Jenkins panics




Dirt
Scholars for 9/11 Truth


Greg Jenkins Panics

A Segment from the highly-funded Jenkins psyops

July 2, 2007
Click on pictures to enlarge

I. Jenkins Panics

Photo
Photo

Figure 1. After the towers are destroyed, the dust cloud rolls along the ground and some of it moves upward. It does not appear to be moving horizontally or downward. The southeast tip of Manhattan is covered in white dust.
(9/11/01 entered) Source
Figure 2. Greg Jenkins panics when he realizes he wasn't able to trap Dr. Wood as he'd hoped he would.

video

Figure 3. Even though Greg Jenkins ambushed Dr. Wood for this surprise interview, he wasn't able to trap her. Imagine what the outcome would have been if he had informed her of his plans. Now, did Greg Jenkins really think he was helping the "truth movement"? If what Dr. Wood is presenting on her website is such nonsense, why would Greg Jenkins invest time and money into this? Why would Steven Jones recruit Greg Jenkins to do a smear job on Dr. Wood for his "journal"? Now, did Steven Jones really think he was helping the "truth movement"?

Deliberately undermining the "truth movement" is an act of treason.




II. Jenkins caught between a rock and a hard spot


Video, pt3 of 4 
Figure 4. Greg Jenkins panics. Note the video inserts. Why does this Greg Jenkins' video contain images that were not being discussed and were about issues that were not being discussed?
0:09:52 URL, (posted July 2, 2007) Link to transcript.
Photo
Figure 5. Greg Jenkins clearly studied just what he was to say and do. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to trap Dr. Wood as he'd hoped he would.
Photo
Figure 6. Why does Greg Jenkins have an agenda to convince us this didn't exist?
(9/12/01) Source: space imaging

III. The snowball can't explain the missing volume


Why has Greg Jenkins tried to convince folks that Dr. Wood is pointing up to the smoke coming from WTC1? The images below are screen captures from the Google video that Greg Jenkins had a professional film crew record and edit. Why has Greg Jenkins worked so hard to convince folks that all of the building "fell" down and none of it blew up? Dr. Wood is clearly pointing to the "snowball" cloud of dust in the photo. Why does Greg Jenkins insert a photo into the video to confuse the viewer? Dr. Wood is showing that approximately 2/3 of the building is no longer there and the volume of material in the "snowball" cannot account for it.

I wonder why the lighting is so different between the two cameras.

Greg Jenkins fails to manipulate Dr. Wood and begins to panic.

Why is Greg Jenkins so desperate to deny that a significant amount of dust went up?

Figure 7.





Link to transcript.

IV. On Being Important

The Greg Jenkins video (a highly-funded psyops) couldn't have done a better job to convince us just how important my message is. I feel honored to have been given such confirmation. Thank you Greg Jenkins! After all, what motivated Greg Jenkins to produce such a hit piece? This video was expensive to produce. It was filmed by a professional camera crew, with professional equipment, and then carefully edited and manipulated, with carefully inserted images and sound into the final production.

This event does nothing to undermine the scientific merit of my work. To the contrary. Who would want to invest so much time, energy, expense, and manpower into producing such a video? How does Greg Jenkins manage to explain the fact that some of his research is funded by the NSA? (See here and here (archived here and here).) Yes, I mean THAT NSA; the one that has a vested interest in making sure the truth of 9/11 stays buried. I can not think of a higher, more direct indicator that I am on the right track in assessing what caused WTC1,2 to be pulverized in less than 10 seconds than to be setup in an ambush video-manipulation by an NSA informant. Imagine that. Why would I be the most important person to attack …and to attempt to persuade every 911 "truther" to attack?
Figure 6. Let us note the not-so-subtle video arrangement and consider the effect of these video-graphic decisions.
Why is the camera angle from the side, showing a profile view?
Why is the image so close up?
Why does my face look purple?
Why is the lighting poor?
Figure 7. Compare the above video arrangement on these same issues.
Camera angle?
How close up is the image?
Are the colors more balanced?
Is the lighting better?

Let us ask what kind of person would even want to make a researcher of the TRUTH look bad?
I cannot imagine how anyone in search of the truth would think that what Greg Jenkins orchestrated was in search of the truth. Those who are truly in search of truth would not use deception. Greg Jenkins used deception to plan his "surprise" event, used deception to carry out his "surprise" event, used deception in "preparing" his product, and used deception in promoting his product. One must ask, "Why?" Why did what he was planning and doing require deception? Why did he choose to be dishonest in what he did?

And, why would another "researcher" recruit such an unethical and dishonest hit job on a "fellow researcher"?

Figure 8. And, most of all, why is this image so out of focus?
Figure 9. Is the focus in this image better?

Greg Jenkins clearly studied just what he was to say and do. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to trap Dr. Wood as he'd hoped he would.

But, the real gift Greg Jenkins provided in this video manipulation is realized by looking beneath the superficial psyops being promoted. Reading between the lines reveals more evidence behind the use of DEW on 9/11 and advances scientific understanding of what happened. We wish to thank Greg Jenkins for the valuable clues he gave us in advancing our understanding of the effects of DEW (Directed Energy Weapons). This conversation and video product is what inspired the new "dirt" series, Molecular Dissociation: from Dust to Dirt.




Figure 8. This is a satellite image captured on 9/12/01. It appears that the cloud emerging from the WTC site stays together until it reaches a particular altitude where it begins to just disperse. There appears to be a kink in the cloud trail where this occurs.
(9/12/01) Source: space imaging

Link to full transcript.


Steven Jones obviously condones the harassment of Dr. Wood and encourages it.

V. Email from Steven E. Jones to Greg Jenkins, Recruiting the Hit Piece
The ambush "interview" with Greg Jenkins is here: (mp3)
What is the motivation of Greg Jenkins to do a surprise "interview" of someone at a time approaching midnight, after they had driven 600 miles just to be a supportive member of an audience? Apparently Steven Jones approves of such tactics.

At a time approaching midnight, Dr. Wood did not agree to discuss or "defend" anything. Is this what Steven Jones considers to be "science"? Do "scientific journals" recruit well-funded psyops hit pieces for their "journal?"

Email sent from Steven E. Jones to Greg Jenkins:
Subject: Judy Wood interview
Relayed On: Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 18:24:04 -0500

[Begin quoted email]

From: Greg Jenkins (*** @http://gregjenkins.myfastmail.com)
To: DC 9/11 Truth mailto:dc911truth@googlegroups.com

I just received the following from Dr. Stephen Jones:

Hello, Greg --

Several weeks ago, we launched the Letters section of the Journal of 9/11 Studies. Perhaps you have seen it? Here we invite discussion of "hot" topics without requiring peer-review so as to encourage rapid feedback:  http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters.html

I am writing to invite you to contribute a (short) letter if you will to Topic B:
B. Was a "star-wars" beam weapon used at the WTC?

The reason I ask is this -- Yesterday I watched your interesting interview with Judy Wood on this topic.
(http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-558096240694803017) That was the first time I had heard Dr. Wood on a video, and she does try there to defend the energy-beam from space theory she is promoting.  (Which as you must know, is causing quite a schism in the community right now...)  Jim Fetzer has joined Judy in promoting this energy-beam idea -- he suggests the beam which hit the Towers came from WTC 7 in his Tucson talk, here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=646337772656177512

I think it would be very valuable to have a Letter to the Journal which provides the URL's to your interview with Dr. Wood, and to Jim F's talk, to allow readers to readily find the video-taped arguments by Judy and Jim F.

Would you be willing to compose then a brief letter to document this, emphasizing your interview?  Pls let me know -- I would appreciate it. I have discussed documenting these two videos in the Letters section with the co-editor, Kevin Ryan, and he agreed that this would be a good idea.

If you do, it would be very helpful IMO to put two photos in your Letter with the text,
1-  The photo you discussed with Judy and
2-- A photo from across the river, showing the smoke from the North Tower blowing "over" the South Tower...  These would provide a preview to your interview.  But that's up to you, of course.

Thanks for your efforts,

STeven J

(PS -- there is also a short clip by John Albanese which shows the dangers of discussing non-evidence based theories publicly, here: http://911blogger.com/node/5474#comment. FYI.  Funny.  )

[End of quoted email]

After reading the above email sent by Steven Jones to Greg Jenkins, one must ask, Was Jones' intention to improve the image of the "truth movement" or to undermine it? Recruiting someone to do a hit piece on a fellow researcher is not only unethical, it goes beyond the pale. This behavior by Steven Jones implies that he knows Dr. Wood is uncovering the truth and it is his job to prevent that or to prevent anyone from listening to her. If he were confident about his own research, he wouldn't feel threatened by another approach.

So, what motivates Steven Jones to recruit hit pieces on a 9/11 researcher?

Perhaps it is true that history repeats. For information on Steven Jones' involvement with cold fusion: (Fintan Dunn (mp3)) (Heavy Watergate (46 min)) (Heavy Watergate (at 1:21 min)) ("Fire from Ice," by Eugene Mallove.)

In his email, above, Steven Jones was probably not referring to the following photo, even though this is one of the photos that Dr. Wood referred to in the "discussion." Had she been informed of Greg Jenkins' plans, she would have come prepared with photos such as these.






Figure 9. After the towers are destroyed, the dust cloud rolls along the ground and some of it moves upward. It does not appear to be moving horizontally or downward. The southeast tip of Manhattan is covered in white dust.
(9/11/01 entered) Source

Figure 10. This is the corner of West and Vesey Streets, looking southward down West Street. After the towers are destroyed, there seems to be very little material on the ground. Where did the building go? WTC6 is directly ahead. WTC1 should be just behind it. Where did it go?

(This photo has been lighten and reduced in size. For original, click on the photo.)
(9/11/01) Source


Shortcut links
I. Jenkins Panics

II. Jenkins caught between a rock and a hard spot

III. The snowball can't explain the missing volume

IV. On Being Important

V. Email from Steven E. Jones to Greg Jenkins, Recruiting the Hit Piece


Dirt



In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles posted on this webpage are distributed for their included information without profit for research and/or educational purposes only. This webpage has no affiliation whatsoever with the original sources of the articles nor are we sponsored or endorsed by any of the original sources.

© 2006-2008 Judy Wood and the author above. All rights reserved.