Mark Dice Interviews (grills) James Fetzer about Fetzer's Energy Weapon Theory

Resistance Radio GCN April 15th 2007;

Also for reference see Dr. Greg Jenkins' Interview with Dr. Judy Wood here;

Mr. Fetzer explains the unexplainable

“In fact, the whole interview with Greg Jenkins was very troublesome to me because it was so clear that he was seeking to put words in Judy's mouth and demand an exactitude of answers that she was going to be unable to provide...”, Dr. James Fetzer during the Dynamic Duo radio broadcast on 02/06/07 regarding an interview conducted at the National Press Club on 01/10/07 ( )

As Dr. James Fetzer suggests, Dr. Judy Wood may be unable to provide answers to basic questions regarding her own speculative hypothesis. However, this paper does quantitatively analyze those issues raised during the interview as well as address other evidence advanced by Dr. Judy Wood and others that the WTC towers may have been destroyed by directed energy weapons. The following arguments will prove that the degree of implausibility places the hypothesis squarely in the realm of the impossible.

The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center Towers

For the record, neither Jim Hoffman or Webster Tarpley support the DEW hypothesis currently. 

Straw-man promoted by Fetzer: “Thermite does not explain all of the evidence.” “Thermite does not cut it.”

Frank Legge: ”Steven Jones has never claimed that Thermite explains all of the evidence.”

Fact: Explosives are often used in combination in controlled demolitions.

Steven Jones argues that we don’t have to explain everything—we need another investigation to determine exactly what happened.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Show "Don't be a (self) Hater" by doughnut

Are you responding to Arabesque? WTF?

Have you read his work here?

In fact, the transformation of "demand exactitude" to "provide basic answers" is no "transmogrification" -- rather, it is cutting through the crap. Have you watched the Jenkins interview?

No, his comments are directed at Fetzer

His post is ambiguous on this however, which is why he probably got some negative votes. I voted his comment up. It looks like another case of unintentional "friendly fire". Cool

Remember the time John called me a "hermaphrodite"? It's easy to misunderstand the intent of posts at times.  If you read his words carefully he is quoting Fetzer and Jenkins from my previous post.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Show "Thanks, but" by doughnut
Show "Now THAT is funny." by doughnut

Doughnut, this is why the

Doughnut, this is why the human race is doomed to these vicious cycles of war. The average person relies heavily upon their limbic system (emotions) with every thing they do. By doing so they are not able to properly analyze arguments and are also easily swayed through emotional appeals.

I couldn't listen to the entire interview. The sound effects were annoying and immature. I DO think controlled demolition is the likely means used in destroying the tower; however, this interview was childish. Both Dice and Fetzer were using propaganda techniques such as appealling to authority and emotions. I disagree with Fetzer on this issue but at least HE is discussing these potential DEW weapons which were theorized almost OVER 100 years ago by Tesla (how many times do I have to repeat this to get people to read his works?!?! The man was SMARTER THAN EINSTEIN!!!).

It's no wonder we're still burning oil. The masses are too god damn stupid to be open minded about physical phenonmena that their puny minds can't grasp. Oh wait I must be nuts too for thinking that water can be used as a fuel on demand based off of Stanley A. Meyer's experiments.

Here's to the next cycle of preventable wars....

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)

Whitey, please respond

to this.

interns < internets

Straw-Men, it appears


Well, it appears that I have mistaken the intent of your post. But you could hardly fault me for this as you have done the same thing.

Straw-man Fallacy:

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Now as Dr. Jenkins has said, it is ironic that you would accuse me of committing a straw-man because it appears that you have done exactly that in coming to your conclusions.

The first part of my post is not a comment by me, it is by Dr. Jenkins. Therefore, it would appear to be a straw-man to critique me for the comments of Dr. Jenkins. I thought this was clear when I provided a link to the original source of these comments--clearly it was not. Your accusations of "self hatred" are therefore a straw-man because I was not the one who wrote the passage.

However, you are welcome to criticize me for supporting Dr. Jenkins position, and yes, I do agree with it. I support Dr. Jenkins to the highest degree possible. For evidence why his comments are not a straw-man I suggest that you read the paper that I provided a link to in my first post.

Indeed, it is doubly ironic that you criticize me for a straw-man when it is actually Jim Fetzer who has committed one in the first place. If you are unaware of the relevant facts here I suggest again, that you read Dr. Jenkins paper, and watch his interview with Dr. Wood. If you have not done so it would explain why think that:

1. Identifying the type of beam is not a "basic question"
Identifying the experiments used to prove the hypothesis (the very basis of the scientific method) is not a "basic question"

Therefore, my post is NOT a straw-man argument. Indeed, it would be quite surprising if a “straw-man” argument could pass peer review and get published in the Journal of 9/11 studies. Your post only made sense to me if you know the definition of a straw-man argument and that you are aware of the relevant evidence. This why I initially thought you were directing your comments at Fetzer.

Fetzer has also committed a straw-man by calling Jenkins' valid questions (which have been peer reviewed and published in the Journal of 9/11 studies) a "hit piece". If asking valid scientific questions constitutes a "hit piece" then the theory is beyond hopeless. It is also a straw-man to imply that these questions require a great "exactitude" of thought to answer.

Your name calling is uncalled for. If you are going to disagree at least get your facts straight and be civil about it.

For the record I do not condone the tone of this interview. The sound effects were inappropriate. Mr. Fetzer has the right to embarrass himself enough as it is.

If you need further clarification, read the response by Dr. Jenkins below: 

"Where is the straw man fallacy? Literally all of the issues raised in the interview are clearly and thoroughly addressed in the paper. That means that the questions are provably answerable, and a cursory look at the paper vividly illustrates that the concepts used and questions answered are basic."

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

transmogrifying vs drawing logical conclusions

Where is the straw man fallacy? Literally all of the issues raised in the interview are clearly and thoroughly addressed in the paper. That means that the questions are provably answerable, and a cursory look at the paper vividly illustrates that the concepts used and questions answered are basic. The only other alternative interpretation of the phrase, that he was demanding “an exactitude of answers that she was going to be unable to provide”, is that Judy Wood was/is incapable of answering “basic questions regarding her own speculative hypothesis”. This is not transmogrifying a phrase, it is a simple, logical, accurate conclusion drawn from Fetzer’s own statement.

The example you provide of 'spin' and 'logical fallacy' completely obscures the rather valid main point which you have haphazardly attempted to make.

Show "Uh, No" by doughnut

ironic misconception

The only thing clearly conveyed in your example is your ironic misconception of a straw man fallacy.

If it makes you feel better, you can suppose that English may be my second language. However, that should not lessen your shame to suppose that someone that may speak English as a second language grasps the subtleties better than you.

If your mind requires cleansing following that...

Check out some videos from the Austin, PNAC event from the weekend.

Where REAL science is discussed, including, new and very damning evidence presented by Prof Jones.

Video Of The PNACitizen Event, Steven Jones, Dan Abrahamson, Alex Jones

Links at :

I watched them earlier and found them very interesting... also I have found a big respect for Mark Dice, who also did a very fine job with his Truth Jam awards... Thanks Mark

Best wishes

This interview was most entertaining

I can't help but marvel at how good of a BS artist Jim Fetzer is. He has a sneaky response to everything in a virtuoso display of misleading arguments and disinformation/misinformation. Bravo!

Thanks for these Jones videos, I have not seen them.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Is there something that

Is there something that isn't real about Tesla's proposal's for Directed Energy Weapons? Am I missing something here?

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)

This is the kind of ignorance I'm talking about

Why not add comments regarding the problems with my statement rather than just voting it down? I have made ZERO claims that DEW weapons were used on 9/11. On the contrary, I have SPECIFICALLY stated that I believe controlled demolition was used. The only thing that I am arguing is that DEW weapons can/may exist. Is there contradicting evidence of my argument? Please post it if so. This doesn't help the public understand the phenomenon by just burying the topic.

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)

Fetzer's tactics remind me of someone...

Starts with n, ends with n, endlessly entertains absurd theories, enervating anyone patient enough to play along, and along, and along...

The parallels are staggering.

interns < internets

I've seen that tactic used again and again..... described it perfectly.....

Almost everyone gets played like that once....usually when we've just woken up to the truth and are bursting at the seams to share this monumental realization....endless insincere debates are a great way for the other side to dissipate our energy and time....and keep us from other productive efforts....


Precisely. Period. Those who have the wherewithall and patience to entertain/ward off these endless diatribes should start up their own autonomous group(s) with the clear intent to deal with the loosecannons/disinfo types, with a PR "department" to explain the 'ins and outs' and history of COINTELPRO operations to newcomers, while those (like myself) who do NOT have patience for this ongoing nonsense make an offical plea to the 9/11 victims' family members to call for a new investigation. Perhaps on the day LooseChange final cut is released....or perhaps on the fourth of July. The familys, although mentioned incessantly, have the most inaudible voice within the movement. 9/11 press for truth needs to be rammed down America's throat.

Don't worry, bruce1377

I won't bother engaging you in discussion any more, as I realize I was mistaken in thinking you were discussing in good faith. I didn't ask you to "play along." Looks like you were just playing me, then when you couldn't answer the question, you quit.

Just to be clear, I do not have an opinion on exotic weapons or thermate. I think the type of weapon is a question we should not be asking at this point, but I don't stop people from asking it. However, I'm not interested in joining this Jones v. Wood circus, and think it is not good.

Jones vs. Wood: A false Dichotomy

In my opinion it is not a “Jones vs. Wood” circus. It is a “9/11 truth movement” versus Wood circus. I do however designate her as the ringmaster.

I’m sure Wood would love to paint this as a 50/50 debate. That’s not even remotely true. That being said, everyone has their own opinions and their own positions.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Why do people look at train wrecks?

The white house web site gets alot of hits too. So does the Fox news website. It does not make either of these sources credible.

No more discussion?

Wonderful. I gave you the benefit of the doubt, you squandered it -- I now consider your endless naiveté a tactic of distraction, and thus disruption. Of course, you can attribute my refusal to address your ever more minutious questions to inability, but as I see it you're the only one who prioritizes the question whether seat 73D's seat cover was checkered or striped. The rest of us pursue justice, and pursuit requires movement.

interns < internets

Real funny, Bruce

Seat 73D's seat cover.

If you are going to call my concerns "minutiae," at least be honest about what I was talking about.

I was talking about an engine part that was found blocks away, even though common sense and NIST's models show the part would never have left the building, certainly not at over 100 mph.

Yes, I can and do attribute your refusal to answer the question to inability. Show me I'm wrong.


Who do you think I am? McFly?


interns < internets

This is a riot!!!

An absolute RIOT!


Just answer the question. Why do you continue to promote information that not only has been debunked, but also sounds crazy as well?

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Exact Weapon, Now?

I have written Fetzer off as an business man eager to stay in the limelight of 911. Regarding his theory, it sounds pretty wild (I've even mocked it to a degree in my video 911 Truth and the Neo-Angst-Order:

But I also remember a time when people were saying that believing our own government carried out the 911 attacks was beyond wild, it was downright preposterous; yet look at the state of 911 Truth today. Another thing about lasers, it's a fact the Pentagon has been spending a shit load of money developing such weapons over the last thirty years, are we to expect that there has been no progress? In the end, without giving praise to Fetzer, the possibility of such weaponry is very real. But it seems Fetzer presses the issue to such a degree that it appears he is trying to pull the Movement in an extreme direction when it is entirely unnecessary. Just think about if we were at the beginnings of deciding whether to open a murder investigation. Would it really make much difference whether a 22 caliber was used or a 45 Magnum or a Glock. We have a dead body (911), lets' just stay focused on opening the investigation. If we succeed, we certainly will reach the point when we have to figure out the exact weapon which was used.

YES ! greenback ! Very well said.

Let's all keep are eyes on the ball, shall we?

How about we put 95% of our energy into getting the investigations and then, once we have them, we can take bets on what happened, actually find out and then tease each other over our various incorrect theories as we rebuild our country.

So, brothers and sisters, can we put less energy into fighting amongst ourselves and more energy into getting the new investigations we all want and must have to move forward?

Start planting your peace gardens now, we'll need them when the non-violent revolution comes.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

LeftWright, generally, I'm with you

and your relentless carpetbombings of love. But in order to conserve energy from endless infighting, it might be wise to forcefully renounce and distance ourselves from the Jetsons instead of tolerating ever more BS in the spirit of understanding. Unlike our brethren still in denial, the Jetsons intentionally abuse our accomodation, and they will continue to, if we let them, forever.

That's my 2c.

interns < internets

Please read my posts further down the thread.

I agree that those who out themselves should remain out in the cold.

Let them build their own ski resort, dagnabbit!

There's my 2c, do we have enough for a Double Bubble? I'll split it with you.

(nothing like chocolate at 4:30 am to make me goofy, LOL)

Cheers, bro!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

"Would it really make much

"Would it really make much difference whether a 22 caliber was used or a 45 Magnum or a Glock".. or a Star Wars Blaster rifle.

I totally agree, this is just good commonsense though, we just need to focus on the investigation at this point. The vast majority of us understand these obvious things, it's the just the disinfo pushers who either don't get it, or they do and they're deliberately trying to damage the Movement.

Well Done!

Mark you rock dude! After Fetzers radio interview with Dr. Jones its great to see some payback - with interest. What a hoot!
"Hope doesn't come from calculating whether the good news is winning out over the bad. It's simply a choice to take action."
- Anna Lappe

that was quite hilarious,

that was quite hilarious, Mark tore fetzer a new asshole.

only good thing fetzer said is when he called out Mark on his luciferian conspiracy theories. I find it interesting that so many people in the 911 truth movement believe the people in the elite all worship lucifer. I guess if i was christian i might think the same thing, but it is a pretty farout kooky theory.

is Judy would an acid casualty ? she seems so messed up mentally i cant imagine how she got any of her degrees, she must have given her hippy teachers free LSd or something .

and i have one question, why woudl anyone ever take Fetzer seriously in this movement knowing he wrote a book called "the great zapruder film hoax" its not like he tried to keep it a secret.

Can you prove that these

Can you prove that these people are in fact genuine Christians? I bet you can't...

Can everyone please give

Can everyone please give this a five star rating, "Killtown" and his disinfo buddies are trying to vote it down and drop negative comments etc;

Mark Dice Interviews (grills) James Fetzer about Fetzer's Energy Weapon Theory

is killtown still a no

is killtown still a no planer? i thought he came around on that

I venture he'll never "come

I venture he'll never "come around" on that lol.

i wonder why jason bermas

i wonder why jason bermas still has him on his show regularly. does he talk about his no plane theories on there? if not what else has he been involved researching? i know of his smoke plume research, but it is not that compelling.

OH, and um...

Why is there still a link to Killtown's site on THIS website?

Well I just find it all

Well I just find it all rather suspect and pathetic frankly, "Killtown" supports Fetzer, Reynolds, Wood etc, he places himself firmly in the camp of the absurd with Nico Haupt and makes it his mission to disseminate junk and disinfo. I did actually used to think he had a good site, but I'd never actually looked at it properly. When I did have a good look I found it was full of things that seemed useful and valid, alongside shear absurdity - in other words his site is like classic disinfo. But who knows maybe he's just an innocent idiot.

judy woods

Judy Woods is an aged hippy who has taken waaaaay too much acid. She seems like a homeless woman who at the surface appears to knows what she is talking about, but once you start talking to her you realize her brain is damaged from an excess of psychadelics.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

I forgot to add this, here's

I forgot to add this, here's Shayler on video talking about how "Holograms hit the Towers";

you know i think i know

you know i think i know fetzer's game now. Hes a philosophy major right? He's reminds me of the 'logic games' st thomas aquinas would use when trying to prove the existence of a christian god. He thinks hes so good at coming up with logical explanations for things but you cant simply use logic to be all inclusive to any hypothesis. There are just some hypothesis that should never be taken seriously, if scientists always took into account wild speculative hypothesis doing their research we would be fucked today. The way he defends morgan reynolds proves that to me, through Fetzers philosophical obsession he's using the old logic loop hole tricks designed by classical philosophers in trying to pretend to be intelligent.

Hey now....

Some of us are Christians here!

(said with a light hearted tone)

I understand your point.

"Some of us are Christians

"Some of us are Christians here!

(said with a light hearted tone)

I understand your point."

you would agree thought hat thinking every member of the elite nwo is a lucifierian is somewhat kooky right? i can understand Christians thinking freemasons are satanic because thats the way they make themselves appear, but for mark dice to paint every secret society that deals in geo politics as a lucierfiran cult is a little beyond ridiculous.

Elite NWO members...

I believe that the Elite are a unique breed. Don't get me wrong. I don't mean a "David Icke" type uniqueness. I mean they are raised with a different mentality and world view. As far as Masons or secret societies in general go, they do participate in 'kooky' things, no? Like the "Cremation of Care." No matter how you slice it, that ceremony is creepy and kooky. I don't know enough about the Bohemian Club or Masons, for that matter, to say they are all Luciferian cults. While Mark Dice has some entertaining theories, I take them, as with everything else, with a grain of salt. I do have to say as someone who does not support Fetzer, Mark Dice handled this interview very poorly. The sound effects were very annoying. He would have been better to just let the facts shoot Fetzer down.

In your opinion.

In your opinion. In my opinion it's obvious that many of these secret societies are part of a diabolical religion that's clearly antithetical to everything true Christianity has ever stood for.

As for Dice's interview, I agree the sound effects were extremely annoying...and well, pointless.

Oh, “it’s a matter of

Oh, “it’s a matter of public record” that “modern mankind was created by an alien race” is it Shayler? You despicable spook!

Shayler's story

It looked like Shayler had some bonafides at one point. He blew the whistle on Brits hiring "Al Qaeda" to do their dirty work. He even did time for revealing these secrets.

But, as time passed, everyone needs money. He was in a perfect position to do PR work for MI6 or even CIA. Today, his job is misleading and discrediting.

I believe it was Shayler who spilled the beans that Tony Blair as a n MI5 agent infiltrating leftist groups in Britain back in the day and spying on them. Which leads naturally to being Prime Minister, and world renowned war criminal.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

I'm so angry. Please let me rant.

If these tactics were used by the MSM in an interview of Stephen Jones, you all would be flipping out, and calling it a 'hit piece'. Derogatory terms like "space weapons", "wild theories", are the exact type of interviewing tactic, and debate framing, that we are all especially aware of. Claiming that Judy sounds like she's tripping on acid? Saying 'even my pot smoking friends don't believe that.'? Is this a real interview?

At one point Dice is laughing into the microphone as Fetzer speaks. There are annoying, distracting sounds going on throughout the entire interview. Fetzer is continually interrupted, a few times after only being given seconds to speak, while trying to directly answer a question. Is this journalism? Is this a real interview? Was this an April Fools Day interview? Is Mark Dice worthy of our praise for this?

I know this post will make me no friends here, but Tucker Carlson was more civil and polite to Stephen Jones then Dice was to Fetzer here. Could you imagine Tucker Carlson, or Sean Hannity actually playing goofy sound effects over the voice of their interviewee? This is unethical, and I wonder why we can't attempt conduct ourselves in a more credible way.

This interview makes me want to pound my head into the wall. Some of the comments here make me even more angry. Mark Dice was using countless straw men arguments here, yet Fetzer is the one accused of doing so in the comments? People in the comments here are claiming this is funny? I think this is scary. I'm literally scared of where this community is headed. I'd be scared if Jim Fetzer publically promotes these theories. I'd be equally scared if those with differing views from our own are to be blatantly mocked by our own truthers, as all of us are by the MSM, or if interviewing tactics like this are to be praised by our community.

I do believe there's a group of elites, who were the puppet masters of 9/11, and generally are the puppet masters of almost everything that happens to us.

I do not believe they worship Lucifer. I don't think Mark Dice should be shunned, or laughed at for believing that. I don't believe he works for the CIA. If he went on CNN and claimed that George Bush worships Lucifer, in the context of 9/11 truth, I would be devastated, but I would not condone goofy sound effects being played on top of his voice during interviews.

I do not believe George Bush had any direct knowledge of the attack until that fateful limo ride to the school that AM. That caller who claimed otherwise, in my opinion, doesn't work for the CIA or the FBI. I think he and I just disagree.

So I'll end my rant with this: This interview, and the responses here, scare the sh!t out of me.

I'd very much like to discuss this with any or all of you. Hopefully we could do so more ethically, and with more civility than the way in which this interview was conducted.

Flip, and others:

You might not have heard...

Mark Dice, just gave James Fetzer a spoonful of medicine from Fetzer's OWN cabinet.

I transcribed Fetzer's interview with Jones from several months back ... (where Fetzer gave the exact treatment to Dr. Steven Jones. Some good lad or lass will likely post a link for us all to cringe yet again)... and even then I was still trying to balance my own ass upon the fence as to the motive and long term product of James Fetzer.

Mr. Dice just delivered the truth movement, a sugary sweet bowl of licious irony frosted flakes. Thanks bunches Mark.

Once again: It has never mattered whether or not Dick himself ordered Zertoplems from planet Zimbaco to zapity zap the buildings (lots of things can be "possible" in this twisted upside down world, for all I know), but if Jim was a genuine man... he would NEVER have needed to stab so many people in the back to make room for his theories about the Zertoplems "POSSIBLE" involvement in 911.

That makes him poop slime... even if he turns out to have been right.

nuff said?

Take care,


Dice has done the entire

Dice has done the entire civilian population a disservice with his ridiculing of the DEW technology. Let me be clear. I BELIEVE controlled demolitions brought down all the towers. The DEW technology that Dice mocks was postulated and tested by Nikoli Tesla over 60-70years ago in Colorado Springs.

Fetzer has done a disservice to the entire civilian population by claiming that DEW technology is the only possible source for "all of that energy". One would expect a lightening type of phenomenon as Tesla described it when one of these devices is used. No one to date has claimed witnessing this.

In conclusion DEW technology exists, however it was not used on 9/11. Look up HAARP, Nikoli Tesla, etc. to find out more. Don't take my word for it. Go read about one of the most brilliant men to walk the face of the earth to better understand these concepts. I almost think Fetzer is intentionally making these claims to fool people into thinking that such technology doesn't exist.

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)

I semi-agree but this

I semi-agree but this disrespectful approach towards Fetzer is justified, he and others have been frustrating the crap out of a lot of people in the Movement and this is a direct product of that, for me at least it's welcome and long overdue.

Fetzer cut off Dr Jones' mic completely and talked all over him in one of the most appalling interviews ever, so again Fetzer does not deserve an ounce of sympathy or respect from anyone;

I would like to have seen a more cool headed and irrefutable debunking of Fetzer, but he is a frustrating character with almost zero intellectual honesty or comprehension of the damage he’s been doing. At least I hope he has no comprehension, because the alternative would make him truly the lowest form of life imaginable.

Why was my post voted down???

I appreciate you answering my post.

I checked the rules, and I didn't break any. The people who voted down my post are out of line.

Why can't we have this debate?

I understand that people here are angry at Fetzer, but two wrongs don't make a right. (Jeez. I sound like an old man.)

Don't we want the moral high ground? Shouldn't we hold ourselves to a higher standard than we hold others?

Show "It was voted down cause blogger is full of hate mongers" by Killtown

There are certain topics here where crabbiness

overrides the desire to discuss things rationally -- and that usually isn't a good thing, but it's a human thing. I think you're correct that two wrongs don't make a right -- I agree with your post in general.

OTOH, I am convinced that Fetzer is not playing by the rules and that he is up to no good and I very muc'h understand the frustration here, that makes something unfair and unbecoming a kind of pressure valve release. Also, you mentioned in your first post a concern that Fetzer would publically promote these theories -- and HE IS. In fact, he is doing little else. People have a right to be very, very pissed off at his behavior -- and that's not an excuse, just context.

Bear in mind that when posts are collapsed, they can still be seen by clicking on them, and that actually makes them more attractive to a lot of people (ie, people pay closer attention to them than to regular comments, unless the person is known to the reader to be a *boring* troll.)

thanks for your input...

I'm just gunna step away from the keyboard for awhile, go back and re-watch the original Fetzer-Jones interview, and if I'm still this ticked off, I'll try to explain myself better in a blog.

My main point here is, we should be able to defend ourselves in a vacuum. When I defend my thoughts or words or posts from accusations, I don't want to start my defense with, "Yeah but Jim Fetzer did it too."

Also: I speak for myself, and myself alone. And nobody else speaks for me. Absolutely nobody.

Well said, casseia (again)

The golden and silver rules should always apply.

We should not adopt the behavior and tactics of our adversaries as we struggle for truth and justice or we will become what we oppose. Do any of you want that?

The means creates the end.

I'm appalled at the Mark Dice interview, his behavior in this interview is immature and very unprofessional. With a little more preparation he could've exposed Dr. Fetzer in a calm and thorough manner that would've paired well with the Dr. Jenkins interview of Dr. Wood and could've been added to the growing archive on disinformation this movement seems to be amassing.

Instead, Mr. Dice's rude behavior and adolescent sound effects only weaken his case and reduce the interview to a verbal food fight. We do not need more NOISE in our media, we need clarity, honesty, and integrity as this is what is sorely missing in the msm and is exactly what will draw the general public to our side. It is incessant negativity that drives the majority of Americans away from public discourse.

I must note, however, that Dr. Fetzer has been a persistent and egregious abuser of civil and rational discourse on many occasions and should be considered to be an extreme liability to the truth movement. After observing his tactics at the Arizona conference in person, as well as his numerous audio, video and written attacks on Dr. Jones and others, it is obvious to me that he is consciously choosing to be as divisive as possible and to introduce unfounded "theories" to assist the msm in marginalizing the movement.

Thus, the frustration with Dr. Fetzer's ongoing antics, and the resulting anger felt by many in the movement toward him is valid, justified and understandable.

What is the best way to counter disinformation and the ongoing efforts to divide the movement into factions at war with each other?

Does it server our interests to engage in the same mud-slinging that has driven the American people out of the political process?

No, in order to succeed we MUST take the road less traveled. We have to lead with the torches of truth and integrity as we work to free our country from the darkness of deceit and corruption. This is how we will draw the American people (and the rest of the world) to our cause and reclaim our constitutional republic and restore our international reputation.

Once again, the means creates the end.

What end do we seek, brothers and sisters?

(End of sermon)

I love you all very much.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Let's sort through this right now:

The Yelling and "ranting": OK

The Interrupting: OK to a point

The sound effects: NOT ok


We walk a very fine line here. This one topic alone is probably the finest (thinnest) I've seen yet. We're walking a tightrope, people...and Mark Dice fell off when he almost didn't. The Howard Stern-like sound effects were what did him in. Sometimes I question how deep the rabbit hole goes. I have no clue whether to trust Mark Dice or not. I just don't know. He may be a trojan horse for all we know. While still giving him the benefit of the doubt, we need to watch him like a fucking hawk.

Comparison of this interview to MSM tactics

is sensible only in context. And the context is that Jones' theories are based in science while Wood's are not. Period.

Are we supposed to court dishonesty for all eternity lest we trail off the high road, or is there a time where good will becomes stupidity?

interns < internets

The tactics of public relations

If one can't be civil, just don't do the interview.

If you're dealing with a known liability, marginalize them by NOT giving them airtime and NOT inviting them to conferences.

Why court dishonesty, at all?

Wise up, brothers and sisters, we're playing in the big leagues now and winner takes all.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

It's true, the radio host is an amateur

It shouldn't be necessary to play moronic sounds over people talking in order to refute their arguments. This is a terrible interview. The host was not prepared to refute point by point, and so he resorted (as is his usual format?) to stupid noises, gags, fake claims of technical problems. This is not helping our case if regular people hear it.

Fetzer has already been debunked by Dr. Steven Jones, right here:

Why give anyone a reason to feel sorry for charlatans Fetzer and Woods? Argue your case, don't resort to Clearchannel/Fox moronism in order to score grammar school fart joke points.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

You beat me to it Flip.

Fetzer's a Shill, no if's, and's or but's about it... but this was a train wreck. Fetzer does very well discrediting himself without the help of a lame, annoying 'o'reilly' act.

Mark Dice is a disgrace; reduced to using JREF tactics

Playing immature sound effects over Fetzer's voice to try to mock and ridicule him and then lying to Fetzers saying those sounds were "technical difficulties". Yelling and screaming loud childish outbursts like Mancow. And then all the blogger groupies are hi-5'ing Mark for his immature display and smear attempt.

The 9/11 truth movement is looking more and more like the JREFers. No independent thought. Just fratboy gang mentality with lots of insults hurled at the other side.

That is disgracing the movement MORE than Fetzer's "crazy" theories.

(Ok, here comes the negative points, childish attacks against me and the claims I believe in the "space beam" theory and holograms at the WTC.)


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

All other aspects aside

I'd have to agree with:
Playing immature sound effects over Fetzer's voice to try to mock and ridicule him and then lying to Fetzers saying those sounds were "technical difficulties". Yelling and screaming loud childish outbursts like Mancow. And then all the blogger groupies are hi-5'ing Mark for his immature display and smear attempt.

And it was pathetic, to say the least. Despite what anyone may or may not believe about 9/11, the stupid sound effects over Fetzer was uncalled for. Equates to nothing more than Bill-O yelling "shut up", and "cut his mic".

And the hypocrisy of this thread being ok to post, considering the reasons given for one of my blog entries being deleted before becoming posted is, as Fetzer would put it, STUNNING.

Shall I dig all that up and post it here so we can all see the hypocrisy and double standards on this site?

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB


I found the interview disgustingly immature. A Fox-style hit-piece only acceptable here since Fetzer is now on the outs with the mainstream of the Truth movement.

Cointelpro couldn't do any better than to have Truthers attacking each other like this.

I am NOT defending Fetzer's views, but this was a really sad and painful listen.

Mark Dice does not add any credibility or honor to Fetzer's critics, and you who think he does have your own ideological blinders on now.

Dear GOD!

I can't believe I'm agreeing with Killtown, and I am definitely NOT a fan of Fetzer and Woods, OR Mark Dice.

But Mark is just as bad, if not worse than, Fetzer at the very least, and maybe even Woods.

He's your typical überParanoid NWO'er, who takes it even farther with his apparent Xtian-based antics and beliefs. (talk about weird, freaky, fantasy-based psychobabble)

He seriously embarrassed himself with this interview. I used to be more supportive of him until I heard this.

I also agree that, because of what some people are doing and saying, we are becoming more like those assbite JREF'ers, which seriously sux.

Luckily there are still a few who are able to maintain a decent, logical, open, objective discussion and debate, but they seem to be falling by the wayside in increasing numbers.

Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst & Correspondent

"When the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box."

9/11 Truth is the Path to Peace

"Dear God! I can't believe I'm agreeing with Killtown"



Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

I don't see it as a increasing trend

it's more like a latent tendency that occasionally rears its ugly head. That's why I asked earlier if you were responding directly to Arabesque -- he's a paragon of the virtues you cite here.

I think the best antidote is collectively thinking about how to deal with disruption and disinfo realistically, creatively and on a grassroots level. People seem to be waiting for an anti-COINTELPRO knight on a white charger, and that disempowering fantasy leads to all kinds of shit, this being just one example.

To comment on the issues here:

Thanks Casseia

To comment on the issues here:

It's ok to have a laugh once in a while. I think some are taking this interview with Fetzer way too seriously. I mean, he's trying to defend space beams as being rational with appeals to authority (Jim Hoffman believes it! Tarpley believes it! Well--no actually they don't believe it anymore). That's the best he can come up with and it's not even true!

And I don't know how many times Mr. Fetzer has to repeat his thermite straw-man... the latest findings by Dr. Jones reveal that dust samples (from an apartment a football field away) have "iron rich spheres" containing thermate compounds.

Now how the heck did thermite residue get from inside the WTC to an apartment a football field away? Now that's an interesting question. No space beam explanations needed.

Perhaps we need a "thermite space beam" camp somewhere. Let's pray it doesn't come to that.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."


Space Beams?

Directed Energy Weapons?

Same thing.

But one phrase is one is technically accurate and one is used pejoratively the same way others use the phrase "conspiracy theorist."

It's not an honorable tactic, nor a necessary one. And it's ironic since it's used in some paragraphs dissecting someone's logical fallacies.

Just sayin.

Greg Jenkins did an EXCELLENT job of calmly and patiently trying to give Judy Wood the opportunity to explain her case. He gave her the benefit of the doubt and let her dig her own hole without stooping to insulting her.

DEW/Space beams

If I offended someone by using the designation “space beam”, well that wasn’t my intent. And to be honest I feel pretty silly defending myself on this point.

Judy Wood calls her paper: "The Star Wars Beam Weapons". I'm not going to link to her site to prove my point. What's the difference between "Star Wars Beam" and "Space Beam"?

I find it interesting how people complain about this point. Does calling it DEW somehow makes the theory more reasonable? it doesn't.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

There is a difference

"Star Wars" is the name of a defense program, and she is suggesting these weapons arose from that program. "Space beams" sounds like aliens.

I'm not defending the theory, just responding to what you said.


But does "star wars" imply.... Ocean warfare?

Actually, Ningen,

the program to which you refer is the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) which the media then nicknamed "Star Wars".

This abuse of that name is absolutely detested by the man who originally made the name famous, one Mr. George Lucas, and I would encourage everyone to stop using it, especially if we want to get his support for 9/11 Truth.

The term DEW is technically correct and should be used, imo.

Just my $0.02.

Be well and keep putting the truth out there.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Thanks, LW

I didn't think of that.

Forward to 35:25 of this disinfomercial...

to hear Judy Wood explain where the beam came from...

Non-Random Thoughts
Host: James Fetzer
Sat., November 11, 2006
w/ guest Judy Wood

And then listen to Jim's performance when selling it to his listeners @ 35:40...

"Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, ho, oh, ho, oh, ho! Oh Judy. Oh my, oh my, oh my, this is HUGE!"


"We are going to keep up this fight till the end, till the very end... They took it from the top to the bottom. We're gonna take it from the bottom to the top!"
-Dan Wallace

Worst Acting Ever

Fetzer: Is it from Building 7? Is it from a plane?

Judy: No, I think it's from Orbit

Fetzer: "Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, ho, oh, ho, oh, ho! Oh Judy. Oh my, oh my, oh my, this is HUGE!"

"I think we're finally figuring out what happened on 9/11"

Yes, but

offensive satellites for surface attack do not imply beam weapons -- they simply, and evidently, lack the punch. However, it would be possible to deploy nuclear warheads in space and drastically decrease response times in comparison to surface launched ICBMs -- instead of shooting up and waiting for it to come down, it would thus be possible to shoot down, immediately. This would halve the attack time, essentially.

interns < internets

Kinetic energy weapons, too

I fully agree with bruce.

Just an FYI: Kinetic energy weapons are a big deal as well. A nicely designed aerodynamic depleted-uranium brick dropped from space can cause major damage without warning (of course, you need some kind of active guidance system).

'space beams' is not derogatory..

The concept that DEWs were used to demolish the world trade center towers is provably fiction.

Why would anyone be overly concerned as to the terminology applied to describe a fictional concept? As far as I am concerned, you can call it anything you want. After all, if Judy Wood can completely invent new words to describe fictional concepts, I beleive others have the right to use actual real words to describe her nonsense.

Fetzer knows that if he can sway people to stop and think about the terminology used, the mere act will inherently make the concept important ---- After all, who would pause and choose their words carefully if the concept was not important? People are now pretending that describing this purely fictional concept as a 'space beam' is derogatory. Oh yeah? Who says? What, exactly, makes the term 'space beam' a derogatory rather than a descriptive term? What is the difference between 'space beam' and what Judy Wood uses, "Star Wars" beam? Does sticking the label "DEW' to describe a fictional concept make it any more credible scientifically?

Using the term 'space beam' is certainly not derogatory just because Fetzer/Woods pretend that it is..... And 9/11 Truthers do not have to go around choosing their words carefully regarding a fictional concept.

I stand

by my point, even if y'all refuse to see it.

I'm not defending the theory and certainly NOT defending Fetzer.

But I do think that stooping to these tactics and taking joy in seeing someone "get a taste of their own medicine" does zero good, other than ego gratification. Nothing of any journalistic value was gained from that interview, and nothing is gained by the subtle smearing of a competing theory by using language that any honest individual will say has a kooky ring to it.

I repeat, this interview had ZERO intellectual or journalistic value, it just served to let everyone who hates Fetzer (rightly or wrongly) get a good laugh at him [and the no-planers and hologram'ers will have a field day rightly pointing out the outrageous way Fetzer was treated, thereby gaining him martyr credit in their eyes]

Whoopty do.

It would have been preferrable

if Mark could have disputed the space beam gibberish on scientific grounds. However, his talents lie in showbiz rather than physics, and I appreciate him employing them, accordingly. What you seem to forget is that the scientific exploration has been performed by Greg (thanks again), completely unchallenged by Judy, and yielded unambiguous results.

Looking at her now infamous interview, it doesn't take a physicist to see Judy for the bumbling fool that she is, and I believe Mark is perfectly entitled to call it as he sees it. Thank you Mark, and I hope you will overcome the "technical difficulties" (not!).

interns < internets

Not actually "fictional"

Laser weapons are real. There is a video by Raytheon, I believe, demonstrating a defensive laser shooting down multiple mortar rounds.

If you're going to argue the point, you have to get the facts.

It makes no sense for bringing down a building for several OTHER reasons than their non-existence.

1. "DIRECTED" energy weapons have a direction. They are vectors of energy. Which direction exactly are we to believe these beams originated from to bring down a building an acre in floor area in perfect symmetry?

2. Why is there no trace of this in any of the videos?

3. How much energy would be required (some calcluate more than the total energy in the world's electricity grids)?

The strongest counterargument by far is #1. From an engineering standpint, it's so far beyond absurd to even consider seriously.

Oh yeah -- and all those hundreds of explosions, squibs, beams ejected, etc.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

Yes, the concept is fictional

DEW's are not fictional. The concept that DEW's could even remotely vaporize an appreciable amount of the steel in the towers is badly written fiction.

The strongest argument is the power requirements: >10^13 Watts (no losses included). The largest laser in the western hemisphere, the MIRACL laser which is used to shoot down Katusha rockets, is only 10^6 watts.

BTW, the power required is over 5 earths worth of power. 'One earth of power' is the *total* power harnessed by human beings including nuclear, water, wind, all carbon combustion, etc..

Let's not forget the spectral range requirements --- the beam has to traverse alot of dust. Observably, the beam did not 'push' the dust out of the way. What this means is that any electromagnetic radiation used would have to be from very low Far-Infrared to microwaves (building geometry sets the lower frequency bound). The reflectivity of steel is much larger than 99% in this spectral range.

It's all in the paper that is reference by Arabesque in the first post.


is the kind of response to the DEW hypothesis that I like to see.

No smearing or personal attacks, just the facts, ma'am.


Show ""The Great Communicators"" by doughnut

Read the paper

The interview was not merely a 'miscommunication' with an 'absent minded professor'. She could not answer basic questions regarding her own research. The paper which Arabesque quotes in the first blog posting represents the work that the 'absent minded professor' should have done as a zeroth order check of her 'theory'. The fact remains that she, to this day, does not redress any of her blatant misinterpretations even when they are explicitly pointed out to her in writing. Inexcusably, she continues to promote a plethora of thoroughly discredited claims.

Since it's been debunked, I'd say no.

You're a shill. Like it or not.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

Like it or not, FWDs is at the center of 911 Truth

There is a massive effort to distract and cover-up the fact that the WTC was destroyed by a top-secret classified weapon. The MSM are totally silent on this. The Pentagon are evasive, although Rumsfeld is silent on this issue. Go to for more information.

FWDs = Flying Wingless Ducks

FWD's spotted over James Fetzer's abode

The only real explanation is that Fetzer is an agent of the FWDs, and was genetically mutated to resemble human form. It has long been established that the FWDs are in direct competition with the Lizard People and the UFO "Greys" to attract earth supermodels. So far their efforts have failed, miserably.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

Like it or not, we won't really know what happened

until we get real investigations.

Can't we all agree to stop shopping at Speculations R' Us?

In case you're wondering, it's that big, empty and useless warehouse on the block between the Pentagon and the Church of Controlled Demolitions*.

(* not meant as a pejorative, no flame war needed, just a wee joke on my part)

Back to work, brothers and sisters, we have another 100 million Americans to educate and activate.

Love is a verb, let's get busy!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

it's tough to see ur leaders, turn to liars

Jim Fetzer has at certain points seemed to bring valid ideas to new discussion. I used to give him credibility. His confronting Oliver North timed perfectly with the AJ conference in LA.
I just wanted to add that I know it is tough to see people that we once looked to for answers lie to us. Reading into 9/11 truth forces us all to accept a reality where leadership must be constantly questioned and regulated. I'm sure we all have different examples of many people we discovered were schills thanks to 911.
Unfortunately I just spent the last few hours reviewing all of these interviews and I am disgusted. The radio show of Jones and Fetzer is amazing. Such an open censoring of one of the most qualified figures in the movement is a horrible thing to hear. Fetzer has obviously been co-opted.
We must regulate our leadership with a group consensus (as suggested above) as to what qualifies as valid. I suggest what I'm sure many people have said before which is, anyone who is blatantly attacking another truther without any factual basis is at that point, not bringing valid new info or constructive development to the movement. I would also say that censorship including silencing of mic's etc. is also a form of a blatant attack. I am not saying Mark Dice's attack of Fetzer is not just, it will just be observed by many as invalid and filled with fallacy. If one observes this blatant attack, we simply set the person aside until they return to rational debate. This will force the fringe elements to out and discredit the real liars. We need not waste our time attack these hacks.
Thanks for showing me who is on the right side. Mark Dice really brings some good things to the table. Mark should just do what he does best and BE COOL. Make the agents crack on their own.
I just look at this interview as a reactionary piece which is not totally unjust. It is just not bringing a positive light to the movement. This movement has to be cool and make people feel cool for joining up. Jim Fetzer sounds more and more like a raving crack pot. Let's let Jim Fetzer be a raving crack pot. Fetzer wants us to fight him. No more wasting our time. Fetzer has provided a wonderful model for what a dis-info schill master looks like. Use this model to the movements advantage. Make the sham artists prove themselves to be politically out of touch and intellectually bankrupt.

A different perspective

I'm new to 911truth, so I know little of Fetzer and Dice's history in this movement, although I'm aware of the controversy surrounding Fetzer. All I can say is that in this particular inverview, Dice lost it and Fetzer showed him up. Dice sounded like Hannity on Fox News, using bullying tactics instead of reasoning. If you want to show the theory to be wrong, then stick to the logic. Dice's only success in this whole interview was in getting Fetzer to respond to the eye-witnesses in the no-planes theory. I personally don't hold to the no-plans or directed beams theories, but neither do I rule them out 100%. Claiming that Fetzer has been bought is extremely speculative.

Why was this voted down.

I wish people here would read the rules, and think twice about voting down posts which clearly don't break the rules. People here are abusing this power.

Voting is not about the rules

it is merely about opinions.

interns < internets

I was also shocked

I was also shocked that my post was voted down. I stand by my point that Dice used bullying tactics instead of reasoning to discredit Fetzer's views.

Ass Clowns of 9-11

Steven Jones destroyed Fetzer at the Arizona conference. That should be the end of his inanity. See:

But, Fetzer's mouth substitutes for reason and science. He's everywhere, babbling his bullshit.

Fetzer's argument relies on there being traceable "markers" in commercial RDX, which he says can trace it back to the manufacturer.

Well, if covert agencies created the explosives, then they wouldn't put in "markers" to leave a forensic trace.

The rest of his argument is that there isn't enough energy in explosives to pulverize the concrete in the towers -- even though they pulverize the concrete in other building demolitions regularly.

Judy Wood seems like a mental patient. I never heard her before, but wow. What more than that audio clip is necessary?

Fetzer is correct about Webster Tarpley's book talking about directed energy weapons. That doesn't mean it's plausible.

As to this radio program -- it's poor form to put annoying sounds over the interview. Quite 3rd grade level.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--


you can include some of this "interview" in your film about how NOT to counter disinformation.

Very good post, btw, short and to the point.

(something I may learn how to do one day, LOL)

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Fetzer handed critics their asses last night on radio

Mike Swenson of interviewed Fetzer last night and Fetzer made all his critics look like goofballs!

I don't agree with everything Fetzer believes, but he sure kicked ass last night, all give him that. Even Swenson acknowledged it!


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.



wonder no more on fetzer

If Fetzer with all his knowledge and intellectual ability was really for getting the truth out and had any kind of credibility or honesty he wouldn’t be spending so much effort trying us to believe some kind of beam particle weapons brought down the towers, instead he be using his talents to bring the criminals to justice and concentrating on the hundreds of other obvious disturbing in your face facts such as the commission report lies. He was ok at the beginning of the truth movement but now hes like a trojan trying to destroy the 9/11 truth from within. So I rest my case, the guy is a professional disinformation artist or a professional nut. Seems he latches onto circumstantial theories for his living. He likes to gather so many theories up and claim it could be this way it could be that way. We could discuss theories forever. Stick to hard facts. What a waste of energy(joke) he is.

F-in A.

Fetzer exists to discredit us all. He needs a good shunning and shaming. He needs to be booted out of this movement and looking for other work. The guy is just plain full of shit, and trying to discredit real scientists like Steven Jones. That says it all.

We need to make sure he's not representing us on television or on the radio. The man is working for the Dark Side.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--