Loading...

Dick Eastman Planes Hit World Trade Center 9-11 vs James Fetzer No Planes Hit

10,180 views

Loading...

Loading...

Transcript

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading...

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Dec 13, 2015

Jim Fetzer was telling people that I was a liar and that he wanted to debate his position that no planes hit the WTC. I don't think he expected that I would find out about that, that I would address his supporters and take him up on the offer. I did not let him back out. The correspondence among dozens of people lasted a long time. For a while, it looked like Anthony Lawson would be joining me on my Big Plane side. At any rate, Mike Harris offered to moderate the debate – and here it is.

Before the debate, I wrote to Fetzer telling him exactly how I would argue. The topic for the affirmative was "Resolved: Two Big Planes Hit the World Trade Center Towers on September 11, 2001". In the very first round of the July 18, 2013 debate, I laid out my position: The witnesses cannot all be liars, and all video cameras showing planes could not have been tampered with. Secondly, each tower had an airplane-sized hole after each crash, with beams bent inward. Thirdly, the explosion was of great force, with a great amount bursting out the other side of the building from where the plane crashed – the debris that flew out had tremendous force, that could only have come from an airplane of great mass striking at great speed. The force was directional, and by the principle of conservation of momentum had to have been delivered to the building by an object of comparable mass and velocity. Much of the plane hit the core and was stopped, but an engine missed the core and flew out, demonstrating this conservation of energy – retaining a high percentage of the original velocity of the plane.

Against this, Fetzer had nothing to argue. In fact, when it was his turn to answer, he began by giving some irrelevant data about the weight of the building – and then, as you can hear, he just cut himself off, leaving Mike Harris and myself wondering where Fetzer went. Then he came back – and listen to how nonchalant he sounded, as he replied to, you were cut off: "oh, really" "well, did you hear me explain this and that" etc. So in fact, he gave no answer to any of my arguments, but avoided the embarrassment of not having an answer by this trick – you can hear it here.

And note that he was in the debate arguing the negative of the proposition that big planes hit the WTC – yet he digressed to talk about all of his other theories, then he talked about all the ways that no-planes could be argued – again not at all addressing the proposition that he was invited to debate. Then he castigated me for not being well-read on all of the no-plane theories and his exact position. But the topic of the debate was the position I was arguing: that big planes hit the WTC. Only in the last round of the debate did he give a counter-claim to only one of my arguments: that the videos and witnesses could not be wrong.

So at the very end, he introduced his answer: the unsubstantiated claim of an impossibility! He said that what the witnesses and video cameras saw were "projected holograms"! This is, of course, impossible: there must be a holographic screen with the proper laser-etched diffraction pattern in order for a hologram to be seen. Jim Fetzer simply relied on the ignorance of his audience. Yet he was all bluster on the offensive. And yes, he does have an edited version of the debate on his website: he cuts out the part where he cut himself off and where I made my case. Yet Jim Fetzer is an editor of Veterans Today.

Fetzer is an operative specializing in the obstruction of justice. He became a spokesman for the "Truthers" – and then he promoted people with the most absurd and offensive claims – like no planes hit the WTC, like the buildings were brought down by "mini-neutron bombs" (see Veterans Today for this disinfo theory).

Dick Eastman

Loading...

When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next


to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...