- For some years now, Jeff Rense has been kind enough to
host my videos and a few of my articles, and several other websites have
followed Jeff's example, including Veterans Today, with whom my relations
have been equally cordial, up until a few weeks ago when the notorious
James Fetzer suddenly appeared out of nowhere, as a contributor, dredging
up the almost-laid-to-rest No-Planes-in-New York theory.
- This is the 9/11 conspiracy theory that the mainstream
media cannot get enough of, because it allows it's well-paid lackeys; commentators
and comedians like Glen Beck and Bill Maher to ridicule the entire 9/11
truth movement as being made up of foil-hatted nutters who think that thousands
of New Yorkers must have been hypnotised or drugged into thinking that
real planes actually hit the Twin Towers, when they were really holograms
or computer-generated images in a made-for-TV spectacular.
- The theory has been thoroughly debunked, but some logic-challenged
diehards still cling to it, and a few others, with sinister agendas, use
it as the thin edge of their disinformation wedge to keep a lot of people
from taking the basic step from a state of: Our-government-could-never-have-been-involved-in-something-like-that,
to the conclusion that terrible things of gigantic proportions could not
possibly have happened the way that the world was told they happened on
that dreadful day: September 11, 2001.
- As the 10th anniversary draws closer, the disinformationists
are cranking up their propaganda machines to try and divert attention away
from the really serious issues such as:
- How could WTC 7, a 47-storey building suddenly collapse,
at 5:20 that evening, virtually in its own footprint when it had not been
hit by an aircraft, and when the falling-debris and fire damage could not
have been serious enough, or more importantly, evenly spreadenough
for that building to fall as though it had been brought down by a controlled
demolition? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk --WTC7
This is an Orange
- Of course, there were other anomalies of monumental proportions
which will never be properly understood unless access is given, to unbiased
investigators, to whatever small amounts of the WTC buildings remain in
storage, or that can be exhumed from their hurried burials in a land-fill
on Staten Island.
- Just the action of spiriting away as much of the evidence
as possible, including the jet-engine core that fell out of the South Tower,
constituted a series of criminal acts known as tampering with the
evidence; literally burying evidence relating to the deaths of then, almost
3,000 people, which figure has now risen well above that level because
of the illnesses that can be directly connected to the dust from the Towers,
which contained tons of cancer-inducing asbestos.
- For some, this heinous crime lives on as they approach
their own deaths in the certain knowledge that they have been lied to,
marginalised and virtually forgotten like the victims of the so-called
collateral damage, brought about by the three wars that this yet-to-be-solved
crime was the excuse for. Millions of people killed in Afghanistan
and Iraq and the victims of the War on Terror are on the rise, with
false accusations of involvement in planning acts of terror, and there
will also be an equally sinister fallout as the after-effects emerge of
increased exposure to full-body X-Ray scans at airports, and anywhere else
these lethal machines might be placed to fill the coffers of those who
manufacture them. And all because of a gigantic pack of government lies
about who was responsible for 9/11.
- And now, Veterans Today, which once seemed to pride
itself on trying to present honest, well-researched articles on all kinds
of issues, is knowingly hosting a person who surrounds his no-planes-in-New
York arguments with a bodyguard of lies. Lies about facts; lies about the
people he regards as experts, and lies about what he claims those who challenges
him have said or written, in the past. One example is all that is necessary.
- James Fetzer, originator of the website "Scholars
for 9/11 Truth", once hosted a radio discussion about the speed of
the plane that hit the South Tower (almost certainly not UA 175) during
which one of his favourite "experts" was thoroughly debunked
by two experienced pilots as knowing nothing about such flying matters,
but whom James Fetzer still claims is an aerospace engineer and now claims
that he developed a non-existent airborne safety system. In
Fetzer's own words:
- "Joe Keith, for example, actually designed the shaker
system for Boeing, which is used to determine when a plane is going to
come apart in flight."
- (Please note, this has nothing to do with the stick-shaker,
stall-warning system that has been around since the 1960's.)
- There is no such system that determines "when a
plane is going to come apart in flight", and this has been pointed
out to James Fetzer and the editorial board of Veterans Today, which
includes Gordon Duff and Dr. Alan Sabrosky, in an e-mail
written three days ago. Far from anyone showing concern, I have
only heard from Gordon Duff, who has been critical of me for
keeping the "dispute" going.
- Dispute? There can be no dispute, the statement was
untrue, and James Fetzer will not retract it. However his latest bit of
reasoning shows a degree of arrogance that is bordering on a belief in
his own infallibility.
- "But since I believe everything I am saying and
have no intention to mislead anyone, I am not lying."
- Members of the alternative media, including the staff
and contributors to Veterans Today are constantly criticising
the mainstream media for telling lies and twisting the truth to fit the
agendas of those who control it, so I would like to ask who is now controllingVeterans
Today, which allows a provable liar to continue to make false claims
about an "expert" he is constantly quoting to back-up his thoroughly
debunked No-Planes-In-New York theory? He has also made a number
of serious accusations about what I have written and said, which I can
prove are not true, so shouldn't Veterans Today be asking:
- What else is he lying about? Perhaps more importantly:
What does he actually know about the subjects he pontificates
- But of paramount importance: How can anyone
trust the veracity of anything else published by Veterans Today, if
they continue to ignore the totally provable accusations of one of its
own, hitherto, trusted contributors? Me.
- --Anthony Lawson
- Only fools believe what they are told, when it is clear
that much else is being hidden.