Dr. Jones & Dr. Deagle debate the 'micro-fusion' hypothesis
(You'll need to turn the volume way up to hear the conversation clearly, be sure to turn it back down when you move on!)
On the final day of the Vancouver 9/11 Conference, Dr. William Deagle gave a presentation that included a hypothesis that suggests 'micro-fusion' devices may have been used to facilitate the destruction of the World Trade Center. Necessarily, this captured the interest of Jones, who has a relevant educational background.
Jones and Deagle bumped into each other following Deagle's talk, and proceeded to debate the merits of this hypothesis.
After exchanging a few remarks, and attracting a crowd, film-maker Jim Brewster suggested that they take the debate to a more controlled environment. The resulting debate was documented by Brewster, a production crew for Soul Tree digital entertainment, and myself. Versions of this interview with much better production quality are coming down the pipe, but in the meantime, here's my version for people to view.
This is not my final word on the conference, which was viewed as a success by all participants, and I'll blog more later.
- Login to post comments
Cheers Reprehensor, Go Prof Jones...
Will definately be checking this out...
Look forward to your report, many thanks and best wishes
PS... Thanks for the updates you provided during the weekend, kept us who sadly could not make it, informed...
Interesting new evidence presented by Prof Jones...
Near the end...
Something about "red colored tiny egg shell like fragments" of unspent components of thermate.
Dr Deagle did better than I thought he would, at least he's totally dismissed "no planes" and "DEW".
I still don't buy the mini-nukes at the WTC (especially as a lot of this fourth generation technology was "word of mouth" by special black op, top top secret etc).
The one question I would have like him to be asked, was about his chain of custody, where his samples were got from and how he knew it was part of his special 10% zone...
I suppose we'll have to see what he comes up with and what Prof Jones has to say.
Good debate though.
Best wishes
**ADDED - Direct link to "Debate" on Google Video (opens in new window)**
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1184826770885695772
You are incorrect... I suggest you listen to it again...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1184826770885695772�h4m40s
Key bit just after 5min 20secs in... (link above should start automatically at 4min 40secs in, covers DEW)
It sounds a bit like "ridiculous" to me... but you listen and tell me what you reckon
I must say this second time I have listened to it, Deagle comes across much worst second time around.
Best wishes
PS... for those interested in Prof Jones new revelation below link jumps to section. (should auto start at 41min 24secs in)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1184826770885695772�h41m24s
I heard what he said
OK, he "dismissed" it, but he didn't refute it.
I repeat. Either he said something very significant, which should be verified, or he said nothing.
Approx. 5:18 into the video:
(Immediately prior to this, Deagle claims to have worked in medicine related to Star Wars with various defense contractors, and to know a lot about exotic weaponry such as scalar technology.)
Discussion of the planes ensued:
Jones: Let me try one more, while we're on a roll here and agreeing. How about the "no planes hit the towers."
Deagle: That's ridiculous.
Jones: OK, I agree with you.
Deagle: In fact, what I was told from my contacts inside the U.S. Air Force, Air Force Academy and so on, is those were probably not United Airlines jets but they were probably E-10s that were flown in there. That's what they told me. In fact, I knew this from being a civil aviation examiner that all jet aircraft, commercial jet aircraft, worldwide, have been capable of being remotely taken over control for over thirty years.
Jones: So we agree that jets hit the towers.
Deagle: Oh yeah, jets hit the towers.
------------------------------------------------
We agree Deagle came off terribly. He, not just his arguments, strikes me as a straw man.
It's funny...
there are two pictures behind them, right above their heads. The left should say: "this man speaks truth"
The right should say:"What is that man talking about ?"
It seems like Deagle is not interested in what happened but trying to push his own (strange) theory(ies).
Jones:"Have you read my paper? " Deagle:"I looked at it"
I think he means that literally !
In the last minutes Jones tells us that he found red specks in the WTC dust which consist of aluminium, sulfur and iron (=little pieces of thermate which have not reacted but blown apart !) This is great news !
Dr. Jones has not officially announced this discovery yet but shares it with Dr. Deagle, the videotape and us.
Go Dr. Jones !
im wary of anybody who bases
im wary of anybody who bases their conclusions on secret NSA sources etc. and i think Prof Jones was trying to make the point at the beginning without being too confrontational that we have more than enough evidence right now to prosecute and come to logical conclusions about 9/11 without muddying the waters and/or slowing progress with theories about mini nukes etc. also, while i tend to agree that a pandemic is likely at some point,manufactured or not, i dont see why hes going on about it in that setting. again this just sounds like an attempt at muddying the waters to me. the towers were demolished, we know they were demolished and we dont need mini nukes to square that for us or anybody else. you dont have to be a physicist or structural engineer to grasp it. i confess i dont know a whole lot about Dr. Deagle though. anybody got a backround on the guy?
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
Deagle is pushing 'exotic weapons'.
On an "I was told" basis, did you catch that? Prof. Jones very tactfully points this out starting at around 14:40 into the video. I'm sick of this scientific speculation bullshit, the evidence is there. Question is & what the PTB don't want you discussing is, "what's holding back the truth?"...
Big_D, I completely agree.....
with you and Chris's replies. This is BS meant to discredit possibly Jones and the movement. Jone's research is rock solid as far as I can tell. Deagle? Nope!
Don't trust him!
Let's just hope...
... that the samples were not provided by the same "NSA sources" as the info about the mini nukes...
There is no harm in additional testing, just keep an eye on the chain of custody...
Deagal comes out of nowhere
OK, firstly, it is quite obvious that Prof. Jones was being polite. Secondly, is Deagle known only in Canada. I have never heard of him and would be concerned about possible intell. connections, which he tends to tout anyway.
Deagle is well known
Deagle is well known in some activist communities and promoted by 9/11 truth groups, the nutritional supplements advocates of a particular sort, and I would guess the those that listen to Art Bell given some of what he talks about.
Here's an interesting link on Deagle -
http://www.christianmedianetwork.com/deagle.htm
Some visions of his are here -
http://www.sherryshriner.com/deagle.htm
Deagle is said to be associated with the Prophecy Club -
Prophecy Club, The
A for-profit "ministry" that specializes in conspiracy theories, pop-apologetics, and presumptious prophecy.
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/p00.html#prophecyclub
I stopped watching after he said "Nano-dust"
and became increasingly frustrated that he would not let Jones answer his points.
Nano-dust at the World Trade Center? Who else promotes "nano-dust" at the WTC?
JW: Well, pulverizing the building is turning… the building contents into Nano-dust, we’ll call it.
Comment: Wood’s statement that the WTC was turned into “nano-dust” has no evidential basis in reality. Nano used in the scientific vernacular is defined as the number 10-9. Debris is considered to be dust when the particle sizes are between roughly 1 and 100 microns (10-6 m = 1 micron). Debris which is smaller than 1 micron is generally considered to be an aerosol. The size of atoms is roughly 1 nanometer (10-9 m). Any reasonable translation of the language Judy Wood is applying here leaves the listener to conclude that Dr. Wood’s opinion is that the WTC towers was dissociated into individual atoms! There are a multitude of reasons this is an absurd claim. One strong argument against this argument is that the power required to atomize all the steel, concrete, and building contents would be much larger than 5 times the global power harnessed by human beings. Wood’s statement is also not supported by official USGS studies.
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/05/interview-with-dr-judy-wood-and...
Now perhaps I'm being picky here, but the point is that "scientists" don't go around making claims about "nano-dust" when they border on science fiction nonsense. When Mr. Deagle mentions "nano-dust" at the WTC, he loses all credibility in my eyes.
I was at Dr. Jones' presentation, and it truly a blessing to have people like Dr. Jones. Here is someone who will stick to the real smoking guns and hard data, avoid the tenuous and unprovable speculations, prove 9/11 was an inside job with devastatingly credible evidence and leave the official story in tatters. If we could get presentations like the one by Dr. Jones available and disseminated widespread to the public, the "official story" would be demolished in short order.
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
That's explains why Deagle
switches from science to conspiracy like he's changing his socks.
BTW: How do you 'wire' a city or anything else for nukes? Plus all these nukes were 'wired' over a decade ago and no one has stumbled across one?
I suppose I shouldn't hold my breathe waiting for the results of his tests.
More Info: Were “mini-nukes” used at the World Trade Center?
You can find more details in the below paper (PDF)...
“Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers” (January 16, 2007) - Steven Jones
Link : http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard-Evidence-Rebudiates-the-Hypothesis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf
---
Best wishes
Deagle berries
I've been checking on the status of first responders. If nuke had been used their dna would be affected and their children could be deformed. Instead because of the toxicity their babies are of low weight (probably because of the exchange of that toxicity between the parents) but there is no report of deformaties. Meanwhile many of the soldiers returning from iraq are deciding to not have children because of the DU they'e been exposed to. The iraqis don't ask anymore what is their baby, now they ask is he normal.
There was a toxic soup at wtc. Lead has an affinity for marrow and can enter it and cause leukemia. I would expect birth defects with the use of nuclear. There is no report on it that I can find and people involved don't know of any spike in deformaties.
I'm wary of this obfuscation
Wasn't too many months ago that NO PLANES/HOLOGRAMS/DEW and other junk ideas were being pushed pretty aggressively around the 9/11 rabbit hole. I was newer to 9/11 truth, and found some of these ideas to be at least pretty interesting in trying to piece together a "people's history"-style narrative of 9/11.
However, really all these ideas do is muddy a picture that has become very clear to reasonable minds. 9/11 was facilitated by mechanisms working in our federal government to serve a corrupt, multinational interest. The media blackout of WTC7 alone is beyond suspect. It is very real. Like Chris said regarding the Jimmy Smits meeting, a lot of people are still unaware not only of WTC7 itself, but also the nature of its tenants (CIA, NSA, Mayor's Emergency HQ, etc.).
Elementary physics is enough to prove that ALL THREE of the WTC buildings were destroyed via a high-output controlled demolition sequence. I am not a physicist by any means, but I understand that there is no way those buildings could fall so cleanly into their own footprints in the time that they did without clearing the under infrastructure first (90+ floors of highly reinforced UL-approved steel). I also frequently wonder aloud what happened to NORAD on that fateful morning. I oftentimes wonder about the abilities of these 'pilots', about Bush-bin Laden connections, about the secret, hand-in-hand, unsworn testimony Cheney and Bush gave to the 9/11 Commission almost 2 years after the crime, and the return-to-the-crime-scene, police-state nature of the 2004 Republican National Conference.
So as interesting as hologram airliners might be, or mini-nukes, or whatever, may be...they are basically best left in the notebook alongside the never-used lyrics. These ideas aren't even necessary to the prosecution of 9/11 war crimes against humanity. And that is what are working towards, no?
Frumpy academic conversations are fun in college. But in the real-time, real world, I personally have no time for such shenanigans. I love 911Blogger, I've been reading on here for the past year, posting only recently, but in my view, this site is more about action than speculation. I commend this site and its moderators/community for this, and hope that soon enough I never have to hear about NO PLANES/SPACE RAYS/NUKES ever again! Let's save it for after the trial!
"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a New World Order — can emerge..." - George H.W. Bush, 9/11/91
Every time I hear 'No-Planes' or 'Mini-Nukes' I get very worried
There is absolutly no edivence to point to either of these thories where as their is rock solid edivence for thermate and controlled demolition.
I really think you have to wonder if this stuff is delibratly designed to dis-credit the movment? The people promoting these crazy theories obviously do not really want 911 truth as there is already enough edivence out there to prove the controlled demolition theory- people now must focus on spreading the word and raising public awareness.
The movement must distance itself from this nonsense and the websites should stop giving it any air time.
Yes it is designed to discredit us
Mixing credible and non-credible information together is at the essence of what disinformation is. That's why Loose Change is considered suspect by many Truthers.
Take the Eric Hufschmidt character. He comes along and blows things open for 9/11 with his book/video. A lot of people use his material in his own work. And then, out of thin air, he's a hardcore holocaust denier? Now, I don't believe most people would have TOUCHED this man's work if they believed that he/she would be linked to someone pushing such controversial nonsense. So yes, Mr. Hufschmidt is DISINFO because only a DISINFO agent would push he urgency of the 9/11 message with the racist hokum of Holocaust Denial. By doing so, he casts a pall over ALL credible 9/11 work in the eyes of an outsider. Of course, it turns out (supposedly) that this man has some family connection with Rupert Murdoch. Well, golly gee wilickers, what's wrong with this picture?
I don't know anything about Dr. Deagle, admittedly. But anyone pushing hypothetical spage-age weaponry and the like is immediately suspect in the 9/11 truth movement. It is very speculative ground, and like I said before, not necessary in the quest for an investigation/trial.
"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a New World Order — can emerge..." - George H.W. Bush, 9/11/91
Something that is controversial...
...is not by any means automatically nonsense !
That stereotype is what the 911 truth movement has been fighting so long...
Hufschmid asks for all (nazi-) documents to be released to supplement the historical story.
Nothing wrong about that, we also want as much info about 911 as we can get our hands on.
All what it can do is clearify the picture, how could it EVER deny anything factual? It can only deny lies.
This is irrational talk to discredit a great 911-researcher.
did you know that Hufschmid
did you know that Hufschmid is married into the Murdoch family? Hufschmid was an asset at one point, his book on 9/11 was one of the very first if not the very first piece of 9/11 truth material that i owned but sadly i think its pretty clear what his purpose now is.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
I don't know if I'm willing to cross that line
Because I don't believe that those views are helpful to the cause of those who were killed as a result of 9/11. I don' t believe that the 'truth' regarding the amount of people killed in Hitler's Holocaust is necessarily relevant to the cause of seeking both truth and justice to the events of that day, which we all agree here were manufactured, synthetic terrorism. Hitler's fascist dictatorship ruined his country and therefore history judges him for the tyrant he was. America's leadership today is a play-by-play rip-off of the Adolf Hitler playbook. There are many who have contributed to the growing body of work indicting elements within the American government for 9/11 war crimes. Mr. Hufschmid, with his ties to the Rupert Murdoch enterprise, and Holocaust denial nonsense, is suspect at best. And I will leave it at that; I was very disappointed to see this man associated with such bigoted, hateful, antisemitic nonsense - especially a work computer. I may not respect his opinion, but I'll defend to my death his opinion to express it, as the saying goes...
"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a New World Order — can emerge..." - George H.W. Bush, 9/11/91
"it is designed to discredit us"
Yeah, Just as 'holocaust denier' & 'anti Semite' crying are designed to keep people from wondering exactly why Mossad agents were caught "documenting" the WTC attacks. This is just a more insidious disinfo tactic (Not an accusation, just pointing out.).
right on. "The Central
right on.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
How can people expect
to be taken seriously by the ones who call them conspiracy nuts for just asking reasonable questions when these same people call everybody who raises reasonable questions about certain issues regarding WW-2 a H-denier. Doing so is stupid. Stop sticking these discussion killing labels on issues that need resolve. Both of you, denier callers and conspiracy nuts callers.
Of course discussing WW2 issues doesn 't help 911 resolve.
WHO was it again who brought this subject up ?... who wanted to discredit Hufschmid by association ? 911 truthmachine ?
Hufshcmid does a fine job of
Hufshcmid does a fine job of discrediting himself without bringing up the Murdoch connection actually. and im not against discussing anything. as you can see i was voted down for simply agreeing with the guy above about Israel/Mossad. people around here are fucking cowards for the most part.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
Thanks for this coverage
It's not just about which evidence is already strong (so ignore other evidence), it's about which evidence literally doesn't exist in any meaningful way or is non-scientific (i.e., hidden military technology cannot even be tested).
There's virtually zero evidence that the planes in NYC were "swapped," as Deagle claims.
People should also be aware that the "INTERNATIONAL 9/11 CITIZEN'S WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL" being announced at this conference also contains promotions of DEW and nukes -
"II. Overwhelming evidence exists that the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 were instances of controlled demolition, and/or of the application of exotic weapons such as land-based, air-based or possible space-based Directed Energy Weapons (DEW). But al-Qaeda operatives could not have obtained the needed access to the buildings to plant the explosives and would not have ensured that the buildings come straight down. Nor could al-Qaeda operatives have obtained command and control of advanced Directed Energy Weapons, Microfusion devices (4th generation mini-nuclear weapons), bunker-busters, or other exotic weapons alternatives that are known to be in the deployment or testing phase in the US Defense arsenal. The controlled demolition and/or Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) or exotic weapons application, therefore, had to be the work of U.S. Government and other insiders." http://peaceinspace.blogs.com/911/2007/06/international_l.html
We all want peace in space and we all are against space weapons. But this should not be used as a way to insert claims that space weapons were used on 9/11.
I say, show us the evidence in writing and scientific analysis that there were nukes or DEW, not at a public conference with public media. Refute Steve Jones - in writing. Refute the other physicists on the Journal (http://journalof911studies.com/). That's how actual science is done, not trying to get a crowd excited enough to part with their money for hoax media by SUGGESTING nukes and DEW - that's not science, that's stirring the masses for the sake of something other than truth, like selling stuff. Then we all lose and one person makes a few bucks.
If nukes/DEW were indeed used, the evidence would begin to surface through analysis and papers should be debated and flying back and forth between different camps and reaching consensus on that evidence. Eventually, through experiment and analysis of the existing evidence, someone loses and someone wins, and the winner goes public. That's how science works. Those who present claims without evidence directly to the public are quickly discredited by most, especially in the scientific community. There is a reason that the scientific community exists and why journals and grants and that whole process exists. To do science properly. Taking claims to the public without internal debate, discussion and evaluation helps no one.
All other issues aside, presenting claims of nukes (even the simple acceptance of claims about them without debate in our own community) at the public conference with public media will only harm our movement.
So the questions people ask on here about disinfo are meaningful. Most of those disseminating misinformation are sincere but misguided (i.e., trying to generate hype about any sort of speculation to get people involved). But not all are.
???
The buildings' structural integrity was pulverized either due to
a.) gravity
b.) explosives
We know it's not a, therefore it's b.
So the idea is to find out who did it and then perhaps you can find the specific details of exactly how it was done.
Not the other way around.
The entire movement stands
The entire movement stands behind one theory and one theory only, "Thermite and explosives brought down the buildings".
This is untrue, the entire movement has one thing in common and only one thing, The Official Conspiracy Theory proposed by the Bush Administration is a LIE.
...and there is evidence of Thermate (sulfur)...
Superthermite is also explosive.
You are exposing disinformation by claiming Prof. Jones claims "Thermite" is the only thing that brought the towers down. Your entire argument is a strawman (thermite).
Yes
You need to read more of the entire cross section of the movement before making broad states. Straw man is right. I don't even talk about explosions all the time. How about Drills?
http://www.thesonsofliberty.us
Observed data must be followed.
As yet we have no clear mechanism to cause not only symetrical failure but also near uniform destruction of concrete. Whatever caused the pressure wave that pulverised the concrete must have a minimum value. This pressure wave hit pretty much every part of concrete of the WTC. I've never seen a single solid chunk of any size in any photo. For control demo the pressure waves of the explosives would necessarily overlap so as not to cause low pressure gaps that wouldn't reach the pulversation threshold. Some of the concret on the upper floors was rated at 6000 psi with the majority of the concrete falling between 3000-4000 psi.
When you think about the actually placing of explosives you can see that no part of concrete flooring could be much more the 10 feet from a high explosive. The drop of pressure is quite fast with distance. Now of course explosives might have been used primarily to cut columns but some other mechanism is involved for the concrete. How much explosives does it take to turn a 400,000 cubic foot slab to dust. Just image the WTC with roughly the same footprint but being a slab 200+ ft tall. 400000 cubic ft = 73yd(219ft) width X 73yd(219ft)height X 73yd(219ft)depth. All turned completely to dust.
The height of the concrete wouldn't be 73 yards
Just to make sure we are using the right numbers;
The tower floors were 4 inch thick concrete slabs poured onto steel floor pans. There were 110 stories above ground so 110 x 4 = 440 inches or 36.6 feet or 12.2 yards high.
The towers were 207 ft. x 207 ft. square and you have a 36.6 ft. height of concrete so 207 x 207 x 36.6 = 1,568,273 cubic feet of concrete in the 110 floors above ground.
add to that the abscense of
add to that the abscense of the corrugated steel pans used as the pans which the concrete was poured. They are pretty much nonexistent in the debris, all 110 floors worth...
Evidence
Larry Central M writes: "if Jones doesn't agree, then show me evidence of explosive materials other than thermite. "
Have you ever heard of the 11 features of controlled demolition?
Did you know that you don't have to know which type of explosives are used to reasonably determine that a controlled demolition has taken place?
Free Fall Speed, Molten Metal, Squibs, and other FEATURES of controlled demolition can be observed WITHOUT knowing the type of explosive to have CAUSED them. This is EVIDENCE. When we see all 11 features, this is strong evidence. http://www.911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
Given the fact, that thermite is present, this also constitutes HARD evidence. Denying or debating the use of thermite will NOT change the fact that 11 observable features of controlled demolition are present. Yes, we know thermite was used, and that possibly other explosives were used in combination. Superthermite could have been used.
So aside from the 11 features of controlled demolition, and the corroboration of thermite at the Towers, what evidence is there to compellingly counter the controlled demolition hypothesis? I dare say that there is none at all.
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
Please explain your argument
Jones rebuttal cites evidence provided by government studies that there was Tritium present, just not at harmful levels. Yet both of these sources could be lying about their testing but Jones supports their research 100% without scrutiny.
Is this the only rebuttal he makes?
Jones response to the evidence of the EM pulse at GZ is "there are other sources of EM pulses", yet no suggestions are given.
At what time in the video does he say this?
Dr. Deagle's Presentation
This makes me want to heard Deagle's entire presentation. Is that up anywhere yet or will we have to wait 6 months for the official conference DVD?
that angry little boy Taibbi
that angry little boy Taibbi is at it again, and surpirse surprise, he ignores the facts and comes strong with the ad hominems as usual. he also takes the typical and weak route of pretending that Jim Fetzer represents us:
Matt-
You’ve probably already been asked this too many times, but, are you planning to write the third installment of your 9/11 series? If not, why?
- Dallas Redig
Hi Dallas. I’ll eventually publish this written debate I had with the Loose Change guys via email. It was pretty funny stuff. At one point I asked them if they’d made even a single phone call before they ran that stuff about the hijackers still being alive. Their answer was that they had made some calls, but “couldn’t get through” to anyone. Then when I tried to point out that not getting through to anyone in your research is usually a good time not to publish your unverified material, they just ignored me and started babbling about how the original congressional report about 9/11 had 28 pages redacted, etc. etc. etc. It wasn’t really a debate, it was like one angry non sequitur after another. Eventually they dropped the debate in the middle – I haven’t heard from them in a while.
But I’ll get back to it eventually. I should say that the hardest thing for me in dealing with the Truthers is this feeling of being intimidated by how ridiculous they are. It would take a comic genius to really do them justice and the fear of falling short of that can be paralyzing. If you’ve ever seen the movie Eating Raoul there’s this scene where Paul Bland throws an electric bug-zapper into a hot tub full of swingers and they all just sort of fall naked and limp all at once. It’s hilarious. Somebody, and it may very well not be me, is going to write the electric bug-zapper of 9/11-debunker essays. But it’s going to have to be an inspired effort, not something you just toss off in one night. I really wish Mark Twain were alive for that reason. A Jim Fetzer’s Literary Offenses would potentially be one of the funniest things ever written in the English language.
Thanks for all the questions, everyone. I hope next time the moderators allow the nastier questions through. I’m a little embarrassed at how polite all of these were. Anyway thanks again and take care
– Matt T.
http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/index.php/2007/06/22/matt-ta...
flame this little boy now. until he finally decides to actually debate us(and not just Dylan and Jason) instead of simply hurl insults. and assuming that Mark Twain would be on HIS side on this issue? HA!
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
ask him to explain freefall...
...any one of the three, his choice. Then he will have something worth reading...
I'm sure we will see the Police State before that paper is available.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB
I'm so tired of having to see Prof. Jones...
...deal with people who are communicatively handicapped.
Deagle has an inability to shut up and listen. He seems to think that as long as he is the one who is speaking, he is the one who is right. I've seen the same thing in people who live in trailer courts.
yep
I could only sit thru the first few minutes, then I had to stop.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB
me too,
only watched like the first 8 minutes and I had enough!
I think that even if explosive weren't involved, and they were, an inside job is still provable!
I'm suspicious of everyone involved!
The main things that convinced me was Bush not running to hide at the school that day.
He could have been a target.
And Norad! No way this wasn't planned.
Another thing I've been thinking about is the patriot act. It was ready to go on 911! Who wrote it? Why? How'd they know they'd even need it? Why go to all that effort and expense unless you know you're going to use it?
No these people whoever they are have already figured out every angle, every possibility. It will be very hard to bring this crime to the light of day in my opinion!
But I'm going to continue to enlighten everyone I come across!
Bill
Also, bush never asked a
Also, bush never asked a question. If you were in charge and someone told you you and everybody you know was under attack wouldn't you ask a question. He sat there. What card actually said was 'everything is progressing as planned.'
He's also a primadonna.
We were concerned about what he was going to be saying at the conference, he gave his assurance that his topic would be limited to "similarities between OKC and 9/11" of which there are several. Little did we know that the only similarity he would cite would be that he claims nuclear devices were used at both sites. Many of us were somewhat horrified when he started going off about this stuff while not citing any evidence other than "somebody told me". He imposed upon us to sell his information for him, and while everyone was lining up for lunch he commanded me to cut in the line and "get him some food". I will never forget that, I very nearly kicked him in the testicles. Cool minds prevailed, and I am eternally grateful to Dr. Jones for this discussion. It was very serendipitous how it happened, there was going to be a Q&A session but they both ran into each other coming from/going to the washroom, where a crowd quickly formed. Someone thankfully got them into a room with a few cameras to continue the discussion.
www.v911truth.org
Jones is being polite
The good Dr. Jones was just being polite. At most he is keeping an open mind. But, nevertheless, Dr. Jones definitively and carefully laid out the existing evidence that others had provided and analysed that repudiates any nuclear or radioactive material such as "mini-nukes" being used at WTC. Bottom line: unless Deagle's tests show what he says they should, and others can reproduce these results independently, the issue of "mini-nukes" is not viable. End of story.
PS, someone else in this post makes an amazingly good point -- there were many cameras filming the collapse of each of the towers from 100's of feet away. EMP should have fried these if there was one. Wait for evidence .. but as it stands .. there is none!
Deagle sucks
I use to listen to Deagle on RBN for about a day ,,, he is a fuckin idiot .were the hell did hie get his MD Cracker jack. He always talks himself into a hole that his dumb ass creates. Jones need to stay away from that shill.
Jones closes "mini-nuke" debate
One of the most instructive aspects of this debate is that it highlights how credible Dr. Steven Jones is, and how doggedly he adheres to evidence. Jones often drags the discussion back, from the extremes of bombast and speculation, to the rational, logical centre of scientific inquiry.
While I'll grant him an undeniable ability to talk chemistry and physics head to head with Dr. Jones, Bill Deagle frustratingly avoided questions by veering off on tangents, often indulding in sheer propaganda. "Mini-nukes" were used at the WTC, Deagle says, because an unknown and shadowy coterie of NSA, "special ops agents", and mil-sci types told him so. Jones once asks Deagle who one of these "agents" is, but it should be obvious to anyone that its irrelevant because Deagle can't or won't tell us. Deagle's only hope to make his claim are results of (unspecified) tests. So recognize that any statement about "mini-nukes at WTC has no support.
The purported use of "mini-nukes" or DEW (which both Jones and Deagle reject) at the WTC have been divisive. By engaging this issue head-on, Jones' patient, paternal, gentlemanly, competent and thorough description of the issue and objectives, and requirements for evidence, help to prevent further divide and reflect today's mature and secure 9/11 truth movement.
So, the debate is finished, we can forget about "mini-nukes" until Deagle comes back with positive test results. But keep in mind that Jones has already published a paper that repudiates the use of nuclear material at WTC.
For those who can't resist the temptation to keep it open, Jones has set the tone - debate on evidence.
Dr. Deagle is a self proclaimed prophet...
I haven't had time to read through all of the comments, but in case anyone didn't point this out, Dr. Deagle is a self proclaimed prophet. See here: http://www.americaslastdays.com/deagle.htm
Is Dr. Deagle a credible source?
"Off World Bases"???
He also talks about a lot of UFO stuff, like the "off world bases" we have on other planets. He is out there. Dr. Fetzer 'the sequal'
Great post!
Very enjoyable reading. Thanks for the post T-Bone (kaaaaaaaaaaaa- stan-za).
Dr. Deagle has nothing, and stacks of contrary evidence he chooses to ignore. Let him run around, collect dust samples, and pay the large amount of $$$ to have them analyzed. It is his money and time to waste.
Just beware that he does not waste yours....
All I know is that I wish I had the time back I spent watching this little video. My sincere thanks to reprehensor for posting it, though --- the video clearly shows he has no idea what he is talking about.
0.1 kTon nukes would only neutron activate "about 10%" of the building material? How many of these did he say went off anyway? Uhhhhhhh ------ I would like to know what orifice this information was pulled out of.... I mean, this guy is talking about the 'top secret' magic variety of 4th generation nukes, which people are saying (with no proof) leave no traces of radio-activity, and now he states these magic little devices would only neutron activate "about 10%" of the building. Therefore, only A SMALL FRACTION of the dust and of the metal and people and asphalt and surrounding buildings and cars and sewar water and river sediment would show neutron activation and abundant nuclei excited-state byproducts like high energy particles and high energy EM radiation which would excite other nuclei.
He is setting up his argument which can not be disproven ---- the samples can all come back negative and he can pretend that it is not statistically significant. Any number of contrary evidence, of which quite alot currently exists, will not disprove this little notion.
The News flash has already been broadcast for those who read the reports ---- NO elevated levels of neutron activated isotopes or anomalous excited state nuclei found in the Lioy dust samples, in the Hudson River sediments, or Gieger counter measurements of MELTED STEEL slag samples and the MacKinlay dust samples.
All hearsay which is directly contradicted by the hard evidence. Another theory which he will claim can not be falsified by any amount of contrary evidence since it will be 'statistically insignificant' and, he will claim as he already does, all contrary evidence does not disprove his claim based upon his inherently flawed assumptions regarding imaginary characteristics and specifications of a weapon system whose signatures are completely unknown.
Let me think real hard about this.... Where have I seen a theory like this before?
Just makes you wonder who is
Just makes you wonder who is crafting these tight little logic bombs? Smells like FABULOUS!
Indeed
Exactly... However one point to pick.
We have camera footage of the initial collapse from around 300 feet away....
What kind of Nuclear Weapon is not going to release a shock wave of EMP??
If there was a nuclear device going off in those buildings....Every single electronic circuit in the immediate area would of been fried immediately.... radios, cellphones, cameras, vehicles, detonation timers, etc ...all wiped out...even with a 0.1kt yielding weapon.
The EMP release area travels much further then its physical damage area of effect... you cannot contain it, you cannot stand within a half of a mile at least with out having your circuits fried... It goes through walls, streets, vehicles, people...it gets in your pockets and into the sky...
It would of instantly castrated the electrical systems in both of those Helicopters which just happened to hover right next to the buildings before they disintegrated, causing them to stall and crash.
This mini-nuke theory is nonsense.
In fact it is patently ridiculous.
EVERYTHING is a conspiracy to Erci Hufschmidt...
..., even the moon landings.
I met and talked to him at The Tampa Theatre when the Jimmy Walter Tour passed through. He's a likeable, articulate fellow but I also thought him sort of sad since absolutely everything is a conspiracy to him. And I believe even his own family has grown tired of it.
It's funny - when I brought up Jim Hoffman's name in our conversation, Eric kind of rolled his eyes and I asked him why. He said, "Well, you start talking about some plausible means by which the government could have used to bring the towers down and Hoffman starts bringing up Energy Beam Weapons". He didn't seem to realize that people rolled their eyes at the mention of his own name too.
I was also one who had bought his book "Painful Questions" when it first appeared. It is useful for its excellent, high-quality photographs. But I doubt Hufschmidt is a shill for Murdoch-style journalism. See, now you're thinking just like he does!
I dont even know if it is the information...or the messenger
Sup all...
I have been lurking for some time,...This Dr.Deagle has driven me to pop the cherry.
IF ... Mini nukes were used... then they were..
However in order to disseminate the information, the last thing we need to try and tell the AVG JOE...is this if we actually want the truth to do what it does best... which is shed some sunlight on the vampires that suck us for every drop.
Now.. I do not know for a fact if mini nukes were indeed used..(but I am 99.999% sure they were not)...BUT. if they were it would seriously clean up the entire skeptic argument about the alleged "thousands involved in a cover-up" mantra..
As it would only take one fascist freak to place a suitcase or smaller in the critical location.
However.... There is also the ample solid evidence for Thermate... which most likely would not of been done by a single person!...We already have that...and it is enough, all we need to do now is lock it up and make sure our science is perfect, make sure our case is molecularly tight...totally impermeable.
I personally do not buy the mini-nuke theory.... and it would have to have ample evidence to support it....Evidence as such that would be irrefutable, and instantaneously lay a death blow to the entire plutocratic powers that did this horrid, manipulating event...
I also do not buy into Dr. Deagles inside information bullshit... Vaccinations at Gunpoint?... sure... That is a good way to start a Civil War instantaneously... While a sizable population of the masses may go for that.. a very well armed population will certainly not... And no world power has the capability to wage a successful campaign against a insurgent force.
It cannot be done...at least ...not for long.
Bollyn on the loose
not that anybody would care but just for the record.
http://www.dailyherald.com/story.asp?id=326286
One-time Hoffman Estates mayoral candidate wanted
By Erin Holmes
eholmes@dailyherald.com
Posted Monday, June 25, 2007
A judge issued a warrant today for the arrest of Christopher Lee Bollyn, the one-time Hoffman Estates mayoral candidate convicted by a jury in June of resisting arrest and aggravated assault.
Bollyn, 50, was scheduled to be sentenced this morning, but never showed in court.