According to Ace Baker: Jim Fetzer is a Psy-Operator

[James H. Fetzer]

Others warned me that he would pull another stunt like this. I think you all should know. He
seems to believe that, if he has ASSERTED that holographic projections are impossible,
then I, Jim Fetzer, KNOW that they are impossible. Anyone who won't take his word for it,
apparently, becomes a candidate for "psy-operator". That is the childlike character of Ace
Baker. Jim

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/2011650/1/

acebaker Jul 24 2009, 03:22 PM Post #1

Posts:
19
Group:
Members
Member
#248
Joined:
Jul 1, 2009

I know Jim Fetzer as well as anyone in 9/11 truth circles. I spoke at his conference,
I've been on his show a dozen times, he's been to my house. Jim fetzer is a psy-operator,
a very important part of the controlled opposition that we know must exist in the 9/11
coverup.

Fetzer has been publishing his list of evidence for video fakery. He cites September
Clues, which is full of mistakes and strawmen, like "pixel perfect match", and "missing
frames", and "line penciled in", and which now promotes the diabolical "total animation
theory", with "moving bridges" and "missing skylines", and claiming the 9/11 videos were
completely animated by some unknown advanced technique.

Fetzer also promotes the hologram theory, which is physically impossible, and he knows it.

I, of course, have written a book length treatise compiling the correct evidence for no
plane crashes and video fakery.

The 9/11 Airplane Video Composites

It is published online for all to experience. I have discussed this material ad nauseum
with Fetzer, on his show, and presented him with multiple revised versions. The entire
project stemmed from HIS request for me to author a chapter in his alleged forthcoming
book.

And yet, Dr. Fetzer refuses to include a link to this treatise. Why would that be? Why
would Dr. Fetzer promote the dubious material, and not the scholarly work?

There are critics of my work. In my opinion, none of the criticism stands up to scrutiny,
but that's a bit beside the point here. There's plenty of criticism of September Clues
also.

"Impossible Speed" is a good argument, but only applies to a stock 767. It leaves open
the possibility of some modified aircraft (Anthony Lawson's hangout).

"Impossible Entry" is a brilliant argument, and applies to any aircraft, but Fetzer never
gets around showing the impossible video frame, the "magically healing columns" frame
from Hezarkhani. I have repeatedly explained why there is more than sufficient resolution
to see the hole in the tower, if it were there.

The goal of the psy-operators is to protect the truth, spinning all seekers off into some
false territory. Observing the behavior of Fetzer and all the other ops is the perfect
compass pointing to the truth, you just need to know how to read it.

Edited by acebaker, Jul 24 2009, 03:22 PM.

JimFetzer Jul 24 2009, 04:51 PM Post #4

Posts:
5
Group:
Members
Member
#259
Joined:
Jul 20, 2009

Egad! Ace Baker stabs me in the back again! What has become of honest differences of opinion?
I had a high enough regard for his work that, even after he had pulled the hare-brained stunt of
faking suicide on my radio program (on Freedom Underground Radio), i was willing to feature him
again on "The Real Deal", where you can hear the program at radiofetzer.blogspot.com. He had
told me he was sorry for having done that and would be willing to say so on the air, but I simply
let it go. This is such ridiculous drivel that I can hardly believe what I am reading here. We all
have our own preferences as to which arguments we find the most persuasive. I outlined those
I have found most appealing in "New Proof of 9/11 Video Fakery". I have featured as many as
fifteen different students and experts on these questions on my radio programs, many of which
are archived at the same site. Apparently, if it is not Ace Baker/Ace Baker/Ace Baker, over and
over, all the time, this self-centered, immature narcissist will not be satisfied, which means that
he will never be satisfied. So what if I don't have a link to his site? What the hell difference does
that make? I featured him again and we told the audience how to get there. I even stated that I
still intended to publish his study of compositing in the new book on 9/11 that I am editing. That,
I am afraid, would be difficult to do under these circumstances. That he would make these claims
after our history is beyond belief. There is no objective basis for such claims. I have persistently
pursued a "big tent" approach in dealing with these subjects, featuring Joe Keith, John Lear, The
Webfairy, killtown, Morgan Reynolds, and many more, in my efforts to present alternative views
to the public and to sort them out for myself. Moreover, if I am an op, I wish those checks would
start showing up, beause--in today's economy--I could make good use of the money. So I suggest
that Ace contact the CIA, NSA, or whomever to get those funds flowing! He thinks I've earned it!