The Science of 9/11
Since Steve Jones and I have diverged in our attitude and our
approach toward the science and the politics of 9/11 research,
here are some videos that explain basic differences between us:
Jim Fetzer on 9/11 in Columbus, OH, Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fymqxVQM8Ps
Jim Fetzer on 9/11 in Columbus, OH, Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNNpPxMx0wg
Jim Fetzer on 9/11 in Columbus, OH, Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYT6jKIMje8
Jim Fetzer on 9/11 in Columbus, OH, Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJwB94_yY0
These videos are from a presentation on 17 February 2007. On
24 February 2007, in Chandler, AZ, Steve and I participated in
discussion of our differences. Here is a video of that session:
Scholars Debate: Jim Fetzer and Steve Jones on 9/11 Science
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9046804812765633069
Here is my opening presentation with a few slides restored:
The Science of 9/11: Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doYGmaYvgMY
The Science of 9/11: Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54-RFTmFdVU
Scholars will be sponsoring a conference on "The Science of 9/11:
What's Controversial and What's Not", 2-4 August 2007, in Madison,
WI. An updated announcement will appear on our web site shortly.
Jim
James H. Fetzer
Founder
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
and
if the questions were pertinant, and if the person is nuts and therefore believes what they are saying, and whether all the poeple who need to be examined take the test. there are thousands of questions. a polygraph would be pointless. if people don't think the empty hole of flight 93 is suspcious then polygraph results would be pointless. we need the movement to stop arguing with each other. we all don't have to agree or research the same things. even once the truth comes out all of these powerstruggles will continue. they are irrelevant
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector
by George W. Maschke and Gino J. Scalabrini
AntiPolygraph.org
pdf, 128 pp.
http://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf
Polygraphs Before Government Job
You want to work for the government and get a clearance higher than dust sucker you have to do a polygraph.
I noted in the recent Alex Jones interview of Sibel Edmonds she stated to get her job she needed a polygraph.
It is my understanding that the powers would like to use this technology to eliminate the majority of problematic people while preserving fear and distrust of it within public use. Making organizations and people rely on "faith based" trust and letting them hope for the best. The government will not rely on such "faith" for its honesty in employees. Connect the dots.
It is a magnificent plan. It shows how easy it is to get the sheep to follow a path.
When we wake up and start using polygraphs on the ones we wish to trust we may get a fair shake. If the government uses it to screen its employees we certainly should use it to screen them. All leaders, especially in the 911truth movement should take them just like anyone who wants
Rick, puh leez
Read the book. The polygraph is just a resistometer with a few bells and whistles - just like the scientological e-meter.
Please do not misquote me in future. I did not say "She has a nice voice, I believe her."
Here is something amusing. Apparently, a White House flack being questioned on CNN about the Iraq war stated : "We
Sophia - where she's at, babe
She represents herself as an D Icke fan, but I think this is just part of her pose. I suspect she is receiving a certain amount of support from our friends in the Georg Soros tendency, who, as Mr Soros himself makes clear in the latest NYRB:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20030
are prepared to outspend AIPAC in the market place of geopolitical graft, if necessary. Hence her interest in Eric Hufschmid's idea that the WTC part of 911 was a zionist coup de theatre, aimed AGAINST the Soroses (and Rothschilds) of this world.
but wheres the tv fakery discussion?
considering the videos available and your presentation style, Jim, I dont see any reason not to present the exposure of TV Fakery at a conference.
It is by far the most obvious issue of 9/11.
A 20 min presentation could be easily put together with help from Fred, Nico, CB, Genghis and webfairy.
It would also remove yourself from the incessant arguing between yourself and Stephen Jones (et al).
Take a break from the madness and present TV Fakery.
i think people are ready
if you follow on from issues already raised in popular dockos. eg. talk about the flashes and pods briefly then, let it lead into... what's wrong here?. why can't we find 1 reliable piece of footage?. some of them seem to be entirely faked... why???. pose it as a question. also maybe focus a bit on 11, and how it can't be confirmed as a boeing from the pictures, so why are we so sure it is flight 11?. could it be something else?. make it clear that you are going in this direction because flight 93 and 77 are obviously missing in action, so only an idiot would not examine the other two planes. and then.. why did the networks show us what seem to be fakes?.
ready or not..
who are we to decide when someone is ready to be exposed to TV Fakery?
Put it out there in a conference and let people deal with it themselves and then upload the video of the conference.
Chances are most have never even considered it due to a number of reasons.
Fetzer's science
Coffinman
Fetzer's science was demonstrated clearly by his refusal to discuss the issue of crash physics regarding aluminium planes penetrating steel buildings.
He has avoided this issue for so long, even when people were asking for his response: http://www.911researchers.com/node/189
He said to another list regarding the matter:
"this is a loose/loose proposition, because it will strike the public as virtually absurd. I have said so in print."
So he tells you only to discuss things that people will embrace readily.
He wants to lie at times to protect people's tiny minds he says.
And you are all talking to him here like you can convince him to pull a TV fakery presentation out of his arse.
If you guys think that Fetzer is gunning for the truth then you are all deluded, it's that simple.
He's just another gatekeeper.
Like I said before, a Trojan horse, and you all want to just let him right in.
Let me see.....
If he gives this TV fakery a mention, he will then be your most visible representative, right?
Some (like Fox) would say your spokesperson.
If anyone can get to read a kid's book called "Ship of fools" you should, it seems stupid for most of the way through, but at the end you realise that the story describes our world.
fetzers appearance
i did urm and ahhh when he appeared recently posting about a misrepresentation of some sentence or other in some cockamamie journal, after (co-incidentally), Sofia and 911Mysteries were exposed for manipulating ricks footage.
I know the score