[Peace-discuss] Midwest 9/11 Truth Video Conference II, Sept 11, 2016

Sun Sep 11 17:59:06 UTC 2016

James Fetzer and I coordinated a second Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference that was held over the last five days or so via video conferencing systems with contributors from the US and EU.https://www.youtube.com/user/sirgaryking
It comes on the heels of our Academic Freedom Conference held about two weeks ago.
It contains contributions from 15 academics, former government officials and various researchers.
It contains material not only on 9/11 Truth but many other issues including Holocaust revision (not denial).In just this short amount of time over 10,000 views from multiple websites have been tallied despite what many on the Peace-discuss list view as controversial material.I work in an international sphere and the resistance I get locally is immaterial. Despite this resistance, I believe there are some local persons that want to see this.I will not respond to any negative replies to this email.

JAMES FETZER

|  
|   
|   
|   |    |

   |

  |
|  
|   |  
JAMES FETZER
   |   |

  |

  |

Jim Fetzer
On the eve of the 15th observance of the atrocities of 9/11, Stephen Francis and I have concluded that a second Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference is warranted, especially in light of the new evidence that has been presented in the new book, AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11: COMPLIMENTS OF THE CIA, THE NEOCONS IN THE DOD AND THE MOSSAD (2016), which substantiates what happened:

While the first Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference featured three speakers, including Wayne Madsen, the second features a broader array of experts, including several civil and structural engineers, who review the proof that this was a nuclear event. Some of the presentations here originally appeared on "The Real Deal", but were so comprehensive and thorough that we have included them here again.

                 The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 1: Jim Fetzer, "What we know now we didn't know then"

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer and McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth in December 2005 and invited Steven Jones, Ph.D., to join him as co-chair. Ironically, they split over Jones' commitment to nanothermite and his opposition to introducing alternative theories into 9/11 research. Those who view this conference will be well-positioned to decide which of them had it right.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 2: Dennis Cimino, "9/11: Who was responsible and why"
Dennis Cimino, who 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. He has collaborated with Jim Fetzer on many articles and videos about “false flag” attacks. In this presentation, he and Jim review 9/11 for the perspective of who was responsible and why and how we know.

         PART II: WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE 

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 9: Susan Lindauer, "My relations with Saddam Hussein"

Susan Lindauer, a former CIA asset who served as liaison between the CIA and Saddam Hussein, recounts her experiences with the agency and Saddam's desire to avoid war with the United States, where he offered to buy 1,000,000 cars a year for the next ten years--and, he aded, "If that is not enough, make it twenty!" Imagine where American would be economically if, instead of squandering four to five trillion in laying waste to the Middle East, we had developed the US infrastructure.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 10: Scott Bennett, "9/11 from the inside"

Scott Bennett, a former Army intel and psyops officer, has become a whistleblower of the financial scams that have been perpetrated under the guise of 9/11. His short of being tried in a civilian court for an offense on a military base became the first installment in an extraordinary saga that led to his incarceration with one of the financial geniuses who was behind the scheme to make money for prominent figures in the government, including Hillary and the Clinton Foundation.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 11: Nicholas Kollerstrom, "Israeli complicity in 9/11"

Nick Kollerstrom, an historian of science from the UK and the world's leading authority on the 7/7 London subway bombings (whose book, Terror on the Tube, is now in its 3rd edition), reviews some of the most striking on-the-scene indications of Israeli complicity in 9/11, including the arrest of the five "Dancing Israelis", who were held for 41 days and then released and allowed to return to Israel, where they went on Israeli television and explained that they had been there "to document the event".

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 12: Preston James, "Complexities of the 9/11 Cover Up"

Preston James, a social psychologist with a Ph.D. from a Big 10 university, discusses the complex moves that were made to cover up the complicity of Israel in planning and staging 9/11, where many false clues were planted to through off even serious and sincere investigators of the crime. He draws a number of parallels with the assassination of JFK, where it becomes apparent that the United States has had a succession of presidents who would never have occupied the office but for the death of JFK.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 13: Alan Sabrosky, "The Rationale behind 9/11"

Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D., University of Michigan), received the Superior Civilian Service Award after more than five years of service at the US Army War College as Director of Studies, Strategic Studies Institute, and holder of the General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research. He has been among the most outspoken critics of 9/11 and has not hesitated to identify the interests and parties that were responsible for committing these atrocities upon the American people.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 14: Stephen Francis, "9/11 and Cultural Marxism"

Stephen Francis proposed the first Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference, which was held on the campus of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (22 September 2013) and, as the 15th observance of 9/11 approached, he and Jim Fetzer decided the time was right for a second. Here Stephen offers a meta-perspective placing the events of 9/11 within a broader cultural context that offers a broader point of view for understanding the events of that tragic and fateful day. 

Click here to return to Part 1 of the Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference. Special thanks to Gary King for the excellence of his work in rendering these interviews for publication here.
POSTED BY JIM FETZER AT 10:12 AM 1 COMMENTS
The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II, Part 1: How it was done

Jim Fetzer
On the eve of the 15th observance of the atrocities of 9/11, Stephen Francis and I have concluded that a second Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference is warranted, especially in light of the new evidence that has been presented in the new book, AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11: COMPLIMENTS OF THE CIA, THE NEOCONS IN THE DOD AND THE MOSSAD (2016), which substantiates what happened:

While the first Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference featured three speakers, including Wayne Madsen, the second features a broader array of experts, including several civil and structural engineers, who review the proof that this was a nuclear event. Some of the presentations here originally appeared on "The Real Deal", but were so comprehensive and thorough that we have included them here again.

                 The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 1: Jim Fetzer, "What we know now we didn't know then"

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer and McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth in December 2005 and invited Steven Jones, Ph.D., to join him as co-chair. Ironically, they split over Jones' commitment to nanothermite and his opposition to introducing alternative theories into 9/11 research. Those who view this conference will be well-positioned to decide which of them had it right.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 2: Dennis Cimino, "9/11: Who was responsible and why"
Dennis Cimino, who 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. He has collaborated with Jim Fetzer on many articles and videos about “false flag” attacks. In this presentation, he and Jim review 9/11 from the perspective of who was responsible and why--and how we know.

                       PART I: HOW IT WAS DONE

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 3: Chuck Boldwyn, "The Towers could not Collapse"
Chuck Boldwyn, a retired high-school math, physics and chemistry teacher, puts the combination of elements together that appear to have been used to destroy the World Trade Center, not just the Twin Towers but WTC-6 and WTC-7 as well, using nano-thermite combined with mini or micro nukes, which appear to have been refined from the nuclear warheads of Davy Crockett recoilless rifles, which were given to Israel by the US to be refined and brought back for deployment on 9/11. 

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 4: T. Mark Hightower,  "The Myth of Explosive Nanothermite"
T. Mark Hightower, a chemical engineer, did pioneering work on nanothermite in 2011, which demonstrate that nanothermite cannot possibly have been responsible on its own for the destruction of the Twin Towers. That is simply a myth. He and I did a radio interview on "The Real Deal" discussing these issues in even greater detail. One article he cites, "Nanothermite: If it doesn't fit, you must acquit!", can be found on-line here as well as in the book. It is disappointing that A&E911 has not been responsive to this evidence, which falsifies its preferred theory of how it was done.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 5: Charles Pegelow, P.E. (ret.), "It looks like nukes"
Charles Pegelow, P.E. (ret.) Civil/Structural EngineerCharles has long held the key to understanding what happened in New York on 9/11 is accounting for between 70 and 90,000-tons of steel, which is missing and appears to have been vaporized. He believes that this was a nuclear event--probably 4th generation devices--substantiated by the US Geological Survey dust sample studies exposing nuclear elements. He thinks A&E911 should have made progress beyond nano-thermite and WTC-7 by now.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 6: Joe Olson, "Unequivocal 9/11 Nukes"
Joe Olson, a license civil and structural engineer, reviews the evidence from the World Trade Center and explains how we know that the destruction of the Twin Towers was done using nuclear devices, which has been confirmed by the US Geological dust study evidence and by the epidemiological data of medical maladies suffered by first responders and residents in the vicinity of Ground Zero.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 7: Don Fox, "Some Elements of Nuclear Events"

Don Fox 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. In this presentation, he talks about the structure of the atom and the effects that result from fission and fusion events, with special concern for the correlations between the elements discovered in the US Geological Survey studies.

Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference II: Session 8: Dennis Cimino, "What Happened at the Pentagon"
Dennis Cimino, who 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. He has collaborated with Jim Fetzer on many articles about “false ag” attacks. In this presentation, he and Jim discussed what did and did not happen at the Pentagon on 9/11.

Click for the rest of the second Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference, "Who was responsible and why".POSTED BY JIM FETZER AT 8:30 AM 14 COMMENTS
Professor of Medicine: Hillary has Subcortical Vascular Dementia and less than 1 year to live

"Hillary Clinton has 1 Year to Live"--Medical School Professor

Published 7 September 2016 

I am a professor at a medical school. I have taught at three institutions (currently in my third). I will not provide my exact credentials because several people who have tried to speak out against Hillary Clinton have been killed (look up "Clinton Body Count"). The Clintons have also ruined the lives of others who have spoken out, including Drew Pinsky. Drew Pinsky had his show canceled and received death threats, and Huffington Post writer David Seaman was terminated and is living in hiding for his columns about Hillary's health. Thanks for understanding the reason why I do not disclose my exact credentials. 

Hillary Clinton might actually have 1 year to live based on medical records that were leaked indicating she has a disease called Subcortical Vascular Dementia. While many videos have been made about her health, all of them have missed the severity of her illness. She could die very soon, since Vascular Dementia is progressive and has a 3-5 year life expectancy. Clinton actually has a severe form of the disease that impacts the subcortex region of the brain, which includes the brainstem. This might explain why Clinton is dry-coughing so much. The brainstem controls primitive functions of the body like breathing, heart rate, and blood pressure. When there is ischemia to this region, B/P, HR, and breathing won't function correctly. Hillary's cough is so noticeable because she can't seem to get over it. Most people only need a couple of coughs and they are able to overcome what is in their throat. But not Hillary. Hillary has tried to explain that she has an "allergic cough." This is completely false and a lie. Based on her medical records, it is related to her Vascular Dementia, which she is dying of. She could rapidly decline if circulation is weak to the brainstem. I am very concerned about Hillary, and if her VaD diagnosis is true, she would likely face increasing difficulties over the next few months. 

|  |
| Here is the notes to which she refers, which lacks the letterhead. |

Hillary's health record also states that she has "complex partial seizures." I have witnessed many people who have had seizures, and I believe Hillary is definitely showing signs of seizing activity. With complex partial seizures, one can show signs such as head nodding or lip smacking. Hillary, has had several instances where she appears to have had a seizure, the most well-known is when she was in front of a group of reporters. External, noxious stimuli can trigger seizing in certain individuals. Hillary had a seizure in front of the reporters. Not unsurprisingly, they are trying to control her seizures using a Diazepam autoinjector. Autoinjectors are used with urgent drugs such as Diazepam and Epinephrine in order to stop an life-threatening event from happening. If Hillary has seizures, they could cause an oxygen deficiency in the brain, resulting in damage and further progression of her VaD. An autoinjector is needed to control the seizure. 

|  |
| Her campaign insists that this man is a Secret Service Agent. If so, he is no ordinary one. |

Many doctors are not speaking out about Hillary's health, but trust me, they are thinking about it and talking amongst themselves. If you specialize in neurosurgery, neurology, or neurovascular specialities as a doctor, no doubt it is quite obvious that Hillary has a big problem. She can barely walk up stairs and can't stand very long, has to hold on to side rails, etc. This makes sense, because she has VaD of the subcortex which involves the cerebellum (involved in controlling gross motor movements). Hillary, for the most part, can still deliver scripted speeches on green screens, so she still has some function. However, VaD will result in a rapid decline in function of the patient. VaD has a average life expectancy of 3-5 years (about 4 years according to the NHS). Hillary is entering into her final year of life since she was diagnosed with VaD in 2013. Why is she running for president if she is going to die soon? Does it have to do with Obama's Third Term? 

Music: Beethoven's Symphony No.7 in A major op.92 - II, Allegretto Ross Bugden "Flight Hymn"POSTED BY JIM FETZER AT 7:26 AM 3 COMMENTS
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2016

The Wisconsin State Journal betrays The State of Wisconsin

Jim Fetzer

When The Wisconsin State Journal (19 August 2016) published an article by Mark Sommerhauser, who claimed that there is no evidence of the theft of elections in Wisconsin, as Roger Stone had claimed in a recent piece in The Hill (16 August 2016), I was incensed because there is a mountain of proof not only of election theft in Wisconsin but that it has happened here five times, including Scott Walker's recall election, his reelection against Mary Burke, and the recent primary pitting Ted Cruz against Donald Trump, to which Stone had drawn attention in his article, which the WSJ dismissed:

I knew this to be the case from my previous collaboration with Richard Charnin, who is a brilliant statistician and the author of two books on the theft of elections using electronic voting machines, where we had published "Voter Fraud vs. Election Theft: Scott Walker's Wisconsin Reelection" (10 July 2015), which documented the theft with a series of graphs that prove it. I had hoped writing to the reporter who had published a false denial with copies to the publisher and senior editors at the WSJ, something would come of it. Apparently, the publisher cares no more about the truth than his reporter, who, in my view, deserves to be fired. The Journal is betraying the State of Wisconsin!

Here is the letter I sent:

| 
| 

James Fetzer jfetzer at d.umn.edu
 |

 | 
Aug 25 (9 days ago) |  |   |
| 
| to msommerhauser, wsjcity, wsjopine, mbeck, pbrinkman, mdefour, ghesselberg, jhumenik, smilfred, mpitsch, jsmalley, Mitch  |

 |

Mark,

Your article, "Walker: 'Sideshow' focus hurts Trump", includes the provably false claim that allegations of the theft of as many as five Wisconsin elections using voting machines "are not supported by evidence". But that is simply wrong. 
I sent a letter to the editor, which the paper has yet to publish, presumably on the ground that the theft of elections in Wisconsin does not matter to anyone here. After all, while Scott Walker is gutting the state, who should give a damn?

The article I cite, "Voter Fraud vs. Election Theft: Scott Walker's Wisconsin Reelection", can effortlessly be found on the internet. Apparently, no one at The Wisconsin State Journal cares enough to bother to verify what I am reporting here, which is an abdication of the responsibility of the paper to the citizens of the state, not to mention dedication to truth!

So apparently there IS evidence of the theft of Wisconsin elections using voting machines, which I cite in the article based upon Richard Charnin's brilliant research, as an expert statistician who has published two books on the theft of elections using voting machines. There are multiple graphs there and citations of his more extensive research on this matter.

When Roger Stone makes an effort to bring this to the attention to the public, you abuse your position to dismiss his piece either without doing any research to confirm or disconfirm it or by deliberately distortion the facts. The state is undergoing a wrecking operation because Walker and his Republican cronies know they are immune from being removed from office. 
Not only are you massively derelict as a reporter but, along with the WSJ itself, a disgrace and a discredit to Wisconsin.
You deserve to be fired!
Jim
James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.McKnight Professor EmeritusUniversity of Minnesota Duluthhttp://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/Editor, moonrockbooks.com

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota Duluth.POSTED BY JIM FETZER AT 8:57 AM 3 COMMENTS
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2016

AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11: Targeting a book to promote 9/11 research

Jim Fetzer

The Cambridge University Press journal, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, became an instant sensation by publishing target articles on specific, well-defined subjects and inviting experts from around the world to post critical commentaries about it, which has resulted in significant advances in research. During the 9/11 Truth Teleconference on 31 August 2016, I proposed that the new book about 9/11,

which has 15 contributors, might serve a similar purpose and thereby similarly significantly advance 9/11 research. Here are some of the important reasons to believe that we ought to adopt that suggestion.

The book is divided into 28 chapters, where the core falls into 8 sections that, in reverse order, focus upon "9/11 Limited Hangouts","The Myth of Nanothermite", "The 9/11 Crash Sites", "The Pentagon: What didn't Happen", "New York was Nuked on 9/11", "What happened on 9/11", and "9/11: Who was responsible and why", Parts I and II, with three chapters each. It has a Preface and a Prologue as well as an Epilogue and an Afterword with an Index. Softcover, 458 pages, 338 photos, priced low at $20.

There are three major groups in 9/11 research--A&E911, which supports the use of nanothermite and focuses on Building 7; Judy Wood and DEWs, which promotes Directed Energy Weapons and no planes theory; and Scholars for 9/11 Truth, which advances the use of mini or micro nukes to blow apart the Twin Towers and likewise contends that none of the official 9/11 aircraft actually crashed on 9/11. The contributors explain why A&E911 is right about Building 7 but wrong about nanothermite and why Judy Wood and DEWs is right about no planes but wrong about DEWs.

Because the arguments and evidence presented are specific and detailed, the book facilitates a level of intellectual engagement that is missing from most discussions about 9/11. In relation to nanothermite, for example, three chapters explain that it is a law of materials science that, in order for an explosive to blow apart a material, it must have a detonation velocity equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material. The speed of sound in concrete is 3,200 m/s; in steel, it is 6,100 m/s; but the highest detonation velocity attributed to nanothermite in the scientific literature is only 895 m/s. And the three chapters in the book that make these points were originally published in 2011--over 5 years ago!

The Latest from A&E911

That makes it obvious that those who want to defend the use of nanothermite in the destruction of the Twin Towers need to explainwhat else was used to bring that effect about. While it is certainly true that something else could have been added to make it explosive, A&E911 has been reluctant to say what that something else could have been. The same, of course, could be said of toothpaste, which is also non-explosive but could be made explosive by adding an explosive to it. After all these years, it is not unreasonable to expect that A&E911 should have an answer to that question. But that does not seem to be the case. Here is a report about the state of its research on 9/11, which has just appeared:

While the article presents proof that the "official narrative" of 9/11 cannot be sustained, it does not advance anything that has not been widely known with the 9/11 research community in the past. If you compare these propositions with my own "20 reasons the 'official account' of 9/11 is wrong", for example, you can see that the latest from A&E911 does not significantly advance our knowledge and understanding beyond what was available then, where "20 reasons" wasoriginally published on 9/11 of 2011! Surely we should be able to expect more from an organization that has such a high profile and tends to consume the attention of the public and media. Just compare their respective contents:

Judy Wood and DEWs

Indeed, some might be tempted to argue that the earlier article covered more ground that the latest from A&E. But Judy Wood and DEWs have not been doing any better. Consider, for example, that a review of her book, WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? (2010), which I originally published on 20 May 2012, was subsequently downgraded from 5-star to 3-star on the basis of research presented during The Vancouver Hearings, which were held in June 2012. It has been subject to attack around 7,500 times now. But denouncing evidence of the use of nukes does not explain it away, where Judy has displayed the unscientific attitude of ignoring it. A scientist would instead take into account new evidence not previously considered and adapt their theory appropriately by accepting hypotheses that had been previously rejected, rejecting hypotheses previously accepted, leaving others in suspense:

The point is that the specificity of the arguments presented in this new book make it possible to make advances by citing specific propositions that are laid out in detail with the evidence supporting them, which enables those who disagree to explain what they have wrong and how we know. Otherwise, we are left in the muddle of having to deal with distorted versions of those arguments, which do not come to grips with the evidence and leaving issues hanging. That was exhibited perfectly during the 9/11 Truth Teleconference, when Adam Ruff and Wayne Costa challenged my explanation of how we know that this was a nuclear event, which were nice illustrations of the point that I am making here.

Objections raised during the call

I observed that the conversion of material into very fine dust and the vaporization of 60-80,000 tons of steel are indicative of the use of nukes as well as the destruction of the buildings to or even below ground level. Wayne Costa replied that elements "that shouldn't be there" does not take into account that some of those elements could have been present because of naturally occurring concentrations of those elements or from other sources. That sounded persuasive but, as the book explains, they would not have been there in the quantities discovered and the correlations between them had this not been a nuclear event. There would have been less likelihood of misunderstanding using the book as a basis.
Adam Ruff contended that there would have been no reason to use nukes because everything that was done could have been done with nanothermite and explosives. Ruff said that there was "a giant pile of debris", but ignored the point that there was no massive stack of debris in the towers' footprints! Comparisons with Building 7 are instructive here, because experience with controlled demolitions have shown that they leave a stack of debris equal to about 12% of their original heights. At 47 floors, WTC-7 left just that residue in a stack of debris 5.5 floors high. But that was not true of the Twin Towers, which, had they been demolished as Ruff suggests, should have left debris piles 14-15 floors high but did not:

|  |
| Compare the debris from WTC-7 (left) with that from WTC-1 (right), which should have been more than twice as high. |

Indeed, while it is appropriate to describe the destruction of WTC-7 as a "controlled demolition", it is not appropriate to use the same phrase for the Twin Towers, which were "demolitions under control" but lacked the characteristics of controlled demolitions. The reason for having to have used a novel technique for their destruction appears to have been to protect the bathtub, which was an enormous dike within which the towers were constructed to protect them from Hudson River water. Had the bathtub been breeched, it would have flooded beneath lower Manhattan, the most valuable real estate in the world, including the subway and PATH train tunnels, which they wanted at all cost to avoid.
The use of mini or micro nukes, which have dialable radii and can be directed upward, means that the destruction of the Twin Towers qualified as the use of "Directed Energy Weapons", which, according to Judy Wood, are devices that provide far more energy than conventional and can be directed. Set at 100' in the core columns, they would have had a diameter of 200' for buildings that were 208' on a side. Their use enabled the destruction of both buildings from the top down in an effort to simulate collapse. But they were being blown apart in every direction and converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust. And this appears to be how it was done as the USGS dust studies substantiate.

Other arguments could be made, of course, including that the final spire of the North Tower seems to run counter to the use of nukes. But even at Hiroshima, the scaffolding of a lone church remained after the enormous blast had done its damage. And these were mini or micro nukes, whose use has also been confirmed by the debilitating medical maladies incurred by first responders and residents of the area, which include non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, esophageal, prostate and blood and plasma cancers at rates far above normal, which Jeff Prager was among the first to point out and whererecent estimates have placed the number affected at close to 70,000.
For those who regard characterizing A&E911 and Judy Wood and DEWs as "limited hangouts", the argument is straightforward. We have three major problems to solve about 9/11: the WHO, the HOW and the WHY. Both of those organizations only address the HOW and refuse to explain the WHO or the WHY. That is simply absurd for 9/11 Truth organizations. Only Scholars for 9/11 Truth addresses all three.AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DOD and the Mossad (2016) lays out the evidence in detail. But we make no claims to infallibility--and the best test of the validity of our case is critical attempts to refute it, which can be accomplished if we make this book the target for scrutiny and criticism and thereby advance the cause of exposing 9/11 Truth.
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20160911/351331c8/attachment-0001.html>