9/11 Scholars for Truthiness

War is Peace, Ignorance is Strength, Scholars for Truth

The "Scholars" group was founded in the winter of 2005 by Professors Steven Jones and James Fetzer.

Jones is a serious, apparently sincere scholar of physics who has been examining the claims for controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7, although this website does not think his findings are provable through independent peer review.

The other co-founder, James Fetzer, promotes hoaxes -- no planes on 9/11, no moon landing, no Zapruder film (JFK). One hopes hope for his sake that he doesn't really believe those things.


These days in the 9/11 Truth demimonde, early and clear-eyed researchers like [Peter Dale] Scott, Paul Thompson and Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed are rarely heard over the likes of Morgan Reynolds and the thermate/"mini-nukes" debate, and rather than contributions such as the discovery of 9/11's concurrent war games we have "scholars for 9/11 Truth" tearing one another new impact holes over speculation on space-based beam weaponry. If you think that indicates progress, and that we're closer to 9/11 justice than we were three years ago, I don't know what more to tell you.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Jeff Wells, Rigorous Intuition, "Back to the Wilderness"


Scholars hoax conference in Madison, Wisconsin

July 28, 2007 at 09:11:23
Mounting Evidence of 9/11 Video Fakery: New proof of media duplicity, Scholars claim
by James Fetzer

New studies of media coverage of the attacks on the Twin Towers have raised serious questions about the integrity of television broadcasts over CNN, CBS and FOX NEWS, according to Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a non-partisan society of students, experts, and scholars. "I used to think that the very idea of faking 'live' broadcasts was at least faintly absurd," observed James Fetzer, the society's founder. "But it turns out that there is a delay between an event's actual occurrence and the broadcasting of footage of that same event, which creates the opportunity for image manipulation."


Kevin Barrett, the founder of MUJCA and a member of Scholars, reports he is troubled by these new studies. "I guess I'll have to take this possibility more seriously now," Barrett said. "In the past, I have assumed video fakery was far-fetched and that anyone who endorsed it was probably a crackpot! Now I'm not so sure."


Ace Baker mentions a group long convinced of video fakery, including Gerard Holmgren, Rosalee Grable, StillDiggin, Killtown, and others, who have been frustrated their arguments have not been taken seriously. "For that reason, I'm including this subject in a conference on 'The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not,' which will be held in Madison on August 3-5, 2007 ( 911scholars.org)," Fetzer said. "We are going do our best to get to the bottom of this. Truth about 9/11 is stranger than fiction."


The conference is here -



3-5 August 2007

"The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not?"

Scholars for 9/11 Truth is sponsoring its first conference, which is on "The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not", from 3-5 August 2007 at the Radisson Madison in Madison, WI. The purpose of this conference is to provide an opportunity (a) to review multiple proofs that the "official account" of 9/11 cannot possibly be true, (b) to explore some of the issues that have generated controversy in the research community, (c) to afford the opportunity for students of 9/11 to interact personally with leading investigators, and (d) for the participants to reflect upon 9/11 in the context of the neo-con agenda. A final session will be devoted to assessing the state of current research.


This cutting-edge conference boasts thirteen stellar speakers:

ALEXANDER "ACE" BAKER, a music composer and producer, is currently the co-composer for "American Dragster" on ESPN and has also been the composer for independent feature films, such as "Mohave Phone Booth", winner of multiple film festival awards and scheduled for SHOWTIME. In scoring for film and television, Ace works with digital video on a daily basis. He has completed a study of television film fakery involving the hit on the South Tower, which is entitled, "Chopper 5 Composite".

KEVIN BARRETT, Ph.D., the leading 9/11 activist in the world today, is the author of TRUTH JIHAD, co-editor of 9/11 AND AMERICAN EMPIRE, and the founder of MUJCA-NET, a society that brings together Christians, Muslims, and Jews in pursuit of the truth about 9/11. He will present an overview about political aspects of 9/11 activism.
[nothing like a little humility when describing oneself -- and it is highly unlikely that any alleged Jews and few alleged Christians who think the idea of MUJCA-NET is a good idea would agree with Barrett's statements that the Nazi Holocaust is a "destructive myth"]

JAMES H. FETZER earned his Ph.D. in the history and the philosophy of science. A former Marine Corps officer, he has published 28 books, including, most recently, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY: THE SCAMMING OF AMERICA, with contributions from eleven experts on different aspects of the case. The founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, he also maintains the society's web site at 911scholars.org.
[note: Fetzer's personal website AssassinationScience.com also claims the moon landings never happened, which suggests it is not exactly a reliable source of information. One of the links he uses to promote "no moon landing" is the Russian newspaper PRAVDA, which means "truth." Much of the "New 9/11 Truth Movement" is similar to the old Communist publication PRAVDA - it says it's "truth" but the claim is not believable.]

BOB FITRAKIS, Political Science Professor at Columbus State Community College, Columbus, OH, earned his Ph.D. from Wayne State University and his J.D. from The Moritz College of Law at Ohio State. He has published many books, including STAR WARS, WEATHER MODIFICATION, AND FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE. An expert on election fraud, he has received many awards for excellence in investigative journalism.
[Fitrakis is with freepress.org - which has done excellent work on vote fraud, safe energy and other critical issues. It is a disappointment to see him lend his name to this circus.]

BARBARA HONEGGER, graduate of the Naval War College master's program in National Security Decisionmaking and the Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the Department of Defense's premiere science, technology, and national security affairs graduate school, she is the author of "The Pentagon Attack Papers", which David Ray Griffin has suggested will "transform the discussion of what happened at the Pentagon". The author of OCTOBER SURPRISE, the first book to expose the origins of Irangate, she was one of two members of the Ronald Reagan Administration to resign from conscience.
[note: at least one need not wonder if this speaker is from the government]

JERRY V. LEAPHART, J.D., is an activist civil rights trial lawyer and a bar member in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. He has more than 33 years experience as a lawyer in both domestic and international areas. He was the moving force behind the use of the Data Quality Act to submit Request for Correction to the NIST, which may lead to shattering the 9/11 cover-up.

JIM MARRS, an investigative journalist and best-selling author, has published books on many controversial subjects, including UFOs, secret societies, and the assassination of JFK. CROSSFIRE, for example, was a primary source for Olver Stone's "JFK". His
work on 9/11 now includes INSIDE JOB: UNMASKING THE 9/11 CONSPIRACIES and THE TERROR CONSPIRACY: DECEPTION, 9/11 AND THE LOSS OF LIBERTY (co-authored with Barbara Honegger).
[note: Mr. Marrs told the 9/11 Inquiry in San Francisco in March 2004 that the real reason for the Iraq invasion was to steal archeological relics - the "blood for oil" meme is evidently just a distraction. His Inside Job and Terror Conspiracy books recycle the various "no plane" claims.]

LEUREN MORET, an independent radiation specialist, has worked in 46 countries as a professional geo-scientist. An expert witness on DU weaponry at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in Tokyo in 2003, she was recently appointed an expert witness on DU weaponry for the Canadian Parliament. She has published on exotic weapons, including HAARP, weather-modification, tectonic warfare, mind-control, 4th generation nuclear weapons, and scientific issues related to 9/11. She also received a University of California President's Mentoring Fellowship in the Sciences during her Ph.D. research on atmospheric dust and the history of the Earth's magnetic field.
[note: Ms. Moret also claims that a depleted uranium tipped missile was fired at the Pentagon, which shows a curious disinterest in scientific analysis. The Nuclear Resister magazine has an excellent article exposing flaws in her work, a copy is archived at www.oilempire.us/depleted-uranium.html

MORGAN REYNOLDS, Ph.D., Economics Professor Emeritus at Texas A&M University and former Chief Economist in the Department of Labor in the Bush Administration, he has also served as Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, Dallas, TX. The author of six books, he has taken a leading role in studies that support the conclusion that no big planes crashed on 9/11. He has a web site at nomoregames.net.
[note the memes: a trusted member of the Bush administration is telling the conspiracy theorists that there were not plane crashes on 9/11]

DOUG ROKKE, Ph.D., former Director, U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project, earned his B.S. in physics at Western Illinois and his M.S. and Ph.D. in physics and technology education the University of Illinois. He has taught undergraduate and graduate courses in environmental science, environmental engineering, nuclear physics, and emergency management, and served as a staff physicist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign for 19 years. His military career spanned four decades, including combat duty in Vietnam and Gulf War I.

DAVE VON KLEIST was among the first to spot problems with the videos of the planes hitting the South Tower, which were featured in his documentary on 9/11, "In Plane Site". He co-hosts "The Power Hour" with Joyce Riley, which can be accessed at thepowerhour.com. An outstanding activist and researcher who has been instrumental in focusing attention on the planes, his latest DVD, "9/11: Ripple Effect", has just now been released.
[note: In Plane Site was the film in 2004 that admitted it was a hoax on the front cover - see www.oilempire.us/hoax-jokes.html for the details]

ALFRED WEBRE, J.D., M.Ed., author, lawyer, futurist, peace activist, environmental activist, and space activist who promotes the ban of space weapons, was a co-architect of the Space Preservation Treaty and of the Space Preservation Act, which was introduced to the U.S. Congress by Representative Dennis Kucinich and is endorsed by more than 270 non-governmental organizations worldwide. Webre is a judge on the Kuala Lumpur International War Crimes Tribunal and is the International Director of the Institute for Cooperation in Space. He is co-author of the 9/11 Independent Prosecutor Act, and author of EXOPOLITICS: POLITICS, GOVERNMENT AND LAW IN THE UNIVERSE. He and Leuren Moret have proposed a Citizens 9/11 War Crimes Tribunal.

JUDY WOOD, Ph.D., may be the most qualified scientist studying 9/11 in the world. She holds a B.S. in civil engineering, an M.S. in engineering mechanics, and a Ph.D. in materials engineering science. A former professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson University, Dr. Wood has done pioneering research on the destruction of the WTC and maintains a web site at drjudywood.com, which is the most important research web site in the 9/11 community.
[note: The Complete 9/11 Timeline, maintained by the Center for Cooperative Research at www.cooperativeresearch.org is the most important research website in the 9/11 truth community -- at least for the reality based part of that community. Ms. Wood claims that space based weapons took down the twin towers, which is about the nuttiest claim to date.]


The Science of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not
3-5 August 2007, Madison, WI

The conference will be held at the Radisson Hotel Madison, 517 Grand Canyon Drive, Madison, WI 53719. Information about the hotel may be located on-line at www.radisson.com/madisonwi.

The hotel provides complimentary breakfasts, has a pool and exercise room, with very nice accommodations. The rooms run $99 per night. Registration, including two lunches, will run $125.


FRIDAY, 3 August 2007

7-10 PM, Registration

SATURDAY, 4 August 2007

7-9 AM, Registration


Jim Fetzer, Scholars, Dave von Kleist and Barbara Honegger, Independent Scholars, Kevin Barrett, MUJCA

Noon-1 PM: Deli Sandwich, Soup, and Salad Buffet


Judy Wood, Scholars, and Bob Fitrakis, Independent Scholar,


Jerry Leaphart, Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Scholars

6-8 PM: Dinner on your own on the town


Doug Rokke, Military Expert, Leuren Moret and Alfred Webre, Independent Scholars

SUNDAY, 5 August 2007


Morgan Reynolds, Scholars, Ace Baker, Scholars, and Doug Rokke, Military Expert


Jim Marrs, Scholars, Dave von Kleist and Barbara Honegger, Independent Scholars, Jim Fetzer, Scholars

1 PM-2 PM: Hot Lunch Buffet, Closing Remarks

The conference will be limited to 150 participants.
The program ends early on Sunday for afternoon flights.
The hotel has a limo service to the Dane County/Madison Airport.


Rooms at the conference rate are only guaranteed until 13 July and thereafter depend upon availability. And you must register in order to reserve your room.

To register, send a check to Scholars for 9/11 Truth, 800 Violet Lane, Oregon, WI 53575. Please contact Jim Fetzer, Program Chair, if you have any suggestions or recommendations.

This is the conference of the year, which pushes the envelope of scientific research in a concerted effort to finally figure out what actually happened on 9/11. You don't want to miss it!


James H. Fetzer
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it


There is an important logical difference between refuting a theory, such as the official account, and discovering how these things were done. The piece, "Why doubt 9/11?", archived on 911scholars.org, for example, offers about two dozen proofs that the government's account is not only provably false but, in crucial respects, even violates laws of physics, of engineering and of aerodynamics. It follows that the official theory is "just fine" as long as you are willing to believe impossible things! That's all it demands of us.

Figuring out how these things were done is another matter entirely. The leading account of how this was done involves appealing to two chemical "cutter charges" known as thermite and thermate, which is the hypothesis advanced by Steven Jones. Unfortunately, the case he has made for this approach appears to be weak from the point of view of scientific inquiry. The growing realization that thermite/ thermate are most unlikely to be able to explain what happened has led me to encourage the study of unconventional alternative causes.

Indeed, conventional explosives seem to be inadequate to account for the breadth and depth of damage to the Twin Towers, much less to the World Trade Center as a whole, which included four other buildings beyond the North and South Towers and WTC-7, which appears to have been taken down by a classic controlled demolition. The towers, by comparison, appear to have been destroyed?largely pulverized?by means of a novel form of top-down demolition. References below.

In addition to the modes of destruction of the WTC, attention will focus on television video fakery in the coverage of the impact of the Boeing 767s that are presumed to have hit the Twin Towers. The existence of examples of video fakery appears to be extensive and raises both fascinating and difficult questions about what actually hit the towers. Could there have been real plane crashes and video fakery, too, which was intended to conceal features of the planes or their impacts? The conference will explore video fakery and what happened and why.

[emphases added]


Background on the alleged "Scholars"

website of James Fetzer that promotes the "no flight 77" hoax and the claim that the Moon landings were faked in a movie studio.

Fetzer is the primary sponsor of Scholars for Truth about 9/11, a mix of some good information and some hoaxes.


Adam Larson / Caustic Logic
The Frustrating Fraud
June 27 2007
last updated August 11

A new press release boosting Pilots for 9/11 Truth as “driv[ing] another nail into a coffin of lies told the American people by The 9/11 Commission” was just released by Scholars for 9/11 Truth (the Fetzer wing). Co-founder of the recently-divided organization James Fetzer in fact seems to have written up the release, titled “New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon.” It was released on June 21 and picked up by Yahoo news, apparently a bit of an achievement, and has been widely republished since then. It demands a firm, well thought out response from my end, and hence the slight delay in publishing this (and the later edits and updates). ....

One of the deepest ironies revealed in Fetzer’s missive is that "Fetzer [...] retired last June after 35 years of teaching courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning.” Well, how could one argue with the logical conclusions of a renowned logic expert? I’ll try it caustically. Fact is, what this background of his shows to me is that he knows exactly what he’s doing – elevating a fraud to guiding principle of the “Truth Movement” he claims a leadership role in to arrive at the “truth.” In the end, from all this Fetzer was able to use his deep knowledge of ctical thinking and scientific deduction (as well, of course, as years learning all of their opposites – the arts of sophistry, quackery, and deception) to deduce an argument finally totally inverse to my own growing suspicions:

"The Pentagon has become a kind of litmus test for rationality in the study of 9/11. Those who persist in maintaining that a Boeing 757 hit the building are either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired. Unless they want to mislead the American people. The evidence is beyond clear and compelling. It places this issue 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

I am quite familiar with the evidence, and I invite anyone to check my reasoning for soundness of judgment. That’s what this site’s about: “the hijacking of the 9/11 Truth Movement by the no-757 at the Pentagon theory." It almost feels with this salvo like Fetzer the mental “muscle hijacker” is letting us know the pilots have the cockpit; he tells us never mind the doubters, move to the back of the plane. No need to investigate for yourselves, we have it all figured out. We are returning to the airport. We just need to agree on this and move on.

But what if the Pilots intend to crash this plane? It’s happened before. That's not even a box cutter Fetzer's holding, people. It's a carbdoard prop. We can take this plane back. Let's Roll.


The Company We Keep
by Michael B. Green, Ph.D.
February 6, 2006

The recently announced "Scholars for 9/11 truth" is the most recent example of an outreach effort blending together quality work and sloppy support for hoaxes. The analysis listed above by psychologist Michael Green is an excellent effort to understand this phenomenon, and how it interferes with disseminating the truths of 9/11 (and related scandals).


Assassinated Science

a review of Fetzer's book "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax"


ScholarsFor911Truth.org: Muddling the Evidence
by Jim Hoffman
Version 1.0, Feb. 12, 2006

Scholars For 9/11 Truth was formed by James Fetzer and Steven Jones in the wake of a huge wave of interest in his paper Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse? The concept of such a group is a noble one. Bringing together a group of scholarly researchers to examine the unanswered questions surrounding the 9/11/01 attack is an excellent way to garner credibility for the 9/11 Truth Movement. As of this writing, the group includes several individuals notable for their expertise in fields relevant to analyzing the attack.
The website ScholarsFor911Truth.org serves as the public face of the Scholars For 9/11 Truth group, but the website's content is not necessarily representative of the views of the group's members. Unfortunately, even a cursory examination of the website suggests that, instead of amplifying the excellent work of Steven Jones and some of the group's other researchers, it promises to undermine that work, and possibly the work of all scholars raising questions about the official story.
Since the tragedy itself, the 9/11 Truth Movement has been plagued by both misinformation, and by deliberate disinformation that has been injected into the debate in order to discredit challenges to the official account. Documenting these poison pills has not redeemed the 9/11 Truth Movement in public opinion because few in the Movement have taken a stand, fearing that to do so would be "divisive." One need look no further than the attack pieces by Popular Mechanics and Scientific American to understand how flimsy, easily debunked claims are highlighted by defenders of the official account to tar the entire community of skeptics as loony conspiracy theorists whose conclusions are not supported by the facts.
Despite the evidence, ScholarsFor911Truth.org has thus far failed to acknowledge that the promotion of nonsensical claims is part of a deliberate strategy to undermine the Truth Movement. Even worse, the website uncritically links to many websites featuring work that is, at best, thoroughly unscientific. ....

ScholarsFor911Truth.org avoids the websites of 9/11 researchers and groups who have established reputations for quality work. Instead, it links to numerous websites that promote red herrings, and analysis that is at best incompetent. ....

ScholarsFor911Truth.org contains a list of names of members. Full members are required to "have or had academic appointments or the equivalent." Unfortunately there appear to be no criteria governing the admission of associate members or student members. Indeed, several of the associate members may [only] exist as internet personas ....

Although Scholarsfor911Truth.org lists over a dozen full members, it is not clear how decisions are made about such critical matters as the website's content. The website's linkage to other sites strongly parallels the ideas that co-founder James Fetzer supports on his own site AssassinationScience.com, such as that the moon landing was faked, that no jetliner crashed at the Pentagon, and that the cell phone calls from the doomed jetliners were faked. Like ScholarsFor911Truth.org, AssassinationScience.com promotes Jack White's Photo Studies of 9/11, Loose Change, and Serendipity.li. In fact, ScholarsFor911Truth.org's Resources page is very similar to the 911 Web Sites page on AssassinationScience.com ....

Although ScholarsFor911Truth.org is relatively new, it has been effectively promoted in national mainstream media, and functions as the public's main source of information about the group. Because of the sudden notoriety of Steven Jones, the website is undoubtedly drawing many curious and naive readers questioning the official story for the first time. Thus, the quality of the website is all the more crucial because, as most long-time 9/11 researchers know, the first impressions are difficult to overcome, and can be a deciding factor in an individual's choice to join the movement.
My link analysis shows that the site directs readers to some of the least credible sources of information about the attack, while effectively ignoring the websites of some of the most respected researchers of the attack ....

The lack of appreciation of the history of the 9/11 Truth Movement is reflected in the forum, which is dominated by discussions of what hit the Pentagon. ....

The idea of Scholars For 9/11 Truth is a very powerful one, given the respect people give to credentialed individuals. Since November of 2005, Steven Jones has made tremendous progress in getting people to seriously consider the possibility that the World Trade Center skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolition, largely because of his qualifications as a professor of physics. Sadly, Scholars For 9/11 Truth might not have its intended effect of building on Jones' work. Instead it is likely to have the effect of discrediting it by associating it with junk science, such as that used to promote the no-planes theories. Because of the visibility of the flawed ScholarsFor911Truth.org website, this seems probable despite the good intentions and excellent credentials of many of the group's members.
In late 2005, people looking into Steven Jones' work would be directed to his paper on the Brigham Young University website. Now, people are directed to ScholarsFor911Truth.org, which mixes the scholarly work of Steven Jones and David Griffin with unscientific, sensationalist, and even offensive material. In the context of the flawed ScholarsFor911Truth.org website, Jones' work will be much easier to dismiss as the product of a group of "conspiracy theorists."


The Company We Keep
by Michael B. Green, Ph.D.
Version 1.2, February 15, 2006

This praise for the new group, alas, is only partially justified, and the part of the group that is not so impressive serves to tarnish the group’s flagship scientist, Steven E. Jones.


Steven E. Jones - A Physics Professor Speaks Out on 9-11: Reason, Publicity, and Reaction
by Victoria Ashley
Version 1.0, Jan. 14, 2006

"In the 9/11 movement there appear to be phases in which disinformation techniques are tried, are pushed hard, and then are either debunked or functionally discarded such that anyone still promoting them are considered disingenuous or extremely naive."


A Critical Review of: Thinking about "Conspiracy Theories": 9/11 and JFK
by Jim Hoffman
Version 1.0, Feb. 6, 2006

James Fetzer's paper 'Thinking about "Conspiracy Theories": 9/11 and JFK' [pdf] is one of three "peer-reviewed" papers featured on the ScholarsFor911Truth.org website. In his paper, Fetzer discusses details of what he considers "the two most important conspiracies in our history" -- "those involving JFK and 9/11." ....

Fetzer advances exactly two theories contradicting the official account of the events of 9/11/01:
The collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7 were the result of controlled demolitions (the demolition theory)
The Pentagon was not struck by a Boeing 757 (the no-757 theory)
Fetzer fails to describe any basis for rejecting the official story other than these two theories -- an omission that may lead some readers to assume the case for official complicity in the attacks is much narrower than it actually is. Fetzer expresses a strong conviction that both theories are correct, but suggests that the no-757 theory is stronger. He fails to acknowledge that it is considered a distraction or hoax by the some of the most respected researchers in the community of 9/11 skeptics.


The Company We Keep
by Michael B. Green, Ph.D.
February 6, 2006

This praise for the new group, alas, is only partially justified, and the part of the group that is not so impressive serves to tarnish the group’s flagship scientist, Steven E. Jones.

Scott Bingham, Flight 77 info


UPDATE 5/24/6
not all 9/11 skeptics are conspiracy theorists. you don't need to think a missile hit the pentagon to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. hard-core conspiracy theorists (CTs) set up shop within the 9/11 truth movement very early. CTs get their joy from promoting and inventing theory (not in seeking accuracy) where accuracy gaps exist. since 9/11 is so full of accuracy gaps, CTs have flourished heavily. it is frequently difficult to know if you're communicating with a CT, or someone who is sincerely interested in filling in the 9/11accuracy gaps with information gained from actual investigation.
most, if not all CTs hang out on the planet called, 'anything other than a 757 hit the pentagon'. it is on this planet that CTs have built their cities. they ARE a movement - it's the '9/11 conspiracy theory movement'. this movement should not be confused with the '9/11 truth movement' - they are very different movements.
one of the more popular cities on planet 9/11 CT is called, 'scholars for 9/11 truth' [the only wikipedia definition i've ever seen being considered for deletion]. this is a relatively new organization, and support the highly dubious judicial watch. while having many well-meaning members, there is no denying that 'scholars for 9/11 truth' neither acts in scholarly ways, nor do they promote accuracy (also known as 'truth'). instead S911T hump to no end the notion that something other than a 757 hit the pentagon.

UPDATE 3/24/6
i hate sort of beating-up on certain segments of the collective of people who are skeptical about the official version of happened on 9/11... but here i go again: scholars for 9/11 truth: another just provocative web site. how can you tell? among other things, on their home page, they promote the 9/11 music video called 'loose change' that offers up every crack pot pod missile theory in the book. 'loose change' is out there just to provoke people emotionally. its substance is in its appeal to teens and twentysomethings. so why are the 'scholars for 9/11 truth' aligning themselves with a tin hat munching 9/11 music video? why are the 'scholars for 9/11 truth' also promoting the no 757 theory? answer: the web site is just provocative. it's using the blanket (AKA 'big tent'; throwing enough shit at the wall) approach to attract more people to the concept that 9/11 was an inside job. then by magic, one of these new people will uncover the proof we need to hang the true conspirators.
what's wrong with this 'scholarly' approach? anyone? anyone ? bueler? bueler?
once bush & co reach the end of their reign - that's the finish line, they win. once those powers-that-be are out of power, people lose interest. we need to get 'em for 9/11 while they're in office if we're going to end this endless war on terrorism.
so the problem with the scholars for 9/11 truth's throw-enough-shit-at-the-wall approach is that they're spinning a new generation of 9/11 skeptics into 9/11 goofballs who are going to spend the next 2 1/2 years looking at the same old pictures of the pentagon going, 'gee, that IS a small hole...' and who will spend endless hours replaying the WTC video trying to see the missile pods.
what does it gain the 9/11 truth movement if everyone is a member - but we're all full of shit reciting misinformation?
the purpose of the 9/11 truth movement isn't to have more members - it's to end the war on terrorism while it's still possible. and time is really running out.

Here is a good article on the sheer lunacy of the disinformation campaigns, although marred by a misrepresentation of the book Crossing the Rubicon, falsely claiming it was primarily a book about Peak Oil that supposedly is not related to the 9/11 issue (Rubicon focused on the interconnection between the two supposedly separate issues). Expecting a dissertation on the crimes of 9/11 to avoid a discussion of the motives behind complicity that allowed and assisted the attacks would be like a crime story that entirely discussed the mechanics of a murder without mentioning who benefitted and what their motivation was.



TUESDAY, JULY 03, 2007
The 9/11 B. S. Movement
Blatant Insanity = Intentional DIS-information

We are drowning in DIS-information, that is deliberate gibberish passed off as a "9/11 conspiracy theory," which is intended to associate all of the 9/11 skeptics with "whack job" ideas about that day.

The rational public will then see the "whack job" ideas dutifully printed in the mainstream corporate press, and they will respond with revulsion to the concept of skepticism of the official 9/11 story. It's simple guilt by association psychology.

No one wants to associate with obvious morons. There is indeed method to the madness.

As if we haven't suffered enough ad hominem attacks, we now must defend against deliberate campaigns that are on their face: MAD. And they're supposedly coming from us. ....

.... they have fired up the thrusters, and they are on some kind of disinformation rampage over at the dark side think tanks. It has become some kind of contest to pass along the most insane nonsense for the willing dupes out there to slurp up.