What's up with Prof. Jones joining forces with disinfo king extraordinaire Jim Hoffman?

This has been bugging me for a while. After the split up of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth organization, which seems to have been precipitated by the falling out between Prof Steven Jones and Prof Jim Fezter, Prof Jones joined Jim Hoffman in founding a new organization called Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, with a new web site http://stj911.org that features Jim Hoffman's disinformation about the Pentagon attack, containing only cherry-picked evidence and other dishonest arguments by Hoffman, but none of the contrary evidence (Jones used to unequivocally dispute the official story of AA77 hitting the Pentagon). What's up with that?
There was almost no one else in the 9/11 Truth Movement I respected more than Prof. Jones. On the other hand, there is almost no one in the 9/11 Truth movement I despize more than Jim Hoffman.
Jim Hoffman is notorious as one of the most divisive and damaging high profile 9/11 Researchers, particularly over his disinformation about the Pentagon attack. Hoffman also penned a trojan horse rebuttal to the Popular Mechanics hit piece in which Hoffman cleverly and underhandedly supported most of Popular Mechanics' misleading/dishonest arguments against 9/11 "conspiracy theories".
Is this an example of how a basically decent person can be duped into joining forces with the disinfo crew by proper "handling." What do you think of Professor Jones? Is he just an honest but naive person who just isn't able to understand the machinations of these skilled, manipulative, disinfo agents such as Hoffman? Or is there more going on with Prof. Jones than meets the eye?
- Keenan's blog
- Login to post comments

let's keep an eye on developments!
There are a few possibilities, I suppose. I am also wary of Jim Hoffman because of his claims about the Pentagon. It may just be his role to fracture the movement. As far as Jones supporting him, who knows. Jones himself could well be disinfo--his role could be to link 9/11 truth with religious weirdness and also with the political right. I think it's a mistake to think of any of these 9/11 truth "celebrities" as anything but part of a whole, the whole being the early truth movement that is rife with disinfo... The trick I guess is to use tham as long as they are not liabilities (I think the marginalization of Uncle Fetzer went pretty well!) and dump them if they become more trouble than they're worth. Pretty soon we won't need any one person since more normal folk will be joining the chorus...
Something really is rotten in the State of Stephen Jones
Well, the more I research the background of the highly revered boy-faced Professor Stephen Jones, the more I am becoming convinced that there definately IS more going on than meets the eye, and it doesn't smell too good. Now, the question that has been bugging me about why Prof. Jones would join with the blatent disinfo agent Jim Hoffman (who is a previous and possibly currrent NSA contractor) and company at the new "Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice" organization is starting to be answered and it doesn't look too pretty. For those of you in the 9/11 Truth Movement who see Prof. Jones as your hero, you may not like what this answer is looking like. Do yourself a favor, hold an open mind, and check this information out for yourselves and follow the links before getting upset with my allegations that Jones is likely a government agent sent to sabatoge, at least in part, the cause of 9/11 Truth.
Let's start with some history of how Stephen Jones was part of the organized effort to kill Cold Fusion research and discredit Ponds and Fleishman in 1989. Stephen E. Jones was a government agent - sent in by an informant at the Department of Energy - to undermine the work of 2 legitimate scientists, who threatened the control of the military-industrial complex, and the hegemonic rule of the People Who Own America, specifically those who keep us dependent on expensive, polluting, and problematic hydrocarbon energy. Please watch the video on google called Heavy Watergate, The War Against Cold Fusion http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2229511748333360205&q=Heavy+Watergate
The above video is 46 minutes long. If you want to see just the section regarding Prof. Jones, watch this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rtNORz4BDY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2E8thestate%2Ecom%2F
Jones' shenanigans effectively prevented Ponds and Fleishman from patenting their work which could have resulted in the introduction of a new, cheap, non-polluting energy source.
I know there is a large number of people in the 9/11 Truth Movement who have become convinced that Jones' thermate/thermite theory is the best thing since sliced bread and is perhaps our "best evidence". Well, I think we should always be wary when a "leader" of our movement tries to lead us down a very narrow path. It's important to keep in mind that while Jones claims to have “evidence†of “Thermate†from Ground Zero, there is no chain of custody for his alleged evidence (which makes his theory easy to knock down by the scientific community), and in fact Jones’ theories lead people away from studying traces of RDX and similar explosives http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=DGUS%2CDGUS%3A2006-22%2CDGUS%3Aen&q=RDX+HMX (which unlike thermate, can be traced to point of origin) and never bringing his audience so much as within miles of mentioning WHO might have actually been behind the deverticalization of the World Trade Center Complex.
Additionally, there are some pretty strange anomalies around the destruction of the WTC that don't seem to fit into Jone's thermate/thermite theory, let alone conventional RDX/HMX/etc demolition devices, such as what happened to some of the steel core that was heated to temperatures "hotter than the center of the earth". Watch this clip: http://youtube.com/watch?v=kzOuyin_2as which shows a sample of some very strange transformed steel into a meteorite-like artifact. Listen to Brian William’s words when he says, “What on earth could make a meteorite-like artifact from the WTC debris, which was cooked by heat hotter than the center of the earth?†Perhaps watch it again just to hear it and see it again.
I’m not saying for certain that “fusion was involved†or any specific exotic weapon at Ground Zero, but I've seen enough anomalous evidence to at least warrent a deeper look and I'm not comfortable with the haste and stampede currently in the 9-11 movement to burry this question. If something caused the steel to get "hotter than the center of the earth", then we need a theory that goes beyond conventional demolition explosives, as well as thermate/thermite. This question is far from being answered satisfactorally, despite what so many loud voices in the movement seem to assert.
Why would Stephen Jones be placed (employed?) to undermine the 9-11 families and truth-seekers? Perhaps more so than anyone else, Stephen Jones (an expert in fusion, and also a long-time government contractor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones) is in a position to serve as an "expert" in the view of a lot of the 9-11 truth movmenet on assessing the possibility of the use of exotic weapons such as fusion devices. But Stephen Jones is also ideally positioned to fill another role: the creation of an overly narrow demolition theory (relying solely on weak evidence of thermate/thermite) that can be easily debunked, while serving to spoil any inquiry into a more insidious possibility and denouncer of anyone who dared to question the veracity of that narrow demolition theory. If that alternate possibility was an exotic weapon, Dr. Jones would be one of the perfect people to put in a place of leadership in the 9-11 Truth movement… if anyone brings up a legitimate question about the excessive heat and proposes anything related to Fusion, Dr. Jones could level his “expert†opinion and state that such inquiries are “preposterous!†or otherwise lay discredit to the inquiry.
As for me, I don’t know what happened at Ground Zero, but my eyes are open; and I’m sharing the information, uncensored, and in the spirit of helping heal this movement by identifying misleadership when I encounter it. We run from one pack of misleaders, into a movement already pre-constructed in such a way that we all look up to the “professionals†or the “scholars†as newfound gods. Thank goodness they have the answers, saving us the trouble of thinking for ourselves. Well, inlight of all the never-ending shenanigans with so many of our "leaders", maybe it’s time to move on and be our own leaders - by becoming informed and thinking for ourselves - by creating our own presentations of fact, our own media… we don’t need professors, attorneys, or “expertsâ€â€¦ all we need are open minded people who know that they do not know, and we all have that in common whether or not people realize that.
yes and, well, uhhh...
I think I'm with you up to apoint Keenan. I am certainly wary of any and all of the "leaders" who have been presented to us, with my usual qualification that among those people I STILL consider David Griffin and Kevin Ryan to be sincere.
I have always found Dr. Jones to be a bit of an enigma. I admit I don't know enough about the cold fusion debate to say, but I thought that it was generally accepted that Pons and Fleishman's (sp?) findings were never replicated and so might well have been too good to be true. In any case I think we have to be very careful of throwing out the baby (legitimate p[ossibility of thermite/thermate use) with the bathwater (the problematic messenger).
Having a problematic messenger deliver a key piece of good info seems to be a well-worn method of the perps to cover their tracks. We might call this the "Hufschmid Gambit" whereby they risk revealing some true secrets in order to associate the truth with a guy that no one wants to in turn be associated with. When you read Jones' paper about Jesus having visited America I think you get the same sinking feeling as when you get too far into some of Hufschmid's theories (or Alex Jones' for that matter, or David Icke to use an extreme case.)
One problem I see is that too many people in the truth movement want to try to solve the case, i.e. put the cart before the horse, as opposed to simply spreading the undisputable facts so as to raise awareness and therefore pressure to have the case investigated properly. Of course it's fun and gratifying to learn about things like thermite but we should be very careful not to allow too much unnecessary speculation into our outreach efforts, which only really require us to prove the official story inadequate, not to provide our own complete story.
I agree with you that DRG
I agree with you that DRG and Kevin Ryan are sincere, and I would add to that list Barrie Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, Jim Marrs, the folks at Signs of the Times who made Pentagon Strike, and perhaps a few others. But it is really disconcerting how many of the "leaders" have turned out to be anything but straight up with their agendas.
In fact Pons and Fleishman's findings WERE replicated around the world and there have been hundreds of scientific papers written verifying it, but the story of how the PTB and the bulk of the scientific community that is dependent on government funds worked to unfairly discredit cold fusion and keep it from ever threatening the most powerful interests is really the epitome of how our science has been compromised and politicized to the point that "scientific authority" in this country really means very little anymore in relation to truth. If you look into how so many promising technologies like cold fusion are suppressed and attacked in recent history, starting with Nicola Tesla, it really is sobering to realize what we are up against. The number of scientists and inventors who met a premature death only because their discoveries/inventions would have had negative financial effects on entrenched interests are legion.
Oh, come on!
Aren't the vast majority (like 90%?) of american physicists dependent on government grants in one way or another? I would therefore say that alone doesn't qualify for suspicion. Also, "hotter than the center of the earth" most certainly was just a metaphor. The core temperature is believed to be ~7000°C -- way above the boiling point of iron. Therefore, such temperatures wouldn't have left "the meteorite" -- they would have left nothing! Thermate explains "the meteorite" quite well.
Also note that RDX is only traceable to its point of origin if the manufacturer conformed to legal obligations of adding markers -- something intelligence services/black ops would probably not do!
I haven't looked into the topic of cold fusion enough to be able to comment, but the points I discussed above do not warrant the kind of suspicion re: Jones that's being offered. Still, let's observe what the Hoffman alliance will bring about.
_________________________________
happiness is either here or nowhere
I'm on the fence
I think Jones' work thus far is solid but as we've learned, it's important to watch these guys carefully so as to disavow them once they "go Fetzal"... :)
Bruce, have you looked into how
Bruce, have you looked into how Jones acted despicably to sabatoge Pons and Fleishman on behalf of the Department of Energy, who cateres to certain powerful interests? Really, watch the documentary I linked to, and check it with other sources as well. What Stephen Jones did was shameful, no buts about it.
i'll have to look into pons and fleishman
let's keep in mind that dissing jones along these lines is a favorite tactic of the no-planers. frankly i don't know if that makes me think I shouldn't believe it because they are such liars or that I should because they are liars with a purpose of discrediting by association. i'll let you knw!
I actually learned about the
I actually learned about the conspiracies to suppress cold fusion and other promising technologies over a year ago that threaten the vise-grip control of energy by Those Who Own the Empire, but I didn't know about Jones' involvement until recently. Remember, though, that you will have to get past the bogus "official scientific consensus" that "cold fusion is fiction" to see what is really going on. But, I'm sure you're getting used to having to set aside "official consensus" in getting to the bottem of things by now.
of course
and we all now know about the electric car, Henry Ford's hemp car, etc... :)
Yea :D
could it be that cartoon planes and super duper free energy both require a certain scientific ignorance to believe? I don't know, but I'll look into it!
_________________________________
happiness is either here or nowhere
Sorry, but now you're using straw man arguments
I never said anything about cartoon planes. That's an unfair association.
The fact that you don't know about cold fusion, or that fact that scientific "laws" are occasionally broken, and with great resistence by the establishment and entrenched belief systems, just shows that you may be ignorant and unflexible, not that those who you disagree with are necessarily crack pots. Paleese, if you've learned anything from your search for the truth around 9/11 and the holocaust, I hope you've at least learned that this dismissive attitude you are expressing isn't very helpful.
Try doing the research around what really happened to cold fusion, like I suggested, before insulting me.
Hey, you took this the wrong way!
The association originated from the no-plane crowd that brought up cold fusion to discredit Jones. All I'm fairly convinced of is that cartoon planes are nonsense -- I'm sure there's still much to discover in terms of physics, and that might include different ways of fusion.
I never associated you with cartoon planes, sorry if it seemed like it! Peace.
_________________________________
happiness is either here or nowhere
Ok, sorry for the
Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding. I do appreciate your debating and discussing these issues and helping me to practice my debating skills. Vigerous debates helps one to try to know more about their own arguments and views.
Incidently, some of the ad-hominem attacks against Jones regarding the cold fusion stuff by certain disinfo types - Morgan Reynolds being the most notorious example - is off base, because they are misrepresenting Jones' role in the whole cf fiasco. Morgan Reynolds falsely asserts that cf was a hoax and that Jones was simply trying to use pseudo-science to give credence to cf. Well, knowing the kind of poisenous agenda that Morgan Reynolds seems to be operating from, I would classify his critique as clever misdirection in that he cleverly attacks both the efficacy cf and Jones' scientific abilities at the same time. It then begs the question, could both Morgan Reynolds and Jones be disinfo agents while trying to discredit each other? Well, if so, it wouldn't be the first time this has happened in the 9/11 truth movement (tv-fakery/hologram people vs Jim Hoffman et al, pod people vs no-planers, etc)
removed - duplicate
removed - duplicate
boiled/vaporized steel
Bruce, what the "meteorite-like" transformation appears to indicate. along with some other anomalous evidence, is that the steel was not only melted, it may have been boiled and vaporized, which requires a temperature hotter than thermate/thermite can produce.
"Therefore, such temperatures wouldn't have left "the meteorite" -- they would have left nothing! Thermate explains "the meteorite" quite well."
Not true. Some of the vaporized metal would be missing, but some would have re-condensed and remained as smaller particles. Also, you could quite possibly see sections of where steel was starting to boil, but then re-cooled fairly quickly leaving the telltale signs behind in how it re-cooled.
Look, let's agree that neither of us are experts and we both need more information to know for sure either way, but I'm not sure why so many people are just absolutely uncritically declaring the case closed based on just one person's - Jones - theory, which to me doesn't seem to be totally complete and unquestionable, based on just one sample where the chain of custody was not properly followed.
Interesting!
Actually, I have to admit that all I've seen of the meteorite is the small clip featured in 9/11 Mysteries -- could you point me to more info, please?
_________________________________
happiness is either here or nowhere
can you recommend a source
for a discussion of why people think the "meteorite" indicates boiling or vaporized steel? I'm kind of with Bruce on this one--that I can see how molten steel perhaps mixed with pulverized concrete could account for its formation in the chaos of the rubble pile...
the importance of sources
Keenan, or anyone, could you point out a source that talks about cold fusion? citing sources saves lots of time, especially when you don't summarize your reasons for finding the case credible. I'm not saying it has to be a mainstream source, just one that you thinks make a good case for why the conventional wisdom about CF is wrong... thanks!
Here's a couple
By the way, cold fusion - which was the term created by Stephen Jones - is not a very good description of the phenomena. A better term is low energy nuclear reaction
The site below is a good clearinghouse of information and has links to many of the 3000 scientific papers that discuss the positive results of cf experiments, including the production of excess heat that cannot be accounted for by chemical reaactions alone:
Low Energy Nuclear Reactions and
Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
Here is an excellent summary of the debate around cold fusion and why the mainstream refuses acknowledge the efficacy of cf:
COLD FUSION:
An Objective Assessment
Edmund Storms
Energy K. Systems
Santa Fe, NM 87501
(12/16/01)http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/review8.html
"Many people still believe that cold fusion is the result of bad science. In contrast, numerous laboratories in at least 10 countries have now claimed production of anomalous energy using a variety of methods, many of which are now reproducible. This energy is proposed to result from nuclear reactions initiated within a special periodic array of atoms at modest temperatures (energy). Evidence for nuclear reactions involving fusion of deuterium, transmutation involving both light and heavy hydrogen, and nuclear interaction between heavy nuclei has been published. The claims, if true, reveal a new method to release nuclear energy without harmful radiation and without the radioactivity associated with conventional methods. This paper examines published evidence describing this new phenomenon in order to test its reality and to extend an understanding of the process."
There are no sacred cows as far as I'm concerned
but I think your criticism of Jones is off-base. I found "Heavy Watergate" to be embarrassingly weak and I just don't see the basis for impugning Jones. I'd like to see a source for your assertion that the Pons and Fleischmann's results were ever replicated, other than that movie.
Also, I wonder if the reaction to Jones' Mormonism is different regionally. Out here (Oregon), Mormons abound, and people don't give their, uh, colorful variation on Christianity a second thought (except when they try to impose their beliefs on others.) His Mormonism really could not be used to discredit him here, in and of itself -- it's just not considered wacky. Jones did do research into the idea that people from the Mediterranean visited the Americas way before Columbus, but he makes a careful distinction between the limited conclusions he drew from his research, and his faith-based beliefs about Christ.
Frankly, at this point I am at least as skeptical of DRG, based on his tight relationship with the LC boyz, as I am of Jones.