Thank you for putting it into the Great Consciousness (otherwise known as prayer), but the sad part here is, that all this information has been out there for over a decade, yet people who deem themselves "truth seekers" are nothing more than conspiracytainment seekers and never do the work for themselves.
Otherwise people would not have been swindled out of $7.5+ million the last 10 years.
In the US, most people don't think about anything. And if they want to think, they have garbage media and search engines that dead end in garbage media. Unfortunately I think you're right about the entertainment. But, when I think about the few people I know who questioned 9/11, they're too consumed with worries about bills and rent and food to be able to give brain space to 9/11. They kinda need entertainment, because life is really stressful when you work full time but still can't pay your bills.
And then there's the thing about how Americans are basically incompetent in math and science, so even if they found trustworthy media like Dr Wood's book, they'd open it up, find math equations, and then close it forever.
All an excellent set of reasons We would do vastly better without that psychopath-promoting tool called "money." It is dangerous - promoting psychopaths to the top - and archaic - though They (the moneyed psychopaths in control) hide and suppress the tech that makes it archaic.
$750,000 a year. That is how much the public is paying to be unwittingly misled about "9/11."
On the one hand, it is scandalous.
On the other hand, it reflects how few people are willing to do the work to get to the truth themselves, and how many people are willing to outsource their thinking to others on even the most important issues.
Imagine what a rival organisation could do with that kind of money.
I had a talk with TAP - Truth Action Project, and basically laid bare how this so called inclusive 9/11 “truth” movement is anything but inclusive…
The thing is, there must be an open discussion pertaining to te evidence presented by Dr Reynolds and Dr Wood, so that people can see who has the more solid evidence, something Gage et al cannot afford, as their grift will be up…
I also mentioned to them that the website, the International Center for 9/11 Accountability, will hopefully be going up soon with your help, Dr Hughes, we just need to arrange that talk to has out some ideas - I’ll be getting into contact with you soon….
As I suspected, 9/11 Revisionist (Norman?) is a shill for Judy and Morgan. It was they who convinced me that something was wrong with the planes in New York City, with which I agree 100%! Flights 11 and 77 were not even in the air that day & 93 & 175 were still in the air after they had "officially" crashed in Shanksville and hit the South Tower. I have been explaining this for over a decade; see, for example, my Boston 9/11 Truth presentation, https://www.bitchute.com/video/cJZCSAv8ZeZC, and tell me where you disagree: what did I say, what do I have wrong, and how do you know. OK?
I'd love to but in and ask why I get ignored or ridiculed everytime I bring up the burning cars, seismic data, lack of debris, unburned paper, undamaged bathtub etc, & ask how the controlled demolition theory accounts for these? I'm not stating that a certain method of destruction is fact, but can't see why this evidence by Wood & Reynolds gets ignored, blocked or ridiculed!
That's for NORMAN, not "MYSTIC BAZARRE". Have you taken a look at what DEWs do? Compare Paradise, CA, Lahaina, HI, and Pacific Palisades, CA, with the WTC. No comparison. PLUS the design of the Twin Towers would have functioned as a Faraday Cage and made DEWs impotent. We all know there are lots of anomalies, but it's 9/11 Revisionist to whom I have replied. GOOD TO GO WITH A 9/11 DEBAGE.
i know it was a reply for Norman, I was just reading the comments and had a genuine question. and I never actually mentioned DEW, I just asked about why the evidence from dr wood gets such a hostile reaction, it was just something I have noticed not just here but on X and other social media. there wasn’t a need to be rude. But it just shows that even as a supporter of 9/11 truth, that if you ask about certain things you get a rude reply for no reason.
OK. There ARE a lot of shills, phonies and frauds in 9/11 research (similar to what I have encountered with JFK investigators). I probably did more to advance discussion of her ideas with the 15 radio shows where I pioneered interaction between computers and websites by having our audience to to her website and then discussing it on the air. I even invited Judy to speak at my Vancouver Hearings in 2010. She not only did not respond but talked her friend John Hutchison from coming and Crocket Gabriel (?) as well. She has promoted the fabrication that I threatened her (which is absurd, given how much I have broadcast her work) by distorting an observation that she was damaging her reputation by advancing a false theory. She's still at it.
Thanks for this article and all the evidence that Richard Gage is a counter-op. I read Sarah and Thomas's article on their website and watch the short video instead of watching the long video - great information about how a counter-op works on the inside.
There is more explosive information in the longer conversation about Richard Gage and the inner working of the architects for an engineered truth.
I found "Juxtaposition1" on substack and what he has to say about Richard Gage is intriguing.
He talks about his friend David W. Gray who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Weapons Lab...
But who he also mentions is Richard Gage... He states, Richard Gage is a spook. A red herring.
A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue.
The term comes from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion.
Gordon Duff - Head Editor of Veterans Today - has already alleged that Steven E. Jones and Richard Gage are spooks for the Defence Intelligence Agency.
I found "Juxtaposition1" on substack and what he has to say is intriguing.
He talks about his friend David W. Gray who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Weapons Lab...
But who he also mentions is Richard Gage...
He states, Richard Gage is a spook. A red herring.
A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue.
The term comes from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion.
Sounds about right. DIA is even more untouchable than the CIA. It's national security. Gage is more or less an actor from Spook Central Casting. He is doing the best he can with a lousy script:).
Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, discussing Black Ops, National Security & 9/11.
Duff also describes how Nano-Thermite does not exist, except for “6 grams of nano-thermite were made on the ISS according to sources supplied by Christopher Bollyn, ONLY as a failed propellant” and that Steven E. Jones knows nano-thermite does not exist, Jones works for the Defence Intelligence Agency, as well as Richard Gage. Video clip: https://rumble.com/v6rm9n1-nano-thermite-does-not-exist.html
I found "Juxtaposition1" on substack and what he has to say is intriguing.
He talks about his friend David W. Gray who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Weapons Lab...
But who he also mentions is Richard Gage...
He states, Richard Gage is a spook. A red herring.
A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue.
The term comes from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs.
It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion.
Thing is - This information has been out there for over a decade.
The problem is that most people who deem themselves "truth seekers" are nothing more than seekers of conspiracytainment, as they don't do the work themselves.
They are more than happy just to outsource their thinking to whatever bullshit they get fed by so called truth tellers in the alternative media sphere.
The people behind 911 have plenty of money. The donations collection is just to provide a veneer of authenticity to a spook cutout organization. Maybe most of the donations are fake. Who knows. I haven't audited it:).
What's to distract? Are you familiar with my arguments: See, for example, "On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a Time Warp", https://jameshfetzer.org/2020/09/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-9-11-truth-in-a-time-warp-2/ Just to give you what to look for, I observe that, for an explosive to destroy concrete requires a denotation velocity of 3,200 m/s; and to destroy steel of 6,100 m/s. But the highest recorded velocity for nano-thermite is 895 m/s, which means it cannot possibly have destroyed the Twin Towers. So what's "distracting" about that? A plain and simple argument. So what is your rebuttal?
SURE. Great idea. I have reached out to Dean Ryan to moderate. His laptop's in for repair but he should be able to work out the arrangements in the meanwhile.
We know what DEWs do from Paradise, CA, Laheina, HI, and Pacific Palisades, CA. They look nothing like the WTC on 9/11. PLUS their design would have functioned like a Faraday Cage. It's not possible this was done with DEWs. Paradise, Lahainaa, and Pacific Palisades prove it wasn't done with DEWs. For easy access to refutations of Judy's theory and of the nanothermite hypothesis as well, check out "On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a Time Warp", https://jameshfetzer.org/2020/09/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-9-11-truth-in-a-time-warp-2/
I was intrigued by Judy's theory and featured her on my radio shows 15 times, where I was pioneering interaction between radio and computers. So I would invite listeners to go to her website on their computers during the show, where she and I would discuss videos and studies she featured there. When I organized and moderated a conference on "The Science and The Politics of 9/11" (2007), I not only featured Judy as my keynote speaker but gave her an unprecedented 3 hours to speak.
When I became convinced the Twin Towers had been destroyed using mini nukes rather than DEWs, however, I modified my 5-star review of her book on amazon.com with a 3-star review emphasizing the results of the US Geological Survey study of dust samples from 35 locations in lower Manhattan, which revealed the presence of elements that would not have been present had it not been a nuclear event. She has never forgiven me.
Conference papers were published in The 9/11 Conspiracy: The Scamming of America (2007), which amazon.com features to this day, as it does my more recent America Nuked on 9/11 (2016). Both are worthwhile and afford an opportunity to compare and contrast the relative merits of alternative theories of how 9/11 was done. ENJOY!
I wondered when you’d crawl out from under your rock, to paste your normal drivel pertaining to you were an ally of Dr Wood.
9/11 Jersey Girl’s Explosive Plea: “A Half-Truth Is Still a Whole Lie”
Jersey Girl and 9/11 widow breaks her silence in a raw open letter to the US Government and the entire truth movement: drop the egos, stop the half-truths,confront ALL evidence
You and I have danced more than once, and your backhanded and deceiving ways have been exposed many years ago, with your honeypot called the “Scholars for 9/11 Truth”, along with the alleged discredited DIA agent, Steven E. Jones, and his fraudulent thermite THEORY.
I will ask YOU again – Just like Richard Gage, with his “explosive” molten metal and thermite THEORY, when will YOU file your “explosive” evidence of nukes on 9/11, to NIST for correction or file a court case against the 23 NIST subcontractors for science FRAUD, like Dr Wood and Dr Morgan Reynolds in 2007.
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Where do you explain what I have wrong? I've laid it out rather clearly in many, many presentations and books. So WHERE ARE YOUR REFUTATIONS? You are terrific at ad hominem attacks and pathetic on responding to arguments supported by evidence. I have asserted: We know what DEWs do from Paradise, CA, Laheina, HI, and Pacific Palisades, CA. They look nothing like the WTC on 9/11. PLUS their design would have functioned like a Faraday Cage.
t's not possible this was done with DEWs. Paradise, Lahainaa, and Pacific Palisades prove it wasn't done with DEWs. For easy access to refutations of Judy's theory and of the nanothermite hypothesis as well, check out "On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a Time Warp", https://jameshfetzer.org/2020/09/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-9-11-truth-in-a-time-warp-2/ Where are your rebuttals? You talk a good game but it's TALK, not PROOF.
Once again, here, We have,The Truth, the Whole Truth,and nothing but The Truth.
Your presentation, of meticulous analysis of factual evidence,
is unbeatable❤️
The highly financed Psy Op lies, "dustify" in the face of it,
Once again unwitting humans end up financing the Glafia……
Thank you Norman🙏😊
Thank you Helen - Hopefully some of the bamboozled donators will start asking questions.
Thank you for putting it into the Great Consciousness (otherwise known as prayer), but the sad part here is, that all this information has been out there for over a decade, yet people who deem themselves "truth seekers" are nothing more than conspiracytainment seekers and never do the work for themselves.
Otherwise people would not have been swindled out of $7.5+ million the last 10 years.
In the US, most people don't think about anything. And if they want to think, they have garbage media and search engines that dead end in garbage media. Unfortunately I think you're right about the entertainment. But, when I think about the few people I know who questioned 9/11, they're too consumed with worries about bills and rent and food to be able to give brain space to 9/11. They kinda need entertainment, because life is really stressful when you work full time but still can't pay your bills.
And then there's the thing about how Americans are basically incompetent in math and science, so even if they found trustworthy media like Dr Wood's book, they'd open it up, find math equations, and then close it forever.
All an excellent set of reasons We would do vastly better without that psychopath-promoting tool called "money." It is dangerous - promoting psychopaths to the top - and archaic - though They (the moneyed psychopaths in control) hide and suppress the tech that makes it archaic.
They would lose Their single tool to power.
Abolition of Money (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/abolition-of-money
$750,000 a year. That is how much the public is paying to be unwittingly misled about "9/11."
On the one hand, it is scandalous.
On the other hand, it reflects how few people are willing to do the work to get to the truth themselves, and how many people are willing to outsource their thinking to others on even the most important issues.
Imagine what a rival organisation could do with that kind of money.
I had a talk with TAP - Truth Action Project, and basically laid bare how this so called inclusive 9/11 “truth” movement is anything but inclusive…
The thing is, there must be an open discussion pertaining to te evidence presented by Dr Reynolds and Dr Wood, so that people can see who has the more solid evidence, something Gage et al cannot afford, as their grift will be up…
I also mentioned to them that the website, the International Center for 9/11 Accountability, will hopefully be going up soon with your help, Dr Hughes, we just need to arrange that talk to has out some ideas - I’ll be getting into contact with you soon….
As I suspected, 9/11 Revisionist (Norman?) is a shill for Judy and Morgan. It was they who convinced me that something was wrong with the planes in New York City, with which I agree 100%! Flights 11 and 77 were not even in the air that day & 93 & 175 were still in the air after they had "officially" crashed in Shanksville and hit the South Tower. I have been explaining this for over a decade; see, for example, my Boston 9/11 Truth presentation, https://www.bitchute.com/video/cJZCSAv8ZeZC, and tell me where you disagree: what did I say, what do I have wrong, and how do you know. OK?
Hey uncle, wanna come have a face to face?
How about a Zoom, you man enough?
Real Deal Media Hosts 9/11 Revisionist
Countering Richard Gage & Jim Fetzer - Making the argument for DEW technology on September 11, 2001
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/read-deal-media-hosts-911-revisionist
SURE. I will reach out to Dean Ryan to moderate a debate. His laptop's in for repair now but I will contact him and we can set it up. GREAT IDEA!
Nope, not Dean - We will get a neutral moderator, as Dean is your friend.
I'd love to but in and ask why I get ignored or ridiculed everytime I bring up the burning cars, seismic data, lack of debris, unburned paper, undamaged bathtub etc, & ask how the controlled demolition theory accounts for these? I'm not stating that a certain method of destruction is fact, but can't see why this evidence by Wood & Reynolds gets ignored, blocked or ridiculed!
That's for NORMAN, not "MYSTIC BAZARRE". Have you taken a look at what DEWs do? Compare Paradise, CA, Lahaina, HI, and Pacific Palisades, CA, with the WTC. No comparison. PLUS the design of the Twin Towers would have functioned as a Faraday Cage and made DEWs impotent. We all know there are lots of anomalies, but it's 9/11 Revisionist to whom I have replied. GOOD TO GO WITH A 9/11 DEBAGE.
i know it was a reply for Norman, I was just reading the comments and had a genuine question. and I never actually mentioned DEW, I just asked about why the evidence from dr wood gets such a hostile reaction, it was just something I have noticed not just here but on X and other social media. there wasn’t a need to be rude. But it just shows that even as a supporter of 9/11 truth, that if you ask about certain things you get a rude reply for no reason.
OK. There ARE a lot of shills, phonies and frauds in 9/11 research (similar to what I have encountered with JFK investigators). I probably did more to advance discussion of her ideas with the 15 radio shows where I pioneered interaction between computers and websites by having our audience to to her website and then discussing it on the air. I even invited Judy to speak at my Vancouver Hearings in 2010. She not only did not respond but talked her friend John Hutchison from coming and Crocket Gabriel (?) as well. She has promoted the fabrication that I threatened her (which is absurd, given how much I have broadcast her work) by distorting an observation that she was damaging her reputation by advancing a false theory. She's still at it.
Jim Fetzer (non scientist) Threatens Dr Judy Wood In Major Cover Up Scandal
Video: https://rumble.com/v6n5nti-jim-fetzer-non-scientist-threatens-dr-judy-wood-in-major-cover-up-scandal.html
His legacy will be that of a truth traitor, and I’ll make sure of that.
He should try and make good with God, as there is a place reserved for him in hell.
The Nuking of Joe Olsen and James Fetzer
It's laughable how people can be so wrong.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-nuking-of-joe-olsen-and-james
Nukes on 9/11 - One big fabricated technical falsehood!
How does Jim Fetzer stand up to the evidence that he runs away from?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/nukes-on-911-one-big-fabricated-technical
Thanks for this article and all the evidence that Richard Gage is a counter-op. I read Sarah and Thomas's article on their website and watch the short video instead of watching the long video - great information about how a counter-op works on the inside.
There is more explosive information in the longer conversation about Richard Gage and the inner working of the architects for an engineered truth.
I found "Juxtaposition1" on substack and what he has to say about Richard Gage is intriguing.
He talks about his friend David W. Gray who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Weapons Lab...
But who he also mentions is Richard Gage... He states, Richard Gage is a spook. A red herring.
A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue.
The term comes from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion.
Video Link: https://rumble.com/v6s67hn-richard-gage-the-spook-and-red-herring.html
Also be sure to scroll down the comments see to Richard Gage's response to the allegation.
Fascinating, Richard Gage actually lived with david. Holy smokes! That's how important it is that this information stays quiet.
The term red herring is apt. 👍🏽
Not shown, of course, is Gage's salary from the CIA paid into his anonymous Caymans account from an untraceable CIA shell company's Panamanian bank.
Gordon Duff - Head Editor of Veterans Today - has already alleged that Steven E. Jones and Richard Gage are spooks for the Defence Intelligence Agency.
Video link: https://rumble.com/v6rm9n1-nano-thermite-does-not-exist.html
I found "Juxtaposition1" on substack and what he has to say is intriguing.
He talks about his friend David W. Gray who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Weapons Lab...
But who he also mentions is Richard Gage...
He states, Richard Gage is a spook. A red herring.
A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue.
The term comes from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion.
Video link: https://rumble.com/v6s67hn-richard-gage-the-spook-and-red-herring.html
Be sure to scroll down the video comments to see Richard Gage's comment to the allegation.
Sounds about right. DIA is even more untouchable than the CIA. It's national security. Gage is more or less an actor from Spook Central Casting. He is doing the best he can with a lousy script:).
Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, discussing Black Ops, National Security & 9/11.
Duff also describes how Nano-Thermite does not exist, except for “6 grams of nano-thermite were made on the ISS according to sources supplied by Christopher Bollyn, ONLY as a failed propellant” and that Steven E. Jones knows nano-thermite does not exist, Jones works for the Defence Intelligence Agency, as well as Richard Gage. Video clip: https://rumble.com/v6rm9n1-nano-thermite-does-not-exist.html
I found "Juxtaposition1" on substack and what he has to say is intriguing.
He talks about his friend David W. Gray who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Weapons Lab...
But who he also mentions is Richard Gage...
He states, Richard Gage is a spook. A red herring.
A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue.
The term comes from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs.
It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion.
Video clip: https://rumble.com/v6s67hn-richard-gage-the-spook-and-red-herring.html
Once a spook, always a spook!
CIA agents on a CIA website laughing at us while stealing more money. It’s not pathetic, it’s criminal.
Thing is - This information has been out there for over a decade.
The problem is that most people who deem themselves "truth seekers" are nothing more than seekers of conspiracytainment, as they don't do the work themselves.
They are more than happy just to outsource their thinking to whatever bullshit they get fed by so called truth tellers in the alternative media sphere.
The people behind 911 have plenty of money. The donations collection is just to provide a veneer of authenticity to a spook cutout organization. Maybe most of the donations are fake. Who knows. I haven't audited it:).
Just incredible. Controlled opposition to distract us, and always follow the money of course.
CIA = Control Information Always:).
Indeed! :)
Give these a read through...
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
9/11 Truth's Protective Layers Unmasked
The cover-up and the vast network continuing to suppress the real 9/11 truth
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truths-protective-layers
The 9/11 TRUTH vs Stand-Down PSY-OPS
Make people believe that someone or some group external to themselves is going to "save" or "rescue" them
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-truth-vs-stand-down-psy-ops
Thank you! I’ll check it out. Nothing surprises me anymore.
If you really want to dig deep - Read Andrew Johnson's two free downloadable e-books, linked at the bottom of each one of my articles.
He chronicles it all from 2005 up to 2019.
Thanks!
What's to distract? Are you familiar with my arguments: See, for example, "On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a Time Warp", https://jameshfetzer.org/2020/09/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-9-11-truth-in-a-time-warp-2/ Just to give you what to look for, I observe that, for an explosive to destroy concrete requires a denotation velocity of 3,200 m/s; and to destroy steel of 6,100 m/s. But the highest recorded velocity for nano-thermite is 895 m/s, which means it cannot possibly have destroyed the Twin Towers. So what's "distracting" about that? A plain and simple argument. So what is your rebuttal?
Hey uncle Ernie, wanna come have a face to face?
How about a Zoom, you man enough?
Real Deal Media Hosts 9/11 Revisionist
Countering Richard Gage & Jim Fetzer - Making the argument for DEW technology on September 11, 2001
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/read-deal-media-hosts-911-revisionist
Nukes on 9/11 - One big fabricated technical falsehood!
How does Jim Fetzer stand up to the evidence that he runs away from?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/nukes-on-911-one-big-fabricated-technical
SURE. Great idea. I have reached out to Dean Ryan to moderate. His laptop's in for repair but he should be able to work out the arrangements in the meanwhile.
We know what DEWs do from Paradise, CA, Laheina, HI, and Pacific Palisades, CA. They look nothing like the WTC on 9/11. PLUS their design would have functioned like a Faraday Cage. It's not possible this was done with DEWs. Paradise, Lahainaa, and Pacific Palisades prove it wasn't done with DEWs. For easy access to refutations of Judy's theory and of the nanothermite hypothesis as well, check out "On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a Time Warp", https://jameshfetzer.org/2020/09/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-9-11-truth-in-a-time-warp-2/
For a greater in-depth account, see Jim Fetzer, Ph.D., founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth Boston 9/11 Truth, https://www.bitchute.com/video/cJZCSAv8ZeZC And, for those who want to go even further, check out the 3-part extravaganza exchange between me and Richard Gage, which was hosted by Dean Ryan of RealDealMedia.TV: (1) Richard Gage on 9/11 (2 September 2025), https://www.bitchute.com/video/84YJEy6Z052L, (2) Jim Fetzer, on 9/11, (4 September 2025), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg6HpwGfWIA, and (3) The 9/11 Debate: Richard Gave vs. Jim Fetzer (6 September 2025), https://www.bitchute.com/video/HrDidBkQeN31
I was intrigued by Judy's theory and featured her on my radio shows 15 times, where I was pioneering interaction between radio and computers. So I would invite listeners to go to her website on their computers during the show, where she and I would discuss videos and studies she featured there. When I organized and moderated a conference on "The Science and The Politics of 9/11" (2007), I not only featured Judy as my keynote speaker but gave her an unprecedented 3 hours to speak.
When I became convinced the Twin Towers had been destroyed using mini nukes rather than DEWs, however, I modified my 5-star review of her book on amazon.com with a 3-star review emphasizing the results of the US Geological Survey study of dust samples from 35 locations in lower Manhattan, which revealed the presence of elements that would not have been present had it not been a nuclear event. She has never forgiven me.
Conference papers were published in The 9/11 Conspiracy: The Scamming of America (2007), which amazon.com features to this day, as it does my more recent America Nuked on 9/11 (2016). Both are worthwhile and afford an opportunity to compare and contrast the relative merits of alternative theories of how 9/11 was done. ENJOY!
https://jameshfetzer.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/The-911-Conspiracy.jpg
https://jameshfetzer.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/America-Nuked-on-911-.jpg
Hi Jim
I wondered when you’d crawl out from under your rock, to paste your normal drivel pertaining to you were an ally of Dr Wood.
9/11 Jersey Girl’s Explosive Plea: “A Half-Truth Is Still a Whole Lie”
Jersey Girl and 9/11 widow breaks her silence in a raw open letter to the US Government and the entire truth movement: drop the egos, stop the half-truths,confront ALL evidence
Open Letter: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-jersey-girls-explosive-plea-a
You and I have danced more than once, and your backhanded and deceiving ways have been exposed many years ago, with your honeypot called the “Scholars for 9/11 Truth”, along with the alleged discredited DIA agent, Steven E. Jones, and his fraudulent thermite THEORY.
I will ask YOU again – Just like Richard Gage, with his “explosive” molten metal and thermite THEORY, when will YOU file your “explosive” evidence of nukes on 9/11, to NIST for correction or file a court case against the 23 NIST subcontractors for science FRAUD, like Dr Wood and Dr Morgan Reynolds in 2007.
Dr Reynolds' case was for the fraudulent plane impact reports: https://nomoregames.net/2011/06/12/request-for-correction-by-nist-for-its-invalid-wtc-jetliner-animations-and-analyses/
Dr Wood's case was for the destruction at the WTC complex: https://www.doctorjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html
You have been exposed in Andrew Johnson’s two free downloadable e-books, 9/11 Finding the truth, and 9/11 Holding the truth.
9/11 Finding the Truth - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf
9/11 Holding the Truth - http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/911%20Holding%20The%20Truth%20-Andrew%20Johnson%20-%202017.pdf
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-facts-that-hurt-peoples-feelings
Nukes on 9/11 - One big fabricated technical falsehood!
How does Jim Fetzer stand up to the evidence that he runs away from?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/nukes-on-911-one-big-fabricated-technical
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Here is a 20-minute video that most can follow: https://rumble.com/v5jnndx-understanding-the-911-evidence.html
Where do you explain what I have wrong? I've laid it out rather clearly in many, many presentations and books. So WHERE ARE YOUR REFUTATIONS? You are terrific at ad hominem attacks and pathetic on responding to arguments supported by evidence. I have asserted: We know what DEWs do from Paradise, CA, Laheina, HI, and Pacific Palisades, CA. They look nothing like the WTC on 9/11. PLUS their design would have functioned like a Faraday Cage.
t's not possible this was done with DEWs. Paradise, Lahainaa, and Pacific Palisades prove it wasn't done with DEWs. For easy access to refutations of Judy's theory and of the nanothermite hypothesis as well, check out "On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a Time Warp", https://jameshfetzer.org/2020/09/on-c-span-richard-gage-leaves-9-11-truth-in-a-time-warp-2/ Where are your rebuttals? You talk a good game but it's TALK, not PROOF.
Hey uncle Ernie, wanna come have a face to face?
How about a Zoom, you man enough?
Real Deal Media Hosts 9/11 Revisionist
Countering Richard Gage & Jim Fetzer - Making the argument for DEW technology on September 11, 2001
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/read-deal-media-hosts-911-revisionist
Nukes on 9/11 - One big fabricated technical falsehood!
How does Jim Fetzer stand up to the evidence that he runs away from?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/nukes-on-911-one-big-fabricated-technical