Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 9, 2020 - Jim Fetzer

01:43:43

The Fetz Presents (8 September 2020) with Jeff Prager,

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I'm recording it too, by the way.
	Good!
	This is Jim Fetzer, the Conspiracy Guy, who I'm very pleased to have as my featured guest tonight, the man who may have been the first to discern that 9-11, the destruction of the World Trade Center in particular, or especially the Twin Towers, was a nuclear event.
	He published a two-volume work about it years and years ago, 2004 as I recall, Yeah, it's extremely, you know, I'm extremely pleased to have him here.
	I have added him to the program for the Question Everything conference in Austin, Texas to be held on the 7th and 8th.
	of November. You can find more about the conference by going to mixedinstream.com or just scroll up
	on Jim the Conspiracy Guy and you'll be able to click right there. It's going to be a fabulous
	conference. We have 22 speakers on a vast range of subjects from targeted individuals to the
	gods of sex abuse to how to fake a hate crime to the Boston bombing to Sandy Hook to 9-11 to JFK.
	You're going to find it all there.
	It's going to be a fascinating conference.
	And guess what?
	You don't actually have to be physically present.
	We only have 200 seats there at the hotel near the airport.
	But the fact is, any number can watch on pay-per-view.
	So you can actually take it all in from the pleasure of your own domicile, your apartment, your home, wherever, a conference room, set yourself up, check out.
	Go ahead.
	I think this is an event you don't want to miss.
	Now, it's a great pleasure to have my guest here.
	Whom I have now added to the program.
	So he and Joe Olson will be my two heavyweights on 9-11, where I myself just gave a two-hour presentation on Sunday.
	There was a catch in it streaming.
	It'll be shortly listed with the other shows right here at Jim the Conspiracy Guy, if it's not already there.
	I didn't take a look to see, but the fact is it will be soon.
	So you'll see how highly complimentary it is, but I'm very pleased to say the man whose work really convinced me initially that this had to have been a nuclear event is my guest tonight, Jeff Prager.
	Jeff, I'm so glad to have you here on the FETS Presents.
	Well, hey Jim, I'm glad to be here too.
	Your audience should know we go back a long way, and I haven't spoken to you in a couple of years, and I'm equally glad to be here.
	I'd like to say a few things.
	You know, I'm really not the person that you said I am.
	What I am is a person that was obsessed with 9-11 until just a few months ago for 15 years.
	I actually retired and sold most of what I owned and retired to a beach in Mexico and researched 9-11 full-time for quite a few years, six years.
	In 2011, I wrote to a physicist named Dr. Christopher Busby in Latvia.
	He had retired, and he confirmed with me that it was a nuclear event based on some mathematical figures that I had put together.
	I attended Cornell University as a public member, so I was able to read the physics department's material for quite a few years.
	But, you know, after 15 years, I did manage to meet the right physicists.
	And the reason I'm here tonight is because I actually represent four physicists.
	I don't represent myself.
	And the book we wrote, which is 192 pages, my chapter, I think, is 10 pages.
	So what did I write?
	You know, less than 1% of the book, I think, or whatever.
	But I'd like to introduce you to the physicist.
	I'd like to first introduce you to Andreas Peiper.
	I like Mr. Peiper.
	He's a physicist.
	He dealt with graphene, which is a novel two-dimensional solid state made of carbon.
	And he also worked on algorithms for matrix solvers on supercomputers, which is, you know, quite interesting.
	And he's a sailor, and I built sailboats when I was a young child.
	Dr. David Madlener is a heavyweight here.
	He's studied at Colonial University, I'm gonna have to read this, both math and physics.
	He graduated in 08 on numerical simulations in astrophysics with a software to simulate hydrodynamics and gravitation.
	He's worked at the German Center for Aerospace on the software and the electronics for a Mars rover.
	For Beagle 2.
	And later on Sesame, that was the experimental lander for Philae, which was a probe that made the first soft landing on a comet in 2014.
	And here in this PhD at Cal University in 2013, researching what are called Young Stellar Objects, with an emphasis on radiative transfer and optimization using Monte Carlo methods, which is a type of physics.
	And he worked as a postdoc at the renowned Max Planck University, of all places, on YSOs and interferometry.
	And now he's an architect, a systems architect for digital designs, and he develops optical sensor technology for autonomous systems.
	Dr. Roby, Dr. Francois Roby, what I'd like to say about Dr. Roby is Dr. Roby is a really sweet, gentle man.
	He's a physics professor at a university in France, and Dr. Roby has been suspended for four years from this university.
	Now, not a student complained, not an employee complained, no professors complained, no members of the university, no employees of the university, nobody at the university at all ever complained about Dr. Roby.
	But what did happen is Dr. Roby had a blog, and the French-Jewish lobby complained.
	They wrote a letter to the university's director, rector in France, and called Dr. Roby a lunatic, insane, an anti-Semite, and requested that something be done.
	And of course, something was done.
	He was suspended for four years at half pay.
	And he can't put foot on the university.
	He did release in February of 2019, and this again is in our book, link in our book, a physics paper to the HAL Scientific Archive website demonstrating the use of nuclear energy at Ground Zero.
	And I'll get into that a little bit later, why we know Ground Zero was a nuclear event, beside the nuclear fingerprint that we've found, that the physicists have found.
	I just want to say some things about Heinz Palmer.
	This is Heinz Palmer's work, most of it.
	Dr. Madlener covers Tritium, Andreas Peiper wrote the introduction, and he also named the Ground Zero model.
	That was his name.
	He came up with that name for our book and for the model that Heinz has put together.
	And Dr. Roby has contributed in terms of the energy level, the energy necessary at Ground Zero, the energy that we saw at Ground Zero, which any physicist can calculate.
	And I may have time to explain that also.
	It's a very easy calculation.
	So I just want to read this.
	Heinz wrote this.
	Heinz Palmer is, I just want to say, the kindest, sweetest, gentlest, most humanitarian person I've ever met in my life.
	And he's brilliant.
	He's a brilliant writer.
	He's a brilliant thinker.
	And he's just a brilliant man.
	And he's a nuclear physicist.
	He was trained as a nuclear physicist.
	So what Heinz wrote about himself is he wrote, Mr. Heinz Palmer is a passionate hiker.
	He's an observer of things, not making for speed, but endurance in the sense of patience.
	For him, connecting to nature does not only mean to observe, but rather feeling being a part of the energy flow of nature.
	It is important to feel nature's energies correctly.
	In respect to September 11, 2001, many walks and hikes were needed to get him closer to the truth.
	So, that's basically just what I want to say about Heinz.
	He's the CEO of his own company.
	He's an author, a lecturer, a physicist.
	He's an investigative journalist.
	He's a documentation publisher.
	That's what he does for a living.
	He's the CEO of a documentation publishing company on extremely complex machinery, typically used in nuclear, like nuclear generators and things like that.
	So, you know, I just wanted to introduce these physicists, Jim, because I'm not one of them.
	I was fortunate to meet Heinz Palmer, because I called him.
	I've been researching 9-11 for 15 years, and when I saw what Heinz wrote, and what he presented in his third presentation in Sweden, which had 3,000 people in the audience, was broadcast in eight languages, and had a little over 100,000 people watching on the internet, I knew Heinz was right, okay?
	I knew his theories were correct, and in writing the book with Heinz, which took 120 days for us to put this book together, And by the way, I want people to know, we're not selling books here.
	The profits for this book are donated to the Feel Good Foundation in New York City, John Feel, who helps currently dying first responders.
	So we're not making any money on this book, nor do we want to.
	I'll give you a link to a free PDF at the end, or I'll give it to you in a few minutes, because the PDF has Clickable links.
	There's a couple of hundred links and references and videos, and you can actually click on them in the PDF.
	So I prefer people have the PDF, actually.
	But we do have the book on Barnes & Noble and Amazon.
	We've sold a few.
	And the title, Jeff, is that American Newt?
	No, the book is called The Ground Zero Model by Heinz.
	Ground Zero Model.
	I'll give you a link for the PDF shortly.
	The first work I'd seen of yours was entitled American Newt, and I guess it was in two parts.
	I thought it was two volumes, but two parts.
	Am I wrong?
	No, the book was just too big to post as one part on the site that I posted it on.
	But, you know, I had it wrong in that book.
	Well, I had a lot right.
	It was a nuclear event, and certainly fission and fusion both occurred.
	But the end result was, I was wrong.
	Jeff, it's called scientific reasoning.
	When you acquire additional evidence or alternative hypotheses, you may have to reject hypotheses you previously accepted, accept hypotheses you previously rejected, and leave others in suspense.
	You're right-headed.
	You had the right approximate solution.
	It was not jet-fueled base fires that caused the building.
	They could not have physically collapsed.
	It was not done with directed energy weapons, and God knows nanothermite had nothing to do with it, which is a feeble explosive, has a power only one-thirteenth the quantity of TNT, where one of its advocates has suggested it would have taken between 29,000 and 130,000 metric tons of nanothermite to bring down a twin tower.
	Talk about your absurdities.
	Right, that was Niels Harit.
	That was actually in an email between T. Mark Hightower, who I published a book for called No Thermite, and Niels Harit and several others.
	And Harriet posited 29,000 to 144,000 or something metric tons.
	And when I did the mathematics on that, in order to load the buildings, you would have had to, first of all, it would have taken 1,500 standard tractor-trailers and working 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
	If you loaded a one-ton box every 15 minutes, you could have loaded the low numbers.
	The 29,000 tons.
	I didn't bother with the 144,000.
	That was ridiculous.
	I used the low number.
	And it would have taken one year, working 24-7, loading one one-ton box every 15 minutes from the back of the truck to its final destination.
	And that's just not possible.
	Well, Jeff, you may or may not know, but Team Mark Hightower and I published three articles in 2011 blowing apart the nanothermite hypothesis, one of which was entitled, Is 9-11 Truth Based Upon a False Theory?
	I read that article.
	I read that article.
	Yeah, well, yeah, I'm just, I'm just, the audience may not know.
	I'm just explaining, you know.
	And nevertheless, to this day, Steve Jones and Richard Gage and others affiliated with architects and engineers insist it was done with nanothermite And so not only do they give a hopelessly inadequate account of how it was done, but believe it or not, they will not talk about who was responsible or why.
	I mean, give me a break.
	Similarly, Judy Wood.
	Continues to insist her do theory is correct, ignoring that the 300 ton steel assembly that was thrown into the Winter Garden 600 feet away, which required a massive amount of energy to be so projected, which directed energy would not have provided, Well, her strongest claim is that directed energy provides far more, this is her definition, far more energy than conventional and can be directed, which is also true of the nuclear devices we're addressing.
	Well, you know, Jim, I debated both Dr. Stephen Jones and Dr. Judy Wood at the same time for about 60 days every day in an email debate moderated by Gordon Duff at Veterans Today.
	And Hutchinson, Judy Wood's pal, he was part of that.
	Actually, in one of the emails he wrote, listen, I've notified the FBI of this conversation, blah, blah, blah.
	It was crazy.
	But anyway, Stephen Jones, at the time of that debate, it was the end of 2011 and Sandy Hook happened, and the debate just ended.
	And it ended at a bad point, because I had Stephen Jones.
	He couldn't answer my questions.
	Well, actually, I mean, it was 14 December 2012 for Sandy Hook, but it probably ended because Stephen Jones couldn't answer your question.
	Do you know that at the suggestion of David Ray Griffin, when I founded Scholars for 9-11 Truth in December of 2005, I invited Steve Jones to be my co-chair?
	But by the following June of 2006, When we participated in the American Scholars Conference hosted by Alex Jones, where he invited me to give the keynote address, I'd already become convinced nanothermite couldn't possibly explain it.
	I actually confronted Steve in the lobby of the hotel on Saturday and said, Steve, do you still think nanothermite could have blown the buildings apart and so forth from the top down?
	He said, Oh, yes, absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	Which was utter nonsense.
	And you know, Let me explain a fact to the audience that's an irrefutable fact.
	We found microscopic molybdenum in the ruins at Ground Zero.
	The USGS took 38 ground samples.
	Now these are secure ground samples.
	They were double nitride gloves.
	They were taken by USGS chemists.
	I feel comfortable with these samples because they show 7.57 parts per million of uranium, which is significantly high.
	If you do that in becquerels per kilogram, it's 93 becquerels per kilogram.
	And in your backyard, if you dig in your backyard anywhere in the world, if you dig in your yard, you're going to find somewhere between 12 and 20 becquerels per kilogram.
	If you live really close to a nuclear generating station, you might find 40 becquerels per kilogram, but you're not going to find 93.
	Jeff, let me just interject.
	Yes, he found barium, strontium, lithium, lanthanum, tritium.
	Elements, some of which only exist in radioactive form.
	Absolutely, absolutely.
	And it was when, listen, before I went to the Vancouver Conference in 2012, where I invited Judy and Hutchison and others of their orientation to speak, where Hutchison and another physicist had agreed after Judy convinced him to withdraw
	I posted a five-star review of her book, Where Did the Towers Go?, because a magnificent collection of photograph studies and so forth as resources, but I have one line where I said that, you know, well, I felt that she had ruled out large nukes, and I'm going to qualify this, but what I wrote then, I felt she had ruled out large nukes.
	She had not In my estimation, ruled out mini or micro nukes.
	I went to the conference and there were speakers there who were presenting your views or those of the physicists you were representing, where I frequently, you know, I collaborate, I specialize in bringing together experts on different aspects of these cases.
	And then publishing our results, you know, with attribution, of course.
	I mean, these are independent essays.
	So, like in my Sandy Hook book, I have 13 experts, including six current retired PhDs, where we established that the school had been closed by 2008, that there were no students there, and that it was a two-day FEMA exercise involving children presented as mass murder to promote gun control.
	Or Jeff, we even had the manual for the exercise, which I included as Appendix A. Now, going to the Vancouver conference, speakers were talking about your work and the evidence and the U.S.
	Geological Survey results and so forth, so that when I returned, I discovered on Amazon that my review had now over 2,000 comments, the overwhelming majority of which were hostile from Judy Partisans attacking me, some quite viciously.
	So I realized, well, this was extraordinary.
	I need to do something about this.
	So I revised it to a 3.5, and I was very specific in saying how Judy was unwilling to take into account results, new evidence in the form of the U.S.
	Geological Survey, and I mentioned barium, strontium, lithium, lanthanum, and the other elements found there, which meant she no longer qualified as a scientist because she wasn't revising her view.
	Now you were acknowledging that in your earlier work you didn't have everything right, but that's exactly what is expected.
	That's how scientific progress takes place.
	I agree.
	Karl Popper, who championed, you know, the method of conjectures and refutations, said, of course, that the way we advance is by testing and attempting to falsify our previous views and discovering their false return to others.
	And he suggests the only problem is we can't falsify them fast enough, meaning discover all the mistakes we've made.
	So you're perfectly in the Popperian tradition.
	Well, until now.
	I've been wrong for 15 years, and I've published 11 books on this subject.
	Yeah, but Jeff, we're talking about an event so complicated, look, it could well take physicists to sort it out.
	Well, it did, and it didn't take me, it took these physicists.
	I mean, what we're going to explain tonight is what we call the nuclear fingerprint.
	It's an unmistakable nuclear fingerprint.
	We only have it for the South Tower because that's the only data we have.
	But the demolition of the North Tower was identical.
	However, Building 7 was different.
	And although we don't have the data, we do have enough data to also show you how Building 7 was demolished.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	And I'm particularly interested because it seemed to me, here in a four, Building 7 was a classic controlled demolition.
	You'd add that little kink in the roof, all the floors come down at the same time, and there's a massive pile of debris equal to about 12% of the original 47 floors.
	What we find with experiments with controlled demolition, whereas with the Twin Towers, 110 floors, they're blowing apart in every direction.
	They're being converted into millions of cubic yards, or meters, of very fine dust.
	And when it's over, there's no stack of debris.
	There should have been about 13 and a half floors.
	There's nothing there.
	We'll continue.
	As a first responder from St.
	Mark's Episcopal Church on my shows of the past, twice affirmed how the buildings were even destroyed to or even below ground level.
	So that's a stunning difference.
	I've been emphasizing the difference in the modes of demolition of Building 7 and the Twin Towers for decades.
	Right.
	Totally different demolitions.
	The Twin Towers were the same.
	Building 7 was different.
	Um, for a number of reasons.
	Uh, first, what I want the audience to know is that if you, I, I, unfortunately, we can't show slides or pictures and, but the book has, my book has all these pictures.
	Let me give you the, the, the short PDF link.
	It's Prager, my last name, P-R-A-G-E-R dot academia, uh, wait a second, that's the wrong link, uh, Prager dot academia, A-C-A-D-E-M-I-A, Prager.academia.edu slash research.
	Pretty simple.
	Prager.academia.edu slash research.
	And it's the books at the top of the page.
	The second book's in German.
	Prager.academia.
	Right.
	Prager.academia.edu slash research.
	Okay, I'm just putting it up in the chat room.
	Prager.academia.edu slash research.
	Go ahead.
	Okay, so let's talk about Building 7, okay?
	You remember the British lady who on TV said... James Stanley!
	Yeah, she said it came down, but it hadn't come down.
	Well, as you can see it behind her left shoulder.
	Right, that was pretty early in the day.
	That was like 10 a.m.
	I think.
	Well, it's 4.57 actually.
	Oh, 4.57.
	Okay, that's right.
	So, Building 7 was supposed to come down early in the day.
	If you look at the LIDAR pictures or the, well, the LIDAR pictures or the AVIRIS pictures, you can type in there USGS 01-0429.
	That brings up that report.
	USGS 01.
	Even, you can just, you can just google 01-0429 and the report comes up.
	The World Trade Center USGS report comes up.
	01-0429.
	01-0429, yeah.
	So, in that report, okay, Building 7.
	In the book, we show pictures of Building 7.
	You're right, it's about 30 feet high.
	What nobody's seen is about the five-second video that's on our server, linked in the book, of Building 7 from the Hudson River, from the New Jersey side.
	When Building 7 came down, it put out four bulbs.
	We showed them in the book as bulbs A, B, C, and D.
	These bulbs stopped at certain heights based on air temperature.
	When you release a nuclear weapon, the side bulbs stop when they hit a certain air temperature, a cooler temperature.
	It just stops the bulb.
	You can see the central stem and you can see the top bulb.
	But nobody's seen this five-second clip.
	It's in the book.
	A link to the clip is in the book and a picture is in the book.
	A picture.
	This cloud rose to 1,300 meters, Jim.
	Okay?
	That's over 4,000 feet.
	That's a 700-foot building that had four bulbs and a stem and a bulb at 13,000 meters.
	You see, now the audience hasn't seen that.
	Very few people have seen that.
	We have the picture in the book and we have a clip to the video in the book.
	It's only five seconds and it's hard to find, but we found it.
	Heinz found it.
	Heinz is an incredible researcher.
	He's found a lot.
	So, we know Building 7 was nuclear just from that picture alone, but let's discuss Building 7 and why it came down the way it did.
	If you go to the avarice pictures in the USGS report, you can see that Building 7, it was shaped like this, you know, it had an angles in a this way and this way in these angles.
	Well, right here in this corner, this right-hand corner, that remained the hottest spot at Ground Zero for the entire four months after 9-11.
	That spot under Building 7 was the hottest spot.
	On top of that spot today, is a radiation barrier, a pond, a heavily cemented pond, just like the two radiation barriers that are covering the Twin Towers.
	Because below those three buildings is still fissioning material in the granite.
	Um so uh and this theory is the easiest and I want you to understand there's the theory of gravity there's the there's a bunch of theories.
	Theories are are facts in science and and this is a factual theory and we're challenging everyone in America all of the universities in America to to refute it because it can't be.
	Well I would just caution Look, even classical Newtonian physics, which was taken as a paradigm of scientific knowledge and viewed as certain for 200 years, turned out to be a special limiting case of relativity.
	So, we don't want to talk about irrefutable, because all scientific knowledge is tentative and fallible.
	No, not at all.
	Jim, if you throw an apple up in the air, it's going to come down and hit you in the head, I promise.
	If you throw it straight... Jeff, Jeff, Jeff, I'm making a point about the theory of knowledge and the nature of scientific knowledge.
	It's all tentative and fallible.
	Even though it's the best confirmed, it might still be false.
	Sure, and we ask in the book, this is called the Ground Zero Model, Because we ask in the book for people to use this model and refute it, oppose it, or affirm it.
	This is written by four European physicists.
	It's hard enough to get two physicists to agree on anything, let alone four.
	But these four physicists agree on everything in this book, and it's a challenge to America.
	It's up to the Americans now.
	We've done our part.
	They've done their part.
	But let me go back to Building 7, okay?
	We show two pictures in Building 7.
	They show Building 7 is nothing.
	It's literally dust, rusted iron dust, but it's covered unusually, Jim, by three foot squares of granite that are unharmed, untouched, blanketed over this pile.
	Dozens of these.
	The whole facade just folded over the building.
	the granite facade. It didn't, there's no harm to that granite facade at all.
	But why is that? Well, the reason is because granite has 21 times the capacity to accept
	fast neutrons as iron does. So when this nuclear device, now these were not bombs,
	these were not weapons, these were devices.
	And we have a picture in the book, they had no moving parts.
	They were rings of uranium and thorium with a central pole and you move the central pole a couple of inches and it starts the fissioning process and the fusion process.
	And the uranium and thorium separate.
	You form what's called a bladder underground.
	You can't disintegrate granite.
	You can't make granite disappear.
	And you can't move it.
	So when surrounded by granite, you form a balloon, a bubble of liquid granite and neutrons moving at 22,000 kilometers an hour, bouncing all around in there.
	But when you release it, With a water booster.
	See, this is all technology.
	This goes back to Edward Teller.
	And this is all in the book.
	There was a symposium in Las Vegas in 1970.
	It was put on by Edward Teller.
	500 of the world's top nuclear physicists attended.
	And the symposium was about nuclear landscaping and nuclear engineering.
	And the physicists were beside themselves.
	They were thrilled.
	They were going to build canals with nuclear weapons.
	They were going to move mountains and not have to build tunnels for trains.
	They were going to do all sorts of construction with nuclear weapons.
	And, you know, there was a divide.
	Half of them felt that it'd be a hundred days before we could even enter the sites again.
	Another half felt to be two or three days.
	And Teller was tasked, him and his colleagues, with reducing radiation.
	And they did reduce it a hundredfold.
	Teller developed what's called the trigger reactor, which can be used by a child.
	And in fact, in the 50s, 60s, and 70s, or in the 60s and 70s, there were reactors that were available for children in science kits.
	And a trigger reactor moderates itself.
	It gets close to critical, and through condensation, it calms back down.
	It gets close to critical, condensation calms it back down, and it never explodes, and it's very safe.
	So, this is a type of device that was used on a very simple, non-mechanical, no-moving-parts device, and as that device cooked underground, It did release x-rays and neutrons into the building, and over time, over hours actually, this causes extreme rust.
	Now, if you look at buildings surrounding Ground Zero that were under construction at the time, and are just beams, they're also extremely rusted.
	Building 7 was taken down by rust.
	It was turned into literally sand being held together by gravity and frictional forces in the end.
	It was just literally sand.
	It was rusted into its constituent parts.
	That's why we saw a 30 foot tall mound of a 700 foot building.
	And that's why we saw a 1300 meter mushroom cloud above the building.
	So it was cooked for hours.
	The iron can accept two neutrons without becoming radioactive.
	But more than that, it does become radioactive, but it hides the radioactivity within the iron.
	And so, the reason the first responders got sick is because when they inhaled these iron micro droplets, their stomach acid dissolved the iron coating and released the radioactivity.
	So, we have the Dust Lady.
	I'm sure you've seen pictures of her, the African-American woman who's just covered with dust.
	She was called the Dust Lady.
	She died of stomach cancer.
	Because she breathed in so much dust into her stomach and the stomach acid dissolved the the coating on the the iron micro droplets that were holding the the two radioactive particles.
	Because again iron can take on two radioactive neutrons without becoming radioactive itself.
	So the radioactivity was hidden in the iron.
	But at the same time, that radioactivity breaks the molecular bonding of the iron.
	Iron is shown as a square in a molecular bond, and it just breaks that square apart at all different angles.
	And so, what we saw in Building 7 was extraordinary rust, and we saw some larger parts.
	You know, there were some parts that were fairly sizable, but everything was rusted.
	And the same with the Twin Towers, everything was rusted, because the Twin Towers went through the same process, it was just much quicker, because the x-rays were much stronger, and the neutrons were much stronger, because they were released.
	The Twin Towers, well I can only talk about the South Tower, but they're both built the same.
	The South Tower, under the elevator, had a drop, okay, a drop about 10 foot by 10 foot, And then a little bit wider above that to access the bottom of the elevator and to account for, you know, if any water filled the elevator shafts.
	That was actually the collimator.
	A collimator is just a tube.
	That was actually where the material was released from.
	And that bubble I spoke about originally that had, you know, thorium and then uranium at the top and And was comprised mostly of liquid granite and, you know, neutrons bouncing around at 22,000 kilometers an hour.
	Once that's released, and it's surrounded by a water booster, this is what Edward Teller put together in the 70s when these buildings were built.
	And the water booster was facilitated by the sprinkler system in the building.
	It came down through the elevator shaft.
	Elevator shafts.
	There were several large tanks of water on different floors of the buildings.
	And by detonating that device and creating that bubble within the granite and then opening the collimator Okay, now what I'm talking about all happens in 13 seconds.
	Out of that collimator comes primarily liquid granite and steam.
	Now x-rays come out and fast neutrons come out too, and they come out in an angled shape.
	So they vaporize the elevator shafts in the center of the building on their way up.
	And it's 13 seconds we're talking about again.
	And at their widest, at the top of the building, they heat up the top of the building.
	And this is why we saw people taking off their clothing where there was no fire visible, and jumping out windows where there's no fire visible, because they were being heated by those x-rays from the inside out.
	And all they could think of to do is they were so hot they could take, they had to take off their clothes.
	Now we have another explanation.
	Barry Jennings and the other councilmen were trapped on eighth floor of building seven.
	They came down the stairway, it blew up, they got blown back up onto the eighth floor, they went back into the room they were in.
	They were so hot that they had to break out the windows with a fire extinguisher.
	Why were they hot?
	They were being heated by the x-rays of the device under Building 7 that was still cooking.
	A device like that can cook for hours without causing a building to drop.
	Jennings and the other guy were eventually rescued.
	Jennings disappeared.
	We think Jennings was murdered.
	Jennings and his family disappeared from the face of the earth.
	He gave a couple of interviews talking about what happened, talking about how hot he was and how he broke out the window with a fire extinguisher and they took off their ties and loosened up their shirts and they were just sweating and you know and he did a couple interviews and you know something was wrong and then he disappeared.
	There was a brief funeral notice, no explanation of how he died, and can't find his family.
	Well, I think Jeff with Barry Jennington, he's been of keen interest to me.
	He went up to the command and control center that Rudy Giuliani had set up.
	He found half-eaten sandwiches, still steaming up coffee.
	A fireman came along and said, we got to get you out of here.
	Yes, explosions were going off while he was in the building.
	This stairwell was blown out from under him.
	At one point, he felt himself stepping over dead bodies in the middle of the black.
	he couldn't see them, but he couldn't feel them.
	And when he got out, he gave several interviews.
	Now, as you well know, in the 9-11 commission report, there's not a word about building seven.
	So that NIST had to go about constructing an independent analysis, claiming, of course,
	and it was ridiculous then, and is ridiculous now that these very modest fires
	had brought about its destruction, which no one with any knowledge whatsoever,
	is in a complete gullible sap would buy, but where just two days before their release
	of their report on building seven, Barry Jennings,
	Thank you.
	Died!
	I think, as you do, that this was a determination of a witness who could have, based on his own direct personal experience, refuted the official account of Building 7.
	Yeah, Dennings was murdered.
	I have no doubt that Dennings was murdered.
	So we have that, and And what you see again, you know, it's highly unusual to see, and you have to see these in the book, and your audience has a link to the free book, you have to see the pictures of Building 7.
	It's, the building is collapsed, a 30-foot pile of literally rusted dust covered by an intact blanket of granite three foot square three four foot square facades that have not been harmed at all.
	And again, this is because the granite has 20, 21 times the capacity to accept neutrons.
	Same reason that we saw paper all over the city.
	Paper has no mass.
	Paper is not affected by neutrons.
	We show in the book, the media tried to hide this, we have numerous pictures in the book of cars that are just on fire.
	And we have testimony from a woman named Androvich who was a She wasn't a fireman, she was an EMT.
	We have her testimony, you know, New York City took testimony from all of the first responders, 1,200 testimonies.
	In her testimony, some of which was blacked out, parts that weren't blacked out, she testified to running down the street and a car door exploded off a car and hit her.
	And she testified to cars exploding into fire for no reason at all.
	And so did a second first responder.
	And we have his testimony in the book, too.
	For no apparent reason at all.
	Right.
	Right.
	For no apparent reason at all.
	And by the way, don't you mean paper has no water content?
	Of course it has mass.
	No, it does not have mass.
	Well, of course it has mass.
	Put it on a piece of paper.
	Take a ream of paper.
	Are you going to tell me your paper has no mass?
	We didn't have reams.
	Jim, we didn't have reams.
	We didn't have reams of paper falling out of the building.
	The point is paper has mass even if it's slight.
	You know what you mean?
	It's just it's very light.
	Okay, in the book we say paper doesn't have mass.
	We should have said paper doesn't have enough mass.
	Right, doesn't have much mass.
	It has very little mass.
	But to say it has no mass is false.
	Right, you're right.
	Paper does not have enough mass to be affected by neutrons at all.
	Cars, on the other hand, immediately flame up.
	The metals immediately flame up in the cars.
	This is why we see cars burning and trees intact.
	Not a fire on a tree.
	All the trees are just fine.
	Paper all over the ground, but the cars... You know we have that phenomenon of the California wildfires, Jeff, you know, where the houses are burned to reduce to ash and the trees are totally unscathed.
	Well, you know, the houses hold a lot of really seriously flammable chemical materials.
	Well, we didn't need to go into it.
	I just wondered if you'd noticed, and if that's all right.
	Well, I don't want to distract you from the World Trade Center, so go ahead.
	Well, let's, I mean, Building 7, I've given enough information to know that Building 7 was nuclear.
	Look, there was a 1,300 meter Uh, obvious nuclear demolition cloud above Building 7, if you looked at it, from New Jersey across the Hudson River.
	And we do have those images in that video in the book.
	I'm telling you, over 1300 meters, a bulb at the top, you can see the central stem, and there's four side bulbs.
	I may need more convincing about Building 7, but I'm fascinated by everything you're saying about your example of the South Tower.
	Now, a colleague of mine, Dennis Camino, who was a top electronics troubleshooter for the Navy before he resigned and went to work for Raytheon, Yeah, I'd be in love with Dennis.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Describe, you know, the tube within a tube design as, you know, a two-part or two-stage, very much as you're describing.
	From the bottom up for the inner tube, and then from the top down, blowing apart in every direction from the outer tube, all we're seeing is the outer tube.
	Therefore, if we miss the inner tube, Which, of course, I'm now open to, and the reason I had originally, in my comment on Judy, said it seemed to me she'd ruled out large nukes is you would assume the building was destroying from the bottom up.
	Now, when I interviewed Dimitri, he was telling me it was a nuclear from the bottom up, and I was explaining, well, then, since we don't see it, so the lower floors all appear to be intact, when we have the explosion from the top down, did he mean to tell me it was an illusion?
	And I think there may have been a linguistic problem there because, you know, I mean, literally, it can't be that those floors were an illusion, that they'd already been destroyed from the bottom up.
	It was the inner tube that was destroyed from the bottom up.
	And the outer from that top down with those 240, you know, steel support beams external to the building.
	One of the reasons it was perhaps the most robust next to Building 7, by the way, ever constructed by the hand of man.
	Okay, so let me explain a couple of things about the towers.
	You're right about the central core, okay?
	Now again, we're talking about a 13-second period, okay?
	We have this 13-second period is the nuclear fingerprint that we show.
	We show you the electromagnetic nuclear fingerprint as clear as day, as easily readable as a barcode scan if you understand the physics, and we explain the physics in language that anyone can understand.
	So, 13 seconds.
	During the first six seconds, that was detonation, okay?
	So the collimator was opened, and this bladder, surrounded by granite, was released in about a 10 meter, 30 foot by 30 foot square opening, square opening.
	And in that first six seconds, It literally vaporized the central core of the building.
	And let me go back a step.
	Let me explain one thing.
	Everybody's seen a fountain.
	Goes up and sprays out.
	Okay?
	Anytime you see something similar to a fountain, it indicates without question that the energy is coming from underground.
	Below the fountain.
	This is physics.
	This is just standard physics.
	So, it vaporized the center of the building in that six-second period.
	We show you this electromagnetic signal in four helicopters, in audio, and in video on the ground, and we coordinate it with the collapse of the building.
	We show you the electromagnetic, we show you the detonation that first six seconds, Material is released.
	I'm sorry, detonation collimators opened.
	Six seconds.
	There's a three-second valley.
	No sound.
	Then there's a two-second spike.
	And another two-second spike.
	The first two-second spike is the material hitting the top of the building.
	And the second two-second spike is the material coming back down.
	That's all in 13 seconds.
	This is a self-sealing mechanism.
	Okay?
	As the material is coming back down, it's cooling so fast that it seals itself, and before you can even hear a nuclear explosion, it's already been sealed.
	So all you hear is the roar of the fountain of the building just coming down, because the central core has been completely eliminated, and the lower portion The structural portion in the bedrock holding the building up is gone.
	And you see a fountain coming down.
	It's a top-down explosion, a top-down demolition.
	This is how underground nuclear demolitions work.
	One might ask oneself, you know, why did the United States explode literally hundreds and hundreds, well thousands, of nuclear weapons underground.
	What were they learning?
	Well, they were learning exactly what takes place when you explode nuclear weapons underground in different mediums, in sand, in granite, in all different sorts of mediums that you find underground.
	And one of the things they learned is that you could explode a nuclear weapon in bedrock, in granite actually, specifically in granite, Again, because granite has 21 times the ability to take on neutrons as iron and many other materials.
	It has a high capacity for neutron acceptance.
	And so, when you explode a weapon in granite underground and then release it, you can control a demolition of a building or a demolition of almost anything above ground.
	And you can control the amount of radiation that's released above ground.
	Now, I'll give you an example.
	We have a study.
	The U.S.
	government went to extreme lengths.
	They spent millions of dollars.
	This is in the book.
	There's a link to the peer review.
	They spent millions of dollars accessing tax records.
	school records, social security records, driver's licenses, unemployment records, employment records, everything that they could possibly find to locate every woman that lived in New York City, worked in New York City, went to school in New York City, or was just visiting New York City on 9-11, that was also pregnant.
	And of course they found hundreds and hundreds.
	And they followed them all.
	And what they found was a statistically significant increase in the number of early gestation, early births, low birth weights, and small head circumferences.
	I'll bet other genetic abnormalities, too, Jeff.
	And they found some retardation.
	And I'll bet it was very significant.
	I mean, not just technically, but highly significant, causally significant.
	Yeah, I can't answer that because the peer-reviewed report glosses over it.
	It indicates they found a small number of retardation, children experiencing retardation.
	But those are all hallmarks of low-dose radiation exposure.
	You know, I wrote to the Japanese government in 2011, and I asked them, I'm sorry, 2014, and I asked them if they would send me their current peer review on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
	And they work with, still work with the American military there, and they still follow the patients from Hiroshima and Nagasaki right through till today.
	They're still writing peer review.
	So I got about 35 really nicely bound reports, 1500 pages.
	It was a big stack of reports that was a large box.
	It was free.
	Anybody can get this material.
	It was free from the government of Japan.
	So it brought me up to date on what was happening with the patients at Nagasaki and Hiroshima to 2014.
	And we see the exact same thing happening now with 9-11 first responders.
	Breast cancer is one of the rarest cancers for men.
	Less than one percent of men in the United States get breast cancer.
	Today we have a cohort of 13 first responders that have breast cancer.
	Men that have breast cancer.
	But let's talk about Physicists like to say leukemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma are the hallmarks of radiation exposure.
	If we see those happen early on, we know radiation exposure took place.
	But 9-11 was different.
	And I discovered the disease that also proves 9-11 was nuclear.
	And that disease is multiple myeloma.
	In the United States, the average incidence of multiple myeloma is three to nine people per 100,000, and the average age of people afflicted with multiple myeloma is 70.
	It's a disease of the aged.
	Now in the 9-11 first responders as of March 11th, 2011, March 1st, 2011,
	which is the last time I looked at the data, Again, 3 to 9 per 100,000 in the United States.
	First responders had an incidence of multiple myeloma of 18 per 100,000, which means they had between 200 and 600 percent what would be normally expected.
	means they had between 200 and 600% what would be normally expected.
	Not only that, this is what's a medical first, truly a medical first.
	I mentioned that multiple myeloma is a disease of the ages.
	We do not see multiple myeloma in young people.
	But first responders stricken with multiple myeloma ranged in age from 30 to 60, 65.
	To see people in their 30s and 40s with multiple myeloma is absolutely unheard of.
	And this is stated so in the Peer Review.
	Now, I published another book.
	What is today?
	Tuesday.
	I published a book Saturday.
	It'll be on Barnes & Noble in a couple of days.
	It's on my website now under the heading... the link I gave you on the left side.
	It says Books Review... Books... What does it say?
	It says Books, Peer Review, Pleasure Reading, and Miscellaneous.
	It's under Peer Review.
	And the name of the book is Ground Zero, The 9-11 Peer Review.
	It's 286 pages.
	There's about 300, 400 peer-reviewed reports in there.
	And you'll find that report.
	You'll find all the reports I'm discussing.
	You'll find the one where they followed all the women that were pregnant.
	You'll find the one with men with breast cancer.
	You'll find Numerous reports on multiple myeloma where the scientists or the researchers are stunned, absolutely stunned, and they say so, that they see people in their 30s and 40s with multiple myeloma.
	Well, but, but Jeff, Once the hypothesis is introduced that it was a nuclear event, it's no longer surprising.
	I mean, it's only in the absence of consideration of that alternative that they are so stunned.
	I mean, sure, it's statistically abnormal generally, but in relation to nuclear events, it's not abnormal at all, but predictable.
	Well, Jim, that's why I mailed a book to 90 oncologists at Mount Sinai Hospital.
	And that's why I mailed the press release to all 200 fire station captains in Manhattan and all just over 100 police station captains in Manhattan.
	And I predict the firemen will read it and the others won't.
	I think they all will.
	We're having right now, we have a problem right now with a significant number of police officers that now have multiple myeloma.
	Oh, really?
	Yes.
	That's good.
	They were victims, and victims care profoundly about the cause of their malady.
	So that's very good, Jeff.
	They have a right to know.
	Of course they do.
	I commend you for that.
	There's another whitewash in the works with this 9-11 lawyers group being misled by a Richard Gage who wants to talk about anything but nuclear aspects of 9-11.
	Jim, I mailed books to the six top attorneys, the partners, in every law firm that's representing 9-11 first responders.
	Very good.
	I have, you don't, man, if you saw my, if you saw my, I mailed 30 envelopes and 10 books today.
	I love it, Jeff.
	I know, I know.
	I sent you an email.
	That affected our actual taping, yeah?
	Yeah, so, so, you know, the 9-11 fingerprint, I gotta tell you, you know, I was at this for 15 years, Jim, and I just could not figure it out.
	I knew it was nuclear.
	I knew it, and I could not figure it out.
	And I have to say, the brilliance of Heinz Palmer, a trained nuclear physicist, who spent five years researching this, hiking in the wilderness in Germany with his three-year-old daughter, it's just remarkable.
	It's just remarkable that he's actually figured out exactly what happened.
	I'm just astounded and I'm humbled to represent these four physicists.
	They've gone to great lengths.
	They together researched this for five years.
	So that's four physicists.
	That's 20 years collectively.
	My 15 years.
	There's 35 years of collective research.
	Between us, we all have about seven terabytes of 9-11 data.
	We have all the original blueprints.
	The blueprints were released in 01 and 05 and 08, you know, different versions.
	We have them all.
	We have everything that's ever been released on 9-11 or written on 9-11.
	In fact, Heinz sent me a 5 terabyte hard drive with 4.7 terabytes on it.
	You know, these guys have gone to great lengths.
	Francois Robie is suspended from his college for four years.
	And the basis for the suspension allegedly was, I mean, he was accused of anti-Semitism.
	When you're describing that, it was parallel to what happened to James Tracy at Florida Atlantic.
	Who published an article about the Wayne Carver press conference on his own personal blog.
	Because of hostility generated by one of the fake parents at Sandy Hook, he got sacked.
	It was an outrageous case.
	He was accused of anti-Semitism.
	The whole bit, too.
	I mean, it's just disgusting.
	This was the same thing.
	Not one single person at the university, no students, no faculty, nobody complained.
	It was a personal blog that Roby kept and the Jewish lobby wrote to the rector of the university.
	It's because he was getting too close to the truth, Jeff.
	He was exposing too much truth.
	There's no other alternative.
	They're punishing him.
	They are punishing him.
	Listen, these four physicists believe That this was nuclear blackmail.
	Was he talking about Israel's role in 9-11, that this is an Israeli plot?
	Well, yes.
	Let me say, Jim, this could not have occurred, listen to me, 9-11 could not have occurred without the Israeli-Russian mafia Without the participation of Saudi Arabia, Canada, Sweden, Germany, and the United States.
	I've proven that.
	You have a link to the Ground Zero model.
	Jeff, I want you to give us a thumbnail sketch in support of what you just said.
	Okay, so let's do that.
	It's my position, and this is based on a tremendous amount of research, there's a book on my website.
	The people viewing your show will see it.
	It's titled the September 11th Commission Report Revised 2008.
	Now this is a report that used Federal Reserve working papers, SEC acts, Bank of America public documents, a couple of depositions I found, some banking records I found, A lot of material like that.
	Mainstream.
	This is, this is a mainstream report, believe it or not.
	So, there were six groups that were involved in 9-11 that, that had different, that played different parts.
	So, there was a group that initiated the attack.
	Now, this was based on nine, this is based on two things.
	It was based on nine federal court cases.
	George Bush, Larry Summers, Dick Cheney, all the top people in the U.S.
	government were being sued in 2001, in 2000, and still in 2001 the lawsuits were going on.
	They were being sued for all for the same thing, for gold market manipulation through Barrick Gold.
	These nine lawsuits needed to be stopped.
	If they weren't stopped, the people I'm about to name were going to go down, and that wouldn't and couldn't happen.
	So, 9-11 did stop those nine lawsuits.
	The second thing I mentioned, every large false flag event has numerous benefits and features to it.
	I'm going to just name two of them right now.
	So, the nine lawsuits, two of the major ones, bombing seven countries in seven years was another, but that's another story.
	So the nine lawsuits were ended by nine.
	Well, one was sealed.
	One was settled and sealed, and eight ended because the evidence was in Building 7, and the investigators were in the Pentagon, and 31 of those 34 investigators were killed.
	But, the second thing was that in 1991, George Bush, with Alan Greenspan, and I have to make an admission here, I smoke cigarettes, and I hate to say this, but I just need to take one puff of a cigarette.
	Go ahead, go ahead, it's not gonna bother me.
	So, in 1991
	Thank you.
	George Bush with Alan Greenspan issued $240,000 in what's called Brady Bonds.
	Now these are 10-year bonds, 10-year securities.
	Of course they became due in September of 2001, but they couldn't be cleared because they were illegal bonds.
	They weren't issued legally.
	So a couple of things happened on September 11th.
	First, on September 14th, The SEC issued an act.
	I can't remember the numbers exactly.
	They did away with something like 12c3.
	And they violated national security.
	And they issued an act that allowed all securities to clear anonymously.
	So if you had $40 billion in securities and you wanted your $40 billion, you sent them to the SEC and the SEC sent you money, and you did not have to provide your name, address, phone number, who you were, where you lived, or anything at all like that.
	That's outrageous!
	The SEC Act is in my book titled...
	This is an abdication of the responsibility to the public.
	This is turning the FCC into a money laundering operation.
	Well, this was when Miles Shattuck was head of the FCC.
	Miles Shattuck resigned the day after 9-11 and then was suicided not long afterwards.
	Anyway, so the FCC issued that act on the 14th, retroactive to the 11th.
	Allowing all securities to clear anonymously for 15 days.
	Now the Federal Reserve claimed that they needed to put $300 billion into the money supply.
	Now we know they did that to cover the $240 billion in securities.
	We know that because three months later, and this is all in my book called Murdering Liberty, Killing Hope, And I have screen captures of the SEC acts, and I have the copies of the Federal Reserve working papers.
	Everything's in there referenced.
	Three months later, the Federal Reserve wrote a new report that said all of the banking data that was supposedly lost on 9-11 was actually stored off-site, and they had all of it.
	So they never really needed to put $300 billion into the money supply, only because they needed to cover $240 billion in stolen bonds that were being released, paid out anonymously.
	This is sensational stuff, Jeff.
	Well, it's all true, and it's all fully referenced.
	It's all mainstream references.
	It's all Federal Reserve working papers, SEC acts.
	It's all the legal stuff.
	Yeah, do it all in plain sight, you know.
	Commit the most egregious offenses all in front of God and everybody.
	Now, to find that book, your readers would have to type in Google, my name, Jeff Prager, comma, Wix, W-I-X.
	You'll find my Wix site.
	It goes from up at the top of the page, it goes from page 1 to like page 13, page 10, and then it says more, and under more it goes to page 15 or 16.
	Jeff Prager comma Wix, W-I-C-K-S?
	W-I-X.
	W-I-X.
	Capital W?
	It doesn't matter.
	Just Jeff Prager comma W-I-X.
	Okay.
	And my Wix page will come up.
	And when you open it up, you'll see a book about vaccines on that first page.
	But at the top, it says 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and then it says more, and under more is even more pages.
	And there's three books on every page, and somewhere in there is Murdering Liberty.
	I gotta say, Jeff, you're a better intellectual than most of the academicians I knew in 35 years of university teaching.
	Well, the difference between me and them is not that I'm a better intellectual.
	I do have a high IQ.
	But I have time.
	I retired in 2005 at 50 years old, so I have all day.
	at 50 years old. So I have all day. I spent six years from 2005 to 2011 researching 9-11,
	eight to ten hours a day, sometimes 12 or more, almost seven days a week. I mean I was obsessed.
	It's not just a function of intellect.
	It's got to do with discipline and perseverance and focus and ability.
	You have a whole lot of traits that distinguish you.
	It's tenacity.
	I regard you as a better research colleague than 99% of those I've ever known in my academic career.
	Well, thank you.
	Thank you, Jim.
	Again, it's a function of my time.
	I have very few... Jeff, most with your kinds of time would have fiddled it away, sitting under a palm tree, dinking Mai Tais, you know, whether or not they're in Tahiti.
	I'm telling you, Jeff, you're really remarkable.
	You're remarkable for your perseverance and discipline under those conditions.
	Well, thank you.
	Thank you.
	And you know what?
	I have to tell you, Jim, I...
	I'm glad that I was obsessed with this, because for me, today, it's over.
	What I'm doing now is I'm sending out press releases, I'm sending out books, and, you know, I'm going to do that for another year.
	Well, I'm the same way.
	I'm a problem solver, Jeff.
	I want to solve problems, and once I solve the problem, I go on to another problem.
	So I'm like that.
	Well, I'm done with 9-11.
	I'm satisfied that the Palmer book Written by four physicists, who all four agree, and we do show you the unmistakable nuclear fingerprint.
	It's unmistakable!
	I'm satisfied that I've finally, on June 15th of 2020, when I published that book, I typeset it for 120 days prior to that, and then published it on June 15th, 2020.
	On June 15, 2020, because the book changed over those 120 days.
	Heinz refined some things and some changes were made in weights and measures and things.
	But on June 15, 2020, my search for answers on 9-11 ended because the book answers, there are no more anomalies.
	Let me put it that way.
	9-11 was full of dozens of anomalies.
	You're talking about physical anomalies.
	Right, like why did this happen and why did this happen?
	You know, there were so many anomalies and there aren't any more for me.
	You know, I know why there were car fires.
	I, you know, I know how the buildings came down.
	I can picture in my mind those 13 seconds because I had to take, well first I had to take the German and translate it to English and then we started over again And I had to take Heinz's, because German is, English is not his first language.
	So I take Heinz's language and make sure it, you know, it was in English that people could understand.
	And in doing so, you know, I've read this book a hundred times.
	I typeset the book.
	You know, I put in all the images.
	I typeset the entire book, and I've read it a hundred times.
	I've proofread it.
	I proofread it, you know, 30 times myself, forwards and backwards.
	So, I know the material really well, and it's not possible to relate that material in an audio video.
	Someone actually needs to see the book.
	So, I'm hoping people will download the free PDF.
	I don't really care about selling books.
	I have other ways to do that.
	I'd like your readers to have that free PDF because the links are accessible.
	So they can actually, there's a picture of the 1300 meter mushroom cloud over building 7, but they can actually click on a link that takes them to the 5 second video where they can see the cloud rising.
	And we also have a video link in the book to Rachel McIntosh, who was an employee of the architectural firm tasked with reinforcing the mayor's bunker in Building 7.
	And she set up a meeting with her architectural firm and the mayor's office And, you know, she says in the interview, you know, she was the coffee girl, but she did set up the meeting, and she was there, and she was inside the room, and this was on 9-11, and everybody, the TV came on and said the Building 7 fell because of fires,
	And the entire architectural staff was questioning that.
	They looked at each other and talked to each other because they all knew, because they saw the blueprints, the building was wired for demolition when it was built.
	Yeah, but they also knew it hadn't collapsed.
	I mean, they knew it at that point in time, yeah.
	Right, there wasn't fires.
	And so they talked about this, and Rachel talks about this in the video that we have linked in.
	Why did Rudy not go to his own command and control center?
	And leave with coffee steaming on the counter.
	Yeah, why?
	Well, are you saying they actually had gone there and that Barry was just showing up late after they departed?
	They did go there.
	They did go there.
	They were in the command center.
	In fact, what we don't know is who gave the command to leave the command center.
	We have the information.
	We have the data.
	We have the referenced data that they did enter the command center and spend time there.
	Do you know from when to when that occurred?
	It's in one of my books.
	Like from 8 a.m.
	to 10 a.m., something on that order?
	Something on that order.
	Early in the morning.
	Early in the morning.
	They went to the command center early in the morning like they normally would.
	But somebody called them and told them to leave the building.
	Or it could have been Rudy Giuliani himself.
	I mean, if you look at where Rudy Giuliani is now, Okay.
	The people that worked on 9-11 all got, you know, billion-dollar promotions.
	Rudy being one of them.
	So he may have been the one that said, we got to get out of here.
	I don't know.
	But that's the part we don't know.
	We don't know who gave... That's how it's written in my book.
	We don't know who gave the order to leave the mayor's command center.
	Well, there's no way, in my opinion, this occurs without Rudy being profoundly involved.
	Yeah, I think so, too.
	You had asked me an important question.
	Let me answer that.
	So, there was a group that initiated this attack, okay?
	These are people that you don't know, nobody knows.
	They're behind the scenes.
	So this would be the Bank of New York, the New York Federal Reserve, Riggs Bank, Deutsche Bank, Union Bank of
	Switzerland, which is called UBS, Bank Manitoba, the South American
	Bank, and some city areas and some major partners of those banks.
	And this was, again, meant to stop the multiple money laundering investigations, the nine US.
	federal court cases I mentioned, which would have traced illegal money laundering operations to the accounts that held the stolen, this was stolen national treasuries, this was the gold that was stolen from Japan during the war.
	And the way it was put into the marketplace was George Bush Senior sold Barrick Gold for $10,000.
	$10,000,000 worth of land.
	I don't know if it was $10,000,000 or $10,000,000.
	$10,000,000 I think it was.
	Yeah, $10,000,000 for $10,000.
	worth of land, or I don't know if it was 10 million or 10 billion, 10 million I think
	it was, yeah, 10 million for $10,000.
	Now the land was not thought to hold any gold at all.
	And somehow, mysteriously, Barrick Gold mined billions of dollars of gold out of that land.
	And some of the first people on the board of directors were Khalid Ben Mahfouz, who was the head of the ISI in Saudi Arabia, and Adnan Khashoggi, who's known for money laundering all over the world.
	So, we believe that The Russian Mafia, the Israeli-Russian Mafia, was involved with those Brady Bonds, as well as all the other bankers I talked about.
	And, you know, for example, the Eli Weasel Foundation was suing George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, and Barrett Gold, and others, for gold laundering and money laundering.
	Multiple billions of dollars in stolen Holocaust gold Okay, so there's a bunch of gold involved in this, from several different sources.
	The Holocaust gold, the Japanese gold, and the gold that was taken by Japan from China, I believe it was.
	I'm not sure about that.
	And did the gold escape radiation?
	I can't answer that.
	I can't answer that.
	I presume it was actually removed before the nuclear events took place.
	In the book we believe it was and we say it was.
	Not all of it.
	Because Rudy Giuliani discussed how much was left and we know how much was there in the first place.
	So we have references to how much was there in the first place and Rudy's references to how much was there afterwards.
	So that was the group that probably was behind the event.
	All of these bankers and hedge fund and corporate owners.
	Now, there was a group that planned and set up the attack.
	That would have been a mix of Russian-Israeli Mafia, ex-KGB, Israeli Secret Service, CIA, with the assistance of David Kimchey, who's a Mossad agent.
	You're really saying everyone and his mother knew what was going to happen on 9-11?
	Right.
	Meir Dagan, who was the head of Mossad.
	Again, Adnan Khashoggi.
	Again, Sheikh Kamal Adnan, the former head of Saudi intelligence.
	Richard Armitage and Richard Secord.
	The reason being that Kim Chi, Armitage, and Secord, they're the only field intelligent operatives identified in the world press as having field management responsibility for Al-Qaeda mercenaries.
	And Khashoggi is documented to have coordinated similar false flag attacks in Russia with the CIA and Israel working with Chechen Mafia and its linkage to the Yeltsin family.
	So that was the group that probably planned and set up the attack.
	Then there was a group that arranged for operational cover.
	Well, the group you've described is too vast and varied to have Agreed on anything.
	I think it was much more centralized.
	Look, there's a real simple observation.
	Larry Silverstein had a phone call every Sunday with Bibi Netanyahu.
	They were close personal friends.
	This is part of it.
	The transfer from the New York Port Authority into Larry Silverstein's hands.
	Absolutely.
	...just six weeks before, he immediately fires the security firm that's guarding and hires an Israeli firm.
	He renegotiates the insurance policy to include an anti-terrorist clause so he can claim a double attack and collect $4.5 billion on $114 million investment.
	I mean... Jim, I agree, but there had to be other people.
	This was a huge event.
	It took a lot of people to put this together.
	You got to remember in Canada there was like dozens of missions being flown in Canada.
	That's why Canada was involved.
	That's why NATO was involved.
	This was a major event.
	This wasn't done by half a dozen people or a dozen people.
	This took a lot of people to put together.
	So, let's go down to, well, you know, I can describe each one of these people.
	Richard Armitage, he managed the illegal gold funds for George Bush during the Iran-Contra period.
	We're talking about some really nasty people when it comes to integrity and dedication to the Constitution or the United States.
	When it comes to murdering people.
	These guys are responsible for murdering hundreds of thousands of people in South America and other countries.
	Farhad Azima, he's a U.S.
	arms merchant.
	He has an Iranian background.
	He's a member of the U.S.
	Azerbaijani Chamber of Commerce, which so is Dick Cheney.
	He assisted Richard Secord in recruiting, transporting, and training Mujahideen, mercenaries.
	He was the owner of the Azerbaijan Airlines, and he has a 20-year-old relationship with the Iran-Contra syndicate.
	And he's a significant co-owner, listen to this, he's a significant co-investor with Wally Hillard of Huffman Aviation, where the hijackers train.
	Khalid Bin Mahfouz is an owner with the Bin Laden family and the Saudi Roi family of the Saudi oil companies Delta Oil and Nimr Oil.
	They're both partners with Unocal and they were a major investor along with Gus Khashoggi in Barrick and Trizak Han, which was the landlord for Halliburton and Enron.
	This is, believe me, 9-11 was deep.
	9-11 involved a tremendous number of people.
	Most of them didn't know what they were doing.
	Meaning they didn't know their role in the larger scheme of things because it was a classified, compartmentalized event.
	Highly compartmentalized, right, right, right.
	Probably you knew what you needed to know in terms of your responsibilities and not how it was linked to everyone else.
	Right, and maybe even less.
	I mean, some of these people could have been given odd stories for what they were doing.
	Yeah, yes.
	That's an unusual story.
	You're doing this for this other reason.
	Absolutely.
	You know, so very hard to tell who knew what.
	Well, it's easy to tell who, actually, it's pretty easy to tell who did know what if you read my books.
	Well, it wasn't easy.
	It took you all these years to piece the details together.
	Yeah, so we can look at who arranged and managed the actual details of the attack and that was most likely the Israeli Secret Service unit that included Mohammed Atta, Rudy Decker, and Khalid Otla.
	We know that Atta's father said his son was with the Mossad and he was still alive after 9-11 from a phone call, a media phone call.
	There's a number of clues that Ada never even got on the plane.
	He also had an interest in space technology, in a company that was later acquired by Israel.
	He also spoke Hebrew.
	He was heavily involved with the German, Pakistan, Saudi, and Syrian intelligence, and U.S.
	military and intelligence organizations.
	The U.S.
	covered up the fact that he had a German host family, And his friends testified he had kind of a dual personality.
	You know, my books have a tremendous amount of information that I can't really relay effectively here, and they have the references and the supporting data that you would need to determine that this is true.
	Do you have any idea of how many may have been read, you know, how many may have been purchased or downloaded or whatever?
	I mean, just roughly, I mean, what you're talking about is so important.
	I mean, it would be wonderful if it got wide distribution.
	Well, I had a little over 3,800 downloads this year, and I average 431 page reads, online page reads every day.
	And I reach 500 universities in over 140 countries.
	Well, I'd like to give you a boost.
	Academia has a little over 140 million academic members.
	It's a good place you should join the site and you should post all of your books there.
	All of them.
	Yeah.
	All your PDFs, everything you've written.
	And you should keep posting there.
	Like I said, Jim, it's astounding.
	I get 431 online page reads per day.
	That's excellent, Jeff.
	Yeah.
	And like I said, I reach over 500 universities.
	I had just this because I get 30-day analytics.
	I can do analytics for any period of time.
	Just this month, I had 14 visits from Harvard University.
	I had 14 visits from Cornell.
	I had 7 from Yale.
	I had 6 from Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
	I get visits from, like I said, over 500 universities.
	I love it.
	Yeah, oh I had, the day I, this is through Mark Hightower, when I posted the book on June 15th, he posted it on his website.
	The audience should know, T. Mark Hightower is a NASA chemist.
	He worked for NASA as a chemist on the space program.
	Chemical engineer.
	Chemical engineer, right.
	So he posted the book on his website, and from the day I posted the book on academia, every single day somebody from NASA Ames Research Center in Iowa visited my website.
	Every day!
	Well, they also want to figure out how much you know.
	You know, not all of this is friendly.
	No, it was, I think it was just, Mark said he has, he says, he said he doesn't talk to anybody at NASA anymore, but he does have just two or three friends that still work there, and they come to his webpage.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Mark's a super good guy.
	He is, he is.
	Mark's a really sweet, gentle, kind man.
	I like Mark a lot.
	I like him a lot.
	I'll look forward to, I have an interview Thursday on the Brian Roux Show in Canada.
	Good!
	And Mark's going to participate.
	Good, good, good!
	Well, Brian's interviewed me on 9-11, on Sandy Hook, on JFK.
	I'm real fond of Brian.
	He's a wonderful guy.
	Yeah, we talked about that.
	We talked about you.
	Well, you're the one who had him call me, aren't you?
	I wouldn't be surprised.
	Well, I think you're the one that had him email me, and then I called... I think I called... No, he called me twice and didn't get through, and I called him.
	Well, he's a good guy.
	Yeah, I thought he was a really nice guy.
	I did, I did.
	You know, I wish I did have slides.
	By the way, on the back of the book... Jeff, we can do other shows where you present your slides.
	That's not a problem.
	And I do have the slides.
	Yeah, yeah.
	On the back of the book though, on the back cover, is, oh no, I'm sorry, on like page two, three, four, or five, right in the beginning of the book, is a link, and it says so, is a link to a one-hour, seven-minute video presentation that Heinz did.
	With all of the slides.
	Oh, wonderful!
	Yeah, it's right there.
	Do you want to give it to me and I'll put it in the chat?
	It's a really long one.
	I can put it in the chat on my side and you can grab it from there.
	Let me get it.
	Well, I'm very, very pleased that we could do this.
	Jeff.
	Yeah.
	Okay, here's the link, and I can send it to you from my chat side here, and you should get it.
	Well, when I write up about the show, I can include it there.
	Okay, so yeah, I did send the link, and it says from me to everyone.
	Yeah, but that's on the Zoom.
	Yeah.
	Right, right.
	So you have that link.
	That's the one hour seven minute video.
	It's really, I got to tell you this, we spent a lot of time on this.
	We numbered the video in sections, very small sections, and of course it was in German, because it's Heinz speaking in German, and I redubbed the video in English And it actually looks like Heinz is speaking.
	His hand gestures, facial expressions, everything is just perfect.
	You can't really tell that it's been dubbed in English.
	It looks like Heinz is speaking English.
	That's excellent, Jeff.
	We did a really good job with it.
	It took us a couple of weeks to dub that video to get it all right.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Very nice, very nice, very nice.
	You're a very clever guy.
	Well, it's Heinz who's clever.
	He owns the company that does technical documentation and produces videos, so...
	So he was able to do that.
	He sent me the numbered video and he told me how to use it and how to record it.
	And then he put the recordings together.
	It's interesting because, you know, he does these gestures and it looks like a... It's funny.
	It was funny to see.
	He talks with his hands.
	Well, it's my voice is what's funny.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	No, that's great, Jeff.
	I love it.
	Yeah, even his mouth looks like it's speaking English, you know.
	It's kind of funny.
	Jeff, this has been a marvelous introduction to you and to your research on 9-11.
	Thank you, Jeff.
	Is there more you'd like to add on this occasion?
	Because listen, I'm already planning to have you back with a Very detailed, you know, presentation using your slide set, so we don't have to go places where the slides are going to make a major difference.
	I think you've done a marvelous job of outlining the big picture here.
	I love it!
	Well, the slides provide the references and the details, and we also produced a number of 3D CAD drawings.
	They're fairly well done, and they show in time.
	So we have the detonation drawing, then we have the drawing at one second, at three seconds, at eight seconds, at 10 seconds, at 13 seconds.
	And so we show with these drawings, and we draw the whole tower, and the inside, and the structures, and everything.
	And they're fairly decent drawings, so the slides do help.
	But you know, Jim, I just I want to thank you.
	I can't thank you enough.
	Like I said in the beginning, it's been too long.
	We should have got together much sooner.
	Well, I'm very impressed, Jeff.
	I think it's wonderful.
	All those accolades I was directing at you are 100% valid.
	You've done tremendous work on this and I just admire you for persevering.
	Well, Jim, the truth is, the physicist did it.
	Heinz Palmer did it.
	And he really deserves all the credit.
	I mean, this guy... Jeff, each of us make our own contribution in our own way.
	There are multiple roles to be fulfilled here.
	But distilling and distributing and disseminating makes a difference between a discovery, however important, and whether it makes a difference.
	Because without that dissemination and impact, it doesn't matter.
	It's like Henry, I can't stand your long, observant, political context of truth.
	The facts don't matter.
	What matters is the impression.
	And even if they'd done the most valuable research, if it never reached the public in an accessible fashion, it wouldn't matter either.
	Well, I'll tell you briefly why I'm doing this and Heinz isn't.
	A couple years ago, Heinz printed 20,000 books.
	He printed 100,000 postcards.
	He mailed out 100,000 postcards, which cost a lot of money just in itself, and he sold 20 books.
	20 books!
	Wow!
	So, he was terribly disappointed, and it took me a lot to convince him to write a book.
	It was funny.
	I convinced him to write a book.
	He sent me some basic material.
	I wrote a really crappy book, and when he got it and saw that his name was attached to it, I think he really, you know, took to it.
	And from that moment on, I had his full attention, and we emailed back and forth every day, five, ten times a day, and we put the book together.
	Heinz put the book together.
	Well, Jeff, because it's so timely, what I propose is We do the PowerPoint for next Sunday.
	That's less than a week from now.
	Is that amenable to you?
	It's fine for me.
	Okay, we'll set it up and follow up.
	I'll jot that down.
	I'll follow up after we complete the broadcast.
	Just stay where you are and we'll work out the details.
	Okay, and you can email me too.
	Yeah, sure, I will.
	Jeff, I want you to have the opportunity to say some final words on this occasion, knowing there will be a sequel next Sunday.
	I'd like to discuss two things, if that's okay.
	Just some final words.
	It's the physicists that did this.
	My perseverance paid off.
	It's my perseverance that got the physicists to allow me to write the book, publish it in the United States, have the copyright.
	I've copyrighted it with the U.S., with the Congressional Office, so it's fully copyrighted.
	In fact, I have the copyright right here.
	It's a certificate of registration.
	It's with the United States Copyright office, the U.S.
	Copyright Office.
	But it's the physicists that did this.
	My perseverance got them to write the book.
	But the physicists really deserve all the credit because they're the ones that found the nuclear fingerprint.
	They're the ones that described it such that I could help to re-describe it.
	And they deserve the kudos.
	The second thing I want to talk about is I'm writing a book right now about COVID.
	I've downloaded about 700 COVID peer-reviewed reports.
	Your audience should know that I specialize in collating peer review and producing books filled with peer review.
	You'll see them on my website.
	And, you know, my most recent research, and this is fully referenced, you know, Moderna applied for a COVID-19 vaccine in 2015, Jim.
	And they were turned down by the FDA.
	Patents are turned down for all sorts of reasons.
	Nothing unusual.
	But what was unusual is they reapplied an amended patent in 2019, well before the coronavirus hit, with these words.
	We think a corona 19 virus may be purposely released and we need a vaccine.
	That is in the amendment for the patent.
	I've seen it.
	I've read it.
	I have the patent.
	I have the amendment as well.
	Now, the fact is the virus is no more dangerous than the flu.
	Today we have enough data to show that the actual death rate from COVID-19 is no greater than influenza.
	It's a little more contagious, but the death rate is not higher, but it's been weaponized against our country and the world in this way.
	It's been weaponized so that people of color and poor people are affected most, and There needed to be a reset.
	If you read, I read a lot of World Bank, IMF, World Health Organization, Brookings Institute, Trilateral Commission, Washington Institute.
	I read a lot of that material, financial material.
	The powers that be were getting ready for a reset.
	I don't think they knew how to do it.
	And COVID was their method.
	This is going to economically crush the world.
	It's going to, just in the United States alone, we've got a little over 40 million people unemployed and 20 million are never going to find jobs again.
	And right now, in about 60 days, we're going to see evictions and foreclosures like you haven't seen since 2008.
	And by December, we'll have seen an entire change in the retail market.
	And part of the change, let me explain part of the change.
	Technology has reached a point where the current system is outdated.
	The system doesn't need a thousand employees in cubicles making phone calls all day long.
	The system needs 200 employees working from home.
	The system doesn't, in two years, right now we're already testing these.
	We've tested these cross-country many times.
	Jeff, Jeff, Jeff, rather than you giving us a whole lecture on COVID, maybe we'll divide the issue the following way.
	Your PowerPoint would be perfect for the Austin conference, I have no doubt.
	Well, I am bringing that to Austin.
	Yeah, so I'm thinking that might be the occasion.
	Maybe we need something about the politics of COVID that would be very timely now.
	Maybe that ought to be our focus.
	Sure, let's do that.
	I've just been recently researching that quite a bit.
	I'm really good at researching.
	I know where to go and I know where to find the facts.
	Jeff, do me this huge favor.
	Sure.
	The very first program I did here on Jim the Conspiracy Guy was on the COVID scam.
	So you might take a look at that just to see where I've gone with it, because I most certainly welcome everything you're doing about it.
	But you'll see the territory that I was plowing, I'd be very interested in your refinements, critiques, Oh, I know how it was released, where it was released, by who it was released.
	Yeah, I'd like you to see how your research and mine fit together.
	Okay.
	Can you email me a link?
	It's right there on Jim the Conspiracy Guy.
	Okay.
	Just go to jimtheconspiracyguy.com and you'll see there are 30 shows that are listed there.
	It's number one, numero uno.
	Okay.
	Now, listen, we do have one question here.
	We can make this our finale.
	Sure.
	Today, from the chat room, questions about damage to buildings surrounding Building 7.
	Particularly, they're asking about buildings north, but I'm interested in whether there was any collateral damage to buildings surrounding Building 7.
	Well, yeah, there was.
	You know, there were Tons of building material ejected from the Twin Towers that landed on the roof of 5, 4, 5, and 6.
	We don't know... But this is specifically asking about damage caused by the destruction of Building 7.
	Damage caused by the destruction of Building 7.
	Okay.
	The damage caused by the destruction of Building 7 was minimal at best.
	I mean, there was virtually none.
	It was perfectly symmetrical into its own footprint.
	Right, there was virtually none.
	I guess the most extreme damage from Building 7 would have been probably 50 feet out in every direction.
	First of all, the material moving away from the Twin Towers and Building 7 was moving at 35 miles per hour.
	So, whatever it may have been, you know, dust, small pebbles, whatever, I mean, these things cause damage at 35 miles per hour.
	So, you know, I'd suggest 50 feet out, 100 feet out, maybe a little more.
	There was visible damage, but there was no true structural damage from the demolition of Building 7 that I know of.
	There may have been, but not that I know of.
	Very, very good, Jeff.
	I'm just delighted we've had this opportunity.
	I'm looking forward to having you back already next Sunday and featuring you at the Question Everything conference in Austin on the 7th and the 8th of November.
	I encourage everyone to check it out.
	You'll find right on Jim the Conspiracy Guy.
	There's images related to the conference and a link.
	I encourage everyone to check it out.
	I think this is one you don't want to miss.
	Meanwhile, this is Jim Fetzer thanking Jeff Frager for being here and all of you for watching.
	We're going to be hearing more, much more from Jeff in the future.
	I can't thank you enough.
	Thanks for having me, Jim.
	Thanks for having me.
	Great pleasure, Jeff.
	Really.
	Truly.
	I'll see you Sunday.
	We will talk again, my friend.
	Okay.
	You have a good night.
	Thanks so very much.

▲