Dr Judy Wood from the video:
Dustification[
edit]
Dr Wood's observation of the destruction of the World Trade Center on
11 September 2001 led her to the
conviction that the towers did not collapse but were "dustified" by a directed energy weapon. According to her, dustification involves molecular dissociation and transmutation.
In a whole series of lectures and media appearances[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-1][1][/url], Wood has maintained that the debris pile was nowhere near tall enough to account for the aggregate mass of the towers and their contents. Rather, she states, the towers were pulverized[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-2][note 1][/url] in mid-air and simply blew away on the breeze.
On her web site, Wood presents a 41-point list of "The principal evidence that must be explained." It includes (point 9) "The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth", and (point 6) "The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition."[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-3][2][/url]
She consistently declines to speculate about the exact nature of the weapon involved[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-4][3][/url], where it was situated or who operated it. Her position is that, as a scientist, her role is to determine what happened that day. Others might or might not address those more political questions.
SNIP
On 25 April 2007 Wood was Plaintiff/Relator in a
qui tam[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-11][note 3][/url] petition to The United States District Court, Southern District of New York. In the nature of the
Qui tam process, she was acting on behalf of the United States of America. She named a list of 23 respondents headed by Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) and Science Applications International Corp.(SAIC)[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-12][9][/url].
The petition claimed that the respondents acted fraudulently in giving advice to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) during their investigation of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. The Statement of Case included these words:
"Those who performed work and received payment from NIST are alleged to have engaged in scientific fraud by petitioner, Dr. Wood, a materials engineering scientist, based upon a process of fraud documented by Dr. Wood's original source research and findings that concluded that the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center were destroyed by an unconventional energy weapon that can be directed and thus is referred to as a form of what are called "directed energy weapons" (DEW).""Dr. Wood has demonstrated that the Twin Towers did not burn up nor did a significant portion of them crash down; they turned to powder in mid air and fire cannot turn a quarter-mile tall building to powder in 8-10 seconds. The respondents herein knew or should have known this and they therefore engaged in actionable fraud within the meaning of the False Claims Act."
Wood potentially stood to cash in big-time if her petition had succeeded, since successful qui tam relators are normally granted 15-25% of the final settlement. In fact, in this case, since the Attorney General declined to intervene, the relator's share could have been boosted to as much as 30%. The original petition sought to recover "all available damages and other monetary relief under the common law or equitable theories of unjust enrichment, payment under mistake of fact, recoupment of overpayments and common law fraud".[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-14][11][/url] The suit also claimed "[T]he amount of the United States' damages, multiplied as required by law, and such civil penalties as are required by law, together with all such further relief as may be just and proper".[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Judy_Wood#cite_note-15][12][/url]
Person Not Capable of Pregnancy