Steven Jones Continues to Demo Truth Movement

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: A note to the remaining Truth advocates at 9/11 Blogger (see the end of the article)

Back in 2003 the RJ Lee Group was contracted by Deutsche Bank to do a study to identify signature markers of the dust created by the destruction of the World Trade Centers on Sept. 11th 2001. Apparently the new owners of the Trade Centers or their insurance company didn’t want to pay for the cleaning of the dust and the damage to the Deutsche Bank building at 130 Liberty Street, New York. So Deutsche Bank paid the RJ Lee Group to prove that the dust and damage to their building did indeed come from the event at the World Trade Center that day. The report was titled WTC Dust Signature Report Composition and Morphology. Who was to know that the key evidence of the demolition of the Trade Centers would turn up in that report.

Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension. Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the melting of iron (or steel).”  2003 RJ Lee Group report page 17

“In addition to the spherical iron and aluminosilicate particles, a variety of heavy metal particles including lead, cadmium, vanadium, yttrium, arsenic, bismuth, and barium particles were produced by the pulverizing, melting and/or combustion of the host materials such as solder, computer screens, and paint during the WTC Event. Combustion-related products are significant WTC Dust Markers, particularly if seen in combination. However, it is worth noting that fly ash and partially combusted products can occur in trace concentrations in ordinary building dusts, but not in the concentrations observed in WTC Dust.”  2003 RJ Lee Group page 19

“The differences within the WTC Dust and typical background dusts include the fineness and evidence of heat, the size and concentration of the chrysotile, and the length and concentration of the mineral wool and other fibers, as well as the frequency of occurrence of spherical particles produced by fire and heat, char and soot, and other building products.”  2003 RJ Lee Group report page 19-20

What the RJ Lee Group found was that MANY types of heavy metals and plastics were melted instantly under great pressure during the event of 9/11 and that the evidence showed that this was due to a combustion event similar to an explosion. This kind of heat, this kind of pressure, could not have existed in the readily accepted Bazant “crush down crush up” theory. Key to the formation of these micro-spheres of molten metal is that they would have had to have been formed in space so that the surface tension would form them into spherical shapes. That means that they weren’t crushed or pulverized into these shapes, but rather massive amounts of heat and pressure were generated and the molten metal results were then formed via surface tension while they were then free floating in space.

This was then and still is now one of the strongest piece of scientific evidence which clearly disproves the official, gravity driven hypothesis of the events of 9/11.

The end result of that study should have been that it was taken up by dedicated researchers and scientists of the Truth movement and expanded upon and it would have been if BYU, an ultra-conservative university in Utah which gave Dick Cheney an honorary doctorate of Public Service degree in 2007, hadn’t paid Dr. Steven Jones to mislead the Truth movement for years about those findings. Ironically (or maybe not so much so) it was right around the same time that BYU also honored Dr. Jones by raising his status at BYU to that of Professor Emeritus.

When Cheney received his honorary doctorate, he also gave the Commencement address to the class of 2007 at BYU. This was part of his opening:

“…And it’s always an honor to be in the company of this university’s chairman, a distinguished American and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Gordon B. Hinckley.” Dick Cheney, 2007

Gordon B. Hinckley, spiritual leader of the Mormon religion, had an interesting quote back in 2003 which I think is extremely relevant   to this topic.

It may even be that [the Lord] will hold us responsible if we try to impede or hedge up the way of those who are involved in a contest with forces of evil and repression.”  Gordon B. Hinckley, 2003

How could it be that BYU would pay Steven Jones to conduct research into “super secret military grade explosives” like “nanothermite”, pay for at least two other researchers to do the work at BYU, have the head of that department “peer review” his paper, and pay for the publication of such a paper in a vanity press like Bentham Publishing? The Chairman of the school and spritual leader of their religon had made it clear that the Lord wanted good Mormons to HELP Dick Cheney and George W. Bush, not “impede” them.

The only logical answer, given what we now know about their “nanothermite” paper, is that from the start Dr. Jones was in fact helping Dick Cheney and George W. Bush by distracting the Truth movement away from the valuable evidence exposed in the RJ Lee Group report from the very beginning.

Since that time, Dr. Jones has behaved in some rather disappointing ways, ways I believe are designed to discredit the Truth movement from within.

1. Prof. Jones refused to test for residues of high explosives in the WTC dust even though he repeated claims that NIST should have done just that.

2. Prof. Jones embarrassed Richard Gage at his press conference for AE911Truth by bringing up “earthquake weapons” in front of the assembled press corp at the reception.

3. Prof. Jones has repeatedly encouraged Truth advocates to listen to Glenn Beck’s show stating that Beck was “getting better”

4. Prof. Jones has been trying to instruct Truth movement activists as to what they should and shouldn’t say about the Truth movement and his “peer reviewed” paper.

5. Prof. Jones will now be headlining with “Master Witches and Hyper Intuitives” at Conspiracy Con.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, Prof. Jones is now over at 9/11 Blogger still pushing his “nanothermite”  distraction but he is also incorporating his “earthquake weapons” and “free energy” research into the mix as well.

It is certainly not a coincidence that Judy Wood, another fake truth advocate who promoted the “dustification” theory and “ray beams from space”, also promoted “free energy” research for many years and her recent book with an embarrassingly  stupid title also incorporates “free energy” research right there on the cover.

Jesse Ventura also just recently showed his true colors by claiming on Alex Jones’ show that the towers were not brought down by controlled demolition but rather by “ray beams from space” while a woman who sounded a lot like Judy Wood fed him lines during the interview.

So it would seem that the planned implosion of the Truth movement is going to center around on of it’s most obvious and ridiculous fake “truthers”, Judy Wood. With Ventura and Jones now channeling the dustification lady with just a few months to go before the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and the staged killing of Osama bin Laden, it would seem that the stage is being set for our targeted assassination.

This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone paying attention. Judy Wood and Steven Jones started out together in the Truth movement. Seems they will finish together as well. Let’s just hope they don’t finish us as well in the process.

Check out the Judy Wood interview that makes her perfect Weapon of Mass Destruction for the Truth movement. If people start to associate this bullshit with us on a wide basis, we are truly done for.

The fact that Steven Jones actually created an organization called “Scholars” for 9/11 Truth with this idiot, should tell us a lot about why he got into the Truth movement to start with.


It seems that Vulich has put a link to a few of my recent articles up on the 9/11 Blogger thread which I link to in this article. Snowcrash, Vulich, shure… and everybody else is right to be concerned about Steven’s sudden departure into “free energy” research especially because free energy research is mentioned right on the front cover of Judy Wood’s new book. The fact that Judy was also feeding Jesse Ventura lines on his recent interview means there’s probably something brewing to make this person, who has been readily dismissed from the real Truth movement for years, seem like a leader in this movement at a very critical time.

And as Snowcrash stated earlier in that thread, Jones has a history of doing some rather odd things in the past that have made us all a little uneasy (please see a partial list above). In this case, a history of establish behavior cannot be easily dismissed.

Look, I make no excuses for what I write about Steven Jones. I used to be one of his greatest fans in all of this and when his “nanothermite” paper came out, like most Truth advocates I was sure that we were well on our way to proving the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7.

But after some emails and further discussions with Jones, right there on 9/11 Blogger (where I used to be a contributor with my own blog before I was banned basically for questioning Jones) is where it started, I came to a different understanding of the man. That was a very difficult few days for me. I quit writing, quit my blog actually.

I have been called “disinfo” for questioning Jones, questioning Deets, questioning Jim Hoffman’s “1.8 million ceiling tile bombs” theory, questioning Dimitri’s 3 150 kiloton nuclear weapons theory, questioning CIT and “fly over”, questioning “mini nukes”, questioning what actually hit the Pentagon (God forbid), for sticking up for David Ray Griffin, and so forth.

But in the end, I am still here and I am still to this day stating loudly and proudly that we need to run tests for traces of residues left behind by high explosives that MUST have been used in the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. The evidence is there… Jones et al actually called for these tests to be run in their “nanothermite” paper and they even criticized NIST for not running these tests themselves.

I have done research on this, devised a demolition hypothesis, and even given many people, including Jones, all the information they need to run these tests and to do them in such a way as to be legitimate evidence in a potential future criminal investigation.

As Vulich said “I believe that if we stick together we can do anything” and that is what we need to remember.

This movement is not about individuals who claim to be our leaders like Jones, Wood, and Ventura, it’s about finding the Truth no matter how painful that process may be.

For those of you just now coming to the understanding that Steven Jones and Jesse Ventura may not have had our best interests at heart from the very beginning, all I can say to you is that I have been there and do not despair.

Because they are not the Truth movement… you are.

67 Responses

  1. Obama said in his recent interview on 60-Minutes, “anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn’t deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.” So the official government line is, only wackos and extremists question endless war and corporate propaganda. By 9-11-2011 it will be clear that

    9-11 truth = mental illness.

    Judy Wood is the perfect start and end for a project like this–just a few seconds at her website (I do not recommend it) will make you crazy from the garish graphics and myriad pointless links.

    Something else–one of the most obvious creepy things about Steven Jones (besides the sick smile) is his prior history with the DOE and subsequent public ridiculing of cold fusion research. Why Jones should reappear in exactly the same role, as celebrity champion of a weak alternative hypothesis, is highly suspicious. From the jump. Jones has zero credentials as a dissenter or activist of any kind. BYU fires real academic freethinkers. But online researchers who look into the background of Steven Jones for more info on the cold fusion controversy and nano-thermite nonsense will inevitably run into Judy Wood, all over the place, as Jones’s obviously crazed nemesis.


    WTC7 was a controlled demolition = 9/11 was an inside job


  3. 9/11 was ordered by NWO Rothschild and and oligarchs and was carried out by Mossad and US secret servive for geopolitical and economic gains.

    America and the Western world your sons and daughters are dying for zionist Rothschild and his counterfeiting IMF cronies

    Wake the f**K up!!!

  4. I was thinking about this the other day, but since you mentioned Ventura again…

    Didn’t Ventura used to say that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition, and that he knew this because of his experience with demolitions in the UDT (or the SEALS as he likes to stress)?

    So first it was demolition and now its microwave weapons? And he stealthily sneaks in that he thinks they had to take bin Laden alive to “find out what weapon he had?”

    Not only is he going with this ray beams/microwave weapon stuff, but he seems to be implying that bin Laden did it!

  5. This bullmanure from Doctor Jones and Doctor Wood is absolutely pathetic! I plan to do a brief, layman-accessible technical analysis of Judy Wood’s ridiculous “theory” when I get the time. This stupid drama is getting sickening.

    Here is a direct link to the interview.
    Dr Greg Jenkins Interviews Dr. Judy Wood UNEDITED Part 1:

    Website deplores the “ambush” of Dr. Judy Wood(!):

    This huge disinfo campaign seems to indicate that there is a far wider conspiracy than I had ever imagined. Disgusting.

  6. Steven Jones and Judy Wood do seem like nuts who have been used to distract and obfuscate the Truth movement.

    However, that said, weapons which can produce earthquakes and severe weather have existed since the mid-1990’s. Please Google HAARP and start reading.

    Scott, your continual dismal of HAARP and what it can do is just as irresponsible as what you are accusing Wood and Jones of doing. You’ve clearly done little or no research on this subject. I’ve submitted links to you in the past, but I can see you didn’t take the time to even give them a cursory glance.

    These guys may be crackpots, but high and low frequency energy weapons do exist, whether you believe it or not. It doesn’t help your cause one bit if you simply call a crackpot a crackpot without knowing the facts behind what they are talking about.

    Please research HAARP. Thanks.

  7. Willy’s discussion here of the RJ Lee report and its unintended consequences seems hugely important. And mostly overlooked, as far as I can tell. Would it be possible to nail down the dates even more precisely, when the RJ Lee study was released to the public, and when Steven Jones first emerged on the scene with his alternative 9-11 study?

    Willy’s cause is truth and justice, rights and dignity for oh, say 99.9 % of humanity, so it’s our cause too, The word for what he is doing is heroic.

  8. Scott

    The first part of the RJ Lee Group study, Composition and Morphology, as referenced in my article above, was published late 2003, December in fact.

    The second part, the full report, Expert Report – WTC Dust Signature, came out in May of 2004.

    These were getting very little attention, but they had been noticed by a few of our researchers back then; Eric Hufschid for example.

    Then in Sept of 2005, Jones gave a presentation at a seminar with about 60 faculty members at BYU and subsequently a few more presentations at other universities, all arranged by BYU as far as I can tell.

    In that presentation he basically regurgitated the work of others in order to build a small bit of credibility. This is what they do when they are looking to establish credibility.

    Well, during that time he put up a paper on his BYU website called “Why Indeed Did the World Trade Centers Completely Collapse” which was his first introduction to the “thermite” angle.

    “Moreover, as hypothesized below, thermite reactions may well have resulted in substantial quantities (observed in pools) of molten iron at very high temperatures” page 5

    So basically he wrote the paper with the thermite angle, and then he started giving his speeches at various universities, while his paper was on the BYU website.

    He came into this IN ORDER TO PUSH “THERMITE” from the very start.

    The paper here was edited by Ryan in 2006, but the history of this paper is very clear as per his own editing on Wikipedia.

    the paper itself is riddled with thermite info. It’s clearly an attempt to introduce this distraction to the Truth movement.

  9. screaming bees

    I admit I have done no research on HAARP or weather modification devices, chem-trails, genetically modified foods, all sorts of things.. because that is not what this website is about.

    This website is about 9/11 truth, neoliberal globalization, and exposing ongoing government propaganda.

    When I say that these issues bring embarrassment on the Truth movement as they are used by people like Wood and Jones, that is not an indictment as to the validity of the research that is out there, that is simply a statement as to the PERCEPTION of the research by those who have not spent time investigating this issues themselves.

    This why Jones makes mention of this things, this is why Wood tries her best to act like a complete flake when talking about these things. Its the perception that they are using.

    Now, as you said, when I point this out, when I make it clear that I don’t like Jones et al doing this, trying to make us look bad by bringing up these issues in public, I understand what you mean that I myself am adding to this perception… valid or not.

    I understand that and it is not my intention.

    My intention is to get other Truth advocates to come to the understanding that we have a very short period of time to distance ourselves from Jones, Wood, Nanothermite, Ventura and the rest of it before it all blows up in our faces.

    I am sorry, but I don’t have the time to research these issues to find out what is valid and what is not. But that isn’t the point. Jones and Wood don’t care either if they are valid, they simply understand how they are perceived by the general scientific and non-scientific public at a large, and that is why they are doing it.

    So again, it is not my intention to dismiss these fields of study. There very well could be something to them but I have done no research on the subjects and cannot form an opinion one way or the other. I just know that they have little to nothing to do with the controlled demolition that took place on Sept. 11th 2001 and therefore we probably should leave them out of those discussions.

  10. Last Friday evening I saw a guy wearing a T-shirt–one I’ve never seen around here before. ‘Firefighters for 9/11 Truth’, it said.

    I’ve known the guy for a while. He’s a retired fireman. We were co-coaches for our son’s little-league team some years back. He never seemed particularly political to me–just a guy with a job, and one wanting to spend time with his son.

    He was standing there talking to somebody, but I waited around till he was done.

    “I like your shirt,” I told him.

    Took him by surprised, I think. “Well,” he said, “I don’t believe what they’re telling us anymore.”

    “That makes two of us,” I answered back.

    Two of us is big deal, around these parts.

    r ap

    Oh, and this little something about Cheney–had a dream about him last night. Dreamed I was a SEAL photographer, sent to get pictures of him working in his office at Langley.

    Somehow, those pictures got posted on the net as photos of bin Laden, watching TV in that compound in Pakistan.

    I might have to go in for an appointment–get my meds checked.


  11. Oh Roy…. thanks for the laugh this morning !!!
    so that makes two of you…. getting crowded in the old neighborhood , eh? Hey….. going to be a great week !!
    and your dream! Maybe you tuned into a special wave length….. Maybe Cheney was the master mind of the bin Laden deception….

  12. Many thanks willy for the chronology. The timeline of publications, events, public appearances is most helpful and suggestive. So after the RJ Lee report in 2003, we get David Ray Griffin’s powerfully argued and influential book The New Pearl Harbor in 2004.

    2003, RJ Lee study
    2004, David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor

    And then along came Jones….

  13. also don’t forget what the leader of the Mormon religion and Chairman of BYU said in 2003…

    “It may even be that [the Lord] will hold us responsible if we try to impede or hedge up the way of those who are involved in a contest with forces of evil and repression.” Gordon B. Hinckley, 2003

    Nothing against Mormans in general, but there is no way that BYU would have supported research that accused Cheney and Bush of carrying out 9/11 after the leader of their university and their religion made a statement like this one. No way in hell. But they did according to Steven Jones’ recent revelations about BYU’s involvement in his work.

  14. Great article. I trust it was sent to Steven Jones himself?

  15. If I still posted on 911blogger I would drop the link there. As has been said many times before though, if you aint controlled opposition(or a useful idiot) you aint gonna last long at 911blogger.

  16. Thanks Chris.

    ah, no, I didn’t send it to Jones. My emails with him are so long ago, I don’t really have his email anymore I don’t think. But I did see him put his email address up several times on that Blogger thread, perhaps I should grab it and send him a copy. But he knows full well what I think of him and his research. I am more concerned about Truth advocates being discouraged by his recent behavior than I am telling Jones what he already knows.

  17. […] Steven Jones Continues to Demo Truth Movement (Interessant …) […]

  18. I hear you but I love the idea of disinfo shills sitting there reading how not everyone is buying into their bullshit. You’re right though. the few genuine people left at 911blogger could benefit most. Ive thought about trying to sign up again(banned numerous times here) but I’m so disgusted by the place I never bothered.

  19. I see what you mean, the open attack on David Ray Griffin is a great example. I was amazed at how that all went down, and then the little “round table discussion” that Gold and others did right after that bashing the man even more… but I was slightly impressed at the shear number of people who were openly standing up for Griffin at the Blogger thread. I derive a little hope from that.

  20. Thanks for your analysis here. But I wonder why you are so skeptical of Steve Jones but not David Ray Griffin. The attack on Griffin was totally legitimate after he started to appear at these funny events and always leading with the voice morphing thing, and citing discredited sources. It surprises me that you harbor good will for him since you are so on the money with Jones and others. Why is this?

  21. The strange truth is that there is an industry of discrediting associations built to subvert our success with the general public. People inside the movement have to expose this and do it quickly before we are permanently associated with these figures in the public consciousness.

  22. The attack on Griffin, as far as I can see, was unsubstantiated in the first place. Take for instance that video someone did when they called that audio technician who was featured on Jesse’s crappy show.

    During the phone interview, the man clearly told the interviewer that he could use this technology to convince anyone that they were talking to their mother, but he claimed it couldn’t have been done on 9/11 30 times, and that was then used as “proof” that it could not have happened.

    Well, actually what the expert said was that HE couldn’t have done it 30 times in that time frame.

    It was simply a matter of man-power… one person could not have done it 30 times, but how about 30 people? If what that man said was to be taken seriously, which according to the video, it was, then according to that interview, it is indeed possible, it’s just a matter of manpower.

    Now, be that as it may, the fact is, since his book “A New Pearl Harbor” I don’t think we have too many issues to take with DRG’s research.

    If you want to stop talking about voice morphing, that’s fine, doesn’t bother me one way or the other.

    Personally I stick with what I know and that’s the controlled demolition of the Trade Centers and Building 7 and various other aspects that would go towards the circumstantial evidence such as the “vigilant” war games, Rumsfeld’s announcement about the missing 2.3 trillion… ect. ect. ect.

    But I don’t hold ONE thing against an advocate who has clearly advanced all of our knowledge about the events of 9/11 and disregard all the other contributions that person has made.

    To me that’s like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

    Especially when the criticism of the bathwater seems so contrived (as Eric’s paper was… don’t take my word for it, Kevin Ryan wrote a good evaluation of it for that thread, BTW). Take a listen to that “round table” discussion and you will know what I am talking about.

    My criticism of Jones deals with pretty much everything that he has done from the start and it deals even with the rather suspect aspects of his start in the Truth movement, as you can see above.

    So to answer your question in a rather long and drawn out way, DRG’s criticism of the phone calls has some merit to it, especially when he talks about various calls placed by certain victims who actually refused to be connected to their loved ones and spoke instead to some stranger operator. That seems a bit odd to me. And when you consider what the audio technician actually said, that he COULD fool you into thinking you were talking to your mother, he just couldn’t do it 30 times in that time frame, well… I give the benefit of the doubt to DRG on that one. right or wrong, jury’s still out, but David has done years of good work. we should try to remember that.

    just my opinion of course.

    edit: It also seemed a bit odd, the timing of all of this. DRG comes out with a book on the cognitive infiltration of the Truth movement and all of a sudden he is marginalized from elements within the Truth movement. If nothing else, that should certainly send up a few red flags.

  23. “The strange truth is that there is an industry of discrediting associations built to subvert our success with the general public. People inside the movement have to expose this and do it quickly before we are permanently associated with these figures in the public consciousness.”

    this statement I completely agree with.

  24. and just to be clear… let me say this:

    to date I have yet to read any articles by DRG posted on Blogger trying to tell Truth advocates what they should say and think about our movement….

    I have yet to watch DRG going on and on about earthquake weapons at Richard Gage’s press conference…

    I haven’t seen DRG come to Blogger suggesting we all start watching Glenn Beck…

    and I have not had DRG tell me directly that he isn’t going to test for explosive residues in the trade center dust like Steven Jones did after he suggested NIST should have done so and should do so now.

    I could be wrong, but I don’t think DRG is going to appear with the “Master Witches and Hyper Intuitives” at the Conspiracy Con freak show later this month…

    so I think you are fully capable of saying what you like about DRG and Steven Jones, but in my humble opinion, it’s apples and oranges at this point. You know?

  25. Vulich, are you aware that your last comment on Blogger seems to be gone now? The one that said I was certainly questioning Jones’ research and that others should be brave and face that probability?

    did you remove that comment or was it removed by the moderators at Blogger?

  26. its ok, there was a disagreement over the language i used. i think the moderator team does their best, i have this habit of using strong language when things dont seem right to me

  27. Scott:

    Thanks for your reply. I appreciate what you’re saying. However, with all the severe weather anomalies we have seen around the world, especially in the last few years, to say that researching HAARP, chemtrails, etc. is not worthy of a few hours of your time seems ridiculous to me and very irresponsible. Especially since you are often quick to label “Climate Change/global warming as a hoax. If it is a hoax then just what is causing all of the catastrophic climate havoc we are seeing all around the world? Haven’t any of these bizarre occurrences peaked your curiosity just a little?j

    You say this site is about truth. You say this site is about exposing the globalists’ agenda. If so, then might it not behoove you (and us) to do a few hours of research in order to understand the true capabilities of those you deem to expose?

    You seem like a smart enough guy to me. Don’t tell us that you aren’t capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time. Two hours or so of research, my brother, that’s all I’m asking for.

  28. I’ll look into it Bees, but do you really think two hours is enough time to formulate an informed opinion on the subject? 🙂

    give me a couple days. remind me this week. but remember, you may or may not like my results. I’m just sayin…. still be friends though, right?

  29. Vulich

    I see on the Blogger thread you were asking who I was and what seems to have been my big crime over at Blogger that makes me “disinfo”

    Here’s a little insight for you… this is just one of the things I wrote and put up on Blogger under my blog over there…

    and here are the comments…

    “It’s a home run! CDI’s involvement in both clean-ups of the 95′ OKC Murrell Building and the 01′ WTC towers stinks, by any measure.

    It’s a fantastic post! It is a revealing quote provided inadvertently by Deputy Chief Peter Hayden:”

    “I believe you just convicted Mark Loizeaux! EXCELLENT analysis. (I hope you archived all your source material.)

    Keep it up, Willy.”

    “I think the biggest question anyone should have is, if CDI was involved with 9-11, why would they do it?I did a search of the founder of CDI, Jack Loizeaux. I found this very disturbing article which I’m pasting here lest the link go missing. I believe there is plently of motive here. ”

    “Excellent post – but controlled demolition evolved in Europe and America before Mark Loizeaux’s father was born. Apparently CDI carried this and a number of other falsehoods in their literature for many years ”

    “however, I think everyone here at should consider looking into this as it shows that Mark Loizeaux doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about :”

    you can start here and read all of them (before Blogger deletes my old blog)

  30. OK, Scott…Knock yourself out. I think once you start reading, two hours may not be enough, but that is your call. I’ll be interested in what you have to say. And yes, we’re still “friends” even if we disagree on your final hypothesis.

    Here’s a good link to start with:)

  31. 911blogger is an invaluable source for information on the fake truth movement and the attempts at cognitive infiltration of the truth movement. It’s beyond obvious what it is at this point and it’s only a shame that some seemingly sincere researchers like David Chandler still don’t seem to understand this.

  32. Gretavo

    What you just put up on WTCdemo is an important reminder of that. The sock puppet feeding frenzy on the reputation of someone as devoted to the Truth movement as David Ray Griffin was offensive to read and should be put up every week or so as a constant reminder of exactly who stands for what in the Truth movement.

    frankly I am honored to be called out by obvious infiltrators like SnowCrash. His repeated and unending divisive behavior based on nothing but outright falsifications and flimsy guilt-by-association smears makes him one of the most obvious for profit agents working in the movement today.

    I’m glad you put those comments up before Blogger has a chance to erase them down the memory hole once the initial damage to DRG’s reputation is done.

  33. BTW. the link to your site is back up on my blogroll.

  34. this morning i’m catching up on the whole nanothermite issue, which i’ve never gotten very into since i first started researching 9/11 truth (summer of 2008). even read the famous harrit et al paper. this article (above) with its links, is invaluable to that research. THANKS!

    you go after jones on the nanothermite issue all the time but not the other authors very much–why? are they “innocent” even tho they too have signed onto the paper? have they been “duped” by jones? both? something else? on gretavo’s site recently, he says “Nanothermite only comes into the picture on the say-so of one person, Steven Jones,” is that accurate, in your view? from my read of the paper itself, this allegation seems to not be warranted, as others also received dust samples (tho jones seems to have been the primary recipient).

    did the powers that be at 9/11 blogger (and who were they back then?) say why you were banned? if yes, what was the reason given? if no, and in any event, what was the real reason, in your view?

    the comments to your cdi article are all so very positive but i could not help but notice that the comments were in large part made by people who are not active at 9/11 blogger anymore. where have all those truthers gone?

  35. Two of the other authors of that paper, according to Jones, were students or graduate level staff at BYU at the time, and there is no sense in going after them.

    Neils Harrit I have certainly done some work on him, I once called him the “Fredo of the Truth Movement” when he went on a Russia Today show (I think that is who it was) and claimed there were 100s of tons of this stuff in the dust.

    I have certainly gone after Gregg Roberts.

    Kevin Ryan (he was one of them, right?) I like. I like his work. Just not that paper.

    Point is, everyone working on the research for the paper isn’t necissarily privy to it’s real purpose. Plus, most of them don’t have Jones’ background in chemistry, so they were probably duped, with the exceptions of the ones mentioned above.

    I was banned right after Operation Cast Lead. I was angry that Blogger hadn’t done a single story about it while it was going on. I called them a Fake truth Site. That’s what probably got me banned. They may have done one article about it after that, I don’t know.

    Yeah, I think a lot of people have picked up on the change at Blogger and stopped going there. That’s my guess anyway.

  36. Very interesting article. I have tried to press all the right button so that I can receive a notice in my email every time a new thread, post, is started, but still I do not receive notice.

  37. Kevin Ryan has shown repeatedly that his aim is to peg Bush and the Saudis exclusively for 9/11. Bush as the “Lihopper” and the Saudis as the architects. I like some of Ryans work too, its ashame hes clearly controlled opposition. His whole “firing” appears to have been a cred building exercise in hindsight.

  38. Mark Hightower, a masters level chemical engineer, wrote a paper and lodged a serious complaint agains the Herrit / Jones study on nano-thermite. His criticisms were quite well argued and documented.

    Mr. Hightower was treated shabbily by Dr. Jones, Frank Legge, and 911blogger, not at all as science professionals looking for truth.

    I think it will be interesting to see all the new crop of 9-11 disinformation pieces to come out soon in coincidence with the tenth anniversary of 9-11. Massimo Mazuko is planning to put out a new 9-11 truth video soon. His other videos have been high quality and did seem to convey much solid information. If this video, which will probably be promoted by several of the main internet alternative “patriot” radio shows, presupposes the key phrases that Dr. Jones, Niels Harrit, Kevin Ryan and Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth constantly harp on, such as “explosive nanothermite”, molten metal, “controlled demolition”, building 7, and a new independent investigation, then I know that Massimo is just part of the problem.

    • I’m a scientist (PhD) and my experience with other scientists is that we often do not treat each other as scientific professionals looking for truth. Most of the time we’re scrambling around trying to get and prolong funding, especially in today’s economy. Much of the rest of the time, we’re trying to be more “correct” than the next guy, especially the one who we may actually agree with, lest he “scoop” us and get the credit (meaning the publication, the funding, the advancement, etc.). Scientists are as much invested in the “system” as anyone else. Also, having a masters or PhD in any discipline today does not equate to being a sound thinker, nor a good experimentalist making grounded conclusions. In fact, it often diminishes the ability for clear independent thought. My personal experience is that even science often goes the way of the herd mentality. It takes continuous effort to play along, stay employed and still maintain an independent mindset in a modern professional environment no matter what the discipline.

  39. Folks, this first. That the 3 building loss on 9-11-01 was without question, suspicious at the least and criminal murder of 3000 at best. These facts are on top. The dust from the event, the visuals of the event, the comments seen and heard by the participants of the event requires all to look deeply at the science, physical evidence (what little was left after 400 trucks a day hauling it off and on to China), and that there are people with real credentials, real experience in the sciences and this supposed website taking aim at them instead of cheering them on, is sad, and stupid. I have looked at comments here and right from the beginning the tone is set. Tear them down, Dr. S. Jones, et al. Shame on you and wake up. Infighting will bury us all, and is just the thing to slow down the investigation. I trust science and credentials more than your thoughts here. Be part of the solution, not more of the problem!

    Thanks for you time. I wasted enough of mine here.

    • Amen to that. Endless energy can easily become misdirected into chasing supposed infiltrators when we don’t know which ones are real, and which are rumors and phantoms.

      My rule of thumb: if you go to a 9-11 truth meeting and a guy that doesn’t add up asks you over & over to join him in an uprising by signing your name to a document and provides paper and pen– don’t sign anything and get the heck away from him as fast as possible.

      The intended result of cointelpro type activities is exactly what is going on here: former allies expend energy suspecting and hating each other.

      The intelligence community wants nothing more than to see half of those passionate about 9-11 truth go on a dead end mission to analyze and expose the other half as frauds. It’s very convenient to the powers that be. Then the other half spends its energy defending itself, and no one finds new ways to get more people involved in seeking the truth about 9-11.

      It is a deliberate psychological game of ego-exploitation. The discovery of infiltrators makes people angry. Anger throws people off balance. Then they are not constructive. The intelligence community has done their homework about human psychology. They know people have a desire to be thought of as clever and they do not want to be made fools of — so they can easily trick people into expending energy on figuring out who is an infiltrator. While it is distracting, it is not anywhere near as important than continuing the real 9-11 investigation. We are just going to have to put up with it if we want to get to the real truth about 9-11.

  40. Concealing the fact the buildings were blown up using RDX (or similar) by pretending they were blown up by thermite?

    It’s not a *great* cover is it?

    • Steven Jones is and always has been a fraud, but RDX does not explain the data.

      Are we supposed to ignore the presence of the elements such as cesium, uranium, thorium, barium, strontium, yttrium, rubidium, molybdenum, lanthanum, cerium, chromium and zinc, all fission pathway elements.

      Clark, R., Green, R., Swayze, G., Meeker, G., Sutley, S., Hoefen, T., Livo, K., Plumlee, G., Pavri, B., Sarture, C., Wilson, S., Hageman, P., Lamothe, P., Vance, J., Boardman, J., Brownfield, I., Gent, C., Morath, L., Taggart, J., Theodorakos, P., & Adams, M. USGS Spectroscopy Lab, (2001). Environmental Studies of the World Trade Center Area After the September 11, 2001 Attack (Open-File Report 01-0429). Retrieved from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) website:

      Also, the Department of Energy (DOE) collected water samples from the basement of Building 6 eleven days after 9/11 that showed tritium levels 55 times greater than background. To read how this proves fusion took place, suggest all who care about 9-11 truth read…

      Mystery Solved: The WTC was Nuked on 9/11

      By Don Fox, Ed Ward, M.D., and Jeff Prager

      • And I suggest that anyone who is going to read this Nuclear sales pitch learn some real nuclear physics, and not take it on the word of these hacks, Fox, Ward, and Prager.

        All of those elements are ubiquitous in the modern industrial environment; “cesium, uranium, thorium, barium, strontium, yttrium, rubidium, molybdenum, lanthanum, cerium, chromium and zinc.”


      • Dachsie, this could indeed be one of the stupidest things I’ve read in quite some time. No offense, but you have either been duped or your cynicism exceeds your intelligence sufficiently to ensure maximum incompetence. You should probably just focus on self-preservation.

        • You certainly have the correct screen name. You people on this forum seem to favor the ad hominem fallacy of logic. Generally there is a low level of discussion on this forum. One cannot even call it argumentation.

          The USGS did not find RDX and they were most competent to do a thorough dust examination. Jones chose to focus on nanothermite, only one thing among many found in the dust, which is dishonest and unscientific. By the way, folks, nanothermite is not an explosive. Read Hightower. If nanothermite played any role in the destruction of the towers, it was not a significant one. Jones simply “forgot” to mention what else was in the dust, and was present in quantities far above background levels. His job was to focus on NT and mislead and co-opt the “truth movement” and he and Gage and other minions did a splendid job of disinformation.

          There is considerable data to show that Bldg 7 was destroyed by conventional controlled demolition, and the height of the rubble pile is appropriate for that, though the evidence of conventional explosives in the dust study does not indicate that. However, the Twin Towers appear to have been destroyed by means other than conventional explosives and the height of the rubble pile is inadequate in the extreme. There are first responders who said the Towers were destroyed below ground too.

          I gave you the references about high levels of tritium found in other areas of WTC. Also there are numeous articles on the web of telling of inordinately large numbers of first responders who have died from or are dying from the kinds of cancer that are caused by high radiation exposure.

          Scott Creighton and this entire forum operates on a very low level.

          Good bye.

          • Well … I certainly deserved that response, but I don’t think it applies to everyone on this forum. Thanks for the info though. I think I will check it out. It’s interesting and I had not heard it before.

            You’re right — I had no basis for rejecting your statement outside of intuition, and I’ve admittedly been wrong on that bais more times than I can count. I apologize.

            • And Whatever Thinking you are today…Lol…be sure to check out my counter arguments against the nuclear and dew aspects of the WTC destruction at:



              • Interesting. I love your diatribes toward the end against El Señor. Your ranting came off as a bit childish, but as a follower of Eris and the Sacred Chao, I appreciate childish. You can add that the (actually quite slightly) elevate tritium levels are probably expected when one considers all of the self-illuminating exit signs that would have been plastered all over the insides of those buildings.

                A two-year EPA study in Pennsylvania ( found that of 54 landfills tested, many had above-normal tritium levels. From the main page describing the situation (

                “The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) recently completed a comprehensive two-year study at 54 landfills within the Commonwealth, testing for the presence of radioactive materials in landfill leachate. The study was performed as a follow-up to DEP’s new requirements for radiation monitoring at all solid waste management facilities in Pennsylvania. Although sample results quantified certain naturally occurring elements within natural background levels, including uranium, thorium and potassium, above-normal levels of tritium were noted in leachate at many facilities.”

                They go on to explain that “The source of higher-than-background levels found in landfill leachate samples was presumed to originate from the improper disposal of self-luminescent exit signs found in construction/demolition (C/D) waste and other solid waste streams. There are no other known sources of tritium in industrial or consumer products that would cause elevated levels of tritium in landfill leachate. Thus, it is apparent that tritium exit signs, which when new may contain up to 25 curies, or 25,000,000,000,000 picocuries (pCi) of tritium, are entering landfills via municipal or residual waste streams. A single tritium emergency exit sign has the potential to cause the tritium levels observed.”

                And from an ad from Seton marketing luminous emergency exit products at

                “Photo luminescent marking in the World Trade Center was the key to safe escape for thousands on September 11, 2001.”

  41. […] Louise’s focus on Steven E Jones seems to be additionally confirmed in comments on a 2-year old Willy Loman Blog.  Additionally, a comment made by a YouTube user with the name Caroline Louise on 08 Jan 2014 […]

  42. “How could it be that BYU would pay Steven Jones to conduct research into “super secret military grade explosives” like “nanothermite”, pay for at least two other researchers to do the work at BYU, have the head of that department “peer review” his paper, and pay for the publication of such a paper in a vanity press like Bentham Publishing?”

    How could it be Scott? The fact is it isn’t. Jones had been let go by the time he was doing his nanothermite paper.

    I don’t understand what is at the bottom of your attacks on Professor Jones, but as you use all the tactics of ‘debunkers’ like those at the James Randy Forums, even the same language; I would say you are the one I would suspect of psyops, not Jones.

    Your theories on PETN have valid points. But it is an entirely different situation when you viciously attack those you disagree with. You stand in the same isle as the Jeff Prager Nuke Clowns and feed them with this type of bullshit.

    Yea…just this one comment, it isn’t worth arguing with people like you anymore.


    • I like this site and Scott’s writing, but I would agree this question deserves a response. Before anyone jumps in with “shill”, “asset”, etc., I’m only asking for a rational and unbiased response with valid (no-emotional, no name-calling) arguments.

      • Think deeper, read more widely.


      • I will close after this comment, as I say above, it is not worth arguing with someone like Creighton.

        But, it is a FACT that nanothermite was identified in the WTC dust.

        It is a THEORY that PETN and Det-Cord took down the towers.


        • And yet … identifying individuals who actually planted the nanothermite, detcord, or whatever else actually took them down is what matters more. Thanks for “Think deeper, read more widely” advice. I could not have thought of that on my own. I am now enlightened.

          • Why the sarcasm Just Thinking?

            We can all learn beyond our present state.

            Forensic Biblioteque

            Modus operandi, Motive, Means, Opportunity, Cue Bono …

            Using these tools we know “beyond a reasonable doubt” that 9/11 was a systemic black operation. As such it is not so much “the individuals who actually planted the…” explosives, as the powers that planned and benefit from the operation.

            Domestically we could say “the military industrial complex”, but the larger picture would consider the architecture of modern political power, and therefore would point to the top of that pyramid, the international banking cabal and it’s so-called “new world order”.
            You can look to the PNAC paper on building a new “defense” for the 21st century [the one that calls for a new Pearl Harbor] as a “bid”, or a business proposal made to this high cabal. It is only through the approval of this cabal that anything is given the go-ahead.

            So, your main suspects are the authors of the PNAC paper, with the added knowledge of where the power of authorization is proximated.


            • Yes, that is “cui bono” — my word processor will change that for me from time to time.


            • ” … it is not so much “the individuals who actually planted the…” explosives, as the powers that planned and benefit from the operation.”

              I’d agree with that.

              And sorry about the sarcasm – it was a pointless response to a pointless statement – I didn’t need to say anything.

              “So, your main suspects are the authors of the PNAC paper, with the added knowledge of where the power of authorization is proximated.”

              So this would point to Donald Kagan, Gary Schmitt and Thomas Donelly? More likely the second part of your statement: “… where the power of authorization is proximated.”

              Where is that really? We could all probably spit out a list of names (Cheney, Wolfowitz, Clinton, Bush, Bolton, a couple hundred others), but can someone actually list key confirmed members at the highest ranks of the “international banking cabal”? These folks seem a little more elusive than the political attention-whores who gobble up all drama and blame in the mainstream media

              Must not be that easy, or some (actually guilty) people would have gone to jail by now and half the world wouldn’t think that some Mid-Eastern flunkies hijacked airplanes that brought three steel skyscrapers down perfectly by hitting two of them and using the fool-proof mechanism of relatively cool-burning fires, not to mention a hole in the side of the pentagon approximately 5 feet lower than physically allowed by the engines protruding below a 757 airplane. I guess it boils down to peoples’ willingness to believe the physically impossible (or highly, highly improbable) preferentially over the socially unpopular.

              Here’s a doc with some potentially interesting info on the organization of PNAC:

              • “Must not be that easy, or some (actually guilty) people would have gone to jail by now”

                It’s not “that easy” because the court system is controlled by the same people who initiated the event. “The Untouchables” is not just the name of an old TV series.

                And yes it is the fact that the masses are enchanted by the necromancy of the Public Relations Regime, that leads to their mental enslavement.

                We are discussing these very deep problems right now on the most current thread at Truth and Shadows – a blog I have been involved in for quite some time now.

                There still seems to be those who believe a new “official investigation” will be “different this time”, despite the solid history of the system sticking to it’s firm MO. It is a dilemma that will not be resolved for as long as this system stands.

                Yes, I do have a list of a couple hundred names of individuals that are prime suspects as actors in the event. It is my view that none of them will ever be charged in a court of law in the west. And charges levied in far off places in the Eastern Pacific is just so much empty gesture.


              • Look Just Thinking,

                I am not welcome here, as if obvious from Jan’s comment. So I am going to bug out. Nice talking with you.


                • You too. Thanks. I might visit the blog you mentioned. I’m not sure why you’re not welcome here. We all need thicker skin, I guess.

      • I am sure their are some frauds in the 9-11 truth movement. But I humbly suggest we keep in mind that the intended result of cointelpro is exactly what is going on here: people in the 9-11 truth movement expend their energy suspecting each other and name calling.

    • yea, and you, hyperrougue, are full of hot air…….think you have an easy open right now? go blow your dust some where else…..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: