From his blog, donaldfox.wordpress.com, which is entitled, “Exposing the Nuclear Truth of 9/11,” we see some interesting articles having nothing to do with what the site purports to present.
From January 1, 2013, he wrote the post, Saturday Night Special: Vikings vs. Packers NFC Wild Card Game, where he informs his readers about all the important details of a particular NFL game, and nothing about the critical matter of 9/11.
Then, from December 25, 2012, he wrote the post, Windows 8 and Office 2013 First Impressions, again, with nothing about the critical matter of 9/11.
If that wasn’t confusing enough for his readers, his December 18, 2012 post, PIDcast with Clare Kuehn, we have Fox giving credence to a theory that the real Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced by a look-alike.
If these posts weren’t questionable enough, there is the October 29, 2012 Veterans Today article by Don Fox, along with Clare Kuehn, Jeff Prager and four others. Veterans Today is the publication that editor Gordon Duff says is about 30% “patently false.”
I wrote about how this article is inflammatory and unscientific, by engaging in character assassination against alternative 9/11 theoritsts, Dr. Judy Wood and Dr. Steven E. Jones.
Then, we have Jeff Prager insisting that Adam Lanza was a lone gunman who carried out the Sandy Hook shootings, despite strong evidence for multiple shooters, as I have previously written about.
We are now starting to see a pattern of behaviour from three of this crew, in engaging in unusual and questionable activity, which makes me wonder what their true motivations are.
Let me also say, I support the idea that there is likely something called, variously, torsion physics, scalar physics, unified field physics, atomic kinetic physics. However, the last segment of my talk at 9/11 Vancouver Hearings, which gives this background and references, was lost to the sands of time; all of us had our talks partly lost, possibly through tech errors or sabotage. Anyway, the part II of the talk is available in slide form on Don’s blog, as a Powerpoint and PDF download. On the other hand, the idea that the WTC 1 & 2 were primarily brought down by technology from such a physic (if it exists), is less supportable now that the MULTIPLE atomic products have been identified in the dust, by the USGS and knowledge of this promulgated by Jeff Prager and Don Fox. It is still possible that Hurricane Erin WAS used somehow to control the EMF around the area from micro nukes, or some kind of combination with DEWs. My presence as “credited” on the article on VT, is because Jim Fetzer quoted my e-mails to Fox, Prager, Boldwyn and Fetzer, where I said Wood is not a disinfo agent but IS dedicated to an impression from the evidence from 9/11, whereby the option of micro nukes was not thought of and the presence of multiple (not merely Tritium) byproducts was not known. — VT does, by the way, have many off-the-cuff pieces on it (prompting Duff to disclaim even his own site’s content in part). — As to McCartney and Sir Paul: this is a separate issue and it has its own case. Let’s not stop people from having their multiple research topics, no matter who they are. I used to think it was dumb of people to mention things in one field which might turn off people in another field. I’ve learned too much from (and not always agreed with) people who mixed interests, to try to say they’re “discredited” for understanding or trying to understand other areas. Best wishes.
My blog started out as a personal blog. 9/11 started taking more of my time last year so I made some tweaks to reflect that. Your point is well taken. I’ll update the tag line so that it doesn’t lead one to believe that it’s a 100% 9/11 site.
Judy Wood and Steve Jones are two of the most disgusting characters in 9/11 research. They are the folks who motivated me to get involved in the first place. I’ve got more on Judy coming very soon.
Everyone else in our group besides Jeff believes that there were multiple shooters. I haven’t done ANY research into Sandy Hook and have NO opinion on it one way or the other. I’m sticking to 9/11 for the time being.
Fetzer, Prager, Kuehn and myself are researchers. We don’t always agree on everything. We have free and open debate. Sometimes it gets pretty intense. We don’t have a party line that everyone has to toe unlike the Judy Wood cult who must memorize her script and parrot that whenever someone asks them a question.
Thanks for your response, Don.
I intend to write a post on what I regard as an anomalous statement in her book.
As for the Sandy Hook shootings, I don’t mind if someone says they think the evidence shows there was a lone shooter, or that it was Adam Lanza — my concern is when it’s being said by someone with a public voice who is also prominently questioning and presenting alternative explanations for a monumentally important matter like 9/11.
Regarding open debate, it is a good thing, as it is all too common for dissent to be suppressed, even within alternative circles, as I have personally witnessed with the AIDS scam, and as we see within certain 9/11 groups.