Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 15, 2020 - Jim Fetzer

02:02:34

The Fetz is Feted in The Wisdom Circle Revolution Radio 14 October 2020

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is Nighthawk, and I say, for myself...
	Okay, welcome to the Wisdom Circle.
	We are about to go live on Revolution Radio, but we're also streaming this to our various Rising Tide platforms.
	So thanks for tuning in.
	Today's featured guest, honored guest really, is Dr. Jim Fetzer.
	So it should be a good two hours.
	As expressed in the time-space continuum that we know as the divine expression of love and light.
	Integrating this conscious unity into the galactic paradigm.
	So welcome all, both terrestrial beings and galactic beings as one.
	So be it.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio.
	I will defend myself against their tyranny.
	against their tyranny.
	Number three is my radio broadcast.
	I'm squarely in front of the public all the time and they all know what's going on.
	Check out those new cool animations I did in the upper right hand corner.
	Because of the windows update, it kept crashing on me, which is very, very annoying.
	But we got 10 minutes that we're going to loop.
	It's pretty cool.
	We'll get more of them made for the next week.
	So, last night we did a fundraiser for Dr. Jim Fetzer, and we'll talk about that today, no doubt, and all his wisdom.
	Coming up on the Wisdom Circle.
	As we journey perilously through this paradigm that we currently reside in.
	And I ask that you join me every Saturday 8 to 10 p.m.
	Eastern Standard Time for the unequivocal truth, Death Prompt 1.
	We shall never surrender.
	The madness grows in this sick society.
	Bye.
	Posers laud shallow youth for their empty fads.
	Phonies seek out vain celebrities for instruction.
	Slaves glorify globalist parasites for their stolen wealth and power.
	Politicians are puppets, not leaders.
	Sheep wear masks and accept deadly vaccines.
	In these dark times, the wise must lead us.
	So we call the Wisdom Circle.
	Each week, Scorpio and Giuseppe will call upon the sages, the learned, the pragmatic, to discuss the great problems and distill the great solutions.
	Here is the leader of the Wisdom Circle, Scorpio.
	Okay, welcome to the Wisdom Circle for today, Wednesday, October 14th.
	And I am here with my co-host Giuseppe from the District of Criminals.
	And today we have a very special guest, a man of wisdom, and I've kind of deemed him the godfather of the truth movement, at least for this modern era that we're in now, Dr. James Fetzer.
	Hello, Jim.
	How are you, sir?
	Oh, Scorpio, Giuseppe, I'm just delighted to be on with you again, you guys.
	You're doing a great job.
	Great.
	Giuseppe, how are you, man?
	How's it going?
	I'm doing well.
	We had the first of several fundraisers for Dr. Fetzer's Legal Defense Fund, and we exceeded the goal I had in my mind because it was kind of... hadn't really done a fundraiser before, and so we kind of last-minuted it and learned a lot, but we still raised a nice little bit of money for people who really care about truth and want to support him and the gross injustice that has been done to him, and
	we can talk about that a little bit later.
	But my first question for Dr. Fetzer is, you're going to be 80 in December.
	What do you say are the top three wisdom lessons you have gained, and let's just round up,
	in 80 years of life?
	Well, number one, take nothing for granted, especially what the government tells you about
	important, complex, and controversial events.
	Second, make every day count.
	You never know which one may be your last and third.
	Spend as much time with friends and family as you possibly can because they are ultimately the meaning of your life.
	That's awesome.
	That's really great.
	Wow, that's good advice.
	Profound and ageless and timeless.
	I'll tell you, I'm still amused by developments now where Vladimir Putin has endorsed Joe Biden because the Democratic Party's values are closer to those of communism than the republicans.
	I mean, this is hilarious!
	You know, Putin really knows how to play the game, that's for sure.
	Yeah, Putin knows how to play that 4D chess, man.
	That's amazing.
	That's actually funny, too.
	It's humor.
	It is hilarious, and I'm looking at four years ago, the New York Times presidential forecast.
	Hillary Clinton has a 91% chance to win, the Donald only nine, and they showed a graph of their polling to support it.
	Oh my goodness, that's hucking that.
	Well, you know, the deep state, the globalists who wanted Hillary Clinton and now who want Biden are trying that old move where the old act as if, you know, if you tell people it's a lot, Biden's going to win, we're acting as if and enough people believe it.
	If they do manage to steal it, they'll be like, what do you mean steal it?
	We've said all along, act as if.
	So I hope not, man.
	I tell you what, because as we discussed on the awesome new show that we're honored to be a part of, Scorpio and I, the Need to Know, the FETSA report, the latest iteration of Jim's long-running Internet video broadcasts that are a wonderful blend of news analysis and commentary, and we stepped in and kind of took it in a more refined direction, and we're really growing the numbers, Jim.
	First off, though, let me have you answer the Biden thing, which sadly, I think, if they place him in there, it's because they want the deviant Kamala Harris to be president, not Biden.
	Oh, no question about it.
	They've even, you know, just as Biden has said about packing the Supreme Court, you got to elect me to find out.
	We have had both of them talk about the Harris-Biden ticket, so we have to elect them to find out.
	That's awesome.
	Yeah, right.
	We have to find out what's in it.
	Yeah.
	There's no doubt.
	It's interesting how the way that the The mainstream media is covering this election.
	They're really focusing on these long lines that people are waiting in six-hour waits in line, which I find this odd that they're focusing on that.
	And I've noticed when you watch the coverage of say Trump's events, he had one just the other night, last night, that was just massive.
	20,000 people there probably.
	And all they did was focus on the mainstream media about how not enough people were wearing masks at the event.
	And they try not to show the crowds at all at Joe Biden's events because there aren't any.
	Scorpio, you got it right.
	And let me observe, there's no enthusiasm, zero, for Joe Biden.
	When he came to Duluth, Minnesota, while Trump was drawing tens of thousands elsewhere in the state, at the rally at the Carpenters Union, he had 12 people.
	When he came to Kenosha, Trump had preceded him and there was a line of citizens five miles long to greet the president.
	When Biden showed up, there was a single school teacher as his cheering squad, and at a recent event in Arizona with the two of them together.
	I mean, look, you got Biden-Harris together.
	Local news media were dumbfounded.
	Nobody, nobody showed up.
	You're talking about people waiting six or seven hours to vote.
	They're not waiting six or seven hours to vote for Joe Biden, I guarantee.
	Yeah, I believe that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	So what do you make of this idea that they're pushing this this notion that, oh, there's a six hour waits to vote.
	But where do you think they're going with that, Jim?
	Well, they're trying to make it look as though there's a great deal of resistance to Trump.
	But I'm telling you, Scorpio, people are waiting.
	They're getting in line six and seven hours in advance for a Trump rally.
	So if you have similar lines for voting, they're waiting to vote for Trump.
	I think the public has been aroused and understands the seriousness of the election and the calamity it would represent.
	If Joe Biden were somehow by some devious process to assume the presidency, it would be a calamity.
	They're not waiting six or seven hours to vote for Joe and Kamala, where in fact, You know, as we've reported before, the guy who's running around the country calling himself Joe Biden appears to be a body double that appeared during the debate.
	Where it's very clear, as a student of body doubles, I can tell you this is not the same guy.
	Look at the earlobes.
	If the earlobes connect smoothly to his jaw, it's not Joe Biden.
	Joe Biden has earlobes, has actual ears that curl up, meaning he has lobes, but the double doesn't.
	The double has a narrower face.
	It looks like a diminutive version of Joe Biden.
	It was a slightly rounder face and is a bit of a larger presence.
	Plus, the double has brown eyes while Joe Biden has blue.
	It's very obvious.
	You can look at their advertising.
	They're putting in photos of the Biden double now with a smooth ear with no lobes.
	It's very telling.
	Wow.
	So Jim, when, uh, tell us about the first time you really, uh, eyes were open to body doubles and being used on such a massive global stage.
	Well, I think, uh, you know, it had to do with, uh, Paul, uh, Paul and Paul, the issue of Paul McCartney, because, uh, I had friends who colleagues, people who would call into the show who were insistent.
	That Paul had died in 1966 and replaced by another musician.
	And I kept asking for proof, and they would refer to clues in the music, the cover of the Sgt.
	Pepper album, Abbey Road and the like, none of which I found convincing.
	I mean, tantalizing, interesting as speculations, but far from definitive.
	And it was when I discovered that a pair of Italian forensic scientists who had set up to disprove the hypothesis, who intended to show they were actually one and the same, wound up disproving the hypothesis on a forensic basis, discovering that Paul, his replacement, who's usually referred to as False Paul or Fake Paul or F-A-U-L, had good teeth and a normal palate, whereas Paul had bad
	teeth and a narrow palate, that they had different ears, and that they had a different shape and
	size of skull, where Paul's face was very rounded, Paul's more elongated, and where Paul had
	this irrepressible boyish charm, which Paul lacks.
	I became convinced, because you cannot have two persons with good teeth and bad, narrow palates and normal palates, different ears.
	It even turns out they had different heights.
	Because we have photographs of Paul with Jane Asher, whom he appears to have truly loved and to whom he was engaged, and they were approximately the same height.
	But subsequently, there were photographs of Paul with Jane Asher, and he towers over her.
	He's at least four inches taller.
	And now if you go back to the Sgt.
	Pepper album, It turns out that actually is memorializing the death of Paul McCartney.
	You've got a grave in the foreground.
	There's a left-handed guitar and flowers on the grave.
	To the left, you see the lads in the Madame Tussaud Waxworks.
	They're all about the same height.
	In the middle, you see the resplendent new Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.
	Where they're now wearing mustaches and their hair longer to conceal features on fall that might give the game away.
	But he's clearly taller than he has been in the past.
	And of course now, when they introduce the band, they talk about the one and only Billy Shears.
	And it turns out that the fellow they used to replace him was a session musician by the name of William Shepard.
	Sheep are sheared for their wool, hence the nickname Shears, Billy Shears for William Shepard.
	And, you know, he was a great success.
	I've now done many shows about Paul and Paul, and I have one, by the way, on Body Doubles.
	You can find Jim the Conspiracy Guy entitled Fake News, Issues of Identity.
	Where I talk about how we were able to establish that the man in the doorway of the Texas School Book Depository was indeed Lee Oswald, which means not only that he cannot have been the lone demanded gunman, but he cannot have been one of the multiple shooters of whom we now are aware of eight.
	Where I have identified six of them, only the Amagard the seventh, with which I agree.
	And most recently, we've discovered the eighth shooter, who was on the grassy area opposite the grassy knoll where there's a single tree.
	You wouldn't think it would be possible for a shooter to be located there.
	But I've now seen two photographs, one in the possession of Rick Russo, another in the possession of Ed Tetreault, where you can see the shooter standing with his rifle.
	These are distinct two separate photographs.
	Then a segment about Noah Posner at Sandy Hook, where they fake the kids at Sandy Hook by using photographs of older kids when they were younger.
	Indeed, Mona Alexis Presley, who's done brilliant work in this area, has concluded some parents actually use photographs of themselves when they were children, just displaying the grotesque cynicism of the entire effort.
	But where Larry Rivera, who's done this brilliant work in the area of photogrammetry, which is the application of the principles of mathematics of the study of photographs, Not only created a GIF where you can see the features of Lady Oswald's face turn into the features of the man in the doorway face, and the features of Billy Lovelady, whom the government insists was the man in the doorway, failed to satisfy the conditions imposed by superposition, where his ears are too low, his jaw is too large, his nose is in the wrong place, clearly not the right guy.
	But with regard to Noah Posner, Kelly Watt, my dear colleague, wonderful person, have noticed a striking resemblance between this alleged decedent of the Sandy Hook mass murder and a young man by the name of Michael Wabner, who was supposed to be his older stepbrother, where she would ask friends whether they thought there were a resemblance.
	And they all agreed, oh, yeah, that's the guy grown up.
	So I sent Larry, knowing his expertise in this area, photographs, one of Noah, one of Michael Vabner, with no context, no identification, no mention of Sandy Hook or of the names of the parties that were being compared.
	And he sent me back a GIF where you can see Noah Posner turn into Michael Vabner.
	Six of us had gone to work independently on the hypothesis when Kelly first advanced it, and we discovered they had the same eyebrows, they had the same eyes, they had the same nose, they had the same mouth, they had the same shape and size of skull, they had the same ears.
	But Larry cinched the deal by showing Noah transformed into Michael Vavner, which you included last night.
	During our fundraiser, Giuseppe, very, very appropriately, because I believe this to be the single most powerful proof that Sandy Hook was a setup.
	Then I also have a series on Paul and Paul that we've been discussing here, but in addition about Hillary Clinton, where after she collapsed following the 9-11 memorial prior to the 2016 election, they took her back to Chelsea's new apartment.
	Where Chelsea already had a wonderful apartment in New York City and didn't need a new one except there just happened to be a private hospital on the same floor.
	So they took possession, closed the hospital.
	So now it had exactly one patient, namely Hillary Clinton.
	Well, while they were treating her, they became concerned that the public's anxiety about her health would grow and undermine confidence in her candidacy.
	So they sent out the first of a series of about eight different body doubles.
	This one was younger, thinner, more attractive and pleasant.
	Clearly not Hillary Clinton.
	I liked her so much she reminded me of one of my favorite actresses.
	I refer to her as the Meg Ryan double.
	And then just about three days later on a flight to Charlotte, North Carolina, they use a second double, shorter, a tad heavier with a more sloping forehead, a smaller mouth.
	She, to me, reminded me of Meryl Streep.
	So I refer to her as the Meryl Streep double.
	But believe it or not, They actually used yet a third double during the debates, both with Bernie Sanders and with Donald Trump.
	I mean, it's just astonishing how they pull the eyes over the American people.
	She had a voice box.
	They've developed a technique now that will give you a voice that is indistinguishable from the original.
	So we were hearing Hillary Clinton's voice, just as during the debate with Donald Trump we were hearing Joe Biden's voice, but it was neither Hillary debating Donald Trump nor was it Joe Biden debating Donald Trump.
	I mean, it's just outrageous.
	The Democratic Party has been reduced to lying.
	It's just a gang of liars, cheaters, thieves.
	I mean, this is just outrageous beyond belief, but those are provable.
	Every claim I'm making here is something I can prove, have proven, and am glad to prove again and again.
	Yes, and Jim, yesterday on the Need to Know News, you showed a close-up of the two different eyes, the blue set of eyes and the sort of brownish set of eyes.
	Totally different eyes.
	It's not the same person.
	And the other thing that struck me was that so many of the wrinkle patterns around the eyes were actually quite different.
	Yeah, you're absolutely right, Scorpio.
	And you'll see now this guy who is making the rounds, Joe Biden's double, whoever he may be, is doing a whole lot of squinting.
	He's keeping his eyes kind of scrunched up so you won't notice the difference in the color, but it's blatant.
	And as you are accurately observing, the whole pattern of wrinkles around the eyes is completely different for Joe Biden and his new imposter.
	Yeah, it's stunning.
	I mean, and even the way they carry the body.
	And as you also observed, Jim, the double, the Biden 2, ties his tie differently than original Groper Joe.
	Yeah, Joe Biden used a double Windsor.
	He uses a single Windsor.
	I haven't worn a tie since 1969.
	We tend to tie our ties the same way.
	Not only that, but another tell is the following.
	Joe Biden has had a skull implant of a hearing device so he can receive instructions from off the stage from a remote source and doesn't need a wire.
	But this guy, his body double, hasn't had a skull implant and needed a wire which was visible on his lapel during the debate.
	So, Jim, why no tie since 1969?
	What's going on with that?
	Oh, I've just never been a tie enthusiast, Scorpio.
	It's just part of my persona.
	And, you know, I'm not about to change at this point in time.
	I did make one exception when my best friend got married and he invited me to be one of the ushers.
	I put on a tuxedo.
	And the fellow for whom I had written my dissertation, Wesley Salmon and his wife Merrily, just a wonderful pair, though Salmon is now deceased due to a Freak automobile accident, sad to say.
	They both told me I had to buy that tuxedo.
	It was as though they wanted me to wear it all the time.
	They just loved how I looked in this tuxedo.
	Really?
	Yeah, it was fascinating and fun, but that's the sole exception I have made.
	Well, Jim, returning to The idea of the new Daily News Show, Need to Know the Fetz Report.
	How do you feel now that you've migrated from the controversy surrounding the real deal to your newest incarnation, like a Phoenix Rising?
	Well, it's quite a story, really, Giuseppe.
	And of course, I'm indebted to you for encouraging me to get back up in the saddle.
	What had happened was, Dean Ryan, whom I'd known for quite a few years, he'd even been to my home, stayed overnight.
	We'd done a number of shows together for a production out of Hollywood called Truth Be Told.
	He did an interview with me in my backyard doing a barbecue that was hugely popular.
	So when he had the idea of doing a daily news report, he wanted to adopt the name that I had in the past for The Real Deal, where I'd done a series of some 225 video news shows with Chance George, a completely brilliant guy in Canada, Who had convinced me by sending me a video introduction that just merged a whole lot of key issues involving 9-11, JFK, Sandy Hook, and the like that I loved.
	He immediately hooked me.
	We did some 225 shows until he got the message by having his cable cut.
	The cable from his home to connect to the internet was cut three different times.
	So he was given the message to discontinue.
	Well, Dean, I think, had been so impressed he wanted to call these the real deal reports about the latest news.
	And we did.
	Yeah, we do one every single day for, I don't know, 70, 80 or 90 days.
	We eventually would take breaks over the weekend.
	But I mean, in the initial covering the coronavirus and all that, and the latest political developments, it was seven days a week.
	And we eventually came up to do one about Shadowgate, where this Woman, Millie Weaver, whom I never before encountered, had done a spectacular job with her husband, apparently a brilliant film editor, putting together a story about how parties previously in the government, including a former Marine Corps general, had formed a private company and they were using technology that had been developed at taxpayer expense
	We're given information acquired by the social media about individuals involved in the platform.
	You know, they know everything about us, which is how Google can manipulate the vote to benefit Joe Biden, as they did in South Carolina.
	Let me remind our audience, prior to South Carolina, although Joe Biden had run for president several times before, He'd never won a single caucus or a single primary.
	He only won in South Carolina because Google sent get-out-the-vote reminders to a targeted audience, principally blacks.
	They knew we're going to vote Democrat.
	And he got this huge surge.
	And once Biden got that huge surge, Google continued to aid in a bet, turning out the vote.
	So it would be obvious that South Carolina was a fluke.
	He doesn't actually have all this much support, as we know, from the failures to even produce crowds at turnouts, even if they involve him and Kamala together.
	So this private company using a new technology It is able to send out information to targeted parties to press their buttons.
	They know so much about our behavior.
	They're able to give the kind of information through their cell phones, especially.
	That'll lead them to produce a riot in Ferguson, Missouri or elsewhere.
	It's a stunning technology.
	Well, Millie had done this completely wonderful job about it.
	But just before Shadowgate was to be broadcast, she was arrested on a phony trumped-up charge of burglary.
	I mean, it was all bizarre.
	The warrant was improperly carried out.
	It didn't even specify what the crime was supposed to be.
	I mean, it was all ridiculous.
	It turned out to be a contrive based upon an argument she'd had with her mother, where
	she'd taken her mother's cell phone and her mother had claimed therefore she had stolen
	her cell phone, a charge which she had subsequently retracted, but which they used to manipulate
	this Warren to arrest Millie just before she was to release Shadowgate.
	Well, she had cleverly arranged with others that if anything happened to her, to get a film out.
	And a fellow named Pete Santilli, with whom I've had very mixed relations in the past, did a completely brilliant job of not only covering the arrest, getting it on the air, but of playing Shadowgate so that I would wind up eventually doing three different Editions of The Conspiracy Guy at Jim the Conspiracy Guy with Danny Sears, who has a wonderful background in law enforcement, and where we went through the whole thing.
	Now, when I included it in the stories for the Real Deal Report that day, once I introduced in the role of Millie Weaver, Dean Ryan, Went on a long ad hominem attack against Millie, including a lot of smears.
	And it went on.
	It was extensive.
	I was very, uh, quite appalled and called him out for what I regarded as his immature and unprofessional conduct.
	Well, he flipped out over that.
	He was very upset.
	So I stopped the recording and said, look, we'll take it out.
	Okay.
	And we proceeded to finish the show.
	Uh, which we then put up on the air.
	But Dean was, uh, unforgiving.
	He sent me something that was supposed to be a justification for his attitude, to which I replied, and we had an email exchange, such that when we did the show Monday, Dean didn't appear, but Mike Berra did.
	And when we went to do the show Tuesday, Mike Barrett asked me had I put up a comment on Dean's blog
	where I was explaining that what he was describing as having gone down was not what went down
	and he refused to go on.
	So I did it with Blake Wally, who turns out to be a really decent guy.
	And the next thing I know, they had notified me that I was off of the show.
	Dean Ryan said he would never work with me again.
	This was really completely ridiculous in my opinion.
	And they went on to do an attack on me at what they call their afternight party
	that was just disgraceful because they told false, they made deliberately made false claims about me.
	Now, frankly, they're getting upset about my calling him out
	for having gone over the edge and acted unprofessionally about Millie Weaver
	would have been forgivable.
	I was even actually writing, OK, now that you've got this off your chest, can we resume doing the show?
	When someone said to me, look, Jim, you got to watch this thing first.
	So I watched it.
	And when I discovered the appalling false claims they were making, I found that inexcusable.
	I mean, lying about me was, you know, a decisive move separating us.
	So, you know, I abandoned the very idea.
	They decided they would go forward and they brought in two girls and they had, you know, a different format.
	At the time, I was predicting giving them two weeks because I had been doing 90% of the work for the show, filtering all the stories, putting together the PowerPoints, recording the shows and sending them to them.
	And it was only, Giuseppe, when you reached out to me that you thought was a good idea to continue to keep going that I seriously entertained the idea.
	And I do agree with you that, well, you know, I liked Dean Ryan and Mike Barra.
	I thought Mike Barra made a lot of good points.
	When they did this blast on me, Mike Berra said he'd never even heard of me before Dean Ryan brought it up, suggesting to me he can't have very deep roots in the truth movement to have not heard of me by 2020, given I began my serious research back in 1992.
	So that, to me, was a revelation.
	But what you and I have now done, I think, is really More professional, deeper and more searching in terms of reporting current developments and bringing in Scorpio, which of course was your original plan, was a brilliant idea because I think the three of us work really well together.
	There's a, just an excellent rapport between us.
	And I've been very, very happy with the outcome too, for which I'm very grateful to you.
	Well, Jim, I was outraged when I stumbled upon the, um, The Antics, because I would always practice guitar and watch The Real Deal because it was the one decent news show covering the real issues of this outrageous globalist scandemic.
	But you know I found both those guys, they have a certain charisma, but they're both
	strike me as lightweights. You know they're they're more worried about
	personality and narcissism issues and
	talking about things like you know sexual conquest and blah blah blah trying to act like a
	couple of studs and you know that's There are times for that, but it wasn't with the gravitas of your reports.
	And then I was stunned when they came out and said, Jim Fetzer's lost his mind, man.
	He's totally championing Millie Weaver.
	And I asked you about it, and you said you've got to go watch The interview with, I forget, wasn't Michael Deacon or one of the radio guys, and they played what really happened, and I was like, my jaw dropped.
	I'm like, this is just a crime.
	This should not have happened.
	Jim's doing, like, I had no idea you were doing that much of the work.
	And so, I was like, well, I'm decent at video production and this really needs to keep going because there is no other really good news service that does this wonderful hybrid of news, commentary, and analysis.
	You know, there's some good news sites and there's some good commentators, but they don't blend it the way you have a talent for blending it.
	And so, um, you know, we, we, uh, the first week was a little rough.
	I really needed to, I threw myself in the deep end of the pool, but I learned quickly.
	And now I think, I think our, uh, our daily shows are, uh, you know, uh, in the fine tradition of what you were doing with Chance George.
	I loved those Chance George shows and, and that whole network.
	I mean, he had pulled in Don Gron and he had pulled in, I forget what that woman was.
	She was doing a lot of shows and it's sad that, um, You know, Chance at the time had young kids, so when they were like physically showing him, look, you know, this axe could go somewhere else, not just your internet feed, so he had to back off.
	It's sad for the sake of his family, but yeah, man, it's getting better.
	I mean, we started a brand new YouTube page for the show when we got it rolling about a month ago, which is under Giuseppe Vafangulo Need to Know the Fetzer Report.
	And uh you know we're over 500 subscribers now and it keeps growing so that you know this is quality rises to the top and I think we put out a really quality daily product and also in addition to the regular team we've got such great guest commentators the brilliant Susan Bradford, the brilliant Carl Herman, the brilliant Michael Ivey, so, you know, it's not just gonna be just the three of us it'll always be you Jim, but sometimes Scorpio I or I especially when Dave Scorpio was seeking to address his Issues with technology in Ecuador, which we finally solved But yeah, it's really I'm proud to be a part of it all and I it was like a gut intuitional thing I was like, man I should step in and see if we can I can help and just popped into my gut and I acted upon it I'm very proud that I did and I think
	It's getting better and better each week.
	It's getting tighter.
	How about you, Scorpio?
	What do you think of it?
	Well, I'm honored to be working with Dr. Fetzer, to be honest.
	I think we work well together and we've got chemistry.
	And we're trying to make an interesting analysis for people to help cut through all the lies and deception.
	You know, I always refer to the mainstream media as enemy war footage, and it becomes more like that almost every day.
	Yeah, no kidding.
	Let me add, Giuseppe, you're right.
	It was on the Michael Deacon Show, and I've been several with him, and I think he's a wonderful host.
	For some reason, I feel completely relaxed When I'm on with Michael Deacon, and it was the end of what we planned to cover.
	And he said, Jim, there's one more thing, you know, I need to discuss with you.
	And it was, of course, about the collapse of the Real Deal Report.
	And he played this segment where Dean was falsely claiming that I'd lost my temper and gone overboard and they just couldn't work with me any longer.
	Which led me to not only explain what had really happened, but when I did with Danny Syrus part three of our series about this whole event, I included the clip that had been taken out of the show.
	So you can actually see what happened and it's there, it's available.
	Go to Jim the Conspiracy Guy and just scroll down to part three and you can watch for yourself.
	Which I think upset them because, you know, it just pulled the rug out from under them.
	I mean, I don't understand why anyone would continue to give them any credibility after they have grossly betrayed and lied about me, who was actually the centerpiece of the show by giving it the framework and the substance, and to use your word, the gravitas the show required.
	I mean, Now, you got a couple of guys who are very self-indulgent.
	Narcissistic is the right word.
	They care more about their own image than they do about getting stories right.
	I think they do have creative ability.
	I think that Dean has a wonderful imagination and that he's got a lot of talent.
	I think Mike Berra is a very good reporter, though I disagreed with him severely on certain issues.
	For example, Mike Berra thinks we went to the moon.
	Well, I have demonstrated in collaborative research it was impossible for us to have gone to the moon.
	We didn't have the propulsion power to escape low Earth orbit.
	We didn't have the computing power.
	The actual design of the computer that NASA claims navigated this entire 250,000 mile trip back and forth to the moon isn't even a functional computer.
	And of course, had less computing power than you have on a typical iPod or cell phone today.
	I mean, it's just ridiculous.
	We didn't have the communication capacity.
	At one point, the Huffington Post put up an incredibly stupid post about this noted physicist in a single brilliant tweet refutes moon landing skeptics.
	I mean, and it was so banal as to say something like, anyone who thinks we didn't go to the moon needs to have their brain examined.
	I mean, it was just that pointless, but I used it as an occasion to start posting proofs that we haven't gone.
	And the most interesting supplement came from a fellow who reported he was in the communications industry at that era, 1969-70.
	And to have the capacity to broadcast, you had to have a van the size of a bread truck.
	Well, there were no vans the size of a bread truck on the moon.
	And if you notice and think about it, we are familiar with delays of broadcasts that are maybe, you know, transatlantic.
	Even today, you'll find when one of the major networks is doing an interview with someone in France, for example, there's a temporal delay.
	But in communicating with these astronauts on the moon, 250,000 miles away, there was no temporal delay.
	Not only that, but they brought back thousands upon thousands of photographs.
	In fact, a dear colleague of mine from JFK Research, Jack White, who became seriously interested in 9-11, did a calculation Of the total number of photographs, it was something over 5,000, and the total number of minutes available for the astronauts who have taken the photographs, which is something over 4,000, calculated in order for those to have all been taken by the astronauts on the Moon, they had to be taking a photograph every 50 seconds,
	I mean, even if they'd done nothing but taking photographs every 50 seconds, and the cameras were mounted external to the spacesuits, and they had no viewfinder, there was no way to focus or frame, and yet every photograph NASA produced as having been taken on the Moon is perfectly focused and framed.
	Not only that, but I am convinced That because of the extreme variations in temperature on the Moon, where it's like 350 degrees above Fahrenheit in the sunny areas and 350 below in the dark areas, including the far side of the Moon, which because of the slow rate of Moon's rotation, we always have the same face of the Moon facing Earth,
	It just is one of those phenomena of nature that it plays out that way.
	And because the influence of cosmic rays, I'm convinced, would have destroyed photographic plates.
	I do not believe it would have been possible to take any photographs on the moon.
	Further confirmation, the whole thing was an elaborate hoax, but Mike Barra insists we went to the moon, so we were actually contemplating doing a debate between me and Mike Barra.
	And people, you know, fans were saying, boy, they'd pay a hundred bucks to watch that debate between me and Mike Barra.
	Maybe we still need to do it to raise funds for a legal defense fund, Giuseppe.
	But the fact is, it caused me to have, you know, some doubts about Mike Berra's confidence in research.
	But I would be still, you know, I'd still be willing to debate him.
	And maybe, you know, just now having this conversation with you revives the very idea.
	But anyone who wants to see, you know, check out Shadowgate, the three parts of Jim the Conspiracy Guy.
	And if you're particularly interested in this fallout with Dean Ryan and Mike Barra, watch part three, where you can even see for yourself the segment that I excluded and where I had received a couple of emails from fans saying, you know, how much they like my work.
	And my contributions, but they really felt I should have taken exception when Dean Ryan and Mike Barrett both dumped on Millie and her mother to boot.
	And I wrote back and said, well, you know, actually I did object at the time and it became so it was such a big deal the way they reacted that we edited it out.
	Well, now they can see what was edited out.
	Well Jim, we've got a commentator in one of the chat rooms, PeterAnon2020, who first observed, Nixon called the moon from a landline with no delay lol, which is one of the big tells in my mind.
	But breaking news, he reports Shadowgate 2.0 will be released tomorrow at Millennial Millie Weaver's YouTube channel.
	Well, that's fantastic.
	Now, I'm a big fan of Millie, and I have no idea why Dean Ryan and Mike Mara were so down on her, but I'll tell you, they were so unprofessional.
	They were so personal.
	They were so salacious.
	I actually believe Millie, even though she's a public figure, would have a defamation case against them, and of course
	this is an area with which I'm now intimately familiar with a completely phony, contrived
	defamation case myself.
	I'm all on Millie's side and I have nothing good to say about the way in which Dean Ryan
	and Mike Barra have treated her and her mother.
	It's disgraceful.
	Well, you know, Barra and Dean both have a good amount of experience on TV with Barra
	somehow getting involved with the ancient aliens issue, and they both have a certain
	charisma.
	But when he said a few months ago that, well, Jim, I don't know that I agree with you.
	I think planes hit the Twin Towers.
	And I'm like, I'll debate you with that.
	I'm like, oh, my God.
	I can't wait for that debate, man.
	You're going to get shredded.
	Well, that would be a fun one, too.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Maybe we should do more than one.
	But, you know, Giuseppe, maybe it's actually worth doing for me to have a debate with Bera about the moon landing that we make pay-per-view in order to get money for my legal defense fund.
	I mean, I'd be up for that.
	Well, we can certainly, as they say, run it up the flagpole to mount a real deal and see if they're willing to open the castle gates or not.
	We'll check it out with them.
	Now, I just don't know if we'd be enabled during the debate to show photos, films, diagrams, and all that, because it makes a big difference to understand what happened.
	But there are so many reasons we know we didn't go.
	I mean, it's utterly fascinating.
	It's a great issue.
	I love it.
	I love debating.
	I think we should pursue it just that way.
	Well, we'll certainly look into it.
	And we can easily, via our StreamYard platform, which is what they use as well, easily put up pictures and video clips.
	And it's easy to do.
	But we want to do it as a pay-per-view event.
	Well, yeah, I mean, I guess, um, that will be, uh, um, I guess what we'd have to do at that point would be to, uh, record it via StreamYard and then put it behind a paywall and people can pay to see it.
	It doesn't have to be live necessarily.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	That's good.
	I like that.
	Very good.
	Very good, Giuseppe.
	I think you just solved the problem.
	Yep, and returning back to the Paul McCartney thing, which is really mind-blowing, a few years ago...
	Uh, when I first became exposed to it, and I was too young, I remember as a real little boy in the 60s, something that there was a rumor that Paul had died and it was on, uh, the, uh, what was the main, uh, AM music radio station in Milwaukee in the 60s was WOKY, the Mighty 920, and, uh, they even said something about it, and then, uh, there was a guy named, uh, Bob Barry who was the emcee for the Beatles concert in Milwaukee and they liked him so much that they touted him as the fifth Beatle in Milwaukee and all that.
	He got a big kick out of it and so I think they played Milwaukee twice and both times Bob Barry was the emcee and he refuted it.
	What you mean is he rejected or repudiated, not that he refuted it.
	That would mean a successful argument.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	Good point.
	Thanks for clarifying.
	He was making a rebuttal.
	Right, right.
	He discounted it.
	There's a better way.
	Right. Yeah. Anyway, around 2012-2013 I came across this amazing documentary called the
	Emerald Beetle that was so good at showing all the occult esoterics involved in what
	the Beatles were doing with that Sgt. Pepper album and all the hidden messages and the
	crazy, crazy antics that if you... and they did it for the viewer where you hold the album
	up to a mirror and all of a sudden there's all these different phrases and things like
	that. It's just stunning. And so whoever was involved in this Paul is Paul thing had it
	really worked out from a mind control perspective and an occult perspective.
	Have you looked into that at all?
	Well, not particularly.
	I mean, I've been concerned with music.
	I've been a huge Beatles fan since my younger siblings.
	We're really more into the Beatles than I. I graduated from college in 1962.
	I was in the Marine Corps.
	I was stationed abroad.
	I was actually anchored out at Kaohsiung Harbor, Formosa, when Jack was whacked, where the executive officer awakened me at 3.30 in the morning to tell me the president had been shot.
	Then he came back an hour later and awakened me again to tell me they caught the guy who'd done it.
	He was a communist.
	Well, I thought that was pretty fast work, but today I know exactly why.
	So I didn't get back.
	You know, I was there from like, uh, let's see, June of, uh, 63 to June of 64.
	And then I spent two years at the Recruit Depot in San Diego, where I was a series commander with, 15 drill instructors and 300 recruits under my command going through the training cycles and then they moved me up to regimental headquarters to revise the training program.
	So instead of producing 8,000 recruits in 11 weeks, we could produce 11,000 recruits in 8 weeks using the same facility.
	and was there to see it operating successfully at a full load.
	I have subsequently, of course, come to conclude the whole war in Vietnam was a terrible mistake, that we should never have been there.
	But it was only after I got back, and maybe even when I entered graduate school, because I resigned my commission as a captain in 1966, And a graduate school in the history and philosophy of science at Indiana University.
	And I think it was then that I really began getting hooked into the Beatles, so it may very well have begun earlier.
	I believe now that one of the major reasons why they had such tremendous impact on America is because we were in a state of grief In the aftermath of the assassination of JFK and that this helped to revive our spirits, a phenomenon I'd undergone myself after my mother had died when I was 11.
	She had divorced my father, married my stepfather, they'd had an additional son, At the time I had one full brother and a stepbrother by my mother and stepfather and my full brother and I went to live with our father and his second wife or stepmother who already had one child who was pregnant with a second.
	And I was really, I think, in a state of despondency until listening to the radio.
	We had redesigned, I actually had done the blueprint for a screened-in back porch to be converted into a boy's bedroom with two, made out of knotty pine with two built-in bunk beds, and by each of the bunk beds there was a little little tray there, a little shelf where you could put a
	small radio, you know, portable radio. And I used to listen to what my stepmother called my
	beer hour, lucky logger dance time.
	And they played the great songs of the era, you know, Shaboom, the Chanel, Smokeheads
	in Your Eyes, and it revived me. It brought me back from the state of despair. So it was
	pretty evident to me that the Beatles had that effect on the entire nation in the aftermath
	of the assassination.
	What an absolutely fascinating point.
	I mean, the healing power of music and sound is Really underappreciated.
	There are some people on the internet, especially on YouTube, and even the watchman on Revolution Radio Studio A, Sunday nights, 8 p.m.
	Eastern, he's all into frequency healing and some of the other hosts are too.
	Jim, it's really amazing that you can put on these binaural It's really relaxing music and it actually can heal the body, help you sleep.
	It's really amazing.
	People don't realize the great power of sound and good music.
	I've lived through many, sadly, a tragedy in my own young life and I did the same thing.
	I turned to music and radio and later stereo and records to have the same healing effect.
	It's really a gift to humanity, no doubt.
	Well, I'll tell you, I had such enthusiasm for The Beatles, I even know one of my shows on an earlier radio broadcast.
	I did a tribute to the Beatles, where in a two-hour program I played what I took to be the 20 best Beatles songs.
	I still have a copy of it.
	I'll share it with you, Giuseppe.
	I think actually the fellow who replaced Paul is an even better musician.
	There are those who disagree, some quite strenuously.
	Well, I think that's the case, that he took them in directions they would never have gone.
	Just listen to Sgt.
	Pepper itself alone already and you can see what's going on.
	And of course, after the band broke up, Fall was oddly unconcerned saying, you know, it's just a band when it was the greatest band in history.
	We got a break, I know, so.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Okay, Jim, we're at the top of the hour and we'll come right back for hour number two.
	Everyone stay tuned.
	Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back after this message.
	Well, we're on pause, Scorpio, on the Rev Radio, but we're still filming live.
	Man, how about Jim Fetzer?
	What an amazing fellow, huh?
	Yeah, that was a good conversation.
	I wanted to touch upon something about What happened with him and Mike Berra, I'm really surprised those guys did a show and put it on the internet and just trashed Dr. Spencer.
	I'm just shocked by that behavior to be honest.
	Yeah, that whole thing is really worth going back and looking at.
	It's still all on the internet, which...
	You know, if you start out watching their Friday night show without Fetzer, and then they really rip on Jim, and then you go and watch his rebuttal on Bitchute, it tells the whole story.
	That's what spurred me to say, you know, screw this, this guy's doing some great work, and I can step in and keep him going.
	And then we talked about joining together and working with him.
	It was meant to be, literally, I think.
	Yeah, it did just sort of happen.
	It wasn't planned at all.
	When things like that happen, it's usually an indication that there is another force at work there bringing it all together.
	Oh yeah, man.
	I had no intentions of...
	of becoming involved with Jim like this. We had talked about
	eventually doing our own little network which we are now doing
	Rising Tide Media on YouTube and and other Twitters and everywhere and
	It's awesome, man.
	and we were rolling out gradually and then all of a sudden when Jim just hit me intuitively
	I was like, man, we can help this guy.
	And went for the intuitional guidance and boy we got thrown into the deep end of the
	pool but I'm really glad to be a part of it all.
	Join me, Ivy West, for People's Time of Win.
	Saturday.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	It's awesome, man.
	Yeah.
	You know, this whole thing with Paul and Paul, we should get more...
	I've studied that a lot.
	And there's some people, at some point once this COVID scam is over, or maybe it's never going to be over, but we should definitely do a show on one of our platforms with Jim and that female author on the East Coast who's delved into it.
	It's just fascinating.
	Yeah, let's do that soon because, you know, we got to have a break from the COVID mania once in a while and it's kind of pertinent too because we're seeing we could tie it together with the doubles that are being used.
	It's true.
	Yeah, it's really true.
	All right, so we'll be coming back soon.
	Management would like to take a moment to thank the Yeah, let's work on setting that up.
	That'd be cool.
	That'd be interesting, too, because, you know, this new Biden is not the same Joe Biden.
	The eyes really sold it for me at first.
	I was like, well, I don't know.
	But yeah, man, the eyes and the chin and the...
	Yeah, there's a cleft here.
	The other one doesn't have a cleft.
	Even the wrinkles are different, like you observed in the close-up.
	I'll have to grab that picture.
	If I would have had it, we could put it up on the broadcast part of this, the video cast, but I didn't realize we were going that way.
	way so. But it's still really something that's for sure.
	Thank you.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listeners.
	All right, here we go.
	And now we return you to your host.
	Okay, welcome back to our number two of the wisdom circle.
	I'm here with Jeffy from the District of Criminals and the great Dr. Jim Fetzer.
	We've been covering all kinds of stuff.
	We've been all over the map here with Kennedy assassination, 9-11, Paul Fall, and up to the phony Joe Biden that we're seeing.
	And so, Jim, you know, I thought maybe just we could start off and just go back to the sort of the genesis of your research and how you got into this.
	You know, I assume it was the Kennedy assassination that sort of made you question our reality.
	About what year did that happen?
	Like, when did you start to realize there was something seriously wrong with the official narrative about the Kennedy assassination?
	Well, I didn't think too much about it at the time when I was in the Far East, you know.
	I mean, I had 13 months in the Far East.
	It was all training ops twice in Japan, in Formosa, in Correa.
	We had R&R in the Philippines.
	We were based on Okinawa.
	I'll never forget my first assignment when I showed up in Okinawa.
	My unit, which was a mortar battery, 1st Battalion, 12th Marines, 3rd Marine Division, was actually pulling a training operation in Japan.
	And when I caught up with the company, of which I was the fire direction officer, my first assignment was to set up, take the crew.
	They were simply excellent.
	They set up for a live fire on the base of Mount Fuji.
	And in the background, you could see the pilgrims making their trek to the sacred mountain.
	And I turned to my exec and I said, who calls us ugly Americans?
	Oh, it's so disgusting.
	This is a sacred mountain to the Japanese people and we're conducting live fire rounds with howitzers and mortars around the base of the mountain.
	I mean, it was just unbelievable.
	Now, when I got back to the U.S., I started, you know, reading some books about it.
	One of the first was one called Six Seconds in Dallas by a fellow by the name of Josiah Thompson.
	I felt a certain kinship.
	He was then an assistant professor of philosophy, which of course had been my undergraduate major.
	He had been in the UDT.
	I'd been in the Marine Corps.
	He had been doing research on JFK.
	I was interested in getting into research on JFK.
	So I picked up the book and I annotated in the margins.
	It had actually, I think, to inflate the number of pages, it had unusually wide margins.
	That was okay.
	It gave me the opportunity to take notes.
	I still have the book.
	Now, he adduced a number of really great reasons to conclude it had been a conspiracy, including a diagram that had been authorized by Dr. Robert McClellan at Parkland Hospital of this fist-sized blowout to the back of JFK's head, which clearly had been the effect of a shot fired from the front, from the right front, it would turn out.
	He also had the best part of the whole book, was a very meticulous scientific analysis.
	And I don't believe he himself actually was responsible, but it was easily the best part of the book, showing that in the Zapruder frame, the extant version of which has 487 frames, every student knows each frame is numbered.
	The alleged hit you see in the Zapruder film is in frame 313.
	Well, in frame 312, just before the hit in 313, there's actually a slight movement of JFK's head forward.
	And then you have this violent back-and-to-the-motion.
	So what they'd done was a kind of a location of the body in relation to a fixed feature of the automobile and how rapidly it had moved back and to the left.
	Which was stunning evidence of a shot fired from the right front that had blown his head backwards.
	In fact, anyone who sees the Zapruder film for the first time is just dumbfounded that it's such an obvious indication of a shot fired from the right front that his head is blown back.
	Oh sure, especially some of those ballistics and, you know, the behavior of when a shot is fired.
	So what year do you think this was, Jim, that you started reading these books?
	Scorpio, let me finish the story. So, you know, this was a wonderful demonstration of what's
	called the double-hit theory. Now, it turns out that David Lifton, who published what I think is
	the single most important book in the history of JFK research called Best Evidence, had an
	elaborate footnote about how he'd taken copies of the frames up to Caltech and asked Richard
	Feynman, who was at the time the most famous physicist in the world, to take a look at
	And Feynman had actually applied a ruler directly to these big blow-ups of the frames and discovered that it was the forward motion before there was the back and to the left.
	So David Lifton in his book, Best Evidence, first published in 1980, had actually also independently confirmed the double hit.
	Well, as the events would turn out, Josiah Thompson, whom I met, I believe, the first time, let's see, it was Midwest Conference on Assassination, something like.
	What year was it?
	I actually, you know, drank scotch with a guy and told him how much I admired him.
	But it turns out that he actually has been working the other side, that his efforts were actually to... He was going to, as we approach the 50th observance in 2013, he was going to do a series of short videos in which he was explaining away a whole lot of the evidence, you know, as though it all always had an innocuous explanation, it wasn't therefore sinister, beginning with
	the umbrella man.
	Well, the umbrella man was standing near the Stemmons Freeway sign with someone usually
	referred to as the Cuban, where the umbrella man is pumping his umbrella up and down, very,
	very peculiar.
	It wasn't a raining day.
	No one else anywhere on the motorcade had an umbrella.
	And the Cuban reaches out his fist in a gesture interpreted to mean stop, you know, and the
	driver, William Greer, pulled the limousine to the left and to a halt to make sure JFK
	would be killed.
	Now, the pumping of the umbrella makes sense because from all the shooter locations, they could see the umbrella pumping and that meant the target is still alive and to keep shooting.
	So Greer pulled the limousine to a left and to a halt.
	Now, they had to edit this out because it was so telling of what had actually happened.
	But during the limo stop, Jack is hit in the back of the head by a shot fired from the Daltex.
	He slumps forward.
	Jackie eases him back up.
	She's looking him right in the face when he's hit in the right temple by that frangible exploding bullet that blows his brains out the back of the head, causing that major defect.
	And he slumps to the left.
	There is none of the violent back and to the left.
	That was an artifact of editing when they revised the film, and this was done over the weekend following the assassination, and they made a substitution of the revised film at the National Photographic Interpretation Center, which was then located in Washington, D.C., the day following the original having been brought there.
	And the editing took out so many frames that you wound up, not only did they merge the two shots, hence the double hit theory, but they took out so many frames, you got this violent back and to the left, which no one, not a single witness at Dealey Plaza reported seeing.
	So it wound up that Josiah Thompson and I were pitted against one another because He was arguing the Zapruder film on which his book was based was the closest thing we have to absolute truth about the Kennedy assassination, where I was doing all this collaborative research demonstrating that was far from the case.
	Indeed, I have gone further now, published a whole book about it entitled The Great Zapruder Film Hoax, which is a third in an original trilogy By bringing experts together that just blew apart the cover-up and really enables you to discern who is behind the assassination.
	And even with funding from the University of Minnesota, I conducted two different conferences on JFK, one in Minneapolis in 1999, the second on the Duluth campus in 2003.
	And on the basis of the conference in 1999, I put together Murder in Dealey Plaza, which many regard to this day as the single best volume ever published on the assassination.
	It's wonderfully balanced.
	And got everything right.
	I mean, it's just a phenomenon.
	So that Josiah Thompson and I wound up on opposite sides on a number of issues where he has attacked me numerous times with arguments that are subtly fallacious.
	In other words, because of his background in philosophy, he knew how to shade things, how to play games with ambiguous or vague language and the like.
	But I think there's really no real doubt about that.
	The evidence is all on my side, and I had the benefit of other really marvelous investigators, including David W. Mantic, MD, PhD, who's the leading expert on the medical evidence in the world today, and John P. Costello, another PhD, who did brilliant work exhibiting internal evidence that the film had been edited Including that they had to take out the Stemmons highway sign, freeway sign, because a bullet had passed through the sign and it wouldn't do since the government had committed to three and only three shots having been fired.
	That would be inexplicable and show in and of itself that the whole story was a charade.
	And when they replaced the freeway sign in the video, they put it in the wrong position.
	So that's one of the simplest proofs we have.
	The Zapruder film has been massively edited.
	When they reimposed the Stem and Three-Way sign, they put it in the wrong position.
	It turns out that the four motorcycle escort officers who are surrounding the presidential
	limousine, and it was ridiculous that his motorcycle escort was cut down to four and
	directed not to ride forward of the rear wheels.
	One of the officers involved saying it was the damnedest formation he'd ever heard of.
	They all did interviews with a fellow named Fred Newcomb, who was an early researcher,
	and they all confirmed the limo stop and the activities that took place, which were so
	extensive.
	For example, Officer Hargis, riding to the left here, actually parked his bike and ran between the limousines to the grassy knoll from which he believed some of the shots had been fired.
	Which would have been impossible had the vehicles been in motion.
	Officer Douglas Jackson on the right side actually motored his bike up on the grassy knoll.
	And we have photographs where you can see the ruts that were caused by the wheels of the bike until it fell over and he proceeded on foot.
	Meanwhile, five of the agents dismounted from the Secret Service Cadillac, known as the Queen Mary, surrounded the presidential limousine.
	One took a piece of skull from a little boy and threw it in the back seat.
	I originally assumed the limo stop was only six to eight seconds, but I've been unable to reconcile all of this activity with less than 20.
	So when you consider that although Zapruder reported he began filming when the limo first came into view, which would have been still on Houston Street, that they took out the turn from Houston onto Elm because the driver swerved out too widely, nearly hit a concrete abutment, And they had to pause to get back in line, which would have shaken the confidence of the American public in the ability of the Secret Service to protect the President.
	And the limo stop, we actually have more than 500 frames removed.
	So the original had about 1,000 frames.
	We have 487.
	So more frames have been taken out than remained in the exit version.
	Amazing, Jim.
	My question is, do you think Josiah Thompson was just arrogant and didn't want to expand and embrace the new discoveries you and others had made, or was he serving another agenda?
	Oh, I don't have any doubt he was serving another agenda.
	I mean, this is a very well-known dispute within the JFK research community, where I have to tell you I have exposed one individual or a group after another.
	I mean, I've really been doing my best to expose.
	There's massive infiltration of the JFK research community, just as there's been massive infiltration of the 9-11 research community.
	In fact, I'll tell you, I founded Scholars for 9-11 Truth in December 2005, and it took off like a rocket.
	There are today three different major groups about 9-11.
	Judy Wood and her DEWS group, where she claims erected energy weapons were responsible for the destruction of the towers.
	Richard Gage and his architects and engineers who defend the nanothermite hypothesis and scholars.
	Which has got to the root of the problem and expose that it was actually nuclear devices that were responsible for the destruction of these massive buildings.
	Well, just on its face, neither Judy Wood nor Richard Gage, neither the group, the nanothermite group, We'll talk about who was responsible and why.
	In other words, they won't give you a narrative.
	Without that narrative, to the American people, it's all just meaningless technical jabber, claptrap, because they don't understand why it would matter how the buildings were destroyed.
	So, you know, as in the case of JFK, I have outed them as limited hangouts, and where it turns out that We can explain all the phenomena, all the available evidence using the nuclear hypothesis without appealing to directed energy weaponry.
	And there are phenomena that directed energy cannot explain, such as the blowing out of a massive, I think it was 300-ton steel assembly, 600 feet into the Winter Garden at an upward 45-degree trajectory.
	That required a massive source of energy that directed energy can't provide.
	The nanothermite hypothesis is utterly indefensible.
	T. Mark Hightower, who's a chemical engineer, and I, in 2011 published three articles exposing
	how nanothermite only has 113th the explosive power of TNT.
	So why would you use such a feeble explosive?
	That, in order to destroy a material, an explosive has to have a detonation velocity equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material.
	Well, the speed of sound in concrete is 3,200 meters per second in steel, 6,100 meters per second, but the highest detonation velocity ever attributed to nanothermite is only 895 feet per second, meaning it can't possibly perform the job.
	One of the proponents of the nanothermite hypothesis and an associate professor of chemistry emeritus from the University of Copenhagen, Niels Harit, Wow.
	estimated it would require 29,000 metric tons of nanothermite to destroy a twin tower.
	Think about it.
	Wow.
	That'd be a lot of work getting that in there.
	It wouldn't be like filling a circus tower with, filling a twin tower with circus peanuts.
	I mean, it's just absurd.
	It's absurd.
	Well, it does appear to me that thermite was possibly used to cut some of the beams inside the tower, but the notion that they brought the tower down with thermite is patently absurd.
	Scorpio, they used it to cut the beams in the cleanup.
	It wasn't used in the destruction.
	It also turns out that because of the chemical interaction, Between the aluminum cladding that was on the external surface and the steel beams for the external support columns, you get a residue that is the nanothermite particles they claim to have found.
	In other words, they found the particles, they simply weren't derived By the causal process claim, just as Werner Von Braun actually led an expedition to the Antarctic to collect moon rocks that had been dislodged from the surface of the moon by the impact with small asteroids and caught in Earth's gravitational surface and brought down to that region so they could present them as evidence we'd gone to the moon where they were, for the most part, modified moon rocks.
	They simply hadn't arrived on Earth by the mode of transportation alleged.
	Right, right.
	Peter Anon in the chat room is saying, 19 goat herders with box cutters.
	That's right.
	Look, 15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia.
	You know, I mean, the whole story is just a fantasy.
	Two of the planes, I've done a huge amount on the aircraft here.
	Two of the aircraft weren't even in the air that day.
	Flight 11 North Tower, Flight 77 Pentagon were not even in the air.
	Pilots for 9-11 Truth has done brilliant work tracking the two planes that were in the air and found that Flight 93 was over Champaign-Urbana, Illinois after it had officially crashed in Shanksville and Flight 175 was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania after it had officially hit the South Tower where I obtained FAA registration records and showed that the planes used for those flights who records the same aircraft, can be used for multiple
	flights today from Tampa to Chicago, tomorrow New York to LA, were not even deregistered or
	formally taken out of service until 28 September 2005. So how can planes that weren't even in the air have
	crashed on 9-11, and how can planes that crashed on 9-11 have still been in the air four years later?
	Those are good questions.
	Jim, how do you think they made the outside cut pattern on the buildings,
	you know, when the plane supposedly flew into the building, did like a perfect Wiley-Coyote-style
	cut into the building?
	How do you think they accomplished that?
	Yeah, that's one of the remaining disputable issues.
	There's a fellow named Steve Dack, with whom I've had debates, who believes that the gashes were made by firing missiles at the building at a certain angle.
	Now, it turns out that in the North Tower, the planes in New York, which were Boeing 767s, allegedly, at the Pentagon and Shanksville 757s, We're intersecting at an angle so that in relation to the North Tower, it was intersecting with seven different floors in the South 8.
	Now each of these floors consisted of a steel truss filled with concrete, and because there were v-shaped grooves that were two inches deep in the steel trusses, in some areas it was two inches thick and others four inches thick, And because the buildings were 208 feet on a side, that means each floor represented an acre of concrete on a steel truss.
	Now the flight 11, which as I've explained wasn't even in the air that day, was intersecting with 7.
	Flight 175 was intersecting with 8.
	There's no way they could possibly have penetrated the building, so that I believe While the original plan was to use remotely controlled aircraft to fly into the buildings.
	I mean, it takes nerves of steel to deliberately kill yourself by crashing an airplane into a building.
	That was how they were going to handle it until they discovered that the design of the buildings precluded it.
	Real planes would have crumbled external to the building.
	Body seats, luggage, wings, tail fall into the ground.
	We have photographs of the roadway sidewalk beneath both facades.
	There's no body seats, luggage, tail, wings at all.
	Engines, yes, would have penetrated the building because they're so massive, but It turns out how an engine was found at church in Murray that was allegedly from flight 175.
	It was an antiquated engine not then in use.
	It was just sitting on the sidewalk under a steel Scaffolding and a canopy which were undamaged.
	Anything that massive at high speed would have gouged up the sidewalk, but it's just sitting there.
	Jack White astutely discovered Fox News footage of a white van at that location where you have four or five guys in FBI vests unloading something heavy, and in photographs you can see they even left behind a dolly that appears to have been used in the transport.
	I mean, it's that bad.
	Now, the alternative is, the alternative to a missile being fired to create the gash, there were Israeli art students in the building.
	They were known as a gelatin group.
	We have photographs of them.
	They had full access to the buildings, and they had box after box of fuse holders, so that I believe they were involved, you know, in doing some prep work My opinion, they were setting up to blow the gashes in the building for the cutouts that don't actually conform.
	to a plane what a plane would have done and where we even Jack White discovered this was an extension of the damage to the North Tower they actually extended it out a little further as though the wingtip would have done more damage than was initially shown but the nose and the wings of the these planes particularly the tips of the wings are very fragile I mean it's all really quite preposterous so there are Two different theories.
	It was done beneath the massive fireball and smoke from the initial explosions, which had to be pre-positioned.
	And in fact, you see a lot of twinkling of light leading me to conjecture that maybe this is what George H.W.
	Bush meant when he talked about a thousand points of light.
	Jim, what do you make of this?
	One last point about this, about the explosion of the If you look at the pictures, it seems like a lot of the beams are actually bent outwards.
	The paneling on the outside is bent outwards, not inward, as though something had gone into it.
	It seems like something blew them outward.
	You have Israeli art students renting like an entire floor in the World Trade Center is patently absurd because, you know, the old starving artist meme is very real.
	I can attest to that myself.
	So the idea that a bunch of art students rented out an entire floor of the World Trade Center is pretty ridiculous.
	Well, they were given it for free.
	I mean, this is all part of the setup, Scorpio.
	I mean, this was an Israeli op.
	Do you have any idea how many Israelis were arrested that day in vans loaded with explosives?
	The plan was to blow up the Holland Tunnel, blow up the Lincoln Tunnel, take down the Brooklyn Bridge, isolate Manhattan, This is all in the record.
	It's just buried because the mainstream media doesn't reveal it.
	There was a group of five known as the Dancing Israelis in Liberty State Park, New Jersey, who were filming the destruction of the Twin Towers and giving each other high fives and celebrating, taking selfies with the buildings in the background.
	Where a neighbor observed and reported to the police, and when they stopped the van to arrest them, the driver said, we are not the problem.
	The problem, our problem is your problem.
	The problem is the Palestinians.
	They found box cutters, passports, money, explosive residue in the van.
	They were held for like 41 days.
	It may have been longer until released by an assistant attorney general to then Attorney General John Ashcroft and returned to Israel, where three of them went on Israeli TV and explained they were there to document the destruction of the Twin Towers, which obviously required foreknowledge.
	The assistant attorney general or deputy who released him was Michael Chertoff, who had become our second director of homeland security and who, you know, just take
	a look at his visage. He looks like a Nazi concentration camp guard. I mean, these guys are dual U.S.
	Israeli citizens. I mean, I'm telling you, it's very elaborate. We've documented it
	in spades.
	Jim, dual U.S. Israeli citizen is a euphemism for traitor.
	I couldn't agree more, Giuseppe.
	Now, my very first political speech I gave in my life was on 15 April 2008 at a Ron Paul Freedom Rally on the grass outside the Capitol in the District of Criminals.
	And I gave a talk that would subsequently be published under the title 9-11 and the Neocon Agenda.
	Where I explained how all these members of the Project for a New American Century had been brought into the Bush-Cheney administration in the Department of Defense, that the overwhelming majority were dual U.S.-Israeli citizens, and that dual citizens should never be given decision-making or policy-shaping positions because you cannot know that their loyalty to the other state does not outweigh their loyalty to the United States.
	That, Giuseppe, was the very first political speech I gave in my life.
	That's excellent, Jim.
	And as they say, you can't serve two masters.
	Right, exactly.
	My final question on the 9-11 false flag is, how do you explain these two clips of video?
	The first clip of video is Uh from ground level all these people look up and see a plane and hear a plane you that That loud noise that they all look up and see it in what appears to be real time And then I've seen the second clip where it's slowed down And the plane is actually
	entering the building with no damage like it's all, you know, it's literally computer-generated animation or
	something.
	What did those people live seeing here?
	Well, that's great. That's a wonderful issue that I dealt with extensively, Giuseppe.
	You're talking about the Evan Fairbanks video, which is looking straight up the building, and you can see the plane disappear into the building with no collision effects, which means it's a violation of Newton's laws of physics.
	For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction.
	Just to illustrate the meaning of that principle applied to this example, A plane traveling over 400 miles an hour and hitting a stationary 500,000 ton building would have the same effects as if the plane were stationary, hit by a 500,000 ton building going over 400 miles an hour.
	In other words, it would have been demolished.
	It would have crumbled external to the building.
	Body seats, luggage, tail, wings fall into the ground, but that did not happen.
	Therefore, We're not talking about a real plane.
	Otherwise, we'd be witnessing a miracle, which is a violation of the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, physiology, and so forth.
	Laws of nature cannot be violated, cannot be changed, and require no enforcement.
	Unlike laws of society, Uh, which can be violated, can be changed and require enforcement.
	I frequently test a speed limit law, for example, 80 miles an hour to see whether that's a law of nature or doing a societal law.
	And I can assure you it's easy to violate, Eric, not a law of nature.
	So we'd have to find an alternative explanation for what happened here.
	There have been three different theories that have been posited.
	One by Rosalie Grebel, who is known as the Web Fairy, suggested it was by computer-generated images.
	A second by Alexander Baker, Ace Baker, was video compositing.
	There's a delay of about 17 seconds between the time a video is taken and the time it's actually broadcast that would allow to introduce other images or to edit something out.
	I mean, this is how they bleep You know, if there's foul language you want to edit out, they got a 17-second interval to snip it out or to, you know, go over it, override it with another sound.
	So all that is what's going on.
	The third is that was done using holography, that these were actually holograms.
	Now, regarding the first two theories of computer-generated images and video compositing, Had those been the method used, then the only time you would have seen the aircraft would have been in the broadcast footage.
	And yet we have hundreds of witnesses who claim they saw planes in real time approaching the South Tower.
	Now, they vary enormously in what they claim they saw.
	Some said it was a small plane, some a large plane, some a commercial plane, some a military plane.
	But the fact is, no one would have seen a plane in real time had it done by CGI or video compositing.
	That leads us to the third alternative, that it was a hologram.
	Now, there's a fellow in the UK by the name of Richard Hall, who published what he calls his Flight 175 3D Radar Study, where Richard Hall took the 52 videos we have of the flight 175 approaching the South Tower.
	He found about 27 of them were sufficiently precise that he could actually plot a location of the plane and the time that it was at that location to get a series of plots of striking the South Tower.
	Now he looked at the government's research and there was a similar plot provided, as I recall, by the NIST, which was claimed to be based on radar data.
	But when he looked at their radar data, it didn't look appropriate to justify the plot.
	What he discovered was, actually, there was separate radar data, which, when he studied, was for an aircraft that was flying 1,200 feet to the right of the points that he had plotted.
	And the radar data showed this plane 1,200 feet to the right, but it did not show the plane that he had plotted.
	And it appears to be explicable as follows.
	The plane was projecting the image of the other plane.
	It was flying 1,200 feet beyond where it was showing up as the holographic image.
	Pilots had long since concluded that Flight 175 was flying at 700 to 1,000 feet faster than was aerodynamically possible that the plane would have come apart structurally in the air at the speed that was shown in the video, had it been a real aircraft, so that to preserve the integrity of the holographic image it had to fly faster than was actually aerodynamically possible.
	The image just goes right into the building because it's only an image.
	And then they actually had the nose out phenomenon you may or may not be familiar with.
	I've seen it.
	But the image projecting actually showed the nose coming out the opposite side.
	During this historic event, like this is the most important event ever recorded by modern television, they fade to black because it was blowing the cover of how they were actually doing it.
	Now, given the nose of these aircraft are filled with electronics of the most sensitive, could not possibly have survived even an encounter with a small bird, much less a massive 500,000 ton building.
	He applied the same analysis to the North Tower and found that's how they did it too.
	I would subsequently be sent a page from an Australian military manual from an airborne holographic projector showing exactly what I'm describing here as the military capability.
	The fact is, Their research is 10 to 20 years ahead of what they allow the public to know, so no one actually believed it was possible.
	It even turns out now we've learned that although the argument was made you have to have a solid surface to project a holographic image, there's a new technology that allows you to use air molecules as a temporary screen for projecting the image, which appears to be what they did on 9-11.
	Yeah, I was just going to say I've seen a video in a high school gym where they displayed that air molecule hologram projection and they had a bunch of children or young adults sitting in the basketball stands and suddenly on the basketball court they projected Yeah, I've seen that video, of course.
	It is stunning.
	and making a big splash and there was no solid surface.
	It literally occurs in the air and the jaws drop on all those adolescents.
	It's really stunning.
	Yeah, I've seen that video, of course.
	It is stunning.
	I've received the complaint that that method of projector was different than, and could not explain
	what happened on 9-11, which I believe was a valid criticism,
	but it is an awesome, awesome exhibition of the powers of projection.
	Giuseppe, you're 100% correct.
	Scorpio, your thought?
	Yeah, Scorpio.
	Oh, I was just going to add in that, you know, I find it very interesting that on the two biggest sort of false flags of our lifetimes, we have 19 hijackers, and then now we have COVID-19.
	19 seems to be one of those repeating numbers that they use in some of their operations.
	19 and 33.
	33 turns out to be ubiquitous.
	You know, for 33-degree mason and all that, there does appear to be Masonic involvement of some kind here.
	I mean, it's just astonishing.
	The deeper you dig, the more astonishing you become.
	Let me just add to tie off our discussion of Flight 175.
	The simplest proof That this is what you're witnessing isn't a physical possibility, is that the plane disappears its entire length into the massive 500,000 ton steel and concrete building in the same number of frames.
	It passes its whole length through air, which is, of course, a physical absurdity, unless a massive 500,000 ton building provides no more resistance to the trajectory of an aircraft in flight than air.
	Yeah, and there's another clip if you watch the video of the plane flying into the building.
	Before it hits, there's a part where the wing on the left side actually disappears behind one of the buildings.
	Well, actually, that turns out to be an illusion, but there is a footage where the wing disappears, and that's because given it's a holographic projection, depending on the angle, you might or might not see the whole hologram.
	So your point, your conclusion is correct, but the evidence is mistaken.
	It turns out the relative position of the building and so forth, and the angle can account for what appears to be the building in the foreground.
	Right, right, yeah.
	The other compelling video that I've seen over the years is when they were testing airplane and airline collision possibilities and they ran high-speed impacts into concrete and it just splatters and sprays everything everywhere which it had those been real
	commercial jet airliners they would have pancaked on the outside of the
	building and some of the momentum clearly would have blasted into the building
	but not to the extent where it would blow out the other side most of the kinetic
	energy would spread like a firework on the outside of the the impact part of
	the building not the opposite side it's just so ludicrous and nobody think doesn't
	step most people Well, actually, more and more are.
	But when it happened, I knew instantly that was fake.
	Like you said, it defied the laws of the rudimentary physics training I've had in high school and college.
	And so I was like, how can that be?
	That's not how this works.
	I've seen pictures of, in the 90s, when my one corporate job was a CD-ROM proselytizer going around the country.
	I flew all the time.
	And one time, You know, I was getting on a plane and they had the next plane next to where I was going was being looked at because it had hit a goose and there was a huge dent in the nose.
	They had, you know, they were like getting ready to repair it and take it.
	It was amazing.
	Just a goose had done that.
	So what's a concrete and steel building going to do?
	Well, you're absolutely right, Giuseppe.
	And of course, you're talking about the Sandia test where they mounted of a fighter jet on a railroad trussle and propelled it by
	a rocket into a nuclear resistant concrete barrier. Now, they filled the plane with water and
	the plane is made out of synthetic and it blew into a million pieces, tiny, tiny pieces.
	They would later claim that's why you couldn't find the plane at the Pentagon.
	But the plane at the Pentagon wasn't made of synthetic material.
	It wasn't filled with water.
	It wasn't mounted on a rocket sled.
	And notice in particular, in relation to the Twin Towers, it didn't penetrate the concrete barrier.
	So those who allude to it are, you know, appealing to a faulty analogy.
	The plane's supposed to have disappeared, but look at what happened.
	You know, this is just a seriously flawed.
	You have a faulty analogy when there are more differences and similarities or when the conclusion is claimed to be certain or when You claim it was a necessary outcome, and none of those are satisfied here.
	So it's a very flawed argument, but it's made by certain members of the 9-11 community nevertheless.
	Yeah, ridiculous.
	The clothing in the suitcases would not vaporize.
	They would just spread, you know.
	Clothing doesn't vaporize on impact.
	What people have the greatest trouble appreciating is that They're not watching a collapse.
	When you see the Twin Towers destroyed, you think you're told you're watching it collapse, and this is the power of language to shape perceptions.
	You're looking at stimuli and your mind is seeking to subsume them by means of concepts.
	So you're given the concept of a collapse in advance and you tend to perceive what you're seeing as though it were a collapse.
	A collapse requires all the floors to come down at the same time.
	We had a collapse with what they call Building 7.
	Which occurred at 520 in the afternoon, a 47-story building, which came down in a classic control demolition.
	All the floors are coming down at the same time.
	And when it's over, you have a pile of residue, debris, mostly floors, equal to 12% approximately of the original five and a half floors.
	Now what's going on with the Twin Towers is they're blowing apart in every direction from the top down.
	They're being converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust.
	And when it's over, There would have been 13 1⁄2 floors at 12% of 110 stores per building, but there's nothing there.
	I had Fr.
	Frank Morales, who was a first responder from St.
	Mark's Episcopal Church, on my earlier radio shows on two different occasions, and both times he emphasized how the buildings were destroyed to or even below ground level.
	And we have photographic evidence to substantiate, including one in which you can see where the North Tower had stood, Building 1, and there's no pile of debris.
	And just across the street from it, you can see there's five and a half floors of debris from Building 7.
	So, they were done in completely different ways.
	The U.S.
	Geological Survey studied dust samples from 35 locations in lower Manhattan, and discovered a host of elements including barium, strontium, lithium, lanthanum, tritium, some of which only exist in radioactive form that would not have been present had this not been a nuclear event.
	And the way it appears to have been done is that there was a relatively modest nuclear device in the sub-basement of each that it blew upward.
	The design was a A cone within a cone, a tube within a tube.
	So you had the massive 47 cold columns in the center.
	That was the center.
	And then you had the external 230 enormous steel support columns that were connected by those trusses to the inner tube.
	The explosion went from the bottom up to destroy the inner tube and then from the top down the outer tube.
	So all we saw was the outer tube.
	And they had the Harley Street guy rush up.
	He figured out what had happened.
	Johnny on the spot.
	That, you know, the explosions caused such intense fire, it caused the steel to melt, and the buildings came down in a collapse, which was complete rubbish, physical absurdity.
	But there he was, imposing the first concept, and many Americans therefore saw what they took to be a collapse, even though the buildings weren't collapsing at all.
	In fact, I was at home Just drinking a cup of coffee, reading the paper when our daughter in Bradenton, Florida called to say, turn on the TV.
	And we saw the North Tower in smoke.
	The South Tower had nothing that happened as yet.
	When they were destroyed, I said to myself, this is impossible.
	But I can't imagine how I'll ever be in a position to do anything about it.
	And then years later, when I was in the midst of this thread, with about two dozen experts
	from around the world, it occurred to me that it might be beneficial to create a loose affiliation
	in the form of a society to bring experts from all around the world together.
	I founded Scholars for 9-11.
	I mean, if it was so intense, it would have never allowed for people to walk there and
	look out the gaping hole.
	Thank you.
	Well, there's a lot of fabricated evidence.
	There's one where you have a lot of firemen peering down an opening that's supposed to be molten metal.
	And they're claiming that this was from nanothermite, that it caused the metal to melt.
	Well, there was molten metal.
	It was really molten iron, because steel is a compound of iron and carbon.
	And the molten metal persisted until 15 December.
	So, it was there from, you know, 9-11, September 11th to 15 December.
	We have thermal maps of the area.
	What actually caused it was, of course, the nuclear event, which creates these vast temperatures.
	Now, they claim that these were first responders peering into an opening, and you can see the glow from the molten metal.
	But you would no more survive if you were peering into an opening like that, given the amount of heat that would be coming out than you would, you know, putting your face over a tea kettle spout when it starts to boil, you know, and steam.
	I mean, it's just absurd.
	The flesh would have melted off of their faces.
	What they did was to colorize a photograph.
	To make it look as though that metal were molten in that particular instance.
	It's one of a number.
	You also have what appeared to be molten metal coming from the 80th floor.
	What turns out that the Fuji Bank had a battery of a huge array of batteries lead batteries as backup emergency to preserve their
	account should the electricity fail.
	And lead has a relatively low melting point. So what you saw was lead coming out of the building,
	which they were claiming was molten metal to try to support their nanothermite hypothesis.
	It's really amazing what you have to go through here to sort out the difference
	between the authentic and the inauthentic evidence.
	Well, and isn't it interesting how this supposed witness that they had,
	that just knew the whole exactly what happened, you know, a couple minutes after it happened,
	they put a Harley-Davidson shirt on him and a ball cap to give him some street cred to
	make him look like he's just an average guy walking down the street.
	That's right, that's right.
	Yeah, he was obviously a plant.
	You're 100% correct.
	Yeah, well, we're only got about 10 minutes left in the show.
	Giuseppe, maybe you could tell the audience a little bit about the fundraiser we had last night and kind of go from there.
	Well, it was the beginning of an ongoing effort because of the Despicable globalist antics with a slap suit which the good professor will describe.
	We started our first fundraiser and we raised a nice amount of money.
	Not great, but better than I expected.
	And if anybody would like to donate Go to paypal.me slash Giuseppe, G-I-U-S-E-P-P-E, and then Victor David Charles or Vafangulo DC, Giuseppe VDC, and you can donate.
	And Dr. Fetzer, why don't you tell the people what you're looking at and what you need to pay?
	Oh, well, I'm just really grateful for the support.
	I mean, this was a classic slap suit, a strategic lawsuit against public participation for my having brought together a group of experts to blow apart Sandy Hook as a completely fabricated event.
	The school we established in the book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, had been closed by 2008, was loaded with asbestos and other biohazards.
	There were no students there.
	Damaged by hurricane.
	Indeed, it was a two-day FEMA exercise.
	We even have the manual for a mass casualty drill involving children, which I included as Appendix A. Now, the book went on sale.
	On 22 October 2015, and it already sold nearly 500 copies when it was banned on 19 November, it was just too good.
	So I immediately released the book for free as a PDF.
	That's what they didn't anticipate.
	Now, no doubt, at that rate, it would have been a bestseller, but it still would have sold in the, you know, tens of thousands.
	I have a friend who follows these matters who's Reported to me that the PDF had been downloaded over 10 million times.
	So there was an effort here, I think, to bring the lawsuit against me, a type of lawsuit that actually illegal in 27 states, in order to punish me, drag me into court, With a trumped up charge of defamation, and then to use the situation to try to get the PDF taken down because they could claim that since the part for which they were suing me were a few sentences, actually three sentences in the book, and one sentence that was in a memorandum for the president I'd done in collaboration with Robert David Steele,
	They would use that as a club to threaten others who were releasing the PDF for free.
	They were successful on the basis of a number of violations of my rights as a defendant.
	Because of the political nature of the case, I could not find an attorney to represent me here in Madison, which is a very left-wing city.
	I've learned more and more the longer I've been here.
	Where I moved after my retirement from the Duluth campus of the University of Minnesota back in 2006 after a 35-year career offering principally courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning.
	I responded to the complaint with an answer that outlined two lines of defense.
	First, I would show that we had a massive evidence that this was not a mass murder, but a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, creating the prima facie expectation that any death certificates from the event would have to be fabrication.
	And second, specific aspects of the death certificate itself that I took to substantiate
	that it was a fabrication.
	The judge early on excluded my first line of defense.
	Now this was a structural mistake he made in the course of the hearing, which he ought
	not to have made.
	That is a reason for reversing the entire matter.
	Now in addition, in the course of preparing for the summary judgment hearing, where both
	sides were entitled to present evidence to the court as to why they were entitled with
	summary judgment.
	Which is only under the statutes permissible if there are no disputed facts, when the authenticity of the death certificate was the key issue in the case and a disputed fact.
	I actually had found two forensic document experts to testify on my behalf, whose report claimed that not only was the death certificate I had published a fabrication, but three others that had surfaced during the course of the case were fabrications.
	And would you believe the judge actually had a discussion with a plaintiff's attorney before I had been allowed to testify during the summary judgment about what to do about it.
	And he explained to the attorney that if he excluded the evidence, it would be a subject for an appeal.
	So he would simply set it aside as someone else's opinion.
	That was another gross malfeasance by the court.
	And in the third place, in order to establish a defamation, you have to show that I was at fault, that there was some mistake in my reasoning.
	They withdrew the charge that I'd been malicious, which they could never have proven.
	I'm a professional scholar.
	Everything I argued was thoroughly documented, indeed, in the book.
	They withdrew the claim that I had been malicious, which they could never have proven, but forgot.
	They still had the obligation to show I was at fault.
	There's no liability without fault.
	They never established fault.
	Therefore, the finding that I was guilty was completely inappropriate.
	This is the core of the appeal that's been submitted.
	There was a separate trial for damages during which they empaneled 12 citizens of Madison, all under the age of 30, one man and 11 women, all of whom professed, if you can believe this, they never even heard of Alex Jones.
	They projected an image of Noah Posner, who is the allegedly deceased child about whom the death certificate was supposed to be an authentic representation on the wall of the courthouse while they were arguing the case.
	Well, yes, nice appeal to emotion.
	Great way to really sway the jury against you.
	And, Jim, we're going to be having other fundraisers, so I'm just happy to be part of that and do what me and Giuseppe can to help your legal fund.
	Final thoughts, sir?
	We're almost at the top of the hour.
	Well, I can't thank you enough for joining me with this and for you and Giuseppe doing the need-to-know with me and for the fundraiser.
	You guys are terrific.
	I'm very grateful to you both.
	Okay, great.
	Thanks a lot, Jim, Giuseppe, and everyone listening.
	We'll see you guys next week.
	Take care.
	Take care. Until then, bye bye.
	All right, Scorpio.
	Hold on here.
	There we go.
	Can you hear me?
	Yeah, I can hear you now.
	For some reason, during the Skype broadcast, I hear you twice with the delay, so I have to Mute you on StreamYard for me to hear so now that's cool.
	Yeah, how about the great Fetzer man?
	Oh Okay, I've noticed in one problem though.
	I noticed unlike on my my show my audio and video are not synced up Yeah, that's just the nature of the beast, man.
	I thought it might be because we're feeding the audio through Skype and not through StreamYard.
	Well that's probably it, but there's no other way to do it.
	I cannot hear that echo, you know, so I have to turn off... and I can't mute Skype because that's our live feed to the world, so it has to be the StreamYard mic.
	So yeah, it's gonna just create that.
	That's just something that... And I think there's a delay because of you being in Ecuador.
	It's not a delay for me here in the U.S.
	So I think that once you get back to the States, that will solve that.
	Oh.
	Hmm.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	That's weird though.
	I'll have to play around with that.
	That doesn't happen on the Zoom calls.
	It's only happening on the StreamYard.
	Well here's the deal.
	Here's what you have to understand that Zoom is just Zoom.
	We're using one software platform doing the rebroadcast to the Rising Tide Network.
	We're using Skype as the audio platform to do the Revolution Radio Show and then we're routing Skype through shared screen and audio into StreamYard.
	So there's The delay right there, because when you speak into the StreamYard part of it, it's immediate, but there's going to be a delay of routing the Skype through StreamYard.
	So unless you have a real powerful feed, because I've noticed it doesn't happen with Fetzer, it doesn't happen with you, I mean, it does happen with you and it doesn't happen with me, so I think it has something to do with Ecuador and the... I don't know, but that's what's going on.
	That's why I have to do that.
	I have to mute one.
	Well, is there any way you can turn off your speakers through Skype and just have the audio only through StreamYard?
	because I turn my speakers off on Skype.
	I'm going to be back in a minute.
	I'm not sure.
	I don't know.
	I'll have to look at that.
	I, I, uh, there's, uh, I, I don't know.
	I have to look into the, I don't know.
	I'll have to explore it, but for now, I don't know.
	It's something I'll have to look into that.
	So I'll answer it that way.
	Cause I don't see any audio controls here on Skype, but anyway, we can talk about that on our own time.
	Thank you.
	Go ahead.
	Oh yeah, no, no, I guess, uh, yeah, okay.
	Well, let's just, uh, we'll just finish up the, uh, the recording here and, uh, sign off.
	That was a good show.
	And then we can talk about that on, uh, yeah.
	Always interesting, man.
	That was really, I never heard him talk about his boyhood and, uh, that, you know, his mother died so young and all.
	Very, uh, Very interesting and just such a great guy and hopefully we can continue to raise money for him.
	So that's it for the Wisdom Circle and we'll be back next Wednesday and don't forget You want to tune in beginning Friday.
	We Scorpio and I interviewed David Icke and we're going to, uh, uh, uh, it was so long.
	We're going to edit into three parts and part one begins on the perfect triangle this Friday, 6 PM Eastern.
	And it is an amazing interview.
	So thank you everyone.
	And we'll be back, uh, Friday.
	Well, actually, if you like the need to know the FETS report, we'll be back later today.

▲