James H. Fetzer's Posts - 9/11 Scholars Forum2024-03-19T10:36:51ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzerhttp://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1547080685?profile=RESIZE_48X48&width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1http://911scholars.ning.com/profiles/blog/feed?user=140ddh87ln6fb&xn_auth=noMemorandum for the President: Three Proofs we have Not been told the Truth about 9/11tag:911scholars.ning.com,2018-07-05:3488444:BlogPost:820792018-07-05T01:30:27.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h2 class="date-header"><span>Wednesday, July 4, 2018</span></h2>
<div class="date-posts"><div class="post-outer"><div class="post hentry"><a name="941457318792553351"></a><h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2018/07/memorandum-for-president-three-proofs.html">Memorandum for the President: Three Proofs we have Not been told the Truth about 9/11</a></h3>
<div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><b>Memorandum for the…</b></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<h2 class="date-header"><span>Wednesday, July 4, 2018</span></h2>
<div class="date-posts"><div class="post-outer"><div class="post hentry"><a name="941457318792553351"></a><h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2018/07/memorandum-for-president-three-proofs.html">Memorandum for the President: Three Proofs we have Not been told the Truth about 9/11</a></h3>
<div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><b>Memorandum for the President: Three Proofs we have Not been told the Truth about 9/11</b><br/><br/><a href="http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/">Jim Fetzer, Ph.D</a>., Founder, <a href="http://911scholars.org/">Scholars for 9/11 Truth</a><br/><span><br/></span><br/><div class="separator"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MmH5JPYz9KI/Wzzz1-_Ts_I/AAAAAAAAKFA/dDv5eT5_HwANMBToFjf8pGOCreuv65bDACLcBGAs/s1600/Memorandum%2B%25231.jpg"><img src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MmH5JPYz9KI/Wzzz1-_Ts_I/AAAAAAAAKFA/dDv5eT5_HwANMBToFjf8pGOCreuv65bDACLcBGAs/s200/Memorandum%2B%25231.jpg" width="148" height="200" border="0"/></a></div>
<div><span><b>The Impossible Entry</b></span></div>
<div><span>The footage of the South Tower hit exemplifies several anomalies, including a Boeing 767 flying at an impossible speed, an impossible entry into the building (in violation of Newton’s laws), and even passing through its own length into the building in the same number of frames it passes through its own length in air—which is impossible, unless this 500,000 ton, steel and concrete building posed no more resistance to its trajectory in flight than air.</span></div>
<span>Some have claimed that this was a “special plane” that could fly faster than a standard Boeing 767, but no real plane could violate Newton’s laws. The structure of the building, moreover, meant that it actually intersected with eight different floors. Each of those floors consisted of steel trusses connected at one end to the core columns and at the other to the steel support columns. Any real plane would have crumpled external to the building.</span><br/><br/><span><b>The Impossible Collapse</b></span><br/><br/>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WJaJUSSK-aI/Wzz0r69D91I/AAAAAAAAKFI/F6lJVVtwOo4NjsVRQNTSn61uvqoE0fEzwCLcBGAs/s1600/Memorandum%2B%25232.jpg"><img src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WJaJUSSK-aI/Wzz0r69D91I/AAAAAAAAKFI/F6lJVVtwOo4NjsVRQNTSn61uvqoE0fEzwCLcBGAs/s200/Memorandum%2B%25232.jpg" width="200" height="151" border="0"/></a></div>
</div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><span>As Chuck Boldwyn has shown, the thickness of the steel varied from six inches thick in the subbasements to a quarter-inch thick at the top, which meant that the overwhelming mass of the steel was below the level at which “the plane” is alleged to have hit the North Tower. By his calculation, the fourteen floors above the “hit point” represented 1.4% of the mass of the steel, where it is preposterous to suppose that its collapse could have overcome the 98.6% of the mass of the steel below it. Indeed, as John Skilling observed, the towers were built with a safety factor of 20, which means that each floor could support 20 times its expected live load (dead load + furniture, facilities and human personnel).</span><br/><br/><span>The claim that the jet fuel from the plane strikes burned so intensely it caused the steel to weaken cannot withstand critical scrutiny. The steel used in the building was certified by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., to 2,000*F for three to four hours without suffering any adverse effects. NIST studied 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500*F and the other three not above 1,200*F. Plus the fires in the South Tower lasted less than an hour, in the North less than an hour-and-a-half. The fires burned neither long enough nor hot enough to affect the steel. It was physically impossible for them to collapse.</span><br/><br/><span><b>A Controlled Demolition (WTC-7) vs. Demolitions Under Control (The Twin Towers)</b></span><br/><span><br/></span><br/><div class="separator"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xPYGI8NDkek/Wzz08ZvVfPI/AAAAAAAAKFQ/HGKH_fJSNdw2hI8xSfE7GWytgNkGQB8ZwCLcBGAs/s1600/Memorandum%2B%25233.jpg"><img src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xPYGI8NDkek/Wzz08ZvVfPI/AAAAAAAAKFQ/HGKH_fJSNdw2hI8xSfE7GWytgNkGQB8ZwCLcBGAs/s200/Memorandum%2B%25233.jpg" width="200" height="160" border="0"/></a></div>
<div>As Jesse Ventura has observed, propane burns hotter than kerosene (the constituent of “jet fuel”), yet his camping stove, which is made of steel, does not melt when he uses it on a camping trip. Far from collapsing, both buildings are being blown apart in every direction by enormous sources of energy, where they are being converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust and, when destruction is complete, there is no massive pile of debris in their footprint, which is a classic sign of a building’s collapse. Unlike WTC-7, the Twin Towers did not collapse, which means that the official account characterizing them as having “collapsed” is another blatant fabrication and deliberate deception.</div>
<h3><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><strong>Unlike the Twin Towers, WTC-7 came down in a classic “controlled demolition” at 5:20 PM that day, about seven hours after the destruction of WTC-1 and WTC-2, which I prefer to refer to as “demolitions under control”, since they were clearly not classic controlled demolitions. You can see the penthouse kink, where all the floors fall at the same time and, after about 6.5 seconds, there is a stack of debris (mostly floors) equal to about 12% of the height of the original. By contrast, the floors of the Twin Towers remain stationary, waiting their turn to be “blown to kingdom come” (in the memorable phrase of Morgan Reynolds).</strong></span></h3>
<h3><strong><i>For a comprehensive overview of the science and politics of 9/11, see<a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/E3YaOLqzcwzF/">"9/11: Who was responsible and why"</a>:</i></strong></h3>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WJNycENfBpk/Wzz21cKgsTI/AAAAAAAAKFc/iJ5ju9__A7sQB5Erd-svqM4IvjOoIJdUQCLcBGAs/s1600/Memorandum%2B%25234.jpg"><img src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WJNycENfBpk/Wzz21cKgsTI/AAAAAAAAKFc/iJ5ju9__A7sQB5Erd-svqM4IvjOoIJdUQCLcBGAs/s320/Memorandum%2B%25234.jpg" width="320" height="193" border="0"/></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>Michael Rivero blows his cover as a 9/11 gatekeepertag:911scholars.ning.com,2017-09-23:3488444:BlogPost:796812017-09-23T14:12:07.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h2 class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-date-header">Thursday, September 21, 2017…</h2>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-date-posts"><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-outer"><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post m_2814541968505654763gmail-hentry"><a id="m_2814541968505654763_3521201200579079832" name="m_2814541968505654763_3521201200579079832"></a><h3 class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-title m_2814541968505654763entry-title"></h3>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<h2 class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-date-header">Thursday, September 21, 2017</h2>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-date-posts"><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-outer"><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post m_2814541968505654763gmail-hentry"><a name="m_2814541968505654763_3521201200579079832"></a><h3 class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-title m_2814541968505654763entry-title"><a href="https://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2017/09/michael-rivero-blows-his-cover-as-911.html" target="_blank">Michael Rivero blows his cover as a 9/11 gatekeeper</a></h3>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><br/><a href="http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/" target="_blank"><span>Jim Fetzer</span></a><br/><br/><span><span>When <a href="http://www.govtslaves.com/2017-09-06-the-importance-of-drudge-quayle-rivero-and-rense.html" target="_blank">governmentslaves.com</a> published a recent piece on the importance of the alternative on-line media, highlighting the contributions of Matt Drudge, Steve Quayle, Michael Rivero and Jeff Rense, I anticipated that it would not be long before they would come under attack by the truth suppressors:</span></span><br/><br/><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-separator"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TSR6AxlPPQo/WcOk5-QpUzI/AAAAAAAAGyU/lCWK61EBIisI3jK-UNhyC-VCQU5Fo_FDACLcBGAs/s1600/Rivero%2B1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TSR6AxlPPQo/WcOk5-QpUzI/AAAAAAAAGyU/lCWK61EBIisI3jK-UNhyC-VCQU5Fo_FDACLcBGAs/s400/Rivero%2B1.jpg" width="400" border="0" height="178" class="CToWUd"/></a></div>
</div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><span><span>I did not have long to wait because Media Matters, which is run by David Brock--reported to be the boyfriend of James Alifantis, notorious as the owner of Comet Ping-Pong Pizza and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1BiBnEUqKw" target="_blank">central to the PizzaGate scandal</a>--launched an attack upon Drudge as an instrument of Russian propaganda:</span></span></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><br/><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-separator"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-g5pMu5Kj04c/WcOl3Y5uy7I/AAAAAAAAGyc/VJ1n_n5VqrQXkgrCxNU38mYfp7_q6wFjQCLcBGAs/s1600/Rivero%2B2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-g5pMu5Kj04c/WcOl3Y5uy7I/AAAAAAAAGyc/VJ1n_n5VqrQXkgrCxNU38mYfp7_q6wFjQCLcBGAs/s400/Rivero%2B2.jpg" width="400" border="0" height="278" class="CToWUd"/></a></div>
</div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><span><span>where serious students of current affairs know that<i> RT</i> (<i>Russia Today</i>) and <i>Sputnik News</i> are among the most accurate and reliable news sources in the world today, unlike <i>The Washington Post</i> and <i>The New York Times</i>, which have long since been absorbed as instruments of propaganda by the CIA.</span></span><br/><br/><b>Rivero attacks Me over 9/11</b><br/><br/><span><span>I anticipated that other attacks on Rivero and on Rense, where my show, <a href="http://renseradioarchives.com/rawdeal/" target="_blank">"The Raw Deal"</a>, is broadcast over<a href="http://renseradio.com/" target="_blank">renseradio.com,</a> would be forthcoming. But imagine my surprise when I received the following from one of my followers who was reporting that Rivero had been attacking me instead: </span></span></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><br/><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-separator"><span><span><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6AU9u4prtBY/WcOtDM8AGoI/AAAAAAAAGys/zrDYeQwHv0odoI0BY0ww6ZmDx7CaGlQ1wCLcBGAs/s1600/Rivero%2B3.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6AU9u4prtBY/WcOtDM8AGoI/AAAAAAAAGys/zrDYeQwHv0odoI0BY0ww6ZmDx7CaGlQ1wCLcBGAs/s400/Rivero%2B3.jpg" width="400" border="0" height="76" class="CToWUd"/></a></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><span><span>Indeed, between 46:40 and 48:40, in response to what I believe to have been a prearranged call, he attacks me in a 2-minute exchange for my positions on the use of <i>holograms </i>and<i> mini nukes</i> in New York, that <i>no plane hit the Pentagon</i> on 9/11 and even (surprisingly) that <i>we did not land on the moon</i>:</span></span><br/><br/><a class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-m_8358415089394828743m_1178385549716840352gmail-m_4825190551560490174OWAAutoLink" id="m_2814541968505654763gmail-m_8358415089394828743m_1178385549716840352gmail-m_4825190551560490174LPlnk607762" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGZ84LZgF2g" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGZ84LZgF2g</a><br/><br/>The caller had no problem with the towers having been destroyed by plane impacts and jet-fuel based fires, which physically impossible. They were too robust for any real plane to penetrate them, which was why they had to be faked. He was calling for expert advice, but Rivero reinforced his ignorance.<br/><br/><b>The Use of Mini Nukes</b><br/><br/>The observable destruction sequence, for example, where the towers are being blown apart in every direction--from the top down--and converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust--which is a signature of nuclear events--would be confirmed by USGS dust studies, as I explain in detail:<br/><span><span><br/></span></span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBBaDchDnOI" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBBaDchDnOI</a><br/><br/>Because the use of mini nukes and of holograms to fake the planes is difficult for many students of 9/11 to understand, I have spelled it out in clear and accessibly ways on many occasions, as I did during the first "Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference" (2013). Apparently, Michael Rivero didn't get the memo:<br/><span><span><br/></span></span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ</a><br/><br/>During the second <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H_ogTE8RQA" target="_blank">"Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference"</a> (2016), Dennis Cimino focused on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EvJ0pC-eXA" target="_blank">what did and did not happen at the Pentagon</a>. (For more, see <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/reflections-on-pentagon-911.html" target="_blank">"Reflections on the Pentagon: A 9/11 Photographic Review'.)</a> <i>We</i> <i>know that</i> <i>no plane hit the Pentagon,</i> something Michael also seems not to understand.<br/><br/><b>"The Kookification Squad" </b><br/><br/>According to Rivero, I am part of <i>"that kookifcation squad and their job is to make anybody that's questioning the official story look bad </i>. . .<i> this idea of no plane at the Pentagon was ginned up out of thin air in order to tarnish the truth movement."</i> But that's a tough case to make on several grounds:<br/><br/><i>First,</i> I founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth (2005), gave the keynote at Alex Jones' 9/11 American Scholars Conference in LA (2006), was flown to Athens for a 3.5 hour television interview on 9/11 that was broadcast worldwide by satellite (2006); organized the first 9/11 Scholars conference in Madison (2007); published <a href="https://www.amazon.com/11-Conspiracy-Scamming-America/dp/0812696123" target="_blank">THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY </a>(2007) with 11 contributors; was flown to Buenos Aires for lectures on JFK and 9/11 (2008); was flown back to give the keynote for An International Symposium on 9/11 Truth and Justice (2009) held at The National Library of the Republic of Argentina; organized "Debunking the War on Terror" in London (2010); organized The Vancouver 9/11 Hearings (2012); organized The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference (2013); organized the Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II (2016) with 12 participants; and published <a href="http://moonrockbooks.com/america-nuked-on-9-11/" target="_blank">AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11</a> (2017) with 14 contributors; while maintaining <a href="http://911scholars.org/" target="_blank">Scholars for 9/11 Truth website</a> and <a href="http://911scholars.ning.com/" target="_blank">its discussion forum</a>. <br/><br/><i>Second,</i> that no plane hit the Pentagon has been apparent since Thierry Meyssan published <a href="http://www.serendipity.li/wot/erreurs_en.htm" target="_blank">"Hunt the Boeing"</a>; there is no sign of any plane having hit anywhere near the Pentagon, as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3pA" target="_blank">Jamie McIntyre of CNN reported on 9/11</a>; there is no massive pile of aluminum debris from a 100-ton airliner at the hit point on the ground floor; <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/09/bbcs-instrument-of-911-misinformation.html" target="_blank">no bodies, no seats, no luggage, no wings, no engines</a>; civilian lime-green firetrucks extinguish the modest fires at the hit point, <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/07/seven-questions-about-911.html" target="_blank">where the Pentagon lawn is clear, green and unblemished</a>; the large section of the Pentagon did not collapse until 45 minutes after the plane had allegedly hit; there is no debris on the lawn until after that section collapses, where <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/07/seven-questions-about-911.html" target="_blank">a piece of debris from a Boeing 757 shows up that has been tracked to a crash near Cali, Columbia, in 1995</a>; black, billowing clouds later visible across the Potomac from the Capitol <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/07/seven-questions-about-911.html" target="_blank">came from a series of enormous dumpsters as a Hollywood-style special effect</a>; and the official trajectory of <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/an-aeronautical-engineer-no-boeing-757.html" target="_blank">a 757 flying at over 500 mph barely skimming the ground, taking out a series of lampposts, is not even aerodynamically possible</a>.<br/><br/><i>Third,</i> the "serious scholars of 9/11" he appears to have in mind are Richard Gage, Kevin Ryan, Steven Jones and those who publish in <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/" target="_blank">The Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>; but who are committed to <i>nanothermite</i> as responsible for the destruction of the Twin Towers, <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/is-911-truth-based-upon-false-theory_28.html" target="_blank">which T. Mark Hightower and I have demonstrated to be impossible</a>; they are publishing articles that claim <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-and-journal.html" target="_blank">a plane really did hit the Pentagon</a>; and they are unwilling to address who was responsible and why, where <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-and-journal.html" target="_blank">Richard Gage left 9/11 Truth in a time-warp on C-SPAN</a>; where a nice overview of the differences between the key groups in 9/1l research--A&E911, <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/judy-wood-and-dews-good-bad-and-ugly.html" target="_blank">Judy Wood and DEWs</a> and Scholars for 9/11 Truth--recently appeared in <a href="http://themillenniumreport.com/2017/09/what-really-happened-america-nuked-on-911/" target="_blank">The Millennium Report</a> (12 September 2017) providing a summary of the differences between the three and why A&E911 and Judy Wood appear to be <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-and-journal.html" target="_blank">limited hangouts, which allow some of the truth about 9/11 to be revealed but conceal, obfuscate or suppress crucial aspects, which include the use of mini or micro nukes, the role of holograms and that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon</a>.<br/><br/>When Rivero claims that <i>"the serious researchers all know that a plane hit the Pentagon"</i>, therefore, he could not be more wrong. Serious researchers have been questioning that claim for 15 years, since "Hunt the Boeing" first appeared (2002). <i>We know for a certainty that no plane hit the Pentagon.</i><br/><b><br/></b><b>Michael Rivero as Limited Hangout</b><br/><br/>More proof that Michael Rivero is a 9/11 gatekeeper includes: that the use of holograms explains the <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/wtc_speed" target="_blank">impossible speed of Flight 175 as it approaches the South Tower</a>, which Pilots for 9/11 Truth has shown <a href="https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/911-intercepted/" target="_blank">would have caused a Boeing 767 to disintegrate at that speed and altitude;</a> its impossible entry into a massive, 500,000-ton building with no collision effects (including no debris beneath the towers' facades), even though <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBBaDchDnOI" target="_blank">it was intersecting with eight floors (consisting of an acre of concrete on a steel truss apiece), and why it did not explode external to the building</a>. Indeed, <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2017/09/james-perloff-conversations-with_10.html" target="_blank">a recent interview of a pilot by James Perloff</a> has confirmed why they had to fake the planes using holograms rather than depend upon real pilots: <i>"What's better than planes flying into buildings? The illusion of planes flying into buildings. Especially if it's a high explosive/incendiary guided missile with some sort of holographic projection device strapped to its back." </i>There's nothing "kooky" about invoking holograms to explain the evidence and the use of nukes, <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/09/rainbow-in-dark-powerful-proof-of-911.html" target="_blank">which are the only hypotheses that fit the data</a>, including the USGS's findings of elements that would not have been present had this not been a nuclear event. It's called "science".<br/><br/>Not only does Rivero attack me for advancing the best-supported hypotheses about how the towers were destroyed and how the planes were projected (when the speed in flight was aerodynamically impossible and the entry absent collision effects was physically impossible) for real planes but<i> his defense of a Boeing 757 having hit the Pentagon was immediate and an addition to the objection being raised by the caller. </i>Once you review the evidence, how can those of us who have concluded that no plane hit the Pentagon possibly be "poisoning the well" or "promoting propaganda"? All the evidence is on our side, where the only alternative arises if TRUTH is envisioned as POISON, which of course it is for those who want to suppress it. I have challenged Rivero to debate these issues on his show, on "The Power Hour" or on "Infowars". He and I have now been invited to appear on "The Power Hour" this Monday, 25 September 2017, from 10-11 AM/ET (9-10 AM/CT). I will be there; he may or may not. The clincher, if one were needed, came when he threw in my denial that we landed men on the moon.<br/><br/><div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-separator"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8JIyQvYO_Kw/WcPacxXlK1I/AAAAAAAAGy8/gqK_dYK212c_tDzGIqgwKbofBTYLq_7ngCLcBGAs/s1600/Help%2BNASA%2Bsolve%2Bits%2B%2522space%2Bpoop%2522%2Bproblem.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8JIyQvYO_Kw/WcPacxXlK1I/AAAAAAAAGy8/gqK_dYK212c_tDzGIqgwKbofBTYLq_7ngCLcBGAs/s400/Help%2BNASA%2Bsolve%2Bits%2B%2522space%2Bpoop%2522%2Bproblem.jpg" width="270" border="0" height="400" class="CToWUd"/></a></div>
</div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content">The proof that we did not go to the moon is abundant and compelling. My interest was awakened during a visit to London where, when we turned on the TV, one of the BBC channels was playing, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIy8ZqqK5G8" target="_blank">"Conspiracy Theory: Did we land on the moon?"</a>, which offers one scientific proof after another that we did not go. Because of my background in the history and the philosophy of science, I was hooked and have since done further research on the matter, including publishing <a href="http://moonrockbooks.com/and-i-suppose-we-didnt-go-to-the-moon-either-book/" target="_blank">AND I SUPPOSE WE DIDN'T GO TO THE MOON, EITHER?</a> (2015) and subsequent interviews with Dennis Cimino, "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4llfIjJBuk" target="_blank">The Great Moon Landing Hoax"</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_agB5jPrsM" target="_blank">"The Real Deal: More on the Moon Landing Hoax"</a>. Indeed, I have been amused by recent developments, where NASA has admitted that <a href="http://idishoom.com/moon-landing-hoax-nasa-unwittingly-reveals-van-allen-radiation-belts-prohibit-human-spaceflight-2min-vid-incl/" target="_blank">the greatest obstacle to a manned mission to Mars is the Van Allen Radiation Belt</a>; where NASA has <a href="https://newstarget.com/2017-07-27-why-did-nasa-just-destroy-apollo-tape-recordings-found-in-a-basement.html" target="_blank">destroyed a priceless collection of video of the moon landing</a>; and where NASA has <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/11/29/can-help-nasa-solve-space-poop-problem/" target="_blank">sought the assistance of the public to solve its "space poop" problem</a>. Rivero appears to have done no more research on the moon landings than he has on the Pentagon. His effort to trash me has instead unintentionally revealed his role in the media today.<br/><br/><i><b>Jim Fetzer, </b>a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota. He is the founder of <a href="http://911scholars.org/" target="_blank">Scholars for 9/11 Truth</a>.</i></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><i> </i></div>
<div class="m_2814541968505654763gmail-post-body m_2814541968505654763entry-content"><i><a href="https://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2017/09/michael-rivero-blows-his-cover-as-911.html" target="_blank">https://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2017/09/michael-rivero-blows-his-cover-as-911.html</a></i></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>Gary Null 9/11 Special (http://thegarynullshow.podbean.com/)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-09-13:3488444:BlogPost:745912016-09-13T19:09:17.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div class="posttitle"><h2><a href="http://thegarynullshow.podbean.com/e/gary-null-911-special/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Gary Null 9/11 Special">Gary Null 9/11 Special</a></h2>
</div>
<div class="entry"><p>Gary Null speaks with some of the smartest minds in the world on what really happened on 9/11 </p>
<div><p>15<sup>th</sup> Anniversary special series on the events of September 11<sup>th</sup> 2001</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Danny Sheehan, PhD, one of the America’s most important and…</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="posttitle"><h2><a href="http://thegarynullshow.podbean.com/e/gary-null-911-special/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Gary Null 9/11 Special">Gary Null 9/11 Special</a></h2>
</div>
<div class="entry"><p>Gary Null speaks with some of the smartest minds in the world on what really happened on 9/11 </p>
<div><p>15<sup>th</sup> Anniversary special series on the events of September 11<sup>th</sup> 2001</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Danny Sheehan, PhD, one of the America’s most important and influential public interest and human rights attorneys</p>
<p>Legal precedents in large national conspiratorial trials that provide groundwork for reopening Congressional investigation into 911</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Barbara Honeger, former White House Policy Analyst; founding member of Political Leaders for 911 Truth</p>
<p>What really hit the Pentagon on 911: A look at the old and new evidence</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth; San Francisco architect specializing in fire proofed steel framed structures.</p>
<p>What do we know about 911 fifteen years after the event, and the problem with Building 7</p>
<p> </p>
<p>James Fetzer, PhD, Distinguished McKnight Professor emeritus of the Philosophy of Science at University of Minnesota,; founder of Scholars for 911 Truth</p>
<p>Overall review of the three theories for how the World Trade Center buildings collapsed</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Greame MacQueen, retired professor of comparative religion at McMaster University in Ontario; co-editor of the peer reviewed Journal of 911 Studies</p>
<p></p>
<p>Evidence of the post-911 anthrax scare as case of national conspiracy</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Scott Bennett, PhD, former US Army Special Operations officer specializing in global psychological operations and terrorist financial funding.</p>
<p>A fifteen year perspective from an American military patriot and federal whistleblower</p>
<p> </p>
<p>David Chandler, retired physics teacher and board member of Scientists for 911 Truth</p>
<p>A scientific analysis of the World Trade Center buildings free fall and its implications</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Les Jamieson, organizer of 911 Truth symposiums and founder of HR14.org</p>
<p>A review of the recently released 29 pages from the 911 Commission Report</p>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div class="podPress_content"><div><div class="aplayer-panel pbplayerBox aplayer-bg theme1" title="click to play"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="postmetadata"><a href="https://www.podbean.com/site/user/login?return=http%3A%2F%2Fthegarynullshow.podbean.com%2F" class="post_toolbar_like unlike">Like(1)</a> | Share | <a class="post_toolbar_comment" href="http://thegarynullshow.podbean.com/e/gary-null-911-special/#respond" title="Comment on Gary Null 9/11 Special ">Comments</a> | <a class="post_toolbar_embed" href="http://www.podbean.com/media/player/embed/postId/6456186?url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegarynullshow.podbean.com%2Fe%2Fgary-null-911-special%2F" target="93579">Embed</a> | <a class="post_toolbar_download" href="http://www.podbean.com/site/UserDownload/index/bid/276663/url/http%253A%252F%252Fthegarynullshow.podbean.com%252Fmf%252Fweb%252Fvnyjuc%252Ftry.mp3" target="21243">Download(2304)</a></div>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II (10 September 2016)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-09-13:3488444:BlogPost:744962016-09-13T16:08:55.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II (10 September 2016)</div>
<div>Part 1: How it was done</div>
<p><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-midwest-911-truth-conference-ii-how.html" target="_blank">http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-midwest-911-truth-conference-ii-how.html</a></p>
<div>Part 2: Who was responsible…</div>
<div>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II (10 September 2016)</div>
<div>Part 1: How it was done</div>
<p><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-midwest-911-truth-conference-ii-how.html" target="_blank">http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-midwest-911-truth-conference-ii-how.html</a></p>
<div>Part 2: Who was responsible</div>
<div><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-midwest-911-truth-conference-ii.html" target="_blank">http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-midwest-911-truth-conference-ii.html</a></div>
<div>Sputnik News coverage</div>
<div><a href="https://sputniknews.com/us/20160910/1045161326/9-11-alternative-versions.html" target="_blank">https://sputniknews.com/us/20160910/1045161326/9-11-alternative-versions.html</a></div>America Nuke on 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DoD and the Mossadtag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:748772016-08-19T15:28:18.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918884?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918884?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918884?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918884?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>Virtual Academic Freedom Conference (Saturday, 27 August 2016)
Jim Fetzer and Stephen Francis are very pleased to announce:
ACADEMIC FREEDOM CONFERENCE II: Are there Limits to Inquiry?
Should facu…tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:745842016-08-19T15:24:53.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/08/virtual-academic-freedom-conference.html">Virtual Academic Freedom Conference (Saturday, 27 August 2016)</a></h3>
<div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><div class="gmail_quote"><b><br></br></b><b>Jim Fetzer and Stephen Francis are very pleased to announce:…</b></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"></div>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/08/virtual-academic-freedom-conference.html">Virtual Academic Freedom Conference (Saturday, 27 August 2016)</a></h3>
<div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><div class="gmail_quote"><b><br/></b><b>Jim Fetzer and Stephen Francis are very pleased to announce:</b></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"></div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br/>ACADEMIC FREEDOM CONFERENCE II: Are there Limits to Inquiry? </div>
<div>Should faculty be restrained from or even punished for investigating </div>
<div>complex and controversial events of enormous political significance?</div>
<div>Each speaker should have 45-50 minutes to present, leaving 10-15 </div>
<div>more for Q&A after each session, with general discussion at the end.</div>
<b>ACADEMIC FREEDOM II: Are there limits to inquiry?</b><br/>
<div>9:00 AM-10:AM/CT: <b>Stephen Francis</b> proposed the first <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/10/academic-freedom-are-there-limits-to.html" target="_blank">Academic </a></div>
<div><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/10/academic-freedom-are-there-limits-to.html" target="_blank">Freedom Conference</a> on 26 April 2014, held on the campus of the </div>
<div>University of Illinois-UC, where he earned a degree in sociology. He </div>
<div>promotes the exercise of critical thinking and unconventional thought.</div>
<div> <b>WHY DOES IT MATTER?</b></div>
<div>10:00 AM-11:00 AM/CT: <b>Francis A. Boyle,</b> Ph.D., noted Professor of </div>
<div>International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, earned his </div>
<div>A.B. in Political Science from Chicago, J.D. from Harvard Law School </div>
<div>and his A.M. and Ph.D. in political Science from Harvard University. </div>
<div>11:00 AM to Noon/CT: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F2TWZ1xfJI">"9/11 in the Academic Community"</a></div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div><div><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920781?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920781?profile=original" width="441" class="align-full"/></a></div>
<div>Noon-1:00 PM/CT: <b>Nick Kollerstrom</b>, Ph.D., an historian of science and</div>
<div>the leading expert on the 7/7 London bombings, had his appointment </div>
<div>at University College London terminated for undertaking scientific</div>
<div>research on World War II that undermines widely-accepted accounts.</div>
<div><strong> </strong></div>
<div><strong> WITHIN THE ACADEMY</strong></div>
<div>1:00-2:00 PM/CT: <strong>Leuren Moret </strong>earned her B.S. in geology at </div>
<div>U.C. Davis and an M.A. in Near Eastern Studies from Berkeley. </div>
<div>She completed all but her dissertation for a PhD in geosciences </div>
<div>at Davis. She has conducted scientific research in 42 countries.</div>
<div>2:00-3:00 PM/CT: <b>Darrell Hamamoto</b>, Ph.D., Professor of Asian <br/><br/>American Studies at the University of California, David, has published<br/><br/>extensively on the representation of Asian Americans in films and on<br/><br/>TV, especially in relation to political issues and freedom of expression.<br/><br/></div>
<div>3:00-4:00 PM/CT: <b>Kevin McDonald,</b> Ph.D., Professor of Psychology</div>
<div>at Cal State-Long Beach (retired), has 8 books on evolutionary theory </div>
<div>and has focused on group selection and the significance of different </div>
<div>strategies of adaptation and on social and personality development.</div>
<div> <b>SOME SPECIAL CASES</b></div>
<div>4:00-5:00 PM/CT: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM">"False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond"</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560923479?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560923479?profile=original" width="442" class="align-full"/></a></div>
<div>5:00-6:00 PM/CT: <b>Sterling Harwood</b>, J.D., Ph.D., professor of </div>
<div>philosophy and attorney-at-law, has published on the moon landing </div>
<div>hoax, Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, including exposing the </div>
<div>role of <i>Snopes.com</i> in misleading the public regarding those events.</div>
<div>6:00-7:00 PM/CT: <b>Preston James</b>, Ph.D., a social psychologist </div>
<div>from a Big Ten University, will address the importance of academic</div>
<div>research in an era dominated by propaganda from the mass media,</div>
<div>where academicians are failing to expose state-sponsored terrorism.</div>
<div>7:00-8:00 PM/CT: <b>Jim Fetzer</b>, Ph.D., a philosopher of science, has </div>
<div>edited a series of books that investigate the moon landing hoax, the </div>
<div>atrocities of 9/11, the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone, the FEMA drill at </div>
<div>Sandy Hook, the fakery in Boston, and other major state deceptions. </div>
<div>8:00- . . . . : General Discussion including questions from the audience</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br/><br/>Those who would like to view the conference LIVE, should send</div>
<div dir="ltr"></div>
<div dir="ltr">an email to <a href="mailto:info@academicfreedomconference.org" target="_blank">info@academicfreedomconference.org</a> indicating <br/><br/>desire to join. If you have questions, call Stephen Francis at </div>
<div dir="ltr"></div>
<div dir="ltr">(<a target="_blank">217) 377-2131</a>.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>The Real Deal Ep #205 Raising "The Smoke Curtain" on the Pentagon with Dennis Cimino (YouTube)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:746772016-08-19T15:17:59.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h1 class="watch-title-container"><span class="watch-title" dir="ltr" id="eow-title" title="The Real Deal Ep # 205 Raising "The Smoke Curtain" on the Pentagon with Dennis Cimino">The Real Deal Ep # 205 Raising "The Smoke Curtain" on the Pentagon with Dennis Cimino…</span></h1>
<p></p>
<h1 class="watch-title-container"><span id="eow-title" class="watch-title" dir="ltr" title="The Real Deal Ep # 205 Raising "The Smoke Curtain" on the Pentagon with Dennis Cimino">The Real Deal Ep # 205 Raising "The Smoke Curtain" on the Pentagon with Dennis Cimino</span></h1>
<p><span class="watch-title" dir="ltr" title="The Real Deal Ep # 205 Raising "The Smoke Curtain" on the Pentagon with Dennis Cimino"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZNZ5Pfpo_0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZNZ5Pfpo_0</a></span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>America Nuked on 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DoD & the Mossadtag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:745812016-08-19T15:13:57.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/08/america-nuked-on-911-compliments-of-cia.html">America Nuked on 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DoD & the Mossad</a></h3>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><h1><em><span><span>America Nuked on 9/11</span><span> …</span></span></em></h1>
<div class="separator"></div>
</div>
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/08/america-nuked-on-911-compliments-of-cia.html">America Nuked on 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DoD & the Mossad</a></h3>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><h1><em><span><span>America Nuked on 9/11</span><span> </span></span></em></h1>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LCNEe4cg87U/V6gHaTBzXZI/AAAAAAAAFBs/T5QcAD7mF4Qxl2cJRxAIqwl6aMyfGbf6gCLcB/s1600/America%2BNuked%2Bon%2B9%253A11%2B%2528front%2Bcover%2529.jpg"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LCNEe4cg87U/V6gHaTBzXZI/AAAAAAAAFBs/T5QcAD7mF4Qxl2cJRxAIqwl6aMyfGbf6gCLcB/s640/America%2BNuked%2Bon%2B9%253A11%2B%2528front%2Bcover%2529.jpg" width="416"/></a></div>
<div><em><span> </span></em><em> </em></div>
<h1><span><span><i>Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons </i></span><i>in the DoD & the Mossad</i></span></h1>
<div><strong>If you want to know the WHO, the HOW and the WHY of 9/11, this book provides the answers. In 28 extensive, thorough and detailed studies, 14 authors contribute their expertise on different aspects of 9/11 to resolve the issues decisively. 9/11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the neocons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad in order to justify the transformation of U.S. foreign policy from one in which we never attacked any nation that had not attacked us first to one in which we became the greatest aggressor nation in the world, launching a series of invasions intended to take out seven governments over the next five years, as Wesley Clark, former Commanding General of NATO, has explained. It hasn’t played out that way, but not for lack of trying.</strong></div>
<div><strong>You will discover here that the most prominent 9/11 organization, A&E911, has been running a limited hangout focusing on the use of Nano-thermite, an incendiary, which has long since been demonstrated to be incapable of blowing the Twin Towers apart from the top down. While Richard Gage, Kevin Ryan and others acknowledge that other explosives may have been used, they refuse to explain what those could possibly be. Although their studies were based upon dust samples obtained from an apartment in the vicinity of Ground Zero, they deliberately ignore the far more extensive results of the U.S. Geological Survey’s dust studies, which reveal the presence of elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.</strong></div>
<div><strong>Moreover, the <em>Journal for 9/11 Studies</em> perpetuates the charade by publishing articles intended to perpetrate the false belief that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. Because the Pentagon is our nation’s military command-and-control center, it was this event that justified declaring a “War on Terror”. But the proof that no plane hit the Pentagon is overwhelming and compelling. In fact, as surprising as it may seem, none of the official “9/11 aircraft” actually crashed on 9/11, as evidence from the “crash sites” and research by Pilots for 9/11 Truth has established. The public was conned by resorting to a series of sophisticated fabrications, reinforced by the major media. This book demonstrates we have lost our way and are now no better than a third world, banana republic.</strong></div>
<div><strong>The contributors include some of the best students and scholars of 9/11:</strong></div>
<div><strong><span>* Ed Ward, M.D. * Jeff Prager * Susan Lindauer * Preston James, </span></strong><strong>Ph.D. </strong><strong>*</strong></div>
<div><strong>* Dennis Cimino * Jack White * Nick Kollerstrom, Ph.D.</strong> <strong>* Mike Palecek * </strong></div>
<div><strong>* T. Mark Hightower * Jim Fetzer, Ph.D. * Steve </strong><strong>Fahrney </strong><strong>*</strong></div>
<div><strong>*Aeronautical Engineer * Joshua Blakeney * Don Fox *</strong></div>
<div><strong>It has been edited by Jim Fetzer, former Marine Corps officer and Distinguished McKnight Professor Emeritus at UMD, and Mike Palecek, who has committed his life to the search for truth and justice.</strong></div>
<div><span><strong><span>Softcover, 458 pages, 338 photos, $20 from <a href="http://moonrockbooks.com/">moonrockbooks.com</a></span></strong></span><br/><span><strong><br/></strong></span><br/><div class="separator"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ThZPf_VTjQc/V6gHqucl16I/AAAAAAAAFBw/LvuKEuoT7ME96TxDy1HApS5nANNKQ7__QCLcB/s1600/America%2BNuked%2Bon%2B9%253A11%2B%2528back%2Bcover%2529.jpg"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ThZPf_VTjQc/V6gHqucl16I/AAAAAAAAFBw/LvuKEuoT7ME96TxDy1HApS5nANNKQ7__QCLcB/s640/America%2BNuked%2Bon%2B9%253A11%2B%2528back%2Bcover%2529.jpg" width="408"/></a></div>
</div>
<h3><span><span>Contributors</span></span></h3>
<div><span><b>An Aeronautical Engineer </b>graduated from a major university with a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in Aeronautical Engineering with a major in aerodynamics. A qualified pilot and co-designer of two experimental aircraft, he has been engaged in aviation for over four decades. Many online debates about a “Boeing 757” at the Pentagon confuse the aerodynamic phenomenon known as <em>Wake Turbulence</em> (caused mainly by Induced Drag) with <em>Ground Effect</em> (caused as a reaction to downwash). Arguments that dispute the official account of a Boeing 757 approaching the Pentagon at 400 mph and taking out a series of lampposts are shown to be well-founded in their conclusion but in need to technical corrections to the explanations that have been advanced in their support, where a Boeing 757 at 400 mph could not have come closer than about 100 feet of the ground.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Joshua Blakeney</b>, a journalist and writer based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, earned a BA (with distinction) in Sociology from Lethbridge. As a grad student, he received The Queen Elizabeth II Graduate Scholarship. His research on the Origins of the Global War on Terror became national news in Canada, when certain neoconservatives took issue with his chosen line of academic enquiry. He published <em>Japan Bites Back: Documents Contextualizing Pearl Harbor</em> (2015) based upon archival research he conducted at The National Diet Library in Tokyo, Japan. He has published in GlobalResearch.ca, The American Herald Tribune, Voltairenet.org, Coldtype.net, The Canadian Dimension, The Canadian Charger and The Information Clearing House. He recently <span><a href="https://questioningjapanesehistory.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">started blogging about Japanese History</a></span>.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Dennis Cimino,</b> who has extensive engineering and support experience with military electronics, predominantly U.S. Navy Combat Systems, was the Navy’s top EMI troubleshooter before he went to work for Raytheon in the 1980s. He has collaborated with Jim Fetzer on many articles about “false flag” attacks, including (with regard to Sandy Hook), “The Nexus of Tyranny: The Strategy behind Tucson, Aurora and Sandy Hook” (30 January 2013), “Sent worldwide, Shannon Hicks’ ‘iconic’ photo was faked” (18 July 2014), and “Sandy Hook, Stephen Sedensky, William Shanley and the Elaborate Hoax” (28 July 2014). He has also published extensively on various aspects of 9/11. His articles on the Pentagon, for example, include “The ‘official account’ of the Pentagon is a fantasy” (2012), “9/11: A World Swirling in a Volcano of Lies” (14 February 2014) and “Reflections on the Pentagon: A Photographic Review” (16 August 2014), and “Limited Hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and The Journal of 9/11 Studies” (with Jim Fetzer, 14 August 2014).</span></div>
<div><span><b>Jim Fetzer</b> earned his Ph.D. in the history and the philosophy of science. A former U.S. Marine Corps officer, he has published widely on the theoretical foundations of scientific knowledge, computer science, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and evolution and mentality. McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, he has also conducted extensive research into the assassination of JFK, the events of 9/11 and the plane crash that killed Sen. Paul Wellstone. The founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, his latest books include <em>The Place of Probability in Science</em> (with Ellery Eells, 2010), <em>And I Suppose We Didn’t go to the Moon, either?</em> (2015), <em>Nobody Died at Sandy Hook</em> (2015) and <em>And Nobody Died in Boston, either</em> (2016), which was his 32nd. He also hosts the two-hour video show, “The Real Deal”, on Media Broadcasting Center M/W/F from 8-10 PM/ET and “The Raw Deal” on <em>renseradio.com</em> T/Th from 8-9 PM/ET.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Don Fox</b> has done extensive research on the role of mini-nukes by Dr. Ed Ward and on work by The Anonymous Physicist on the towers and has formulated an account of how it was done and why there is more to this story relative to very low-yield thermonuclear devices. His articles include “Mystery Solved: The WTC was Nuked on 9/11” and “Mini Neutron Bombs: A Major Piece of the 9/11 Puzzle (with Clare Kuehn, Jeff Prager, Jim Viken, Dr. Ed Ward and Dennis Cimino). Don Fox has been among the most successful in conveying the results of this complex and technical research in a fashion that makes it easily accessible to a wide audience. See, for example, “2 + 2 = Israel Nuked the WTC on 9/11” and “Rainbow in the Dark: Powerful Proof of 9/11 Nukes”. He maintains a blog at <a href="https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/">https://donaldfox.wordpress.com</a>.</span></div>
<div><span><b>T. Mark Hightower</b> earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in Chemical Engineering from San Jose State University and over 30 years of engineering experience. He has worked in the chemical industry, the space program and the environmental field. He is a member of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), and the American Water Works Association (AWWA). He became a “born again” conspiracy theorist in January 2004 after stumbling upon Peter Meyer’s <em>Serendipity</em> web site and learning that controlled demolition was a more likely explanation for the destruction of the Twin Towers than the official government story. He is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a petition signer at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and a member of Pilots for 9/11 Truth. His 9/11 research is done as an exercise of his Constitutional rights as a private citizen, and in no way represents his employers or the professional societies in which he holds membership. He recently retired after 25 years with NASA.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Nicholas Kollerstrom, Ph.D.</b>, has two history of science degrees, one from Cambridge 1968, plus a Ph.D. from London, 1995. An honorary member of staff of UCL for 11 years, he was in 1999 elected as a Member of the New York Academy of Sciences. A Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society, he has several dozen articles on the history of astronomy in academic journals. His book,<em> Terror on the Tube</em> (3rd edition, 2011), establishes that the accused Islamic youth were innocent of the 2005 London bombings. <em>Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust, Myth and Reality</em> (2014), demonstrates that the official narrative of WWII cannot be sustained. He contributed four chapters to <em>And I suppose we didn’t go to the moon, either?</em> His latest book,<em> The Life and Death of Paul McCartney 1942-66: A Very English Mystery</em> (2015), has recently appeared.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Susan Lindauer</b> covered Iraq and Libya at the United Nations, as a U.S. Intelligence Asset and back-door channel on anti-terrorism from 1993 to 2003. Most notoriously, in the summer of 2001, her team warned about a major terrorist attack involving airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. Lindauer also campaigned heavily against the War in Iraq, and developed a comprehensive peace framework through her back-channel in the run up to War. Her book, <em>Extreme Prejudice</em> (2010), is the true story of what happened when she tried to disclose what she knew personally of Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence and the 9/11 warning to Congress and the American people. Her attempts to bring the truth to the public led to the nightmare of her arrest under the PATRIOT Act and her imprisonment without trial at the notorious prison inside Carswell AFB in Texas.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Mike Palecek</b> lives in Saginaw, Minnesota, west of Duluth. A writer, he is a former federal prisoner for peace and the Iowa Democratic Party candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives, 5th District in the 2000 election, gaining 65,000 votes on an anti-war platform in a conservative district. A former award winning reporter, editor, publisher in Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota. The small newspaper that Mike & Ruth Palecek owned and operated in Byron, Minnesota, won the MNA Newspaper of the Year Award in 1993. He co-hosts “The New American Dream” radio show and has published over a dozen books that offer fictional but insightful studies of the American character and the plight in which we lend ourselves in the world today. Mike is the founder of Moon Rock Books and the co-editor of this volume.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Jeff Prager,</b> founder of an award winning magazine for senior citizens, set out in 2002 to prove that 19 Muslims had hijacked four airplanes and attacked us. After extensive investigation by 2005, he realized that the official narrative of 9/11 was false, sold his business, left the United States and began to conduct 9/11 research full-time. What he found astonished even himself, because the evidence that the Twin Towers had been destroyed by a sophisticated arrangement of very small nuclear devices became simply overwhelming. He subsequently published an extensive and detailed report about this research in 9/11 AMERICA NUKED! (2012), which is a 500-page book available to the public for free, in <span><a href="https://www.datafilehost.com/d/79644cfa" target="_blank">Part 1</a></span> and <span><a href="https://www.datafilehost.com/d/51eec327" target="_blank">Part 2</a></span>.</span></div>
<div><span><b>Mike Sparks</b> is a graduate of Liberty University with a B.S. degree in History/Education. His last assignment in the U.S. Army Reserves was as a MOS 11A5P Airborne-qualified Infantry officer with the rank of 1LT promotable. He leads Military Intelligence Group [00]7 (aka MI7) focusing on how Commander Ian Fleming, creator of the fictional super-spy James Bond (Agent 007), is actually warning us in code of real organized evil entities. He is the editor and co-author of several military reform books, including <em>Air-Mech-Strike: Asymmetric Maneuver Warfare for the 21st Century</em> (2002) and<em>Airborne Warfare: New Edition</em> (2015), plus several books on American Cultural Reform; <em>Racket Theory: Why Humans Embrace Problems instead of Solving Them</em> (2006), <em>Hive Theory: Why Humans Stay in Destructive Rackets</em>(2015) and in the military/spy arena with James Bond is <em>REAL: The Untold Story of the Political & Military Threats Ian Fleming Warned Us About</em> (2011). More recently, he has published <em>The Point of Gravity</em> (2012), <em>Masquerade: Everything is NOT What it Appears</em> (2013) and <em>The Bell Tolls for Thee: The Poppy is Also a Flower</em> (2014).</span></div>
<div><span><b>Ed Ward, M.D</b>., among the leading experts on the use of nukes on 9/11, maintains an extensive archive about them and other forms of malfeasance by the U.S. at his “Weblog of Tyranny”, <a href="http://edwardmd.wordpress.com/">http://edwardmd.wordpress.com</a>. He has been among the most brilliant and tenacious investigators of “false flag” attacks by the government and other entities, where his recent publications include “EgyptAir 804: Just another Government Mass Murder” and “Proven 9/11 Nukes = U.S. Government Involvement”, where he was among the first to appreciate that the official account of plane impact/jet-fuel fires/collapse was completely preposterous and scientifically indefensible. Ward has also appeared as a guest on “The Real Deal”, which you can hear at <a href="http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/">radiofetzer.blogspot.com</a>.</span></div>
</div>False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond (YouTube)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:744832016-08-19T15:08:00.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h3 class="r"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM">False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond - YouTube</a></h3>
<div class="s"><div><div class="th _lyb _YQd"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM"><img alt="Video for False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond" class="_WCg" height="87" id="vidthumb1" width="116"></img> <span class="vdur _dwc">▶ 59:20…</span></a></div>
</div>
<div><div class="f kv _SWb"></div>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class="r"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM">False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond - YouTube</a></h3>
<div class="s"><div><div class="th _lyb _YQd"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM"><img id="vidthumb1" class="_WCg" height="87" width="116" alt="Video for False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond"/><span class="vdur _dwc">▶ 59:20</span></a></div>
</div>
<div><div class="f kv _SWb"><cite class="_Rm"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PdSoNXwlM</a></cite></div>
</div>
</div>White Rose Blooms in Wisconsin: Kevin Barrett, Jim Fetzer & the American Resistancetag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:745792016-08-19T15:04:05.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920827?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920827?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920957?profile=original" target="_self"><br/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920827?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920827?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920957?profile=original" target="_self"><br/></a></p>SANDY HOOK starring Wayne Carver as The Medical Examiner (YouTube)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:744812016-08-19T14:59:59.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h3 class="r"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31T0PkSODDg">SANDY HOOK starring Wayne Carver as The Medical Examiner ...</a></h3>
<div class="f kv _SWb"><cite class="_Rm"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31T0PkSODDg">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31T0PkSODDg</a></cite></div>
<h3 class="r"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31T0PkSODDg">SANDY HOOK starring Wayne Carver as The Medical Examiner ...</a></h3>
<div class="f kv _SWb"><cite class="_Rm"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31T0PkSODDg">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31T0PkSODDg</a></cite></div>Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, 2nd edition (2016)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:747762016-08-19T14:56:31.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918792?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918792?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918792?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918792?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>And Nobody Died in Boston, Either (2015)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-08-19:3488444:BlogPost:747742016-08-19T14:53:55.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918889?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918889?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918889?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560918889?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>9/11: The Who, the How and the Whytag:911scholars.ning.com,2016-06-02:3488444:BlogPost:739922016-06-02T04:30:00.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"></h3>
<div class="post-header-line-1">~ by Jim Fetzer</div>
<div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="post-header-line-1"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/06/911-who-how-and-why.html">http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/06/911-who-how-and-why.html</a></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><br></br> <br></br><div class="p1"><span class="s1"><i>"(All) the wise people in the world who are experts on American policy and who analyze the images…</i></span></div>
</div>
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"></h3>
<div class="post-header-line-1">~ by Jim Fetzer</div>
<div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
<div class="post-header-line-1"><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/06/911-who-how-and-why.html">http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2016/06/911-who-how-and-why.html</a></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><br/> <br/><div class="p1"><span class="s1"><i>"(All) the wise people in the world who are experts on American policy and who analyze the images and the videos [of 9/11] agree unanimously that what happened in the [Twin] Towers was a purely American action, planned and carried out within the U.S"</i>--Saudi Arabian Press</span></div>
<br/>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QLTLRaDbBQE/V0sYo3q2fXI/AAAAAAAAEq8/q7dAnQEZQ_osJ103-vwXyyFpdI5I2lJkQCLcB/s1600/Saudi%2BPress%2Baccuses%2BUS%2Bof%2B9_11.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="302" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QLTLRaDbBQE/V0sYo3q2fXI/AAAAAAAAEq8/q7dAnQEZQ_osJ103-vwXyyFpdI5I2lJkQCLcB/s320/Saudi%2BPress%2Baccuses%2BUS%2Bof%2B9_11.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">Saudi Arabia has blown the whistle on the US over 9/11</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<span>It was only a matter of time. Once the infamous 28 suppressed pages of </span><i>The 9/11 Commission Report</i><span> (2004), which report on Saudi Arabian funding for several of the 19 alleged 9/11 hijackers--15 of whom were from Saudi Arabia, none of which were from Iraq--became the focus of public attention in the mass media and a bill had been introduced to allow US citizens to sue Saudi Arabia for its complicity in the atrocities of 9/11, it was only a matter of time before Saudi Arabia struck back by revealing that, on 9/11, the US had attacked the US in order to provide the pretext for perpetual war in the Middle East.</span><br/> <br/> <span>The plan for 9/11 appears to have originated in the fertile imagination of Benjamin Netanyahu, who was seeking a means for manipulating the United States into attacking the modern Arab states that served as a counter-balance to Israel's domination of the Middle East, which would pave the way for its eventual expansion to become "the Greater Israel" of historic Zionist aspirations that would extend from the Tigris-Euphrates to the Nile. He had already organized a conference held in Jerusalem on which </span><i>Terrorism: How the West can Win</i><span> (1987), long before the concept of terrorism had begun to exert its influence up the American mind. Netanyahu has displayed political genius in bending America to do the dirty work for Israel.</span><br/> <br/>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cXv7Y91g8wo/V0sgcQWA0KI/AAAAAAAAErM/N2LJYrNwiI85METcftZ2ofC-1H5fkpEqwCLcB/s1600/Terrorism-How%2Bthe%2BWest%2Bcan%2BWin.jpg"><span><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cXv7Y91g8wo/V0sgcQWA0KI/AAAAAAAAErM/N2LJYrNwiI85METcftZ2ofC-1H5fkpEqwCLcB/s1600/Terrorism-How%2Bthe%2BWest%2Bcan%2BWin.jpg"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">Bibi at the top of his game</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<span>9/11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the Department of Defense (most of whom had come from the Project for a New American Century and were dual US-Israeli citizens) and the Mossad, with funding, it turns out, from Saudi Arabia. It should have struck a nerve in the US when a half-dozen or more of the alleged "hijackers" turned up alive and well the following day, making contact with the media in the UK, which David Ray Griffin, </span><i>The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions</i><span> (2011), makes the first point in his classic demonstration of the deceit and deception of the 9/11 Commission by suppressing and misrepresenting key aspects of the atrocities of that day.</span><br/> <br/> <span>What this means is that the WHO and the WHY are easier to establish than the HOW, where the HOW becomes enormously important as proof about the WHO and the WHY. There are three major 9/11 research groups active today, including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which has long championed the use of nanothemite in the destruction of the Twin Towers) and the Judy Wood DEW group (which focuses on the use of directed energy weapons as the means that was deployed to attack the World Trade Center). Remarkably, neither A&E911 nor the DEW group has been willing to address the WHO and the WHY--where even their explanations of the HOW appear to suffer from serious inadequacies. Only those associated with Scholars for 9/11 Truth--and, in the past, with </span><i>veteranstoday.com</i><span>--have addressed all three with success.</span><br/>
<h3>The importance of "the HOW"</h3>
<span>The question of HOW it was done has to be the foundation for any serious investigation of the WHO and the WHY for the obvious reason: If the WTC was attacked by 19 Islamic terrorists who hijacked four commercial carriers and brought about the atrocities of 9/11 under the control of a guy in a cave in Afghanistan, as we have been told, then the case is closed! It is because the "official narrative" of 9/11 cannot be sustained that serious students have been driven to search for more adequate accounts of 9/11, which are consistent with the available relevant evidence and do not violate laws of physics, of engineering and of aerodynamics. Indeed, these violations are among the most blatant refutations of </span><i>The 9/11 Commission Report</i><span> (2004), because they prove that it cannot possibly be true.</span><br/> <br/>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wtJKm0gKYxs/V0tOcmjLIZI/AAAAAAAAEro/mYJVWoE7FZU1uPs96VdKBf0ckdiEi5jdgCLcB/s1600/Massive%2Bcore%2Bcolumns.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="174" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wtJKm0gKYxs/V0tOcmjLIZI/AAAAAAAAEro/mYJVWoE7FZU1uPs96VdKBf0ckdiEi5jdgCLcB/s320/Massive%2Bcore%2Bcolumns.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">The 47 massive core columns vs the external support columns</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<span>The Twin Towers incorporated an innovative "tube within a tube" design, with 47 massive core columns at the center, which were connected to the external steel support columns by steel trusses, which were filled with 4-8" of concrete (where the variance reflects that the trusses had v-shaped groves that were 4" deep, so in some places, the concrete was 4" thick but in others 8" instead. The buildings were among the most robust in the history of architecture, exceeded perhaps only by WTC-7, the infamous "Building 7", which would undergo a </span><i>bona fide</i><span> collapse at 5:20 PM/ET, 7 hours after the Twin Towers were demolished, even though it was hit by no plane and endured no jet fuel fires.</span><br/>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1">In "20 Reasons the 'Official Account' of 9/11 is Wrong" (<i>veteranstoday.com</i>, 10 September 2000), I explained some of the most basic reasons we know that what we have been told is not only false but provably false and, in crucial respects, not even scientifically possible. </span>The impact of the planes, for example, cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand even multiple impacts by aircraft (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes alleged to have hit were similar to those they were designed to withstand, and the buildings continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects.</div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">Most of the jet fuel, principally kerosene, burned up in those fireballs in the first fifteen seconds or so. Below the 96th floor in the North Tower and the 80th in the South, those buildings were stone cold steel (unaffected by any fires at all other than some very modest office fires that burned around 500 degrees F), which functioned as massive heat sinks dissipating the heat from building up at specific locations of the steel. </span>The melting point of steel at 2,800 degrees F, moreover, is about 1,000 degrees higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800 degrees F under optimal conditions; but the NIST examined 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500 degrees F and the others not above 1200.</div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., had certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000 degrees F for three or four hours without any significant effects, where these fires burned neither long enough or hot enough at an average temperature of about 500 degrees for about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North Tower to weaken, much less melt, any steel. And i</span>f the steel had melted or weakened, then the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some degree of asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt and total demolition that was observed. Which means the NIST cannot even explain the initiation of any ”collapse” sequence. And their collapse was not even physically possible.</div>
<h3>The Destruction of the Twin Towers</h3>
<div class="p6"></div>
<div class="p6"></div>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hQpIBzM_Wvw/V0tLu-BC8oI/AAAAAAAAErc/J72hvk1hQcEXnp5RaXO2WKs3pfVd4rBDwCLcB/s1600/Relative%2Bthickness%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bsteel.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="238" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hQpIBzM_Wvw/V0tLu-BC8oI/AAAAAAAAErc/J72hvk1hQcEXnp5RaXO2WKs3pfVd4rBDwCLcB/s320/Relative%2Bthickness%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bsteel.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">The thickness of the steel from subbasements to top floors </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">The top 30 floors of the South Tower pivoted and fell to the side, turning to dust before it reached the horizontal. So it did not even exist to exert any downward pressure on the lower 80 floors. A retired high-school physics, chemistry and math teacher, Charles Boldwyn, has calculated that, if you take the top 14 floors of the North Tower as one unit of downward force, there were 199 units of upward force to counteract it. Moreover, the relative thickness of the steel used in the core columns diminishes from 6" thick in the subbasements to 1/4" inch at the top, where the top 14 floors of the North Tower, for example, represented only 1.4% of the mass of the steel, where it is absurd to suppose that 1.4% of the mass of the steel could have caused the collapse of the lower 98.6%.</span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">William Rodriguez, who was the senior custodian in the North Tower and the last man to leave the building, has reported massive explosions in the subbasements that effected extensive destruction, including the demolition of an hydraulic press and the ripping of the skin off a fellow worker, where they filled with water that drained the sprinkler system. </span>Rodriguez has observed that the North Tower explosion occurred prior to reverberations from upper floors, a claim that has now been substantiated in a research by Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross, ”Seismic Proof: 9/11 Was an Inside Job”, in which they demonstrate that those explosions--both in the North Tower and also in the South--took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds before the presumptive airplane impacts, a point to which I shall return.</div>
<div class="p2"></div>
<div class="p6">.</div>
<div class="p6">Heavy-steel-construction buildings, such as the Twin Towers, are not generally capable of “pancake collapse,” which normally occurs only with concrete structures of “lift slab” construction and could not occur in redundant welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column had been simultaneously removed, floor by floor, as Charles N. Pegelow, who is a structural engineer, has observed. The demolition of the two towers in about 10 seconds apiece is very close to the speed of free fall with only air resistance, which Judy Wood, Ph.D., formerly a professor of mechanical engineering, has observed is an astounding result that would be impossible with extremely powerful sources of energy. If they were collapsing, they would have had to fall through their points of greatest resistance.</div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">Indeed, the towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where their floors do not move, a phenomenon Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the buildings--their conversion into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust--the government’s account cannot explain. There were no “pancakes”. </span>WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM/ET after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to “pull it”, displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions: a complete, abrupt and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, yielding a stack of pancakes about 5 floors high.</div>
<h3>How it was done</h3>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZzzzVP5GgfY/V0tTvuOt0XI/AAAAAAAAEr4/Chkuac-sVo8L5790MwoU5pE6h8CklNwigCLcB/s1600/WTC-7%2Bvs.%2BWTC-1.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="237" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZzzzVP5GgfY/V0tTvuOt0XI/AAAAAAAAEr4/Chkuac-sVo8L5790MwoU5pE6h8CklNwigCLcB/s320/WTC-7%2Bvs.%2BWTC-1.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">WTC-7 debris (upper left) vs. WTC-1 (mid-right)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">Had the Twin Towers collapsed like WTC-7, there would have been two stacks of “pancakes” equal to about 12% the height of the buildings or around 15 floors high. But they were actually reduced to below ground level. Since there were no “pancakes”, there cannot have been any “pancake collapse” of either building, where the buildings were destroyed by different modes of demolition. As Fr. Frank Morales of St. Mark's Episcopal Church located near "Ground Zero" and a first responder, explained to me during two interviews on "The Real Deal", both buildings were actually destroyed to or even below ground level, as the photographic evidence confirms. Notice here, for example, that, to the left you can see the 5.5 stories of debris from WTC-7, but in the immediate foreground where WTC-1 had stood, there is nothing comparable--because these buildings did not collapse! </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">But if the buildings did not collapse but were converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust in about 10 seconds apiece (officially, 11 seconds for the North Tower; 9 for the South), how was it done? Judy Wood's comparison to two enormous trees turning to sawdust from the top down gives us some clues. Blowing them apart from the top down required some form of energy that delivered far more than conventional and that could be directed, where the apparent cause was a very sophisticated arrangement of micro and mini nukes, directed upward, and initiated in a sequence that was intended to simulate the collapse of buildings by another means, one model for which would be to take them out one cube of 10-floors at a time, which, in the case of the North Tower, would have required 11 seconds and, in the case of the South, 9, which corresponds with NIST's own temporal estimates.</span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">Anyone who studies the destruction pattern of the North Tower has to be struck by the complete and total demolition taking place, which proceeded in stages that correspond closely to the model. Here, for example, is a time sequence of the destruction of the North Tower as it took place on 9/11:</span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<table align="center" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-X_49qmmPu18/V0x4PTcrN2I/AAAAAAAAEsI/dYaX84xFvRkYj2Q8v4RCF-Y_YRjNFZfJgCLcB/s1600/WTC-1%2Bdestroyed%2Bin%2B11%2Bseconds.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="392" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-X_49qmmPu18/V0x4PTcrN2I/AAAAAAAAEsI/dYaX84xFvRkYj2Q8v4RCF-Y_YRjNFZfJgCLcB/s640/WTC-1%2Bdestroyed%2Bin%2B11%2Bseconds.jpg" width="640"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">The North Tower being blown apart from the top down and converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">While the photographic recored proves that the Twin Towers did not collapse, it does not explain HOW it was done, which has been established on the basis of other evidence, including especially the United States Geological Survey (USGS) studies of dust samples taken from 35 locations in lower Manhattan, which record the presence of an array of elements that would only been present in the quantities and correlations found had this been a nuclear event. Consider the following findings:</span></div>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KXNUmPGPxww/V0yBdZC12II/AAAAAAAAEsY/0c4bZ3mRr7kHlk_H4CcgxqrUIsv9F2T4gCLcB/s1600/USGS%2Bdust%2Bstudies.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="197" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KXNUmPGPxww/V0yBdZC12II/AAAAAAAAEsY/0c4bZ3mRr7kHlk_H4CcgxqrUIsv9F2T4gCLcB/s320/USGS%2Bdust%2Bstudies.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">Elements found in USGS 9/11 dust studies</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p2"><span class="s1">Indeed, the USGS data has been confirmed by the variety of incapacities incurred by the first responders and others in the vicinity of Ground Zero, which including multiple myeloma at the rate of 18 per 100,000 vs. 3-9 per 100,000 in the general population;</span> non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers, which are highly associated with exposure to ironizing radiation. As of March 2011 no less than 1,003 first responders died from various cancers; more recent estimates put the number close to 70,000. </div>
<h3><span class="s1">What about the planes?</span></h3>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1">Since a half-dozen or more of the alleged hijackers turned up alive and well the following day, it ought to have crossed the mind of Americans that they cannot have died on 9/11 by causing four commercial carriers--two 767s in New York and two 575s in Shanksville and at the Pentagon--to have crashed in suicide missions. in The Pentagon’s own videotapes do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O’Reilly admitted when one was shown on ”The O’Reilly Factor”; at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and easily visible; it was not, which means that the video evidence also contradicts the official account.</span></div>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kW8NCQf9ZyU/V0yf9fYkQqI/AAAAAAAAEso/bq23569M-iUtrWKtE21cBThBCaw6jLsYgCLcB/s1600/Pentagon%2Blawn-clear%252C%2Bgreen%252C%2Bunblemished.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="229" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kW8NCQf9ZyU/V0yf9fYkQqI/AAAAAAAAEso/bq23569M-iUtrWKtE21cBThBCaw6jLsYgCLcB/s320/Pentagon%2Blawn-clear%252C%2Bgreen%252C%2Bunblemished.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">The clear, green, unblemished Pentagon lawn</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1">The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory “flying at high speed barely above ground level” physically impossible, because a Boeing 757 flying over 400 mph could not have come closer than about 60 or even feet of the ground, which means that the official account is not even aerodynamically possible, an aeronautical engineer, explains here. Since the laws of aerodynamics, no less than the laws of physics and of engineering, cannot be violated and cannot be changed, we should have known from the beginning that something was drastically wrong with the official story of 9/11. But, as CIT (Citizens Investigative Team) has emphasized, we have multiple reports of a plane approaching the Pentagon on a different trajectory only to swerve over it with no impact.</span></div>
<div class="p2"></div>
<div class="p2"></div>
<div class="p2">.</div>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1">Flight 93, which is alleged to have crashed in Shanksville, left no obvious aircraft debris. As both the reporters first on the scene reported, the eerie aspect of the crash site is that there was no sign that any plane had crashed there. To cope with the obvious, one variation has it that the plane disappeared into an abandoned mine shaft, which is absurd on its face. But then they should have brought out the heavy equipment and the bright lights and dug and dug, 24/7, in the hope that, by some miracle, someone might possibly have survived. But nothing like that was done. Even the singed trees and shrubs were trimmed, apparently to make it impossible to subject them to chemical analysis, which would have revealed that they had not been singed by any jet-fuel based fires.</span></div>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1"> </span></div>
<div class="p1"><span class="s1">The fascinating cases, therefore, are not the 757s in Shanksville or at the Pentagon, where the proof no planes crashed is simply overwhelming, but in New York, where we seem to have videos showing Flight 11 hitting the North Tower and Flight 175 hitting the South. Because we have so much more data related to Flight 175, let's take a closer look at what happened there, which appears to be a classic instance of the <i>propter hoc</i> fallacy, which maintains that, because one event happened before another, we are entitled to infer that<i> the second happened because of the first. </i>As in the case of typical Hollywood special effects (such as Superman in flight or Spiderman spinning webs), things are not always as they appear to be. This may be the most stunning case in history.</span></div>
<h3><span class="s1">Flight 175 and the South Tower</span></h3>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pF9MIAnV0IQ/V0ykka9Aa4I/AAAAAAAAEs0/Hunlx0FcCGUNTi08cC7pw7UVJrk9LXkVQCLcB/s1600/Flight%2B175%2Bentering%2Bthe%2BSouth%2BTower.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="253" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pF9MIAnV0IQ/V0ykka9Aa4I/AAAAAAAAEs0/Hunlx0FcCGUNTi08cC7pw7UVJrk9LXkVQCLcB/s320/Flight%2B175%2Bentering%2Bthe%2BSouth%2BTower.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">Flight 175 simply disappears into the Sosut Tower</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p1">There are some 52 videos of one or another portion of the trajectory of Flight 175 approaching the South Tower, which were broadcast again and again on 9/11 to create the virtually indelible visual impression of the plane hitting the building. It actually requires considerable concentration to see that the plane disappears effortlessly into the building <i>with no collision effects!</i> So we are witnessing an impossible scenario in violation of the laws of physics and of engineering. The impact between a 120-ton aluminum aircraft and a massive 500,000-ton steel and concrete building should have caused the plane to crumple against the building, with wings and tail, bodies, seats and luggage falling to the ground. The engines might have entered, but most of it not. Yet none of that appears to have happened. It simply disappears into the building.</div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<div class="p1">.</div>
<div class="p1">We have done frame-by-frame analysis of the two most important videos, the Michale Hezerkhani (taken from the side) and the Evan Fairbanks (taking looking up the side of the South Tower). In both cases, the plane disappears its whole length into the building in the same number of frames it passes its whole length through air. (Try it yourself, if you have any doubt! Do frame-by-frame advance and verify what I am reporting here.) Unless the resistance posed by a massive, 500,000-ton steel and concrete building to the trajectory of an aircraft in flight poses no more resistant than air, we cannot be viewing a real event. We know the formula, d = r x t, where d is the length of the plane and t is the time taken, which yields the rate of travel. They are the same. There is no diminution in velocity.</div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UvU-bhl8Jws/V0yoOZEQPaI/AAAAAAAAEtA/2a5mG22R8JUxuSd19uGY-GxrbrcSFYgSQCLcB/s1600/Flight%2B175%2Bagainst%2BWTC-2.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="219" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UvU-bhl8Jws/V0yoOZEQPaI/AAAAAAAAEtA/2a5mG22R8JUxuSd19uGY-GxrbrcSFYgSQCLcB/s320/Flight%2B175%2Bagainst%2BWTC-2.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></div>
<div class="p1">As if that were no sufficient proof, we know the structure of the facades of the Twin Towers, where Flight 11 was intersecting with seven floors consisting of steel trusses connected at one end to the core columns and at the other to the external steel support columns, filled with 4-8" of concrete. At 208' on a side, that means each floor represented an acre of concrete. The horizontal resistance posed would have been simply enormous. We also have photos of the streets beneath those facades, which are bereft of any aircraft debris. You could have reclined in a lounge chair sipping Mai Tais and been perfectly safe at the times these events took place. </div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<div class="p1">.</div>
<div class="p1">These were not real collisions with real airplanes, where debates have raged over whether it was done with CGI (computer-generated images), VC (video compositing) or using sophisticated holograms. As if more proof were required, Jack White, legendary photo/film analyst with whom I collaborated in research on JFK, discovered video footage of a white van at the intersection of Church & Murray, where an antiquated engine from a Boeing 767 was found. Several agents wearing FBI vests are in the process of unloading something heavy, but they didn't know enough to get it right. It was under a steel scaffolding and resting on the sidewalk. Had anything so massive hit the sidewalk at high speed, it would have done tremendous damage. But there it sits. Incredibly, they even left a dolly behind!</div>
<h3>Why did they have to fake it?</h3>
<div class="p1">It sounds incredible until you put the pieces together to figure out why they had to fake it. The plan was to have these planes completely enter the buildings before they exploded to create the impression that the Twin Towers had collapsed because of the jet-fuel based fires. We already know that that was simply impossible, but the perps were counting on the media to endlessly repeat the video footage in the expectation that public would believe what it was seeing with its own eyes. The original plan had been to use drones under remote control, until they discovered that the intricate lattice structure of the steel and concrete buildings made that physically impossible. They had to fall back on "Plan B" by faking the images of the planes and using prepositioned explosives to simulate those explosions.</div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gSQMJPeZ2gQ/V0z_yA9u80I/AAAAAAAAEtQ/6rvchIkmdOgdbqaZZZjMX84VigiXRTxGQCLcB/s1600/Explosions%2Bin%2Bsubbasements.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="314" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gSQMJPeZ2gQ/V0z_yA9u80I/AAAAAAAAEtQ/6rvchIkmdOgdbqaZZZjMX84VigiXRTxGQCLcB/s320/Explosions%2Bin%2Bsubbasements.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">Explosions drained the water from the sprinkler systems.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p1">An intense fire in the North Tower in 1975 had tested Underwriters Laboratories certification, burning at an estimated 2000 degrees F for four hours without causing the steel to weaken, much less melt. At that time the decision was made to install sprinkler systems in both of the towers, which would have extinguished the very modest fires that remained after the prepositioned jet fuel or napalm had been consumed in those spectacular fireballs. In order to nullify their effect and preserve the illusion that the buildings had collapsed because of the fires--where no steel structure high-rise has even collapsed from fire before or after 9/11, much less on 9/11 itself--they had to neutralize the sprinklers. Massive explosions were set off in the subbasements of both buildings in order to drain them of water. </div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<div class="p1">.</div>
<div class="p1">The problem was to "explain away" those explosions, which were timed to coincide with the apparent impact of the planes with the buildings, where they would be attributed to jet fuel falling through the elevator shafts. That was implausible, since the buildings had staggered elevators that ran for 30 floors, where you had to exit and take the next for another 30 to reach the ground. There were only a few maintenance elevators that went from the subbasements to the top. But who would even notice? It required precise timing, however, which made it all the more imperative that the planes should appear to impact with the buildings at just the right time to be responsible for the explosions in the subbasements. It did not work out as planned.</div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<table cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container">
<tbody><tr><td><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sCZn5tvmejw/V00DjeegG3I/AAAAAAAAEtc/jSruL4eoY6kMjaIiv2HHqP5J2IVkLajnQCLcB/s1600/Delays%2Bof%2B14%2Band%2B17%2Bseconds.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="98" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sCZn5tvmejw/V00DjeegG3I/AAAAAAAAEtc/jSruL4eoY6kMjaIiv2HHqP5J2IVkLajnQCLcB/s320/Delays%2Bof%2B14%2Band%2B17%2Bseconds.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption">14 seconds too early at the North Tower; 17 at the South.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="p1">As Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong, "Seismic Proof: 9/11 was an 'Inside Job'", have shown, there were hand/eye coordination discrepancies of 14 and 17 seconds in the detonation of the explosions in the subbasements and the apparent impacts of the planes--<i>where the explosions occurred before the plane impacts! </i>They have reviewed the data repeatedly, but have been unable to eliminate the time differential, which makes their research one more decisive proof that 9/11 was indeed "an inside job"--where this one does not depend upon any violations of the laws of physics, of engineering or of aerodynamics, which are, if anything, even more conclusive. They simply screwed up the timing, which, all by itself, proves that 9/11 was, indeed, "an inside job".</div>
<h3>Where do things stand with 9/11?</h3>
<div class="p1"><div class="separator"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-K6usnL2JgZE/V00Ovv-FvpI/AAAAAAAAEtw/0Tgu1iwwiMoWXSHb0Tko79Ck--pWyMBmwCKgB/s1600/At%2BThe%2BCommonwealth%2BClub.png"><span><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-K6usnL2JgZE/V00Ovv-FvpI/AAAAAAAAEtw/0Tgu1iwwiMoWXSHb0Tko79Ck--pWyMBmwCKgB/s1600/At%2BThe%2BCommonwealth%2BClub.png"/></span></a></div>
There is more, especially about the alleged Islamic hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly these planes and that their names are not on any original, authenticated passenger manifest. But it's hard to defeat the fact that several of them turned up alive and well the following day, which ought to have raised suspicions in the minds of Americans that, if the hijackers did not die, then the planes cannot have crashed; and if the planes did not crash, then the passengers aboard them did not die because they had been hijacked and forced to crash by the 19 Islamic fundamentalists--which means that the entire "War on Terror" was based upon a lie by the American government to the American people. The American government has not even produced their tickets as evidence that they were even aboard the aircraft that they are alleged to have hijacked, which would have been easier to create than faking all four of the alleged aircraft crash sites. (For more of the evidence that supports this conclusion, see "The Real Deal Ep #100 The 9/11 Crash Sites" with Maj. Gen. Albert Stubblebine (USA, ret.), who was formerly in charge of all US military signals and photographic intelligence, who not only agrees but offers some additional substantiation.)</div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<div class="p1"><div class="separator">.</div>
As Wesley Clark informed us during his speech to The Commonwealth Club in San Francisco in 2007, when he returned to the Pentagon from serving as Supreme Commander, Allied Forces Europe (the Commanding General of NATO), he learned of a plan to take out the governments of seven countries in the next five years, beginning with Iraq and Libya and ending with Syrian and Iran. The Russians have put an end to that by intervening at the request of the Syrian government, but it has not been for lack of trying. What most Americans do not appreciate to this day is that the plan Gen. Clark was outlining was not a response to 9/11 but the motivation for 9/11 by annihilating each of the nations that posed the least threat to Israel and its future aspirations.<br/> <br/>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Xki3AujH-tc/V00S21gv3ZI/AAAAAAAAEt4/P4zIAudLe90NgMBXVrYjGR5_48fFAeJiQCLcB/s1600/9%253A11%2Bfamilies%2Blivid%2Bover%2BObama%2Band%2BSA.jpg"><span><img border="0" height="144" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Xki3AujH-tc/V00S21gv3ZI/AAAAAAAAEt4/P4zIAudLe90NgMBXVrYjGR5_48fFAeJiQCLcB/s320/9%253A11%2Bfamilies%2Blivid%2Bover%2BObama%2Band%2BSA.jpg" width="320"/></span></a></div>
When the 28 pages of <i>The 9/11 Commission Report</i> (2004) that have been suppressed became the inspiration for Congress to pass a bill that would allow American citizens to sue the Saudi Arabian government for its complicity in 9/11, the families and survivors of the victims of 9/11 were livid that the President of the United States would side with Saudi Arabia and lobby for its defeat. But Barack Obama is simply carrying out the policies and positions that he inherited from the previous administration of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, who directed the CIA, the Neocons in the Department of Defense (most of whom had come from the Project for a New American Century and were joint US-Israeli citizens) and Mossad to conduct the operation to transform US foreign policy from one in which we, at least officially, never attacked any other nation that had not attacked us first to one in which we, to benefit our "ally" in the Middle East--have now become the greatest aggressor nation that the world has ever known.<br/> <br/> The truth would have emerged by now but for the influence of 9/11 organizations that are functioning as gatekeepers by offering limited hangouts in lieu of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but about 9/11. A&E911, for example, continues to focus on nanothermite, even though it cannot possibly have been responsible for blowing the Twin Towers apart from the top down. They claim they know that other explosives may have been involved, but refuse to identify what they could possibly be. And, like Judy Wood and DEWs, they refuse to discuss WHO was responsible and WHY. Unfortunately, they do not even do an adequate job of explaining HOW it was done, where the nanothermite theory was inspired by the study of dust samples from an apartment near Ground Zero, which has now been superseded by the far more extensive research of the USGS. What lives by the dust, dies by the dust. You are not going to like what you read here, but it is your duty as an American citizen to absorb it.</div>
<div class="p1"></div>
<strong><span class="font-size-5" style="color: #ff0000;">This is the Prologue to <i>America was Nuked on 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DoD and the Mossad</i> (<a href="http://moonrockbooks.com/"><span style="color: #ff0000;">moonrockbooks.com</span></a>, 2016 forthcoming)</span></strong><br/> <br/>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WArXb03gW6w/V0-VCftt4KI/AAAAAAAAEuI/yO1mFibKa_sfPGXTEFMjaCj9vjmCVDgAACLcB/s1600/Moonrockbooks.com%2B2.jpg"><img border="0" height="201" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WArXb03gW6w/V0-VCftt4KI/AAAAAAAAEuI/yO1mFibKa_sfPGXTEFMjaCj9vjmCVDgAACLcB/s400/Moonrockbooks.com%2B2.jpg" width="400"/></a></div>
<br/>
<div class="sexy-bookmarks sexy-bookmarks-expand sexy-bookmarks-bg-love"></div>
</div>Nobody Died at Sandy Hook Free Ebook Edited by Jim Fetzer and Mike Palecektag:911scholars.ning.com,2015-11-23:3488444:BlogPost:718872015-11-23T22:59:52.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><span><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920159?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920159?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></img></a> This book proves that the Obama administration has been deceiving the public in spectacular ways. They are out to promote gun control when the American people need their weapons. When Washington, D.C., is taken out because they have provoked war with Russia, how are we--the public--to defend ourselves from roving gangs out to rape, loot and pillage? The whole story is a…</span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920159?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560920159?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a>This book proves that the Obama administration has been deceiving the public in spectacular ways. They are out to promote gun control when the American people need their weapons. When Washington, D.C., is taken out because they have provoked war with Russia, how are we--the public--to defend ourselves from roving gangs out to rape, loot and pillage? The whole story is a sham--and when guns are banned, the crime rate goes up! And that is for the obvious reason that, when law-abiding citizens are deprived of their guns, those who still have them are used to violating the law. The situation is completely absurd. Read the book and judge for yourselves. Nobody died at Sandy Hook.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="http://rense.com/general96/NobodyDiedAtSandyHook.pdf" target="_blank">Download/View</a></p>
<p></p>The Real Deal (new video version) with Joe Olson on the destruction of the World Trade Centertag:911scholars.ning.com,2015-03-17:3488444:BlogPost:696902015-03-17T17:25:01.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p>Joe Olson is a registered professional civil engineer with a background in structural. Several times he confirmed that no real plane could have entered either building, so I am puzzled that anyone would think differently. He gave many reasons why this could not have been done with conventional explosives and nanothermite, which is the A&E position, and why Judy Wood's DEW hypothesis cannot explain all of the data, including the USGS dust samples, the massive chunks of the building being…</p>
<p>Joe Olson is a registered professional civil engineer with a background in structural. Several times he confirmed that no real plane could have entered either building, so I am puzzled that anyone would think differently. He gave many reasons why this could not have been done with conventional explosives and nanothermite, which is the A&E position, and why Judy Wood's DEW hypothesis cannot explain all of the data, including the USGS dust samples, the massive chunks of the building being tossed 600' through the air, and a myriad of other kinds of evidence, where there appears to be no evidence of hers that the mini-micro nuke hypothesis cannot explain as well or event better. Neither A&E nor Wood will address WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE AND WHY, which means that, if there are limited hang-out here, they are theirs and not the position of Scholars and Veterans Today. Go to <a href="http://new.livestream.com/accounts/4937810/events/3629901">http://new.livestream.com/accounts/4937810/events/3629901</a></p>Ian Greenhalgh, "Slam Dunk! Most Classified 9/11 Revealed--It was done using nukes!tag:911scholars.ning.com,2014-09-21:3488444:BlogPost:679212014-09-21T08:28:24.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Friday, July 18th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/iangreenhalgh/" rel="author" title="Posts by Ian Greenhalgh">Ian Greenhalgh</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Slam Dunk! Most Classified 9/11 Revealed…</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"></div>
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Friday, July 18th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/iangreenhalgh/" title="Posts by Ian Greenhalgh" rel="author">Ian Greenhalgh</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Slam Dunk! Most Classified 9/11 Revealed</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"><a title="Facebook" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/bent-girder_1477855i1.jpg" class="addthis_button_facebook at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/07/18/slam-dunk-most-classified-911-revealed/#" title="Tweet" class="addthis_button_twitter at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"><span class="at_a11y">Share on twitter</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/07/18/slam-dunk-most-classified-911-revealed/#" title="Email" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_email at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_email"><span class="at_a11y">Share on email</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/07/18/slam-dunk-most-classified-911-revealed/#" title="Pinterest" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_pinterest_share at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_pinterest_share"><span class="at_a11y">Share on pinterest_share</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/07/18/slam-dunk-most-classified-911-revealed/#" class="addthis_button_compact at300m"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_compact"><span class="at_a11y">More Sharing Services</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/07/18/slam-dunk-most-classified-911-revealed/#" title="View more services" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_expanded">334</a></div>
<p><a><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-311496 data-lazy-ready" alt="bent-girder_1477855i" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/bent-girder_1477855i1.jpg" height="400" width="620"/></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: large;"><strong>… by <span style="color: #000080;">Ian Greenhalgh</span> & <span style="color: #333399;">Don Fox</span></strong></span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote><div id="attachment_311501" style="width: 308px;" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/fallingman_crop.jpg"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy size-medium wp-image-311501 data-lazy-ready" alt="Falling man" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/fallingman_crop-298x320.jpg" height="320" width="298"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Falling man</p>
</div>
<p align="left"><strong>[ <span style="color: #000080;">Editors Note</span>: VT is publishing this material in an attempt to address extremely serious national security threats right here at home that we have been writing about for years. The sad state of our situation does not come as any news to VT readers.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>We have found huge support for our efforts not only among our regular readers but the international Intel community itself concerned with the prospect of certain parts of US government operations having been penetrated and subverted to the control of what for today I will call a "shadow government", again...something that is not new to our readers.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>We did not hunt this material down. It hunted us down because we have a reputation for having the balls to publish what no one else will, which is one reason what our phone never rings from corporate media.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>We are the last people they want to talk to because they know "we know" how they have failed America miserably in terms of their 4th estate duties to keep the public informed.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><span style="color: #000080;"><strong><em>You can call it corny all you want, but we have a lot of respect for the warning our Founding Fathers gave us that once we had been given a Republic that the next trick was going to be in keeping it.</em></strong></span></p>
<p align="left"><strong>And being informed about what was really going on was the bottom line in terms of whether government was really serving you, or had you been morphed into serving it. These men were all classical scholars going back to Athenian days, and they knew the history of deception practiced by those in power against their subjects.</strong></p>
<div id="attachment_311503" style="width: 566px;" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/banner_1002.jpg"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy size-full wp-image-311503 data-lazy-ready" alt="We have a second chance now - after having lost the first" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/banner_1002.jpg" height="174" width="556"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">We have a second chance now – after having lost the first</p>
</div>
<p align="left"><strong>How would you like to wake up one day as a nuclear weapons designer to realize that after having worked on “boutique” new weapons to provide America a wider array of nuclear options to destroy certain targets with limited collateral damage, only to find they had been used against your own country, killing your own people, effectively as part of a coup which is really the only way to describe it?</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>Sure…you would be pissed, but what would you do? And if you looked around and saw legions of top government people, military, civilian…including top Intel people doing nothing, what would you do? You would be scared because you saw everybody else was, so you would not feel so bad about that.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><span style="color: #000080;"><em><strong>But then you start thinking about those who did the last one, how they will do the next one with much less fear and trepidation of the first, and that your doing nothing has made you part of aiding and abetting in the next attack. The child abuse analogy here is that when you know a kid is being abused and do nothing, you are charged with the same level of felony as the physical abuser.</strong></em></span></p>
<p align="left"><strong>One of the main motivations we feel we are getting this material now is that some brave folks want to stand with those who tried to stop the next one. And until we hunt down all of those involved in the first, the clock will keep ticking on the rest of us on borrowed time until someone decides to flick the switch. Personally, I am a bit uncomfortable with than scenario. How about you?</strong></p>
<div id="attachment_311504" style="width: 330px;" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/342x256_Founding-Fathers.jpg"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy size-medium wp-image-311504 data-lazy-ready" alt=""Here's looking at ya!"" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/342x256_Founding-Fathers-320x239.jpg" height="239" width="320"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">“Here’s looking at ya!”</p>
</div>
<p align="left"><strong>If the public does not respond to having been given this opportunity to know what happened on 9-11 enough to force what should have been done way back when…hunt down those who really did it, then they will become owners of their fates.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>So to those in the denial mode who will claim we are betraying our country by publishing his material, I have some bad news for them. We feel they are the betrayers, and we have nothing but contempt for them.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>And for all the combat vets out there who have been in God awful situations where you saw no way out of it, you know how wonderful having “a chance” is being placed before you.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>It’s time for the whining and “why me” to be set aside, grab the chance, and make the best of it that you can. That is exactly what we are doing, and I wanted to make sure you all understood that…<a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/staff-writers">Jim W. Dean</a> ]</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"> _________________________________</p>
<h2 style="text-align: center;">Slam Dunk! Most Classified 9/11 Revealed</h2>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/911_170_06.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-311498 data-lazy-ready" alt="911_170_06" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/911_170_06.jpg" height="275" width="625"/></a></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><strong>It was Dr. James Fetzer that introduced me to Veterans Today. We had worked together on 9/11 where my expertise in photographic and image analysis helped his research.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Several teams at Veterans Today had been working on 9/11 and, by the time I met them, all had come to the conclusion that 9/11 was a nuclear event. They had also come to the conclusion that other researchers, the total amateurs and those with some expertise but “axes to grind,” pet conspiracy theories or books to peddle, had crippled any effort to move forward.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Others, far too many others, many “activists” were something else, something unwholesome, clearly working for those responsible for 9/11. As many if not most of these folks aren’t very bright, they had become rather obvious.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">The real breakthrough came when Veterans Today was given access to documents “borrowed” from the Department of Energy and given to Russian intelligence. The Russians, in turn, angry at the US over the Ukraine coup, looked for an American source to publish this material. Only “VT” would touch it.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">This material was the product of a broad investigation into where nuclear weapons were acquired, who had stolen them, how they were reconfigured, where they were placed and more. However, not all information we wanted was there.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Don Fox and I went to Gordon Duff who introduced us to a senior US Army/NATO officer who had commanded nuclear forces in Europe. He concurred that 9/11 was nuclear, answered what he could and helped direct us onward.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Although we had made a lot of progress, there were still many gaps in our knowledge so when we learned that Gordon Duff had sources within the US nuclear weapons labs and that material was coming out that had never been seen before, we were eager to see if we could use it to fill in the gaps.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">We were given direct access to documents, not only tied to the suppressed nuclear weapons investigation of 9/11 but private notes by investigators as well. Duff then told us that we could submit questions. A day later, we received answers you will see below.</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><strong>This material is astounding, it comes from the highest levels of America’s weapon design community and is highly classified. After reading this, you will never be able to think about 9/11 and the threat of nuclear weapons in the same way ever again.</strong></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Where, for years, would-be investigators, bloggers, phonies, malignant narcissists have peddled pet theories like carnival barkers, real nuclear weapons designers, many from the same team that wrote the DOE 9/11 Report (2003), had no need to fabricate and dissemble.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000080;"><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Q: How many types of devices were used in New York on 9/11? I see where a case can be made for 2 or 3 different types of devices.</span></strong></span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em> A: At least two different types of nuclear weapons were used. One being a standard micro nuke with a (W-54 Pit design) of less than 3 kiloton in size and greater than 500 ton minimum in blast size.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>The bigger enhanced weapons use to bring down towers 1 and 2 were at least 1 to 3 kiloton in size. The fireball size limits the kiloton size of the weapon to less than 200 feet in diameter due to the size of the buildings. For every 1 kiloton of blast effect you get approximately a 50 foot radius sized fireball. The size of the fireball can be much less when contained inside a steel structure. So a 3 kiloton weapon will produce a 150 foot fireball.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>In a thermobaric design, the plasma fireball will remain the same size but it will be under much greater pressure and have more density due to the added iron oxide material in the fireball. When the fireball expands to its maximum size of 150 feet and just after it consumes all of the building materials in this area; (up to 150 tons for a 3 kiloton weapon) it begins to cool very rapidly. As it cools it will expel the molten hot iron plasma under great pressure just like in a volcano. Shooting the “Lava” or plasma straight up the central core of the building. This volcanic burst of hot iron plasma will literally gut the inside of the building of anything that it comes in contact with. The follow on EMP pulse will add even more thermal heat to the structural components of the building. The EMP pulse will also destroy or erase any surviving computer hard drives in the area.</em></span></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="color: #000080;"><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Q: The above ground nukes appear to be much smaller than the below ground nukes. And the nukes below the Towers appear to be different than the nukes below Building 7.</span></strong></span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>A: Yes each building needs a different amount of explosive charge to bring it down. This depends on the size, shape and mass of the building. It is basic demolition physics. Buildings 4-6 were smaller requiring lesser charges to bring them down. Building 7 was bigger needing more than one charge. Towers one and two required much more charge and they needed a bigger hole to drop them into. These were the specially designed thermobaric weapons, used just for this purpose.</em></span></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="color: #000080;"><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Q: We see evidence for neutron bombs in the USGS dust samples and the DOE water samples. The primary stage appears to be uranium as we see uranium in the dust samples and not plutonium. The secondary appears to be lithium deuteride as we see tritium in the DOE water samples. Could a thermobaric nuke use uranium for the primary?</span></strong></span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>A: Yes. A Uranium or Plutonium weapon can be used as the primary. The primary only needs to be a fission weapon design. Uranium is also used in a Plutonium weapon as a neutron reflector and energy booster. It reduces the amount of PU needed by 25 to 50%. The Uranium will not completely burn because it is a neutron reflector so it shows up in the fallout. 1 pound of Pu or Uranium will produce up to 3 ounces of fallout per pound of fuel consumed by the primary.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>So if the weapon used 15 lbs of fuel it will produce 45 ounces of fallout. Most of this will be absorbed by secondary burning the remaining nuclear fuel in the thermobaric reaction. Adding Iron oxide to the secondary will reduce heavy radioactive fallout to acceptable levels after several days. It is a clean burn weapon. This is why it was used; less fallout problems to deal with.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em> For every 1 kiloton of energy produced in a nuclear explosion, it will consume up to 50 tons of iron or steel when it is sucked into the plasma fire ball turning it into vaporized gas. When it cools and it is exposed to air or water vapour, it forms micro granules of iron oxide spheres in the 7 to 10 nanometer range.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>All metal spheres formed by the plasma ball when cooled will vary in size, based on their atomic weight and wave length of light that they absorb. The size is determined by the wave length of the light radiated by the plasma fire ball ranging from 30 nano meters (infrared light) down to less than 1 nano meters for (x-rays and Gamma rays). Iron only absorbs light in the 7 to 10 micron range, this is why they are that size. Gold Silver and Aluminum all adsorb shorter wave lengths so they are much smaller in size.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>If the fallout sample is not taken directly from the very center of ground zero it will show less and less PU or Uranium in the samples the farther you get from the zero point of detonation. This is because most of the unburnt radioactive material does not travel very far from the plasma ball.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>The secondary purpose of the iron oxide is to convert excess Gamma, X-ray and Neutron radiation into thermal energy. Its third function is to convert Alpha and Beta radiation into heat. Its fourth function is to convert the excess free electrons produced by the blast into a bigger EMP pulse. Its fifth function is to contain or absorb the radioactive fallout and reduces its levels, helping in clean up.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>If a very thick solid iron casing is used it will fragment just like in a grenade or in an artillery shell so softer iron powder is used. It also needs a lot of surface area in order to produce the thermobaric effect. When this hot plasma that is over 1 million degrees centigrade in temperature and over 5,000 degrees C. at its edges comes in contact with any other material it will either immediately vaporize it or melt it. Even if it does not melt it if the structural steel elements of the building rise in temperature above their Curie point then they will lose all structural strength and bend like pretzels.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>This is basically a first generation plasma weapon when used in a closed steel construction building. The closed steel construction also further helps contain the fallout, when used in a very tall steel structure such as on 911. The 1,000 foot long or tall steel central core of the building acts as a thermal wave guide for the hot plasma converting the central steel core into a Directed Energy Weapon. It also acts as a electromagnetic wave guide for the EMP pulse and directs the energy produced by the weapon strait up the central core. It basically forms a very crude Directed Energy Weapon.</em></span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>The EMP pulse is vertically polarized and it is primarily absorbed by the buildings steel structure. The reaming EMP field effects do not radiate any farther than the magnetic near field produced by the original blast. The steel building acts as a Faraday cage absorbing and re radiating the EMP energy as thermal heat, adding to the thermobaric effect. X-rays, Gamma rays and neutrons are rapidly absorbed by most of the heavy materials in the building so very little of this radiation will travel more than a few blocks from the outside of the building structure. In order to prevent a counter EMP from knocking out electrical power in lower Manhattan the building had to be power downed just before the blast. This would require someone switching off power in the transformer substation that was used by the WTC complex and the power company.</em></span></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"> _____________________________________</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><strong>So there you have it</strong> – the nuclear secrets of 9/11 laid bare for all to see. No longer can there be any denial that NYC was nuked. The nanothermite theory was a psyop from the beginning to hide the nuclear event at the towers.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">We must salute those who chose to release this highly classified information, they have done a great service by finally answering the ‘how’ of the destruction of the WTC.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">It did occur to us to ask why is this information coming out now, the answer gave us further insight into the people behind the terrible crime of 9/11. The following short remark was at the end of the text.</span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><em>“Bush, Cheney and Rahm Emmanuel are gone. So are most of the original co-conspirators. They are or have been removed from power. This makes it safer for the whistle blowers.”</em></span></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Note the names they use and the order they are in. This opens up so many more questions, this time questions that may actually have answers of consequence.</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><strong>Dick Cheney recently warned, or perhaps threatened would be more accurate, that a ‘far deadlier nuclear 9/11” may happen; now we know that 9/11 was a nuclear event and that Cheney was at the heart of the conspiracy; therefore his prediction is truly frightening.</strong></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">The information above is far from all that has been published, supplied as part of the DOE documents or brought forward by loyal Americans working in our nuclear weapons programs. These are only the unanswered questions, the details we felt would give us the answers we needed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Veterans Today had already published papers on the bomb designs, where the 9/11 weapons had been placed and extensively on those who had accessed the weapons. All of the articles I reviewed were, as with this one, detailed, lots of hard science. What is of particular note is the fact that never have so many previously unpublished details on specialized weapons programs ever been released in the same decade, much less in a few short days.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">What I also learned working with VT is that, though the mainstream media is boycotting this information, the military and intelligence community is not. Some very dangerous people are now both angry and motivated.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">That I have seen. It took this kind of openness and detail after over a decade of childish deceit.</span></p>"Top Ten 9/11 Cons: 'Fraud Vitiates Everything' (FVE)"tag:911scholars.ning.com,2014-09-21:3488444:BlogPost:685962014-09-21T07:57:52.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Thursday, August 21st, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" rel="author" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)…</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style" title="Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)"></div>
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Thursday, August 21st, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer" rel="author">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style" title="Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)"><a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" title="Facebook" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_twitter at300b" title="Tweet" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"><span class="at_a11y">Share on twitter</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_email at300b" target="_blank" title="Email" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_email"><span class="at_a11y">Share on email</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_pinterest_share at300b" target="_blank" title="Pinterest" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_pinterest_share"><span class="at_a11y">Share on pinterest_share</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_compact at300m" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_compact"><span class="at_a11y">More Sharing Services</span></span></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_bubble_style" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#"></a><a class="addthis_button_expanded" target="_blank" title="View more services" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/#">112</a><div class="atclear"></div>
</div>
<h2>Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/21/top-ten-911-cons-fraud-vitiates-everything-fve/www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/">Jim Fetzer</a>, Dennis Cimino and Mike Sparks</h3>
<p> <br/>“<i>Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters”–</i>37 Am Jur 2d, Section 8</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Flight-175-entering-the-South-Tower.jpg"><img class="lazy alignright wp-image-317332 data-lazy-ready" alt="Flight 175 entering the South Tower" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Flight-175-entering-the-South-Tower.jpg" width="242" height="221"/></a></p>
<p><strong>“FRAUD VITIATES EVERYTHING” (FVE) is the legal principle that, once it has been shown shown that one party has lied or committed a deliberate misrepresentation, <a href="http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/ChallJurisdiction/ThreeElements.htm">their whole case is thereby compromised and no longer defensible in a court of law</a>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Fraud-vitiates-everything1.jpg"><img class="lazy alignleft size-medium wp-image-317474 data-lazy-ready" alt="Fraud vitiates everything" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Fraud-vitiates-everything1-320x93.jpg" width="320" height="93"/></a><br/> </p>
<p><strong>37 Am Jur 2d, Section 8, states, “<i>Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters, and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments.”</i></strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Were that principle applied to the government’s case for 9/11, the demonstration of fraud and deliberate deception would warrant its dismissal in it’s entirely, since it’s entire case has been built upon nothing but fraud and deliberate deception. Here we are going to present ten examples of fraud and deliberate deception in relation to 9/11, five of which derive from the Pentagon, the other five from events in New York City. Given the principle that “Fraud vitiates everything” (FVE), each of these is sufficient, by itself, to warrant the dismissal of the official account of 9/11.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the case of the Pentagon, they range from the relatively obvious–that the plane seen in the Pentagon frame labeled “plane” turns out to be too small to be a Boeing 757, but could be a Global Hawk delivering a missile to the building–to the far more subtle and complex case of the image that Frank Legge touts as his “conclusive proof”, which has been photoshopped–in the case of the Pentagon.</p>
<p>In New York City, they range from the impossible speed and impossible entry of a Boeing 767 to planting an engine component that did not come from the plane to the impossible “collapse” of the Twin Towers and the blatant controlled demolition of WTC-7. These are “ten top” cases, which warrant dismissing the government’s case in its totality because of fraud and deliberate deception, where there are many, many more.</p>
<h2>AT THE PENTAGON</h2>
<p> <br/>There are dozens of arguments against the official account that a B-757 hit the Pentagon, which is a fantasy. They include that the “plane” seen in the Pentagon frame is too small to be a Boeing 757; that the “hit point” could not have accommodated a 100-ton airliner with a 125′ wingspan and a tail standing 44′ above the ground; that debris from a Boeing 757 which should have been present is not there–no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage and no tail–where not even the engines, which are made of titanium and steel, were recovered; <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/">that one piece of debris, which did come from a Boeing 757, has been traced back to a crash in Cali, Columbia, in 1995</a>; and that the smoke observed by members of Congress rushing out of the Capitol came from a series of enormous dumpsters, a blatant act of fakery.</p>
<h3>(1) The Pentagon “plane”</h3>
<p>According to the official account, AA Flight 77 approached the Pentagon on an acute north-east trajectory, barely skimming the ground at over 500 mph and taking out multiple lampposts, which would have ripped its wings open and caused the plane to burst into flame. The aerodynamics of flight, including “downwash”, moreover, would have made the official trajectory–flying at high speed barely above ground level–physically impossible, because a Boeing 757 flying over 500 mph could not have come closer than 60 or more feet to the ground, which means that the official account is neither physically nor aerodynamically possible. But here is an even simpler disproof:</p>
<p><a href="http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/sizingproblem/" rel="attachment wp-att-7398"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" title="sizingproblem" alt="" src="http://nsnbc.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/sizingproblem.jpg?w=640" width="402" height="259"/></a></p>
<div class="separator"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-igIyM7xjf4k/U_T54Z10ZGI/AAAAAAAACg0/X54fflEJ3nQ/s1600/GLOBAL%2BHAWK%2BIN%2BHERE.jpg"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-igIyM7xjf4k/U_T54Z10ZGI/AAAAAAAACg0/X54fflEJ3nQ/s640/GLOBAL%2BHAWK%2BIN%2BHERE.jpg" width="461" height="297" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>When the image of a Boeing 757 is sized to the tail of “the plane”, it turns out to be more than twice as long as what the frame shows, which means it cannot possibly be a Boeing 757. But, as Dennis Cimino has observed,<a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/">it could have been a Global Hawk, which may have fired a missile into the building, where the white plume is not from the exhaust of any jet engine but from the solid-propellant engine of a Maverick.</a> The fragile composition of the Global Hawk would have made it an ideal delivery system, since it would have been obliterated into tiny parts upon impact with the Pentagon.</p>
<h3>(2) The lack of debris</h3>
<p>Although many Americans are unaware, the hit point on the Pentagon is a hole about 10’ high and 16-17’ wide, which is surrounded by a chain-link fence, two enormous spools of cable and a pair of cars, where there are unbroken windows beside and above the opening. What we do not see is an enormous pile of aluminum debris, broken wings or the tail, bodies, seats or luggage. Remarkably, not even the engines were recovered from the crash site—although a part of a compressor, which was too small to have come from a 757 and too large for a cruise missile—was later reported there. Even more striking to me, however, is this photo of the civilian lime-green fire-trucks as they extinguish the fires:</p>
<p><a href="http://tinypic.com/?ref=n08prm" target="_blank"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic" src="http://i52.tinypic.com/no8prm.jpg" width="500" height="350" border="0"/></a></p>
<div id="innerLeft"><div><p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-1.jpg"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #1" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-1.jpg" width="600" height="393"/></a></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="separator"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-drm-5JFlbLY/U_YmY8WQKzI/AAAAAAAAChk/hQPeAyIbx0k/s1600/WHY-ARE-THESE-BLOWN-OUT-NOT-INWARDS-FROM-PLANE-IMPACT-640x286.jpg"><img class="lazy data-lazy-ready" border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-drm-5JFlbLY/U_YmY8WQKzI/AAAAAAAAChk/hQPeAyIbx0k/s640/WHY-ARE-THESE-BLOWN-OUT-NOT-INWARDS-FROM-PLANE-IMPACT-640x286.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>Since these fire trucks arrived after the crash and spent fifteen minutes or so putting it out, I have been struck by the clear, green, unblemished Pentagon lawn. There is no indication that a Boeing 757 hit the building–NONE! <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/">Nor in any of the other photographs we have featured about the Pentagon.</a> And, as Dennis Cimino has observed, <em>if a plane had flown into the building, then why are these supports blown outward?</em> No plane hit the building.</p>
<h3>(3) The planted fuselage</h3>
<p>Later, of course, debris would start showing up. Since there was none even as the fire trucks were extinguishing the fires, it has to have come from somewhere. It would have been difficult to have had officers and enlisted men carry pieces of debris out onto the lawn without being observed, so it has occurred to me that perhaps it was dropped from a C-130, which was circling the Pentagon that morning. That’s my best guess. I am open to other possibilities, but I haven’t been able to think of real alternatives.<a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/"> One piece of debris has been used to cement the case for the crash of Flight 77, where Frank Legge, for example, has argued that no one has been able to show it did not come from a 757:</a></p>
<p><a href="http://tinypic.com/?ref=4jrxqe" target="_blank"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic" src="http://i52.tinypic.com/4jrxqe.jpg" width="477" height="200" border="0"/></a></p>
<p>One of the oddities about this debris is that <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/05/inside-job-seven-questions-about-911/">it shows no signs of having been involved in a violent crash or exposed to the intense heat of those fireballs–and it includes a piece of vine</a>. Another student of the Pentagon, James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6133">traced that debris</a> to an American Airlines 757 that crashed <a href="http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/04/jim-hansons-de-vine-revelation.html">in a rain forest</a> above Cali, Columbia in 1995. “It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact.” That this piece was on the Pentagon lawn is an obvious case of fraud and deliberate deception vitiating the official account.</p>
<h3>(4) The dumpster fires</h3>
<p>As though that were not disturbing enough, I was also puzzled why, later in the day, when rumors were circulating that the Capitol might be next and the members of Congress rushed out onto the steps of the building, when they looked across the Potomac, they witnesses billowing black clouds of smoke. That struck me as rather odd, since the lime green fire trucks had put out the modest fires long ago. When I took a closer look, I discovered that these black clouds of smoke were not coming from the Pentagon itself but from a series of enormous dumpsters in front of the building:</p>
<p><a href="http://tinypic.com/?ref=sx0sk3" target="_blank"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic" src="http://i55.tinypic.com/sx0sk3.jpg" width="472" height="300" border="0"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://tinypic.com/?ref=2ni0hua" target="_blank"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic" src="http://i52.tinypic.com/2ni0hua.jpg" width="474" height="640" border="0"/></a></p>
<p>When I was still living in Duluth before my retirement in June of 2006, another student of the Pentagon came by and showed me forty-four (44) more frames of the same thing, where you could actually see light between the dumpsters and the building. If a plane has actually crashed there, it would not have been necessary to fake fires coming from the Pentagon, which appears to have been contrived to induce members of Congress to support requests for new funding Donald Rumsfeld would present the next day–another instance of fraud and deception vitiating the official account.</p>
<h3>(5) The photoshopped images</h3>
<p>When we turn to <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf">the photograph that Frank Legge cites as “proof positive” of the presence of an airliner</a>, a B-757, specifically, inside the Pentagon, not only do you not notice no debris associated with an airliner, but it turns out that the photo has been altered extensively–it has been photoshopped!–to obfuscate details in it (see the next photo with the cyan marking and the magenta bottom line) In this photograph, the cyan area (expanded in the final photo) clearly reveals that photoshopping was crudely used to add the extremely lighter area into the image:</p>
<div><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Rs6gdg9L8FQ/U_Psq_mDiwI/AAAAAAAACgE/PRbWUXiD7NU/s1600/EVEN%2BLEGGES%2BPHOTO%2BIS%2BPHOTOSHOPPED.jpg"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Rs6gdg9L8FQ/U_Psq_mDiwI/AAAAAAAACgE/PRbWUXiD7NU/s640/EVEN%2BLEGGES%2BPHOTO%2BIS%2BPHOTOSHOPPED.jpg" width="640" height="484" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>Even closer examination in the debris field mostly in the upper half shows demarcation lines of cut and paste having been performed in more than one area inside it. In his original upper ceiling beam (left-hand side), you can see where they pasted in over the beam to obfuscate something that happened on the beam itself in an attempt to hide that from us. The shading of the reverse “E” area shows, beyond any doubt, that this photo was heavily retouched and altered.</p>
<div><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VN0H-jEMmco/U_Ps27C0tZI/AAAAAAAACgM/-_wBNkTNPhc/s1600/PHOTOSHOPPED%2BIN%2BHERE.jpg"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VN0H-jEMmco/U_Ps27C0tZI/AAAAAAAACgM/-_wBNkTNPhc/s640/PHOTOSHOPPED%2BIN%2BHERE.jpg" width="640" height="434" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>However they were not able to paste any airliner parts into it without having issues with perspective and sizing very obvious to the naked eye. This photo, which Legge himself emphasizes, is bogus and hence “non-authentic”. <a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/">He thus picked a very sad and poor choice from Jim Hoffman’s web site.</a> A very good question to ask Frank Legge, therefore, is, <em>“Why did you pick a photograph that had been altered and is also bereft of any sign of aircraft wreckage?”</em></p>
<div class="separator"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AHX2j7FRuEk/U_WL3TX4qBI/AAAAAAAAChU/Mq3yr9AekZI/s1600/PUT%2BTHIS%2BPHOTO%2BIN%2BSOMEHOW.jpg"><img class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AHX2j7FRuEk/U_WL3TX4qBI/AAAAAAAAChU/Mq3yr9AekZI/s640/PUT%2BTHIS%2BPHOTO%2BIN%2BSOMEHOW.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<div>That this photo was shopped may or may not have been something of which the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a> was aware when it accepted his article for publication. But that means its vaunted “peer-review” process, upon which Steven Jones has placed so much emphasis, failed in this instance. As I have explained elsewhere,<a href="http://twilightpines.com/images/themanipulationofthe911community.pdf">Jones also advocates an inadequate mode of scientific reasoning</a>, which means that the procedures he endorses as “scientific” are not those that properly qualify. But something is terribly wrong when a faked photo appears in the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies.</a></div>
<p> </p>
<h2>IN NEW YORK</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>(6) The Impossible speed</h3>
<p> </p>
<p> <br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nX0e_AplhWw" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Indeed, as John Lear, perhaps our nation’s most distinguished pilot, has observed, the plane in these videos does not even have strobe lights, which are required of every commercial carrier. But how can a Boeing 767 possibly travel at an impossible speed (as Pilots for 9/11 Truth has <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/wtc_speed" target="_blank">confirmed</a>), where the estimates of its speed run as high as 560 mph or more, which is aerodynamically impossible at the altitude of 700-1,000′ at which this flight trajectory was taking place?</p>
<p><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K-WjsHa_2k" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p> </p>
<h3>(7) The Impossible entry</h3>
<p></p>
<p>The footage of the South Tower hit exemplifies several anomalies, including a Boeing 767 flying at an impossible speed, an impossible entry into the building (in violation of Newton’s laws), and even passing through its own length into the building in the same number of frames it passes through its own length in air—which is impossible, unless this 500,000 ton, steel and concrete building posed no more resistance to its trajectory in flight than air.</p>
<p><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YMpU6Y5eJ8" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Some have claimed that this was a “special plane” that could fly faster than a standard Boeing 767, but no real plane could violate Newton’s laws. The structure of the building, moreover, meant that it actually intersected with eight different floors. Each of those floors consisted of steel trusses connected at one end to the core columns and at the other to the steel support columns.</p>
<p><a href="http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/id6dzk/" rel="attachment wp-att-7407"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" title="id6dzk" alt="" src="http://nsnbc.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/id6dzk.jpg?w=479&h=340" width="479" height="340"/></a></p>
<p>They were filled with 4-8” of concrete (deeper in the v-shaped grooves) and posed enormous horizontal resistance. (Imagine what would happen to a plane encountering one of them suspended in space!) The windows were 18” wide and the support columns one meter apart, while there were no windows between floors, which means far less than 50% if the plane should have entered via them. But <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/13/911-illusions-special-effects-and-other-magic-tricks-2/">as Jack White has shown here, that is not what the videos display:</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Jetliner-melts-through-steel-wall1.jpg"><img src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Jetliner-melts-through-steel-wall1.jpg" alt="Jetliner melts through steel wall" width="412" height="575" class="lazy alignleft size-full wp-image-317774 data-lazy-ready"/></a></p>
<div id="attachment_317773" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/external-support-columns-going-up.jpg"><img src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/external-support-columns-going-up.jpg" alt="We know what happens to a plane encountering a small bird weighing a few ounces in flight. What if it were to impact with one of these support panels suspended in space?" width="200" height="504" class="lazy size-full wp-image-317773 data-lazy-ready"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">We know what happens to a plane encountering a small bird weighing a few ounces in flight. What if it were to impact with one of these support panels suspended in space?</p>
</div>
<p><span>No real plane–commercial, military or otherwise–could enter a steel and concrete building in violation of Newton’s laws, pass through its own length into the building in the same number of frames that it passes through its own length in air, and not have its fuel explode as it makes contact with that massive edifice. Even the frames from the Pentagon show a huge fireball upon impact. If that was true of the 757 there, why is it not also true of the 767 here? And no real plane could have passed through and its nose come out the other side. It looks as though the fabrication of Flight 77 fakery was just a bit better than the fabrication of Flight 175 fakery. But both involved massive fraud and deception.</span></p>
<h3>(8) The planted engine</h3>
<p></p>
<p>Notice that the plane completely enters the building before its jet fuel explodes, when one would have thought that, insofar as most of its fuel is stored in its wings, they should have exploded on entry—which is comparable to the failure of the 757 at the Pentagon to have its fuel explode when its wings hit those lampposts. And while some have sought to support the claim that this was a real 767 based upon the engine found at Church & Murray Streets, those who were fabricating evidence in this case did not get it right: <a href="http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/1829738/1/">what we have is a JTD9 engine with a cooling duct assembly from a Boeing aircraft manufactured in the 1970s, not the plane allegedly used for Flight 175:</a></p>
<div class="separator"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--Xglkn6WutQ/U_UJFUIbKKI/AAAAAAAAChE/YEjvlVe2faA/s1600/Pickup%2Bor%2Bdelivery%3F.jpg"><img class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--Xglkn6WutQ/U_UJFUIbKKI/AAAAAAAAChE/YEjvlVe2faA/s640/Pickup%2Bor%2Bdelivery%3F.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p> </p>
<div><a href="http://ckpi.typepad.com/christopher_king/2009/12/lets-cover-that-murray-street-engine-one-more-time.html">Since this is the wrong engine component and was off-loaded as a prop, how can anyone be so gullible as to believe that it supports the official account</a>, especially when its under a steel scaffolding and sitting on a sidewalk, where if something that massive had hit there at high velocity (having come from the South Tower as alleged), it would have been buried half-way into the concrete, not sitting on top of it? There is even a dolly present, which–although not heavy-duty–may have played a role in moving it from the white van to its location on the sidewalk. This a blatant case of deliberate deception and fakery that completely vitiates the official account.</div>
<p> </p>
<h3>(9) The impossible collapse</h3>
<p></p>
<p>The Twin Towers were masterpieces of architecture and engineering, which received multiple awards at the time. By using an innovative design known as “a tube within a tube”–<a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/">which was innovative with regard to the elevator systems (using a combination of express and local elevators) and by adopting 47 massive core columns at the center connected to 238 external steel support columns by steel trusses</a>–the architect, Minoru Yamaski, created enormous open space unobstructed by walls and support columns. Here you can see the 47 core columns at the center, where <a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html">the external steel support columns–which would be added to what is shown–created the equivalent of “a steel beam 209′ deep”:</a></p>
<p><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/construction_11.jpg" width="630" height="355"/></p>
<p>As Chuck Boldwyn has shown, the thickness of the steel varied from six inches thick in the subbasements to a quarter-inch thick at the top, which meant that the overwhelming mass of the steel was below the level at which “the plane” is alleged to have hit the North Tower. By his calculation, the fourteen floors above the “hit point” represented 1.4% of the mass of the steel, where it is preposterous to suppose that its collapse could have overcome the 98.6% of the mass of the steel below it. Indeed, as John Skilling observed, the towers were build with a safety factor of 20, which means that each floor could support 20 times its expected live load (dead load + furniture, facilities and human personnel):</p>
<p><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/AveragerelativeThicknessofSteelanditsDistributioninaTwinTowe.jpg" width="663" height="497"/></p>
<p>The claim that the jet fuel from the plane strikes burned so intensely it caused the steel to weaken cannot withstand critical scrutiny. The steel used in the building was certified by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., to 2,000*F for three to four hours without suffering any adverse effects. NIST studied 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500*F and the other three not above 1,200*F. Plus the fires in the South Tower lasted less than an hour, in the North less than an hour-and-a-half. The fires burned neither long enough nor hot enough to affect the steel. It was physically impossible for them to collapse.</p>
<p><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITa3SzTOY3k" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>As Jesse Ventura has observed, propane burns hotter than kerosene (the constituent of “jet fuel”), yet his camping stove, which is made of steel, does not melt when he uses it on a camping trip. Far from collapsing, both buildings are being blown apart in every direction by enormous sources of energy, where they are being converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust and, when destruction is complete, there is no massive pile of debris in their footprint, which is a classic sign of a building’s collapse. Unlike WTC-7, the Twin Towers did not collapse, which means that the official account characterizing them as having “collapsed” is another blatant fabrication and deliberate deception.</p>
<h3>(10) The controlled demolition</h3>
<p>Unlike the Twin Towers, WTC-7 came down in a classic “controlled demolition” at 5:20 PM that day, about seven hours after the destruction of WTC-1 and WTC-2, which I prefer to refer to as “demolitions under control”, since they were clearly not classic controlled demolitions. You can see the penthouse kink, where all the floors fall at the same time and, after about 6.5 seconds, there is a stack of debris (mostly floors) equal to about 12% of the height of the original. By contrast, the floors of the Twin Towers remain stationary, waiting their turn to be “blown to kingdom come” (in the memorable phrase of Morgan Reynolds). Compare the below video with those for the towers above:</p>
<p><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.911scholars.org/ArticleFetzer_14Jun2006.html">Almost everyone knows that Larry Silverstein acknowledge authorizing the building to be “pulled”, which is a term for taking it down by controlled demolition.</a> Far fewer are aware that Barry Jennings (from the New York City Emergency Management Division) was in WTC-7 that morning, where he went to the Command and Control Center, which had its own air and water supply, and found half-eaten sandwiches and still-steaming cups of coffee. A fireman found him and escorted him out of the building, while explosions were going off and a stairway was blown out from under him. At one point, he felt himself stepping over dead bodies, which he could feel but because of the darkness, he could not see:</p>
<p><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbbZE7c3a8Q" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Richard Gage and A&E911 focus on WTC-7, where Barry Jennings was inside the building that day. His story is very compelling and makes the case that this was not a consequence of the destruction of the Twin Towers but an entirely separate event involving the use of explosives. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/">It would have made for compelling television on C-SPAN when Gage made his recent appearance, but the best he could do was talking about nanothermite for the umpteenth time.</a> I am sorry, but Barry Jenning’s story would have made an impact on the public, especially by observing that he died a few days before NIST would release its report on WTC-7, which he was in the position to contradict on the basis of his own personal experience. Consider the options that we have enumerated here and ask, “Why didn’t he talk about them?”</p>
<h3>Concluding reflections</h3>
<p>The principle that fraud vitiates everything devastates the official account of 9/11, which, by virtue of appealing to 19 alleged collaborators (plus a guy in a cave in Afghanistan), itself qualifies as a “conspiracy theory”, which is the most outrageous and easily disproven. Nothing we have been told by the government can be trusted once we realize they are no longer acting in good faith but are instead perpetrating “reality fraud” upon us, the people. The challenge then becomes to do our best to get things right.</p>
<p>We should be tolerant of reasonable differences but not of cover-ups or limited hang-outs. Even the three of us are not of the same mind about the image seen in the Pentagon frame, where Mike believes it more closely resembles an A-3 Skywarrior (<a href="http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/fetzerexpandedx.pdf">as I myself have argued in the past</a>), <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbw-SWxqzKI">which may have been painted to resemble an American Airlines plane</a>, because the high vertical fin looks more like that of an A-3D, whose length at 76′ is about half that of a Boeing 757, where future research should enable us to reduce our differences even further:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Sizing-problem-at-the-Pentagon.jpg"><img src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Sizing-problem-at-the-Pentagon-320x229.jpg" alt="Sizing problem at the Pentagon" width="320" height="229" class="lazy alignleft size-medium wp-image-317901 data-lazy-ready"/></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/A-3D-Skywarrior.jpg"><img src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/A-3D-Skywarrior.jpg" alt="A-3D Skywarrior" width="290" height="229" class="lazy alignright size-full wp-image-317903 data-lazy-ready"/></a><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>If 19 Islamic fundamentalists had hijacked airliners and committed these atrocities, there would have been no reason to plant and fake evidence, which demonstrates guilty demeanor and makes the government complicit before and accessory after the fact. 9/11 was a blatant “False Flag Attack”, which puts the ball in the American public’s court to create a grand jury to <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/">indict members of the Bush/Cheney administration and make them talk</a>, where a good place to start would be the cell-phone faker, former Solicitor General, Ted Olson. Because until the American people reclaim reality by actual investigation/verification, we will continue to be mislead and manipulated by one administration after another, as we have been discovering with Biden and Obama.</p>
<hr/><p></p>
<p><em><strong>Jim Fetzer</strong>, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.</em></p>
<p><em><strong>Dennis Cimino</strong> has extensive engineering and support experience with military electronics, predominantly US Navy Combat Systems, was the Navy’s top EMI troubleshooter before he went to work for Raytheon in the 1980s.</em></p>
<p><em><strong>Mike Sparks</strong>, a former 1st Lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve, has published articles in Air Defense, Armor, Artillery Online, Armed Forces Journal International, and Behind the Lines. He is the author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1257844903">James Bond is Real</a> (2011).</em></p>Reflections on the Pentagon: A 9/11 photographic reviewtag:911scholars.ning.com,2014-09-21:3488444:BlogPost:685942014-09-21T07:36:36.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Saturday, August 16th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" rel="author" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Reflections on the Pentagon: A 9/11 photographic review…</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"></div>
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Saturday, August 16th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer" rel="author">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Reflections on the Pentagon: A 9/11 photographic review</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/#" title="Facebook" class="addthis_button_facebook at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/#" title="Tweet" class="addthis_button_twitter at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"><span class="at_a11y">Share on twitter</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/#" title="Email" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_email at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_email"><span class="at_a11y">Share on email</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/#" title="Pinterest" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_pinterest_share at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_pinterest_share"><span class="at_a11y">Share on pinterest_share</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/#" class="addthis_button_compact at300m"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_compact"><span class="at_a11y">More Sharing Services</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/reflections-on-the-pentagon-a-911-photographic-review/#" title="View more services" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_expanded">86</a></div>
<h2>Reflections on the Pentagon: A 9/11 photographic review</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>by Dennis Cimino (with <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/">Jim Fetzer</a>)</h3>
<p> </p>
<p><em>“Frank Legge paid special attention to a prominent piece of fuselage, which had come from a Boeing 757–not one that had hit the Pentagon on 9/11, but one that had crashed in Cali, Columbia, in 1995″</em>–Jim Fetzer</p>
<div id="attachment_316802" style="width: 245px;" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/USE-THIS-FACE-PIC.jpg"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy size-medium wp-image-316802 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis Cimino" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/USE-THIS-FACE-PIC-320x318.jpg" height="245" width="235"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Dennis Cimino</p>
</div>
<p><strong>As we explained in <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/">“Limited hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies”</a>, the Pentagon serves as a litmus test for those who profess to be dedicated to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths about 9/11.</strong></p>
<p><strong>By that standard, the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a> does not measure up, because articles published there by <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf">Dr. Frank Legge</a>, by <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf">Legge with Warren Stutt</a>, and by <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Wyndham1.pdf">Dr. John D. Wyndham</a> on the Pentagon are intellectually indefensible.</strong></p>
<p><strong>They attempt to demonstrate that a Boeing 757, designed as “Flight 77″, hit the building and caused the death of 125 Pentagon personnel as well as its passengers and crew. But no passengers or crew died in a plane that did not crash.</strong></p>
<p>What did and did not happen at the Pentagon has become a source of immense controversy within the 9/11 research community, which I have found difficult to appreciate, since books by Thierry Meysson about the Pentagon, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/9-11-The-Big-Lie/dp/1592090265">9/11: The Big Lie</a> (2003) and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pentagate-Thierry-Meyssan/dp/1592090281">Pentagate</a> (2003)–were the first serious studies of 9/11 I read and convincing that no plane had hit the building. <a href="http://rense.com/general86/911s.htm">“What didn’t happen at the Pentagon”</a>, for example, was published by <em>rense.com</em> in 2009 and then <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-didnt-happen-at-pentagon.html">republished in my own blog</a> in 2010. And when Gordon Duff invited me to write for <em>Veterans Today</em>, my first article, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/05/inside-job-seven-questions-about-911/">“Seven Questions about 9/11″</a>, published in 2011, also focused on the Pentagon.</p>
<p>Among the points I made is that the official trajectory–of a Boeing 757 traveling over 500 mph and flying low enough to take out a series of lampposts–is neither aerodynamically nor physically possible. Such an aircraft at that speed could not have come closer than 60′ or even 80′ of the lawn because of (what is known as) downwash. And had a plane encountered a series of lampposts, the effects on a plane traveling over 500 mph hitting stationary lampposts would be the same as if the plane had been stationary and hit by lampposts traveling over 500 mph: its wings would have broken open, its fuel would have exploded and it would have careened on fire across the lawn. They missed two of my crucial questions:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Question-4.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Question 4" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Question-4.jpg" height="533" width="661"/></a></p>
<p>When he published, <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf">“What Hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth”</a>, Frank Legge paid special attention to a prominent piece of fuselage, which had come from a Boeing 757. Although he did not appear to know it at the time, this was authentic debris from a Boeing 757–not one that had hit the Pentagon on 9/11, but one that–as <a href="http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/04/jim-hansons-de-vine-revelation.html">James Hanson had already found by 2007</a>–had crashed in Cali (or Buga), Columbia, in 1995, where the keys to its origin include its lack of effects from intense heat or from a violent crash–and a piece of vine.</p>
<p><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xtkUgg38vwM/U-5Ht0hus1I/AAAAAAAACeY/NK4hnMo2VcE/s1600/No%2Bone%2Bhas%2Bproved%2Bthat%2Bit"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" style="border: 0px none; display: block;" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xtkUgg38vwM/U-5Ht0hus1I/AAAAAAAACeY/NK4hnMo2VcE/s640/No%2Bone%2Bhas%2Bproved%2Bthat%2Bit%27s%2Bnot.jpg" height="549" width="640" border="0"/></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09/03/the-bbcs-instrument-of-911-misinformation/">As I had explained to the BBC when it came to my home near Madison, WI, and interviewed me for eight (8) hours for its first “Conspiracy Files” documentary about 9/11</a>, the most stunning and revealing aspect of alleged crash at the Pentagon was the virtually complete absence of any debris from a Boeing 757, including no wings, no tail, no bodies, no seats and no luggage. They just weren’t there. And even the engines, which are virtually indestructible, were not recovered from the site. But the distinctive piece of debris has to have been dropped on the lawn by a C-130, which was circling the Pentagon: <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Question-5.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316721 data-lazy-ready" alt="Question 5" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Question-5.jpg" height="472" width="673"/></a>The probability that a Boeing 757 could have hit the Pentagon and not left debris from its wings and tail or even its engines–not to mention bodies, seats, and luggage–is zero. The probability that the alleged trajectory could have been flown in violation of the laws of aerodynamics is less than zero–since violations of these laws is not even physically possible. The probability that such a crash, had it been possible, could have left a smooth, green, unblemished lawn is zero. The probability that debris would have been planted, had this event been authentic, would likewise have been extremely low. That all of these things should have occurred, if the alleged crash had been contrived, however, is precisely the opposite. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine any reasonable alternative, as the photographic record confirms.</p>
<h2>On the Pentagon: Whom are we supposed to believe?</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>by Dennis Cimino</h3>
<p>Jim Fetzer asked me to participate in our earlier article, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/">“Limited Hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies”</a>, from an analytic angle, where I enthusiastically joined in the effort to address the pathetic and sad attempts by the faux truthers–namely, Richard Gage, Kevin Ryan, Mr. Legge, Mr. Stutts, and Mr. Wyndham–to promote indefensible assertions made in the position papers we have addressed. Here I want to elaborate on the photographic proof that no Boeing 757-200 hit the Pentagon.</p>
<p>From the initial sentences of these articles, which are effectively being offered as incontrovertible proof that a B-757-200 struck the Pentagon on 9/11/2001–during what can only be assessed as a very elaborate hoax and ruse played out against the world that day–it is clear they are making the contrary assertion that a very complex aircraft was hijacked and flown with a great deal of precision into an impossible building entry that left no wreckage of the empennage or fuselage, nor wing, tail, or rudder fin (aka vertical stabilizer), when it hit the Pentagon that morning. We are to believe around 80% of the “official story” to simplify our understanding.</p>
<p>I wish to call everyone’s attention to these three photographs of the “Pentalawn”, as we call it in many places. The first was snapped less than 10 minutes after an explosion made the hole on the façade of the building. Note that there is virtually no wreckage in front of the entry hole. You won’t see this photograph in any of the Legge-Stutts-Ryan-Gage-Wyndham fraud, because this photograph by itself tells the “hole story”, as I laughingly refer to it as. Notice, too, the difference between the guard rail in the first (which is rusted) and in the second (which is not), which shows that at least some of the photos from the Pentagon were photoshopped:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6MSBF1ns6JY/U-5G2zHgzOI/AAAAAAAACeI/Gbot7LfeMHs/s1600/Dennis%2By.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6MSBF1ns6JY/U-5G2zHgzOI/AAAAAAAACeI/Gbot7LfeMHs/s640/Dennis%2By.jpeg" border="0"/></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qE_j7_N9ZmM/U-5HCmQiYkI/AAAAAAAACeQ/ipdMvT_Tgs8/s1600/Dennis%2Bz.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qE_j7_N9ZmM/U-5HCmQiYkI/AAAAAAAACeQ/ipdMvT_Tgs8/s640/Dennis%2Bz.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u3aVz6esCXM/U-5GlYw6DSI/AAAAAAAACeA/2rrEYhRwi74/s1600/Dennus%2Bx.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u3aVz6esCXM/U-5GlYw6DSI/AAAAAAAACeA/2rrEYhRwi74/s640/Dennus%2Bx.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p> </p>
<h3>More photos that simplify matters</h3>
<p>And the fact of the matter is that there are many more photos taken early on that demonstrate the absence of the kinds and quantity of debris that would have been present had a Boeing 757-200 actually crashed there. As Jim Fetzer has observed, <em>it is possible to prove a negative, as we do when we visit our living room and find no signs of the presence of an elephant, when those signs should be present if an elephant were there</em>. We thereby prove that no elephant is in our living room, just as the absence of signs that a plane crashed at the Pentagon prove that no plane crashed at the Pentagon.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-5.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316511 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #5" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-5.jpg" height="734" width="599"/></a><br/> <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-2.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316509 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #2" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-2.jpg" height="393" width="595"/></a> <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-1.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316508 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #1" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-1.jpg" height="393" width="600"/></a></p>
<p>And here is one from the Pentagon helipad, showing that no Boeing 757-200 crashed at that location, either:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-3.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316510 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #3" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-3.jpg" height="397" width="598"/></a></p>
<p>As you can see, inside the entry hole some structural members of the building are visible. But do you still think an airliner slid in this hole and disappeared? This is the entry hole. Yes. That is where 80-100 tons of airliner and wings went, according to what they would have us believe. Had an airliner truly struck the building in this location, not only would there be problems with fuselage entry through this hole, but clearly there are no slots present where wings entered the building either. Indeed, not only are those wing slots not there, we also do not have two engine penetration holes 48 feet apart where they, too, would have had to enter to not be seen in the above photograph.</p>
<h3>The most powerful proof</h3>
<p>Now this photograph is the most powerful indicator to the world that the wreckage that these men advance as “proof positive” could not have been the immediate result of an aircraft impacting the building, because not a single part of the plane is visible on the lawn. So one should ask, “How did any of the purported wreckage arrive there–and why so late?” Here it is post-collapse <em>and there is still no real wreckage yet either</em>. Given this late photo shows virtually no wreckage from an aircraft of the kind and quantity expected–period. End of story.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-6.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316512 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #6" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-6.jpg" height="319" width="598"/></a></p>
<p>Here is one more post-collapse shot, which is also consistent with the absence of the expected field of debris:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-7.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316513 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #7" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-7.jpg" height="391" width="598"/></a></p>
<p>A jet engine will miraculously appear in the vicinity of this generator; it is not there now but was planted later:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-8.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316514 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #8" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-8.jpg" height="455" width="599"/></a></p>
<h3>Legge’s “Proof of Impact”</h3>
<p>In Mr. Legge’s astonishingly unsubstantiated “white paper”–a good term for articles published in the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>–he makes the claim that his photo of the main floor offers proof of airliner impact at this location:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqoSVLVNqKQ/U-5Ig9tqieI/AAAAAAAACeg/O7aBqaZBp4Y/s1600/Legge-But%2Bwhere%2Bis%2Bthe%2BBoeing%3F.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqoSVLVNqKQ/U-5Ig9tqieI/AAAAAAAACeg/O7aBqaZBp4Y/s640/Legge-But%2Bwhere%2Bis%2Bthe%2BBoeing%3F.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>As you can see, there are no aircraft components in this area. Per Mr. Legge’s statement, this photograph is indisputable evidence of an airliner impact in this location. Really? How did he deduce this? As many people might remember, a reporter named Jamie McIntyre had that morning observed that he saw no proof of an airliner having crashed there. Now we can all maybe in retro have asked McIntyre to go get his eyes checked, but then you would also have to send an F-15 pilot who also overflew the Pentalawn a few minutes later and likewise assessed that he, too, saw no evidence of an airliner impact there.</p>
<h3>The Buga, Columbia crash</h3>
<p>Unbeknownst to many people globally, a very little known American Airlines accident in Buga, Colombia in the end of 1995, provided the small amount of 757 wreckage that would be photographed on the Pentalawn, which was dropped later that morning from the lowered cargo ramp of a C-130H transport aircraft under call sign, GOFER SIX, flown by Cdr. Steven O’Brien of the Air National Guard.</p>
<p>This is the source of the small amount of plane parts seen on the Pentalawn after the explosion took place. GOFER SIX was the only aircraft allowed to be in the air in the immediate aftermath of this incident and had just enough cargo capacity to air drop these small fragments seen on the Pentalawn after the above photograph with NO WRECKAGE visible was taken by a U.S. Army enlisted woman. That photograph alone proves beyond reasonable doubt that there was no aircraft impact on that building that morning. There was no wreckage 9 minutes later. Notice the arrival of wreckage is evident here, when it was not there in the earlier shots:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-9.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #9" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-9.jpg" height="397" width="596"/></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">The wreckage placement team has decided that the time is right for them to perform their assigned tasks:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-10.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #10" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-10.jpg" height="320" width="468"/></a></p>
<p>Notice that rivet holes have already popped from corrosion on this allegedly fresh piece of 757 wreckage:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-11.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #11" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-11.jpg" height="462" width="597"/></a></p>
<p> </p>
<h3>The series of lamp posts</h3>
<p>The official story claims that this aircraft, N644AA, a B-757-200, flown by “Chic” Burlingame, had 5,300 gallons of JET-A on board when it pushed back from the concourse that morning and, notwithstanding a very modest amount consumed enroute, the lion’s share of the remainder of the onboard fuel should have been all over the lawn after the plane struck six lamp poles on it’s way to the building. Had this actually been the case, the fuel in the wings would have provided some spectacular pyrotechnics on the way to the building, because the wings would have been ruptured all the way to the fuel tanks and the voltage potential between the poles and the plane would have ignited massive fireballs for us to see–not to mention the shredding of wing components as the leading edge slats would have been torn from the wings on the way to the building post-impact with those poles. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-12.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316529 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #12" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-12.jpg" height="443" width="589"/></a><br/> If you believe the plane struck the poles on the way to the building, then you cannot with a straight face assert there would be no damage to the aircraft as it struck those poles at that speed. Certainly that no fuel explosions or wing components separated as clearly they did not, apparently. Virtually all of the fuel in this aircraft was in the wings. Yet no fuel was present at the Pentagon lawn, no wing wreckage was found and no signs of the B-757’s massive wings or tail anywhere near the entry hole, which was too small for them to have politely neatly folded in, had the plane turned into a barn swallow and tucked the wings before impact. It’s not possible these massive wings vaporized. They would be there–mostly intact–and outside, due to the lack of wing entry slots in the façade of the Pentagon. So where did they go?</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ySCDkt93qrQ/U-61ltzTrDI/AAAAAAAACfk/7QqjhuOjNGI/s1600/official77trajectory-228x320.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img class="lazy alignleft data-lazy-ready" style="border: 0px none; display: block;" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ySCDkt93qrQ/U-61ltzTrDI/AAAAAAAACfk/7QqjhuOjNGI/s640/official77trajectory-228x320.jpg" height="320" width="228" border="0"/></a>And, even more importantly, where are the engine entry points? Where? The west portion allegedly hit by this plane had just been reinforced with Kevlar jacketing, making it even more likely to repel the penetration of the wings, which remain invisible in every photograph either inside or out. A key point of the official theory that these wings are not visible outside because they are inside. In Legge’s photo, however, you cannot see a single aircraft component: no wings, no main spar, no spar box, no fuselage components, no seats, no overhead bins, not even a seat cushion. And, remarkably, not one torso or body part. It’s physically impossible that such a plane could effortlessly penetrate the building without being destroyed by the heavy reinforcement of that façade, no matter how fast they assert it was flying, which was in this case beyond its aerodynamic capability.</div>
<p> </p>
<h3>What does this mean?</h3>
<p>I have carefully read the assessments of another researcher about this absurd position that these gentlemen advance, where Mr. Ryan’s recommends that we ACCEPT AS TRUE as much as we can of the official story. Our puzzlement about the dearth of wreckage, body parts and other things unpleasant, are somehow buried in the rubble. <em>So we are supposed believe an American Airlines jet flew at an impossible 465 knots speed into this building, hitting six poles en route, yet the wings didn’t rupture or fireball–and the plane did not have enough structural integrity post-crash to remain visible outside the building?</em></p>
<p>When Pentagon employee, April Gallop, crawled with her son from the building through the entry hole, she saw no evidence at all to support the assertion that any aircraft had struck the building that morning. Not one body part, not one plane component, not one strand of aircraft wiring, not one seat cushion, nothing from a plane visible to her, and amazingly, no pools of jet fuel which would not have been burnt if they assert the plane made it into the building. Are we to believe April Gallop or those who are lying to our very eyes?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-13.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316518 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dennis #13" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dennis-13.jpg" height="396" width="597"/></a></p>
<p>The repetitious <em>‘believe, believe, believe’</em> and <em>‘accept, accept, accept’</em> suggestion by Kevin Ryan and indeed his henchmen who would wish us to so believe, is that much of an 80 ton aircraft could crash at the Pentagon and leave such a dearth of wreckage. Mr. Legge asserts that those of us who beg to differ are doing a ‘disservice’ to the truth community that he would like us to believe he is a valid part of, when neither he, nor Ryan, nor Stutts nor Wyndham has any experience or valid credentials in aviation or aircraft certifications, or aircraft operations; yet they pose as the arbiters of 9/11 Truth? How could anyone, after reviewing these photographs, continue to place faith in any of them–or in the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>, for that matter?</p>
<p>The proponents of the official story have told us that to not believe them, and to reject the nonsensical ‘official story’ is doing a massive disservice to the truth that they apparently are the sole arbiters of. Sound familiar? Which is it? Do we live now in a world where persons without ANY recognized credentials in these areas of AVIATION and FLIGHT and AIRCRAFT BUILDING AND CERTIFICATIONS now can suddenly be the very experts that tell us that the OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT STORY is TRUTH and that it’s perfectly fine that nearly 80 tons of airplane wreckage simply turned into vapor at the Pentagon? Apparently so. But it’s nonsense.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>I have examined the documents Mr. Fetzer has cited in this article, written by these men, and have deduced that in spite of their very grandiose and outrageous claims in them, they have totally failed to prove that not 80 percent, not 60 percent, not 10 percent of the official story about the entire day holds any water, let alone that we should now trust them, without any requisite backgrounds or credentials, to assess for us that we should now believe the official government story that indeed a plane was involved in striking the Pentagon that morning. From my viewpoint, these men lack the requisite experience, background, credentials and knowledge to asses a dog fight let alone adjudicate this matter in a fashion that would lead anyone to see it for the pathetic psychobabble attempt by them to market a pile of lies that defies the evidence.</p>
<h3>A missile or a Global Hawk?</h3>
<p>Some have postulated that enough evidence of some form of air vehicle striking the Pentagon exists–and that appears to be the case. We have shards of very fine pieces of fiberglass, all over the area near the helipad and the helo control tower. A truck parked there has been fire damaged, but none of the glass is broken in that truck, which means whatever hit there didn’t hit with enough force to create shockwaves that would shatter the glass in the truck. So what created these shards of fiberglass? Could it have been one of these? The Air Force, incidentally, in the months after 9/11, reported that it had “lost” two of these in Afghanistan, which were never recovered.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e-TEK12jJ6w/U-5Xyj3b-fI/AAAAAAAACew/uVtuFNg5ono/s1600/RQ4A%2B%22Global%2BHawk%22-two%2Bmissing%2Bon%2B9%3A11.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e-TEK12jJ6w/U-5Xyj3b-fI/AAAAAAAACew/uVtuFNg5ono/s640/RQ4A%2B%22Global%2BHawk%22-two%2Bmissing%2Bon%2B9%3A11.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p> </p>
<p>John Danner, an EMT and commercially rated pilot, who was in the vicinity that morning, reported he observed a Global Hawk approach the building that morning. If this is true–which I believe it may be–then why was it there? What function did it serve? If there was a B-757-200 involved that day, any one of the Pentagon’s camera tapes would have shown that clearly to us en route to the Pentagon. So why withhold that from us? For what good reason? The only logical explanation is that the myriad of recordings clearly do not show a B-757-200 flying and striking the Pentagon as we have been maliciously and fraudulently told.</p>
<p>Clearly the government has not come clean here, in that IT holds the indisputable proof of what did and what did not fly over or fly into the Pentagon. We have the eyewitness testimony from N.E.I.T. 428’s Mr. Russell Roy interview by the Army, as you can easily verify for yourself, reporting that he saw a plane overfly so low that he could see the pilot’s face that morning as he pitched his plane up and banked away and flew away to the northwest towards Washington, D.C.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3kOuQEqUqJ8/U-5YG_6kh2I/AAAAAAAACe4/ut6IBTeaDHc/s1600/Russell%2BRoy%2C%2Balias%2B%22NEI%2B428%22.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3kOuQEqUqJ8/U-5YG_6kh2I/AAAAAAAACe4/ut6IBTeaDHc/s640/Russell%2BRoy%2C%2Balias%2B%22NEI%2B428%22.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>This man’s testimony is damning ‘prima facie’ evidence of a ‘flyover or flyby’ as is the excellent work of C.I.T.’s analysis and interviews of several very close in eyewitnesses that more or less reinforce the fact that a large aircraft flew a low approach to the building but then swerved over it. And this ‘low approach’ was not in sync with the external explosion at all, which means someone got his timing off a bit. Russell Roy could clarify this, if he is still alive today. But his interview still stands as proof of an aircraft having been close enough to the Pentagon and then departed, meaning we have ascertained that ‘something’ did not strike the building but flew over it.</p>
<p>Some in the truth movement believe that John Farmer, aka as Blue Collar Republican, a known ‘well poisoner’ in the 9/11 research realm, by the way, misused the Russell Roy interview transcripts to obfuscate and or muddy up the water about what really did occur at the Pentagon on 9/11. It is my professional opinion that the once fairly reliable source, Mr. Farmer, was co-opted and ‘bought’ by someone with a lot of cash to dangle, but I cannot certify the reason he went from once being a good source of information to being a definitive and certain ‘well poisoner’ for his later work, before he left the 9/11 Truth community in a huff.</p>
<h3>What about the E4B?</h3>
<p>One question remains in that it was well photographed that day over Arlington, high above the ground, an ‘E4B’ ‘TROUT’ doomsday aircraft was seen in a ‘hold’ pattern up high and yet this aircraft does not appear in the heavily doctored RADES 84 data for good reason. Is this the plane people seem to be pinning on Russell Roy’s observations that morning? Somehow as relevant as the E4B sighting is to the whole thing, it was up so high above Arlington that connecting it directly to a Pentagon overflight is a bit of a stretch, if not an absolute attempt to obfuscate the tight close in recollections of Mr. Roy that morning.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FO_YlBAyG40/U_Ay3HJbrHI/AAAAAAAACf0/Q4dzokZ24EM/s1600/E4B%2B%22Doomsday%22%2Bairplane.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FO_YlBAyG40/U_Ay3HJbrHI/AAAAAAAACf0/Q4dzokZ24EM/s640/E4B%2B%22Doomsday%22%2Bairplane.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>He was an Arlington Cemetery worker, in a very good position to see everything but the Pentagon itself from his viewpoint. At the very least we have enough damning information that firmly places O’Brien’s C-130H in tight and close to the Pentagon for wreckage seeding operations as I assert, contrary to his own disinformational claims that he was never anywhere within 4 n.m. of the Pentagon. And today, nobody has really addressed the <i>clearly ‘supervisory’ role of the E4B aircraft</i> in the operation in Arlington to attack the Pentagon using a missile. A solid fuel rocket motor propelled, D.U. penetrator equipped, land attack missile.</p>
<p>My assertion that an AGM-65J ‘maverick’ missile (below) was used to punch the ‘entry’ hole seems to fit well in what NEIT-428’s testimony states happened that morning, namely, that a large explosion occurred and then the flyover took place a few seconds later. Additionally, we also know that decontamination procedures for D.U. or ‘depleted uranium’ were being followed as It had been detected immediately after the explosion, so crews were washing people down to get D.U. off of them.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-a8xUsNwkuKw/U-5ai6DIiUI/AAAAAAAACfU/6-MeOwhpKjM/s1600/Could%2Bit%2Bhave%2Bbeen%2Ba%2BMaverick%3F.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-a8xUsNwkuKw/U-5ai6DIiUI/AAAAAAAACfU/6-MeOwhpKjM/s640/Could%2Bit%2Bhave%2Bbeen%2Ba%2BMaverick%3F.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>As I have stated, this indicates a penetrator warhead was used and, although I cannot pin the tail on AGM-65J with certainty, it’s inclusion in the Navy weapon’s inventory that year makes it the perfect candidate. In the below photograph, you can clearly see the use of ‘masking’ of the D.U. signature by the military having procured a huge amount of granite aggregate and other cover being laid down in the blowback area. Had an airliner been the whole gig, why would the government need to lay down rock to mask and suppress the radiation from fragments in the soil?</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ChVpVhGRxLw/U-5ZO2Ehw2I/AAAAAAAACfI/OG4MZlX169Y/s1600/Pouring%2Bgranite%2Bto%2Bcover%2BDU.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ChVpVhGRxLw/U-5ZO2Ehw2I/AAAAAAAACfI/OG4MZlX169Y/s640/Pouring%2Bgranite%2Bto%2Bcover%2BDU.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>I don’t think they were landscaping. In other words, nobody can justify this masking of the underlying fragments of D.U. by the use of enormous quantities of radioactive granite fragments and other aggregate. So this, too, appears to be an attempt by the government to cover up the use of a D.U. penetrator warhead missile of some sort.</p>
<h3>Kevin Ryan, Richard Gage and CIT</h3>
<p>One of the leading sources of good solid detective work regarding the Pentagon attack is Craige Ranke’s Citizen Investigation Team (or C.I.T.), where their work on its own destroys the official story that a B-757-200 flown by inexperienced and incapable hijackers were somehow able to skillfully fly this machine to a pre-designated spot in the ‘Catcher’s Mitt’, which they hit with a great deal of precision and without being challenged or shot down by interception that day.</p>
<p>If one wishes to take the bait and believe Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage and the Legge-Stutts-and-Wyndham disinformation team and, just for simplicity sake, believe the government because that is less confusing, then one also has to ask these same disinformation peddlers ‘how’ we are to dispose of all of the damning evidence that suggests that they are in fact shills pushing the official government story, when so much contradictory proof destroys their assertions altogether? Simpler theories, as Jim Fetzer has reminded us many times, are only preferable when they can account for the same body of evidence.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LowalA57AzY" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Which is it going to be? Do as Kevin Ryan suggests and believe the official story because it is the easiest path? or follow the more logical and complex one, which implies that, no matter how hard they try, they simply cannot place a B-757-200 crash at the Pentagon, due to the total utter lack of wreckage in the immediate aftermath? The evidence we have reviewed here supports the possibility of a missile strike guided by remote control from the circling E4B ‘TROUT’ airplane above the area that morning. But it does not support Flight 77 having crashed there. None of their work even touches O’Brien or the E4B’s presence. Why? They weren’t there merely by coincidence that morning, folks.</p>
<p>We know the Pentagon had more than 80 video tapes of what happened that morning. “Show us the 80+ tapes”, Mr. President! Let us see what really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11.” The government will never ever come clean about this ruse, because to do so would de- legitimizes it fully and make it painfully clear that we are prisoners in a nation run by criminals and knaves, not a nation ruled by law. This event that took place going on almost 13 years now is the one that is the deal breaker. America <em>was</em> hijacked but those hijackings did not happen to any airliners that day. They happened in the very buildings we trust these frauds to govern from in the Beltway. <em>That</em> is where the hijackings really took place.</p>
<hr/><p> </p>
<div><p><b><i>Dennis Cimino </i></b><i>has extensive engineering and support experience with military electronics, predominantly US Navy Combat Systems, was the Navy’s top EMI troubleshooter before he went to work for Raytheon in the 1980s.</i></p>
</div>Limited Hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studiestag:911scholars.ning.com,2014-09-21:3488444:BlogPost:674282014-09-21T07:33:27.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Thursday, August 14th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" rel="author" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Limited hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E 911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies…</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"></div>
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Thursday, August 14th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer" rel="author">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Limited hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E 911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/#" title="Facebook" class="addthis_button_facebook at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/#" title="Tweet" class="addthis_button_twitter at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"><span class="at_a11y">Share on twitter</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/#" title="Email" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_email at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_email"><span class="at_a11y">Share on email</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/#" title="Pinterest" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_pinterest_share at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_pinterest_share"><span class="at_a11y">Share on pinterest_share</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/#" class="addthis_button_compact at300m"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_compact"><span class="at_a11y">More Sharing Services</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/#" title="View more services" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_expanded">29</a></div>
<h2>Limited hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/">Jim Fetzer</a> (with Dennis Cimino)</h3>
<p><em>“Ryan’s book … confirm(s) my impression that Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage are the core of a limited hang-out designed to contain the breadth and depth of 9/11 research”</em>–Jim Fetzer</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Another-Nineteen.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy alignright size-full wp-image-316310 data-lazy-ready" alt="Another Nineteen" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Another-Nineteen.jpg" height="251" width="173"/></a><strong>In <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/">my critique of Richard Gage on C-SPAN</a>, I faulted him especially for offering an answer to the question of HOW that was provably false–<em>the myth of explosive nanothermite</em>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>I also faulted A&E911 for its failure to address the WHO and the WHY, which are ingredients that are essential to constructing a narrative about 9/11 for the American public.</strong></p>
<p><strong>There are going to be those who respond that I have overlooked Kevin Ryan’s recent book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Another-Nineteen-Investigating-Legitimate-Suspects/dp/1489507833">Another Ninteen</a> (2013) and, on that basis, claim that it proves I am wrong.</strong></p>
<p><strong>But the meaning and implications of Ryan’s book, including its own subtitle, <em>“Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects”</em>, instead confirm my impression that Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage are the core of a limited hang-out designed to contain the breadth and depth of 9/11 research.</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Another-Nineteen-Investigating-Legitimate-Suspects/dp/1489507833">As the author’s bio explains</a>, <em>Kevin Ryan is co-editor of the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a> and a whistleblower from Underwriters Laboratories. He has contributed to many books and scientific articles on the subject of 9/11, and has made presentations around the U.S. and Canada. He has appeared on National Public Radio, Air America Radio, Pacifica Radio, C-SPAN Book TV, Free Speech TV, and Colorado Public Television.</em> His views are taken seriously by a large percent of the 9/11 Truth community. The question is whether they ought to be.</p>
<h3>The original nineteen</h3>
<p>Wikipedia summarizes the official account, where “the <b>hijackers in the September 11 attacks</b> were 19 men affiliated with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda">al-Qaeda</a>, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia">Saudi Arabia</a>. The others were from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates">United Arab Emirates</a> (2), <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt">Egypt</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon">Lebanon</a>. The hijackers were organized into four teams, each led by a pilot-trained hijacker with four ‘muscle hijackers’ who were trained to help subdue the pilots, passengers, and crew”. Their images have been widely published in many places, even though their identities have never been confirmed:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_YNB2XMcbqY/U-tqkH4uDBI/AAAAAAAACdw/td4dcGCgYJc/s1600/The%2B9%3A11%2B%22hijackers%22.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_YNB2XMcbqY/U-tqkH4uDBI/AAAAAAAACdw/td4dcGCgYJc/s640/The%2B9%3A11%2B%22hijackers%22.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>Their names were released by the FBI on 27 September 2001, by the FBI Director, Robert Mueller, allegedly based upon the passenger manifests. But that claim is indefensible on multiple grounds, including that, as David Ray Griffin has observed in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Commission-Report-Omissions-Distortions/dp/1566565847">The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions</a> (2005), page 23, no Arab name appears on the manifests published by CNN and the airlines have refused to release the originals. Efforts to explain this away are transparently contrived, suggesting, for example, that <a href="http://www.911myths.com/index.php/No_hijackers_on_the_passenger_manifests">they were “victims lists” rather than “passenger lists”</a>, when the airlines would only have known who was aboard their planes, not their roles.</p>
<p>The names almost certainly originated with the Mossad since, <a href="http://www.opinion-maker.org/2011/01/british-intelligence-reports/">as Wayne Madsen has reported</a>, the Mossad was running the “hijackers” to make sure their whereabouts were known and to lay a trail of evidence implicating them in the crimes of 9/11. Moreover, since a half-dozen or more of the alleged “hijackers” turned up alive and well–but scared out of their minds–the following day, as Griffin also observes (pages 19-23), claims about any “suicide hijackers” are dubious <em>unless they could survive their own death and then appear the following day! </em></p>
<h3> The “other” nineteen</h3>
<p>Since the “original” nineteen are clearly fabrications (where <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/">the evidence suggests that none of those aircraft actually crashed on 9/11</a>), it would be a good thing if Kevin Ryan were to point us in the direction of the real perps who brought us 9/11. It could not have been Osama bin Laden, no matter how many times it may benefit an administration to <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/26/zero-dark-thirty-the-deeper-darker-truths/">revive a man who died on 15 December 2001 for the sake of promoting a political agenda</a>. Thus, David Chandler, who publishes in the Journal of 9/11 Studies, offers this concise summary overview:</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Kevin-Ryans-ANOTHER-NINETEEN.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-316313 data-lazy-ready" alt="Kevin Ryan's ANOTHER NINETEEN" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Kevin-Ryans-ANOTHER-NINETEEN.jpg" height="502" width="554"/></a>While I am not disputing that many of those Ryan names appear to have played key roles on 9/11, especially in the Pentagon (to make sure that there would be no military response by attempting to intercept the four “hijacked” airlines), there is a conspicuous absence of those who arranged for the transfer of the World Trade Center into private hands for the first time since it was opened in 1970–<em>where the events of 9/11 would take place just six weeks later</em>–and of those “managing” the hijackers, which means that he excludes some of the other most important players. But Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld <em>are</em> among the most important few.</p>
<p>A mountain of evidence substantiates that <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/">9/11 was a national security event,</a> which involved collusion between the CIA, the Neo-Cons in the Pentagon and the Mossad. Given the crucial role of the Mossad in looking after the “original nineteen”, <em>Kevin Ryan seems to be oblivious to the role of Israel in 9/11.</em> Many military/intel experts have observed there were only two agencies in the world capable of pulling this off: the CIA and the Mossad, which were collaborating in this instance. <a href="http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/all-the-proof-in-the-world-israel-did-9-11">The indications of complicity by American Zionists and other agents of Israel is simply overwhelming</a>, but you would not know that from Kevin Ryan’s book on “another nineteen”.</p>
<h3>The Kevin Ryan “Paradox”</h3>
<p>Adam Syed has published a fascinating study of (what he refers to as) “the Kevin Ryan paradox”, namely: <a href="http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2013/08/03/the-kevin-ryan-paradox-the-way-to-show-the-911-official-story-is-false-is-by-accepting-as-much-of-it-as-possible/">the stance that the way to show the 9/11 official story is false is by accepting as much of it as possible as true</a>. Right off the bat, it should be apparent that something is wrong. After all, if <a href="http://www.amazon.com/11-Commission-Report-Terrorist-Authorized/dp/0393326713">The 9/11 Commission Report</a> (2004) or NIST has anything right, then it would be indefensible to claim that its true claims are untrue. What he seems to be implying is that, in any case where there is room for doubt, the benefit should go to the government account.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/The-Kevin-Ryan-Paradox.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-316332 data-lazy-ready" alt="The Kevin Ryan Paradox" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/The-Kevin-Ryan-Paradox.jpg" height="686" width="516"/></a></p>
<p>That ignores the difference between <em>accepting a conclusion</em>, <em>rejecting a conclusion</em> and <em>leaving it in suspense</em> (by neither accepting it as true nor rejecting it as false). What could be more obvious? Moreover, it is essential to do your own research in order to be in the position to appraise what you are being told in a document such as <a href="http://www.amazon.com/11-Commission-Report-Terrorist-Authorized/dp/0393326713">The 9/11 Commission Report</a> (2004). For an appropriate parallel, consider <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Warren-Commission-Report-Assassination/dp/0312082576">The Warren Commission Report</a> (1964) of 40 years earlier. Lee Harvey Oswald was <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/03/jfk-judyth-vary-baker-cements-oswald-in-the-doorway/">not only not “the lone assassin” but wasn’t even a shooter!</a></p>
<p>As Syed reports, Ryan says he favors this strategy for the sake of “simplicity” and to avoid “adding unnecessary complications.” The problem is that he often achieves just the opposite – adding complications and muddying the waters. My first tinge of alarm came upon reading the book’s introduction: “For simplicity, this alternative conspiracy should accept as much of the official account as possible, <b>including that the alleged hijackers were on the planes</b>.” This is extremely disturbing and is an excuse to beg serious questions about 9/11.</p>
<h3>Problems with the Planes</h3>
<p>Syed continues, “This is not the book’s only such passage. On the first page of Chapter 10, which deals with the Pentagon portion of 9/11, he says: “Considering means, motive and opportunity might allow us to propose a possible insider conspiracy <b>while maintaining much of the official account as well</b>.” But the evidence is all against the hijackers being real, the planes having been commandeered or even having actually crashed. Consider some of the most important research on these questions, which Ryan attempts to finesse:</p>
<p>(1) Elias Davidsson has demonstrated that the government has never been able to show that any of the alleged hijackers was aboard any of those planes in <a href="http://www.opednews.com/articles/There-is-no-evidence-that-by-Elias-Davidsson-100811-366.html">“There is no evidence that Muslims committed the crime of 9/11″</a>;</p>
<p>(2) A.K. Dewdney has established that then-available cell phones were useless above 2,000′ altitude and speeds over 200 mph: <a href="http://physics911.net/pdf/Achilles.pdf">the towers transmitted horizontally and could not relay the messages rapidly enough</a>;</p>
<p>(3) Dewdney and David Ray Griffin have demonstrated that all of the phone calls allegedly made from the 9/11 aircraft were fabricated or faked, where none of them was authentic: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16924">“Phone Calls from the 9/11 Airliners”</a>;</p>
<p>(4) Col. George Nelson, USAF (ret.), has observed that, of the millions of uniquely identifiable component parts of those four airplanes, the government has yet to produce even one: <a href="http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlesNelson26Apr2006.html">“Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True”</a>;</p>
<p>(5) Leslie Raphael has demonstrated that, for the “French film crew” to have been in the right position to film the first strike, a hundred improbable factors had to have converged: <a href="http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm">“Jules Naudet’s 9/11 Film was Staged”</a>;</p>
<p>(6) Killtown, among other, has shown the virtual absence of any proof that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville,</p>
<p>where Pilots for 9/11 Truth have established <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/united-93-still-airborne.html">it was over Champaign-Urbana, IL, after it had allegedly crashed</a>;</p>
<p>(7) <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/">the videos of Flight 175 entering the South Tower display feats that no real plane could perform</a>, while Pilots have established that <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRMED-911-AIRCRAFT-AIRBORNE-LONG-AFTER-CRASH.html">it was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA, long after it had allegedly hit the tower</a>; and,</p>
<p>(8) <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/">FAA Registration Records show that the planes used for Flight 93 and 175 were not formally taken out of service (or “deregistered”) until 28 September 2005,</a> which would be impossible had they crashed in 2001.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Indeed, since Bureau of Transportation Statistics records show that Flight 11 (North Tower) and Flight 93 (the Pentagon) were not even scheduled that day, how could planes that were not in the air have crashed on 9/11? and how could planes that crashed on 9/11 have still be in the air four years later? <em>Ryan is not only begging the question by taking for granted the answer to crucial questions about 9/11 but has ignored a mountain of proof that his position is wholly and hopelessly untenable because it has already been proven to be false. </em></p>
<h3>The box that didn’t squawk</h3>
<p>Adam Syed has done a masterful job of debunking Kevin Ryan’s position, including, for example, the issue of precisely why, if real hijackers really were aboard those planes, none of the pilots had signaled that their planes were in the process of being commandeered by hijackers, for which there are well-established procedures. Here is his critique of how he attempts to explain the inexplicable by adding complications and muddying the water:</p>
<blockquote><p>Some 9/11 researchers, particularly David Ray Griffin, have provided strong cumulative evidence that there were no hijackers on the alleged planes. One example that shows Griffin to be superior to Ryan as an analyst of evidence involves the issue of “hijack codes,” namely, the code that a pilot would “squawk” back to the FAA in the event of an actual hijacking.</p>
<p>In his <i>New Pearl Harbor Revisited</i>, Griffin addresses this issue. He quotes a passage from the 9/11 Commission Report that says: “FAA… assumed that the aircraft pilot would notify the controller via radio or by “squawking” a transponder code of “7500” – the universal code for a hijack in progress.”</p>
<p>Griffin then goes on to explain how all four planes did not squawk the hijack code. He then alludes to a famous Sherlock Holmes mystery story, “Silver Blaze,” in which a famous racehorse disappeared the night before a big race. Holmes disputed a police investigator’s belief that an outside intruder had stolen the horse: the guard dog never barked during the night. Had an outside intruder stolen the horse, the dog would have barked.</p>
<p>Griffin then concludes: “Just as the intruder theory was disproved by the dog that didn’t bark, the hijacker theory is disproved by the pilots who didn’t squawk.” (NPHR, p. 178) (It is important to remember that while I am isolating this issue of the hijack codes, it is just one of many pieces of evidence presented in Griffin’s research which points to a “no hijacker” scenario.)</p>
<p>So how does Kevin Ryan address this same issue? Looking at the index of <i>Another Nineteen</i>, we find one mention of the hijack codes on page 125. On this page, the issue is mentioned in the context of a list of facts as to why NORAD commander Ralph Eberhart should be a prime suspect for 9/11 culpability:</p>
<p><i>8. For whatever reasons, Eberhart also gave false information about the NORAD response to others. General Richard Meyers, acting CJCS that morning, said that Eberhart told him there were “several hijack codes in the system.” Yet none of the four planes had squawked the hijack code on 9/11 <b>and therefore it is not clear how such codes could have been in the system.</b></i></p>
<p>While Griffin’s analysis makes perfect logical sense (and in so doing, achieves the kind of “simplicity” that Ryan professes to desire), Ryan’s analysis muddies the waters and leaves the readers scratching their heads in confusion.</p>
<p>Ryan’s analysis seems to hinge on the idea that real hijackings were taking place, and that of course the hapless pilots would indeed have squawked the codes <i>if only </i>they were in the system.</p>
<p>While Ryan stated at the book’s outset that we should accept that “the alleged hijackers” were on the planes, passages like the above go further, and promote the idea that these Middle Eastern men were conducting a genuine terrorist hijacking. (Without stating it explicitly, Ryan’s analysis seems to insinuate that the hijack codes might have been disabled or removed from the four flights in question so that the hijackings could be successful; in other words, a “LIHOP” [let it happen on purpose] scenario, whereby US officials took steps to <i>allow</i> a terrorist hijacking to take place.)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As Syed observes, Kevin Ryan’s scenario is not only confusing in attributing far more sophistication to the purported hijackers than anyone would suppose they deserve (in light of their modest experience with piloting aircraft) but implies that they gained access to the planes (including those that were not scheduled that day) and that they successfully hijacked them and caused them to crash, in spite of a mountain of proof to the contrary.</p>
<h3>The Journal of 9/11 Studies</h3>
<p>Kevin Ryan is also co-editor of the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>, as I have previously observed. But the journal has published a series of studies that support the conclusion that the Pentagon was hit by a large aircraft, which of course is supposed to be Flight 77 (even though BTS records initially showed that neither it nor Flight 11 were scheduled to fly that day). Here is <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles.html">a sample of articles from the Journal</a>, including several on the Pentagon:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Sampler-from-Journal-of-911-Studies.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-316331 data-lazy-ready" alt="Sampler from Journal of 9:11 Studies" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Sampler-from-Journal-of-911-Studies.jpg" height="617" width="487"/></a></p>
<p>What are we to make of this? Here we have several on the discovery of those red-and-grey chips that are said to be nanothermite, which cannot possibly explain how the Twin Towers were blown apart in every direction but appear to function as a massive distraction to keep the 9/11 Truth community from asking, “What was used to blow them apart?”, where it won’t do to claim, “They never said that only nanothermite was involved!” <em>If the heaving lifting was done by other sources of massive energy, what were they?</em> For that, they have no answer.</p>
<p>The Pentagon is an excellent test case of the authenticity of the professed commitment of the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>, whose subtitle is “Truth matters”. But when it comes to the Pentagon, there appears to be very little truth in the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>. The “official account” is neither aerodynamically nor physically possible, as I have explained many places, but that has not inhibited the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles.html">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a> from publishing articles that support it. Here I take just one example from the three about the Pentagon included in the sampler above:</p>
<p>(1) In <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf">What Hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth</a> Dr. Frank Legge talks about “the hit point” but he does not include any photographs that display it, for the obvious reason that it makes the theory that a 100-ton airliner with a 125′ wingspan and a tail standing 40′ above the ground hit there look ridiculous. Notice the clear, green and unblemished lawn, which displays neither wings nor tail nor bodies nor seats nor luggage. Not even the engines, virtually indestructible, were recovered from the Pentagon:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Hit-point-but-not-in-Legges-paper.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316426 data-lazy-ready" alt="Hit point (but not in Legge's paper)" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Hit-point-but-not-in-Legges-paper.jpg" height="391" width="599"/></a></p>
<p>(2) In <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf">Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon</a>, Frank Legge and Warren Stutt support the theory that a Boeing 757 struck a series of lamp posts en route to “the hit point” (above). But the effect of a plane flying over 500 mph hitting a stationary lamp post would be the same as the effect of a lamp post flying over 500 mph hitting a stationary plane: it would have ripped the wing open, the fuel would have burst into flame, and the plane would have careened on fire across the lawn:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Legge%10Stutt-believe-in-lightpoles.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-316427 data-lazy-ready" alt="Legge:Stutt believe in lightpoles" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Legge%10Stutt-believe-in-lightpoles.jpg" height="362" width="602"/></a></p>
<p>(3) In <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Wyndham1.pdf" style="line-height: 1.5em;">The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact</a>,<span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> Dr. John D. Wyndham offers his summary of the evidence in this case, which does not take into account that virtually all the witness testimony appears to be fabricated and that no alleged “evidence” can overcome the laws of aerodynamics and of physics, which means that the official account cannot possibly be true, no matter how many articles <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a> might publish to the contrary. No competent “peer review” process could have endorsed them.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Wyndhams-summary-of-the-evidence.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-316428 data-lazy-ready" alt="Wyndham's summary of the evidence" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Wyndhams-summary-of-the-evidence.jpg" height="480" width="629"/></a></p>
<p>The alleged “witnesses” at the Pentagon–more than 80 in number–are fascinating subjects of analysis on their own, where Mike Sparks, who has an extensive background in military and defense matters, and I went through the list and appraised their credibility. The overwhelming majority were either not in the position to have seen what they claim to have seen or offered testimony that was either too vague or too ambiguous to be of forensic value. And how can Wyndham remotely reasonably dismiss <a href="http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/">the very significant findings of CIT</a>? Unbelievable!</p>
<p>It took six hours for Mike and me to cover them all on 4 January, 18 January, and 1 February 2010 as follows:</p>
<p>Pentagon Witnesses, Part 1: </p>
<p>Pentagon Witnesses, Part 2: </p>
<p>Pentagon Witnesses, Part 3: </p>
<h3>On capturing the public’s attention</h3>
<p>Suppose that, instead of talking about a non-explosive incendiary that emits bright light and high temperatures but has virtually no explosive force, Richard Gage had explained <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/28/2-2-israel-nuked-the-wtc-on-911/">that, on 9/11, Israel nuked New York</a>; or that the evidence confirms <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/15/the-911-passenger-paradox-what-happened-to-flight-93/">that no plane crashed in Shanksville</a> <a href="http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42516-9-11-The-Official-Account-of-the-Pentagon-Attack-is-a-Fantasy">or hit the Pentagon</a>; and that, what was shown on television across the nation was <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/">images of planes hitting the North and South Tower, which were performing feats that no real plane could perform?</a> Or <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/">that 9/11 was brought to us by the CIA, Neo-Cons and the Mossad?</a></p>
<p>One of the most surprising discoveries in relation to those three Pentagon studies is that Frank Legge actually includes a photograph of the most interesting piece of debris, which actually came from a Boeing 757. But the crash in this case occurred in Buga, Columbia, which some refer to as Cali. The plane hit the side of a mountain and passed through jungle terrain, during which it was ripped from the fuselage and entangled a piece of vine. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/05/inside-job-seven-questions-about-911/">I have published about this many times,</a> but this journal’s authors apparently only read each other’s articles :</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Legges-devine.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-316430 data-lazy-ready" alt="Legge's devine" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Legges-devine.jpg" height="289" width="489"/></a></p>
<p>What can be said about Richard Gage, A&E911 and the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Studies</a>? Even on C-SPAN, Richard Gage is promoting <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/">a false theory about explosive nanothermite</a>, which has been indefensible at least since 2011 when <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/17/is-911-truth-based-upon-a-false-theory/">T. Mark Hightower and I began publishing about it</a>. A&E911, in its documentary, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN4XDF4kOMQ">“Explosive Evidence”</a>, strikes the same note, where they allow for the use of “other explosives” but have shown no inclination to pursue them, perhaps because <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/29/mini-neutron-bombs-a-major-piece-of-the-911-puzzle/">they appear to have been micro or mini nukes</a>, which might excite the attention of the public.</p>
<p>So they do a poor job with respect to the question, “HOW was it done?” In relation to the questions of WHO and WHY, which Gage and A&E911 tend to eschew altogether, Kevin Ryan has published, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Another-Nineteen-Investigating-Legitimate-Suspects/dp/1489507833">Another Nineteen</a> (2013), which invited attention to some worthy suspects. But he does not explain that <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/">9/11 was brought to us with the compliments of the CIA, the Neo-Cons and the Mossad. It is difficult to a</a>void the inference that all is not well with respect to 9/11 Truth, because its ostensive leaders do not seem to be aggressively pursuing truth.</p>
<p>The Pentagon serves as an appropriate litmus test. Dennis Cimino and I have published a number of articles on <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2012/06/official-account-of-pentagon-attack-is.html">what did and did not happen there</a> (<a href="http://www.rense.com/general86/911s.htm">some as early as 2009</a>), where proof that no Boeing 757 hit the building is abundant and compelling. While I am not surprised when <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09/03/the-bbcs-instrument-of-911-misinformation/">the BBC produces a documentary that supports the “official account” of the Pentagon</a>, it simply astounds me that the <a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/">Journal of 9/11 Truth</a> publishes articles that could have come from the government itself. Truth <em>does</em> matter, but we are not getting truth from any of these sources, who, I regret to say, appear to have an agenda that diverges substantially from advancing 9/11 Truth.</p>
<p><b><i>Dennis Cimino </i></b><i>has extensive engineering and support experience with military electronics, predominantly US Navy Combat Systems, was the Navy’s top EMI troubleshooter before he went to work for Raytheon in the 1980s.</i></p>On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a "tme warp"tag:911scholars.ning.com,2014-09-21:3488444:BlogPost:679152014-09-21T07:30:53.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Monday, August 4th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" rel="author" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a “time warp”…</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"></div>
<div class="metasingle"><span class="postDate">Monday, August 4th, 2014</span> | <span class="postAuthor">Posted by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/" title="Posts by Jim Fetzer" rel="author">Jim Fetzer</a></span></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a “time warp”</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/#" title="Facebook" class="addthis_button_facebook at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/#" title="Tweet" class="addthis_button_twitter at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"><span class="at_a11y">Share on twitter</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/#" title="Email" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_email at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_email"><span class="at_a11y">Share on email</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/#" title="Pinterest" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_pinterest_share at300b"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_pinterest_share"><span class="at_a11y">Share on pinterest_share</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/#" class="addthis_button_compact at300m"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_compact"><span class="at_a11y">More Sharing Services</span></span></a><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/#" title="View more services" target="_blank" class="addthis_button_expanded">90</a></div>
<h2>On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a “time warp”</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/">Jim Fetzer</a></h3>
<p> </p>
<p><em>“9/11 was conceived as an elaborate psychological operation to instill fear into the American people in order to manipulate them into supporting the political agenda of the Bush/Cheney administration”</em>–Jim Fetzer</p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/bubbler.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy alignright wp-image-314869 data-lazy-ready" alt="OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/bubbler-264x320.jpg" height="288" width="238"/></a><strong>Everyone who’s committed to 9/11 Truth should welcome more coverage from C-SPAN. Perhaps the greatest coverage to reach the public in the past was also from C-SPAN, when it covered <a href="http://www.c-span.org/video/?193155-1/september-11th-terrorist-attacks">the panel discussion of the American Scholars Conference, Los Angeles</a>, 24-25 June 2006. But this one might be an exception.</strong></p>
<p><strong>We heard then about nanothermite from Steve Jones, Co-Chair of <a href="http://911scholars.org">Scholars for 9/11 Truth</a>. And we heard it again from the founder of A&E911. But a major division has arisen between those who claim that nanothermite can have blown the buildings apart and those who maintain that it isn’t even theoretically possible. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/06/02/vt-nuclear-education-undeniable-proof-of-911-as-a-nuclear-event/">Recent intel dumps confirm the use of nukes</a> and <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/07/08/vt-nuclear-education-fission-based-thermobaric-weapons/">explain those small iron spheres as a consequence of the use of special (iron jacketed) high-tech nukes</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>So what’s with Richard Gage and A&E911 that they are still promoting a theory that T. Mark Hightower and I proved was indefensible in three articles published on <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/05/has-nanothermite-been-oversold-to-911.html">1 May 2011</a>, on <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/17/is-911-truth-based-upon-a-false-theory/">17 July 2011</a> and on <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/27/nanothermite-if-it-doesnt-fit-you-must-acquit/">27 August 2011</a>? Why did Gage squander this precious opportunity to advance 9/11 Truth on C-SPAN by endorsing a provably false theory?</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zY9HfwzGPg" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<h3>The “big three” questions</h3>
<p>Not only that, but there are three major questions in the public mind about 9/11, which are these:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong><em>(a) what happened on 9/11? </em></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><p><strong><em>(b) how was it done?</em></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><p><strong><em>(c) who was responsible and why?</em></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>We know the before and after of the World Trade Center in relation to 9/11, so the answer to (a) is trivial. But Richard Gage had no answer to (c), even though he was asked it several times, and his answer to (b) was false and misleading. Is this the best that Richard Gage and A&E911 can do? It was embarrassing when he was asked the all too obvious question and could not answer it:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Unanswered-questions-.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-314882 data-lazy-ready" alt="Unanswered questions" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Unanswered-questions--640x322.jpg" height="261" width="518"/></a></p>
<p>A&E911 is not alone in attempting to place <em>the how</em> ahead of <em>the who</em> and <em>the why</em>, where Judy Wood and her DEW supporters adopt the very same stance. But the American public has limited patience with those who can’t produce answers to such obvious questions, especially more than a decade after the event. And that is why <a href="http://www.operationterror.com/">“Operation Terror”</a>, Art Olivier’s reconstruction of the events of 9/11, is a more powerful instrument for opening the mind to what may have happened than the appeal to an obscure causal mechanism–especially when it is misconceived.</p>
<p>All three questions have justifiable answers, but Richard Gage did not deliver them. It was much worse than that, because the host had prepared to defeat any appeal he would make to “thermite”, using NIST as his authority and thereby begging the question, by assuming the position of NIST that is the position in doubt:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hPYmmnB3Cko/U-AL4LtUjxI/AAAAAAAACZA/BOwcJHBMWrc/s1600/NIST+response+on+thermite.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" style="border-style: initial; border-color: initial; border-width: 0px; display: block;" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hPYmmnB3Cko/U-AL4LtUjxI/AAAAAAAACZA/BOwcJHBMWrc/s640/NIST+response+on+thermite.jpg" height="410" width="576" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>Most Americans are too gullible to realize that this is citing the very source that Gage is disputing. But it could have been worse. He could have pointed out that Neils Harrit, a proponent of the nanothermite hypothesis, has estimated that <a href="http://rt.com/usa/did-nano-thermite-take-down-the-wtc/">it would have required “hundreds of tons” to do the job</a> (where Harrit has also offered <a href="http://rt.com/usa/did-nano-thermite-take-down-the-wtc/">the more precise calculation of from 29,000 metric tons to 143,000 metric tons for each tower</a>) or that the lab Christopher Bollyn has cited Los Alamos as his source for “explosive nanothermite” told Gordon Duff <a href="http://rt.com/usa/did-nano-thermite-take-down-the-wtc/">“they couldn’t produce anything smaller than 10 microns and it couldn’t blow a hole in a piece of paper”</a>.</p>
<h3>Why nanothermite can’t cut it</h3>
<p>If this had been an episode of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052520/">“The Twilight Zone”</a>, it might have made more sense where 9/11 Truth is caught in a time warp. Richard Gage must know by now that nanothermite cannot live up to its capabilities as advanced by Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, and others, who regard themselves as the custodians and only true practitioners of the scientific method in 9/11 research. Nanothermite (or even “thermite”, which is the term Gage used) has only 1/13 the explosive force of TNT and, whatever contribution it may have made to the collapse of Building 7, cannot possibly have been responsible for blowing apart the Twin Towers.</p>
<p>As Denis Spitzer et al., <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022369709002650">“Energetic nano-materials: Opportunities for enhanced performances”, <em>Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids</em> (2010)</a>, observes, given the crucial role of the rapid expansion of gases to perform work by explosives, states, “Gas generating nano-thermites: Thermites are energetic materials, which do not release gaseous species when they decompose. However, explosives can be blended in thermites to give them blasting properties”, which implies that, unless supplemented with explosives, nanothermites are non-explosive. So Mark and I may have been overly generous.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://tinypic.com/?ref=98h6qp" target="_blank"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" style="border-style: initial; border-color: initial; border-width: 0px; display: block;" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic" src="http://i52.tinypic.com/98h6qp.pgn" height="333" width="446" border="0"/></a></p>
<p>Having published three articles explaining that nanothermite cannot have done it and to inform prominent researchers about this discovery, Mark wrote to Steven Jones, Richard Gage, and others. Dwain Deets, the former Chief of Research Engineering and Director for Aeronautical Projects at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, wrote to Mark and told him that he had listened to our interview on <a href="http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com">“The Real Deal”</a> and said: “Excellent interview. A step toward trimming back claims that overshoot the evidence.”</p>
<p>Listen here for yourself:</p>
<p>Dwain also sent a diagram illustrating certain detonation velocities as well as the sonic (speed of sound) velocities in various materials. Thus, for a high explosive to significantly fragment a material, its detonation velocity must be equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material. This law requires a detonation velocity of at least 3,200 m/s to fragment concrete and 6,100 m/s to fragment steel, which is far beyond the highest recorded detonation velocity of 895 m/s for nanothermite.</p>
<h3>“Explosive Evidence”</h3>
<p>It came as no surprise when Richard Gage recommended <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-911-truth-in-a-time-warp/%C2%A0">“Explosive Evidence”</a>, the A&E911 documentary about what happened to the World Trade Center, especially to WTC-7. Since it was published on 12 September 2012, while Mark and I published our studies in May-August 2011, A&E911 must have known that the theory they were presenting had already been shown to be indefensible on scientific grounds. While nanothermite proponents claim to be “scientific”, they violate the canons of science by not revising their views when new evidence or new hypotheses become available.</p>
<p>Indeed, during <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/10/03/the-complete-midwest-911-truth-conference-parts-1-2-and-3/">The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference</a>, which was held in Urbana, IL, on 22 September 2013, we presented “Explosive Evidence” as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIy4LUpSKhA">the first hour of the conference</a>, where I advanced a critique of its limitations and shortcomings during the second hour as follows and explained why the currently available evidence now supports the conclusion that the Twin Towers were taken out using a sophisticated arrangement of micro or mini nukes, which appear to have been attached to the core columns of each:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Indeed, ample substantiation had already been presented during <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/12/911-truth-will-out-the-vancouver-hearings-ii/">The Vancouver Hearings</a>, which were held there 15-17 June 2012, including several presentations that supported the use of nukes on 9/11, the most significant of which was made by Jeff Prager (where Don Fox presented on his behalf). Jeff explained that, in 2002, he set out to prove that, on 9/11, 19 Muslims had hijacked four planes and attacked us. But by 2005, he realized this was false, sold his business, left the US and began to investigate 9/11 full-time. (See his <a href="http://911scholars.ning.com/profiles/blogs/jeff-prager-9-11-america-nuked-free-downloadable-ebook">9/11 America Nuked</a>.)</p>
<h3>How it was done</h3>
<p>In <a href="http://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/jeff-pragers-vancouver-powerpoint/">“Proof of Ternary Fission in New York City on 9/11″</a> he observes (1) that dust samples are the best evidence of what happened on 9/11; (2) that the USGS samples taken over a dozen locations show how various elements interacted prove that fission reaction(s) had taken place; (3) that Multiple Myeloma in the general population at a rate of 3-9 incidents per 100,000 people, but the rate was 18 per 100,000 among first responders; (4) that other cancers relatively unusual cancers have appeared among the responders, including non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers; and (5) that, as of March 2011, no less than 1,003 first responders died from various cancers. The elements found in the USGS dust samples provide a rather astonishing array of proof of nukes:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Barium and Strontium</strong>: Neither of these elements should ever appear in building debris <strong><em>in these quantities</em></strong>. The levels never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and reach over 3000ppm for both in the dust sample taken at Broadway and John Streets.</p>
<p><strong>Thorium and Uranium</strong>: These elements only exist in radioactive form. Thorium is a radioactive element formed from Uranium by decay. <em>It’s very rare and should not be present in building rubble, ever.</em> So once again we have verifiable evidence that a nuclear fission event has taken place.</p>
<p><strong>Lithium:</strong> With the presence of lithium we have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of Uranium to Thorium and Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into Lithium has taken place.</p>
<p><strong>Lanthanum:</strong> Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of the element Barium.</p>
<p><strong>Yttrium</strong>: The next decay element after Strontium, which further confirms the presence of Barium.</p>
<p><strong>Chromium</strong>: The presence of Chromium is one more “tell tale” signature of a nuclear detonation.</p>
<p><strong>Tritium</strong>: A very rare element and should not be found at concentrations 55 times normal the basement of WTC-6 no less than 11 days after 9/11, which is another “tell tale” sign of nukes.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>New research on the use of nukes has provided further confirmation, including studies by Don Fox, Dr. Ed Ward and Jeff Prager, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/01/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/">show these elements occur in patterns of correlation that make the hypothesis virtually undeniable</a> (not that Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage, among others, will not continue to deny it), where Gordon Duff has recently published that <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/05/20/nuke-cancer-from-911-revealed/">the actual number of New Yorkers who have incurred these unusual 9/11-related cancers has now increased to more than 70,000</a>.</p>
<p>And this is not a new issue. In his analysis of <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09/20/the-pros-and-cons-of-the-toronto-hearings/">“The Pros and Cons of the Toronto Hearings”</a>, for example, which was published 20 September 2011, Joshua Blakeney observed that Judge Richard Lee was concerned about Kevin Ryan’s appeals to nanothermite and asked whether it had ever been used to demolish a building. If there was even “an embarrassing moment” in the history of the 9/11 Truth movement, this must have been it. So why was Richard Gage repeating the blunder on C-SPAN? <em>Wasn’t once bad enough?</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kJTigupiJc" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>It is ironic that the nanothermite theory, which was based on dust samples, has been superseded by new research based on more comprehensive dust samples, but that is characteristic of scientific research: the discovery of new data or of new alternatives can lead to the rejection of hypotheses previously accepted, to the acceptance of hypotheses previously rejected and to leaving others in suspense, which is characteristic not only of science specifically but of rationality of belief in general.</p>
<h3> What about Planes/No Planes?</h3>
<p>If the impossibility of nanothermite having blown apart the Twin Towers drives Richard Gage, Steve Jones and Neils Harritt up the wall, questions that have arisen about the 9/11 crash sites and evidence suggests that all four of them were fabricated or faked (albeit in different ways). It was profoundly disturbing, therefore, when Richard Gage implied the 9/11 plane crashes were real, which contradicts the available evidence. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/">But we have documentary proof that Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) were not even scheduled that day, where FAA registration records show that the planes used for Flights 93 (Shanksville) and 175 (South Tower) were not taken out of service (“deregistered”) until 28 September 2005.</a> So how could planes that were not even in the air have crashed on 9/11? and how could planes that crashed on 9/11 have still been in the air four years later?</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/United-93-still-airborne.jpg"><img style="display: block;" class="lazy aligncenter wp-image-314943 data-lazy-ready" alt="United 93 still airborne" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/United-93-still-airborne-640x229.jpg" height="206" width="576"/></a></p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qOmjWPMOsr8/U-AlKBzPXPI/AAAAAAAACZc/q70Se4mOgTI/s1600/Flight+175+still+in+the+air.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" style="border: 0px none; display: block;" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qOmjWPMOsr8/U-AlKBzPXPI/AAAAAAAACZc/q70Se4mOgTI/s640/Flight+175+still+in+the+air.jpg" height="200" width="640" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>For many students of 9/11, their brains shut off at the very idea, even though <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/">Pilots for 9/11 Truth</a> have established that Flight 93 was in the air that day, but that <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/united-93-still-airborne.html">it was over Champaign-Urbana, IL, after it had allegedly crashed in Shanksville</a>; and that Flight 175 was also in the air that day, but that <a href="http://pilotsfor911truth.org/WTC2.html">it was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA, long after it had purportedly hit the South Tower</a>. This means that <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/">the videos we have seen of the planes hitting the North and the South Towers involved some form of fakery</a>, as I have repeatedly explained.</p>
<p><a href="http://nomoregames.net/2008/06/13/311/">It won’t do to suggest that real planes of any kind–such as drones or special military aircraft–were used for that purpose, since their entry involved no loss in velocity in violation of Newton’s third law.</a> And, as Jack White, a legendary student of JFK, who turned his attention to 9/11, discovered, the engine component found at Church & Murray was under a steel scaffolding, sitting on a relatively undamaged sidewalk, and was the wrong make to have come from a Boeing 767. He also found FOX NEWS footage of men in FBI vests unloading something heavy from a white van, which would have come as sensational news, had Richard Gage made observations of this kind on C-SPAN:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jJR6rdQ50KU/U-Aj8N3x-OI/AAAAAAAACZQ/vZ7moj8ju6w/s1600/Pickup+or+delivery%3f.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img style="display: inline;" class="lazy data-lazy-ready" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jJR6rdQ50KU/U-Aj8N3x-OI/AAAAAAAACZQ/vZ7moj8ju6w/s640/Pickup+or+delivery%3f.jpg" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>That no plane crashed in Shanksville should be apparent to anyone who has seen what a real plane crash looks like, such as the downing of the “Malaysian 17″ in Ukraine. While that case is fascinating in its own right, the proof that we were mislead about the Pentagon extends from violation of laws of aerodynamics and physics entailed by the official flight trajectory to the more obvious consideration that the plane shown in the one frame that the Pentagon claims to show “the plane”, when compared to the image of a Boeing 757 (properly sized for comparison) was far too small to have been a Boeing 757:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ledihtOKWSg/UquAVezFpyI/AAAAAAAAB-g/Fynwb0TL2w8/s1600/Sizing+problem+at+the+Pentagon.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img class="lazy aligncenter data-lazy-ready" style="border: 0px none; display: block;" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ledihtOKWSg/UquAVezFpyI/AAAAAAAAB-g/Fynwb0TL2w8/s640/Sizing+problem+at+the+Pentagon.jpg" height="373" width="518" border="0"/></a></div>
<p>Issues about the planes would be overwhelmingly more interesting to the public than talking about red-and-grey chips found in the dust, especially when–even if they were <em>bona fide</em> nanothermite–cannot possibly explain how the Twin Towers were destroyed. That none of the 9/11 aircraft actually crashed and none of the passengers aboard them died is an entirely different matter, because it proves the entire “War on Terror” was a fabrication. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Commission-Report-Omissions-Distortions/dp/1566565847">Too many in the movement seem to forget that a half-dozen or more of the “suicide hijackers” turned up alive and well the following day.</a> Gage not only made none of the obvious points made here but implied that the 9/11 aircraft were real. Either way, issues are raised about his competence or his integrity.</p>
<h3>Who was responsible and why?</h3>
<p>More disturbing than his failure to discuss the planes that did not crash–and to imply that they were real–was his utter incapacity to answer simple, direct questions about who and why. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/13/james-h-fetzer-911-iran-review-interview/">9/11 dates from the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990-91, which left the military-industrial complex without a boogie man to pacify the American public with regard to the “peace dividend” it would never see and a new threat to keep the taxpayer’s billions coming into their coffers</a>. It involved collusion between the CIA, the Neo-Cons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad, where Israel would come out of 9/11 as “the big winner”.</p>
<blockquote><p>During The Vancouver Hearings, Susan Lindauer revealed inside information that 9/11 was an “inside job.” <em>She served as the liaison between the CIA and Saddam Hussein, who was so eager to avoid war with the U.S. that he offered to purchase 1,000,000 cars per year for the next ten years. If that was not enough, he said, make it the next twenty! </em> Imagine where the U.S. would be economically if we had only taken up his proposal? Instead, when Susan learned of plans to attack Iraq, she protested vigorously to President Bush. For taking that step, for speaking out about her concerns over the injustice of it all, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/30/911-confessions-of-a-former-cia-asset/">she was harassed, intimidated, imprisoned and tortured</a>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>9/11 was conceived as an elaborate psychological operation to instill fear into the American people in order to manipulate them into supporting the political agenda of the Bush/Cheney administration, which included the invasion of several nations in the Middle East to bring about the creation of a new century of American domination of the world for the next 100 years. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/">The evidence supports the inference that 9/11 was a “national security event” which was authorized at the highest levels of the American government–the CIA, the NSA, the Pentagon and The White House.</a> It facilitated a reversal of US foreign policy and extraordinary constraints on the Constitution of the United States, which have dramatically increased the centralization of political power in the executive branch and dominating the legislative and judicial branches of government.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><br/><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT1AzrKuEtM" title="YouTube">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>The creation of the Department of Homeland Security has been especially ominous, where DHS has now requisitioned more than 2 billion rounds of .40 caliber hollow point ammo, which is not even permissible in the conduct of warfare under The Geneva Conventions. <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/12/11/from-america-to-amerika-the-end-game/">Combined with more than 300 FEMA camps around the country, every American should be alarmed at the parallels with the rise of The Third Reich in Germany before WWII</a>. As a former Marine Corps officer, I am extremely apprehensive over the future of my country, which has been transformed from the most admired and respected nation in the world–along with our “gallant ally”‘ in the Middle East, Israel–to being the most despised and reviled. By 2014, Richard Gage should have known these things, which makes his silence about them all the more telling.</p>
<p><em><strong>Jim Fetzer,</strong> a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.</em></p>Belgian Kairos Journal Special Focus Section on 9/11tag:911scholars.ning.com,2014-09-09:3488444:BlogPost:676892014-09-09T15:55:19.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><span>The (French-language) Belgian bimonthly journal Kairos has published in its Sept./Oct. issue a special focus section on 9/11, edited by Olivier Taymans. It features the following articles: <br></br> <br></br> —An “Introduction” (p. 5) by Olivier Taymans, a Belgian freelance journalist, director of the documentary Wrong, Blasphemous and Sinful (cf. <a href="http://www.blasphemous.info/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.blasphemous.info</a>, on the media treatment of 9/11 and the Truth…</span></p>
<p><span>The (French-language) Belgian bimonthly journal Kairos has published in its Sept./Oct. issue a special focus section on 9/11, edited by Olivier Taymans. It features the following articles: <br/> <br/> —An “Introduction” (p. 5) by Olivier Taymans, a Belgian freelance journalist, director of the documentary Wrong, Blasphemous and Sinful (cf. <a href="http://www.blasphemous.info/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.blasphemous.info</a>, on the media treatment of 9/11 and the Truth Movement. <br/> <br/> —“21 reasons to question the official version of 9/11” (pp. 6-7) by David Ray Griffin (Claremont Graduate University), who sketches some of the most striking incoherences of the current vulgate. <br/> <br/> —“The endless war on terrorism” (pp. 7-9) by Paul Lannoye (retired Belgian senator and former European MP) questions the geopolitical consequences of an event whose precise circumstances remain completely opaque. <br/> <br/> —“Cyber-protest vs. media (a)version" (pp. 9-11) by Olivier Taymans analyzes the dialectic that exists between the open discussions on 9/11 that can be found on a number of websites and the completely autistic attitude of the mainstream media in that regard. <br/> <br/> —“ The strategy of tension” (pp. 11-13) by Daniele Ganser (Lecturer at the University of Basel; cf.<a href="http://www.danieleganser.ch/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.danieleganser.ch</a>) summarizes his work on the meaning and significance of the implementation of secret operations (including false flag) within the fabric of Western democracies. <br/> <br/> —“911 between myth and grand narrative” (pp. 13-15) by Michel Weber (philosopher; cf.<a href="http://www.chromatika.academia.edu/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.chromatika.academia.edu</a>) investigates the scope of the event from a broad perspective on the very nature of culture and citizenship. <br/> <br/> —“Inside job? Who cares?” (pp. 15-17) is an interview of Jean Bricmont (who teaches physics at the University of Louvain in Belgium) by Olivier Taymans. Although Bricmont is well-known for his dialogues with Chomsky on (humanitarian) imperialism and his insightful perspective on current political matters, he remains reluctant to discuss 9/11.</span></p>
<div><div><div><div><div><span><br/> <a href="http://chromatika.academia.edu/MichelWeber" target="_blank">http://chromatika.academia.edu/MichelWeber</a></span></div>
<div><span><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1560919950?profile=original" target="_self">weberkairossept2013-libre.pdf</a></span></div>
<p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference, Part 2tag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-09-30:3488444:BlogPost:639532013-09-30T15:11:36.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div>The link to my presentation: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ</a></div>
<div><div><h1><span dir="ltr" title="Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference Part 2">Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference Part 2</span></h1>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf2wxSxCHjXaS5tMVDQqZFg?feature=watch" target="_blank"><span><span><span><span><img alt="Midwest 9/11 Truth" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-3M2LVEtYGTM/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/Vq-MI8V3abQ/s48-c-k/photo.jpg" width="48"></img> …</span></span></span></span></a></div>
</div>
<div>The link to my presentation: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ</a></div>
<div><div><h1><span dir="ltr" title="Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference Part 2">Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference Part 2</span></h1>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf2wxSxCHjXaS5tMVDQqZFg?feature=watch" target="_blank"><span><span><span><span><img alt="Midwest 9/11 Truth" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-3M2LVEtYGTM/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/Vq-MI8V3abQ/s48-c-k/photo.jpg" width="48"/> </span></span></span></span></a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf2wxSxCHjXaS5tMVDQqZFg?feature=watch" dir="ltr" target="_blank">Midwest 9/11 Truth</a><span>·</span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf2wxSxCHjXaS5tMVDQqZFg/videos" target="_blank">3 videos</a><br/><div style="text-align: center;"><font class="Apple-style-span" face="'Lucida Grande'"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 11px;"> </span></font></div>
</div>
<div><div><div><div><div><p><strong>Published on <span>Sep 28, 2013</span></strong></p>
<div><p>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference was held at the Urbana Free Library on 22 September 2013, featuring Kevin Barrett, Jim Fetzer and Wayne Madsen. It began with the A&E911 documentary, "Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out" as Part 1. <br/><br/>There followed a critique of the documentary by Jim Fetzer, who explained the latest scientific findings about what happened on 9/11 and how it was done in Part 2. Wayne Madsen concluded with a discussion of three deaths that appear related to 9/11 in Part 3.<br/><br/>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference was sponsored and organized by Stephen Francis, a long-time student of 9/11, who was glad to have the opportunity to bring these speakers to Urbana and who is planning to conduct additional 9/11 events in the future. Stay tuned.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>Controversy stalks Sunday’s 9/11 Truth Conferencetag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-09-18:3488444:BlogPost:638242013-09-18T21:06:39.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Controversy stalks Sunday’s 9/11 Truth Conference</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style" title="Controversy stalks Sunday’s 9/11 Truth Conference"><a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#" title="Facebook"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook…</span></span></a></div>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">Controversy stalks Sunday’s 9/11 Truth Conference</h1>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style" title="Controversy stalks Sunday’s 9/11 Truth Conference"><a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" title="Facebook" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_facebook"><span class="at_a11y">Share on facebook</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_twitter at300b" title="Tweet" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"><span class="at_a11y">Share on twitter</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_email at300b" target="_blank" title="Email" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_email"><span class="at_a11y">Share on email</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_pinterest_share at300b" target="_blank" title="Pinterest" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_pinterest_share"><span class="at_a11y">Share on pinterest_share</span></span></a><a class="addthis_button_compact at300m" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#"><span class=" at300bs at15nc at15t_compact"><span class="at_a11y">More Sharing Services</span></span></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_bubble_style" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#"></a><a class="addthis_button_expanded" target="_blank" title="View more services" href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/18/urbana/comment-page-1/#">2</a><div class="atclear"></div>
</div>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ng_press_release1.jpg"><img class="lazy aligncenter size-full wp-image-269879 data-lazy-ready" alt="ng_press_release1" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ng_press_release1.jpg" width="313" height="337"/></a></p>
<p>A conference scheduled for this Sunday at the Urbana Free Library is generating controversy – and threats to protest or even disrupt the event.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://midwest911truth.com/">Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference</a> is scheduled for this Sunday, September 22nd from 1:30 to 5 pm in the Urbana Free Library, 210 W. Green St., Urbana, Illinois. Featured speakers include Philosophy of Science Professor Jim Fetzer, former National Security Agency agent turned muckraking journalist Wayne Madsen, and Arabic and Islamic Studies scholar Dr. Kevin Barrett.</p>
<p>Protesters are threatening to disrupt the event with such tactics as:</p>
<p>*Using the Freedom of Information Act to force the Free Library to turn over all paperwork related to the event</p>
<p>*Harassing the sponsoring organizations</p>
<p>*Flooding the event with protestors to disrupt proceedings</p>
<p>(The above proposals and more are from the comments at the News Gazette article: <a href="http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-09-16/sunday-conference-focus-911-attacks.html">http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-09-16/sunday-conference-focus-911-attacks.html</a> . )</p>
<p>Opponents of the event claim that the speakers are “conspiracy theorists” and have even raised charges of anti-Semitism.</p>
<p>The event organizers have responded to the charges in detail, explaining that their only interest is the truth, no matter how politically-incorrect it may be. They add that the insulting term “conspiracy theorist” was launched into circulation by the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird program as part of a mind-control effort designed to prevent Americans from questioning such obvious insider crimes as the JFK assassination.</p>
<p>Jim Fetzer and Kevin Barrett are the subjects of a new book by Mike Palecek called <a href="http://cwgpress.com/the-dynamic-duo/">Dynamic Duo: White Rose Blooms in Wisconsin</a>.</p>
<p>For more details about the event and the controversy it has triggered, contact:</p>
<p>Jim Fetzer, Scholars for 9/11 Truth<br/>jfetzer@d.umn.edu</p>
<p><a href="http://cwgpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/duo-front-comingsoon.png"><img class="lazy size-medium wp-image-141 alignleft data-lazy-ready" alt="duo-front-comingsoon" src="http://cwgpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/duo-front-comingsoon-216x300.png" width="216" height="300"/></a></p>
<div><a class="addthis_button" href="http://addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300" title="Controversy stalks Sunday’s 9/11 Truth Conference"><img class="lazy data-lazy-ready" src="http://cache.addthis.com/cachefly/static/btn/v2/lg-share-en.gif" width="125" height="16" alt="Bookmark and Share"/></a></div>
<p></p>
<h3 class="related_post_title">Related Posts:</h3>
<ul class="related_post">
<li><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/22/fetzerdoubts/" title="Fetzer Questions Holocaust – Call the Spanish Inquisition!">Fetzer Questions Holocaust – Call the Spanish Inquisition!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/14/bishop-richard-williamson-boston-bombing-was-another-false-flag/" title="Bishop Richard Williamson: Boston Bombing Was Another False Flag">Bishop Richard Williamson: Boston Bombing Was Another False Flag</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/28/shut-it/" title="Zionist loses it on-air: “Shut it Mr. Barrett!” ">Zionist loses it on-air: “Shut it Mr. Barrett!”</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/06/12/drg-atzmon/" title="David Ray Griffin, Gilad Atzmon take the United Nations! ">David Ray Griffin, Gilad Atzmon take the United Nations!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/06/04/anti-anti-semitism-and-the-search-for-historical-truth/" title="Anti-Anti-Semitism and the Search for Historical Truth">Anti-Anti-Semitism and the Search for Historical Truth</a></li>
</ul>Lee Hamilton and Thomas Keane, "Stonewalled by the CIA", The New York Times (2 January 2008)tag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-09-12:3488444:BlogPost:632302013-09-12T21:45:33.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div id="article"><div class="kicker">OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS</div>
<h1>Stonewalled by the C.I.A.</h1>
<div class="byline">By THOMAS H. KEAN and LEE H. HAMILTON</div>
<div class="timestamp">Published: January 2, 2008</div>
<div class="timestamp"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html</a></div>
<div id="articleBody"><br></br><p>Washington</p>
<a id="secondParagraph" name="secondParagraph"></a><br />
<p>MORE than five years ago, Congress…</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="article"><div class="kicker">OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS</div>
<h1>Stonewalled by the C.I.A.</h1>
<div class="byline">By THOMAS H. KEAN and LEE H. HAMILTON</div>
<div class="timestamp">Published: January 2, 2008</div>
<div class="timestamp"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html</a></div>
<div id="articleBody"><br/><p>Washington</p>
<a name="secondParagraph"></a><br />
<p>MORE than five years ago, Congress and President Bush created the 9/11 commission. The goal was to provide the American people with the fullest possible account of the “facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001” — and to offer recommendations to prevent future attacks. Soon after its creation, the president’s chief of staff directed all executive branch agencies to cooperate with the commission.</p>
<p>The commission’s mandate was sweeping and it explicitly included the intelligence agencies. But the recent revelations that the C.I.A. destroyed videotaped interrogations of Qaeda operatives leads us to conclude that the agency failed to respond to our lawful requests for information about the 9/11 plot. Those who knew about those videotapes — and did not tell us about them — obstructed our investigation.</p>
<p>There could have been absolutely no doubt in the mind of anyone at the C.I.A. — or the White House — of the commission’s interest in any and all information related to Qaeda detainees involved in the 9/11 plot. Yet no one in the administration ever told the commission of the existence of videotapes of detainee interrogations.</p>
<p>When the press reported that, in 2002 and maybe at other times, the C.I.A. had recorded hundreds of hours of interrogations of at least two Qaeda detainees, we went back to check our records. We found that we did ask, repeatedly, for the kind of information that would have been contained in such videotapes.</p>
<p>The commission did not have a mandate to investigate how detainees were treated; our role was to investigate the history and evolution of Al Qaeda and the 9/11 plot. Beginning in June 2003, we requested all reports of intelligence information on these broad topics that had been gleaned from the interrogations of 118 named individuals, including both Abu Zubaydah and Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri, two senior Qaeda operatives, portions of whose interrogations were apparently recorded and then destroyed.</p>
<p>The C.I.A. gave us many reports summarizing information gained in the interrogations. But the reports raised almost as many questions as they answered. Agency officials assured us that, if we posed specific questions, they would do all they could to answer them.</p>
<p>So, in October 2003, we sent another wave of questions to the C.I.A.’s general counsel. One set posed dozens of specific questions about the reports, including those about Abu Zubaydah. A second set, even more important in our view, asked for details about the translation process in the interrogations; the background of the interrogators; the way the interrogators handled inconsistencies in the detainees’ stories; the particular questions that had been asked to elicit reported information; the way interrogators had followed up on certain lines of questioning; the context of the interrogations so we could assess the credibility and demeanor of the detainees when they made the reported statements; and the views or assessments of the interrogators themselves.</p>
<p>The general counsel responded in writing with non-specific replies. The agency did not disclose that any interrogations had ever been recorded or that it had held any further relevant information, in any form. Not satisfied with this response, we decided that we needed to question the detainees directly, including Abu Zubaydah and a few other key captives.</p>
<p>In a lunch meeting on Dec. 23, 2003, George Tenet, the C.I.A. director, told us point blank that we would have no such access. During the meeting, we emphasized to him that the C.I.A. should provide any documents responsive to our requests, even if the commission had not specifically asked for them. Mr. Tenet replied by alluding to several documents he thought would be helpful to us, but neither he, nor anyone else in the meeting, mentioned videotapes.</p>
<p>A meeting on Jan. 21, 2004, with Mr. Tenet, the White House counsel, the secretary of defense and a representative from the Justice Department also resulted in the denial of commission access to the detainees. Once again, videotapes were not mentioned.</p>
<p>As a result of this January meeting, the C.I.A. agreed to pose some of our questions to detainees and report back to us. The commission concluded this was all the administration could give us. But the commission never felt that its earlier questions had been satisfactorily answered. So the public would be aware of our concerns, we highlighted our caveats on page 146 in the commission report.</p>
<p>As a legal matter, it is not up to us to examine the C.I.A.’s failure to disclose the existence of these tapes. That is for others. What we do know is that government officials decided not to inform a lawfully constituted body, created by Congress and the president, to investigate one the greatest tragedies to confront this country. We call that obstruction.</p>
<br/>
<div id="authorId"><p>Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton served as chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the 9/11 commission.</p>
</div>
<div class="nextArticleLink"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/index.html">More Articles in Opinion »</a></div>
</div>
</div>Jim Fetzer, Veterans Today, articles about Syriatag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-09-09:3488444:BlogPost:631322013-09-09T18:19:51.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<div><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">"Obama lies, Syrians die: What's wrong with this picture?"</span></div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/08/obama-lies-syrians-die-whats-wrong-with-this-picture/" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/08/obama-lies-syrians-die-whats-wrong-with-this-picture/</a></div>
<div>"Are we going to war with Syria over a natural gas pipeline?"…</div>
<div><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">"Obama lies, Syrians die: What's wrong with this picture?"</span></div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/08/obama-lies-syrians-die-whats-wrong-with-this-picture/" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/08/obama-lies-syrians-die-whats-wrong-with-this-picture/</a></div>
<div>"Are we going to war with Syria over a natural gas pipeline?"</div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/07/are-we-going-to-war-with-syria-over-a-natural-gas-pipeline/" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/07/are-we-going-to-war-with-syria-over-a-natural-gas-pipeline/"</a></div>
<div>"Ten Reasons why America does not need to go to War over Syria"</div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/04/ten-reasons-why-america-does-not-need-to-go-to-war-over-syria/" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/04/ten-reasons-why-america-does-not-need-to-go-to-war-over-syria/</a></div>
<div>"Russia has equipped Syria with its Most Advanced Missile Systems"</div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/03/russia-has-equipped-syria-with-its-most-advanced-missile-systems/" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/03/russia-has-equipped-syria-with-its-most-advanced-missile-systems/"</a></div>
<div>"US Attack on Syria would violate International Law"</div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/02/us-attack-on-syria-would-violate-international-law/" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/02/us-attack-on-syria-would-violate-international-law/</a></div>
<div>"Israel gets its want: WWIII, not if but when--and soon"</div>
<div><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/27/israel-gets-its-want-wwiii-not-if-but-when-and-soon/" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/27/israel-gets-its-want-wwiii-not-if-but-when-and-soon/</a></div>2 +2 = Israel nuked the WTC on 9/11tag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-08-28:3488444:BlogPost:623062013-08-28T18:31:22.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/28/2-2-israel-nuked-the-wtc-on-911/">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/28/2-2-israel-nuked-the-wtc-on-911/</a></p>
<p></p>
<h2>By Don Fox (with <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/">Jim Fetzer</a>)</h2>
<p> <br></br><em>“[I]f New York was outsourced to the Mossad and if the Twin Towers were nuked, then the nukes that were used have to have been Israeli….[N]o alternative explanation is reasonable.”</em>–Jim Fetzer<br></br> …<br></br></p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/28/2-2-israel-nuked-the-wtc-on-911/">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/28/2-2-israel-nuked-the-wtc-on-911/</a></p>
<p></p>
<h2>By Don Fox (with <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/fetzer/">Jim Fetzer</a>)</h2>
<p> <br/><em>“[I]f New York was outsourced to the Mossad and if the Twin Towers were nuked, then the nukes that were used have to have been Israeli….[N]o alternative explanation is reasonable.”</em>–Jim Fetzer<br/> <br/><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Israeli-nukes-featured-image.jpg"><img class="lazy alignright size-medium wp-image-266202 data-lazy-ready" alt="Israeli nukes-featured image" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Israeli-nukes-featured-image-304x320.jpg" width="200" height="300"/></a></p>
<p><strong>How many wars is the US supposed to fight for Israel? How many of our sons and daughters must die? How much of our national treasury and moral standing must be squandered to insure Israeli domination of the Middle East?</strong></p>
<p><strong>Does any serious analyst actually believe that the Syrian government–which has been routing the rebels for the past several months–would jeopardize its standing in the eyes of the world by launching a gas attack when he has no reason to do so? </strong></p>
<p><strong>Does anyone believe that doing so on the eve of the arrival of a UN inspection team would be rational? Are the American people so stupid and gullible that we are going to fall for the same “song and dance” from the nation’s leaders who so massively misled us about the massive surveillance being conducted by the NSA?</strong></p>
<p><strong>The lied to us about Iraq. They lied to us about Libya. They lied to us about Iran. And what could be more obvious than that they are lying to us again about Syria? The US is wreaking havoc in the Middle East for Israel. We have become Israeli liars, enforcers, stooges and dupes!</strong><br/> </p>
<h3>Some historical background</h3>
<p> <br/>We know that 9/11 involved close collusion between <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/">the neo-cons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad</a> to create a pretext for <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09/13/911-interview-with-irna-the-islamic-republic-news-agency-of-iran/">the US to invade the Middle East and deconstruct the modern Arab states by converting them into statelets</a> to promote the domination of the Middle East by Israel. We know that New York City appears to have been outsourced to Israel and that the destruction of the Twin Towers, unlike WTC-7, can only be explained on the basis of sophisticated arrangements of mini or micro nukes. We have proven this <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/12/911-truth-will-out-the-vancouver-hearings-ii/">again</a>and <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/29/mini-neutron-bombs-a-major-piece-of-the-911-puzzle/">again</a> and <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/01/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/">again</a>. It is beyond reasonable doubt.</p>
<p>The most powerful proof, ironically, comes from dust samples collected by the USGS, which substantiate the presence of elements that would not be present in this form had the destruction of the Twin Towers not been a nuclear event. Those include:</p>
<blockquote><p>Barium and Strontium: Neither of these elements should ever appear in building debris in these quantities. The levels never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and reach over 3000ppm for both in the dust sample taken at Broadway and John Streets.</p>
<p>Thorium and Uranium: These elements only exist in radioactive form. Thorium is a radioactive element formed from Uranium by decay. It’s very rare and should not be present in building rubble, ever. So once again we have verifiable evidence that a nuclear fission event has taken place.</p>
<p>Lithium: With the presence of lithium we have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of Uranium to Thorium and Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into Lithium has taken place.</p>
<p>Lanthanum: Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of the element Barium.</p>
<p>Yttrium: The next decay element after Strontium, which further confirms the presence of Barium.</p>
<p>Chromium: The presence of Chromium is one more “tell tale” signature of a nuclear detonation.</p>
<p>Tritium: A very rare element and should not be found at concentrations 55 times normal the basement of WTC-6 no less than 11 days after 9/11, which is another “tell tale” sign of nukes.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But the proof also includes the dramatic incidence of cancers associated with nuclear events, where, as Jeff Prager has observed, (a) Multiple Myeloma in the general population at a rate of 3-9 incidents per 100,000 people, but the rate was 18 per 100,000 among first responders; (b) that other cancers relatively unusual cancers have appeared among the responders, including non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers; and (c) that, as of March 2011 no less than 1,003 first responders died from various cancers. Those familiar with the available evidence who continue to deny that 9/11 was a nuclear event would appear to be either cognitively impaired or deliberately deceptive.</p>
<p></p>
<h3>How it was done</h3>
<p style="text-align: center;"> <br/>Unlike WTC-7, which was destroyed by a classic controlled demolition where all the floors fell at the same time, none of the floors were blown apart, and there was a stack of debris equal to 12% of the original height of the 47-story building, the Twin Towers were blow apart from the top down, they were converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust, each floor remained stationary until its turn came and, when it was over, the buildings had been destroyed belong ground level: there was no stack of around 12 floors of debris. They did not collapse. They were blown apart using mini or micro nukes, which too many have continued to deny for too long.</p>
<p><br/><a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPJUP-Ry7d0">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Indeed, if we assume that it was done by blowing one ten-floor cube per second, then the time for the destruction of the 110-floor North Tower would have been approximately 11 seconds, which is the time estimate of NIST. And when we note that the top three floors of the South Tower had begun to tilt and were blown as one, then the time for its destruction would have been approximately 9 seconds, which is also in agreement withe the time estimate of NIST. This appears to have been roughly how it was done, where we will continue to fine-tune the sequence as we continue.</p>
<blockquote><p>But what is most striking is that we know the Twin Towers were nuked and we know that New York appears to have been outsourced to the Mossad. What we have now realized–it is like adding “2″ and “2″–is that, <em>if New York was outsourced to the Mossad and if the Twin Towers were nuked, then the nukes that were used have to have been Israeli.</em> And that by itself may explain why New York was outsourced to the Mossad. Israel has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel does not allow inspectors. Unlike the US, whose nuclear arsenal is tightly controlled, Israel could use its nukes–as it appears to have recently done in Syria–without having to answer to anyone and without any risk of detection. Indeed, we have now proven this beyond a reasonable doubt, because no alternative explanation is reasonable.</p>
<p></p>
<h2>Did Israel Nuke the WTC on 9/11?</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>By Don Fox</h3>
<p> <br/>There are voices in the 9/11 Truth Community who believe that determining the exact cause of the World Trade Center building’s destruction is unnecessary and perhaps even a waste of time. One often hears comments that the official government account is blatantly false and that should be sufficient to get a real investigation launched into the events of 9/11. However the track record of government investigations into government crimes is rather poor (see the Warren Commission and the House Select Committee on Assassinations). Since an honest official investigation into 9/11 with subpoena powers is not likely to happen the task has fallen to private citizen researchers to determine what really happened that awful day.</p>
<p>Before you can determine WHO committed a crime you first must determine HOW it was done. No doubt that the events of 9/11 were some of the most outrageous crimes ever committed so the effort to determine HOW it was done is certainly justified. 9/11 has radically changed the world and certainly not for the better. In order to understand how the post 9/11 world actually works, determining WHO and HOW it was done is are vital questions. Merely stating that “9/11 was an inside job” is not good enough.</p>
<div class="separator"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E6kYZFueEpY/Uh4zwgVCGWI/AAAAAAAABys/949u9IqJnRE/s1600/South+Tower+tipping.jpg"><img class="lazy data-lazy-ready" border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E6kYZFueEpY/Uh4zwgVCGWI/AAAAAAAABys/949u9IqJnRE/s400/South+Tower+tipping.jpg"/></a></div>
<p> <br/>The major alternative theories of the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings include the directed energy weapon (DEW) (non) theory (associated with Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson), the nanothermite theory (associated with Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage), the big nuke theory of Dimitri Khalezov (150 kt subbasement nukes) and the mini-nuke theory (associated with Dr. Ed Ward MD, the Anonymous Physicist, Dr. Bill Deagle, Jeff Prager and myself). We have determined that the mini/micro nuke hypothesis best fits the evidence. See the <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/01/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/">Mystery Solved</a> and the <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/29/mini-neutron-bombs-a-major-piece-of-the-911-puzzle/">Mini-Neutron Bomb</a> articles for a full break down of the WTC Mini-Nuke Theory.</p>
<h3>Nuclear Bombs Narrows the List of Suspects</h3>
<p> <br/>Very few groups have access to nuclear bombs. Officially there are five countries designated as Nuclear Weapons States: China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States. Three more countries have conducted nuclear weapons tests: India, Pakistan and North Korea. There is another country who refuses to confirm or deny that it has nuclear weapons: Israel. Though it is believed that Israel has produced enough<a href="http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/israel/nuclear/">weapons-grade plutonium for 100-200 nuclear warheads</a>. Former President Jimmy Carter has stated that Israel has <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7420573.stm">more than 150 nuclear weapons</a>.</p>
<p>Of these Nuclear Weapons States which ones would have had the motive, means and opportunity to detonate nuclear bombs in downtown Manhattan? The Twin Towers were destroyed by a very sophisticated arrangement of mini-nukes that were placed in the core columns of the buildings, detonated sequentially from top to bottom and configured to explode upward. This arrangement allowed the nukes in the upper floors of the buildings to explode without destroying the bombs beneath simulating a free fall collapse. This was the epitome of an Inside Job!</p>
<p>I think we can safely rule out China, France, Russia, the UK, India, Pakistan and North Korea. None of these countries would have had access to the core columns of these giant skyscrapers required to pull of this feat. Had the Towers been destroyed by an ICBM or a sub-based missile then some of these other Nuclear States may be suspects.</p>
<div class="separator"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qUruSadxgtA/Uh40AFFRgUI/AAAAAAAABy0/-KNkK6MrNsA/s1600/North+Tower+sequence.jpg"><img class="lazy data-lazy-ready" border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qUruSadxgtA/Uh40AFFRgUI/AAAAAAAABy0/-KNkK6MrNsA/s400/North+Tower+sequence.jpg"/></a></div>
<p> <br/>Certainly the United States military and intelligence community had the ability to pull off 9/11. The United States is the world’s leading nuclear superpower with the most advanced nuclear weapons arsenal. However the United States is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and several treaties (SALT, START I, START II, START III and New START) with the former Soviet Union/Russia.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/">The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons</a>, also referred to as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)<i>, obligates the five acknowledged nuclear-weapon states (the United States, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, France, and China) not to transfer nuclear weapons, other nuclear explosive devices, or their technology to any non-nuclear-weapon state. Nuclear weapon States Parties are also obligated, under Article VI, to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”</i></p>
<blockquote><p>Non-nuclear-weapon States Parties undertake not to acquire or produce nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices. They are required also to accept safeguards to detect diversions of nuclear materials from peaceful activities, such as power generation, to the production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. This must be done in accordance with an individual safeguards agreement, concluded between each non-nuclear-weapon State Party and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Under these agreements, all nuclear materials in peaceful civil facilities under the jurisdiction of the state must be declared to the IAEA, whose inspectors have routine access to the facilities for periodic monitoring and inspections. If information from routine inspections is not sufficient to fulfill its responsibilities, the IAEA may consult with the state regarding special inspections within or outside declared facilities.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The United States nuclear arsenal is subject to inspections. Is it possible that some “loose nukes” made their way from the US stockpile to Ground Zero? It is possible but not a slam dunk by any stretch of the imagination. It appears more likely that nukes from an uninspected, rogue facility like Dimona would be used in an operation such as 9/11.</p>
<h3>All Roads Lead to Dimona</h3>
<p> <br/>As NTI.org has observed, <a href="http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/israel/nuclear/">“Israel has not joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)</a>and is widely viewed as the first and only country in the Middle East to possess nuclear weapons. Believing a nuclear weapons deterrent to be essential vis-à-vis Israel’s Arab adversaries, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion instituted a nuclear weapons program in the mid-1950s as part of his “activist defense policy.” Consistent with Prime Minister Levi Eshkol’s declaration that “Israel will not be the first nation to introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East,” Israel maintains a policy of “nuclear ambiguity,” or “nuclear opacity,” refraining from overt admissions that it possesses nuclear weapons, nuclear tests, or threats to its adversaries that explicitly involve nuclear weapons. Israel has also made extensive efforts to deny other regional actors the ability to acquire nuclear weapons, most prominently in the air strikes against Iraq’s Osiraq Reactor in 1981 and Syria’s suspected reactor near Al-Kibar in 2007.”</p>
<p>President John F. Kennedy was deeply concerned about Israel using the Dimona nuclear plant to produce nuclear weapons. <a href="http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/FRUS7_4_63.html">He wrote a letter concerning Dimona to Prime Minister Levi Eshkol on July 4<sup>th</sup>, 1963</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Dear Mr. Prime Minister:</p>
<p>It gives me great personal pleasure to extend congratulations as you assume your responsibilities as Prime Minister of Israel. You have our friendship and best wishes in your new tasks. It is on one of these that I am writing you at this time.</p>
<p>You are aware, I am sure, of the exchanges which I had with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister’s strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel’s willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona.</p>
<p>I regret having to add to your burdens so soon after your assumption of office, but I feel the crucial importance of this problem necessitates my taking up with you at this early date certain further considerations, arising out of Mr. Ben-Gurion’s May 27 letter, as to the nature and scheduling of such visits.</p>
<p>I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. [3-1/2 lines of source text not declassified]</p>
<p>Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you had proposed. If Israel’s purposes are to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which Mr. Ben-Gurion proposed in his May 27 letter. It would be essential, and I understand that Mr. Ben-Gurion’s letter was in accord with this, that our scientists have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time be allotted for a thorough examination.</p>
<p>Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will have your most sympathetic attention.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p><i>John F. Kennedy</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p>US inspectors DID go to Dimona; however, they were <a href="http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/israel/nuclear/">not allowed to tour the entire facility</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Under pressure from the newly elected American president, Israel reluctantly agreed in 1961 to U.S.-Israeli bilateral inspections of the Dimona nuclear facility. The inspections at Dimona were tightly controlled by the Israelis, and restricted to the first floor of the facility. U.S. inspectors were not allowed to bring their own technical instruments, take measurements, or see the control room, instead being shown a mock-up.</p>
<p>It was later learned that the Israelis went so far as to wall-up elevator banks down to the underground reprocessing facility in order to evade discovery. When inspections ended in 1969, the visits had never produced any evidence of weapons-related activity or a plutonium-reprocessing facility, but inspectors often were left highly suspicious of illicit activities.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em><strong><span class="font-size-3">The Nixonian Compromise</span></strong></em></p>
<p><br/>The sham of US “inspections” continued until <a href="http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/israel/nuclear/">Nixon struck a deal with Golda Meir</a> whereby Israel would not openly declare or test its nuclear capability and the US would cease inspections and stop pressuring Israel to sign the NPT.</p>
<p>The gap between JFK and Nixon in regards to the Israeli nuclear program was enormous. Kennedy was not going to let Israel dictate terms to him. JFK was determined to stop Israel from producing nuclear weapons. If it turns out that Israel DID nuke the WTC buildings then there is a direct historical path from JFK’s assassination to 9/11. Had JFK lived to serve a second term Israel’s nuclear program may have been dismantled before they could have nuked anybody.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.vanunu.com/uscampaign/morestory.html">Mordechai Vanunu worked at the Dimona plant</a> and took photographs inside the facility in 1985. Vanunu revealed that indeed Dimona was producing nuclear bombs. Vanunu’s whistleblowing got him 18 years in the hoosegow; the first 11 ½ were in solitary confinement.</p>
<div id="attachment_266200" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Damona-facilities-2.jpg"><img class="lazy wp-image-266200 data-lazy-ready" alt="Production model of nulcear weapons core" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Damona-facilities-2.jpg" width="480" height="298"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Production model of nulcear weapons core</p>
</div>
<div id="attachment_266199" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Damona-facilities-1.jpg"><img class="lazy wp-image-266199 data-lazy-ready" alt="Dimona's plutonium separation control room." src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Damona-facilities-1.jpg" width="480" height="297"/></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Dimona’s plutonium separation control room.</p>
</div>
<p>By the late 1970s Israel was believed to have produced thermonuclear weapons, mini-nukes in the 1980s and<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_nuclear_program">neutron bombs by 1995</a>. While Israel’s nuclear arsenal was no match for the United States or Russia, Israel was certainly capable of pulling off the nuclear destruction of the World Trade Center buildings.</p>
<div><h3>Why Were Israelis Dancing on 9/11?</h3>
<p> <br/>Mike Rivero has an <a href="http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html">excellent post about the Dancing Israelis</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>The New York Times reported Thursday that a group of five men had set up video cameras aimed at the Twin Towers prior to the attack on Tuesday, and were seen congratulating one another afterwards. Police received several calls from angry New Jersey residents claiming “middle-eastern” men with a white van were videotaping the disaster with shouts of joy and mockery. They were seen by New Jersey residents on Sept. 11 making fun of the World Trade Center ruins and going to extreme lengths to photograph themselves in front of the wreckage. Witnesses saw them jumping for joy in Liberty State Park after the initial impact. Later on, other witnesses saw them celebrating on a roof in Weehawken, and still more witnesses later saw them celebrating with high fives in a Jersey City parking lot.</p>
<p>According to ABC’s 20/20, when the van belonging to the cheering Israelis was stopped by the police, the driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Later the Dancing Israelis appeared on an Israeli talk show:</p>
<p><br/><a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>One of them declared that he was there to “document the event.” Who knew there was going to be an event to document? The actions of the Dancing Israelis lead a reasonable person to conclude that they were Mossad agents. It certainly appears that the Dancing Israelis knew the buildings were going to be nuked. They were cheering and high-fiving after the extremely sophisticated nuclear demolition sequence was pulled off to near perfection.</p>
<p></p>
<h3>Are Shills Covering Up Israeli Nukes at the WTC?</h3>
<p> <br/>The hysterics of the Wood Cult and the other nuke-denying shills makes a lot more sense if indeed they are covering for Israel’s rogue nuclear program. The shills will throw ANYTHING out there to divert people from looking at nukes: hurricanes, directed energy weapons, Steve Hutchison’s lab and nanothermite – anything to keep your eye off the ball. If you disagree with Judy Wood, Pete Santilli, Andrew Johnson, Emmanuel Goldstein, Thomas Potter or any other members of The Cult you will be <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/20/judy-wood-and-dews-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/">subjected to attacks, intimidation and even death threats!</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/22/confessions-of-a-911-truth-activist-2/">Richard Gage does not allow discussion of any explosives except nanothermite</a>. But of course nanothermite is not an explosive! This has been demonstrated again and again by T. Mark Hightower, who is a chemical engineer, and Jim Fetzer, who have published three articles about it, namely: ”Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?”, “Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”, and “Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”. These have been out for years and demonstrate conclusively that nanothermite cannot possibly have been responsible for blowing the Twin Towers apart. Yet Richard Gage and A&E911 continue to promote the theory that it was done by nanothermite:</p>
<p><br/><a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Some Sobering Thoughts</h3>
<p> <br/>9/11 was the most historically significant event since the Kennedy assassination. Understanding current events is impossible if you do not understand 9/11. The 9/11 scam was used to justify foreign wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, the TSA assault on travelers and the loss of civil rights for American citizens. The biggest question is who was really behind the events of 9/11?</p>
<p>The destruction of the WTC buildings was a nuclear event. Only a handful of countries are considered Nuclear Weapons States. Of those countries only the United States and Israel would have had the necessary access to the buildings to plant the bombs. However the United States nuclear arsenal is subject to inspection by international organizations so the odds of the bombs coming from the US stockpile are much lower than the rogue Nuclear Weapons State Israel.</p>
<p>Israel neither confirms nor denies that they have nuclear weapons but it’s an open secret that they have several hundred nuclear devices. Israel does not allow inspectors into the Dimona facility. When the US inspectors showed up in the 1960s, the Israelis cemented the elevator banks shut so that they could only inspect the first floor. These are not the actions of a Nuclear Weapons State with nothing to hide. The 9/11 wars have primarily benefited Israel. Who had the motive, means and opportunity to nuke the World Trade Center Buildings? The answer is as obvious as “2″ plus “2″.</p>
<p><em><strong>Donald Fox</strong> has done extensive research on the role of mini-nukes by Dr. Ed Ward and on work by The Anonymous Physicist on the towers and has formulated an account of how it was done and why there is more to this story relative to very low-yield thermonuclear devices. See his blog at <a href="http://donaldfox.wordpress.com">http://donaldfox.wordpress.com</a>.</em></p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style" title="2 + 2 = Israel nuked the WTC on 9/11"><div class="fb-like fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget"></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference, Champaign-Urbana, IL, 22 September 2013tag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-08-28:3488444:BlogPost:623042013-08-28T18:08:44.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p><span><span>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference </span><span>Update <img src="http://www.newsfollowup.com/id/images_68/investigation1.jpg"></img> <br></br></span></span><br></br><span>Many changes have occurred over the last couple of weeks with the Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference. <br></br>First, the date has been moved to <span class="aBn"><span class="aQJ">Sept. 22, 2013</span></span></span><span> </span>and w<span>e have new </span><span><span>guest speakers and broader focus. <br></br>Our new conference speakers are </span><span><strong>Wayne…</strong></span></span></p>
<p><span><span>The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference </span><span>Update <img src="http://www.newsfollowup.com/id/images_68/investigation1.jpg"/><br/></span></span><br/><span>Many changes have occurred over the last couple of weeks with the Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference. <br/>First, the date has been moved to <span class="aBn"><span class="aQJ">Sept. 22, 2013</span></span></span><span> </span>and w<span>e have new </span><span><span>guest speakers and broader focus. <br/>Our new conference speakers are </span><span><strong>Wayne Madsen</strong></span><span> and </span><span><strong>James Fetzer</strong>, Ph.D.</span><span> (bios below). <br/><br/>Both are </span></span><span>internationally known and respected in their fields. Both have been featured in the national and<br/><br/>international media. Both have </span><span>websites and publish articles that are read by millions all over the world. <br/><br/>They are both experts on 9/11 Truth and can place 9/11 in a historical perspective to understand complex<br/><br/>and controversial events in order to explore their scientific, political and social dimensions See Facebook <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/uc911truth/" target="_blank">page</a><br/><br/></span></p>
<div><span> </span></div>
<div><span><span><img src="https://sphotos-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/p480x480/1017021_10200250239401308_1366614174_n.jpg" alt="Photo: <a href="/>https://www.facebook.com/steve.francis13 Announcing The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference with Wayne Madsen and James Fetzer PhD, as guest speakers... sponsored by <a href="http://www.newsfollowup.com">http://www.newsfollowup.com</a> ... they will debunk Dr. Judy Wood and critique AE911Truth's Explosive evidence, and put 9/11 into a historical perspective that showing it as one of the most heinous crimes of the 21st century that has led to the deaths of at least 2 million people. ..Sept 22, 2013, Urbana Free Library, Urbana, Illinois, auditorium." /></span><span> </span></span></div>
<div><span>Honoring the dead by revealing how they died</span></div>
<div> </div>
<div>After a short introduction by <b>Steve Francis</b> and <b>David Johnson</b>, there will be an airing of the documentary film </div>
<div>by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. "Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out". This documentary has </div>
<div>been distributed all over the world and has won awards on PBS as one their the most watched documentaries. </div>
<div><span> </span></div>
<div><span>Then <b>Jim Fetzer</b> will pick up where "Explosive Evidence" leaves off and explain the latest research on what</span></div>
<div><span>happened on 9/11 and how it was done, emphasizing what science has to tell us about 9/11. <b>Wayne Madsen</b></span></div>
<div>will complement the science of 9/11 with the politics by discussing who was responsible and why it occurred. </div>
<div><span> </span></div>
<div><span><img src="http://www.newsfollowup.com/id/images_69/waynert.jpg"/><br/></span></div>
<div><span>Wayne Madsen, Investigative Journalist</span><span><span><span><br/></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span> </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and columnist. He has written for </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>The Village Voice, The Progressive, Counterpunch, Online Journal, CorpWatch, Multinational Monitor, News </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Insider, In These Times, and The American Conservative. His columns have appeared in The Miami Herald, </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Houston Chronicle, Philadelphia Inquirer, Columbus Dispatch, Sacramento Bee and Atlanta Journal-Constitution, </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>among others.</span><br/><span><br/></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Madsen is the author of <i>The Handbook of Personal Data Protection</i> (London: Macmillan, 1992), an acclaimed </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>reference book on international data protection law; <i>Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999</i> (Edwin </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Mellen Press, 1999); co-author of <i>America's Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II</i> (Dandelion, 2003); </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>author of <i>Jaded Tasks: Big Oil, Black Ops & Brass Plates; Overthrow a Fascist Regime on $15 a Day</i>; and </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span><i>The Manufacturing of a President: the CIA's Insertion of Barack H. Obama, Jr. into the White House</i>.</span><br/><span><br/></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Madsen has been a regular contributor on RT and PressT and a frequent political and national security analyst </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>on Fox News and has also appeared on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, and MS-NBC. Madsen </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>has taken on Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity on their television shows. He has testified as a witness before the </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>US House of Representatives, the UN Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and an terrorism investigation panel of the </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>French government.</span><br/><span><br/></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Madsen has some twenty years experience in security issues. As a U.S. Naval Officer, he managed one of the </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. He subsequently worked for the National Security Agency, </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>the Naval Data Automation Command, Department of State, RCA Corporation and Computer Sciences Corporation. </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Madsen was a Senior Fellow for the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a privacy public advocacy </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>organization. </span></span></span><span>Madsen is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club.</span></div>
<div><font color="#000000" face="'Times New Roman'" size="3"> </font></div>
<div><div><div><span><span><img src="http://www.newsfollowup.com/id/images_69/jim2.jpg"/><br/></span></span></div>
<div><font color="#111111" size="5"><b>Jim Fetzer, Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth</b></font></div>
<div><span><span><span><span> </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>James H. Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is Distinguished McKnight University Professor on the Duluth</span></span></span></div>
<span>campus of the University of Minnesota. A <i>magna cum laude</i> in philosophy graduate of Princeton University in </span></div>
<div><span>1962, he was commissioned as a 2nd Lieutenant and became an artillery officer who served in the Far East. </span></div>
<div><span>After a tour supervising recruit training in San Diego, he resigned his commission as a Captain to begin work </span></div>
<div><span>in the history and philosophy of science at Indiana in 1966. He completed his graduate work by earning his</span></div>
<div><span>Ph.D. in the history and philosophy </span><span>of science from Indiana in 1970.</span></div>
<div><span> </span></div>
<div><div><span><span><span> He has taught at a wide range of institutions of higher learning, including the Universities of Virginia (twice), </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>Cincinnati, North Carolina at Chapel Hill, New College of the University of South Florida, and UMD, where he served </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>from 1987 until his retirement in 2006. His honors include a research fellowship from the National Science Foundation </span></span></span></div>
<span>and The Medal of the University of Helsinki. He has published more than 100 articles and reviews and 20 books in </span></div>
<div><span>the philosophy of science and on the </span><span>theoretical foundations of computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive </span></div>
<div><span>science. </span><span>His biographical sketch has appeared in the <i>Directory of American Scholars</i>, <i>Who's Who in the Midwest</i>, </span></div>
<div><span><i>Who's Who in America</i>, and <i>Who's Who in the World</i>.</span></div>
<div><span> </span></div>
<div><span> In 1992, he organized a research group consisting of the most highly qualified experts to study the death of</span></div>
<div><span>JFK, which led to the publication of <i>Assassination Science</i> (1998), <i>Murder in Dealey Plaza</i> (2000) and <i>The Great</i></span></div>
<div><span><i>Zapruder Film Hoax </i>(2003). He founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth in 2005 and invited Steve Jones </span>to serve as his </div>
<div>co-chair. He organized the first national conference for Scholars in Madison in 2007 and published its first book, </div>
<div><i>The 9/11 Conspiracy: The Scamming of America</i> (2007). He also organized Scholars' first international conference </div>
<div>in Vancouver in 2012.</div>
<div><span> </span></div>
<div><span> He was the keynote speaker at The American Scholars Conference hosted by Alex Jones in Los Angeles in</span></div>
<div><span>2006. That year, he also appeared on "Hannity & Colmes" (twice) and later on "The O'Reilly Factor". He was flown</span></div>
<div><span>to Athens to be the featured speaker on 9/11 on a 3.5 hour television program broadcast worldwide by satellite. He</span></div>
<div><span>was flown to Buenos Aires to speak in 2008 and again in 2009, where he was the main speaker at The International</span></div>
<div><span>Symposium on 9/11 Truth and Justice. He organized another symposium in London in 2010, "Debunking the "War on</span></div>
<div><span>Terror'". He has been widely interviewed on radio and television. </span></div>
</div>
<div><span><span><span> </span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>This symposium will explore the physical, scientific, political and criminal aspects of 9/11 letting the chips fall</span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span>where they may. I will keep everyone informed of any changes related to The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference.</span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span> </span></span></div>
<div><span><span>Thanks!</span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span><span> </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span><span>Steve Francis</span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span><span><span><span><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.newsfollowup.com/" target="_blank">http://www.newsfollowup.com</a></span></span></span></span></div>From a recent email exchange about planes/no planes with Anthony Lawson, Clare Kuehn, me and Morgan Reynoldstag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-07-15:3488444:BlogPost:579572013-07-15T13:26:31.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<p></p>
<div><p><span>(1) Anthony Lawson:</span></p>
<p><span>I really am getting quite a lot of amusement, on a rather dull <span class="aBn"><span class="aQJ">Sunday</span></span> morning, from these exchanges. <br></br><br></br>Have you got a calculator anywhere handy?<br></br><br></br>If so, try this: 160 minus 48<br></br><br></br>Press EQUALS and the answer is 112<br></br><br></br>That means, according to Professor Dr James Fetzer, that 112 feet of aeroplane should have been left sticking out of the South Tower, had the…</span></p>
</div>
<p></p>
<div><p><span>(1) Anthony Lawson:</span></p>
<p><span>I really am getting quite a lot of amusement, on a rather dull <span class="aBn"><span class="aQJ">Sunday</span></span> morning, from these exchanges. <br/><br/>Have you got a calculator anywhere handy?<br/><br/>If so, try this: 160 minus 48<br/><br/>Press EQUALS and the answer is 112<br/><br/>That means, according to Professor Dr James Fetzer, that 112 feet of aeroplane should have been left sticking out of the South Tower, had the plane had been real, that is.<br/><br/>Now send that off to the aforementioned physics departments and see what responses you get. </span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>(2) Clare Kuehn:</span></p>
<p><span>No, you miss the point. Like your orange, it's a thought experiment but it's an exaggeration. Point is: SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN STUCK ON ENTERING THE FLOORS ... stuck out or not fully entered, with parts breaking off, as he's said repeatedly.</span></p>
</div>
<p></p>
<div> </div>
<p></p>
<div><span>So who's laughable, Anthony? 1. parts broken off different directions air vs. floorpan trajectory path</span></div>
<p></p>
<div> </div>
<p></p>
<div><span>2. video fine all through, just grey in that part with NO HOLE; same blur all over (very little) and no interlacing.</span></div>
<p></p>
<div> </div>
<p></p>
<div><span>So how's that for amusement?</span></div>
<p></p>
<div><span> </span></div>
<p></p>
<div class="im"><div><p>(3) Jim Fetzer:</p>
<p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Well, let's see. According to Anthony's hypothesis, a real plane really entered a massive, 500,000-ton building with no loss in velocity, which is a gross violation of Newton's laws and, as Clare has explained, there is no evidence of collision effects, which should have been numerous and varied due to the difference in resistance it would have encountered. Indeed, it also does not explode on impact, which should have happened due to immense friction.</span></p>
<p></p>
<div>Moreover, as anyone can see from the videos, it passes completely inside the building BEFORE it explodes. There is a discernible difference in time between the disappearance of the tail (where the building shows no signs of damage) and its subsequent explosion. It has to have come to rest in that 48' traveling 500 mph, if Anthony is correct. And if he now claims it was only exploding from the friction, it should have done that already. Q.E.D.</div>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<div><p>P.S. The man can't even substract! The building was 208' wide. The plane was 160' long. So had to come to a halt in 48' = 208' -160'. I knew Anthony was dumb, but not this stupid.</p>
<p></p>
<p>(4) Morgan Reynolds:</p>
</div>
<p></p>
<div class="gs"><div id=":1y8"></div>
<div id=":1ym" class="ii gt m13fe05ef07614689 adP adO"><div id=":1yl"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div align="center">WTC Tower 2 to Plane: So You Think You Can Take Me?</div>
<div align="center">by</div>
<div align="center">Morgan Reynolds</div>
<div><p></p>
<p>I have no trouble admitting error on 9/11. Like many, I erred on the ‘demolition’ meme before Dr. Wood’s work. And long ago I hypothesized a fly-by at WTC2 with the technology the perps have to turn the underside of a plane sky-blue, ‘disappearing it’ visually. <a title="http://nomoregames.net/2006/08/27/how-they-did-the-plane-trick-at-wtc2/" href="http://nomoregames.net/2006/08/27/how-they-did-the-plane-trick-at-wtc2/" target="_blank">http://nomoregames.net/2006/08/27/how-they-did-the-plane-trick-at-wtc2/</a> When I did not get attacked for that article, I knew it was the wrong idea for how they pulled off the WTC plane trick!? I get attacked if I’m over the target, but not if I’m off target, which just adds more to the 9/11 clutter they love. </p>
</div>
<div><p>I’m so glad to see Anthony Lawson’s camera expertise employed to explain away disappearing wings ‘n things like engines in the South Tower penetration images when other parts of the plane image are clear. Isn’t that reassuring? Whatever it takes, hey Anthony? Then we’ve got Anthony’s expertise to explain impossible air speeds through air and little or no deceleration upon ‘impact’ with a steel/concrete tower despite an aluminum airliner supposedly encountering the resistance of a real steel/concrete building. Ain’t imagery wonderful, whether cgi or images projected in the sky recorded on videos located on buildings or on the ground? Road Runner physics but trot out anything and everything to defend the official story or some minor plane departure from it. Planes are a vital key to the whole caper because Planes = Muslim hijackers = war on Muslim world = war on the world. </p>
<p></p>
</div>
<div><p>Poor Anthony, it’s an impossible thesis to defend. Let’s discuss three points here to disprove the proposition that planes crashed into the twin towers, with more proof to follow:</p>
<p></p>
</div>
<div>1) Fact: the core was 39’ from the wall in the case of the 9/11 South Tower hit. Talk about a tight, hellacious collection of steel and concrete only a first down (that’s an American football term, Anthony) + 9’ away. So it is not stupid, ignorant or arrogant to expect most of a 160’-long aircraft to be stopped cold outside the building. It would have been. That WWII B-25 bomber was mostly stopped outside of the Empire State Building or stuck in it. <a title="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUlWpqLsOVs" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUlWpqLsOVs" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUlWpqLsOVs</a> Further, the 9/11 ST videos show no deceleration. Impossible in a real collision, otherwise known as Newton’s first and second laws. Don’t know them? Look ‘em up. Joe’s law might help. <a title="http://nomoregames.net/2008/06/13/311/" href="http://nomoregames.net/2008/06/13/311/" target="_blank">http://nomoregames.net/2008/06/13/311/</a> Of course, Joe’s just a retired engineer who worked once upon a time in the aerospace industry, so he don’t know nuthin’. Then we see no 9/11 aircraft debris visible in either WTC hole—rather unusual, no? (=impossible collision physics). There was such debris in the B-25 crash. Of course that was a real crash, not a fake one. Further, there was no aircraft debris below the holes according to first responder testimony I cite in my legal affidavit. <a title="http://morganreynolds.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/080128_reynolds93aff.pdf" href="http://morganreynolds.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/080128_reynolds93aff.pdf" target="_blank">http://morganreynolds.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/080128_reynolds93aff.pdf</a> There should have been a lot. Another physical impossibility. Surprise! You believe otherwise? Prove it. There was such debris in the B-25 crash. For another instructive NYC crash see<a title="http://nomoregames.net/2012/01/19/what-911-should-have-looked-like/" href="http://nomoregames.net/2012/01/19/what-911-should-have-looked-like/" target="_blank">http://nomoregames.net/2012/01/19/what-911-should-have-looked-like/</a> </div>
<div><p></p>
<p>2) Fact: Newton’s third law of motion was still in effect that morning; remember the ‘equal and opposite reaction’ deal? The force of the collision is equal and opposite on both objects in a collision. Same collision physics if the building falls on the 767 as the plane running into the building. Doesn’t matter, force is equal and opposite on both bodies. Either way, whichever body is in motion, the Boeing survivability is bulls**t. Pardon my truthful language. The building is hell strong vs. an aluminum plane. <em>Capiche</em>? The ‘damage-inflicted’ score in terms of an NBA contest (that’s a basketball league, Anthony) would have been WTC2 100, plane 2. I’ve proven that every which way, go to <a href="http://nomoregames.net/" target="_blank">nomoregames.net</a> and dig in. A zillion joules? Whatever, says the building, bring it. I’ll throw it right back at you. No time lag. See how you like it. Have some. Gonna run your VW convertible into my 18-wheeler? Fine, bring it! Stronger structure wins, big time. Gonna run your airplane into a steel lighting rig? Have at it. It doesn’t require a whole lot of steel to destroy a plane. Only takes a bit. I could get up on a plane with my 10-lb. sledge hammer and make it unflyable in minutes. Steel cables/lighting system? OK, good example: Little Rock AR American flight 1420 landed in a T’storm and hit some steel, <a title="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1420" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1420" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1420</a> * destroying the plane. Broke the fuselage into three sections. Call it Joe’s Law. OK, you’re gonna run your plane into 7-8 floors of my towers? I’ve got about 4,545 tons of steel, glass, concrete, aluminum, etc., per floor to f*** you up. That’s 31,818 tons vs. your 125 tons? Hey joke, bring it. I’ve got you 254 tons to one and I’m steel and concrete and you’re aluminum. You want a piece of me? Steel is about 3x stronger than aluminum per pound. You think you can take me? Let’s see what you got! Run into me, come on! See how much you hurt me! OK, I’ve got thinner steel toward the top, so I’ll cut the margin by 5% (steel was 20% of tower weight and let’s say 20% lighter toward top = .2 x .2 = .04 = 4%). Don’t like that number? Put in another, it’s still a colossal mismatch. So the aluminum plane runs into 7-8 compact 208’ squares of steel and concrete which outweigh the plane 241:1. Can you say, “Plane go splat.” Anybody see the Asiana flight 214 miss the landing a bit at SFO? See the tail section snap right off? Plane now uncontrollable. Doesn’t take much force for that tail to go bye-bye, oops separation, cause it’s a 40’ tall heavy section hanging out at the end of that egg shell, er, airframe. Mass centralization? Not! I pull a fifth wheel trailer, trails no problemo vs. a bumper pull travel trailer. Fifth wheel hitch is over the rear wheel axle, like 18-wheelers do it, not hanging out hitched up past the bumper. A travel trailer sways much more than zero and needs an equalizer hitch to control it. Meanwhile, we have not a single tail section from four alleged airliners 9/11? Bullshit! I’m quoting George Carlin here. If religion is bullshit, then 9/11 is bigger bullshit. </p>
<p></p>
</div>
<div>3) Fact: the official seismic data on the Richter equivalent scale show 0.9 ML and 12 sec. duration at 8:46:26 for the NT hit and a weaker 0.7 ML and 6 sec. duration at 9:02:54 for the ST hit despite allegedly much higher speed by the 580-mph 767 (whoa, big boost in joules) and a hit lower in the tower. And the ST hole was smaller than the NT hole too, though both were quite undersized to swallow the 767s whole. At least that was consistent: the hole was too small at all four events. NIST never gave the dimensions of the tower holes despite its 10,000-page report, predictably enough. A 1.0 ML (local magnitude Richter) is equivalent to 30 pounds of TNT of force or energy yield (source: Wood, <em>WDTTG?,</em> pp. 78-9) or about 20 pounds at 0.7 ML. This is a ‘micro earthquake’ not felt by humans. Under 2.0 are micro earthquakes usually not felt by humans. Since the towers were anchored in bedrock, the signal traveling through the earth would be bigger if a real 767 had hit but it was weak, weak, hardly above the background noise level. Virtually no ground motion. It had no P or S wave, just a barely detectable surface wave. Like the destruction of WTC7 (ML=.06), we can say “there’s basically no seismic event,” Wood, p. 87. That raises a question about manipulation to make the WTC 2 image sway as shown in Anthony’s favorite data point for the WTC 2 hit <span lang="EN-AU"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcPICd0o_kg" target="_blank"><span><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman"><font>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcPICd0o_kg</font></font></span></a> </span> Let’s get the photographer under oath, etc. Towers designed to withstand #5 hurricanes waving around like palm trees in a hurricane? Hmmm...<a title="http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php" href="http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php" target="_blank">http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php</a>. Who buys that? I don’t. If the video is honest, and based on visual inspection and seismic data I have serious doubt, then the no-plane weapon that made the hole is responsible for the sway anyway, as previously pointed out. Here’s a more credible video posted by the same guy <a title="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIZO-zY3Cug&feature=c4-overview&playnext=1&list=TL_AaqC1ZAe_U" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIZO-zY3Cug&feature=c4-overview&playnext=1&list=TL_AaqC1ZAe_U" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIZO-zY3Cug&feature=c4-overview&playnext=1&list=TL_AaqC1ZAe_U</a> showing no deceleration in the Evan Fairbanks immaculate penetration ST video. </div>
<div><p></p>
<p>4) Bottomline: the evidence shows the four plane “events” on 9/11 resembled no previous or subsequent plane crashes in history. Why is that? Duh. Could it be because they weren’t real? They were faked? Isn’t it obvious? </p>
</div>
<div>QED</div>
<div><p></p>
<p>PS: The 9/11 planners faked the ‘plane events’ well enough, however, to convince dullards, the inattentive, the fearful, trolls, and the bought-up that planes really crashed, here, there, everywhere. Into what category does Mr. Lawson fall? Who cares? Tail sections? Serial numbers? Fuhgeddaboudit. </p>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>*<font face="Times New Roman">The aircraft skidded off the far end of the runway at high speed, slammed into a steel walkway with the landing lights for runway 22L and finally came to a stop on the banks of the </font><a title="Arkansas River" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas_River" target="_blank"><font face="Times New Roman">Arkansas River</font></a><font face="Times New Roman">.</font></div>
<blockquote><p><font face="Times New Roman">"After departing the end of the runway, the airplane struck several tubes extending outward from the left edge of the instrument landing system (ILS) localizer array, located 411 feet beyond the end of the runway; passed through a chain link security fence and over a rock embankment to a flood plain, located approximately 15 feet below the runway elevation; and collided with the structure supporting the runway 22L approach lighting system." <sup><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1420#cite_note-ntsb-2" target="_blank"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a></sup></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Such structures are usually </font><a title="wikt:frangible" href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/frangible" target="_blank"><font face="Times New Roman">frangible</font></a><font face="Times New Roman"> - i.e. designed to shear off on impact - but because the approach lights were located on the unstable river bank, they were firmly anchored and the impact destroyed the aircraft. It broke into three pieces and </font><a title="Fire" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire" target="_blank"><font face="Times New Roman">ignited</font></a><font face="Times New Roman">.</font></p>
<div><font face="Times New Roman"> </font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Dick Eastman vs. Jim Fetzertag:911scholars.ning.com,2013-07-11:3488444:BlogPost:579192013-07-11T14:00:00.000ZJames H. Fetzerhttp://911scholars.ning.com/profile/JamesHFetzer
<h1 class="singlePageTitle"><span class="font-size-3"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/11/the-debate-over-911-truth-dick-eastman-vs-jim-fetzer/">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/11/the-debate-over-911-truth-dick-eastman-vs-jim-fetzer/</a></span></h1>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Dick Eastman vs. Jim Fetzer</h1>
<h2>by Jim Fetzer (with Dick Eastman)</h2>
<p> …</p>
<p></p>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle"><span class="font-size-3"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/11/the-debate-over-911-truth-dick-eastman-vs-jim-fetzer/">http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/11/the-debate-over-911-truth-dick-eastman-vs-jim-fetzer/</a></span></h1>
<h1 class="singlePageTitle">The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Dick Eastman vs. Jim Fetzer</h1>
<h2>by Jim Fetzer (with Dick Eastman)</h2>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/11/the-debate-over-911-truth-dick-eastman-vs-jim-fetzer/flight-175-2/" rel="attachment wp-att-259392"><img class="lazy alignright wp-image-259392 data-lazy-ready" src="http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Flight-1751.jpg" alt="" width="158" height="166"/></a>As the founder of <a href="http://911scholars.org">Scholars for 9/11 Truth</a>, it has been my fate to receive attacks from all sides, including “the thermite sniffers” (Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan, and their allies) but also by “the plane huggers” (including Anthony Lawson, and Dick Eastman), not to mention the members of the Judy Wood alliance, which displays <a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/01/911-photographic-portfolio-of-death-and.html">the features that are characteristic of a cult</a>.</p>
<p>The first group, “the thermite sniffers”, has been defeated by a series of articles co-authored with T. Mark Hightower, a chemical engineer–”<a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/05/has-nanothermite-been-oversold-to-911.html">Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?”</a>, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/17/is-911-truth-based-upon-a-false-theory/">“Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”</a>, and <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/27/nanothermite-if-it-doesnt-fit-you-must-acquit/">“Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”</a>, which has been complemented by new research supporting the conclusion that the Twin Towers were destroyed by means of mini or micro nukes, including <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/12/911-truth-will-out-the-vancouver-hearings-ii/">“9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings II”</a>, <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/29/mini-neutron-bombs-a-major-piece-of-the-911-puzzle/">“Mini-Neutron Bombs: A Major Piece of the 9/11 Puzzle”,</a> and <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/01/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/">“Mystery Solved: The WTC was Nuked on 9/11″</a>.</p>
<p>The situation with the Wood’s cult–which includes the dogma of DEWS, the sacred text, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0615412564/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=27932663875&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8107399212051190916&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_5wbzimp8xp_b">Where did the Towers Go?</a>, a mystical leader (Judy Wood herself), an a praetorian guard that viciously attacks anyone who questions those views (as <a href="http://www.amazon.com/review/RC0R225GYLP3J?cdPage=1">3,000 attacks on me</a> for an originally 5-star review, now downgraded to 3-stars following The Vancouver Hearings, vividly displays). But while we disagree about how the Twin Towers were destroyed, key members of this group, including Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds, agree with me that no Big Boeings–757s at Shanksville and the Pentagon, 767s at the North and South Towers–crashed on 9/11, which makes them allies on this aspect of 9/11.</p>
<p>Morgan was the first to make a public splash about “no planes” when he appeared on FOX NEWS in 2008, which appears to have been a set-up to discredit him when the anchor brings up the idea of “no planes” given the videos “the rest of us saw”, as though any of us who deny that Boeing 757s and 767s crashed on 9/11. He did what he could on that show:</p>
<p><object width="480" height="395" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7Q8tA2iqaXo"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><embed wmode="opaque" width="480" height="395" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7Q8tA2iqaXo" allowscriptaccess="never"></embed> </object>
<br/> <a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q8tA2iqaXo">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>More importantly, Morgan published <a href="http://nomoregames.net/2008/06/13/311/">a piece by Joe Keith</a>, who was the software engineer who designed the on-ground “shaker system” for Boeing, who’s point that the videos show the plane (Flight 175, presumably) passing through its whole length into the building in the same number of frames it passes through its own length in air, which is impossible–unless Newton’s laws were suspended on 9/11! Notice that Joe describes himself as an “aerospace engineer” because he is a software engineer who worked in the aerospace industry.</p>
<p>It was Joe’s argument that convinced me that no Boeings had crashed on 9/11, which has come to be known as the “no planes” position. But Anthony Lawson and Dick Eastman appear to have no grasp of elementary physics and have both attacked me again and again for my position, which they assume to be false, given the limitations of their understanding. The only attack on me that comes close to the one launched by Dick Eastman was advanced by Kevin Ryan, who, like them, did not understand the issues, as I explained in <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/06/the-debate-over-911-truth-kevin-ryan-vs-jim-fetzer/">“The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Kevin Ryan vs. Jim Fetzer”</a>. I am glad to report, therefore, that he appears to be redeeming himself with a new book on 9/11, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Another-Nineteen-Investigating-Legitimate-Suspects/dp/1489507833/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1373503451&sr=1-1&keywords=ryan+kevin">ANOTHER NINETEEN</a> (2013), which I have yet to read but which others are telling me looks very good to them.</p>
<blockquote><p>Dick Eastman has attacked me many times, where I am publishing this together with my replies in exactly the same sequence of sentences and exchanges that appeared during a recent email thread–the only exceptions being that I have introduced some formatting to separate one huge paragraph into several smaller and more manageable paragraphs, fixed a few typos on both sides, and have added some videos related to the “no planes” question.</p>
<p>Dick Eastman and I are going to have a public debate over whether or not the Twin Towers were hit by Boeing 767s, which he claims is true but I deny. It will be held on <a href="http://mikeharris.us/">The Mike Harris Show</a> on Thursday, 18 July 2013, from 3-5 PM/CT on the Rense Radio Network. So those who care about these issues may want to join us. It will be a two-hour program with the time to speak allocated impartially between us about a crucial bone of contention regarding 9/11.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>True history of how the truth of 9-11 was thwarted and who thwarted it.</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>by Dick Eastman (with Jim Fetzer)</h3>
<p> <br/> However he presents himself now in articles and on the radio, James Fetzer was one of a group who fatally hurt efforts to bring the true perpetrators of 9-11 to justice. <span>FALSE. AS BECOMES INCREASINGLY OBVIOUS AS YOU READ THROUGH THE RUBBISH HE HAS POSTULATED TO SUPPORT THIS FALSE DEPICTION, WHICH IS PROVABLY FALSE, HE HAS MISREPRESENTED ME AT EVERY TURN. HE HAS NEVER READ MY STUFF AND DOESN’T EVEN KNOW THE HISTORY OF SCHOLARS.</span></p>
<p>He gave massive attention to the no-planes-hit-the-WTC towers group that I many years ago named the “no-planers.” (They called me the “plane hugger” because I countered with others all their arguments stating that the planes were all “video fakery” (Nico Haupt’s term), that the witnesses who saw planes were liars, that it would have been impossible for a “flying bus” (Morgan Reynolds’ term) to penetrate a “steel building” and not bounce off (Gerard Holmgren’s argument) and a dozen arguments which I answered, Peter Sault answered, Mark Bilk answered, Eric Salter answered. <span>FALSE. SALTER COMMITTED A BLUNDER THAT WAS EXPOSED IN AN ARTICLE CO-AUTHORED BY MORAN REYNOLDS WHEN HE USED TWO DIFFERENT FRAMES OF REFERENCE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS DECELERATION.</span></p>
<p><span>IT WAS A MISTAKE BUT THE MINOR KIND OF DECELERATION HE WAS CLAIMING — WHICH IS NOT PRESENT — IS NOTHING LIKE THE COMPLETE LOSS OF FORWARD MOTION THAT SHOULD HAVE TAKEN PLACE, AS I’VE EXPLAINED IN ONE ARTICLE AFTER ANOTHER EASTMAN HAS NOT READ:</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/911-planesno-planes-and-video-fakery/"><span>“9/11: Planes/No Planes and ‘Video Fakery’”</span></a></span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/15/the-911-passenger-paradox-what-happened-to-flight-93/"><span>“The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93?”</span></a> (with Dean Hartwell)</span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/04/01/reason-and-rationality-in-public-debate-the-case-of-rob-balsamo/"><span>“Reason and Rationality in Public Debate: The Case of Rob Balsamo”</span></a></span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2012/06/official-account-of-pentagon-attack-is.html"><span>“The ‘official account of the Pentagon attack is a fantasy”</span></a> (with Dennis Cimino)</span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/jim-fetzers-vancouver-powerpoint/"><span>“Fakery and Fraud in the ‘Official Account’ of 9/11”</span></a></span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/07/911-truth-will-out-the-vancouver-hearings-i/"><span>“9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings I”</span></a></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>I caught the no-planers in deliberate deception after deception to mislead people in support of their theory. <span>FALSE. I WAS NOT A “NO PLANER” UNTIL AT LEAST MID-2007 AND MY VIEWS ARE DIFFERENT THAN THOSE OF OTHERS MENTIONED HERE.. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY REAL PLANE TO HAVE ENTERED THOSE BUILDINGS WITHOUT CRUMPLING AND EXPLODING.</span></p>
<p><object width="480" height="395" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7l_c1gJEpJE"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><embed wmode="opaque" width="480" height="395" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7l_c1gJEpJE" allowscriptaccess="never"></embed> </object>
<br/> <a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7l_c1gJEpJE">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p><span>I TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE WITNESS REPORTS, WHICH EASTMAN DOES NOT UNDERSTAND. AND I EXPOSED ANTHONY LAWSON AS PROMOTING RUBBISH YEARS AGO. SEE, FOR EXAMPLE, “AN OPEN LETTER TO ANTHONY LAWSON ABOUT ‘ABSURDITIES’”. HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND EVEN ELEMENTARY PHYSICS. I HAVE EXPLAINED THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE “HITS” WERE SHOWN ON TELEVISION FOOTAGE MANY TIMES. HERE’S AN EXAMPLE,</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span>“Were the 9/11 crash sites faked?” (Seattle, WA, 13 June 2012):</span></p>
<p><span>Part 1 <a href="http://archive.org/details/scm-75926-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320"><span>http://archive.org/details/scm-75926-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320</span></a></span></p>
<p><span>Part 2 <a href="http://archive.org/details/scm-75938-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320"><span>http://archive.org/details/scm-75938-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320</span></a></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Rosalee Grable and Holmgren met in Chicago and devised the “no-planer” thesis — I knew the both well — I had introduced Holmgren (an Austrailian) to American 9-11 investigators — having been an investigator since way before Fetzer, Reynolds or Haupt began their counter-intelligence operations against the American public. <span>FALSE. I RESISTED THE VERY IDEA FOR AT LEAST 18 MONTHS OF BADGERING BY MORGAN REYNOLDS AND THEN BEGAN INTERVIEWING ABOUT 15 STUDENTS ABOUT IT BEFORE I BECAME CONVINCED BY THE ARGUMENT OF JOE KEITH, WHICH ANTHONY HAS DONE HIS BEST TO MISREPRESENT.</span></p>
<p><span>HIS ARTICLE CAN BE FOUND ON MORGAN’S SITE AT NOMOREGAMES.NET. JOE OBSERVED THAT THE “PLANE” PASSES THROUGH ITS OWN LENGTH INTO THE TOWER IN THE SAME NUMBER OF FRAMES THAT IT PASSES THROUGH ITS OWN LENGTH IN AIR, WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE UNLESS A 500,000 TON BUILDING PROVIDES NO MORE RESISTANCE TO A THE PATH OF A PLANE IN FLIGHT THAN AIR.</span></p>
<p>Not only did James Fetzer give the many who suddenly appeared all believing the no-plane-hit-the-WTC position — but he also stated that their arguments had merit and deserved the foremost place he had given them at Scholars for 9-11 Truth — which he founded with Steven Jones and then took over for himself to lead <span>COMPLETE RUBBISH. STEVE JONES LEFT SCHOLARS. I DID NOT BOOT HIM. THAT WAS HIS DECISION–AND IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH “PLANES/NO PLANES”, WHICH AT THAT POINT IN TIME I HAD NOT TAKEN SERIOUSLY</span></p>
<p>– with the army of no-planers backing his power play – and himself presented the no-planes-hit-the-WTC arguments — as Fox News and the American Press Club and other networks started using him as the representative “9-11 Truther” <span>FALSE HISTORY. I WAS FEATURED ON FOX THREE TIMES –TWICE WITH “HANNITY & COLMES” AND ONCE WITH O’REILLY– BEFORE I TOOK “NO PLANES SERIOUSLY AND IT DID NOT COME UP DURING THESE INTERVIEWS</span></p>
<p><object width="480" height="395" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ys41jnL2Elk"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><embed wmode="opaque" width="480" height="395" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ys41jnL2Elk" allowscriptaccess="never"></embed> </object>
<br/> <a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>he and Morgan Reynolds (whom I knew at Texas A & M when I was in the doctoral program in Economics) and who was with Karl Rove and Ted Olsen in the White House on Sept 11, 2001 so suddenly he shows up joining Fetzer and Holmgren and Rosalee and Haupt in saying no-planes-hit-the-WTC <span>FALSE HISTORY, SINCE I DID NOT TAKE AN INTEREST IN “NO PLANES” UNTIL MUCH LATER</span>– when he must have known — if he was looking at the subject at all — that his old acquaintance from 1980-82 was arguing that Flight 77 did not crash at the Pentagon — which is in fact proven in a way that no one can question the proofs.</p>
<p>He must have known because of the I was the first to prove that witnesses were right about a large plane seen heading towards the Pentagon over the Naval Annex but that it flew over the Pentagon while bombs (see Barbara Honegger on bombs inside the Pentagon here and <a href="http://tinyurl.com/smokecurtain">http://tinyurl.com/smokecurtain</a>). <span>GOOD FOR DICK EASTMAN, BUT I NEVER BELIEVED A BOEING 757 HAD HIT THE PENTAGON. WHEN I PUBLISHED ABOUT IT, HE ATTACKED ME, EVEN THOUGH HE AND I WERE (OR SO I THOUGHT) ON THE SAME SIDE. </span></p>
<p>I was one of the first and it turns out one of the few that was not part of the Mike Ruppert Carol Brouillet group which immediately acted as gatekeepers — keeping away the ones who knew what decisive and conclusive evidence is (what is decisive and conclusive evidence? <span>THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME. I HAVE PUBLISHED MANY ARTICLES EXPOSING THE FRAUDS OF SANDY HOOK AND THE BOSTON BOMBING.</span></p>
<p>Dzhokhar Tsaranev’s white backpack for example — how can you respect anyone writing about the Boston Marathon Bombing who misses that (either through being really slow or because they are part of the obstruction of justice effort protecting the false-flag terrorism complicit Joint Task Force). <span>I POINT OUT THE WHITE PATCH ON THE BACKPACK FOR THE CRAFT INTERNATIONAL GUY WHO’S BACKPACK APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE TWO THAT EXPLODED.</span></p>
<p>All of my arguments were met Fetzer and all of the other no-planers with the same kind of response you just got when you forwarded my letter. Fetzer accused me of divisiveness because I would not tolerate putting “no-planes-hit-the-twin-towers” on the same footing <span>NO, I HAVE ONLY FAULTED YOU FOR CRITICIZING ME WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING MY ARGUMENTS. IF YOU HAD ACTUALLY READ THEM</span> , YOU (Fetzer gave it top priority, along with Judy Woods ray gun thesis which was contrived to crowd out Dr. Steven Jone’s discovery of thermite residues in WTC dust. <span>FALSE. I FEATURED JUDY ON MY RADIO PROGRAM ON 11 NOVEMBER 2006 BECAUSE I HAD BECOME CONVINCED THAT NANOTHERMITE WAS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE EVIDENCE, WHERE IN COLLABORATION WITH T. MARK HIGHTOWER, IT HAS BEEN PROVEN:</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span><a href="http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/05/has-nanothermite-been-oversold-to-911.html"><span>“Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?”</span></a></span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/17/is-911-truth-based-upon-a-false-theory/"><span>“Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”</span></a></span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/27/nanothermite-if-it-doesnt-fit-you-must-acquit/"><span>“Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit!”</span></a></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>– but that is another story about Fetzer that Jones and other physicists have told – and remember, Fetzer at first “made nice” with Jones to jointly found “Scholars for 9-11 Truth” — only to, in a coordinated effort with the dedicated no-planers crowd — to take over Scholars from Jones and afterwards to pit Judy Wood’s energy-beams-brought-down-the-WTC against the conclusive evidence that Thermite was used in the demolition (as proven in laboratories in the USA and Europe) <span>THIS IS COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH. I INVITED JONES TO BE MY CO-CHAIR AT THE SUGGESTION OF DAVID RAY GRIFFIN. HE AND I NEVER DISCUSSED “NO PLANES”. IT WASN’T EVEN ON MY RADAR UNTIL THE FOLLOWING YEAR. JUDY’S ALTERNATIVE DESERVED CONSIDERATION, IN MY VIEW, BECAUSE I WAS CONVINCED THAT NANOTHERMITE COULD NOT CUT IT.</span> — in fact, when a graduate student involved with “9-11 Truth” (a cultish name — the real investigators refer to themselves as “9-11 (citizen) investigators”.</p>
<p>Anyway, this graduate student was later walking down the sidewalk with two women when he was approached by two men and shot in the head twice, the women he was with were unharmed and nothing was stolen. <span>THIS WAS A TRAGIC EVENT THAT APPEARS TO HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 RESEARCH. I SPOKE WITH THE DETECTIVE WHO INVESTIGATED THE CASE TWICE ABOUT IT.</span> Knowing the role that Judy Wood and Fetzer were playing I speculated in a letter whether this graduate student had visited Wood’s office and seen something on a monitor that he should not have seen — and guess how Judy Wood reacted? Did she say I was crazy? No. Did she simply deny it? No. Did she ignore it as a suggest that is beneith being dignified with a response? No. What she did was accuse Steven Jones of being behind the murder. Dr. Jones in another state. <span>WHAT JUDY THOUGHT ABOUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME.</span></p>
<p>Dr. Jones being the most peaceful and loving soul one can imagine, a quiet conservative professor of Physics at Brigham Young University with no political or activist interests, beyond local public service (like most Mormons) — and that to me was a significant datum telling me all I need to know about Judy Wood and reinforcing all I had already known from direct experience about Dr. Jame Fetzer. <span>RIDICULOUS. I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT AND HAD NOT EVEN FEATURED JUDY WOOD ON MY RADIO SHOW. DICK EASTMAN IS MAKING THIS UP AS FAR AS IT GOES CONCERNING ME.</span></p>
<p><object width="480" height="395" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hcE2IFJ7wCY"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><embed wmode="opaque" width="480" height="395" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hcE2IFJ7wCY" allowscriptaccess="never"></embed> </object>
<br/> <a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcE2IFJ7wCY">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>Morgan Reynolds went to the no-planers rather than me — I was certainly known to him — and he never once contacted me before going to Reynolds. The fact is that I was better known in November of 2001 than I am today — David Ray Griffin’s first book “9-11 The New Pearl Harbor” devoted half of its chapter on the Pentagon to my work, and the other half to Gerard Holmgren’s who I introduced to the world when he first contacted me and I began including his articles on 9-11 in my postings. Indeed Griffin had more references to Dick Eastman than to Condoleeza Rice — as me in my vanity readily recall. Also I was on the Jim Valentine program with Christopher Bollyn — one of the few investigators who was for real and is still in action looking for the truth — Bollyn and I were interviewed on November 25, 2001 — when we already had enough evidence of remote controlled planes and bombs in the WTC that should have brought down the organized crime Administration — were it not for the Karl Rovish operations involving Mike Ruppert and Carol Brouillet — who became the leaders of ther “Truth Movement” and kept me out of every conference — Ruppert later said that 9-11 was irrelevant, and when the 9-11 commission opened up Ruppert left the country as a guest of some non-profit group to discuss “peak oil” in several countries in Europe and Latin America. I was outraged that he took everyones money and became the big spokesman — pushed me aside — and even threatened to sue me for harming his business (he is in the business of informing you, just like Alex Jones — who as far as I know still has never mentioned my name to any of his audience) — if it wasn’t for Rense I would not have had a threat of hope to hang on to, btw – and so the big name 9-11 guy that took front stage — disappeared when it was time to present evidence. I sent evidence and e-mailed evidence but it never reached the committee. Some Jewish guy was the gatekeeper to the committee — and I asked him to forward my evidence — and was told by this Jewish guy, that he knew who to give my letters to and it wasn’t the committee. And I shared that with people — and still got the same zero response I get on social credit and Dzhokhar’s white bag. People are afraid to speak up — because they do not want to lock horns with an organization that shoots people in the head twice for going against their obstruction of justice operations. I have seen good men slandered and insulted and ridiculed until they gave up. My friend Quig was a reporter and he talked to me on the phone and in internet about starting his own website, about how cop-vs-cia which was started by Ruppert and which was rejecting his 9-11 postings, they banned me — how he was going to start a website and post my stuff. He was also talking to me about General Purdy, whom he know and had told about me, he wanted me to call Purdy — I was reluctant — I like the “merchandise” the truth to sell itself, and so I hesitated. When I did call Purdy it was to tell him that Quig had been run over in a parking lot in Arizona, by a pickup truck. Quig had been carrying a piece of plywood when he was hit. I told Purdy about Quig but I knew it was pointless to tell this know-it-all general what I knew without having Quig there endorse me. (Because by then the false-theories — the planted absurd theories — were in full swing and people expected everyone talking about 9-11 to be a crazy unbalanced sort of person — a view which Nico Haupt cultivated and developed — an agent from the Netherlands — helping to cover the crime in which his Bilderberger queeen was doubless involved. Haupt took my writings by the way and told me he was distributing them to everyone — he had built a data-bank of all 9-11 investigators and was communicating with them all — part of the operation to isolate and shut down the real ones and promote the false ones - like the no-planers, like the hologram plane people, the nuclear devices people and any fool theory or blind ally leading red-herring person. There are videos of Haupt by himself disrupting real grass-roots citizen investigation meetings. He just started talking and they guy who had the floor speaking to the group – just could not continue as Haupt gave his raving talk — repulsing everyone — not making sense, interjecting the no-planes-hit-wtc arguments about video “fakery” etc. And in that way good people gave up or were turned off on the very thought of looking into the matter. And Fetzer sided with Haput, Reynolds, Holmgren and several others — John Lear, the black sheep CIA-flying son of the Lear Jet man — he too a no-planes-hit-the-WTC operative. <span>YES, AFTER I INTERVIEWED FIFTEEN GUEST ABOUT IT AND BECAME CONVINCED BY JOE KEITH’S ARGUMENT, WHICH ANTHONY HAS NEVER BEEN ABLE TO GRASP.</span></p>
<p>And Fetzer called on the Truth Movement to ban me because I am divisive and not “inclusive”, not tolerant of other opinions all of which deserve a fair impartial hearing by qualified scholars – etc. but Fetzer never allowed my findings to be presented in his Scholars for 9-11 forums — <span>FALSE. I HAVE NOT MADE THE PRACTICE OF BANNING ANYONE, ALTHOUGH DICK EASTMAN IS SLOPPY AND IRRESPONSIBLE, AND I HAVE BEEN DEMONSTRATING HERE.</span></p>
<p><object width="480" height="395" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uo7OJAJtyxk"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="never"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><embed wmode="opaque" width="480" height="395" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uo7OJAJtyxk" allowscriptaccess="never"></embed> </object>
<br/> <a title="YouTube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo7OJAJtyxk">YouTube - Veterans Today -</a></p>
<p>He preferred Morgan Reynolds who gave weak and bogus reasons on TV and in mainstream media interviews — giving as his reason for saying Flight 77 did not crash: “Where’s the blood.” <span>FALSE. I DID NOT COMMENT ON MORGAN’S “NO PLANE” POSITION AT THE TIME, SINCE I HAD NOT STUDIED THE ISSUE. UNLIKE EASTMAN, I ACTUALLY TAKE THE TIME TO STUDY THE EVIDENCE BEFORE I ADOPT POSITIONS ABOUT THESE ISSUES.</span></p>
<p>Now that was a valid question for most of you dummies (who do not see the importance of Dzhokhar’s white backpack when the bomb was in a black one!!!!! — you swallowed it — you let Fox news and other media get away with showing Fetzer and Reynolds <span>YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE BOSTON BOMBING, WHICH ONLY OCCURRED THIS YEAR, WHEN THE FOX APPEARANCES WERE IN 2006!</span> and not showing them Christopher Bollyn or Dick Eastman (someone bought the populist Spotlight newspaper, just to fire reporters like Bollyn, in my opinion, btw — but as I was saying, Morgan Reynolds knew — from Karl Rove? — that you can always turn people away from the truth and make them dead-set against accepting the truth by getting there first and giving them stupid arguments for the truth, bad arguments for the right answer, arguments like, “where is the blood?” which repel people, which insult them, which infuriate them, which make the whole question aversive to them — and that is what the media with Fetzer’s and Reyonold’s help accomplished <span>WHAT IN GOD’S NAME IS HE TALKING ABOUT? THIS VERGES ON THE INSANE</span></p>
<p>– Reynolds and Holmgren and Wood are the kind of people that Fetzer showcased after he threw out Jones <span>FALSE AGAIN. I DID NOT “THROW OUT” JONES. THE HISTORY OF SCHOLARS IS DOCUMENTED AT 911SCHOLARS.ORG UNDER “FOUNDER’S CORNER” AND IN “WIKIPEDIA AS A 9/11 DISINFORMATION OP”. HE GETS NOTHING RIGHT.</span> and as he called for everyone to blacklist me because I am divisive. <span>I COULD HAVE CARED LESS ABOUT DICK EASTMAN. I DID NOT EVEN KNOW OF HIS EXISTENCE UNTIL HE BEGAN MAKING THESE FALSE, MALICIOUS AND UNWARRANTED ATTACKS UPON ME</span></p>
<p>(Actually Fetzer started promoting no-planes and Judy Wood while Jones was still co-chairman of Truth — Jones objected to this effort to attach all of that crap to Jones work through the affiliation — and Jones protested and so Fetzer threw Jones out <span>THIS IS COMPLETELY FALSE. I WAS NOT INTERESTED IN “NO PLANES” AND DID NOT REMOVE STEVE. HE DEPARTED ON HIS OWN AND WAS VERY NASTY ABOUT IT</span>– but Jones gave the laboratory discovery of thermite in the WTC dust – Fetzer gave us nothing <span>NANOTHERMITE CANNOT POSSIBLY HAVE BLOWN THE TOWERS APART, AS T. MARK HIGHTOWER AND I HAVE EXPLAINED IN THREE ARTICLES THAT, LIKE MY WORK ON “NO PLANES”, DICK EASTMAN HAS APPARENTLY NEVER BOTHERED TO READ.</span> — nothing but his puffed up pose as a scholar, which he sold to naive Jones — and then when Jones had his name associated with Scholars for 9-11 Truth Fetzer brought in the no-planers. <span>THIS IS ALL RUBBISH AND IS PROVABLY FALSE. CONSULT THE SOURCES I HAVE CITED HERE AND MORE</span>.</p>
<p>I want that in the history books because that is what really happened. None of the big names today are for real. Jesse Ventura included none of the evidence of the Pentagon that is conclusive and compelling — he gave another version of the Morgan Reynolds argument. You don’t go from professional wrestler (all fake) and before that a trained killer for the Navy Seals and then become Governor of a state unless you have pleased the power brokers of high organized crime. <span>THIS IS DUMB. EVEN IF JESSE DOESN’T ALWAYS HAVE IT ALL RIGHT–HIS ENDORSEMENT OF NANOTHERMITE BEING AN EXAMPLE–HE DOES A FAR BETTER JOB THAT NITWITS WHO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE THEY ARE SLOPPY, CARELESS & FOCUSED ON THEMSELVES.</span></p>
<p>That’s my view of all this. I was there. I measured these people first hand. And I was the expert in the field — the field that Fetzer and his fellow operatives succeeded in muddying and stinking to protect the real killers of 9-11. <span>THIS IS COMPLETE CRAP. THIS MAN IS A FRAUD AND A PHONY AND, AS I HAVE DEMONSTRATED HERE AGAIN AND AGAIN, A BIG-TIME LIAR FOR PRETENDING TO KNOW WHAT HE DOES NOT KNOW. HE HAS HIS “FACTS FOXED”. INDEED, IT IS WORSE THAT THAT. HE IS MAKING ALL THIS UP.</span></p>
<p>Don’t let Fetzer impress you with what he learned from us — because he uses all of the good arguments we gave him when he goes to another country — because first he has to make himself credible — that is why sometimes he sounds like one of the real investigators — he has had a lot of contact with us — but then he turns, as he turned on Jones and starts sabotaging with his usual counter-intelligence measures the people who invited him to speak. <span>DICK EASTMAN HAS CONSIGNED HIMSELF TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY. I DON’T THINK I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED A MORE IRRESPONSIBLE MAN IN THE HISTORY OF 9/11 RESEARCH. HE HAS DISCREDITED HIMSELF WITH HIS RUBBISH.</span></p>
<p>End of story. Save this for the history books. <span>YES. LET THE HISTORY BOOKS RECORD THAT DICK EASTMAN WAS SO PREOCCUPIED WITH PROMOTING HIS OWN IMAGE AND PACIFYING HIS INSATIABLE EGO THAT HE EVEN ATTACKED THOSE WHO WERE DOING MORE TO ADVANCE THE CAUSE OF 9/11 TRUTH THAN HE AND HIS IGNORANT FRIEND ANTHONY LAWSON COULD POSSIBLY CONTRIBUTE BECAUSE OF THEIR LAÇK OF KNOWLEDGE OF PHYSICS AND PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS. IT IS ALL THE MORE A PITY, BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH INTELLIGENT MEN WHO, HAD THEY NOT ABUSED THEIR TALENTS, MIGHT HAVE ACTUALLY AMOUNTED TO SOMETHING. I HAVE OFTEN EXTOLLED THE VIRTUES OF “THIS IS AN ORANGE”,</span> <span>BUT THAT CONTRIBUTION HAS BEEN MORE THAN OFFSET BY ANTHONY’S OWN ENDLESS OBSESSION WITH ATTACKING ME FOR HIS IGNORANCE OF PHYSICS, WHICH APPEARS TO BE EXCEEDED ONLY BY EASTMAN’S INSATIABLE QUEST TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR IMMENSE CONTRIBUTIONS THAT EXIST ONLY IN HIS MIND.</span></p>
<p>Dick Eastman<br/> Yakima, Washington</p>
<p>P.S. ON ANTHONY LAWSON, SEE <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/03/911-an-open-letter-to-anthony-lawson-about-absurdities/">“9/11: An Open Letter to Anthony Lawson about ‘Absurdities’”</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>Dick Eastman and I are going to have a public debate over whether or not the Twin Towers were hit by Boeing 767s, which he claims is true but I deny. It will be held on <a href="http://mikeharris.us/">The Mike Harris Show</a> on Thursday, 18 July 2013, from 3-5 PM/CT on the Rense Radio Network. So those who care about these issues may want to join us. It will be a two-hour program with the time to speak allocated impartially between us about this contentious issue.</p>
</blockquote>