Dr. James Fetzer and Dick Eastman


Dear John Kaminski and others,
John, you have forwarded a letter to me from James Fetzer showing that he is continuing to poison the atmosphere of 9-11 discussions with the claim that "science proves that no planes hit the WTC towers." He makes this claim and is endlessly accepted as a guest and an authority on the alternative news outlets -- what does that tell us about them? -- and so I waste another day rebutting him.
It's time to expose an eleven-year-old ongoing conspiracy to obstruct justice to protect the perpetrators of the 9-11 false flag attack.
Let's begin here.

Mike Rivero does not accept the claims of James Fetzer that no planes hit the WTC twin towers on September 11, 2007, that that the video cameras recroded and witnesses saw "projected holograms" and all of his "reasons" for not accepting the evidence that Mike Rivero, myself and six billion other people do not find incredible. Retired philosophy professor Fetzer has written to several people, many of them people also claim that no-planes-hit-the-towers but also J

ohn Kaminsky who has forwarded Fetzer's letter to me. Fetzer invites a response to his claims, saying "commentaries welcome." My comments are in green bold, below:
----- Original Message -----
From: John Kaminski <p s e u d o s k y l a x@gmail.com>
To: Dick Eastman <o l d i c k e a s t m a n @q.com> ....
Sent: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:54:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Fwd: Response to attack re 9/11 by Michael Rivero

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Fetzer<j f e t z e r @d.umn.edu>
Date: Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 9:10 AM
Subject: Response to attack re 9/11 by Michael Rivero
Rivero attacks me about mini-nukes in New York,
the use of holograms, no plane at the Pentagon
and denying that we went to the moon. Outline
of relevant evidence. Commentaries welcome!
(1) Were real planes used in New York on 9/11?
impossible speed
Comment DE: There is no upper speed at which an airplane can crash. The planes had to be modified and tested before the perpetrators would proceeds with their false-flag attack. The planes were not piloted anyone on board. The opinion of John Lear, who flew for the CIA and therefore is under agreement not to say anything the CIA does not approve of, is not credible. Most absurd of all is the claim that people using a flight simulator were unable to crash their simulation planes into the simulation WTC tower, as if that proves anything about what could or could not be done with a real airplane when trillions of dollars and global geo-political dominance depends on the planes crashing into the WTC towers.

Fetzer: impossible entry
Comment DE: How absurd when the photographs of the entry holes made by each plane in each tower was photographed. When Jim Fetzer debated me on this subject on Rense Radio he unhooked his phone and pretended that there was some kind of phone problem while he was answering me -- and he never did answer me. What had I said? That the holes where there, that there were broken beams bent inward by the crash, that there was nothing inside the building that could have pulled the wall in. Only the planes could have supplied the outside force to make those holes. Furthermore, the claim that the hollow aluminum planes hit a steel building, is also absurd. First of all the WTC outer walls were at least one quarter to one third glass. Also it is the mass of the plane and its velocity against the wall where impact took place that matters, mass being the number of protons and neutrons, whether configured as aluminum or titaneum of duck feathers. The plane was travelling at the speed of a bullet fired from a handgun and force increases with the square of the velocity. Ample to make the hole.

Fetzer: absence of collision effects
Comment DE: The hole in the building was an effect. The explosion and movement of debris northward, conserving the momentum introduced by the plane are effects. The jet engine and landing gear parts that missed the core of the building and passed out at the of the north wall near the northeast corner of south tower were collision effects. The fire was a collision effect. The claims of the no-planes-hit-the-WTC-towers team are intentionally absurd and offensive to the intelligent person, because these operatives push themselves on the public as representative of the "9-11 truthers", to turn the public off to anyone who questions the original box-cutter story.

Fetzer: no debris beneath the facades
Comment DE: The force of impact was such that the mass what had been the plane passed the outer wall of the south tower that was hit from the south. This is not to say that the plane entered as a plane. It certainly was broken to pieces in the crash, except for the starboard engine that did not meet much resistance by the windows and the empty office space, and some landing gear. Most of debris what was the plane was stopped at the heavy core of the building. This is not to say there was no recognizable airplane debris at all. There are pictures of some of that debris that were taken and the camera escaped destruction in the collpase of the towers.

Fetzer: John Lear vs. Field McConnell
Comment DE: John Lear worked for the CIA and likely still is on an undercover operation with his support of the no-planes-hit-the-WTC disinformation, an obvious component of the cover-up of the crime, an attempt to obstruct justice by leading the investigation on a false trail. The planes were real. They were remote controlled. They crashed into the WTC twin towers, but they did not bring them down.

Fetzer: planted engine at Church & Murray
Comment DE: We see the engine emerging from the building every camera recording of the north wall of the south tower during the crash event. It landed and sunk deep into the street. Whether it was the proper engine for Boeing 767-222 United Airlines Flight 175 or not is irrelevant to the question at hand. The engine that fell buried itself three feet deep in the pavement was the starboard engine of whatever large jet in United Airlines livery hit the tower. No reports of the engine there before the event, much l3ess anyone seen digging a deep hole for it.

Fetzer: landing gear wedged between buildings
Comment DE: The landing gear is also seen falling in an arc to the spot were it was later found.

Fetzer: CGI vs. video compositing vs. holograms
Comment DE: Holograms are defraction patterns made by two lazers captured on a screen. They are only seen through the developed plate. The plane was seen by witnesses and captured by cameras from fifty different angles simultaneously. To accomplish that an exposed surface bigger than the plane would have had to have been flown to the building. Holograms cannot be projected. See the debate to discover how disingenuously Fetzer defends his contention. He never explains where the hole came from or where the momentum came from. He seems not to realize that I was arguing the affirmative of the pre-arranged debate topic proposition, "Resolved: That big planes hit the WTC twin towers on September 11, 2001." He does not even offer a counter explanation until the last round of debate -- showing that he was afraid to defend it against me. Yet the hologram fairly tale did not answer any of the arguments proving a large plane. Also Fetzer has edited the debate to conceal how badly he did. See debate on Vimeo here: https://vimeo.com/124004440

Fetzer: AU military manual: airborne holographic projector
Comment DE: All of this is a hoax based on some idle speculation by non-scientific men about something they know nothing about. . Google this phrase and you will see fake links to real places that have nothing to do with holograms. You will also see questionable annonymous websites asserting the notion, but with absolutely nothing behind the assertion. The hologram hoax was not planted very deep -- only a little investigation shows that there is nothing behind the false claims. By the way, in the 1970s my physics professor was Tung Jeong, international pioneer in holography and director of the Center for Photonics Studies. While Fetzer inrtoduced his hologram argument at the end of the debate so I would not have an opportunity for rebuttal I do, following the debate explain what a hologram is and why the idea of projecting holograms is absurd and why in 2017 there is not one demonstration of such a technology. One can use use two lazer beams to mark of photographic surface a light diffraction gradient but no technology exists to project that image apart from the screen that holds the pattern. Fetzer's ignorance is immense but he counts on his gift of bluster and bluff to make you believe it..

Fetzer: James Perloff, "A Conversation with a Pilot"
Comment DE: Perloff shares email from a pilot of Airbus aircraft who does not give his name, calling him merely "Pilot A." He quotes Pilot A, "Whatís better than planes flying into buildings? The illusion of planes flying into buildings. Especially if itís a high explosive/incendiary guided missile with some sort of holographic projection device strapped to its back." Incidentally, Perloff was already part of the disinformation when stated that the WTC towers were brought down by nuclear bombs. Nuclear bombs and electro-magnetic ray guns are two disinformation operations to draw people away from the finding by Dr. Steven Jones of thermite in the WTC dust, explaining how the towers came down so quickly. The fact is that Perloff is no expert and this unnamed Airbus pilot offers no credential that would give him information about what is possible with holographics than any other Airbus pilot or bus drive or milkman for that matter. They want to promote the no-planes-hit-the-WTC stupidity and they failed to convince people that all of more than 50 video cameras were tampered with and all the witnesses who say planes were liars -- which was the first version of no-planes-hit-the-WTC-towers that began in 2006 and which Jim Fetzer heavily showcased and defended from his leadership position in the Scholars for 9-11 Truth organization. When the absurdity that all of those people, including firemen, policemen and people who were in the buildings, who saw the planes and that all of the videos of the crash were altered with planes "cartooned in" -- when that monstrous and maddening claim was found to be too absured to hold on to any more - the convenient swtich to "projected holograms" was begun. I was there arguing with Fetzer and the others as were Erick Salter, Galen Denzen, Peter Wakefild Sault, Anthony Lawson, myself and many others who were met with abuse from Fetzer, Morgan Reynolds, Ace Baker, Balsamo, Lear, Joseph Keith, Perloff and the rest of the no-planes team. Morgan Reynolds became of no-planes-hit-the-WTC-towers coming directly from the Bush White House and going directly to Rosalee Grable and Gerard Holmgren who began the no-planes hit the WTC deception in early 2006 when Holmgren flew from Austrailia to visit Webfairy to work out the details of the hoax. Morgan Reynolds arrived shortly afterwards. I knew all three long before they started the project, since Grable, as "the Webfairy" and Holmgren both attached to me after I began writing about the bombs in the WTC and the fact that the Pentagon evidence was inconsistent with a large plane crashing there. Ted Olsen and Karl Rove certainly noticed what I was saying at that time and Morgan Reynolds, who was an economist at the White House certainly remembered me from the days when I was a student in the Doctoral program in economics at Texas A & M and I tried to get a course started that young Reynolds would teach. Reynolds was given the assignment to take part in the operation to get people's minds off of no Boeing at the Pentatgon which was an easily established fact and unto the ridiculous and repelling story that no planes hit the WTC towers -- a perfect stink bomb of distraction, confusion and insult to drive everyone away from anyone talking about 9-11 evidence contradicting the official boxcutter story. Fetzer and the rest are as guilty as any other participant in any other phase of the 9-11-01 mass-murder false-flag war-provoking treason/terrorism. Do you suppose Dr. Fetzer would be willing to debate the question again on Rense with Mike Harris hosting?
Here are the no-planers and Karl Rove and Ted Olsen who very likely put them up to it:

Fetzer made war on Dr. Steven Jones, who found the thermite and all of the best investigators while
but endlessly showcased the absurd and offensive no-planers, including those shown below:
On other issues raised by Fetzer below (not included): I will not go further in answering the disinformation put out by Fetzer on the cause of the twin towers collapsing other than to say that the discovery of thermite in the WTC dust and the established fact of molten steel -- intensely eated to easily flowing liquidity -- pouring from South Tower three minutes before the collapse is sufficient to explain the event without the recourse to groundless claims of ray guns or "neutron bombs" put out by the justice obstructing accomplices and whatever ignorant people they can carry along with them. Nor will I bother Fetzer's claim that the Apollo missions were fake, other than to point out that faking the event would be much further beyond the capacity of the United States government then as is the effort to discredit the fact is today. China has always told its people that the US never landed on the moon -- and China will lose face if its people found out that China was deceiving the Chinese. So the Establishment is doing China a favor by erasing the American accomplishment, which, of course, works nicely with transfer of international hit-man status from the US to China for the latter part of the 21st Century.

Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Next let us get into who was connected with the deaths of Pentagon witness