Power Struggle over Scholar's Website - ST911.org?

Well the view from the outside seems to indicate the Space Beam interview Fetzer had with Judy Woods has not gone without incident.

An Open Letter About Steven Jones

Jim Fetzer, Phd

19 November 2006

Friends and Colleagues:

When I founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth, I invited Steve Jones to serve as co-chair. He has responsibility for co-editing our journal, which he originally founded with Judy Wood as co-editor and me as managing editor, and runs our members' forum, while I maintain our web site at st911.org. He is now planning to take control of the web site from me.

I have raised objections on moral, legal and intellectual grounds and I am categorically opposed to it. But he appears to be persisting in what might be described as a "hostile take over" to control Scholars. Because this is going on behind the scenes and you would otherwise be unaware of this scheme, I am publishing this open letter on st911.org.

The background to this move concerns new research about what happened at the World Trade Center involving hypotheses that differ from those Steve has been investigating and promoting for more than a year now. On 11 November 2006, Judy Wood was my guest on "Non-Random Thoughts" and we discussed new research she and Morgan Reynolds were doing on possible causes of the destruction of the World Trade Center, which involves the use of high-tech, directed energy-weaponry. I put up links to their research, which are available on our web site under "Events" for that date. Right or wrong, this is fascinating stuff, which I even discussed during lectures in Tucson the next two days:

Dr. James Fetzer: Did Classified Weaponry Destroy the Twin Towers?

On 15 November 2006, I invited Steve to come on a new program that I will be hosting on gcnlive.com with Kevin Barrett. "The Dynamic Duo" will be broadcast from 3-5 PM/CT. Kevin will host on M/F and I will host on T/W/Th. This new approach is so fascinating that I wanted Judy, Morgan and Steve to be my guests 28, 29, and 30 November 2006 with consecutive appearances on those days. Judy and Morgan agreed, but Steve has not, and, in a series of email exchanges, he began to raise questions about my management of the web site, where he seems to think any new idea that is controversial requires some kind of counterbalancing opinion. These are new views, of course, and the purpose of inviting him onto the program was for that very purpose!

Steve appears to be committing the blunder of supposing that the web site, like the journal, should include only finished research reports, which are fully referenced and formally presented. That is all wrong, because the web site and the journal have entirely different functions. The journal is for peer-reviewed studies. The web site is for current events and recent developments to keep the public informed about what is going on within the research community in its exploratory stages, including mini-nukes and high-tech weapons, which may or may not "pan out" and reach stages of development suitable for journal publication.

What is ironic about his attitude toward "unfinished research" is that he repeatedly characterizes his own studies of the use of thermite (in a sulfur-enhanced version known as "thermate") as both preliminary and incomplete. If that is the case, then by his own standard, there is a serious question whether his own research is ready for prime time! It is also worth mention that he has revised his basic paper on numerous occasions, which, to the best of my knowledge, have not been subject to additional peer review. If we only mention or discuss finished research on st911.org, there is a serious question whether Steve's work properly qualifies for inclusion in the journal he edits, much less the web site.

The hardest part of scientific inquiry is the stage of speculation in coming up with alternative hypotheses as possible explanations for the phenomena under consideration. Here we are talking about the complete destruction of two 500,000-ton buildings and five other structures the demolition of which is seldom mentioned in public discourse. Judy and Morgan have discovered the WTC was constructed in an enormous "bathtub" to create a barrier to protect the site from overflow of water from the Hudson River, which would have flooded PATH TRAIN tunnels and subways throughout Manhattan. To avoid this catastrophe, it appears to have been indispensable to turn 4/5 of the towers to dust and demolish just 1/5 by more conventional means, such as those Steve Jones has advanced.

Critics seem to be deriving a lot of mileage from my having described this new research as "Fascinating!" What I meant by that--as I think anyone who listens to the program can discern--is that the importance of the bathtub and the completeness of the destruction of the World Trade Center, where it looks as though every building with a "WTC" designation was targeted for devastation, greatly expands the scope of the evidence regarding what has to be explained (in philosophical language, it broadens and redefines the explanandum for any potential explanans, where the explanandum describes what is to be explained and the explanans offers the initial conditions and laws advanced to explain them). This is an enormous advance and is truly fascinating!

11 November 2006
Interview: Judy Wood will be the guest on "Non-Random Thoughts" with host Jim Fetzer
Related: The Star Wars Beam Weapon

You don't have to be a philosopher of science to understand that, in a scientific investigation of the events of 9/11, the range of alternative explanations that might possibly explain the explanandum must include not only (a) jet-plane-impacts/jet-fuel-fire/pancake collapse hypotheses and (b) classic controlled demolition from the bottom up hypotheses but (c) non-classic controlled demolition from the top-down hypotheses. It should be clear that these, in turn, can be refined in terms of (c-1) non-classic controlled demolition from the top-down using thermate and other conventional explosives, (c-2) non-classic controlled demolition from the top-down using mini-nukes, and (c-3) non-classic controlled demolition from the top-down using directed energy weapons. All of these deserve consideration and, to the the best of my knowledge, none of (c-1) to (c-3) has been refuted at this stage of scientific inquiry.

During the course of her interview with me, Judy suggested that the source of the energy required might possibly have been based in space. This is not as fanciful as it might sound, insofar as the US has been pursuing "full spectrum dominance" (of air, sea, land and space!) for some period of time. The very idea of space-based weapons strikes many people as a stretch, if not absurd. But they are trotting out a lot of the same kinds of ridicule and sarcasm as apologists for the official government's account have been advancing to attack those of use who are critics of what we have been told, which is supposed to be "completely ridiculous"! Just listen to O'Reilly or Hannity & Colmes! If we don't consider the full range of possible alternative explanans, we may arrive at false conclusions by eliminating the true hypothesis from serious consideration because it seems farfetched or even absurd.

Cutting-steel using thermate and disintegration-of-steel via directed energy weapons, of course, are different kinds of causal mechanisms, where we have visual evidence of disintegration at work, which may be found on Judy's site and is included in the 16-minute segment from my second lecture in Tucson, a link to which I have given above. Indeed, Judy appears to have done far more to develop her "proof of concept" than has Steve. Some of these research preliminaries are archived:


Indeed, prototypes have been built and tested, beginning as long ago as 1991! Videos and links to other videos demonstrating the use of Ground Based Lasers (GBLs) may also be found at several links here:


Appendix2, for example, includes this about Space Based Lasers (SBLs):

"Talon Gold achieved performance levels equivalent to that needed for the SBL. In 1991, the space-borne Relay Mirror Experiment (RME), relayed a low-power laser beam from a ground site to low-earth orbit and back down to a scoring target board at another location with greater pointing accuracy and beam stability than needed by SBL."

The specific weapons used to destroy the WTC could have been ground based or space based. Judy tends to believe that, whether it was the use of a mirror to reflect an energy beam from Earth or a space-based energy source, it came from above. (My own opinion is that WTC-7 may have played a crucial role here.) If someone suggests that this sounds "loony" or "far out" to them, then I would ask, "How do you know that she's wrong?" It would be scientifically irresponsible not to consider an hypothesis that poses such an intriguing alternative to account for demolishing the WTC, especially given all the evidence she has adduced.

His desire to keep discussion of new, controversial approaches from the public appears to have motivated his attempt to take-over the web site. Personally, I find this rather odd, since all of our research on the events of 9/11 qualifies as "controversial" and the public is entitled to know about new research at the cutting edge. As I have explained in email exchanges, especially, "An Open Letter to Steve Jones", his attempt to take over the site is morally, legally, and intellectually objectionable on many grounds, including that it qualifies as taking something that does not belong to him. I created st911.org and have maintained it from scratch. Because this would affect everyone with a serious interest in Scholars for 9/11 Truth, I am exposing it here.

To the best of my knowledge, Steve has found support among perhaps ten or twelve members of Scholars who are active on the forum. Since our current membership approximates 400, this does not appear to be the majority view. Splinter groups often form when dealing with complex and controversial issues, especially when they have ramifications of a political kind. Everyone who has joined Scholars has joined with the current web site and management of st911.org. If he thinks that he can do better, then I encourage him to resign from Scholars and create his own site. But he should not attempt to take control of a site that I created and maintain, which would display the virtues of theft over honest toil. Those who have opinions they want to express about all this can email hardevidence@gmail.com or jfetzer@d.umn.edu.

James H. Fetzer
Founder and Co-Chair
Scholars for 9/11 Truth


As a former associate member and a very active participant in the forums, I can state 10-12 members is a very large portion of the active participants.  Not being a participant of the forum does not imply disagreement with Professor Jones. 


Scholars For 9/11 Truth...

Would have been nothing without the work of Professor Steven E. Jones. Fetzer should step down. 9/11 Truth is bigger than ANY one person, no matter how great they think of themselves as being.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Show "Who care who leads the nut" by Anonymous (not verified)

I' m really beginning to wonder about Fetzer.

Reynolds and Woods are already discredited.

This "Star wars beam weapon" theory is ridiculous. Like something taken from a pulp mag.

Why is Fetzer promoting this BS?.

Yes, Fetzer should step down.


Did Jim Fetzer cause disruptions in the JFK Movement? Why did Jim Fetzer make a spectacle of himself at a recent JFK Book Signing? Why has Jim Fetzer endorsed, promoted, and defended WingTV? Why did Jim Fetzer promote Barbara Olsen as being alive on National Radio? Why did Jim Fetzer come out of NOWHERE right after Prof. Jones came forward?

Ok, now let's talk about "Space Beams."

I have told Jim Fetzer in the past that this is NOT "Jim Fetzer's 9/11 Truth Movement." This cause is bigger than ANY one person.

He has bitten the hand that fed him. He should step down.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Come on, Jon,,,

We haven't reached the final climactic point of this disinfo crescendo yet -- when Fetzer will be invited back on The O'Reily Factor and Hannity & Colmes to discuss SPACE BEAMS taking down the twin towers. Hell, he'll probably even be the next 9/11 "leader" to appear on Mancow's show.

No, Fetzer isn't going to step down any time soon. He'll just keep popping up whenever he's needed.

Ok then...

I denounce Jim Fetzer. He does not speak for me.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I will gladly leave the Scholars group if it continues this way

I do not wish to have my name associated with patently absurd theories. If Steve Jones and Uncle Fetzer part ways, I know whom I'll be following. And you know what? I hope they do part ways.

I don't know what is going

I don't know what is going on with Fetzer, but it's clear to me that the Reynolds and Woods are intentionally disrupting the Scholars. Steve Jones ought to attempt to authenticate his samples and publish a new paper on the results of his studies, preferrably somewhere other than the Scholars for Truth journal. However, Judy Woods and Morgan Reynolds ought to take their supposed research and deposit it in the nearest trash can. The mix of legitimate criticism of Jones along with outlandish theories does indeed smell of intentional disinformation.

Fetzer has been in love with outlandish theories and grandstanding all along. He has frequently presented the worst arguments and ideas in public appearances. I once wrote him to say, despite my differences with his approach and ideas, that I was confident that he was presenting what he thought was the truth. Now I'm not so sure.


Cause I was bad.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


This space beam may have it's merits.... I have studied many technologies and it is concievable... but this will never garner any public support.

And the amount of time required to even get a sniff of evidence about this is well beyond our time frame.

I know this isn't the direction this movement need to pursue.

this is like trying to make a u-turn at 70 mph.

the question is

not whether or not space based weapons are real--of course they are in some stage of development. the question is were they used on 9/11, and it is so clear that they were not needed, that this was a much more traditional demolition job, that we are right to discard this "research" as disinformation junk. Yet another reason why we need to focus on facts, not personalities.

Show "The more I find out about" by Anonymous (not verified)

I'll give you a point...

just for having the balls to post that. But I'll then take it away for it being "Anonymous".

Show "What is wrong with" by Anonymous (not verified)

You can't pick a fake name and stick with it?

Dude, "they" have your IP address already -- what's the problem with a fake name?

No "they" do not!!!

No "they" do not!!!

We need to bring Professor Jones' attention

to this thread or another one, and all the denizens of 911blogger who support him and his attempt to keep disinfo out of the Scholars' site need to express their opinions clearly and firmly. I know he won't have the time to read tens of supportive emails, although those should be written as well.

My opinion:

If one of them has to leave, there is simply no question but that it be Professor Fetzer. The movement cannot afford to lose a scientist and resource like Professor Jones under any circumstances.

Except J. Fetzer founded the site.

And invited on Mr. Jones.

Why don't you start a new site for Jones, Casseia?

You wouldn't want your idol guilty of theft, with you as an accessory?

Exactly for what reason is Jones' theory "better."

Just because you think it's more "acceptable" and the other theory is, "obviously" false?

Isn't the entire 9/11 Truth movement written off as "obviously false." So I guess that's a really good reason to disparage something?

"Fetzer founded the site."

I'd say that's next to irrelevant. The work of Steven Jones is and always has been the thing that made people visit and recommend it.

"Because you think it's more acceptable..."

Because Jones' work is consistent with conventional scientific methodology and Wood's work is not.

What does the Scholars

What do the Scholars bylaws say about control of the website and how does the collective membership assert its will? Is there an annual meeting where members can vote up a slate of representatives? Could a vote be taken by mail or over the internet? Fetzer points out that there are 400 members in the Scholars. I say ask them if they want Space Beams and hologram planes to be a key issue for the group. Ask them if they would prefer Jones to Fetzer.

Scholars or Space Cadets?

Wood and Reynolds are promoting pure lunacy. It doesn't matter if there's a very remote chance they could be correct. How many people are willing to accept: (a) 9/11 was an inside job, and (b) the World Trade Center was destroyed by a space beam? I'll tell you how many: about 3, and they should all leave Scholars for 9/11 Truth because they're making everyone look foolish.

If Jones wants credibility, he must establish an unquestionable chain of custody for his WTC sample.

If Fetzer, Wood, and Reynolds don't jump ship, they're going to drag what's left of 9/11 Truth down with them.

Of course, Fetzer has a book coming out in the new year, so I don't imagine he's going anywhere.

With 911 Scholars in such

With 911 Scholars in such disarray, the Democrates backing off from investigations, and no-one in the MSM willing to cover 9/11 Truth - the movement is dead unless....

Unless a massive march on washington can be organized and people start focusing on the need for a new investigation and stop trying to solve the crime from a 100,000 foot view (i.e., not access to real evidence and testimonies).

For people like J.F. who think that we can all just sit back and talk about every single theory and not have that hurt the truth movement, they are not living in the real world. Once this starwars beam weapon idea is linked to the 911 scholars by the MSM, all credibility will have been lost (and rightly so).

Show "LC Final Cut is the last chance." by Anonymous (not verified)

new shill category for the taxonomy: Doomshiller

Doomshiller - a shill whose job it is to demoralize people in the movement by pointing out minor irritations and making them out to be "the death of the movement" one tactic used by a Doomshiler is to pin the hopes of the movement to a single thing, like, say, the release of LCFinal Cut. Now just suppose theoretically that LC Final Cut came out, and it just so happened that Dylan and Korey and the other guy were disinfo all along (remember this is purely to make a point--i don't actually think that's the case) and the film is rife with references to space beams, elvis sightings, etc. Impressionable truthers who remember what the Doomshiller said MIGHT (in the shills dreams) say--OH MY GOD--that gloomy anonymous truther was right! We're screwed! The movement is over! And if enough people are sick of truthing, the prophecy could self-fulfill.

I suggest Doomshiller for lack of a better term. If anyone has any other suggestions for a good name for this type of shill, please share! We really should create a 9/11 truth glossary...


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


Another kind of disinfo

Another kind of disinfo tactic is to constantly go on the attack and call people shills based on flimsy or no evidence thus muddying the water.

To generalize, they simply

To generalize, they simply foreshadow a planned event.  If know that you have a event planned and in place to do your disninfo/disruption/psych-job, why not magnify its significance by planting seeds before the event. 

Automatically giving those words, wisdom status.

In either case, the dynamics of the cover-up is as big as 9/11 itself...

This is an information war for sure, but we can tap into our own inherent  strength, and that is our sheer numbers.

Local Truth groups is exactly what the cover-up agents do not want, it takes the battle out of their territory and into ours.  They have limited resources and individuals, we have MILLIONS.

The revolution will not be on youtube... 

Just saying...

It's late '06, and I doubt any Democrat in Congress is going to pick up the ball in the next two years. The only hope is to win in the court of public opinion, and the only way that is going to happen is if a movie like LC Final Cut hits it big. But, if you want to be on here in ten years debating whether Jim Fetzer, Nico Haupt, or Paul Thompson is the best 9/11 researcher, be my guest.

truth has no expiration date

And none of those three would be on my list tomorrow, let alone ten years from now. Again, this anonymous doomshiller is scraping the bottom of the shill tactic barrel for something--ANYTHING--that will discourage people from demanding answers.

The only way to win in the court of public opinion is for a movie like LCFinal Cut hits it big? So now it's not LC, it's a movie LIKE it. But I take your point to be that the measure of our success is basically whether or not theatre owners (didn't Carlyle Group buy Loew's a few years back?) decide to run the movie as if it were a blockbuster. Guess what? Not gonna happen UNTIL we win in the court of public opinion. And that means lots more people hitting the pavement with the truth in tow.

So instead of waiting around on your butt watching the ratings game when LC or a movie like it gets released in theatres, why not get out and make sure the truth gets out regardless of what hollywood or the theatre owners decide to do. The influence of movies has been waning for years anyway. We're entering a new paradigm in media but the powers that be will never acknowledge it--they will just slowly fade into irrelevance while we wise up and wake each other up in time to save ourselves from the fate of third world status that awaits on our current track.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force



This is just nuts. How exactly again does the StarWars theory account for any of the evidence again? There are more holes in matching the evidence of StarWars beams to the available evidence then there are with the official story.

So they used the StarWars beam to destory the building, but needed planes, smoke and bombs to divert attention from the "beam"? So when exactly did the beam go off, after the building was collapsing, because it certainly didn't start the collapse sequence? Oh, that's right, they needed the beam only for cleanup to make sure they didn't damage the bathtube .

And what about building 7, I guess they didn't need a beam for that building....

So if the beam was used to evaporate the building, how come the firefighters in the stairwell that survived weren't fried to a crisp (because we know from the videos on the starwars sight that beam weapons fry people)?

And if a beam was evaporating the steel (i.e., grainy video of the core spire falling), how come the only thing of mass that was left behind WAS THE STEEL!

And if a beam was evaporating the steel, were did the explosive energy come from to propel some columns outward?

Oh, but it does explain the fried cars and the holes in the buildings!!!!

You see, it’s easy to match nutty ideas to photographic after effects. What's difficult is to match such ideas with a real world scenario that satisfies ALL the evidence.

Currently, there is only ONE theory that can explain ALL the evidence and that is CD.

Building 6

And what about building 7, I guess they didn't need a beam for that building....

What about Bld. 6?

I guess you don't even know about that one....

A person betrays their own ignorance when they put something down without understanding it.

Peggy, Your comment is


Your comment is unsupportable. I didn't mention a lot of things - that hardly implies ignorance about building 6. Evidence for anything associated with building 6 beyond collateral damage from the WTC collapse is beyond scant. There is a very logical and rational reason from building 6 at


If a Laser beam blew up building 6, I guess it did it before the WTC collapse, because you can clearly see the WTC debris inside of bulding 6. And if building 6 was blown up before the WTC collapse by the laser beam, don't you think it would have shown up on the videos, or photographs, or eyewitness reports? But I guess that is all outwayed by the mysterious shape of the holes --- must have been a laserbeam!!!

It's difficult enough to put together a reasoned argument for WTC 1, 2, and 7, much less WTC 6. Truther's that attempt to "know everything" about what happened on 9/11 based on the available evidence are very misguided and should find a better day job.

I suggest in the future that you try to be less bias, accusational and emotional when you write responses.



Dominic tried to get into 6, but it was guarded.

The peripheral of the building was *completely* intact.

The center was burned out.

He couldn't figure out how it was bombed. The center of the building was entirely destroyed.

Debris from the Tower doesn't explain it.

People are as ignorant of 6 as they used to be, several years ago, of 7.

So what is your hypothesis

So what is your hypothesis for building #6?

Debris falling on it, bombs, fire...

anything but frigging "SPACE BEAMS".

Not very logical

There is a very logical and rational reason for building 6

Your link brings me to here

The writer at the link, Jim Hoffman?, states "it could be imagined....." steel falling from the building "could've" caused it. He doesn't say it did.

Yep. Many things "could be imagined" mostly because that's the only way they could've happened....in someone's imagination.

How can it be a "logical and rational reason" when the author himself (or herself) states: "It could be imagined." The reason is either logical and rational, or imaginary. Not both.

What is so logical about:

caused by heavy steel beams falling from the Tower, when:

1. There is no visual evidence of any steel beams large enough for that job falling off the Tower. I'm speaking of visual evidence of the North Tower falling. The area in question is covered in dust after the failutre of the Tower. Yet how then, if the Bld. 6 was covered in dust, which occurred once the Tower was completely destroyed, could the steel have fallen with the requisite momentum? This imaginary steel obviously wasn't coming from the top area of the Tower or you would've seen itfalling out and away. Actually, all we see is dust.

(The beam that hit across the street was blown out (and nicked and damaged the corner of the building.) In the case of "6" the entire center of the building was scooped out.

2. If you look down the hole there is no sign of any steel. There was no steel laying in the bottom of the hole.

3. Look at the clean cut around the edge of where the damage took place. Why is it a scallop shape? That couldn't have been done neatly and perfectly all around the edge of the hole by randomly falling steel.......

Plus the damgae goes straight through to the ground,,,,but the peripheral walls remain. Again, where is the imaginary steel which caused this?

unless this is one of the billion-to-one coincidences that always seem to cluster around

1.the deaths of important witnesses or journalist writing on supressed stories,
2.political heads of state with powerful enemies,
3. voting machine anomolies.


This damage:

was not caused by falling steel girders.

A cluster of them just happened to plumk down in the middle of the building and scoop it out to the ground floor!!!!?

Peggy! Italics tag!

What about explosives in Building 6?

Hell I got a phone call

I posted too early.

Tried to correct.

Got a phone call.

And now that you've replied casseia, I can't fix it!

It not good to be dsylexic, with tags.


Sorry, that didn't even occur to me! D'oh!

To me, those pix o' six look like a CD that went awry, starting from the bottom, and allowing a lot of material to fall straight down. Pure conjecture.



I make and distribute a lot

I make and distribute a lot of flyers about 9/11. My flyers used to have st911.org listed on them, because it seemed like a very respectable site which would be convincing to the average American. I stopped listing them after they started promoting the mini-nukes theory, and now they're just completely ridiculous. It's really disappointing to see such a great meme, "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" get turned into such a poison pill. I applaud Steven Jones for his earnest research.

Fighting for G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, and Drugs) is available now for pre-order on Amazon.

Moronic drivel on blogger . . .

Jim Fetzer on what may have destroyed the World Trade Center

Obviously unfamiliar with my lectures in Tucson, this is more moronic drivel. I
tend toward a mixed causation theory of the destruction of the WTC, where some
massive explosives (possibly mini-nukes?) were used in the subbasements about
the time the planes hit the buildings, that high-tech weapons (directed energy,
possibly from WTC-7, possibly from space?) were used to deconstruct most of the
towers and then more conventional explosives (possibly thermite or thermate?)
were used to bring down the last 20 floors or so. Given the available evidence,
this is my best guess, but obviously all of this has to be confirmed. What is
beyond question, in my view, is that even super-thermate in the towers cannot
possibly account for the enormous and total devastation of the complete WTC!
I suggest reviewing Judy's studies and my lectures before drawing conclusions,
if you have any respect for logic and evidence, which may be too much to ask.

I'll be glad to view your

I'll be glad to view your lecture and consider the evidence, but can't you see why this mix of theories strikes so many as a classic example of disinformation?

Not a mix of theories...

just a mix of causes (of the destruction of the towers).

Don't forget the Reverse

Don't forget the Reverse Vampires. They probably aimed the Space Beam.


When I read that comment I thought it must be somebody parodying a no-planer and trying to make them sound as stupid as possible. Then I got to the bottom and read the name. With reference to the fact that Wood doesn't even know how much the WTC weighed, how much weight should be placed on her theories?

well, he does think they

well, he does think they just discovered the whole bathtub:
Judy and Morgan have discovered the WTC was constructed in an enormous "bathtub" to create a barrier to protect the site from overflow of water from the Hudson River, which would have flooded PATH TRAIN tunnels and subways throughout Manhattan.

Apparently Fetzer just heard of it. He has a tendency of parroting things he hears -> "Barbara Olsen is alive!", "the Pentagon hole was only 12 feet!", "space beams!"


Go away shill

and take your SPACE BEAMS with you.


ok, lets see,
this is the first time i see the mini-nukes combined with space beams. And , to increase the stupidity to absurd levels, it ends with that arrogant "if you have any respect for logic and evidence, which may be too much to ask" sentence.
Jim Fetzer has to step down. Now. If not, everyone with a brain in st911, RUN!

Goodbye Fetzer

See you at the 9/11 Trials, buddy.

911 trials

Where these trials? When?

Show "Why 9/11 Truthlings are siding with Spooks Hoffman, Jones agains" by ForgottenScripts (not verified)

Nice to see our tax dollars

Nice to see our tax dollars hard at work funding specialized datamining system to create social/organizational relationships REGARDLESS of the true relationships.

Its shame those individuals who have poured a significant chunk of there time to construct such tools are being used to enslave mankind rather than free us.

Deception at its finest! 


Directed-energy weapon

A directed-energy weapon is a type of energy weapon that directs energy in a particular direction by a means other than a projectile. It transfers energy to a target for a desired effect


Microwave guns powerful enough to injure humans are possible.

* Active Denial System is a microwave source, to heat the water in the target's skin and thus cause incapacitating pain. It is being developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory in New Mexico by researchers working with Raytheon for riot-control duty in Iraq. While intended to cause severe pain while leaving no lasting damage, some concern has been voiced as to if the system could cause irreversable damage to the eyes. However, any such damage would still be preferable to the damage caused by conventional munitions. There has yet to be testing for long-term side effects of exposure to the microwave beam. It can destroy unshielded electronics.
* See VMADS (Vehicle-Mounted Active Denial System)

[edit] Pulsed Energy Projectile

Main article: Pulsed Energy Projectile

Pulsed Energy Projectile or PEP systems emits an infrared laser pulse which creates rapidly expanding plasma when meeting the target. The resulting sound, shock and electromagnetic waves stun the target and cause pain and temporary paralysis. The weapon is under development and is intended to be used as a non-lethal weapon in crowd control.

[edit] THEL

Main article: Tactical High Energy Laser

THEL (Tactical High Energy Laser) is a weaponized deuterium fluoride laser developed in a joint research project of Israel and the U.S.. It is designed to shoot down aircraft and missiles. See also National Missile Defense.

External links

* Ionatron - Maker of directed-energy weapons

You're a riot. And what's

You're a riot. And what's extra nice about this comment is that it serves as such an excellent example of Guilt by Association:
Hoffman's Uncle Jack Hoffman furthermore is married to June Armstrong, sister of ex-NASA and "moon veteran" Neil Armstrong.

Suck a dick, Nico.

Suck a dick, Nico.

Triangulating for truth!

I've looked at Judy Jetson's page to be sure, and I can say without hesitation that there is not much there there. First off, lots of the links don't work--they say it's being updated. Second, there are pop-up ads. Third, there is little there besides Steve Jones bashing and cartoon promotion. I could not even find a working section on space beams (in writing that is).

So here's the lay of the land. We have in this movement two parties, let's call them the red team and the blue team. The red team are LIHOP sympathizers who would like to see Pakistan take the blame, if some "truth" about 9/11 needs to be exposed. They will argue that the hijackings happened and that Bush and Co. had our defenses stand down to allow the attacks to succeed. No controlled demolition--planes can bring down towers. they believe Barbara Olson is dead because she was on the big boeing that hit the Pentagon. They don't like Steve Jones.

Then there is the blue team. The blue team, led by Judy Jetson, Uncle Fetzer, and Morgan Reynolds Wrap, seem to be cool with the hijackings being fake. They agree it seems unlikely that a big boeing hit the Pentagon. But they don't stop there--they don't think big boeings hit the towers. They think they were cartoon planes. They believe in controlled demolition, but claim to believe space beams were involved. They now don't like Steven Jones either because he won't play along with their blue team antics. Can't say I blame him.

Here's a tip--don't trust either the blue team or the red team. Of course the perps would love for 9/11 truth to descend into a game of which team are you on--the Pakistan blamers? Or the crazy noplaners? Kind of like having to choose between the Democraps and Rethuglicans. you don't want to pick either, and the fact that that is the only choice you are realistically offered depresses you and you reluctantly throw your vote away on a minor candidate if you vote at all.

Well hell, if I were a perp, that ain't a bad example to follow! So what do all of us do who believe the hijackings were faked, flight 77 didn't hit the pentagon, and the towers and building 7 were destroyed with RELATIVELY conventional means like RDX, thermite/thermate, etc.?

We make it clear that we are the only real majority in 9/11 truth circles. I noticed on of Judy Jetsons tactics is to use google stats to show that there are more hits for CD AND space beam than there are for CD AND thermite. I won't even go into why her methodology is messed up there, but it is. Since she and Nico and the rest of the disinfo gang are having trouble gaining converts, they resort to silly methods to try to prove their views are mainstream in the movement.

I think we're doing quite well given the drama that the perps are bringing down on us. SO much theatre for something so simple--Arson, insurance fraud, murder, racketeering, obstruction of justice. A criminal case is all we need. A few indictments. None of that will come without mass awareness and popular support. THAT is what the blue team is about. If the blue team fails, the red team is expected to make sure only Paksitan and W take any blame whatsoever.

With a strategy so simple, obvious, and doomed to fail, I think we have great cause for optimism, folks! Remember--don't let them frame the terms of the debate! Don't waste too much time arguing with proponents of obvious bunkum! Warn people against the disinfo elements as we identify them, and be able to explain why they are disinfo. Keep hitting them hard with the simple facts, like building 7! Each of us has the power to put this baby to bed once and for all--let's use it with a vengeance!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


I'm shocked that you didn't

I'm shocked that you didn't mention Israel.

Of course those who give two shits about reality are interested in the fact that Pakistani intelligence supported Mohammed Atta to the tune of 100,000. But given the kinship between the ISI and the CIA that fact does not lead to pinning blame on Pakistan, but rather on connecting 9/11 to US intelligence. Something similar would be the case if good evidence came forward regarding Israeli intelligence involvement in the attacks given that Israel is a US client state.

The real split is between those who equate "thinking for themselves" with "choosing to believe whater I damn well please and attacking those who are rational and disagree."

It doesn't matter if you're a no-planer, a holocaust denier, or happen to hew close to what appears to be true and rattle on and on about CD, if you pick the information you like in order to reinforce your own views then you're not an asset to this or any other movement.

Pinning blame on Pakistan

"Of course those who give two shits about reality are interested in the fact that Pakistani intelligence supported Mohammed Atta to the tune of 100,000. But given the kinship between the ISI and the CIA that fact does not lead to pinning blame on Pakistan, but rather on connecting 9/11 to US intelligence."

Is anyone denying that Pakistan played a role? Is anyone saying the money transfer isn't interesting? The point is that your assertion that Pakistani culpability will be transferred to American intelligence is optimistic. To me, the situation reads very much as though some parties believe the chain-reaction of blame could be arrested at the point of Pakistani involvement.

There's also a question of picking information you like in order to further your own goals. What do you hope to have happen if 9/11 could be connected to US intel via Pakistan? New investigation? Criminal indictments? Impeachment? War crimes tribunal? The Pakistan connection is excellent if your goal is a new investigation. It starts to seem like a rather slippery noose if you're thinking more along the lines of war crimes trials for some of the big muckety-mucks.

You don't need to implicate

You don't need to implicate the current administration in 9/11 in order to justify a war crimes tribunal.

Put another way my goal is

Put another way my goal is to seek a new investigation that will examine all the evidence rationally and that's why I'm skeptical about all the evidence we have before us now.

Fair enough.

Who do you imagine doing the new investigation? A special prosecutor or international tribunal or some "bipartisan" group from within the government? Obviously, some groups (I hope) would want to follow the evidence all the way to the top, but others might be looking for something just like Pakistani culpability as a good place to stop. And some players have covered their tracks better than others, undoubtedly.

As far as implicating the current administration, I'm not even sure they ARE the big muckety-mucks.

Thx man, your posts are

Thx man, your posts are always a breath of fresh air in this stinking pool of deception. Keep it up!

Heres a clue.....

Ever hear of divide and conquer?......think about that.
This issue alone will be the downfall of the 9/11 movement.
I must say my opinion of Dr. Fetzer and his credibility
have changed considerably.

The only way the enemy can

The only way the enemy can win is to convince us that we have lost...

I don't care if every single 9/11 Truth organization is covertly controlled, it is meaningless.  They cannot and will not instill a defeatist mindset in me.

Follow no banner except the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, all others can be subverted. 

Mission accomplished Fetz! I

Mission accomplished Fetz! I think The Man will be happy. So you will get your money and they won't release the pictures of you and the little boys.

Now call scotty to beam you back to the sixties so you can figure out where you went wrong as a human being.
Now I look at David Icke's theories and see them as poetry : you'd have to be something other than human to be able to play with ppls feelings like that.

Get rid of the crazy stuff

Get rid of the crazy stuff on the site. Remove talk of the nukes. Remove links to the star wars beams. Remove the link to Alex Jones' Terror Storm, and put a link to Loose Change in its place. Remove the 'Informed Fiction' section. In fact, remove everything but Steven Jones' paper, and just work on it.