{"id":32358,"date":"2011-08-18T07:50:08","date_gmt":"2011-08-18T07:50:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=32358"},"modified":"2013-06-15T06:39:39","modified_gmt":"2013-06-15T06:39:39","slug":"comments-on-attack-on-jim-fetzer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=32358","title":{"rendered":"Comments on Attack on Jim Fetzer"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 style=\"text-align: center;\">Email from Nick Kollerstrom \u2013 August 17, 2011<\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">Dear Rixon,<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">It does seem a pity that \u2018The Truthseeker\u2019 has published an article slagging off Jim Fetzer (&#8216;the notorious Jim Fezer&#8217;), as if he were some kind of fruitcake. (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=32191\" target=\"_blank\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=32191<\/span><\/strong><\/a><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\"> )\u00a0He&#8217;s a retired emeritus professor of philosophy of science, has published loads of books about logic, founded scholars for 911 truth, and edited books about 911 \u2013 none of which Anthony Lawson has done.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">A couple of years ago, Jim got converted to the \u2018no-planes\u2019 theory of 911, on account I believe of the \u2018September Clues\u2019 video, also Judy Wood\u2019s work. Frankly I don\u2019t know what the truth is here, but the point is that people of integrity do defend this position.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">For example, leading UK paranormal researcher Richard Hall proposed his theory about what went into the Towers, two years ago, which was not a plane, and he accepted that that the plane images were somehow fabricated. <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.checktheevidence.co.uk\/cms\/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=298&amp;Itemid=60\" target=\"_blank\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">http:\/\/www.checktheevidence.co.uk\/cms\/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=298&amp;Itemid=60<\/span><\/strong><\/a><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\"> <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">(I think that people should be aware that the &#8216;no-planes&#8217; theory does not mean that the &#8220;virtual planes&#8221; necessarily only impacted on peoples&#8217; TV screens. These planes are asserted (as a possibility) to have been real in space and time but having existed as &#8216;holograms&#8217; (using some as-not-yet-released technology) that surrounded missiles that passed (in one case at least) right through the building.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">Whether or not its true, the image of the plane hitting the second tower and &#8216;melting&#8217; into the building has yet to be satisfactorily explained.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">The point is not whether this is\u00a0necessarily true, but that the people offering it as a theory to explain anomalies in the existing news footage are not (I believe, knowing Jim Fetzer) &#8216;shills&#8217; or agents but real researchers and thinkers doing their best to understand an extremely strange event.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">Anthony Lawson\u2019s \u2018real-planes\u2019 video is to be welcomed, but I suggest it is way too brief to cover the relevant material. The point, is more or less all of the images of both planes going into the towers that morning, look very suspicious. If he thinks he has a long shot of the plane that really went into the South tower, flying low, then he needs to tell us very clearly where it came from.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">The problem of how a Boeing jet could apparently go right through the building and emerge on the other side is a weighty one, which most experts I\u2019ve heard would say is impossible. Most people say, that only some solidly-constructed missile would be able to do that (David Shayler\u2019s view!) He needs (I suggest) to cover this material with a bit more care \u2013 which I\u2019m sure we would all appreciate \u2013 if he is going to re-establish the real-planes theory.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">We\u2019d like to hear a bit more detail from Mr Lawson \u2013 if he\u2019s going to make a video of this subject \u2013 about the witnesses who testified to seeing the planes, but also (he may not like this) about the witnesses who were surprised and puzzled that they did <em>not <\/em>see any\u00a0 planes, before impact. In the meantime, slagging off Veterans Today because they have featured Jim Fetzer is just a cheap jibe. Saying that the \u2018media\u2019 will be grateful for any no-planes theory, may or may not be true, but its a cheap way to try and smear Jim Fetzer.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">Jim Fetzer&#8217;s work on the JFK assassination is seen by many as definitive. I work a lot with Jim (see his \u2018real deal\u2019 interviews) but also have the highest regard for Anthony Lawson, equally his political insights and his film-making skills.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">So this is a difficult letter, but if it stimulates Mr Lawson to make a more thorough real-planes \u2018in plane sight\u2019 video, it will have been worthwhile!<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">With deep appreciation for your wonderful work,<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ccffff;\">Nic Kollerstrom<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Nick Kollerstrom comments on an article on the \u201cNo-planes\u201d 9\/11 theory by Anthony Lawson. We endorse neither Jim Fetzer \u201cNo-planes\u201d theory nor Lawson\u2019s comments on it but post this in the interests of balance <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":134,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-32358","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-September_11"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32358","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/134"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=32358"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32358\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":73261,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32358\/revisions\/73261"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=32358"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=32358"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=32358"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}