Jim Fetzer's Three-Plus Hour Blockbuster on Greek Television, Monday 12/18
Greetings fellow 9/11 Patriots,
When I arrived at my week night job late this Monday afternoon, little did I suspect that the prime theme of the evening was not going to be pizza deliveries and tips as usual. Much to my surprise, the evening was dominated by extensive discussions about what really happened on 9/11, and watching my boss and a coworker wake up quickly and dramatically to the entire 9/11 matrix.
The pizzeria where I work is owned and operated by Greek immigrants. My boss has a TV in the kitchen which is hooked up to a satelite dish. He is able to receive the Alter Globe Greek language station, which he has on much of the time.
As soon as I walked in on Monday, he immediately called my attention to what was taking place live on Greek television. It was a panel discussion show involving several Greek journalists and broadcasters. They were asking questions from none other than our own Jim Fetzer, who was laying out his case - point by point - that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by elements within the U.S. government.
The entire program was quite slickly produced and was supplimented by plenty of file footage. Included was an interview segment with Willie Rodreguez, a recording of Norman Mineta's testimony, and some of the sharpest, most revealing video footage of the twin towers' demolition I have seen to date. Everything was instantly translated so that the participants could understand professor Fetzer and he could understand them.
Overall, I was extremely impressed with this detailed, one-two punch from Jim Fetzer. Certainly, it was the strongest performance I have ever witnessed from him. As can be expected, the scientific aspects were covered. But his overwhelming emphasis was on political testimony and the 9/11 timeline. One after another, the points he made were the ones that everyone in the 9/11 Truth movement knows and agrees upon - dozens of them, in fact over the course of the three hours. And contrary to the divisions and fear mongering that still plagues our movement, Professor Fetzer unequivocally confirmed the findings of Dr. Stephen Jones and stated that thermite/thermate was used in the destruction of the WTC.
"The simplest explaination for something usually turns out to be the most accurate," he remarked. "But it should cover all the observable data." He then briefly mentioned the possibility that other high tech systems were also utilized on that day, but he quickly added that we don't know what they are or how they work, if any were involved at all. Never once during the course of the three-plus hours did he mention anything about "space beams" or weapons from space being involved. But he did add a political possibility that I never heard of or considered before, namely that the entire 9/11 operation could have been outsourced to the Israeli government, and they are the ones who scripted it. I started thinking about that possibility and realized that if such was the case,it may explain where the missing two-plus trillion dollars from the Pentagon budget went and why the instigators of 9/11 wanted the accountants who were working on the case killed.
Needless to say, the whole experience of this broadcast was quite revealing. Over the past few weeks, I've been hearing incessant criticism of Jim Fetzer, almost to the point of hysteria. But this presentation renewed my faith in him, his judgement, and his value to the movement. It also gave me a chance to witness other people awaken to the truth of 9/11 the same way I did many months ago. My boss had been aware for some time that I was a "9/11 Truther," but we never had the opportunity to discuss it in detail until this presentation appeared on his television. Frequently, I added my own commentary to reinforce the points even further. My boss could barely pull himself away from the set and his assistant once went several minutes before realizing there was a customer at the counter. It's a good thing that overall, it was a slow night.
However, there was one "negative" result of this presentation: It increased my already intense hatred of the American broadcast media. Here is a television network in a far off land that considered this information so important, they devoted more than three consecutive hours of air time to it. Although I did not have the luxury of hearing the English translations of the questions and commentary made by the Greek journalists, it was obvious from Professor Fetzer's answers that their input was thoughtful, intelligent, and appropriate.
Compare that to the corrupt fascism, mockery, and frat boy tactics of our dysfunctional American TV networks and cable outlets. Webster Tarpley is correct: the United States is an autistic nation. And our intollerant, antagonistic, scape goating, sound bite loving, corporate scum media is largely to blame for it.
I have every reason to believe that millions of Greeks, in their native land and around the world, woke up to 9/11 Truth on Monday night. Can you imagine what would happen if, for once, just ONE American network or cable outlet found the courage to turn the tables on their New World Order handlers and air a similar three hour panel discussion featuring ANY leading figure in the 9/11 Truth movement? Could you imagine the impact such a broadcast would have?
So, blog all you want about poor Kevin Barrett subjecting himself to more abuse from neo-con shill O'Reilly, and being shouted down before he can get two sentences out. Kevin puts up with it because he has no other options for a mass audience in America. But as for me, I refuse to even watch such uncivilized abuse. Opportunities like Jim Fetzer's Greek TV marathon have far more positive impact and offer far more
opportunities and hope.
COMMENTS ON THE BOSTON TEA PARTY for 9/11 TRUTH
Overall, the event was successful, but failed in two areas. The first was the procession route to the harbor. Boston is not like New York where there are always hordes of people on the street all the time. On weekends, especially before Christmas, the streets are largely empty with two notable exceptions: Quincy Market and the area around the Common. Instead of Marching directly to Congress Street, we should have marched around the entire circumfrence of Quincy Market first so thousands of shoppers and pedestrians would have seen our procession right from the start. We then should have marched to the Common and then to the harbor bridge near the Barking Crab. True, this would have made our march considerably longer, but there were certainly enough of us to share the burden of carrying the mock crates of 9/11 Commission Reports.
The second area of failure is the one that made a longer route feasible, namely the cancelation of the press conference due to the inability to attract any local media coverage of the event. But needless to say, this was not the fault of the organizers.
On the positive side was the overwhelming public support we seemed to be receiving. I didn't witness a peep of dissent or mockery toward us, which there still was a bit of in New York on the fifth anniversary.
America may have the most corporately gagged media in the world, and the local media in Boston and New York are the worst of the lot. But the Northeast is also the smartest, most internet savvy portion of the country and people are waking up in droves, in spite of the media lockdown. Lots of people came up to us hungry for more information and web site URL's.
If the opportunity comes for another Boston event, let's learn from these experiences.
fjockey
Troubadour 1700 AM
Home Brewed Radio 1700 & 1670
Shirley, MA
Progressive Easy Listening Music
Progressive Talk without the Gate Keepers
http://www.t1700.net
- fjockey's blog
- Login to post comments
Yes, this where Dr. Fetzer has been the past week
Yes, the preparation of this show in Greece is why Dr. Fetzer was not on his GCN radio show this last week and why Dr. Barrett filled in for him. I thought Dr. B. said Dr. Fetzer went to Italy to film this 3 hour documentary, but maybe he said Greece - not sure.
I am just curious as to where this video will be shown in the USA or when and where it will be marketed.
I am so glad that Dr. Fetzer is the one who was called on to do this. Can't wait to see it.
Blessings from Dachsie in Austin.
One or more more things
I knew Dr. Fetzer would do a good job. He speaks always very logically and always with conviction and gusto. What the Brotherhood of Darkness has done on 9-11 and has done over the years to our once great Constitutional Republic is something that ought to put real emotion and gusto into the demeanor of every red blooded American.
About the US media. It is owned by 5 globalist mega corporations. These corporations and the interests of our globalist rules of the USA government have exactly the same interests. This is fascism. No way our US media is going to say anything that deviates too much from the "party line", the US government / international corporatist cabal.
We no longer have anything in US journalism that has to do with the people's right to know or being watchdogs of the government or being true investigative journalists. It is all about ratings and market share and profits for those big corporations' shareholders. News is entertainment and vice versa.
Blessings from Dachsie in Austin.
http://www.aulis.com/jackstud
http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html (bottom)
"Jack White's studies of anomalies in the Apollo space program raise the disturbing question, if man went to the Moon, then why was it necessary to fake so many photos?"
James H. Fetzer PhD
Dr. Fetzer is a Distinguished McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota, Duluth
Sounds like a good question to me . . .
Anonymous apparently intends merely citing the question I raise as a smear! That is a nice example of the coward's approach toward discovering the truth. If anything runs contrary to accepted wisdom or widely-held beliefs, don't question it! Except that, if we adopted that policy, then how could 9/11 research get off the ground? Anonymous has no idea if man went to the moon. And I seriously doubt that he has ever studied Jack's research on the moon photographs. If he had, then if he is a rational agent, I would think he would share my concern. If we really did go to the moon, then why was it necessary to fake so many moon photos? That's a really, really good question. If this is the best response that 911bloggers can offer to the summary of a nearly 4-hour program on 9/11 broadcast world-wide, then that is pathetic. I thought that blogger was supposed to be related to the discovery and dissemination of 9/11 truth, not simply personal vendettas. By the way, I am now Distinguished McKight University Professor Emeritus. My remaks about Steve's work were somewhat more qualified, insofar as I reported the use of thermite or thermate as his hypothesis where other conventional explosives may have been used, while pointing out that other means of destruction could have also been involved in bringing about the massive devastation of the World Trade Center.
Thanks to fjockey for an excellent summary and Dachsie in Austin for her posts.
The numerical rating of an event of this magnitude speaks volumes about blogger.
From Fetzer's page on
From Fetzer's page on wikipedia . . .
Fetzer spoke positively of former scholars Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds, who left the Scholars due to disagreement with the organization, objecting in particular to the Scholar's rejection of 'no plane' theories (theories arguing that no planes hit the World Trade Center).
Fetzer talks about the theory that a "satellite-mounted military weapon" may have been used to bring down the World Trade Center, and writes that
"the range of alternative explanations that might possibly explain the explanandum must include non-classic controlled demolition from the top-down using mini-nukes, and...non-classic controlled demolition from the top-down using directed energy weapons...The specific weapons used to destroy the WTC could have been ground based or space based."
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/OpenLetterToJones.html
For Fetzer, "Judy [Wood] appears to have done far more to develop her "proof of concept" than has Steve [Jones]".
Steven Jones and others have refuted the mini-nuke claims -
Testing the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/MiniNukeHypoth_Jones_300906.html
Theories that Nuclear Weapons Destroyed the Twin Towers
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/theories/nuclear.html
Note that Fetzer's site still has about 10 links suggesting that nukes were used at the WTC . . .
The trolls want to hide this from you!
Gee, you trolls are working overtime to suppress this!
Your motives are becoming too obvious!
Anonymous, you are off-topic and you are spreading disinformation. Why? Perhaps this is why you post anonymously. Why is it so important to smear the research of these leading 9/11-truth scientist to the point you are telling lies? I'm sure you are getting overtime pay for your working through the holidays. Is that the way this game is played? What happened to the TRUTH?
You wrote, "Fetzer spoke positively of former scholars Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds, who left the Scholars due to disagreement with the organization, objecting in particular to the Scholar's rejection of 'no plane' theories (theories arguing that no planes hit the World Trade Center)."
This is a lie. If you looked at the facts instead of propagating disinformation, you would know this. The work of Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds is based on scientific evidence. That's more than I can say about anything I've seen from Steven Jones, thus far. So, why do you have a problem with scientific evidence? Perhaps this scientific evidence contradicts the disinformation /propaganda that you are "selling?"
Jim Fetzer, who accepted their letters of resignation, now regrets having done so. Jim Fetzer now admits to having been manipulated into suppressing the research of Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds, who resigned from Scholars in order to be free to conduct their research. After leaving Scholars, these two researchers have indeed demonstrated they have some fairly powerful research to present.
It appears that Steven Jones is trying to suppress the real research presented by Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. Why? Remember that the more successful disinformation proponents deliver a mix of truth:disinformation at a ratio of about 80% -to- 20% or even 90% -to- 10%. This is how they are able to win over their unknowing followers who are suckered in and quit thinking on their own. A cult hero can control the hearts and minds of his followers. So, all he needs to do is establish the "hero" position, and then re-direct their "opinions."
It appears that Steven Jones worked on the development of Directed Energy Weapons (DEW), the development of Space Based Lasers (SBL), and the development of Ground Based Lasers (GBL). Steven Jones worked at Los Alamos National Labs in the same department where these weapons were being developed, and he worked there while these weapons were being developed. So, why would he use the derogatory term, "space beams," and laugh off the data presented by Wood and Reynolds as ridiculous, when he knows better? The only reason I can think of is that this is his job to suppress the truth! The alternative is that Jones is so incompetent that it renders whatever he says as useless.
Jim Fetzer acknowledges why Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds resigned. "Morgan and Judy, I am sure, believed that they were not free to pursue their research on 9/11 without having to compromise for political purposes. I am now convinced that they were right..." I believe this shows what a humble person Jim Fetzer is. He wants to uncover REAL research and wants to sidestep unscientific, unproven, propaganda.
Does Steven Jones care about honest research?
1. Break for news audio from 6/15/06 (mp3)
2. Better picture quality, but no scroll bar.(link)
Click on "Heavy Watergate - The War Against Cold Fusion" when you get to that page.
3. Googgle video (Scroll bar, but reduced picture quality.) (link)
I noticed that someone has posted a miniature google video of the second one here:
* For the Jones segments, move the progress bar to 11:00 -
Suppression of Research
The "other actions and communications" may be even more important but also more subtle than terminating access to the forum in these cases. As anyone who has read the "Open Letters" exchange posted on st911.org will be aware, it is my position that a wide range of alternative approaches toward understanding what happened on 9/11 deserve serious consideration. But I have not always implemented that policy consistently. Steve has attained enormous popularity among students of 9/11 for his studies of the destruction of the Twin Towers and how they may have been taken out. Somewhat surprisingly, his research was accepted almost immediately, without question or searching evaluation.
While I have been keenly interested in Steve’s research, I have become convinced that the complete and comprehensive devastation of the World Trade Center–including WTC-3, WTC-4, WTC-5, and WTC-6 as well as WTC-7–is very unlikely to be explainable on the basis of his hypothesis. It may well be that thermate was used to destroy some of these buildings. In fact, Judy Wood has suggested that the last 20 floors of the towers may have been demolished using thermate and other explosives. Alternative hypotheses deserve to be explored, not condemned. Many advances in science first encountered ridicule!
We need to remember that the 9/11 truth movement itself has had to cope with mountains of ridicule. We should not abandon our commitment to the principles of science and to the primacy of logic and evidence in the appraisal of possible explanations. I have therefore been dismayed at the dawning realization that even I may have been an accomplice to the constraint of research in several cases by removing at least two articles that were critical of Steve’s work, which I now believe deserve more objective scientific consideration, namely:
Aluminum Glows
1 Mar 2006, Judy Wood and Michael Zebuhr
Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Disintegrate?
18 Sep 2006, Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood, v. 1.02
Because these studies are critical of his research and because I have sought to keep the level of tension within the society relatively minimal, I am quite certain that I allowed myself to be influenced by pressure from supporters and friends of Steve–and they are legion–to have them taken down. Even if a desire to reduce tensions over differences has led me to constrain debate in the past, in the case of Judy’s directed-energy hypothesis, I do not want this to deteriorate into the suppression of evidence and the obstruction of research. I am therefore drawing a line where I believe it has to be drawn. I am only disappointed that the importance of unfettered discussion has not always been foremost in my mind.
Morgan and Judy, I am sure, believed that they were not free to pursue their research on 9/11 without having to compromise for political purposes. I am now convinced that they were right and that, as the manager of st911.org, I should have found a way to make their research available to the public, perhaps by creating a new section of the site devoted to theories and to criticism of theories about how the towers were destroyed. I even believe that Steve would agree with that; indeed, it seems to me that he may even have suggested as much. Sometimes even the best advice falls on deaf ears. I would like to think that the proposals I have offered for reorganizing and revitalizing Scholars will matter here, too!
lock
lock
Anonymous' incorrigibility
The likelihood that thermite/thermate can explain all of the damage to the World Trade Center approximates zero. This guy, who lacks the courage to even identify himself by name, would have you believe that the consideration of alternative hypotheses--such as mini-nukes, directed energy weapons, HAARP, or other possibilities--is bad for your health. Well, it won't cause tooth decay and, frankly, it is the only method known to science for discovering the truth. If Steve Jones' hypothesis is correct, then the only way to demonstrate that it is better than the alternatives is to compare it with the alternatives! There is nothing wrong with doing that. Take a look at the section on mini-nukes on st911.org to see why some scientists take them seriously. And visit the Wood/Reynolds web site, which is also accessible from st911.org (by scrolling to the interview of 29 November 2006) to see what that's all about. Don't let some airhead lead you around by the nose. If this guy is scared of alternative possibilities, why? What you have here is an excellent example of an unscientific attitude. A true scientist would welcome new hypotheses as much as new evidence. And anyone who only posts anonymously should not be taken seriously. Seriously! Start thinking for yourself.
lock
lock
Submitted by Jim Jones on
Submitted by Jim Jones on Mon, 12/25/2006 - 12:03am
Submitted by Jim Fetzer on Mon, 12/25/2006 - 12:05am
Merry Xmas!
ho ho ho
XD
Jim Jones
Interesting.
Jim Jones didn't like how I exposed Wood and Reynolds in their disinformation essay on Steven Jones' non-existent "thermite hypothesis." He called my post "divisive."
http://www.911blogger.com/node/5124
What bothers me personally is the mission statement of scholars for 9/11 truth:
Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths
Question: What falsehoods besides the official story are exposed as untrue? By definition if something is true, everything else can't be!
What about the "thermite hypothesis" essay. Is that "revealing truths?"
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test
quack quack
waddle waddle
Arabesque didn't expose them, he exposed himself.
Arabesque can't even address one of the 30 points that Wood and Reynolds made. Instead, he attempts to distract the reader away from the facts by using divisive ad hominem.
It is a telling statement about 911blogger that such a post is "approved" while news items related to 9/11 events are not posted.
Arabesque is not worthy of my time.
expose of a straw-man
I’m flattered that you think I’m not worth your attention based on the content of your posts.
I addressed all 30 points when I revealed that they are a straw-man fallacy. If I addressed all 30 of the points separately my post would have been 3 times as long! That would be a waste of time.
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
You write like an old member
You write like an old member of the Scholars Forum, Congressman Kellog , or whatever that name was... Same tone, and tense...
Formulaic almost...
Jim Fetzer + Steven Jones =?
Jim Fetzer + Steven Jones = Jim Jones?
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!
http://www.911blogger.com/node/5161
Just say NO to Trolls for the Holidays!!
Another heart warming message for the yuletide season!
Rawr!!
Rawr!!