Note on last night’s debate with Mike Piper


Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears…

Last night’s debate between the established, highly-credentialed and obviously very capable Michael Collins Piper and his 2 opponents who have become the Laurel and Hardy of Sandy Hook vaudevillism has–I believe–signaled a turn in the road as far as the perpetuation of this nonsense is concerned. Other than a few sane voices who have countered their nuttery, the Sandy Hookers have had an unfettered year now to propagate their mindless theories concerning the terrible event, to the obvious detriment of the 911 Truth Movement’s credibility with other matters more important.

To say that it has been a difficult year in dealing with them is an understatement, as for the most part, the task of challenging them on the nuttery they were propagating fell upon a handful of individuals while the rest of the ‘movement’ sat back and merely watched or else watered and fed this weed that has now grown into the man-eating Venus Fly Trap featured in the film Little Shop of Horrors.

Now however, and particularly in the aftermath of last night’s debate and the absolutely unequivocal mental meltdown that took place on the part of Fetzer and ‘Friendly’ John Friend, it is safe to say that people have had enough of it and are ready to move on. An entire year has been wasted in dealing with the hallucinations and political acid trips that the 911 truth movement’s version of the Ghostbuster team have suffered as they made a name for themselves chasing around the ghouls and phantasms of a ‘hoax’ that did not exist, to the obvious detriment of dealing with more important issues, such as WWIII.

Nevertheless, we ask one more indulgence from the readers of this website as we (hopefully) turn the page on this very tumultuous and tedious chapter and move on to better and more profitable activism.

Understanding that the end is near as far as his personal cult is concerned, Fetzer & co have obviously enlisted the services of some of their more devout disciples in flooding the poll on the AFP website in his favor. Whereas it could be said that in a cosmetic sense, Fezter came out slightly ahead in the debate last week with Keith Johnson and which MIGHT explain his being ahead in the poll, there is NO chance–neither in the cosmetic nor substantive sense–that he came out ahead in last night’s debate with Mike Piper. Anyone listening to what took place cannot conclude anything other than that it was a total defeat for Cheech and Chong and a victory for the REAL ‘Sandy Hook Truth Movement’ that MCP represented in last night’s discussion.

Therefore, we are asking that anyone who listened to last night’s program and who in good conscience can say that MCP was indeed the victor to please visit the American Free Press website here and vote accordingly. Simply go down to the bottom where Mike Piper’s name is listed on a green-colored bar and click it. Also, those who did not vote in last week’s debate with Keith Johnson can do so here.

We thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

TUT

  1. #1 by Peter Amling on 01/28/2014 - 9:34

    Letting your EGO’s run amok again. Do you realise this childish crap is tainting your other work. No no, i’m right,, no, no I’m right, just pathetic. Neither are right.

    ed note–Egos have NOTHING whatsoever to do with it, and someone here IS right.

    This is much bigger than simply someone holding onto a strange political theory. In today’s world, where EVERYTHING is related to credibility, things like this are not just nuisances, but major liabilities. The fact that this very minor point needs explanation to you underscores that you are in way over your head on this and don’t understand the seriousness (long-term) of what is involved.

  2. #2 by jeffreyalbert on 01/28/2014 - 9:34

    Mike Piper’s name is on the GREEN colored bar. Hopefully more people who read your blog are intelligent enough to read the names, but I’m getting used to dealing with the terminally dumbed down. After all, it was apparently necessary to even have this debate. The vote of common sense goes to Piper. Tell him I hope he is recovering well from his heart problems and I pray regularly for his good health and recovery.

  3. #3 by SS-The Independent on 01/28/2014 - 9:34

    Why ‘ Laurel and Hardy ‘, if you have arguments ?!…It’s their opinion and in a democracy, everyone is entitled to express their opinion. Deja-vu for people like me, born under Communism: ” The Ministry of truth ” is always right. No dissent is allowed. B.T.W., I have most of your books, Mr. Collins and I was a subscriber at ‘ AFP ‘…Please, don’t let your self esteem to obscure the reality, Gentleman ! Like I said: please show us the PROOF ( not images with few broken windows, kids in parking lot, etc. ). Images of bodies, blood, of Adam Lanza at the door and inside the school, in action…Then I’m going to believe you and apologize…Until then…it’s a false flag operation 100%.

    ed note–show us the PROOF that you are not a hasbara shill working for the enemy, and THEN we will believe YOU and ‘apologise’.

    Works both ways, you know?

  4. #4 by Tom Mysiewicz on 01/28/2014 - 9:34

    This was a poorly moderated debate and the first 40 minutes were wasted in ad hominum flailing at one another. I’m interested in facts. As for public records being falsified I have had experience with a county recorder (Clallam Co., WA) putting through a marriage license and marriage certificate some 6 years after the death of the alleged groom. The State of WA online vital records did not show these records until after I started raising the roof. Then they showed a single entry of the marriage license. Then they showed images of two records, one being the supposed marriage certificate. Finally they showed both records. Neither the county recorder nor the State of Washington, at my invitation, would state for the record that either or both of these had been in the records all along, or that they were considered authentic.

    Tom

  5. #5 by persnipoles on 01/28/2014 - 9:34

    Yup, they are totally destructive.
    There are Sympathy-Objects around an event just the same as there are Hate-Objects. Yes, you can sometimes call the bluff –e.g., ‘troops’ = Sympathy-Object, but ‘support our troops’ was an obvious low-life appeal for getting well-wishing, do-gooding morons to screw troops to the wall with multiple occupations, stop-loss, and frequent redeployment. Victim’s-families are Sympathy-Objects, but in the case of e.g. 911 it was absurd to say getting the story right was somehow opposed to them –though those families probably would’ve been right to be cautious about their ‘help.’
    In both of those cases the ‘truther’ was falsely painted as ~’opposed’ to popular objects of sympathy; the people you’d really be an asshole to ‘oppose;’ the people we’d all agree we’re concerned about.
    But the SH theories reallly do oppose the pop Sympathy-Objects. Better be damned sure you got something before you try calling that opposition a bluff. E.g., that something better be a hell of a lot better than a quirky coroner or a smiling father. Better have three skyscrapers telescoping into their footprint at a smoothly increasing rate attributed by gov’t to damage random from the buildings’ perspectives (and a post-event roll-up of hundreds of Israeli agents), for example…

  6. #6 by carlbaydala on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    Mark, I am a big fan of you and Mike as regards this fighting Zionism fighting business. But, I don’t get your position on Sandy Hook. Mike says he doesn’t know if any children were killed or not. Of course he doesn’t and that is because you simply cannot trust your government to give you the straight goods on anything. So, what makes you so certain that Sandy Hookers are not the more logical breed? Mike admits they are by his comments. A discussion evolves regarding a government helicopter arriving before the event and Mike steers the discussion somewhere else. Please. Like all traditional government false flags there are similar exercises occurring nearby at other schools. Remind you much of the simultaneous drills taking place during 9/11? This is Dick Cheney’s kind of action. Why so hostile here? You don’t have to be a Sandy Hooker to get you off the hook, just agree that your government is capable of anything because that is what Michael Piper just did.

    ed note-lol. This is one of the things that amazes me the most about the SHookers and some of the inherently irrational positions that they take. They say in effect —

    ‘Well, ya know, MCP did some great work–so far has been the ONLY person to effectively solve the JFK assassination despite the thousands of books, articles, documentaries, etc produced on this topic…As a researcher, investigative reporter and analyst he has been unchallenged in the scope and quality of his work. But despite all this, (the combined effect of which would be that he receive a PhD for all the highly-sophisticated work he has done in ferreting out fact from fantasy) I just don’t get it when he doesn’t agree with me, a virtual nobody who is just a spectator in this exercise, who has contributed nothing to the advancement of our understanding of what has taken place and really who would have no voice in this discussion at all were it not for the fact that I have a computer hooked up to the internet.’

    And you expect us to take this position seriously?

  7. #7 by carlbaydala on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    I know that there are not too many Alex Jones fans around here, but listen to this little tidbit about Sandy Hook @ approximately 1:39:25 Broadcasted on September 22, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=aHgJ6w7jGuU

  8. #8 by Spytfyre on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    Well, if we are back in business and are no longer going to entertain these FOOLS who are getting all of you good-hearted seekers worked up, then I will return to commenting, InshAllah. I pray all of you have been well and are moving ever closer in your relationships with our Creator, Subhanahu wa’atala! Love you guys.

  9. #9 by carlbaydala on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    My dear friend Mr. Mark Glenn. You have made a very serious error in judgment here. A tactical blunder actually. You are running an alternative website here and the mainstream audience knows absolutely nothing about what you are doing. And, now with your stance on Sandy Hook you have alienated half of your following. They are only following your conspiratorial teachings. As a teacher you have taught them to think critically, to reject mainstream media propaganda and the like.Your students know about 9/11 and false flag events. Sandy Hook for many of them is simply another government operation. Michael Collins Piper, our friend and colleague doesn’t even know if any children were actually killed. How the hell can you take a position on that and dig in your heels when you cannot even confirm to the flock that all are killed and accounted for? And, this is only one issue among many. I want to be on your side based on your past performance, but where do I jump back on board? No one has proven to me that Sandy was not another government operation. Certainly not you. I think we both agree on 9/11, so what is so difficult about Sandy? I have had my mind changed in the past. But, MCP does not get to the nitty gritty just like Keith. You have to demolish the big picture and both Mike and Keith deviated. Why did they do that please tell.

    ed note–I suppose I could forgive such an inane statement Carl about ‘alienating’ half the readership here were it NOT for the fact that on the VERY FRONT PAGE of TUT you can clearly see the number of subscribers to this website. When all this SH nuttiness started, we had about 2,000 subscribers. That number has now climbed to over 3,000 and I expect–based upon the number of new subscribers we get everyday–that somewhere around half way through the year we will pass 4,000. In addition to this, we went from getting an average of 7-8000 hits a day to now getting somewhere between 10-12,000 and sometimes as high as 20,000.

    So, are the analytical skills and criteria you are using to make this half-witted statement–when your own eyes can tell you differently–the same analytical skills you are using to deduce that a ‘hoax’ took place at SH?

  10. #10 by unitedagainstzionism on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    Understanding that the end is near as far as his personal cult is concerned, Fetzer & co have obviously enlisted the services of some of their more devout disciples in flooding the poll on the AFP website in his favor. Whereas it could be said that in a cosmetic sense, Fezter came out slightly ahead in the debate last week with Keith Johnson and which MIGHT explain his being ahead in the poll, there is NO chance–neither in the cosmetic nor substantive sense–that he came out ahead in last night’s debate with Mike Piper. Anyone listening to what took place cannot conclude anything other than that it was a total defeat for Cheech and Chong and a victory for the REAL ‘Sandy Hook Truth Movement’ that MCP represented in last night’s discussion.

    I don’t think the Sandy Hoaxers see it that way. The only specific “argument” that MCP accurately addressed was the Robbie Parker smiling video. Beyond that, MCP spoke in more general terms, while Fetzer & Friend were focusing on their imagined “evidence” (in-between all the personal attacks)… So to their mind, F&F “won the debate” and wept the floor with MCP’s ass, as Fetzer might say in private.

    The reason is that MCP hasn’t spent a lot of time researching the Hoaxers’ “evidence”, seeing it from a higher, more holistic, perspective. F&F — much like the self-styled skeptics/debunkers — focus on single details and construct a wholly-inaccurate big picture. They find 20 “anomalous” pieces in a 1,000,000-piece puzzle and fool themselves into believing they can construct a valid alternate full picture from that. One that is preposterous on every level — which is what makes me refer to them as delusional cranks.

    Their counterparts-in-delusion, the self-proclaimed “skeptics”, do the same thing but in reverse (in a sense): they focus on individual “claims” and then find the “evidence” to support the story they dogmatically believe is true. Whether you’re trying to explain “anomalies” or “claims”, what you are actually doing is looking for nuggets of “evidence” to fit your pre-determined conclusion. Which — given the size of the full picture — you will usually find. The majority of the pieces of the puzzle you’re looking at are missing, and it’s those missing pieces — the unknown unknowns as Donald Rumsfeld put it — that paint the real picture of what happened.

    The powerful dogmatic belief that nothing is ever as it seems (TV fakery/hoaxers) or that everything is always as authorities say (skeptics) can be seen as two sides of the same coin. Both types of lunacy are detrimental, but the oppression-promoting super-statist lunacy of the self-proclaimed Skeptics is far more dangerous than these disturbed individuals who have lost touch with the collective consciousness.

    With the above I’m referring more to the few actual SH “researchers” like F&F, not to the majority of their followers, like ‘SS-The Independent’ above, who wrote:

    Like I said: please show us the PROOF ( not images with few broken windows, kids in parking lot, etc. ). Images of bodies, blood, of Adam Lanza at the door and inside the school, in action…Then I’m going to believe you and apologize…Until then…it’s a false flag operation 100%.

    So you start with the conclusion (even using the term “100%”) and then demand that “the other side” provide proofs of all sorts (some of it completely unreasonable, like Adam Lanza in action). Not to mention that if such media were released, you would assume it’s fake. This is blind fanaticism, not sanity.

  11. #11 by rmstock on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    The Sandy Hook controversy is becoming a real problem. It takes total Grotesk conspiracy claims to explain Fetzers interpretations of made observations. Jim Fetzer was even warned by Mike Piper that he even might get lawsuits of slander on his ass by surviving family members of the killed children, as Fetzer stated that some children were still alive and had been spotted singing at the super-bowl. Always keep in touch with hard fact reality of your surroundings and the society you live in. At the end of the day, anyone subscribing to Jim Fetzers interpretations, thus becoming a Sanky Hooker, will get hooked, by the rest of the community, hooked by the medical staff, if subscribed to Obamacare, because all self declared Sandy Hookers will be admitted into psychiatrical care, sooner or later, by sane standards of the rest of society. Maybe ask Spingola how she felt after going through Fetzers work. If the Jim Fetzer – new age mindset resembling – soulless and bizar Sandy Hook theory gets hooked within the truth movement, all the federal government has todo, is to have all truthers admitted into forced psychiatric medical care, preferably through Obamacare, and Obama will receive the Medal of Honor for finally solving that nasty 911 truth movement problem. Maybe Jim Fetzer should consider a voluntary admittance into psychiatric care, as a lot of disturbing diabolical confusion seems to originate at his end.

  12. #12 by unitedagainstzionism on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    Here we have another example (from ‘carlbaydala’ above):

    Michael Collins Piper, our friend and colleague doesn’t even know if any children were actually killed. How the hell can you take a position on that and dig in your heels when you cannot even confirm to the flock that all are killed and accounted for? And, this is only one issue among many. I want to be on your side based on your past performance, but where do I jump back on board? No one has proven to me that Sandy was not another government operation.

    Good luck waiting for someone to prove a negative.

    No one has proven to me that ‘carlbaydala’ is not another hasbarat. So I will believe that you are until someone proves to me otherwise. Makes sense?

  13. #13 by ms on 01/29/2014 - 9:34

    Unfortunately, being right doesn’t automatically mean one would win a debate. Even if I don’t believe there was a total hoax on Sandy Hook and would like to give my vote for Piper, I must say this wasn’t a very good debate and I don’t think there was a winner at all. Yet, both sides are now announcing their ultimate victory.

    I’m not saying there wasn’t anything good on this debate, but overall it was a somewhat disappointment. The debate should have been more heavily moderated. Now there was too much time wasted on other topics and too many arguments were discussed simultaneously. There should have been one argument at a time and shorter statements for each opponent to comment only that argument.

    I understand Piper having some grudges to Fetzer. But even though MCP did make some good points like the family ties of the children, I was still expecting more hard facts on the topic than attempts trying to discredit Fetzer in other ways. It’s not going to convince the other side, if you just say you haven’t read Fetzer’s article because it’s so silly. Even if it is, there are a lot of good counter arguments, as Keith Johnson did point out in his debate. But I don’t think Keith succeeded perfectly to make his points either. So that’s why we may have needed someone more fluent speaker like MCP to make those points clear to get people convinced.

    I can see why MCP hasn’t spent a lot of time researching the issue, but maybe there shouldn’t have been any debate at all then.

  14. #14 by Poseidon on 01/30/2014 - 9:34

    The esteemed Professor Fetzer correctly states that it is necessary to revise hypotheses in the light of new evidence. But what “evidence”? Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and he has never presented any evidence against the official Sandy Hook narrative. A few reporting errors, glitches with Google’s date logs, attempts at practising psychiatry without a license, and unsubstantiated, unbridled speculation that makes Inspector Clouseau look the consummate professional, does not constitute evidence.

    For example, an article entitled “Sandy Hook: The curious case of Emilie Parker” was posted on January 14, 2013 by “Dr. Eowyn”. But the comment by “Rich in NJ” on that page [i] is dated December 14, 2012 – a month before the article was posted!

    Anyone who watches this video [ii] of Benjamin Wheeler’s parents and sincerely thinks they are “faking” their distress is obviously suffering from some sort of autistic spectrum disorder. Have Fetzer and Friend actually watched it? It’s bad enough that these people must reveal their grief to the world as they fill in for Obama’s weekly address, but to have Sunstein shills (who lie and pose as retards and cranks in order to prop up the official 9/11 conspiracy theory) accusing them of faking it is beyond the pale.

    Ben Wheeler’s uncle Andrew “Drew” Wheeler [iii] is a scuba dive instructor and underwater videographer [iv] from Hawaii. He has a website for which the domain was created in April 2003 [v], and messages about him posted on an internet forum in 2009 [vi] refer to his plans to document the Great Pacific garbage patch (aka “Pacific trash vortex”) that summer.

    The Sandy Hookers should state which of the following they believe:

    1) Andrew Wheeler is a fictitious person, but in order to make his online presence appear realistic, Sandy Hook Hoaxers created his website’s domain in April 2003, had other conspirators post about him on internet forums – e.g., in 2009, obtained a photograph of a person to use on his website, and tricked or persuaded various newspapers into using another photo of the same person in reports stating that he traveled to Connecticut in December 2012.

    2) Although Andrew Wheeler loves his island lifestyle, he was inexplicably recruited as a “crisis actor”, a job that involved him traveling from Hawaii to Connecticut to pose as the uncle of one of the “fake” victims, as part of an operation to back up a false Sandy Hook narrative.

    3) A “crisis actor” resembling Andrew Wheeler was hired to travel to Sandy Hook and pose as Wheeler, with backup plans to shoot or otherwise eliminate the real Andrew Wheeler if he ever found out about it and talked, and a second backup plan to shoot anyone who found out that Wheeler had been killed, and a third backup plan to shoot Wheeler’s killer if he talked, and so on, with another series of backup plans to shoot the “crisis actor” if he talked, along with thousands of conspirators bribing, blackmailing and threatening thousands of co-conspirators to play their part in the plot.

    And whichever the Sandy Hooker selects, he or she must provide evidence to prove it. Otherwise, the Sandy Hook “hoax” theories can be consigned to the garbage bin, for once and for all.

    Fetzer “knows” that the children’s deaths were “faked” (after claiming they were killed by a three-man Mossad hit team!), yet he and his team of ‘researchers’ don’t know whether their relatives actually exist. Shouldn’t Fetzer and friends first determine whether or not the bereaved family members exist, before declaring that they are willing participants in a money-making fraud or are simply roles played by crisis actors?

    How long will it be before Fetzer and friends assert that no one died on 9/11/01 and the WTC buildings never collapsed? The difference between that and their current position of no-planes-on-9/11 and no-one-killed-at-Sandy-Hook is less than the width of a cigarette paper.

    Real conspiracies do occur. Israel’s central role in 9/11 can be proven to the same certainty as two plus two equals four [vii], and there is no doubt that Israel deliberately attacked the USS Liberty, and the Mossad has carried out plenty of false-flag terror attacks such as London 7/7/05 and Amman 11/9/05. Similarly, the official account of WWII is not consistent with the laws of thermodynamics, thermochemistry, and ultimately probability. As long as Sunstein shills and their misguided followers post outrageous conspiracy theories that anyone with an ounce of commonsense will instantly recognize as crazy, genuine research into conspiracies will be discredited by association.

    References:

    [i] http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2013/01/14/sandy-hook-the-curious-case-of-emilie-parker/#comment-227010
    [ii] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308352/Francine-Wheeler-Mother-year-old-killed-Sandy-Hook-shooting-Obamas-weekly-address.html
    [iii] http://www.scubadrewvideo.com/about_us.shtml
    [iv] http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ben-wheeler-6-remebered-irrepressibly-bright-article-1.1224225
    [v] http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-282271.html
    [vi] http://whois.domaintools.com/scubadrewvideo.com
    [vii] http://www.takeourworldback.com/dancingisraelisfbireport.htm‎

    Source: http://www.takeourworldback.com/sandyhook.htm

  15. #15 by unitedagainstzionism on 01/30/2014 - 9:34

    How long will it be before Fetzer and friends assert that no one died on 9/11/01 and the WTC buildings never collapsed? The difference between that and their current position of no-planes-on-9/11 and no-one-killed-at-Sandy-Hook is less than the width of a cigarette paper.

    Hahahaha, where have you been Poseidon? They’ve already done that! Google “vicsims” and “wtc collapse cgi”.

    As long as Sunstein shills and their misguided followers post outrageous conspiracy theories that anyone with an ounce of commonsense will instantly recognize as crazy, genuine research into conspiracies will be discredited by association.

    Agreed, but unfortunately we have no evidence that they are Sunstein shills, so it would seem a bit hypocritical for us to refer to them as such, as if proven. As unlikely as I find Fetzer’s behavior, it’s not impossible that he believes the nonsense he spews. I even think it might be real in his reality… just obviously not in mine or yours.

  16. #16 by Poseidon on 02/01/2014 - 9:34

    Hi UAZ. When I saw YTubers such as ctcole77 posting slogans such as “no buildings were used on 9/11”, I initially supposed it was some form of sick ‘humor’. Max Konrardy/hoi.polloi posted “An Introduction To The Possibility That Nobody Died On 9/11”, but even the Fetzerians have been forced to admit that Simon Shack/Hytten and hoi.polloi are disinfo agents. Hytten’s father Eyvind was a Judas Goat government asset who served as controlled opposition, in order to counter the anti-Mafia crusader Danilo Dolci, who accused prominent members of the government of colluding with the Mafia. Moreover, the Formula One racing career of Simon’s brother Mario Hytten was sponsored by Yeslam bin Laden.

    Back in December 2012, I wrote an article “Zionist Anti-Truth Activist Caught Posing As No-Planer Nutjob”. It’s at my website, and at:

    http://youtubedisinformation.blogspot.com/2012/12/zionist-anti-truth-activist-caught.html

    It was about a Zionist (very probably Jewish) who posed as a dumb 16YO kid who swooned over Alex Jones (whom he described as “a very good looking man”!) and swallowed every crazy conspiracy theory under the sun: no-planes, WTC-was-nuked, directed-energy-weapons-toppled-WTC, etc. But part of the time he would attack 9/11 truth; for example, he said ae911truth are “faggots”, and he would get praised by the likes of ctcole77. One of his channels was UnitedChildrenOfZion, and he also revealed his true allegiance with statements such as “Zionism will save us, shalom.”

    But this was soon after Sandy Hook, and interestingly, this Oliver Terrance character on YouTube came out as a staunch supporter and promoter of Sandy Hook hoax / “crisis actor” theories. (After I exposed him, he closed his other channels and retaliated by posting comments on my videos such as “I hope you cat gets bone cancer” / “I hope your mother gets run over by a bus full of Jews”.)

    So the Sandy Hookers tend to support crazy 9/11 theories. We have this example of one who plays both sides of the fence and reveals his allegiance to Zionism. And then you find they’ll never post incriminating information, such as Dov Zakheim’s access to Flight Termination Systems, his co-authoring of the PNAC “new Pearl Harbor” paper, and how his position of Pentagon Comptroller, a year after it’d been revealed how $2.3 trillion of accounting corrections lacked receipts, would allow him to hire and fire the workers who did data backups, in advance of the attack that targeted the Pentagon’s accounts section.

    And they won’t tell you how Sivan Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel and Oded Ellner were seen video-taping, high-fiving, smiling and hugging each other on the roof of an Urban Moving Systems van after having parked it in the parking lot of the Doric apartment block at 100 Manhattan Avenue in Union City. To get from the former UMS office at 3 W 18th St, Weehawken to Doric is a 4- or 5-minute drive at the best of times, even on a Sunday, never mind at around 08:50 a.m. in the rush-hour on a Tuesday morning. One witness saw the Israelis before the news had even broken on WINS 1010, the local AM news station that had one of its account executives on the phone to the newsroom before the first plane hit the North Tower, because she’d seen the plane flying low. Another witness saw them “5 minutes” after the first impact. And the North Tower was visible from the roof of UMS; but not the South Tower. Sivan Kurzberg was sighted at the Doric apartment block the day before 9/11, posing as a “construction worker”.

    That’s the sort of information that should be getting circulated, not preposterous, evidence-free claims about faked deaths, “crisis actors”, nukes, and faked Boeing aircraft.

  17. #17 by Poseidon on 02/01/2014 - 9:34

    Fetzer, in one of his own articles “After two defeats over Sandy Hook, AFP editor declines a third debate”, inadvertently reveals the voting fraud carried out by his supporters, by showing screenshots of how the voting progressed. The following table shows the number of votes, where “from” is the number of votes when Piper was standing at 52% and Fetzer/Friend at 41%, “to” is the votes when Piper declined to 20% and Fetzer/Friend increased to 78%, “difference” is the votes gained between those two times, and “percentage in final flurry of votes” is the percentage of those final 780 votes gained by each selection.

    choice, from, to, difference, percentage in final flurry of votes:

    Fetzer and Friend: 163 911 748 95.9%
    Piper: 206 232 26 3.3%
    No one: 22 28 6 0.8%
    Tie: 3 3 0

    Total votes at the “from” stage, at the “to” stage, and the difference:
    394 1174 780

    So we’re supposed to believe that Piper got 52.3% and Fetzer /Friend 41.4% out of the first 394 votes, and then Fetzer/Friend got 95.9% of the final 780 votes as Piper got only 3.3%.

    The “no one” vote increased by 27.3%; the Piper vote increased by 12.6%. If the extra “no one” votes were genuine, then the Piper/no one/tie votes increased by 13.8%, which would suggest a genuine Fetzer/Friend increase of 22, from 163 to 185. The Fetzer/Friend vote increased by 748, which is an excess of 726.

    Clearly, the fact that Fetzer/Friend had been beaten must have so rankled the Sunstein brigade that they had to call for the cavalry.

    Amusingly, Fetzer says the final results “appear to be accurate”.

  18. #18 by Poseidon on 02/02/2014 - 9:34

    I’d started to write a piece “Top Ten Reasons: Jim Fetzer and Friends are Sunstein Shills” to post as a comment here, but it’s too long. I’ll probably post it on my site in the next few days. So here’s some points.

    Cass Sunstein, in his “Conspiracy Theories” paper, argues that the “best” way that “such theories might be undermined […] consists of cognitive infiltration of extremist groups.” Sunstein claims that “those who subscribe to such theories” do so because they have a “crippled epistemology”.

    Jim Fetzer has authored or co-authored at least eleven books that were published by Jewish-founded Springer. Note from the titles that Fetzer is an expert on epistemology and cognition:


    Epistemology and Cognition (Studies in Cognitive Systems)

    Sociobiology and Epistemology

    The New Theory of Reference: Kripke, Marcus, and Its Origins

    Aspects of Artificial Intelligence (Studies in Cognitive Systems)

    Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines (Studies in Cognitive Systems)

    Definitions and Definability: Philosophical Perspectives

    Philosophy, Language, and Artificial Intelligence: Resources for Processing Natural Language (Studies in Cognitive Systems)

    Philosophy, Mind, and Cognitive Inquiry: Resources for Understanding Mental Processes (Studies in Cognitive Systems)

    Probability and Causality: Essays in Honor of Wesley C. Salmon:

    Program Verification: Fundamental Issues in Computer Science (Studies in Cognitive Systems)

    Scientific Knowledge: Causation, Explanation, and Corroboration (Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science)

    Sunstein needed someone to manage “cognitive infiltration designed to break up the crippled epistemology of conspiracy-minded groups”. Who better than a professor whose expertise is in epistemology and cognition, and had already been flagged as operating a “campaign of disinformation” prior to 9/11/01?

    http://web.archive.org/web/20010702153119/http://www.jfk-info.com/feedback.htm

    Google epistemology cognition kennedy conspiracy, or epistemology cognition jfk conspiracy, and Fetzer comes in first place. As of 2008, the Wiki entry on Fetzer also contained those words.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20081012161247/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_H._Fetzer

    Sunstein recommends a strategy of “rebutting many conspiracy theories” because this yields a “synergistic gain” for the government from reducing “the legitimating effect of rebutting any _one_ of them”. As someone who is well aware that Israel did 9/11, Sunstein knows that his best strategy is to introduce many new conspiracy theories, each of them with various degrees of craziness, and they all need to be crazier than the government’s own 9/11 conspiracy theory of nineteen hijackers with box cutters.

    So, with Sunstein recommending a policy of countering multiple theories and “cognitive infiltration” of truth seekers, the disinformation agents promote and optionally debunk preposterous theories such as no-one-died-on-9/11, no-planes-hit-the-WRC, WTC-was-nuked, and no-one-died-at-Sandy-Hook. (The theory that no-one-died-on-9/11 is so crazy that they would probably not even bother to debunk it.) At the same time, they try to counter those who tell the facts about 9/11.

    Theories such as no-planes and no-one-died-at-Sandy-Hook are promoted so strongly that they appear more popular than evidence-based theories about Israel’s central role in 9/11. Government benefits from the “synergistic gain” obtained from not legitimating a particular theory, specifically, Israel’s orchestrating of 9/11. Third-parties (the mass audience) form the impression that “conspiracy theorists” are all a bunch of fruitcakes who think the 9/11 planes were holograms, the WTC was nuked, no children died at Sandy Hook, and “crisis actors” pretended to be bereaved family members.

    Disinformation brokers such as Jim Fetzer, Sofia Smallstorm, James Tracy, Simon Shack, Max Konrardy, Morgan Reynolds, John Lear, Dave Shayler, John Friend and Judy Wood et al have skills such as writing, video production, flying and spying, and at least four of them qualified as professors. One professor becoming senile and postulating crackpot hypotheses about space-based beam weapons, faked planes or faked deaths could be considered unlucky, two a coincidence, but three or four is a conspiracy.

    When a number of people with skills in writing, video production, flying, spying, etc, are found to be promoting ideas that are so at odds with the evidence that only retards could subscribe to them, and these people’s skills demonstrate that they are not retards, then there is a contradiction that is resolved only by assuming that these people are liars. There is no evidence that no planes hit the WTC, or that the Sandy Hook deaths were “faked”, and there is no credible motive for anyone to believe such ridiculous ideas. There are however powerful motives for them to lie: tribal loyalty, bribery, blackmail, bullying, etc.

    In October 2012, Gordon Duff, of Jewish descent, actually admitted that 40% of his writing was at least “purposely partially false”, and that about 30% of the material on Veterans Today is “patently false”.

  19. #19 by UAZ on 02/05/2014 - 9:34

    Good work Poseidon, as usual. I didn’t know about your http://youtubedisinformation.blogspot.com/ site, interesting.

    Note from the titles that Fetzer is an expert on epistemology and cognition

    Yeah, this is what has always bothered me. He really is an expert in the field of identifying bullshit and nonsense. Yet his (entire?) body of work is exactly that.

    Just off the top of my mind, some other disinfo claims by Fetzer are: Zapruder film is fake, OKC bombing was space beams, Paul Wellstone plane also space beams.

    Disinformation brokers such as Jim Fetzer, Sofia Smallstorm, James Tracy, Simon Shack, Max Konrardy, Morgan Reynolds, John Lear, Dave Shayler, John Friend and Judy Wood et al have skills such as writing, video production, flying and spying, and at least four of them qualified as professors. One professor becoming senile and postulating crackpot hypotheses about space-based beam weapons, faked planes or faked deaths could be considered unlucky, two a coincidence, but three or four is a conspiracy.

    When a number of people with skills in writing, video production, flying, spying, etc, are found to be promoting ideas that are so at odds with the evidence that only retards could subscribe to them, and these people’s skills demonstrate that they are not retards, then there is a contradiction that is resolved only by assuming that these people are liars.

    Excellent point, yep. It seems so unlikely, yet it’s not impossible. Consider all the other PhD’s in the 9/11 movement; it’d make sense that the few nutty ones would end up together. Just playing devil’s advocate here. I wish we had some evidence beyond just the logic of it.

    I’m not sure what to make of Sofia Smallstorm (9/11 Mysteries was pretty good but then she was Fetzmerized), but the others you listed are the no-planer gang. You can add to the list some of the earliest no-planers: Rosalee Grable (the webfairy), Paula Gloria, Nico Haupt, Gerald Holmgren.

    A more recent example of Fetzmerizing is Joshua Blakeney, who was doing some good work but then surprisingly and suddenly fell under Fetzer’s spell.

  20. #20 by Poseidon on 02/06/2014 - 9:34

    I agree with Dr. Fetzer’s principles that we should “Consider the totality of the evidence”, and “The hypothesis that confers the highest probability on the evidence is the preferable”.

    Let’s ask which is the more reasonable hypothesis:

    1) That the 9/11 planes were holograms and/or eyewitnesses were paid to lie, physical evidence was faked, video and images were faked, and so on, when it would have been far simpler to crash planes into buildings with Zakheim’s Flight Termination Systems. And hundreds of crisis actors were hired for Sandy Hook, children were paid or threatened to pretend to be dead and not talk about it throughout adulthood, in order that the government has a stronger case against gun control and the construction industry gets a few million dollars worth of work, when it is far simpler to wait until some lone nut with a gun goes on the rampage and not have to pay off the construction industry. And Mike Piper, Keith Johnson and Mark Glenn are part of the conspiracy, paid to help cover up the government’s subterfuge.

    2) That four professors turn from brilliant academics into raving lunatics who are suffering from a “crippled epistemology” – including one who has co-authored and edited books and papers on epistemology, and another who specializes in media and communications. They not only subscribe to crackpot ‘theories’ about faked Boeings and faked deaths, but promote the ideas with an evangelical fervor.

    3) That four professors along with dozens of others, all of them otherwise rational people whose confirmation bias precludes them from seriously considering evidence of government conspiracies such as Israel’s central role in 9/11, agree to act the role of epistemologically-challenged conspiracy theorists, in order to help the government counter “extremist groups”. The leader is selected because of his expertise in epistemology and cognitive systems. Another is recruited because of his knowledge of media and communications.

    It doesn’t make sense that these esteemed professors should turn into lunatics and inexplicably develop a bizarre evangelical zeal to promote their crackpot theories, at the expense of making themselves look stupid and even facing calls to resign in the case of James Tracy. It doesn’t make sense that the government would hire hundreds of crisis actors, or that thousands of conspirators would fake videos and images, write CGI scripts, plant aircraft debris, pay eyewitnesses to lie, etc., when they could simply wait for some lone nut with a gun or crash planes into buildings. It does make sense that people with an ideological blind spot, which prevents them from accepting that it wasn’t Osama bin Laden or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who masterminded 9/11, would agree to help the government, probably for a fee, by “cognitive infiltration” of “extremist groups”, when the epistemologically blinkered shills mistakenly perceive the “extremist groups” as having a “crippled epistemology”.

    And of course, many activists know that Israel did 9/11, but are motivated by tribal loyalty to play the part of no-planes, micro-nukes, Sandy-Hook-hoax and Boston-bombings-hoax theorists.

    It is not hundreds or thousands of “crisis actors” who faked deaths and faked plane crashes. It’s Fetzer, Tracy, Reynolds, Wood, Hytten, Konrardy, Friend and their colleagues who are acting and faking. Fetzer & Co are government loyalists who don’t subscribe to any conspiracy theories. Fetzer and his friends think that the Arabs did 9/11, Oswald was a lone assassin, and Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty was an accident. And they think they’re being patriotic by operating as Sunstein shills, disinformation agents, Judas Goats, and by lying, faking and acting as crazed conspiracy theorists. In reality, Fetzer & Co are traitors. However, in their blinkered world-view, Fetzer & Co imagine they’re doing the right thing.

    When Dr. Fetzer meets up with his friends or old colleagues, he doesn’t need to play the role of a crackpot whose cognitive powers are in decline, leading him to fall for preposterous hypotheses whilst developing an irresistible urge to broadcast his weird beliefs to the world. He simply tells them that his “applied philosophical research” includes his role in infiltrating “conspiracy theorists”. After all, his friends and colleagues probably imagine that all “conspiracy theorists” are nuts who think the 9/11 planes and the Sandy Hook deaths were faked.

    When the media reports on James Tracy’s crazy theories about Sandy Hook and the Boston bombings and he’s facing calls for his resignation, he’ll tell the administrators that he’s acting a role for his conspiracy theories studies. Indeed, he needs to be as belligerent as possible, not even receiving a letter of reprimand until he’s refused for months to add a clear disclaimer at his blog to confirm that his views are not those of his university, and eventually relenting. (If they took no action against him, his legend would look even more suspect.) Given that Tracy is already on $64,650 per annum, there is no need for him to receive donations for his spare-time activities. Yet his website has a Donate button, most likely a flypaper trap that gathers the names and addresses of any patriots who are foolish enough to fall for it, for the attention of government agencies.

  21. #21 by UAZ on 02/06/2014 - 9:34

    It doesn’t make sense that these esteemed professors should turn into lunatics and inexplicably develop a bizarre evangelical zeal to promote their crackpot theories, at the expense of making themselves look stupid and even facing calls to resign in the case of James Tracy. […] It does make sense that people with an ideological blind spot, which prevents them from accepting that it wasn’t Osama bin Laden or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who masterminded 9/11, would agree to help the government, probably for a fee, by “cognitive infiltration” of “extremist groups”, when the epistemologically blinkered shills mistakenly perceive the “extremist groups” as having a “crippled epistemology”.
    […]
    Fetzer & Co are government loyalists who don’t subscribe to any conspiracy theories. Fetzer and his friends think that the Arabs did 9/11, Oswald was a lone assassin, and Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty was an accident. And they think they’re being patriotic by operating as Sunstein shills, disinformation agents, Judas Goats, and by lying, faking and acting as crazed conspiracy theorists. In reality, Fetzer & Co are traitors. However, in their blinkered world-view, Fetzer & Co imagine they’re doing the right thing.

    So you’re saying that they’re Sunstein shills who mistakenly perceive us as having a “crippled epistemology”, and are just pretending that their epistemology is orders of magnitude more crippled? Essentially they’re parodying us?

    Don’t you think that this scenario is even more unlikely than the idea that they really are epistemologically crippled?

    What if they are epistemologically crippled only from our perspective? Put another way, they are out of touch with the collective unconscious, but epistemologically sound in their own reality. As they were shaken awake by one of the big lies (e.g. 9/11) and began realizing that everything they believed is false, they jumped the boat and assumed everything ever presented is false, and so it becomes in their particular reality. Makes sense?

  22. #22 by Poseidon on 02/07/2014 - 9:34

    They’re parodying us, yes. The highly improbable scenario is that the Zionists would orchestrate 9/11 and never set up any counter-intelligence program, and that it was purely coincidental that a troll posting articles claiming no one died on 9/11 should happen to be Eyvind Hytten’s son, and that James Murdoch’s brother-in-law would soar into internet stardom with a book and video looking like it was produced by a committee, before claiming a few years later that Ernst Zundel, Germar Rudolf and Willis Carto were Zionist agents, and then going out with a whimper as a blogger who conducted research into “liquid farts” and posted nude photos of himself taken from the rear.

    The highly unlikely and very close to impossible scenario is that a distinguished retired professor whose field of study included the history and philosophy of science, epistemology, philosophical reasoning and cognitive science, would degenerate into a moron who thinks Flight 11 and 175 were “sophisticated hologram[s]” and the Sandy Hook shootings were an “elaborate hoax”, yet could almost sound lucid in a debate if you overlook his lack of evidence for his own position and the way he moves on to another point whenever he gets debunked as if nothing had happened. It’s near to impossible that Fetzer could be stupid enough to believe his junk science about an aluminum fuselage being incapable of penetrating a wall made partly of steel. Jets of water can penetrate steel plates, given sufficient momentum.

    Professors such as Fetzer and Tracy would understand that you do not reject everything as false; you formulate the hypothesis that is the best match for the evidence, minimizes inconsistencies, has the greatest explanatory power, satisfies Occam’s Razor, is consistent with the laws of physics, chemistry, probability, etc., and this allows you to determine what is false and what is true.

    The shills benefit by putting out a large number of crazy theories, so that Sunstein’s “third-party mass audience” perceives “conspiracy theorists” as cretins and the demand for conspiracy theories is damped. But for those of us whom Sunstein describes as the “supply side”, they’ve gone too far. Given their skills and/or qualifications, they could not be as idiotic as they pretend to be.

  23. #23 by UAZ on 02/07/2014 - 9:34

    The highly improbable scenario is that the Zionists would orchestrate 9/11 and never set up any counter-intelligence program

    Yes, of course, but that doesn’t mean it’s Fetzer & co and their psychopathological network of deluded followers, even if they effectively serve such a purpose.

    Are you saying that Hufschmid is also parodying us? Hahaha, that’s hard to imagine.

    The more I think about it the more I like this theory, While I still find it highly improbable that they are actually statists/government loyalists who believe the official fairy tales, their ideological zeal is peculiar and outstanding. It’s also the best kind of motivational force for this kind of job (vs profit and blackmail).

    And it’s close to 100% of their “research” that is BS, particularly with Fetzer. If your job were to come up with parodies of “conspiracy theories”, would you be able to come up with something better than Fetzer’s work? Your theory explains things nicely in the case of Fetzer, but less with others.

  24. #24 by Poseidon on 02/07/2014 - 9:34

    Making the third-party mass audience think “conspiracy theorists” are crazy is one purpose of the cointelpro operatives. This can be done by putting out ideas that are too off-the-wall even for Fetzer, like the “vicsims” of Hytten/Konrardy, or the recent “fake snow” videos. If an idea “snowballs”, some people will be promoting it for fun, with no need for government agents. There is a “Dr. Uranius Brown” who claims to have got to the “bottom of the Fake Snow conspiracy” and proven it 100%.

    But when you Google “fake snow” “conspiracy nuts”, it shows that the hoax has achieved a serious political purpose. There are comments such as “You conspiracy nuts make me laugh”, and “Like a hoard of starving ticks grabbing onto a passing dog, the chemtrails conspiracy people and various assortments of other tinfoil types immediately had the explanation [for snow that doesn’t melt immediately when heat is applied from a lighter]: massive government conspiracy! Proof that Chemtrails are real! And that September 11 was a government plot!”

    Governments achieve the same aims by having Dave Shayler pretend to be ‘ex’-MI5 and a 9/11 truth-teller, then promote the hologram-planes theory and declare himself to be the “son of God”, a transvestite and a Kabbalist.

    Another function of cointelpro is to weaken morale and sow mistrust in truth-seeking circles. Sunstein would love us to think that Fetzer, Shayler, Reynolds, Lear & Co are part of our group – genuine, honest patriots who just happen to be crazy, rather than actors posing as crazy, honest patriots by lying and peddling bizarre claims. I think AFP, Piper and others have been more than generous in giving Fetzer a platform to argue his views. Fetzer will never provide any credible evidence for Sandy-Hook-hoax or no-planes, because there isn’t any, so when he’s beaten on any point he’ll resort to ad hominems and divert attention to “new evidence” that he’s uncovered.

    In September 2012 there was an amusing exchange at Veterans Today between Fetzer and a poster named Rollo, whom Fetzer was attacking for opposing his no-planes. When Rollo asked how Fetzer’s hologram-plane theory could account for details such as amateur videos of Flight 175 that captured the Doppler shift of the roaring jet if the camera was south of WTC2 and the plane passed nearly overhead, but exhibited very little shift if the camera was to the north and the plane was never actually receding, Fetzer continued to dodge the question. After getting the last word in with ad hominems on how Rollo was a “goof-ball or an op” who was “posting rubbish”, Fetzer banned Rollo from responding and closed the comments on spurious grounds that Rollo did not “even know [Fetzer’s] position”!

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/13/james-h-fetzer-911-iran-review-interview/comment-page-1/#comment-451537

    So my opinion is that many of these disinfo promoters are government loyalists who don’t believe in any big government conspiracies. They may suspect that Flight 93 was shot down, but their belief that the government is basically good gives them the incentive to go to work at countering the “conspiracy theorists”.

    Then there are disinformation promoters, even no-planers, whose actions are hard to explain. Ironically, it was Gerard Holmgren’s satirical “Debunking Conspiracy Theorists” that inspired me to research 9/11 back in early 2003, and it was his findings on how the AA Flights 11 and 77 weren’t listed as scheduled in the BTS database that renewed my interest in 9/11 after a lull in the later part of 2003. The BTS database was down for months after he reported his discovery. But that didn’t prove anything; it could have been that American Airlines didn’t think it was worth putting crashed flights into a flight time punctuality database, whereas United Airlines stuck to the procedure. And then Holmgren became a no-planer.

    Strangely, he apparently died of cancer at 51, a week or two after diagnosis, despite never using tobacco.

    Hufschmid is rather a one-off, but he did serve all the purposes. After becoming accepted as a “genuine” truth-teller, he played on the fact that it was initially something of a novelty to hear him and DBS chatting about the gossip on various personalities in the truth “movement”. This allowed him to progress to the point of working to divide the movement with allegations of everyone being a shill. Whenever Hufschmid heard anything bad about anyone, he would eagerly hoard the information and use it to support his claims that most of the truth-seekers were part of the “criminal network” or had something wrong with them. His “liquid farts” research, his Danner-saw-Global-Hawk-hit-Pentagon story, and his Bollyn-family-kidnapped claims hardly helped the image of truth-seekers. I suspect Hufschmid persuaded Bollyn to call the cops out to his home and get himself arrested, with the result that “bollyn” became a verb in the debunkers’ dictionary.

    http://screwloosechange.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/dictionary-of-9-11-denial.html

    IMO the truth movement should distance itself from some of these obvious shills and liars such as Fetzer. But sometimes online wars develop because of personality differences, when both sides are sincere in their opposition to government and Zionist crimes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: