 2011.

          • Emmanuel Goldstein

            BTW- The forensic scientific evidence contained in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? noted fluctuations in the Earth’s magnetic field during five key events.
            They were at the time each cookie-cutout plane shaped hole was created
            and when towers one, two, and seven went “poof”.


          • andy

            So they used exotic weaponry for the Twin Towers but then used super quiet explosives and incendiaries for your Sacred Tower.Why would they do that?

          • Emmanuel Goldstein

            I understand you are playing Devil’s Advocate but what is your question? Could you define it more? The evidence has eliminated destruction by any form of kinetic energy. Lasers do not do that, bombs do not do that, thermite does not do that, thermate does not do that, nano-enhanced thermite does not do that, nano-thermite does not do that, new-and-improved super-duper mini-micro-nano thermite does not do that, firecrackers do not do that, fire does not do that, nukes do not do that, megga nukes do not do that, milli-nukes do not do that, mini-nukes do not do that, nano-nukes cannot do that, missiles cannot do that, a wrecking ball cannot do that, or a slingshot cannot do that. It will shortly be five years since I have read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and this article hits the nail on the head:

            ♥ The Miracle of Directed Energy Technology on 9/11 ♥
            2015-09-26 2:19 By Tomfarrar Talley | Red Ice Creations

            The fabric of the human mind is flexible, but the strings of credulity can only stretch out so far, and then incredulity settles in. The New York Times reports today that Pope Francis will visit the National September 11 Memorial Museum at Ground Zero in NYC, and view its exhibits.


            I understand you are playing The image above depicts an artifact residing in the 9/11 Museum of an open Bible fused to a hunk of steel wreckage, with some of the steel overlapping the pages after it was softened by extremely high heat, or some other process. How could this happen and not have burned the paper? Was it a miracle? Is such a thing even possible in the physical world? And yet, the result can clearly be seen.


            When shown this artifact of the bible fused with steel, will the pontiff proclaim it a miracle? Will he designate it as a holy relic? Or, will he state: “This is impossible! Bible paper burns at 451 degrees Fahrenheit, just like Ray Bradbury wrote about in his book.” The autoignition point of paper has a range of from 440 – 470°F, depending on the type of paper. Steel melts at 2500°F. When the pope inspects the opened bible paper fused to the steel, will he find burnt paper, or even any scorch marks? No, not if his eyesight is corrected to 20/20.

            Bible paper, of low acid content and thin manufacture is very combustible. Soldiers during World War II, when out of cigarettes or rolling papers, would tear pages from their pocket New Testaments and use the thin paper to roll their cigarettes from loose tobacco and the makeshift papers proved burn evenly.

            How then, did this artifact of bible pages become “fused” with steel, without the paper combusting into a blackened mass of ashes? Thanks to the pope and his visit to New York City, much needed attention will be brought upon this anomalous artifact, which could prove successful in helping to solve the puzzle of the destructive process at work on 9/11.


            Revisit that day, and remember all the images of showers of paper floating down through the air and scattering all over the sidewalks and streets, when the towers were destroyed. These papers were intact and surely not burned. What process was at work that could turn steel and concrete towers to dust, and yet not affect paper?

            A process used in directed energy technology can cause a dissociation and alteration of the molecular structure of metal, to fuse with combustible objects and appear as if the materials melted together, but with no discernable evidence of heat or combustion.

            So evidently, a technology exists which can accomplish those results, the results seen in the bible papers fused to the metal, steel. This is not a miracle, other than this technology being able to appear miraculous to most people. Arthur C. Clarke once opined: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Other forces were at work the day of 9/11, other than magic or the hand of the Divine..

            Very much related to this anomalous artifact in the 9/11 Museum, is another one found in the ruins of an almost forgotten and seldom mentioned building which was immediately destroyed on the morning of 9/11, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox church, just across the street from the southside of the South Tower, or WTC-2. When retrieval of the relics in the church was undertaken in the following days, only a few pieces survived.. and one find was called a miracle.


            “The great miracle, […] was the recovery of an icon of St. Spyridon. The silver around the icon had melted, but the paper icon had not been burnt.”


            This discovery was one of the church’s most holy relics, and it was declared a miracle because the silver onlay applied to a paper icon of St. Spyridon had “burned off”, leaving the paper intact and unscorched. The melting point of silver is 1,763°F.

            So, will Pope Francis also, like the Greek Orthodox Archbishop Demetrios, declare the bible paper fused to steel artifact a holy relic, and now, a miracle? Or, will he assign responsibility to the science? Or, would he rather the unknown science of directed energy technology remain unknown, and suppressed?

            Probably the best collection of evidence making the case for a directed energy technology at work and used as a weapon on 9/11, can be found at the website of a mechanical engineer named Judy Wood, Ph.D – and in her landmark book: ”Where Did The Towers Go?”.


            Red Ice Creations is an independent radio program and news website headquartered on the west coast of Sweden, in the heart of Scandinavia.

          • Emmanuel Goldstein

            Wake up sheeple. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Big Brother only has as much power as you grant him. Independent thought is powerful. After reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Charlie Pound of the U. K. produced the song WAKE UP THIS YOUR ALARM! Unless you enjoy being fleeced, leave the opinion herd and read Dr. Wood’s book too. It has been over 14 years since a secret technology was used to create terror and mass murder for the sake of imperialism and hegemony based on a fiat money system in its death throes. What are we as a people left with? A published scientific forensic investigation that concludes a type of Directed Energy that was used as a weapon “dustified” the World Trade Center complex and a group of shadowy people determined to suppress that evidence by any means. This is the sad reality that we live in. Wake up!

            © 2012 Music, Lyrics, & Vocals by Charlie Pound