Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 2, 2024 - Jim Fetzer

01:48:07

Jim Fetzer, PhD Explains Why He Believes Holograms Were Used on 9/11 - Part 2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	My woke shirt.
	Good morning, everybody.
	Welcome to the Untold History Channel.
	It is Sunday, September the 1st.
	September the 1st.
	And we are, I'm joined today for part two with Dr. Jim Fetzer.
	And we're going to be, this time we're going to, what are we, what's more of the topic today?
	It's going to be more of the towers, yes?
	Yeah, yeah, primarily the destruction of the World Trade Center and how they faked planes in New York City.
	Gotcha, okay.
	Well, then let's hear, let's bring the, let's bring your, Let me say how much I enjoyed yesterday, Ron.
	I think you're a wonderful host for this subject.
	You know so much.
	And I feel there's just a tremendous benefit from having the kind of relaxed, in-detail discussion of these issues as we were having yesterday.
	So I've been very delighted to be doing this and looking forward to today.
	Well, I sincerely appreciate the compliment, Jim.
	That's coming from you, somebody who I've admired from afar for quite some time, at least a good 15 years.
	So it's coming from you that, to me, that carries a lot of weight.
	And I sincerely appreciate those kind words.
	You're doing a great job, a great job.
	I'm really very impressed.
	Thank you.
	Sincerely.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Here we go.
	All right.
	So here we go.
	Excellent, Ron.
	Well, there we were talking about the gelatin group, how the CIA brought in over 200 Mossad agents under the guise of being art students, and they were giving free reign to the North and the South Tower.
	They were doing performance art external to the buildings.
	It was quite extraordinary.
	And here you see boxes of fuse holders, which I believe were used to an arrangement to create cookie cutter cutouts in the sides of the buildings for reasons I'm going to explain.
	On 9/11, there was a huge amount going on.
	Their responsibilities extended far beyond what took place directly in the Twin Towers.
	Here you have the dancer art students The dancer refers to the dancing Israelis at Liberty State Park in New Jersey, who, observed by a resident celebrating, taking high fives, filming themselves with the Twin Towers being destroyed in the background, had a variety of attacks on 9-11 among them.
	Planting jammers on buildings on Exhibit 1 to block Port Authority dispatchers and first responder radios.
	Plant explosives on the New Jersey side of the George Washington Bridge, where the cables are anchored that collapse a bridge.
	Explode a truck in the Lincoln Tunnel.
	Explode a truck in the Holland Tunnel.
	Parked truck with demolition devices in specific parking areas of the Twin Towers.
	In other words, Ron, we're talking about an attempt to isolate Manhattan as an island by destroying all the modes of connection.
	Here you had, of course, Urban Moving Systems even had paintings on the side of their van.
	Is that the vehicle?
	Is that the actual vehicle that was stopped by the police?
	This may be a reconstruction, Ron.
	It's identified here as having been stopped on King Street in New York City.
	But these guys were These guys, they had explosive residue, they had passports, they had money, they had box cutters.
	And when the cop approached, the driver said, we are not the problem.
	Our problem is your problem, the problem is the Palestinians.
	Which of course was ludicrous, but indicative of the fact that we're talking about an Israeli hawk.
	So, you know, I mean, really, truly embarrassing.
	Meanwhile, five of these guys went back to Israel after they'd been held for, I think it was 141 days.
	Michael Chertoff, assistant director of the, I think at the time, the FBI, because Homeland Security hadn't yet to be created by the Patriot Act in the wake of 9-11.
	It may have only been 44.
	Release them, and they went back to Israel.
	Three of them went on Israeli TV and explained how their role there was to document the destruction of the Twin Towers, which of course implied more knowledge.
	But what they said was, for you guys that are watching, are you going to play the video?
	Is that just a screen or is there a video?
	Oh no, yeah, that was just a shot.
	That was just a single shot.
	You can find their interviews online.
	I will try to find that while you're doing this because I'd like to show people You know, what the Israeli students said on video is they said our purpose was to document the event.
	Now, what event were they documenting?
	Were they documenting 9-11?
	If they're documenting, and obviously I'm asking a rhetorical question because you and I know, but the fact of the matter is that if they're there to document the event, that means they have foreknowledge of it.
	It was 44 days, 441 was how long Bush and Cheney put off creating the 9-11 Commission, which was absurd.
	I mean, within a week of Pearl Harbor, FDR had a commission within a short time after JFK had a Warren commission.
	They were really meant to cover up for knowledge or conspiracy.
	But I mean, the point is, it ought to have been done promptly.
	And Bush and Cheney put it off because they were complicit in the event.
	So they did not want to have an investigation.
	I 100% agree.
	And so let me just wrapping up that thing.
	I'm not actually gonna look for that video I'm you guys what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna upload the the next documentary that I upload will probably be Missing links and if you've never seen missing links that will that basically shows all of the Israeli ties to 9-11 so if for it for those of you who have questions about Israel and whatnot and
	When I put that up, that will answer any of your questions, and I'm sure Dr. Fetzer can attest to missing.
	You're absolutely correct.
	That's a really, really good idea.
	So, of course, again, a dual U.S.
	Israeli citizen.
	I mean.
	This is a real bad guy.
	He'd become the second secretary of Homeland Security after Tom Ridge, the governor of Pennsylvania at the time, who looked the part.
	This guy looks like it could be a Takao death guard, you know?
	You know what Chertoff is?
	You know what Chertoff is in Hebrew?
	Tell me.
	Devil.
	Devil.
	Well, take a look at the guy.
	He's one of my least favorite Not only that, but he owned stock in the company that was doing all of the body scanners for the airports.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And after Las Vegas, they thought they were going to be installed at all the resorts and casinos, all the hotels.
	Didn't happen that way, thank goodness, but it was not for lack of trying.
	Correct.
	Now we turn to what happened in New York.
	Here you have One of innumerable photographs and lots of videos of what appears to be Flight 175 approaching the building now.
	It's extremely interesting, Ron, that in fact the speed of the plane exceeded that of a 767.
	Remember now, at Shanksville and the Pentagon, these were 757s.
	In New York, it was two 767s.
	But the fact of the matter is, You had the Marine Corps, the British, a whole lot of analysis of the speed of the plane in flight, and it was too fast.
	It appears what happened was they took the cruising speed of a 767 at 35,000 feet, Well, the air is only one-third as dense as it is the 700 and 1000, and they assumed it could fly as fast at that lower altitude.
	But as, you know, John Lear, for example, our nation's most distinguished pilot, gave an affidavit about how the plane would have come apart, because at that speed, the turbines can't suck the thicker air fast enough, and they start functioning as brakes.
	So we have, for example, now, Ace Baker.
	Well, this actually is from 9-11 Intercepted.
	This is pilots for 9-11 Truth.
	You can't do better than that.
	Explaining in their documentary that a plane would have physically come apart in the air.
	Had this been real, something is terribly, terribly wrong.
	Something is terribly wrong.
	And the problem is figuring out exactly what it was.
	Now, This is fast!
	Go ahead, go ahead.
	And the primary reason for that is that you have to understand the thickness of the air at sea level.
	I'm sure many of you have gone from wherever you are to, you know, going down to the ocean or down to a, you know, to the lake or whatever.
	And the air is always thicker when you get down to the waterfront, right?
	Because You've got a lot more humidity in the air.
	So the more humidity in the air, the more particulates you have in the air, the thicker it's going to be.
	If you were trying to, how many people have tried to run in a swimming pool?
	You can't run in a swimming pool because there's so much resistance.
	And that's essentially the same thing.
	The water in the air, the particulate water in the air is going to reduce the speed that you can go.
	And if the aircraft were doing the exact speed that they claim that they were doing, like 500 knots, It would literally rip the wings off.
	They would not be able to go forward.
	And to your point as well, that the engines would basically behave as brakes as opposed to thrusters.
	Yeah, you can actually get John Lear's affidavit.
	I founded Scholars for 9-11 Truth back in December 2005, and we have a forum, 911scholars.ning, N-I-N-G dot com.
	scholars.ning, N-I-N-G.com, 911scholars.ning, N-I-N-G.com.
	And you can go there and you can do searches.
	You can get John Lear's affidavit.
	You get a huge amount of wonderful stuff.
	There are hundreds of videos and reports there, still available.
	911scholars.ning.org.
	The Lear affidavit, absolutely sensational.
	And here you have one of many, many images of what reports to be a 767 entering the South Tower now.
	It just melts into the building, which is caused to be referred to as a ghost plane, or the building, you know, butter plane, as though we had a 110-story stick of butter there.
	Interestingly, Ron, it's intersecting.
	With eight different floors.
	Remember, each of those floors has a steel truss with an acre of concrete intersecting with eight.
	And of course, connected in a formidable support columns externally, which were so massive, no real plane could have entered.
	But I know we're going to be discussing this in some detail.
	Among the most important proofs right here.
	You see, the plane disappears its entire length in the building in the same time it passes its entire length through air, which is a physical impossibility unless a massive 500,000 ton concrete and steel building provides no more resistance to the trajectory of an aircraft in flight than air.
	Ron, your thoughts?
	Well, so I always hearken back to The event back in 1944, I believe, when a B-25 crashed into the Empire State Building.
	And that B-25 was probably flying half the speed, and it was able to penetrate concrete and steel.
	It made a big hole in the Empire State Building.
	Looking at it from a physics perspective, I think the vast majority of people, and again, this is just my opinion, I think the vast majority of people look at a plane and think, oh, well, it's aluminum, and so it's very, very soft, and if it hit a building, it's going to crunch up against the steel.
	But what they what I believe people fail to take into consideration is the fact that the plane had the plane was loaded with fuel.
	So there was a lot of mass in the wings besides the aluminum that was very likely pressurized but not necessarily pressurized.
	But it certainly gave it it added to the mass plus the the fuselage which would have been Pressurized, which would have increased the rigidity of the aluminum prior to it coming into contact with the building.
	And lastly, I think it's kind of like the difference between being hit with an empty aluminum can or a full aluminum can.
	If somebody threw a can of Coke at you and it was empty and it just hit you and it would bounce off, there's no mass to it.
	But if it's full and it's pressurized and they throw it at you, you could go to the hospital if it was thrown hard enough.
	I don't know what happened here.
	I'm open to the idea that these were holograms and that this was done the way that you're claiming.
	But I have questions about that too.
	I'm not going to take a strong position on either one.
	Again, I'm not going to plant my flag and defend it.
	I just have questions.
	Well, we've done a frame-by-frame count, you know, and it's true of both Hezzer and Connie.
	They can look it up.
	Actually, these are frames from Hezzer and Connie.
	And from the other film taken from the side, maybe it was a Hezirkani from the side and this is Evan Fairbanks looking on, but the fact is you got the same phenomenon of the brain completely disappearing its whole length with no diminution in velocity now.
	Even on your theory, if it were a real plane, there would have to be a reduction in velocity, but there is not.
	And if you want a piece of confirming, look at that lower left, the tiny, at the bottom, you've got the nose-out phenomenon.
	Now, the nose of a commercial aircraft is the most fragile part.
	It's loaded with electronics.
	No possible way it could encounter a massive 500,000-ton steel and concrete building and survive, but we got the nose-out phenomenon, which you may or may not recall, led to the film going fade to black.
	Here they are filming the most significant event to ever occur in American history, with the possible exception of the assassination of JFK.
	And they fade to black?
	That's because it was a hand-eye coordination problem, and they got a nose-out giving away that actually it will turn out it was a hologram.
	And they didn't want the public to be able to put the pieces together.
	So I guarantee from the point of view of physics, we're watching an impossible phenomenon.
	Let me say, regarding the laws of physics, they cannot be violated and they cannot be changed.
	So anytime you're witnessing a violation of laws of physics, or of chemistry, or of biology, for that matter, you're witnessing something that cannot be authentic.
	And indeed, this is fabricated evidence.
	What should have happened, as you are suggesting, here's Ace Baker, In his 9-11 sci-opera, showing the plane actually would have crumbled external to the building.
	Body, seat, sluggage, wings, tail, fallen to the ground.
	Yeah, the engines, which are virtually indestructible, could have passed through the building.
	We do find one at Church and Murray, I'm going to address, that turns out to have been planted.
	And believe me, once you find it fabricated, the whole thing is fabricated.
	If you find a part of an event like this that you can clearly establish to be fake, you know something's wrong with the whole event now.
	Ron, I don't want to cut you off from your rebuttals, but let me make two more points and then we'll come back to you.
	Here we did have the spectacular fireballs, which by my hypothesis was from pre-positioned explosives.
	There may have been some napalm in there.
	The gelatin group may have had a role here in setting this up.
	I believe, in fact, that they did.
	And then you have the cookie cutters going on beneath the smoking mirror, just as we had with Flight 11, ostensibly, in the North Tower.
	But take a look at this.
	This is really, I think, very convincing.
	If you look beneath the facade of the North and South Tower on the sides which were hit or allegedly hit by buildings, you'd have to have debris from the aircraft on the ground, as I say.
	But there are no bodies, there are no seats, there is no luggage, there are no wings, there are no tail beneath the facade.
	That means it did not happen.
	Because that would have been an attack that was inevitable, could not have been circumvented had real planes actually hit these buildings.
	And now look, here at Church and Murray.
	My dear friend Jack White, who also prepared that earlier slide, going back here, he prepared the one about the impossible entry, prepared this one too about the engine found at Church and Murray.
	Now it was under a steel scaffolding, under a canopy, just sitting on the sidewalk.
	Now, let me observe how preposterous this is from the point of view of physics.
	Anything that massive coming out of that high an altitude at that velocity would have churned up the sidewalk.
	It would have been a mess.
	Instead, what we have is the alternative explanation.
	And recall, I've been emphasizing from the beginning you want to compare alternative hypotheses Yeah, of a van.
	Jack found Fox footage showing a van there with individuals wearing FBI vests unloading something heavy.
	And you'll see in the foreground there, there's even a dolly that appears they used to put it together.
	So let's contemplate the two hypotheses.
	What is the probability of this engine simply sitting on the sidewalk under a steel scaffolding canopy that are undamaged if it had actually come from the light 175 hitting the South Tower?
	Versus the probability that you have this engine sitting on the sidewalk under the steel scaffolding canopy which are undamaged if it had been planted?
	And clearly the probability of it had been real is approximately zero.
	The probability of it was planted is very high.
	So then we have the preferable likelihood of it having been planted, having a higher degree of evidential support than the idea that it was real and wrong.
	Experts have studied this engine.
	and it was a type that was not even in use in 767s in 2001.
	So they made a mistake.
	And it's those kinds of mistakes that enable us to sort out what really happened.
	Have you thoughts about this, Church and Murray?
	You know, Jack Label is pick up or delivery.
	Pick up or delivery.
	I wasn't delivering.
	He's a wonderful guy.
	I'm sorry he's no longer amongst the living.
	To go forward, just to contemplate what we're talking about.
	If a bird doesn't vaporize in the process of slicing a winglet, a plane shouldn't vaporize.
	This is one of the theories offered, right?
	They go back to that Cynthia Tess.
	We had this synthetic fighter, full water, on a jet-propelled ski, running into a nuclear reinforced barrier.
	And it just blows apart in every direction.
	But it doesn't go through the barrier.
	But it could be said to have vaporized during the process of slicing stool and concrete.
	Where's the evidence that a plane created these holes?
	And of course, the plane didn't create the holes.
	They get a little segment of these massive external support columns.
	They were thick.
	I don't believe a plane could have penetrated those steel, some external support barriers all by themselves.
	And then we have one more here about Newton's third law, which, of course, equal and opposite reaction, which roughly in this case comes to the following.
	Just as we analyzed that plane at the Pentagon and observed that it's traveling over 400 miles an hour hitting these stationary steel lampposts, that that would have the same effect as if the plane were stationary, hit by those lampposts that are traveling over 400 miles an hour.
	The effect of this plane hitting this massive 500,000-ton steel and concrete building would be the same as if the plane was stationary, hit by a massive 500,000-ton steel and concrete building going 400 miles an hour.
	And there, by the way, we get the Sandia.
	I was talking about the Sandia.
	Notice there, Ron, we have that Sandia experiment.
	And remember, it's made of some kind of synthetic material, the fiber.
	You mentioned I was actually going to use the idea of an empty beer can versus a full beer can.
	But just think about this analogy.
	If you throw an empty or a full beer can at a brick wall, is it going to go through the brick wall no matter how hard you throw it?
	The answer is no, it is not going to go through the brick wall.
	It's not like if it was going at 500 miles an hour, it might.
	If it was going in, maybe.
	I don't know.
	I've never conducted that experiment, so there's no way for me to know.
	Most of these discussions about a plane, they talk about a velocity of a plane, and they ignore the resistance provided by the building.
	We're going to see this again.
	When we turn to the Twin Towers, like for every unit of downward force, there were 199 units of upward force.
	Well, it's roughly equivalent to what we have here.
	There was massive resistance.
	No real plane could actually have entered the building, but we'll go further.
	And I most certainly respect
	your your uh entitlement to an alternative position so there's a lot we we're not we're just going to look at some of the images going on here of what was let me pause you for just yeah i want to address something in the audience just in case you were wondering what jim and i are discussing today is whether or not aircraft were used we are not
	Neither of us are claiming that aircraft caused the towers to collapse.
	The towers collapsed due to deliberate planted explosives and controlled demolition.
	That is what caused these buildings to collapse.
	We are simply going into the minutiae of whether or not aircraft were used.
	The aircraft that were used, that was the That was sort of like, that's the firework show to make it look like, you know, we're actually in a war.
	Whereas the actual behind the scenes, all that stuff was done on the internal part.
	So this is so interesting, Ron, what you think is a day after Donald Trump was interviewed by a local New York network.
	And he was explaining how the builders who constructed the World Trade Center were working for him now.
	And that was impossible that planes could have caused the destruction of the Twin Towers.
	That was impossible.
	Something else had to be involved.
	He actually used the word bombs.
	And in terms of a massive source of energy, he's absolutely right.
	It had to be something else.
	He called it bombs.
	We got buried theories of the ghost plane, whether it was CGI, whether it could have been a hologram.
	And I'm going to go ahead and explain why I think the only hypothesis that can explain the evidence is the hologram hypothesis.
	We have a guy from the UK, Richard D. Hall is his name.
	He did what he calls a Flight 175 3D radar study.
	You can find it online.
	Richard Hall did a study of all the, you know, There's some like, oh, I don't know, 56 different videos showing Flight 175 approaching the South Tower.
	Now, he found about 27 of those were sufficiently precise that you could plot a location in a time for the plane as it approached the South Tower.
	Now, he compared that with what the National Transportation Safety Board, or actually NIST, National Institute of Science and Technology, Standards and Technology, were reporting, and he said they had a similar graph that they claimed was based upon radar data.
	Well, he looked at what they had, and he said it didn't look right to him.
	But he did further research, and he found there was radar data.
	But the radar data showed a plane that was like 1,200 feet to the right of the plots he'd made.
	And that raises a question in his mind, what in the world could be going on here?
	But if you adopt his hypothesis, and actually this was a hologram being projected by another plane to the side, 1,200 feet to the side, because it was a real plane, it would show up on radar because a projection of 175 wasn't a real thing, it didn't bounce the radar waves, the radio waves didn't bounce off it, create a radar pattern.
	Then you can get an explanation for the impossible speed Because this was a much smaller plane that was projecting the image and it was flying faster than a 767 could fly at that altitude for the impossible physics.
	Because you got the entry that no real plane could have made while leaving none of the effects we would expect, like the The debris beneath the facade and account for the radar data of being 1,200 feet to the side.
	So here you get an image of a projection of how it was done by a plane and get this.
	I was sent a page from an Australian military manual for this holographic projector.
	Let me read a brief description.
	The holographic projector displays a three-dimensional visual image in a desired location removed from the display generator.
	The projector can be used for psychological operations, strategic perception management.
	It's also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary.
	Well, I guarantee you the American people are an unsophisticated adversary.
	So what we got going in here is deceiving the American people.
	And get this, we also have, it turns out that, and this is in many ways to seal the deal, Pilots for 9-11 have not only ascertained, as I've already reported, that Flight 93 was over Champaign-Urbana after it officially crashed in Shanksville.
	They discovered that Flight 175 was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, after it had officially crashed into the South Tower.
	And get this, Ron, I obtained FAA registration records for the two planes involved in those flights.
	Now remember, The same physical aircraft could be used one day, Tampa to Chicago, the next day New York to San Francisco.
	But the actual physical aircraft used for 93 and 175 were not even formally taken out of service, formally deregistered until 28 September 2005.
	Which since, as we've already explained, 11 and 77 weren't even in the air that day.
	How can planes that weren't even in the air have crashed on 9-11?
	And now we have for 93 and 175, and how can planes that crashed on 9-11 have still been in the air four years later?
	So we appear to have been subjected to an enormous scam.
	This required all kinds of sophistication.
	Hollywood was involved, I have no doubt, Ron.
	Oh yeah, absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	Because here's the bottom line.
	If no planes crashed, and no passenger died, and no Islamic hijackers caused them to crash, and if no Islamic hijackers caused them to crash, then there's no warrant or any justification for the War on Terror, that project that will, you know, take out the governments of seven countries in the next five years.
	And I'm telling you, we fell into a trap.
	We were just Israel's saps and suckers.
	We were duped.
	Unbelievable, unbelievable, Ron.
	So, as I mentioned before, I presented, I had, it took two members of scholars, Morgan Reynolds, who'd been an assistant secretary of the treasury or of labor under a Bush administration, and Judy Wood, who's the, of course, advocate of dues,
	A year and a half of beating up on me for not looking closer at the planes in New York, and it was when I started looking at the planes in New York and discovered what I've been explaining here with you today that I realized, my God, they were right!
	Now, people talk about no planes theory, and that sounds preposterous on its face, because after all, we all saw the planes, right?
	We saw them on television, and we tend to believe anything we see on television.
	What no planes theory means is a conjunction of four different theses.
	Number one, Flight 11 did not hit the North Tower.
	Number two, flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon.
	Number three, flight 93 did not crash in Sanksville.
	Number four, flight 175 didn't hit the South Tower.
	And I submit, I've proven all four of those during our conversation yesterday and today, and that therefore, as counterintuitive as it may initially appear, no plane's theory appears to be exactly right.
	Stunning, stunning, really.
	I want to play something, I want to play something real quick because I think this is very, this is interesting to me.
	Let me here, let me make the screen so it's a little bit more aesthetically pleasing to the eye.
	Did you ever watch the movie Swordfish?
	Yeah!
	Love it!
	Love it!
	So, let me... I'm gonna play a little clip of that.
	Alright.
	I'm gonna make it bigger.
	- Wonderful, wonderful film. - That, all right.
	I'm gonna make it bigger.
	Okay, so.
	Entire screen.
	Come on.
	To share audio.
	Okay.
	So it's wanting me to do this.
	I have to do it in a different format.
	Give me a second here.
	I want to do this.
	I want to do it.
	I appreciate all your add ons, all your comments, all your questions, all your critique.
	It's wonderful.
	This, this is, um, I think this is extremely apropos from the standpoint of, um, What they call misdirection here, right?
	Yes.
	All right.
	So this is a clip from how the, it's from the movie Swordfish and it says misdirection, how the government fools you.
	So let me know if you guys can hear this.
	Yeah.
	Well, he wasn't like, he wasn't like his day.
	He was an artist.
	So, what the eyes see and the ears hear, the mind believes.
	Do you know how he did that?
	Mr. Rich.
	What the eyes see and the ears hear, the mind believes.
	So, what the eyes see and the ears hear, the mind believes.
	Now, I'm going to tell a little personal story here because I think it's relevant.
	I remember watching the documentary about the construction of the World Trade Center that happened on the History Channel sometime in the early 90s, right?
	Right.
	And it was talked about how there was multiple that they intentionally built the towers with the idea of being able to withstand a strike from a 707, which was the which was the largest.
	which was the largest page.
	Yes.
	- There was some barrier at the time. - Right.
	And they said that they believed that the strength of the structure was so strong that it could withstand multiple 707s hitting it.
	And it still would be standing.
	Now, this is in my head, right?
	So, on the morning of 9-11, I think it was about 9 o'clock in the morning, 8.30, 9 o'clock in the morning Pacific Time, when I got a phone call, get up and look at the TV!
	And by this time, of course, everything had already happened.
	And I remember my mother telling me, it was my mother that called me, and she said, the towers have collapsed.
	The planes hit the towers and the towers have collapsed.
	And I was in a, I was, you know, I have very good recollection.
	And I said, no, that's nice.
	I'm half asleep.
	And I'm like, that's not possible.
	That's just not possible.
	Because, you know, a plane isn't going to bring a building down.
	So this is me, my first initial reaction.
	Then I get up, put some clothes on, go out, turn on TV, and I see the planes hit the building and I see the towers come down.
	And if I can paraphrase and make fun of a guy like the name of Sean Hannity, oh, we saw the planes hit the buildings and we saw the towers come down.
	Okay, so that was me being a victim of the misdirection.
	What my eyes saw and my ears heard, my mind believed.
	And it wasn't until I watched the documentary from von Kleist that I realized, you know what?
	I was duped.
	Let me tell you a parallel story.
	I'm just lying in bed, drinking a cup of coffee, reading the paper, and we get a phone call from our daughter in Bradenton, Florida, saying, turn on the TV.
	We turn on the TV.
	There's a North Tower smoking.
	I think the alleged hit on the South End took place.
	And when the buildings were destroyed, I said to myself, this is clear as a bell, this isn't physically possible.
	But when would I ever be in a position to do anything about it?
	And then it winds up in late 2005, I'm in this conference, you know, a discussion thread with two dozen experts from around the world, and it occurs to me there might be a benefit from creating a society to bring together a loose affiliation of scholars and experts.
	To discuss all these issues, and I founded Scholars for 9-11 Truth, I invited Steve Jones to be my co-chair.
	And by the end of 2006, we had hundreds of experts around the world in four different categories.
	I mean, it was a smash.
	I initially invited David Ray Griffin.
	To be my co-chair, but he declined the honor.
	He later acknowledged to me that, at the time, he hadn't believed a society would make a difference, but he was wrong.
	Now, just to return to Trump, because this is so telling, Donald Trump was the first personality in the world to contest the official version of the attacks on 9-11 on television that very day.
	I thought it was the day after, but it was probably that very day.
	After having noted the engineers that built the Twin Towers were now working for him, he declared on New York Channel 9 that it was impossible that Boeing's going to burst through the steel structures of the towers.
	He continues stating, it was also impossible Boeing's going to cause the towers to collapse.
	He concluded by affirming there had to be other factors of which we are as yet unaware, but he actually used the word bombs.
	Which I praise him to the sky.
	I mean, this guy was very courageous and outspoken, Ron.
	It was just wonderful.
	It was one of the reasons I would eventually have so much faith in him becoming president.
	I'm right there with you.
	You know, I don't want, this is not a video about Trump, but you know, just because we have the opportunity, because you've presented the opportunity to kind of inject him into this.
	I think so many people are just, they get sucked into the narrative that the media spends and that all the other people spend.
	Yeah.
	that they refuse to even analyze it critically.
	Nobody thinks about the things that Trump says or does critically.
	They just look at it.
	They look at it on the surface, and they are easily influenced by their peers who, because the media says he's divisive, then they just assume that he's divisive.
	You know what?
	First of all, and I'll end with this, but first of all, he never attacks anybody unless they attack him first.
	Right.
	Right, right.
	I couldn't agree more.
	All these mean tweets and everything.
	Yeah, whatever.
	If you go back and you look, he is defending himself.
	This is not the greatest quality in a man, but he is extraordinarily and absolutely extremely vindictive.
	I think a lot of his opponents are worried about that, Ron, and that's why they're so upset about the prospect.
	You know what?
	I hadn't thought about that, but you know what?
	You're probably right.
	I hadn't given that credence.
	I'm glad I actually said what I said, because you just kind of thought... Frankly, to put it most candidly, they are scared shitless.
	Yes.
	A thousand percent.
	Agreed.
	Be tactical about it.
	Now listen, even most students at 9-11 have overlooked the fact that there was an explosion in the sub-basements of the Twin Towers, coincident with the planes hitting the buildings.
	Now, this was supposed to be explained by jet fuel falling through the buildings.
	But I have looked into this to some degree.
	It did damage to the lobbies, these explosions.
	And guess what?
	They were much earlier.
	You can see them here, the earlier explosion, Minnie versus the big, massive, when the buildings were destroyed.
	Now, Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong, who are two members of Scholars, did a study and they found that the official report by the 9-11 Commission in terms of when the planes hit and the seismic record I'm just reporting had discrepancies of 14 seconds and 17 seconds.
	In other words, that the actual seismic activity had occurred 14 seconds earlier in the case of the North Tower, and 17 seconds earlier in the case of the South.
	Now, what was going on here, and it was kind of elaborate, You know, the towers were like three different 30-story buildings stacked on top of another with then connecting units installed.
	So there were only one or two elevators that actually went from the top to the bottom where they could claim this jet fuel had fallen through those elevator shafts to cause these explosions in the sub-basement now.
	William Rodriguez, who was the senior custodian of the North Tower, came here to Madison, and he was hosted by me and Kevin Barrett, and we took him to dinner afterwards, and he was telling us, watching the water fill up the sub-basement.
	Well, that was astonishing to me.
	That explained what in the world was going on here, because, you see, they had an event in the North Tower 1997, maybe, where they had an intense fire, I mean earlier, and the temperature actually got up to 3,000 or more degrees, and it didn't cause any of the steel to weaken or melt, but they used that as an occasion to install a sprinkler system.
	Throughout the Twin Towers.
	Now, what was going on here was they were draining the sprinkler system so it couldn't put out a very modest fires that were left over as a residual from the prepared, you know, may have been napalm and kerosene, whatever.
	Remember, jet fuel is just kerosene.
	Kerosene, yes.
	And even in the controlled environment, kerosene can, a kerosene-based A fuel cannot burn at a hot enough temperature to melt steel.
	Right, Ron, you're 100% correct.
	So, what we're talking about is how they were able to drain the swingler system so that they have a fire that would endure long enough for them to claim a fire had weakened the structure sufficiently to bring it down.
	Now, here's a very important point.
	The Twin Towers were constructed in what was Known as a bath tub, it was a boat that gave Hudson River water out.
	In other words, their sub-basement extended below sea level, below river water level.
	So what they had to do was to construct a mode of demolition that would leave the bathtub intact, because otherwise you would have had a flooding of lower Manhattan.
	We're talking about the most valuable real estate in the world.
	They wanted to circumvent that catastrophe.
	And here you can see, this is after the, during the renovation or the, you know, the cleanup, you see what was left of the bathtub.
	It remained intact, and it did not collapse.
	We didn't have the flooding.
	There was water, got into the pathway and tunnels and so forth, connecting New Jersey with New York.
	But they didn't have the calamity that would have occurred had this been done in a different fashion.
	So they're very ingenious.
	And the question becomes, how did they do it?
	Well, here's one image of the North Tower coming down.
	I mean, does that look like a collapse?
	You know, I mean, in fact, the buildings are blowing apart in every direction from the top down, Ron.
	All the floors are remaining stationary, waiting their turn in the memorable Fraser Morgan rainbows to be blown to Kingdom Come.
	And when it's over, There's nothing there.
	I had Father Frank Morales from St.
	Mark's Episcopal Church.
	He was a first responder on my radio shows twice.
	Both times he emphasized how the buildings were destroyed to or even below ground level.
	Well, contrast that with Building 7, which came down in a classic controlled demolition.
	You saw all the floors coming down at the same time, and there was a pile of debris equal to 12% of the height of the original 47 floors, or five and a half floors, which is what we have based on experience from controlled demolitions of coliseums, resorts, hotels, just as Dan Rather was observing on 9-11.
	Here's what we had with the design and the claim that was being made by the government, which turns out to be physically impossible.
	They claim that it weakened the steel, that the upper floors collapsed, and they caused the lower floors to collapse in a sequence like a pile driver.
	But look, here's, I mention, I mention how Chuck Boldman is this High school, retired high school math, physics, and chemistry teacher did a construction and analysis of physics.
	And for every unit of downward pressure, there were 199 units of upward.
	I mean, it was just ridiculous.
	There's no possible way it could have happened that way.
	In this case, I think he's saying 118 units upward, reached downward.
	The fact is, it was impossible for those buildings to collapse.
	And yet, what do we get?
	I mean, look at this.
	Judy calls this a bubbler.
	Does anybody think that's a collapse?
	And notice Building 7 is still standing there in the foreground, huh?
	This is one of the most devastating photographs you have from 9-11.
	This was a collapse.
	It's preposterous!
	Yes, because what it shows there and what you are showing there to the naked eye, people just, oh, well, it's just, it's just coming down.
	No, what you are seeing there is lateral ejection and you do not get lateral ejection without explosives.
	Period.
	That's absolutely right.
	And that's, by the way, turns out to be an argument against the use of directed energy weapons, because they wouldn't bring that about now.
	No.
	Not only that, but you have... I don't think that directed energy weapons were used on 9-11, especially on the towers, because in order for the towers to collapse,
	you needed to have a controlled demolition where it was timed and the timing had to be impeccable because if, if any, if any timing sequence was off by even maybe even a, and I mean this sincerely, even a 10th of a second, you're going to, it's, it's going to cause a ripple effect where you're not going to get it's going to cause a ripple effect where you're not going to get a complete implosion straight down without, uh, it has to be, everything has to Yeah.
	I, I tend to use that phrase controlled demolition for a classic controlled demolition, like building seven and call this a demolition under control because it wasn't classic.
	But take a look at this gif here.
	Now, these are the final spires of 47 core columns of the North Tower being turned to dust before our very eyes.
	I mean, this is just staggering.
	And Judy wants to use this.
	Yeah.
	Judy wants to use this.
	I've actually never seen this.
	Oh, wonderful.
	Wonderful, Ron.
	I'm thrilled to have something of this importance that you haven't seen before.
	That's amazing that I've never seen that before.
	How fabulous.
	I'll leave it up again.
	Let's watch another repetition.
	Because that's the inner column.
	Yep.
	That's a core column.
	That's a remnant of the core column.
	Yeah.
	This is like the last part of the North Tower to go down.
	And they just, it was like they just, when they came down, it was like they just, it was like they vaporized.
	Yeah.
	Judy calls it dustified.
	But this is an effect of a nuclear device disintegrating, bringing about molecular dissociation.
	Or, and see, now that right there, I could, I agree with you that there was a micro nuke used at the site, but that even to me could be plausible that there was some sort of like a directed energy weapon used for maybe that particular thing, but it would be very, it would be a very small usage, a very, I don't think it would be, it wouldn't be the entire
	Yeah, let me agree to the extent, Ron, yeah.
	A primary mechanism for demolition, as I'm going to explain, was mini-nukes in the sub-basement.
	These were very sophisticated devices.
	Blowing the towers apart with regard to the inner tube from the bottom up and then having the residual effect of blowing apart the outer tube from the top down.
	But I'm willing to concede that there may have been a use of directed energy weapons as an auxiliary, just as you are suggesting.
	So I'm open to that.
	I am open to that.
	Let it be known.
	Meanwhile, what did we have?
	Massive dustification.
	In other words, what you had were these 500,000-ton steel and concrete buildings converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust.
	Now, it turned out that the U.S.
	Geological Survey did a study of 35 samples of the dust from lower Manhattan and found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
	Barium, strontium, lanthanum, tritium, some of which only exist in radioactive forms.
	I shall return to that.
	Meanwhile, here we have, and this is the South Tower.
	Most people forgot that the top section of the South Tower started to tilt over.
	This is right after the fire chief said, we got a couple of modest fires here.
	I think a couple of lines will be able to put it out.
	And at that point, I think that was catch.
	Was it Caciola, the guy who was the fire department?
	He was he was the the the fire.
	He was the fireman who climbed all the way up to the 78th floor.
	And he said, we've got two isolated pockets of fire that we can knock down with two lines.
	Radio, you know.
	Yeah.
	And that's because they were monitoring that Correspondent.
	They knew they had to do it now or they didn't have any fire to explain away what happened.
	So buildings start to tilt and then poof!
	It's gone!
	Even Steve Jones, and I think, frankly, he knows exactly what happened.
	Even Steve Jones claimed he was absolutely mystified when that part of the tower tilting over disappeared.
	So what we're seeing here, this is from the Palmer Report.
	The guy did an absolutely brilliant, devastating job.
	And may I say, Veterans Today, for which I was a journalist for, I don't know, a couple of years, has over 50 articles about the use of nukes on 9-11.
	And let me add, Joe Olson, that engineer I mentioned before, is an expert on this area as well.
	So here you see again, at the South Tower, here's what happens.
	You blow it up from the middle, from the inside, and then it has the effects of destroying the outside, the outer Uh, tube from the top down.
	So really, really fascinating stuff to sort out how this was done.
	And of course we got a lot more here in terms of residual effects.
	This is Judy's emphasis, the toasted cars, which is to say that automobiles in the vicinity and parking lot had weird effects, had melted engines, you know, very, very damn strange.
	These are the things that give me pause to why these are the things that give me the reason to suspect that directed energy weapons were used because that is, as we saw in Lahaina, as we saw in some of the fires in California, you know, where you'd as we saw in some of the fires in California, you know, where you'd have a wood structure sitting next to a metal structure and the metal structure or the metal car is like fried and there's nothing happening to the
	So yeah, yeah, yeah.
	That's good, Ron.
	Here's more.
	Toasted cars and related a badly damaged fire truck.
	Where did the engine go?
	The bottom of the tires turned to goo.
	Here's more.
	A fire department has metcocked in front of six on West.
	The remaining upper part has been peeled and evaporated.
	I am open, but look at this.
	We had massive debris ejected at a 45-degree angle from the North Tower into the Winter Garden.
	Thus, one of my colleagues describes the Winter Garden where dews and nanothermite go to die, for reasons such as the following.
	Jet fuel fires, even if they burn hot enough and long enough, would cause a building to sag and gradually collapse, actually only briefly, asymmetrically.
	Jet fuel could not have ejected 300 tons up at a 45 degree angle and 600 feet outward into the winter garden.
	To explode steel, an explosive needs to have a detonation velocity of 6,100 meters per second.
	To explode cement, a detonation velocity of 3,200 meters per second is required.
	Kerosene has a detonation velocity of only 1,600 meters per second.
	Nanothermite has a detonation velocity of only 895 meters per second.
	Many nukes would have had the observed effect.
	This is one of the most important summaries of how it was done we have available to us today, Ron.
	Meanwhile, as I said, the U.S.
	Geological Survey did a study of 35 locations they found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
	Barium, and strontium, thorium, uranium, lithium, lanthanum, yttrium, chromium, tritium, I emphasize, some of these only exist in radioactive form.
	Now, they cannot have been produced by nanothermite.
	They cannot have been produced by directed energy weapons.
	They were produced by a nuclear event.
	So this is among the most powerful.
	That is complimented.
	By the fact that so many have had the kind of medical maladies, I mean, you know, multiple myeloma, leukemia, esophageal pancreatic cancer.
	The pattern epidemiologically of New York, Ron, is very similar to that of Chernobyl, when we had the meltdown of the reactor in Ukraine way back when.
	I mean, this is very serious.
	And the number, by the way, it's now affected as many as 70,000.
	Here they were only talking about more than 5,004 in less than three years, but the effects have been manifest.
	And it's now up to around 70,000.
	Meanwhile, get this.
	The records for reported renovation work on the WTC, which was a cover for setting the whole thing up, were destroyed!
	They just happened to be destroyed, Rod!
	They wouldn't do such a thing, that's illegal!
	That's illegal!
	They wouldn't do such a thing, I know, I love it!
	That's illegal!
	They can't do that!
	Meanwhile, if you want to see what it would actually look like when you have a collapse of a building here, I think this is from Pakistan.
	I mean, it ain't pretty, but the point is it's totally different than what we had in New York, and contrast that now with Building 7.
	You know, architects and engineers focus on Building 7.
	Well, it is the greatest Achilles heel.
	It's such a blatant contradiction because it came down at 5.20 in the afternoon.
	This is like seven hours after the North Tower.
	Remember, they had to destroy the South first because that fireman went up there and was about to put up the fire, which was going to be their pseudo-explanation.
	So I had to blow it first, and then the north.
	But this is seven hours later.
	It wasn't hit by any airplane.
	And in fact, the fires there were extremely modest.
	And yet you got a classic controlled demolition.
	Danny Jowinko, a Dutch expert on demolition, was shown this footage without identifying.
	He said, oh yeah, of course that's a controlled demolition, of course.
	And then he was told it was Building 7.
	And, you know, they eventually took him out because they don't like having experts around.
	Here you had that five and a half floors of debris that is what we find from a classic controlled demolition, 12% of the original 47 floors.
	Well, get this, Barry Jennings actually was in New York.
	He was a part of the New York City Emergency Management Team.
	He went to Building 7.
	Because Rudy Giuliani, the mayor, had two floors there with their own air and water, a kind of command and control for emergencies.
	And when he got up there, he found still steaming cups of coffee.
	He found half-eaten sandwiches.
	And a fireman came along and said, we've got to get you out of here.
	Well, there were explosives going on when he was inside the building at one point.
	It was pitch black, but he felt himself stepping over bodies of dead people.
	And when he got out, he gave interviews based upon his experience.
	Well, guess what?
	He met an early demise.
	He did.
	One of the major lacunae, or gaps, in the 9-11 report was it didn't say anything about Building 7.
	So they had to do a supplemental explanation for Building 7, and the day or two before the report, Barry Jennings, who was an eyewitness who could have contradicted it in a court of law, died mysteriously.
	It's like my friend, the trucker, in front of the Pentagon.
	Watch the plane approach and then swerve over.
	I said, I said, Roy, we got to get him on the air and then he'll be safe.
	But he didn't want to do it.
	Next time we know he's dead, you know, found dead in an abandoned building.
	I'll tell you, this is not a first time I've done my best to get people To go on the air to tell their story, to make them safe, and I've been able to manage to get that done in one or more cases in relation to JFK.
	Meanwhile, now look at this.
	In the immediate right foreground, to the right, is where the North Tower stood.
	And then to the left, on the opposite side of Building 6, is where Building 7 was located.
	And look at the massive pile of debris from Building 7.
	And what do we have from the Twin Tower?
	Nothing.
	I mean, think of it.
	It should have been 13 1⁄2 floors, 12 1⁄2, 110 stories.
	It should have been 13 1⁄2 floors of debris there had this been a collapse.
	But it's not there because it was no collapse.
	It was obliteration.
	It was a nuclear obliteration.
	Potentially supplemented by directed energy.
	I'm with you, Ron.
	I don't have a problem here.
	Now, one of the great gaffes was when James Stanley, a BBC reporter, went on here, and this was like at 4.57, to report that the Solomon Brothers building, which was another name for Building 7, had been destroyed.
	And yet, the building was there, right behind her.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's right near her left ear.
	Just look at her left ear.
	The BBC has never been able to explain it.
	I mean, this is one of those mock-ups where, you know, they blew it.
	They blew it badly.
	Now, I'm sorry to say, but Rudy Giuliani appears to have been involved.
	This was actually election day.
	He thought it was going to wind up making him mayor of New York forever.
	But Rudy had to be in on it.
	Would you believe, the day after 9-11, they had like 50, 50 dump trucks coming in to clean up the debris.
	50!
	Now, if you're in New York, to get one dump truck probably taking a month in advance, maybe more.
	50 the following day.
	In other words, that had to be set up in advance.
	And one of the astute observations of Judy Wood was, they weren't just taking that debris out as fast as possible, they were bringing in tons of dirt!
	So that initially the debris pile actually grew because of these tons of dirt at just what they did at Chernobyl, Ron.
	They brought in tons of dirt to absorb the radioactivity, okay?
	They did it in New York, too.
	And Judy, I give her full credit for making that observation.
	Meanwhile, they originally wanted Henry Kissinger to be the head of the 9-11 Commission, which is what you do if you want to cover something up.
	But Henry declined, because he would have had to expose all his financial intentions.
	I think he actually he actually accepted it at the beginning or at the outset.
	He accepted doing that at the outset, but the the families questioned his connections for personal and business connections with the Bin Laden family and he's like, okay.
	Yeah, I'm out of here.
	I don't I can't I can't afford this type of exposure and he's like, yeah.
	That's right, that's exactly right.
	So instead they brought in Philip Zelikow.
	Now, this is a very interesting guy.
	He's today a professor of history at the University of Virginia.
	I believe it was before he was brought in to head the commission.
	And get this, his area of expertise Was it Creation and Maintenance of Public Myths?
	M-Y-T-H-S.
	The Creation and Maintenance of Public Myths.
	And who better to put in charge of the 9-11 investigation than the guy who wrote the script?
	I'm convinced Philip Zelikow wrote the script for 9-11.
	And that they then put him in charge.
	And this guy, sad to say, remains a professor in the Department of History at Mr. Jefferson's University.
	It's a disgrace.
	I hope I'm not getting my names crossed up, but I believe Zelikow also was involved with a company that was retrofitting 767s with flight termination systems down in Florida.
	I think that was Zelikow.
	Well, honestly, that would surprise me, Ron, but I'm telling you.
	In my opinion, this is the guy who created the narrative.
	I mean, that's his area of expertise.
	A thousand percent agree.
	Yeah.
	So we have this theory about 9-11 and it's anchored to reality by chains that are supposed to be evidence.
	The plane crashes, the cell phone calls from planes, the alleged hijackers, Osama bin Laden and all that.
	We as scholars have investigated none of those chains within critical inspection.
	In fact, A.K.
	Dudney, who just kicked the bucket with a professor of computer science at Western Ontario, he took three different types of cell phones and made various trips and found that at speeds over 200 miles an hour or altitudes over 2,000 feet, The switch towers can't switch the phones fast enough to retain a connection, so that all those allegations about cell phone calls were fabricated.
	They're all fake.
	They actually, if you listen to them enough, they appear to have been done during a drill, a simulation, so they could use them, plug them in for 9-11.
	And that includes Barbara Olson, who's supposed to have been on Flight 77 and allegedly called her husband Who is a solicitor general for the United States, the third highest ranking member of the Department of Justice, Ted Olson, to ask him what they should do because of the hijackers that come into the plane.
	Well, just think of the absurdity of that.
	What the hell would Ted Olson be able to tell her?
	But the whole thing was fabricated.
	They wanted someone who was prominent.
	And because she was frequently being featured on Fox, they wanted someone that everyone would say, oh my, I knew her.
	So you knew someone personally who died on 9-11.
	Well, get this, it turns out that she was subsequently apprehended in Europe at the Swiss-Austrian border for some kind of currency exchange impropriety.
	She appears to have had some kind of cosmetic surgery and come back and remarry her husband as Lady Booth.
	So Lady Booth, who married Ted Olson, is actually Barbara Olson plus a little Nip and Tuck, as a prominent figure who is supposed to have died on 9-11.
	They characterize this in a very clever way, you know, psychological input, just like they did with Sandy Hook.
	I mean, the idea of 20 little innocent first graders having an emotional hook, and the fact that it was a total scam, that they're using it as a money laundering op, that they're still bringing in a million bucks a month over Sandy Hook.
	Ron, we can do that, too, because believe me, I earned my word on Sandy Burr.
	There's a lot there.
	Unreal, unreal.
	Now, they were worried.
	They were worried there might be lawsuits.
	Well, they had their ace in the hole, Alvin K. Hellerstein.
	Just another person that wears a small hat with a big ass nose.
	Oh, yes.
	Listen, these dual U.S.-Israeli citizens were running the shop, let me say.
	Dick Cheney was the executive director in a bunker beneath the White House, all come to him.
	But they let—Hillerstein had the role of blocking all the lawsuits.
	So even Judy Wood was involved in one.
	And it had a massive evidence in its support, but Hellerstein wouldn't let it go anywhere.
	Meanwhile, here you have the two principals, Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Olmert, who mapped out the whole idea for 9-11 back in around 1987 when they published that book, you know, Terrorism, How the West Can Win.
	And we're behind the neocon agenda.
	And then right here in the USA, I mean, this is why they had to steal the election in 2000 to install Bush and Cheney.
	Let me tell you, let me, let me, let me actually, let me, let me pause you there for a second, because I know where you're going with that, but I'm going to actually, I want to throw you in even a different curve ball.
	That's exactly why.
	HW threw the election in 92 to give it to make sure that Clinton could be there for the for the eight years and then in 2000 come back with his kid and Cheney.
	Yeah, it could be.
	I mean, W was not as incompetent as Kamala, but he's a dim bulb.
	I mean, he's dumb.
	Actually, that is a public persona that he puts out deliberately to make people think that he's stupid.
	I know somebody who had a very close friend who was Secret Service and said, yeah, that's all that whole persona of him being goofy and dumb and appearing to be like an idiot.
	That is an act.
	He is one of the most sharpest people that I've ever met and he is extraordinarily unpredictable.
	Very similar to how Very similar to how Adolf Hitler was back in the back in the 30s when he would like just out of the blue just kind of change plans and everybody had to like, you know, Reese reorganize themselves because he he believed the best thing to do to prevent himself from being, you know, taken out was to be unpredictable and that was the way that W was and I and that's that's a now that to be fair.
	That is a secondhand account.
	But it's a secondhand account from somebody who was a former Navy SEAL and somebody that I trust.
	You can forgive my skepticism, Ron, but let me just tell you a story about each of these guys.
	My wife and I lived in Sarasota, Bradenton for like five years.
	I taught at New College University of South Florida on Sarasota Bay.
	Old Ringling Brothers Estate turned into this small college.
	They had only 400 students and 40 faculty.
	Everyone designed their own curriculum.
	Everyone did a thesis, no grades, all narrative evaluation.
	It was really wonderful when I was there.
	Not far from where we resided was this Booker Elementary School.
	Bush, W., was at Booker reading a book about a pet goat where he had the book upside down, talking with little kids when Andy Card came in to tell him America was under attack.
	Now, here's the story I want to relate.
	On several occasions, W. talked about seeing That plane hit the North Tower.
	He talked about it on multiple occasions now.
	That happened when he was en route to Bucker in the presidential limousine.
	Now, the presidential limousine has a TV for closed circuit secret service network, and they have at least two channels.
	It appears one of those channels was focused on the facade of the North Tower, and he actually witnessed.
	He said, man, we saw that plane hit the North Tower.
	I thought that guy was really a bad pilot.
	Now, just think of how colossal that remark is.
	But the fact is, it was sincere.
	He saw it.
	He saw it.
	And then when he learns about the second hit, he has to acknowledge, oh, well, there's some players who have been on purpose.
	Now, I'm telling you.
	He actually did witness a first hit because the camera, the Secret Service, had a circuit on the North Tower.
	He watched it as it happened.
	And we know he was saying this the day of the event.
	Now, he couldn't have actually seen it on television because nothing was broadcast, even the Nadé footage, until the following day, until the following day.
	Exactly.
	The Nadé Brothers is the only video clip The Israeli art students have something.
	Oh, I wouldn't be surprised.
	one other video from the side.
	They can go crossing a bridge.
	It's kind of obscure, but that's the only other.
	The Israeli art students have something.
	Oh, I wouldn't be surprised.
	Now about Dick Cheney.
	He was in an underground bunker and Norman Mineta was there with him.
	I remember.
	Norman Mineta testified to the 9-11 Commission, and they excluded his testimony from their report.
	That's correct.
	At an aid, Cheney came up and said, sir, it's 50 miles away.
	Sir, it's 40 miles away.
	Sir, it's 30 miles an hour.
	Does the order still stand?
	And Cheney whipped his head around and said, of course the order still stands.
	Have you heard anything to the contrary?
	Well, we're talking about that plane that came in on the opposite side of the Cisco to the Pentagon.
	This is a plane flying toward the Pentagon.
	The order was to not shoot it down.
	That's the only order.
	That's the only order that it could have been.
	Because... That's right!
	That's right!
	That's the only order that it could have been.
	Because, essentially, these guys are saying, hey, it's coming in, it's coming in.
	I mean, does that order still stand or can we shoot?
	Basically, I mean, that's... We have to...
	We don't know exactly what the order was, but by process of elimination and logical, you know, deduction, we can infer that the order was not to shoot.
	It had to be, had to be.
	Now you shoot down the plane, you use the passengers of the plane, but you'd save the property and the personnel at the target.
	And we know it was a diversion.
	It was just to get a real plane in there so people could see a real plane approach the Pentagon when they actually fired the missile using the unmanned aerial vehicle, the Global Hawk, to destroy the West Wing and kill all the budget experts who were tracking the $2.3 trillion that had gone missing.
	I mean, you know, what a super plan!
	Super plan!
	And the only others who were there were from the Office of Naval Intelligence, which apparently was trying to figure out what was going on 9-11.
	So you got a double or triple benefit from your effort.
	So when Alex Jones invited me to give the keynote address at his American Scholars Conference in Los Angeles in June of 2006, I was invited to come on to Fox.
	And they told me they wanted to learn what scholars for 9-11 Truth had discovered about 9-11.
	So I'm in the waiting room and I say, well, why are you bringing in a TV?
	And then I hear Colm saying, you're not going to believe what your students are being taught by their professors.
	And I knew they had played me, but I knew they didn't know enough about my courses to make it stick.
	So, when I come on the air, Combs said, well, professor, is this a required course in elective?
	And I said, no.
	I said, I don't have a course on 9-11.
	He said, you don't have a course on 9-11?
	No, I said, but I think it's a great idea.
	I said, there's lots of material.
	And I went, I explain now, I founded a research organization, but that wasn't teaching a course.
	Did I know of anyone teaching a course on 9-11?
	And that's when I said, No, but I think it's a great idea.
	And I took control and guess what?
	It wasn't Sean sitting in, it was Ollie North.
	So then, when they had told me it was going to be Ollie, I called my wife and I said, honey, look, it's going to be Ollie.
	There's going to be a conversation between two former Marine Corps officers.
	And she says, don't kid yourself.
	They're going to try to kill you.
	And she was right.
	So Ollie, you're going to love this, Ron.
	Holmes actually asked, well, do you have any evidence of any complicity of the Bush administration, such as Dick Cheney in the event?
	I said, well, I'm glad you asked that question.
	Yes, I do.
	And I told him the Norman Mineta story right there on the air.
	They were blown away.
	And then Hawley comes in and said, well, Dr. Fanzer, let me get this straight.
	Didn't you tell our producer you had a course on 9-11?
	I said, no.
	I said, I have a research organization, but I don't have a course.
	I do discuss issues like the Iraq War and JFK and so forth in my courses on critical thinking.
	But let me tell you, Ron, I was followed by that show by guess who?
	Benjamin Netanyahu, I think, was the next guest.
	So here you got the guy responsible for 9-11.
	That year, 2006, I'd be on three different times.
	And then they brought me back a couple months later with Sean Hannity.
	And then a couple months later with O'Reilly.
	And O'Reilly was especially nasty.
	So I'm sitting here in the waiting room, bright lights.
	20 or 30 minutes, all of a sudden his voice comes on, he says, I'm gonna tell the country, the nation, you're a nut and yay, your country, boom, I'm on television.
	And he is immediately going after me and giving me a double whammy attack so I can't go back and justify myself.
	And I do my best, but he's being very, very nasty.
	I thought it was a complete disaster.
	Well, about a year later, I'd given a talk at the Great Hall at Cooper Union in New York City on 9-11, and then my wife and I and a friend Walked over to a theater where Alex Jones was conducting a 9-11 presentation.
	And to my astonishment, they just rolled out the red carpet for me.
	They put me up on a platform with first responders.
	As I'm sitting down, he leans over to me and said, seeing you on O'Reilly was what convinced me 9-11 was an inside job.
	And I thought to myself, well, maybe it was worth it.
	You can find all three of those interviews online. 2006.
	With Ollie North, with Sean Hannity, and with O'Reilly.
	Let me interject something here, because I think what you just said, I think, is very important for my audience to understand.
	And look, guys, you can't force people to believe the things that you believe or have come to believe.
	You've got to realize that everybody Has their own moment in time where they wake up to what's going on.
	Everybody has that moment.
	And if they don't, they, if they haven't yet, then they're either going to die or they're not going to.
	But, uh, you know, any sane, rational person is going to have a moment of clarity where they, they're, they're like, Oh crap.
	Everything that those guys have been saying, I've been criticizing.
	That's actually probably true.
	But it's not your responsibility to wake people up.
	It's your responsibility to plant seeds and just live the way that you can.
	And, you know, speak factually.
	Don't be condescending.
	Be respectful.
	Defend yourself if you're attacked.
	But it's not your job to wake people up.
	It's just your job to plant seeds.
	And planting seeds, I would testify that what you did on the O'Reilly Show was, you know, you were there.
	Not to persuade anybody, but that was a seed planting event that who knows how many people it impacted.
	Yeah, let me say, I have eight books I've published with Moonrock Books, six of which have been banned.
	Two that have not, by Amazon.
	Two that have not, one on JFK and this on 9-11.
	My second book on 9-11, American Newt on 9-11.
	Now remember, I do collaborative research, so I bring together groups of experts to sort out what really happened.
	These are not single-authored books.
	These are edited books with lots of contributors.
	I think in this book, Probably 15, I'm gonna guess.
	I'm just telling you, you can find the resources out there.
	Plus, if you go to my video blog, Bitchute Channel Jim Fetzer, You can just look for 9-11 Special and a whole bunch.
	I've got, you know, at least a dozen probably different presentations about 9-11, just as I have on JFK, Sandy Hook, and a host of others.
	And Ron, I just want to say what a wonderful job you're doing here with your Untold History Channel.
	I think it is sensational.
	And I'm just ecstatic, really ecstatic.
	You brought me in to talk about this, especially as we're approaching 9-11 in 2024.
	So what is it?
	13th observance.
	So what is it?
	13th observance.
	I'm telling you, 23rd observance, right? - Right. - 2001 to 21.
	2001 to 24.
	I mean, I'm just telling you, this is such an important event in American history, and I think it had a tremendous effect on the course of what happened thereafter, creating Homeland Security, increased censorship.
	I think it's second only to the assassination of JFK, whereby You know, bad guys really basically took control of our government and things have never been the same since.
	Well, and I don't want to push back on that because I agree with you, but I would say that there's there's some other events in there that I think actually have a little bit, maybe more significance, at least in the grand scheme.
	And number one would be the Federal Reserve Act.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	The 14th Amendment, then the Federal Reserve Act, then JFK, and then I think another one that is lesser known but equally as important is the Murrah Building in April of 95.
	Because they were able to pass legislation at that point Then and then when 9-11 happened, then they were able to get the real meaty one.
	And then the last one is it was the Affordable Care Act that really what the argument over the Affordable Care Act What what that was all about while we were sitting there bickering and over over government health care that was when they were creating the national security state with the with all of the intelligence basically the intelligence branch of the of the government that's on.
	That's completely unaccountable.
	No accountability at all.
	Thank you, Obama, the Manchurian candidate and his henchman, Eric.
	Yes.
	Whatever his name is.
	Eric Holder.
	Holder, thank you.
	And, of course, Big Mike.
	I gather there's a movie coming out that's going to tell all, and I say, not soon enough.
	Fascinating, Ron, what's going on here in America today.
	I can't thank you enough.
	We're inviting me to join you for this.
	Oh, that's it.
	That's the last one.
	Let me play.
	I want to play this for you here, because this is something that I don't know.
	I don't know about this, but this is a piece of the von Kleist documentary.
	This deals with something that I don't know can be accountable or can be accounted for with a hologram.
	And I just, you know, again, I'm not questioning you.
	I'm just posing this as evidence.
	So, let's see here.
	On April 15, 2004, we received a news release that alerted us to a website that was entitled www.letsroll911.org.
	Phil Jahan, the webmaster for this website, had taken the video clips that you've just seen and slowed them down and examined them frame by frame, and what he found was astounding.
	There are several different anomalies that need to be examined and questioned.
	First of all, what is attached to the bottom of the plane that hit the South Tower?
	And second of all, what is that brief flash that occurs just as the plane makes impact?
	Now, when we first looked at this video footage, I said to myself, well, this video footage could very well be manipulated.
	So I wanted to check it out myself.
	Well, we went and found the DVD that we had purchased shortly after September 11th and titled, America Remembers.
	This was directly from CNN.
	We took this DVD and put it in our machine and examined very clearly what you've just seen.
	Let's take a look at it.
	Let's take another look at this clip in slow motion.
	But before we do, keep in mind that sometimes the best place to hide something is in a plain sight.
	We've all seen this video clip, and there have been many publications that have taken frames for this video and published them in hundreds of magazines.
	Here's an example.
	On page three, a full-size book appears to be something attached, and just as it hits the building, there's a flash.
	Let's take another look.
	Now, I'm not gonna belabor the point, but he goes on to show that there's four different angles that all show basically the same thing.
	And then let me get to the one that... I think it's this one right here.
	this one right here.
	And now let's take a look at it again from a third angle.
	And you can see the explosion's reflection in the fuselage.
	So that is a question that I have that's like, to me, it lends a little bit more credibility to the drone theory.
	Um, you know, Zelikow or I think it was Zelikow, whatever, um, the, the, the drone theory of the planes being the, those are with actual plane sitting.
	And if you go and you look at the Nade brothers, very slowed down, very, very, I think I showed that yesterday where Not a brother shown it when it hits it you see a flash or flash before the shadow of the nose cone comes into contact with the North Tower.
	So those are just anomalies that give me pause on the hologram theory again.
	I'm not saying that that's That's not a hologram.
	That's not what I'm... I just don't know.
	I'm just posing questions.
	Yeah, good.
	I don't have a problem with that.
	I've heard the idea that the blast was somehow got to do with the videography, but go back.
	I put back on that one slide from showing its intersection with eight different floors.
	Yeah, it wasn't physically possible for a real plane to enter the building, so it cannot have not been a hologram.
	But how they, the little flash, is that somehow when the hologram is going to start to disappear because it's entering the building?
	There's something there that I agree is not explained.
	But I'm telling you, it's not physically possible that those were real planes entering the building.
	It's not physically possible, Ron.
	But I have tremendous respect for you.
	I'm a big fan of Dave von Kleist.
	When I gave the very first speech, first political speech I ever gave was at a Ron Paul Freedom Rally in 2008 on Tax Day on the grass outside of the Capitol.
	I gave a talk that would be published under the title 9-11 and the Neocon Agenda, where I claimed that no dual citizen should ever be put in a policy-shaming or decision-making position, because you cannot know that their loyalty to the other state does not weigh their loyalty to the United States Which has been proven again and again and again.
	David von Kleist was there.
	And as I may have mentioned to you before, he did a sequel called 9-11 Ripple Effect for you to interview with me to be the framework for the whole show.
	So you might or might not want to share that with your audience.
	I shared that last night.
	Very good.
	Did you enjoy it?
	Did you like it?
	On top of it, it's very interesting.
	You talk about dual citizens and it reminds me of a clip from the HBO miniseries about John Adams.
	When John Adams was made the first minister to go to England and meet King George.
	And King George at the time, and this is in the show, right?
	He says, I hear a rumor that you are not, you know, too enthralled with manners and respect to France.
	And he kind of laughs and he says, well, I must have vowed to your majesty that I only am interested in things to do with my country.
	And the response that he gave when the king responded, he says, an honest man will have no other.
	And to me, that is exactly what we're dealing with here right now.
	We are dealing with dishonest men who are not loyal to the United States.
	And And, uh, you know, to take it back to Trump, I firmly believe that Trump is loyal to the United States, and that is another reason why they are terrified of him.
	I agree, Ron.
	I mean, and there isn't any option.
	No rational person could ever support Harris-Walz.
	I mean, you got two incompetent, corrupt, socialist communists.
	I mean, it's blatant that there is no real choice in this election.
	And for all his flaws, warts and all, Trump is head and shoulders above any alternative available to us.
	So let us hope it happens.
	We don't have the election stolen, but they're planning to do it.
	It's going to have to be so obvious that nobody gives a toot about Harrison Walls that everybody's supporting.
	And it's moving that way, Ron, that they cannot steal it without exposing the whole thing to be a sham to the entire world.
	But I guarantee you, they want to do it if they think they can get away with it.
	I agree.
	I've heard from, I've heard from some, I just call them insiders that say that there's not, you know, that the election, I firmly believe the election was not stolen, but was prevented from being stolen in 2016.
	Well, I'll tell you what happened there.
	I followed that very closely.
	There were all kinds of written polls.
	I mean, they're deliberately doing what they're doing, over-assembling Democrats and women and blah, blah, blah, to manufacture outcomes.
	Even the pollsters were admitting that I had extensive discussion with Richard Charnin, who's an expert on election theft.
	And he said, to steal an election, you've got to go where the votes are.
	The votes are in the cities.
	So they had it rigged for Hillary in the city.
	What they didn't anticipate was an enormous outpouring of rural voters for Trump.
	That's what made the difference in 2016.
	And there are tremendous outpouring of rural voters going to participate again, between their mail-in ballots and their drop boxes and the electronic voting machine.
	Remember Obama's last act, virtually, when he left the office.
	After Trump had been elected, they weren't guaranteed it couldn't happen again.
	He had our election system declared our critical infrastructure and put it under Homeland Security.
	So they can't today monitor the vote down to the precinct level and change it on Homeland Security, which has brought us open borders.
	This Mayorkas is among the greatest traitors in the history of America, sad to say.
	There he is.
	Well, do you know off the top of your head the statistics for the number of votes that were cast in the presidential election in 2016 versus 2020?
	No, I guess there were probably 4 million more in 2020.
	But, you know, in that outcome, my best estimate got over 100 million and Biden about 37.
	So, I mean, it was gigantic.
	Okay, so I don't know if that's correct.
	Because they said that Trump actually got more, he got like 10 million more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016.
	And I don't know how many votes Hillary got, but they said that Biden got, Biden beat Trump.
	And so I don't know what the numbers were, but there's no way, there's no way in hell I'm telling you, 100 mil versus 37, pretty good approximation.
	It's in that ballpark.
	Nobody cared about Biden.
	Before 2020, did I not mention this already?
	There was a joint appearance of Biden and Harris in Phoenix.
	This is like the day before.
	Very rare joint appearance.
	A guy supposed to get 81 million votes.
	Nobody came.
	Nobody turned out, Ron.
	Nobody turned out to see Biden and Harris.
	Nobody gave it to... I mean, they're meaningless.
	These are You know, nabby shots.
	These are scoundrels.
	And the indictment of the Bush family that has come forth from the Congress is devastating the crime family.
	And they've known it all along.
	The FBI has been running cover.
	One of the latest reports I got, and I do news every day, you know, five days a week on RBN, my show, Authentic News, where I succeed at Michael Rivero, who is very popular.
	I picked up where he left off when he departed.
	One of the latest stories is the country has lost faith in the FBI.
	And for good reason!
	For good reason!
	Right.
	They are.
	Let me get into some prognostication.
	Do you think that they're going to dismantle certain government institutions and then Raise up new ones to replace them so that they can eliminate the corruption?
	Well, you need the functions that they're performing when they're done properly.
	So what you need is massive reform.
	Now, exactly what form that would take, I'm open to that.
	I think Trump is going to be in a much better position now.
	He was very much played, surrounded, contained, constrained.
	He'd have aides who would agree with him and smile, oh, yes, sir, when he issued commands and they'd get outside the Oval Office, look at another and say, we're not doing that.
	Again and again.
	I think he knows a whole lot more.
	And I think having Bobby Jr.
	and Tulsi there, they're going to help keep him on the straight and narrow.
	I think this is shaping up pretty well if we're allowed to actually have an election.
	That's the question.
	What it reminds me of is it reminds me of, again, I go back to movies.
	I like movies because people remember movies and the movie JFK when you had that the theoretical scene where Where Mr. X meets with Jim Garrison at the mall in Washington and he said, you know, he says, Kennedy's directives were never really implemented because of bureaucratic resistance.
	And that is exactly what happened to Trump.
	A lot of things were implemented, but a lot of things weren't implemented because You had people in places that it did not benefit them to initiate those policies because it would have been cost that could have potentially cost them their job.
	Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep.
	So, but I do like that.
	JFK was so far ahead, you know, but you had all these powerful special interests who would have been adversely impacted.
	And if they cared about what was best for America, they would have been out of support of JFK.
	But because they were much more narrow, he exceeded them intellectually by I mean, it was just no contest.
	Curtis LeMay was a key player here in taking Jack out.
	He was all for it.
	In fact, one of the shooters up here has been given a weapon by Curtis LeMay so he'd know he was acting on behalf of the nation.
	That's interesting.
	I don't doubt that at all.
	LeMay was a good leader in World War II, but...
	But, you know, after World War II, I think he got, I think he allowed the power to really go to his head.
	Edward Lansdale appears to position the shooters and determine the sequence of shots.
	And he was Air Force General.
	He was actually Colonel Lexus Superior.
	And X was sent down to Antarctic to get him out of the way because he would never put up with this kind of shenanigans.
	They had all the vehicles in the wrong order.
	They were all different makes and colors.
	They left agents behind at Love Hill.
	The whole thing was a setup.
	In fact, when Nigel Turner did his Men Who Killed Kennedy installment number seven, he invited me to address the 15th indication of Secret Service complicity in setting him up with a hit and covering it up.
	I don't doubt for one second that the Secret Service, they had to have been complicit.
	There's no way that they could have done it without Secret Service.
	And in Butler!
	That's the thing here in Butler, people don't realize.
	You had the shorts.
	29 million stock of Donald J. Trump stock were shorted, meaning there's an expectation their value is going to drop the day before.
	And if Trump had been taken out, it would have dropped.
	They would have made a bundle.
	And now, before the House investigates, Secret Service, FBI, Homeland Security are not willing to share their records of coverage of Butler.
	And that tells me there really wasn't one.
	And you got Victoria Nuland saying that Donald Trump is not going to serve another four years.
	And it was she who warned us that the Nord Stream pipeline wasn't going to open either.
	So she and her husband, Robert Kagan, who's about as deep in the neocon agenda as anyone has ever been, you know, they're betraying America for their own special interests, which are all Zionist.
	Yes.
	The neocons basically are Trotskyites.
	They subscribe to a communistic ideology that's very similar to what Trotsky Wanted, which is different than what Lenin and Stalin wanted.
	So, but, but, you know, I digress.
	That's a topic for another day.
	It's great stuff, Ron.
	I really like what you're doing here with Untold History because it needs to be told.
	Well, and that's why I focus primarily on history because there's a thousand, there's thousands of people out there talking about current events.
	And what I try, what I strive to do here is to Is to relate historical events, um, so that it gives context to where we are in, you know, 2024 in our modern world.
	So, uh, November 22nd, if you want to do anything about JMK, Ron, I am at your disposal.
	Let's do it.
	I would absolutely love that.
	I've never really done a deep dive, but let's be real, Kennedy pissed off everybody.
	I mean, he literally pissed everybody off.
	Except the American people who adored him.
	Right, exactly.
	He pissed off the Israelis, he pissed off the mob, he pissed off the intelligence agency, he pissed off the military, he pissed off the bankers, he pissed everybody off.
	You got it!
	Well, Jim, you've already let people know where they can find you, but one last time, give your credentials and where people can find your work.
	Well, my blog, jameshfetzer.org, there's all kinds of stuff about JFK 9-11, Sandy Hook, and more.
	And my video archive, BitChute channel, Jim Fetzer, you're going to find, well, I don't know, there might be a thousand videos there.
	You pick your topic and I'm on Twitter, at jimfetzer on Twitter.
	I'll follow you on Twitter.
	I'll go follow you on Twitter right now.
	So, yeah.
	Guys, go check Jim's workout.
	He's he's a brilliant scholar.
	And, you know, I can't say enough about him.
	I've known about Jim for, like I said, for probably a good 15 years.
	And I want to give give credit to Scott Bennett for connecting us.
	I was surprised by the other day I got a phone call from Jim.
	So and I was like, huh?
	Well, Jim Fetcher is calling me?
	So, it was very humbling.
	Yes, you're a super guy, super guy, doing great work and becoming quite the international celebrity for having gone to Ukraine, interviewed on Russian television.
	Today, Russia is the moral leader of the universe, Ron.
	It's astonishing.
	The ironies of history.
	The ironies of history.
	I look back at the article that James Perloff wrote back in like 2014 or 15, and it says that it's crazy that Russia and the United States have switched places.
	Yeah.
	Reverse.
	You're right.
	That's what's happened in our lifetime.
	Fascinating stuff.
	But hey, Jim, I cannot thank you enough for your time today.
	Thank you again.
	Seriously, very, very appreciative.
	You're doing a super job, Ron, and I'm glad to come back.
	If you want to do JFK, I'm here.
	I'm here for you and for your audience and for America.
	Thank you.
	I'm sure we could do quite a bit of other things, too, because you're very well versed in a multitude of topics.
	So again, everybody, thank you to Jim.
	Go support his work.
	Follow him on Twitter, if you're on X or Twitter or whatever you want to call it, and check his work out on BitChute and his blog.
	So I'll make sure that those links get put into the description.
	So again, thank you, Jim, and happy Communistic Labor Day.
	Yeah, happy Labor Day, everyone.
	Spend as much time as you can with your family and friends and people you love and care about because we do not know how much time we have left.
	Amen.
	Amen to that.
	All right, guys.
	Well, thanks for tuning in today.
	Appreciate it.
	I should be back a little bit later today with Ghost.
	That's the plan.
	I haven't heard back from him to confirm, but that is the plan.
	So I will be posting something a little bit later, probably the The video on, what was it, not loose change, missing links, all about the Israeli involvement of 9-11.
	So that will be posted later this afternoon.

▲