This article illustrates what I would call “Psychological Blockage to Data”. And I know that David Wilcock has mentioned this in some of his articles and books, particularly as it applies to “not lined up with the Official Government Commission Findings and Reports” about things like “JFK Assassination”, 9-11, Sandy Hook, etc., etc.
People become very brain-oriented (brain washed) to those “Official Government Commission Findings and Reports”, and often never look at alternative theories, since those theories require a Brain-FUD (Flipping Inside Out). And accepting such alternatives requires “The OM” (Open Mind).
And that, my friends, is what “The Red Pill” is all about.
How I love it when these so-called “scientific” types hear about an alternative idea and promptly close their minds so quickly you can feel the earthquakes in the Halls of Knowledge. Just as the folks in Jim’s article immediately dismiss him, without researching what he has actually written and looking at the data he presents. “He’s just a ‘holocaust denier/conspiracy theorist (aka “nut job”)’ so anything he writes is bad…”
Another name for such “scientists” would be “Data Deniers”. I quote Professor John Q. Smith, PhDD (advanced degree in Data Denial)… “If the data does not match (my pet theory), we must redact (that data).”
————————————————————–
The Abdication of Reason and Rationality in Northfield, MN
Rabid Zionists suppress research on 9/11 because it implicates Israel in the attack
When Norman Butler invited me to speak at The Contented Cow a few months ago, I was very please to have the opportunity to address some of the complex and controversial issues of our time to which I have been devoting myself since my retirement from UMD in 2006 after a 35-year career as a professor of philosophy, during which most of my courses were in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning. With two liberal arts colleges in the area, I looked forward to making contacts with faculty and students as well as residents of the community, where this article is an open letter to those who are opposing my speaking there.
Read more at VT…
That Norman has been besieged with demands that he not feature me and that I have been repeatedly and viciously assailed by faculty and members of the community–many of whom are on this email list–has come as quite a surprise and has shattered any lingering illusions I may have had about Northfield as an enlightened and intellectual environment. Several of you are from Carlton College and others from St. Olaf’s, but you are not alone in assailing me, even though none of you appear to have actually read any of my work or to know my positions. Here is a recent example from Theodore Earl Durbin on facebook:
This impressed me because, unlike virtually any other of those who have taken up the cause, he actually cites some of mine, in this case a radio interview from 24 February 2014, when I had only published about a half-dozen articles about Sandy Hook. So I listened to the whole 23:13 interview in search of signs that I might qualify for the loony bin. Search as I might, however, I only found (an unusually relaxed) professor emeritus (who was slightly under the weather) patiently explaining some of the results of his collaborative research, where he was responsive to questions, receptive to corrections and cited other sources.
What could have possibly induced Theodore Earl Durbin to maintain that this is an example of a paranoid schizophrenia is beyond me, so you are going to have to excuse me if I find that virtually all of what I and Norman have been sent qualifies as complete, unadulterated rubbish. I am scheduled to speak on Sandy Hook, JFK, 9/11 and Wellstone, where my qualifications as an expert on each of those subjects appears to be indisputable, as I shall demonstrate seriatim. But what I am further experiencing here leads me to remind you that rationality involved adjusting your beliefs to the available relevant evidence, where, when new evidence becomes available, it may be necessary to accept beliefs you previously rejected, to reject beliefs you previously accepted and to leave others in suspense.
Rationality of belief–and there are three kinds of rationality, where rationality of action and rationality of ends are the other two–requires a high degree of correspondence between a person’s subjective degrees of belief and objective standards of evidential support. I not only spent 35-years offering courses on the standards of rational belief but I have published multiple books about it, especially in relation to the principles of scientific reasoning. I can understand why those who believe everything they are told by the mass media might be alarmed that I do not accept that JFK was killed by a lone-nut, that 9/11 was the work of 19 Islamic terrorists acting under the control of a guy in a cave in Afghanistan, or that Sen. Paul Wellstone, a former professor of political science at Carlton, died in an accidental plane crash.
But that is precisely why Norman wisely invited me to speak at the Cow. I not only reject those contentions as propaganda and disinformation but I can back up every claim I make about them because I have done the research necessary to qualify as an expert on each of them–as well as on Sandy Hook, where I shall leave the Holocaust (on which I was not invited to speak) for last. If these subjects were not controversial, there were would be no good reason to address them; and if they were not complex, everyone would have already figured them out for themselves. The fact that we are getting such an outpouring of objections and complaints under these circumstances therefore suggests to me that there is a hidden agenda at work, which has nothing to with my qualifications or credentials, much less logic and evidence. That bothers me.
The Scheduled Sequence
SANDY HOOK (19 February 2015): You all know (and apparently buy into) the official account that Adam Lanza shot and killed 20 kids and 6 adults, which has been widely broadcast by the mass media. But working together with three other professors and a host of other independent students, we have established (1) that the school was closed by 2008, (2) that there was no mass evacuation (because no students were there); (3) that the “iconic” Shannon Hicks’ photograph was staged in advance; and (4) that the “official account” does not create a causal nexus that ties the alleged shooter to his purported victims and the weapons he is said to have used. Egad! We have even discovered the FEMA manual for the event, where there was a rehearsal on 13 December 2012 and the event went “LIVE” the next day. For substantiation, see the following and the list of articles I have attached:
“Media complicit and indispensable to ‘false flag’ success”
“Rejoice for Christmas: No one died at Sandy Hook or at the Boston bombing”
“The Sandy Hook Hoax: How we know it didn’t happen” (with Dennis Cimino)
“VIDEO: Bev Collins features Jim Fetzer on Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing”
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8xPw07MIRw?feature=oembed]
JFK (19 March 2015): I organized a research group consisting of the most highly-qualified persons to ever study the assassination, including a world authority on the human brain, who was also an expert on wound ballistics; a Ph.D. in physics, who is also an M.D. and board qualified in radiation oncology; and several others. We discovered almost immediately that the “official” autopsy X-rays had been altered to conceal a massive blow out at the back of the head, that another brain had been substituted (because once they patched the hole, there was nowhere for those brains to go) and that the home movies of events on Elm Street were altered to conceal the true causes of his death. I have edited three collections of expert studies that Vincent Bugliosi has described as “the only exclusively scientific books” ever published on this subject: ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), MURDER IN DEALY PLAZA (2000) and THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003). For more, see, among others,
“Reasoning about Assassinations”
“Dealey Plaza Revisited: What happened to JFK?”
“Zapurder frame 343: New proof of blowout at back of JFK’s head” (with Larry Rivera)
“VIDEO: JFK at 50: The Who, the How and the Why” (2012)
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVCv3Yha4xw?feature=oembed]
9/11 (16 April 2015): I founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth (911scholars.org) in December 2005 and invited Steve Jones to be my co-chair. During the American Scholars Conference held in Los Angeles (June 2006), C-SPAN covered the panel discussion, which featured four members of Scholars–Steve Jones, Bob Bowman, Webster Tarpley and me–which ran 1:45:00 and was broadcast seven or eight times. I organized its first national conference for Scholars in Madison (2007), its first international conference in London (2010) and its second international conference in Vancouver (2012). I edited its first book, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007) and, on this as on JFK and Sandy Hook, have done hundreds of interviews, lectures and presentations, most of which are readily available on YouTube. For a sampler, here are a few of my more recent articles concerning A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies:
“On C-SPAN, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 Truth in a ‘time-warp’”
“Limited hangouts: Richard Gage, A&E911 and the Journal of 9/11 Studies” (with Dennis Cimino)
“Top Ten 9/11 Cons: ‘Fraud Vitiates Everything’” (with Dennis Cimino)
“VIDEO: The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference, Part 2″
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ?feature=oembed]
Wellstone (21 May 2015): Insofar as the Duluth campus is situated only a hour’s drive from the location where Sen. Paul Wellstone’s plane crashed–where I was among his great admirers–it was inevitable that I would pursue the truth about his death, which was too convenient for the GOP, who had targeted him for political assassination. His loss gave control of the Senate to the Republicans, who aggressively pursued the invasion of Iraq and other atrocities in the Middle East, which Wellstone had opposed. Although I was not the first to publish something was wrong, I have been the most dedicated and determined, where the results have shown that the NTSB Final Report was a sham, where even one of its signatories admitted they had no idea what happened–no doubt because, as a matter of policy, the NTSB is not allowed to investigate a crash site as a crime scene without the approval of the Attorney General. It has astounded me that MN Democrats have avoided this issue like the plague. My co-authored (with Don “Four Arrows” Jacobs), AMERICAN ASSASSINATION (2004), has been highly praised by highly qualified experts:
“The NTSB Failed Wellstone” (with John P. Costella, Ph.D.)
“Senator Paul Wellstone: More Proof of Assassination” (with Dennis Cimino)
“Wellstone: THEY KILLED HIM!”
“VIDEO: The Senator Wellstone Assassination”
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rO3ZVceNM2A?feature=oembed]
The Hidden Agenda
On hearing, one June afternoon in 1860, the suggestion that mankind was descended from the apes, the wife of the Bishop of Worcester is said to have exclaimed, ‘My dear, descended from the apes! Let us hope it is not true, but if it is, let us pray that it will not become generally known.’
Once I began receiving copies of these complaints to Norman insisting that I not be allowed to speak (which I thought was bizarre on its face, given my qualifications for addressing them), it became clear that there was a hidden agenda here, because I was being characterized as “anti-Semitic” and as a “Holocaust denier”. While there may be some warrant for the latter (since my research on the Holocaust narrative suggests it is not only untrue but provably false and not remotely scientifically sustainable), I composed a response which I asked that Norman send to everyone who was objecting to my visit to Northfield, which I would guess includes just about everyone on this email list, inviting them to show what I have wrong about the Mossad’s involvement in 9/11 or the research I have done on the Holocaust. No one has done that, which indicates to me that this is not an effort to oppose falsehoods on my part but to suppress unwanted truths:
Jan 10 (7 days ago)
Norm,
I have published over 33 articles about Sandy Hook. My first was based upon the information available to me at the time, which included that it looked like a three-man hit team, where a white van had been tracked back to a Mossad safe-house in Greenwich Village (filled with Nazi paraphernalia). I did not assert that was what happened but that it looked as if it may have been. I did not have it right, of course, because we have a mountain of proof that no one died there, but my critics continue to cite that article as though it were still my view, because Wikipedia revised my entry to used it to smear me without justification, a common tactic.
My entry, which was chock full of important information about JFK, 9/11 and more, has been edited twice. See “James Henry Fetzer: Wikipedia NOT”, for a comparison of the original (which was highly accurate) and its sequel. And Wikipedia did it again after I participated in “The Academic Freedom Conference: Are there limits to inquiry: JFK, 9/11 and the Holocaust. See “James H. Fetzer – Wikipedia the free encyclopedia BUSTED!”
My concern about the Holocaust narrative is that it does not appear to be true: if people were gassed using Zykon B, then their bodies would have turned bright pink; and if there were gas chambers where Zyklon B had been used to gas them, their walls would have turned blue. The walls of the delousing chambers are blue, but those of the alleged “gas chambers” are not; and we have no reports of pink bodies.. As a philosopher, I care about truth. As a philosopher of science, I recognize science as our most effective method for its discovery. As a former Marine Corps officer, I care about my country. I believe we are entitled to the truth.
For those who want to review my academic qualifications, see my academic website. For those who want to review my articles on JFK, 9/11, Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, try my Veterans Today article archive. I recommend my most recent article on Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, “Rejoice for Christmas! No one died at Sandy Hook or at the Boston bombing”, You are not going to hear what I have to say from the mainstream media. If you don’t want to hear it, then don’t come to my talks.
Please send a copy of this to everyone who has written to complain about featuring an “anti-Semite”. I am not anti-Semitic, where that phrase has been used as a political club to attack anyone who is remotely critical of the policies or actions of the government of Israel, such as its subjugation of the Palestinian people. I have a simple question: If Israel was complicit in 9/11, then it is anti-Semitic to expose it? And if the most widely accepted narrative of the Holocaust cannot possibly be true, as I have explained in “The Holocaust Narrative: Politics trumps Science”, should we still continue to believe it?
While I no longer believe the Mossad was involved with Sandy Hook, there is a mountain of proof that 9/11 was brought to us by the CIA, the Neo-Cons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad. Here is an article that just appeared about this: “Mapping 9/11: The Fort Lee Mystery”. I have found that most Americans are too busy to bother with research on these subjects and would rather not know. I am doing what I can to expose falsehoods and reveal truths. Our government is lying to us ALL THE TIME! For my part, I am sick of it. Don’t come if you don’t want to know.
Jim
Because none of you seem inclined to read anything I have published on any of these subjects, I am going to forward my latest research on the Holocaust in a second, complementary email. I suspect that many of those attacking me now know that I am right but, like the wife of the Bishop of Worcester (upon learning of Darwin’s theory of evolution), do not want it to become widely known. In that case, reacting with alarm and denouncing discoveries that are well-founded and apparently true promotes the Zionist agenda, where the official narrative of the Holocaust has served as a political lever to manipulate Western nations into subservience to Israel on the basis of their sense of guilt for allowing 6,000,000 Jews to be exterminated during World War II. Any proof that it didn’t happen, therefore, must be opposed with all the zeal and fury that the Zionists can muster “lest it become widely known”. Although I am not even schedule to speak on the Holocaust, that appears to explain why there has been so much “sound and fury” regardless of its merit:
“Academic Freedom: Are there limits to inquiry? JFK, 9/11 and the Holocaust”
“The Holocaust Narrative: Politics trumps Science”
Nick Kollerstrom and Jim Fetzer discuss the Holocaust on “The Real Deal”
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=videoseries?list=PLsfS5KpYMzb20sCxyfSotfX1ELkIBrXZ3]
Having dealt with thousands of attacks by shills and trolls for my research on JFK, 9/11 and Wellstone (where whole web sites have been set up to assail me), it comes as no surprise that a handful of rabid Zionists should be coming after me. That this should be happening in this community with two liberal arts colleges, however, is another matter entirely. And that faculty from both institutions should be among them frankly astounds me. The whole objective of a liberal education is to inculcate the virtues of critical thinking in our students so they can lead more successful and productive lives by being better able to sort out the false from the true. That faculty are suppressing the truth and promoting the false (displaying grotesque intolerance for diverse points of view in the process) is therefore a gross betrayal of the values and standards they are supposed to represent. I look forward to speaking at the Cow, where you are all entitled to follow through on your threats to never enter the establishment again.