The Fetzer-Jones Love Spat Continues
Jim Fetzer and Steven Jones continue to post attacks on each other, giving us even more insight into the bizarre paranoid world they live in.
I have reams of evidence from the forum that Steve was patiently explaining to others how they could proceed to take control of the web site and even the society from me. He wants you to ignore his actual conduct, which was offensive,on the ground that he was merely offering advice about how it could be done and not pursuing power for himself. But those whose loyal followers acquire that power following their leader’s instructions are going to be beholden to them, as we all know.
This bit is my favorite though:
It was with considerable distress, therefore, that I discovered the editorial board he appointed was not chock-full of first rate, "hard science" types. Its lack of appropriate balance has led to criticism on various 9/11-related sites, criticism that I acknowledge to have been well-founded.Well duh, where are you going to find "first rate hard science types" among the "Scholars" for 9/11 "Truth"? Geez Jim, you are asking the impossible of him.
posted by James B. @ 2:41 PM
11 comments
11 Comments:
Hey, maybe these two should give mud wrestling a shot.
I said this over on the Bad Astronomy and Universe Today forums, but... it seems to me that Jones was actually holding Fetzer back in some sick and twisted sort of way.
Creepy.
Holy shit that's a lotta spam.
You know what that reminds me of actually? Back when I was in boy scouts, one of the kids was having trouble learning to tie a simple knot, and the scoutmaster said:
"hey, if you can't tie knots, tie lots".
Seems like ewing subscribes to the same theory when it comes to 9/11 "research".
Can we just ban him? It's really annoying scrolling through 1000 lines of spam.
Yeah, it's not really infringing on freedom of speech. A spambot doesn't HAVE any freedom of speech.
That was a big F*&king Spam. That was like the money of all money shots of stupid.
Anyhow;
I love the bit where Fetzer cries foul on the lack of science experts for the journal...hello. You lack scientific experts in your entire organization (if that is what you want to call a bunch of people who sign up on your web site, but contribute NOTHING to your cause).
The most agonizing thing about the fall of the 9/11 truth movement, is how long it is taking. It is like watching a building collapse brick by brick.
TAM
Can anyone explain where ewing2001 is going with his research?
Is his basic premise stating that the 9/11 blooger/movement has been compromised by intel agents?
Swing Dangler said...
Can anyone explain where ewing2001 is going with his research?
Is his basic premise stating that the 9/11 blooger/movement has been compromised by intel agents?
I can't explain. I'm not sure I am going to read it.
Here's my very limited thoughts on Nico:
After a year ago, Nico has explained to me some of his history in emails and posts, especially his time with GNN. He was there with Sander Hicks (at GNN), and he spoke favorably of Mr. Hicks.
My appraisal of Sander Hicks (author of The Big Wedding) is so negative that I look with a jaundiced eye on anyone who supports him.
I think Nico's theory that the 2nd Plane hit on 9/11 was a cgi insert, not a real plane, is erroneous. I would say that there's a 60% probability that Nico is a disinfo agent. The remaining 40% would allow for just human fallibility.
The kind of posts that he make above tend to, in my mind, push that 60% probability higher.
The positive responses that I give to Nico are in case I'm wrong and he is on to something to make sense of 9/11 in a way no one else has.
addendum, comments about Nico....
Ok I scanned Nico's post here.
This guy Floum is placed at an odd nexus (st911.org domain name owner, S. Jones atty?, etc.). The fact that Nico leans hard on questioning him and his activities is something I can't easily dismiss as idle gossip.
Thanks to Nico, we've got a "watch the deniers bash each other" thread. Maybe he's not such a bad guy after all...
Haupt is now considered one of the most consistently reliable spotters and analysts of COINTELPRO and related activity within the movement itself.
He rarely tags people outright as perps or agents.
He simply presents the background material and lets you do your own homework.
Likewise with Holmgren.
Whatever one thinks of their personal idiosyncracies or the credibility of their models for what happened (or didn't happen on 9/11), from a strictly historicist point of view, they have been on the mark in all of their strategic political analysis of the movement as a whole.
The background material on D. Alexander Floum, his role in managing Prof. Steve Jones and engineering the content at 911blogger, the critical importance of maintaining official government secrecy on most classified weapons research, development and deployment ... all this makes it highly unlikely that the cult gurus of the officially designated "9/11 Truth Movement" would just happen to be classified Los Alamos developers (like Jones, Bowman or Kubiak , or NSA subcontractors like the celebrated dustier extraoridinaire Jim Hoffman.
Holmgren was on the mark, way back when he spotted Jones a Trojan Horse (Los Alamos and the Mormons) with an evidentiary poison pill - "thermate" ..
Likewise, Haupt has been on the mark in identifying Floum as a serious COINTELPRO operator in the offcial media designated cast (containment) of the script: Michael Berger, Steve Jones, John Albanese on FOX ..
Read Haupt's analysis of the whole set-up.
Then watch who shows up as a "9/11trooth" spokesperson on FOX or Pacifica.
If we had a media betting pool on this, his scorecard wins every time.
Post a Comment
<< Home