Scholar Schism Make-up?
I got this from an e-mail group, forwarded from Kevin "hang 'em high" Barrett. Apparently Steven Jones and Jim Fetzer, who had a rather public falling out which led them to split their "Scholars" group, are kissing and making up:
Jim Fetzer writes: "I have tremendous admiration for Steve's recent paper 'Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction,' co-authored by Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, and James R. Gourley: http://www.911blogger.com/node/15081 I think it is brilliant the way the authors made their points by 'agreeing' with NIST and FEMA. While I remain convinced that conventional explosives alone cannot account for the nature and extent of the damage to the World Trade Center, I also welcome Steve's ongoing research on thermite and thermate residues. Thermate and thermite may well have contributed to the destruction of the Twin Towers and even been used to bring down WTC-7. I have invited Steve to return to my show for another interview, assuring him that I will let Steve get in a word or two now and then. I would like to do whatever I can to acquire a united front for 9/11 research, including urging us to support those rarest of animals, 9/11 truth candidates who are running for office. Someone like Kevin could make a huge difference."
9/11 truth guru David Ray Griffin even chimes in, endorsing the work of Fetzer, and paranoid anti-semitic numerologist and former Army Reserve officer Eric May:
Here is David Ray Griffin's take, written in response to someone who had harshly criticized Jim Fetzer:
"Jim Fetzer has done a lot of good work and did much to build up the scholarly component of the 9/11 truth movement. "It is true that I ultimately dropped out of his organization (Scholars for 9/11 Truth) and instead, along with many others, joined Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, which is associated with Steven Jones. But my leaving involved issues of style rather than substantive matters (although it's also true that Jim had used his position as head of Scholars inappropriately, I thought, to promote some controversial theories, rather than remaining publicly neutral while allowing Scholars to be a place where these theories could be debated in a scholarly manner; but these are matters of judgment, on which sincere people can
"Part of the good work Jim has done is the article he co-authored with Captain May and two other military men."