Rainbow in the Dark: Powerful Proof of 9/11 Nukes

by Don Fox with Jim Fetzer In accounting for the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11, there are three contending factions within the 9/11 research community. While virtually everyone agrees that WTC-7 was brought down in a (classic) controlled demolition, they differ with respect to how the Twin Towers were destroyed, which was obviously not by means of any kind of collapse, which we know, given their design, would have been impossible, but which the government has told the American people was the case. These three factions advance different alternative…

9/11: A World Swirling in a Volcano of Lies

by Dennis Cimino with Jim Fetzer BREAKING NEWS: We have found a resolution that validates and integrates three apparently inconsistent positions (on the use of big nukes, small nukes and nanothermite) from respected experts on 9/11. The contentious debate over how the Twin Towers were destroyed has pitted those favoring large (“basement”) nukes against those identifying small nukes distributed in the elevator shafts throughout the buildings against those promoting thermite (or “nanothermite”). Some of the most interesting and important research on the mode of destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC)…

2 + 2 = Israel nuked the WTC on 9/11

By Don Fox (with Jim Fetzer)  “[I]f New York was outsourced to the Mossad and if the Twin Towers were nuked, then the nukes that were used must have been Israeli….[N]o alternative explanation is reasonable.”–Jim Fetzer 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? Does any serious analyst actually believe that the Syrian government–which has been routing the rebels…

9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings II

by Jim Fetzer “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”― Arthur Schopenhauer The evidence that none of the “official plane crashes” actually took place is simply overwhelming, even if there are 9/11 Truth groups that want to avoid it.  Not only did Flight 77 not hit the Pentagon, but Flight 93 did not crash in Shanksville and, even though we have all seen videos purporting to show Flight 11 hit the North Tower and Flight 175 hit…

9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings I

by Jim Fetzer “And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free” — the motto of the CIA, taken from the Gospel according to St. John, which was inscribed on the facade of its Headquarters Building in 1959. The array of ongoing attacks on the 9/11 Truth movement has reached astonishing proportions.  A “10th anniversary 9/11 Truth ‘Hit Piece’ Roundup” published on 12 September 2011, a year and a day after 9/11, included excerpts from and links to no less than 32 attacks, where the majority emphasize the…

An Aeronautical Engineer: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon

by An Aeronautical Engineer (with Jim Fetzer) “This article explains why high-speed flight in relatively close proximity to the ground [as for Flight 77] is virtually impossible – in any fixed-wing aircraft”–An Aeronautical Engineer Among the most important proofs that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon is that the official trajectory — barely skimming the ground at over 500 mph and taking out a series of lampposts — is both aerodynamically and physically impossible. I have argued in the past that it is aerodynamically impossible because ground effect would not allow a 757…

Reflections on the Pentagon: A 9/11 photographic review

by Dennis Cimino (with Jim Fetzer)  “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”–Jim Fetzer Dennis Cimino As we explained in “Limited hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies”, the Pentagon serves as a litmus test for those who profess to be dedicated to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths about 9/11. By that standard, the Journal of 9/11 Studies does not measure up, because…

Limited hangouts: Kevin Ryan, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies

by Jim Fetzer (with Dennis Cimino) “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”–Jim Fetzer In my critique of Richard Gage on C-SPAN, I faulted him especially for offering an answer to the question of HOW that was provably false–the myth of explosive nanothermite. 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…

On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a “time warp”

by Jim Fetzer  “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”–Jim Fetzer Everyone who’s committed to 9/11 Truth should welcome more coverage from C-SPAN. Perhapsthe greatest coverage to reach the public in the past was also from C-SPAN, when it covered the panel discussion of the American Scholars Conference, Los Angeles, 24-25 June 2006. But this one might be an exception. We heard then about nanothermite from Steve Jones, Co-Chair of Scholars for…

James H. Fetzer – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia BUSTED!

by Jim Fetzer Imagine the benefits that would be derived from a dictionary in which the words were improperly defined, whether that occurred accidentally or not. And similar considerations apply to encyclopedias.–The author Having encountered the abuse of Wikipeida for political purposes both in relation to the entry for Scholars for 9/11 Truth, “Wikipedia as a 9/11 disinformation op”, and in relation to my own biographical entry,  “James H. Fetzer — Wikipedia NOT”, I suppose I should not have been surprised. When it turned to the latest version of my entry–which has…