The Nuking of Joe Olsen and James Fetzer

It's laughable how people can be so wrong.

In order to understand why I’m writing this “hit piece” I would suggest you scroll back in my substack articles and read this article first, before reading what is about to follow… I also suggest the various other articles that I’ve written on the 9/11 “truther” talking heads that I will be linking to is to be read before continuing with the rest of the article, because context is very important, otherwise you’d struggle to see the patterns in the way these so called “truthers” operate on.

Now, I need to give you a little bit of background information as to why I started this substack in the first place. I, like most people, started smelling a rat on Sept 11, 2001 because of what my eyes were seeing and what the TV news anchors were saying just did not gel at all. Two little planes could NOT have caused the destruction we were witnessing in real time.

My truth seeking with regards to the events on Sept 11 was the same as most, I saw Loose Change and all the various other “truther” talking heads like Steven E. Jones, Jim Fetzer, Richard Gage, David Chandler, Jonathan Cole PE, AE911 and recently the newly formed “International Center for 9/11 Justice”, suppression under the leadership of the disingenuous Ted Walter. If you’ve been honestly looking at what I have been writing the last couple of months and the video evidence presented when interacting with these people, you will clearly see how they are muddling up the search for truth and my article on the debunking Olympics should have made it abundantly clear.

“The objective of disinformation is not to convince you of one point of view or another, it is to create enough uncertainty so that everything is believable and nothing is knowable.” - Robin Fisher

If you have been following the Covid debates on vaccines then you must have come across the work of Denis Rancourt and I was amazed to see that he too has had tipped his toe into the 9/11 “debate” and did a brilliant job of exposing the fraud of Steven E. Jones’ paper on thermite, which AE911, Richard Gage and Ted Walter and most of the “truthers” tout as truth - Listen to it here. Only issue is, he’s wrong on everything else with regards to the disintegration we saw on Sept 11, 2001 it’s cringe worthy from both these PhD holders in this debate. You might have a PhD, but that does not an intelligent person make. They should work through this article and this scary book.

Now, I have extensively shown who and what James Fetzer is and today I will like to discuss my interactions with Joe Olson, PE.

My first interaction began in January 2023, via email, as a friend and I were having a discussion about the nuke theory and he happened to work with Joe Olson on TNT Radio. At that stage my friend still believed that planes hit the buildings, but after two years of discussing all the problems with that and then subsequently interviewing Dr Wood (he was still behind the curve when interviewing her) and then later interviewing Andrew Johnson on his podcast and again his radio show, he eventually has woken up to the multi-layered cover up of the truth on the events on 9/11, but I digress.

I wrote to Joe Olson discussing that my friend asked me to write some articles on 9/11 for his website, seeing the 21st anniversary rolled around and he wasn’t so well versed in the events of that fateful day and that had re-lit my passion for finding the truth.

I also mentioned that Dr Rancourt had been a regular guest on his podcast and what a sterling job he did on debunking thermite and even shared the links to the debate he had in 2020. Little did I know of the disingenuous interview Joe Olsen and Fetzer had in 2020 where they attacked Dr Wood and blatantly lied about her, but I’ll get into that more, later in this article.

I explained my position on 9/11 as the following;

1. The official narrative of terrorists with box cutters and jet fuel bring the towers down is bunk.

2. The NIST report is riddled with science fraud.

3. The planes are a distraction – Something resembling planes “hit” the buildings.

4. AE911 is a disinformation group, that acts as the “controlled opposition” to the government narrative.

5. The various other fringe “truther / debunkers” like Jim Fetzer, Steven E. Jones and more are also disingenuous.

I also expanded on WHAT happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix (article)

I ended off my email to him: “So, I would love to know what your stance on the 9/11 debate is and look forward in sharing some ideas with you and also the strange things that I’ve “uncovered” regarding people interacting with me on the internet on the various platforms.”

His response was the following:

“I am retired structural engineer who has invested thousands (10K) hours into WTC. My subject "Unequivocal" explains some of my research. I've been interviewed by Jeremy Nell, James Fetzer, Robert David Steele and more on this. I agree with most of your analysis. Right after my "Unequivocal" was posted, a reader suggested the Pommer Report, forwarded to VT >

"Breathtaking: Solving Nuclear 9/11" has 45 power point slides and three 90 min videos, but missed a few things >

"Exposing the NIST Jenga Game" at VT covers construction details and gamma ray absorption isotopes. Enjoy”

I worked through it all and found it superbly lacking in explaining the mountain of evidence that Dr Wood presents in this very scary book, which currently is still unrefuted, so I wrote him back and this is what I wrote:

Hi Joe

Thank you for writing me back.

That 9/11 should have been investigated like a crime scene but wasn’t, is something we could all agree on.

Before one can solve a crime, you need to know, WHAT happened, how it happened and then you can ascertain who did it and why they did it.

I also think this statement is rather accurate:

Empirical Evidence is the TRUTH that THEORY must mimic.

But WHAT happened at the WTC complex has so many layers to the onion, it makes it very hard to get to the truth and over the years, so much disinformation and theories have been abound, one can see some serious work in perception management and psy-ops are in play to this day.

Jeremy Nell did send me your information on the nuke theories, which I did work through, and not to sound disrespectful, but they just don’t explain many of the strange anomalies at the WTC complex and then that also still leaves us with the Pentagon and Shanksville that need to be answered, but for now, let’s just focus on the WTC complex.

I sincerely hope you will take into consideration what I will be presenting, without a knee jerk reaction, due to it being “far out” and I hope I will present my case in a good manner, seeing I’m just your average dumb guy and “learned” people in my opinion, tend to stick to their “education” and struggle to step out of their comfort zone and try to make sense of things in relation to their “education” and then mould what they saw on 9/11 into models that fit their assumptions, just like we’ve seen the last 3 years with COVID.

So maybe it’s time for people to step out of their comfort zones and really investigate an alternate opinion they might have disregarded in the past?

Unfortunately I am not a good writer, so I do visit a lot of visual cues to make an argument, as I feel seeing is believing, and lot more “educated” researchers have done some great work, so please, I hope you will take the time to work through video’s that I am sharing to bring my points across (most are between 2 to 5 minutes each).

I do not want to diminish the work you have done or change your beliefs, but I would like to possibly have you just look at things with an open mind and not just dismiss it off hand, as most people tend to do that, with whom I have been interacting with over the last 6 months.

Please give me feedback on what I am presenting.

That some sort of nuclear event took place is indeed certain, but not in conventional terms, as put forth with the “buried” nuke theory or the mini nuke theory pushed by Jim Fetzer.

I do have various issues with the “nuke theory”, as it does not explain the massive anomalies with buildings, 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Banker’s Trust building (after working through the points below, have a look at the pdf attached to the email regarding the 9/11 orphans).

With regards to what I think the real story is on WHAT happened on 9/11, this is most probably one of the best documentaries that encompasses the full 9/11 on what happened and how they dunnit in a 3 hour documentary, which my subsequent questions below tie into, but broken up into smaller segments on all the various points raised to make it shorter for you to work through, so after going through my questions below, you might find it interesting to watch “9/11 Alchemy – Facing reality” - documentary

But before I ask my questions, we do need to realise the NIST report is bunk and it has been explained rather well;

“NIST used a technique that is not uncommon in science fraud and the technique that they used was basically to define their objectives in such a way as to make sure that they basically did not investigate what happened.

NIST set up its investigation so that the starting point was the moment after the alleged jetliners hit the towers which literally meant that they did not have to confirm that jetliners hit the towers and the fact of the matter is no jetliners did hit those towers. And then they concluded their investigation at the point where or when the towers were about to be destroyed.

Here you have a 10,000-page NIST investigation that investigated everything that happened after the towers suffered damaging explosions and then ended before the towers underwent their final demise.

Their language was “up to the initiation of collapse.” That is science fraud.” - Source

NIST also used government subcontractors to help their various reports and these subcontractors have been co-defendants in numerous Qui-tam cases that made it all the way to the Supreme court, which the Supreme court just decided not to hear.

1. The plane / no plane debate – Your thoughts on this? – This ties into James Corbett’s work on the 9/11 war games that were being held the morning of 9/11 that caused so much confusion for air traffic controllers and luckily a researcher has stumbled across this flight radar information on the day, though I do not fully agree with the final points made. video

2. It’s impossible for planes to fly that low at the claimed speeds – Listening to aeronautical engineers, pilots and aviation consultants all agree that the planes could not do what they apparently did on our TV screens. video

3. How do you explain the 16 survivors in stairwell B of tower 1 if a nuke was placed under each tower? – No one ever takes the testimonies of the survivors into account in their models of the destruction of the towers, why? Because it blows their theories out of the water. video

4. “9/11 Surfer” - Pasquale Buzzelli’s testimony does not fit with a nuke going off in the base of tower 1. video

5. What is your take on this interaction with Richard Gage, where he refers to MANY anomalies that he cannot explain in relation to AE911’s theory of “controlled demolition”? video

6. Also, building 4 – What did that?  - Here the issue is, no controlled demolition or nuke could do that, so what did? Where is the rubble that should have landed on the building? video

7. Dismantling Building 6 - Holds some keys regarding “controlled demolition” and the nuke theory – Listen to what is said toward the end of the short 2-minute video.

8. Another aspect, Hurricane Erin – It was making a B-Line straight at NYC for 4 days and then magically, it stopped dead in its tracks for the whole day on 9/11, with constant speeds and air pressure, just to start moving just after the demise of WTC7 – Isn’t that a bit odd? video

9. What caused this anomaly with earth’s magnetic field? – This must make you scratch your head when you take Erin into account. video

10. Then there are strange links to SAIC and ARA, who helped write the NIST report – The interesting part is what they specialise in, and do you really think they will let the cat out the bag regarding WHAT really happened to the buildings at the WTC complex? What did they stand to gain post 9/11? video

11. Someone might just know WHAT really happened. – Interesting little society he is a part of, where you need top secret security clearance to attend their seminars that are held bi-monthly. video

12. Steven E. Jones the disinformation agent – His paper has been debunked, as confirmed by Dr. Denis Rancourt during the debate in 2020, in my previous email and he gives the reason for it. But unfortunately, Jones has ties to Los Alamos labs, same as certain other people who he has worked diligently to discredit in the eyes of the scientific community, going back to 1989 and work on LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) video

13. Steel is not solid; we just perceive it to be – If the work of Ponds and Fleischman was so way out that nuclear physicists claimed they are rewriting the laws of nuclear physics, then Hutchison was also doing something most cannot comprehend. video

14. Hutchison, Steven E. Jones, and Los Alamos laboratory – Strange that Steven E. Jones both spent time at Los Alamos and then you have Jones coming at Hutchison, just like he did with Ponds and Fleischman in 1989. video

15. Tritium, LENR and Steven E. Jones – Some sort of nuclear process took place, as tritium was found at the base of WTC6 and the link between LENR / cold fusion and Steven E. Jones. video

16. Disappearance of steel – Have a look and how do we explain that taking everything into account so far? video

17. Rolled up carpets of steel – The small snippet poses some interesting questions. video

18. Everything that goes boom is not a bomb – Interesting fireman testimonies that hardly ever gets mentioned. What caused it? video

19. Toasted cars and the heat dust cloud – If the 1400 cars were damaged due to some sort of super-hot dust cloud, why did people caught in the cloud not get burned and why did their video cameras keep on recording and did not melt, but vehicles in the direct path had melted engine blocks? video

20. The lack of seismic readings – There wasn’t a big enough thud for buildings 1, 2 and 7 – Why was it so low? video

Joe, I really hope you will take the time to work through this, as I would love to discuss this more with someone who is open to open discourse.

Thank you for your time.

Here is his response to my email and you will notice his denigrating tone towards Dr Wood, by calling her “Judy Woods” - A tactic used by all Dr Wood’s detractors.

“I have done engineering work in hundreds of multi story buildings in twenty states. I have talked to R Gage at three A&E events. I have invested 10,000 hours of research on WTC in addition to 50 years experience with structural engineering education.  I watched the only video of immediate importance, the Odysee on Gage Pants Down. Unfortunately, Judy Woods is another controlled opposition parrot who refuses to debate NUKES.

I have analyzed EVERY hypothesis, and rejected garbage, incorporated any supportive information. 

Read > Unequivocal 9/11 Nukes > Breathtaking: Solving Nuclear 9/11" > "Exposing NIST Jenga Game" and eighty articles on Nuclear Education at Veterans Today 

Read > Solving 9/11 by Christopher Bollyn - Joe”

That was our last interaction (Feb 13, 2023) and he only popped his head back up after I wrote this article in June 2023 and then we had a to and fro in the comment section which then spilled over to another email flurry where Joe included James Fetzer and Richard Gage in the email correspondence. That then led to me writing this article.

Here is some of the highlights on the email exchange between Joe Olson, James Fetzer and me after I mailed him this article, Richard Gage unfortunately did not respond…

“Since Judy won't come out of her rabbit hole, Dr Fetzer and I challenge you to debate 9/11 Nukes.

We'll debate you IN ABSENTIA on BitChute if you want to remain a VPN disinformation agent.

You know my REAL NAME, as well as James Fetzer and Richard Gage.

Put up or shut up - Joe O” 

“Joe…

You’re not answering my questions…

Too scared to comment on substack? Is that why you’re emailing me to keep this exchange “private”?

Read the book and the Qui-Tam case yet?

When are you and Gage filing your “explosive evidence” in a RFC against NIST?

I’d LOVE to read it.

Gage figured out if the earth is flat or a ball?

I’ve been interacting with Gage, AE911T, David Chandler and the rest of the “donate now” teams for the last 11 months – It’s been entertaining seeing them squirm.

Let’s see what’s in that RFC – It’s been 16 years – Put your money where your mouth is.

PS – I told you Fetzer and Gage and the circling of the wagons with the reshuffling of the cointelpro agents – You cannot hide the truth forever. Tick tock, tick tock…” - 9/11R

“VPN

Me having a private debate on a substack YOU control, or any appeal to NIST puppets is a waste.

We will NOT edit a debate and both can screen share texts, video.

"Every epiphany is permanent" > we will let viewers judge evidence - Joe”

“Joey

How bout you ask Richie, Jimmy, AE911T and even yourself why none of you can count past 3.

Isn’t it strange out of ALL the anomalies at ground zero, Gage and AE911 and ALL the other pooba’s like Chandler and his “International Center for 911 Justice” can’t count past 3?

O, it was so entertaining seeing Chandler squirm in that question and answer session for the Colorado 9/11 Truth presentation of another flawed theory of “Propelled demolition” – Seeing Wayne stumble and admitting things just disappeared was a classic example of putting one’s foot in one’s mouth. And when Richie chimed in with the thermic lance cut beams – what a laugh!

I watch it often and I just laugh harder every time.

Here, have a look, make sure to read the description - video

You want to discuss evidence? The evidence in your RFC?

Great – send me the document to read.

As far as your “debate”.

My points are nicely set out in my substack and addresses and demolishes ALL your THEORIES.

Once you file your RFC, then we can debate what you bring to the table.

For now, you KNOW that you haven’t read the book, you haven’t read the two separate Qui-Tam cases and the people you defend can’t even commit to saying if the earth is flat or a ball.” - 9/11 Revisionist

“VERY KEEN TO SEE WHAT YOU HAVE. Great points about the A&E "team" or propagandists.

We could do a separate show as a Real Deal Special Report independent of the radio program.

Like your slides. Did you include a link to one of your complete presentations? PLEASE SEND. - Jim Fetzer”

So with no further hold ups, here is my video breakdown of Joe Olson’s 2020 disingenuous presentation where he co-opted Dr Wood’s title of her book, “Where did the Towers go?” I have a lot to say about the statements he’s made, but the article is getting long and I might run out of space.

Alex Jones NEVER interviewed Dr Wood, his statement that the heat of the rubble pile was in excess of 2500 degrees in December 2001, how could CNN and 60 minutes walk around in the basements in December, 2001? Joe, if the book is too expensive for you to buy, I’d suggest asking your local library to stock it, then you don’t have to buy it and you can then read it for free. When you watch the full discussion of Dr Wood’s evidence, especially the “toasted cars”, Joe goes on 5 minute rant about voter fraud? If you cannot talk about the evidence, you talk about anything else, Joe? Joe, Dr Wood has NOT claimed to know where the “weapon” was. - Why lie Joe? And now you state it must have been DEW when looking at the South Tower and by the end you talk about explosives? So what is it Joe? Nukes, explosives or DEW - Make up your mind.

Remember DO NOT get your hands on this absolutely scary book.

And whatever you do, don’t watch the 1h “9/11 Essential Guide”.

Free PDF downloads: 9/11 – Finding the Truth & 9/11 – Holding the Truth