Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Faction Freezes Society's Web Site:

Scholars for 9/11 Truth Threatened

by James H. Fetzer

29 December 2006


The situation with Scholars has taken an ominous turn, where we have been frozen out of the Scholars web site and posting and updating has been made impossible, which can only have been done by Fred Burks, who has possession of the domain names, or Alex Floum, who may still control the password.  It looks like a nice example of the lack of scruples to which I drew attention in my most recent message to the membership.  I find this quite distressing.

Alex Floum continues to abuse his position as a former member of Scholars by distributing contrived and misleading characterizations of the issues.  To hear him tell it, it is a conflict between the forces of democracy (led by Alex Floum) and those of dictatorship (me).  My frank assessment is that his crass and underhanded tactics threaten the continuing existence of Scholars.
Here is a summary of the situation, followed by a list of forthcoming events.

1) As the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth who has acted on behalf of the society to expose falsehoods and reveal truths about 9/11, I alone remain as an officer of the society, which former members are attempting to control.

2) The extant Scholars for 9/11 Truth is the rightful owner of the web site, the journal, and the forum as well as their contents, where, in some cases, such as copyrighted articles, that ownership may be shared with the authors.

3) Alex Floum, who obtained the domain names for the web site and the journal on behalf of the society, had no right to transfer what he never owned to Fred Burks, a friend of some ten years who served as a translator for Presidents, who has neither legal, moral, nor intellectual rights to any of these sites.

4) The anonymous email requesting a vote on the future of the society's sites and membership was unauthorized, illegal, null, and void.  The manner in which it was conducted (by creating fake addresses and phony administrators) offers clear evidence that this was an ignoble action taken under cover where those effecting these misdeeds were not even willing to identify themselves by name.

5) Theft of property is not an appropriate remedy for internal disputes over control and content of the society's website and other properties; and thieves have no grounds to complain about my seeking appropriate legal remedies as the founder of the society on behalf of the society as its sole remaining officer.

6) Former members of the society have no right to determine its future.  It is as if a gang of bank employees robbed a bank as they quit or were fired from their jobs, then complained that that the bank manager was not playing fair, because he called the police as they tried to make their escape out the door.

7) Steve Jones has objected to open discussion of possible explanations of the destruction of the Twin Towers other than his preferred thermite/thermate idea, yet the adequacy of his approch can only be assessed in comparison with the explanatory power of the available alternatives, such as mini-nukes, directed energy or HAARP weaonry, which is the only way in which science can progress.

8) Having now siezed control of our web site, they have made it impossible to bring current information to the members of the society.  This includes the process of updating our membership, which has taken longer to complete than normal in the wake of recent events.  That process has now been frozen.

I am taking whatever steps I can to insure that control of the web site is returned to the society and whatever other measures must be pursued in order to deal with this rogue group.  In the meanwhile, you are entitled to know forthcoming events of interest as well as what's going on behind the scenes.

Since I cannot have them posted on the web site, which they control, I append the list of forthcoming events.  The most interesting for many members may be that I have invited Steve Jones to appear on my program on 2 January 2007 to discuss and debate his thermite/thermate hypothesis with Judy and Morgan:

2 January 2007
Interview: Steve Jones, Judy Wood, and Morgan Reynolds have been invited to discuss 9/11
with Jim Fetzer on "The Dynamic Duo"3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

This appears to be especially imporant insofar as Steve has admitted in a recent email, "One cannot rule out the use of thermite or superthermite cutters for the WTC just because it has not been used before for demolition" and that a patent for this process requires placing devices "on either side of the steel".  I have included the original email, along with a few replies to Alex Floum, below, preceding the announcement of our forthcoming events.

Please know that I made repeated past proposals to this rogue faction to resolve these matters informally, including giving them the journal and the forum, where they need only create their own web site to bring into existence a society of their own.  I offered them the opportunity to show that posting by committee--one of their primary desiderata--works better than having a single site manager.  They never responded to my invitation.

Moreover, I have offered Steve Jones many platforms to present and defend his research on thermite/thermate, including earlier appearances on radio talk shows, encouraging him to speak at The National Press Club, inviting him to chair a panel at the forthcoming Scholars' conference in Madison, and appointing him a member of my team for The National 9/11 Debate.  He has now declined all of these invitations.  The proper way to prevail in scientific research with logic and evidence, not political power plays.

Everyone needs to appreciate that Scholars is a relatively young society and that growing pains are normal and to be expected.  That I have been the manager of the web site should not be news to anyone, any more than that Steve has managed the journal.  With our new steering committee of Kevin Barrett, Richard Curtis, Rick Siegel, and Judy Wood, I am in the process of effecting a transition from an informal structure to a more formal structure, where the society has by-laws and a board of directors.

I have created an entity, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Inc., as a framework for formalizing this new society.  But the by-laws, the board members, and all the rest are the very issues we are attempting to work out, and we intend to submit them to the members of Scholars for their comment and review.  The board of directors, for example, will supervise the editors of our journal, the moderators of our forum, and the managers of our web site.  They can approve or remove any as they choose, including me, if I were to be retained in the position of managing the society's web site.

I have no problem with the creation of another society.  If you disagree with the policies and practices of a society, the honorable thing to do is to resign and, if you are so inclined, create a new one of your own. What is going on here, however, is completely different and not at all honorable.  It is reminiscent of children playing football, where one of them takes the football and claims it for his own, then passes it off to another when players are closing in, where the new possessor sticks it with a knife so the game becomes impossible.  That's what is going on.

I would close by observing that, on 13 December 2006, the attorney for the society I have retained, Jerry S. Leaphart, sent Alex Floum a proposal for binding arbitration:  "I am authorized to indicate that Dr. Fetzer would be willing to enter into a mediation agreement concerning the domain names. I suggest mediation under WIPO as per the rules set forth . . ."  Alex Floum did not respond to this proposal, but I reiterate it here.  I am willing to abide by the decision of binding arbitration through the professional WIPO society to resolve the issues between us and let us get on with our work.

If any of you would like to express your opinions about their conduct, the members of this rogue group include Alex Floum <>; Carl Weis <>, Steve Jones <>; and Fred Burks <>.  These are the persons who are in in charge now because they control all access to the journal, the forum, and the web site.  If you approve of what they are doing, tell them; if not, let them know.  The fate of Scholars for 9/11 Truth is at stake.

James H. Fetzer
Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Some emails of possible interest:

Sent 12/28/06


If you don't realize directed energy weapons exist, have been tested, and are in use and you don't want to read our paper (which shows examples of them in use), perhaps you'd like to visit the US military's web site on Directed Energy Weapons: directed energy quotes (dated February 2000)

The above information is all in the public domain.  So, perhaps you can imagine what is not in the public domain.

Don't you find it a bit concerning that Steven Jones, whose area of expertise this is in, claims to know nothing about the development of directed energy weapons over the past 30 years?  Even if he were that ignorant about his field of expertise, isn't it a bit concerning that he uses divisive and derogatory statements to describe our research, such as "space beams knocking down the towers"?  It's very difficult not to conclude that his motive for taking over the ST911 website is to keep the truth about 9/11 hidden.  After all, he has admitted that he knows of no way thermite could have brought the towers down.

I thought you might be interested in the response to Alex Floum's email given by Andrew Johnson, a physicist and full member (FM) of Scholars.  What does it mean when yet another physicist objects to Steven Jones' actions?


Sent 12/28/06 to Alex Floum


Personal disputes aside, I would feel happier if Jim, Judy and Rick et al lead forward with ST911 while Steve et al maintain "Journal of
911 Studies".

From a science perspective, I can no longer accept Steve Jones' critique of Fetzer and Wood and his generally evasive attitude (whilst generally remaining civil and polite) and have been somewhat surprised by his apparent inability to answer basic questions and respond to certain basic points of evidence. There is also some apparent previous record of this type of activity from Prof Jones in relation to his research pertaining to the LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions).

Looking at this in context, it appears that someone somewhere is, with intent or through ignorance, adopting a "limited hangout" about certain aspects of what happened on 9/11. I feel this is either through a deliberate or unintentional failure to acknowledge the very real threat to humanity posed by out-of-control black-projects (sometimes called USAPs), which a number of highly credentialed whistle-blowers have already spoken out about. There is therefore a very strong incentive for the real power brokers in the game to limit the credibility or ability given to anyone to demonstrate links between 9/11 and Black Projects.

My view is that this is what is behind the split in the movement and those that have been closest to uncovering the evidence for the above are the ones that who have been treated with the least respect. Because I have no reputation or position to protect, I am free to speak in this manner, and also I now have what I think is a good collection of evidence to back up the essential arguments behind this analysis.

So this is the bottom line really - the future of humanity is at stake. I hope I have made the correct choice and I hope I live to find out if I have, for myself and my children.

With good wishes for the future of us all,

Andrew Johnson

Sent 12/28/06 to Alex Floum

Interesting perspective Alex.  Why is it that those who Jim is associating himself are those who are providing the most new ideas on 9/11 based on observable data?  It is my observation that those who receive the most resistance to their findings are most likely on the right track.  Further, I keep waiting for new answers from Professor Jones and have found very little.  I went to Chicago in June to see what was new in his research and I got one slide (out of more than 100) hinting that he was close to having signature evidence that there was thermite residues in the WTC debris.  This after six or seven months of intense research?  We spent a half an hour (or more?) talking about solar cookers and icebergs.  What I expected were results that asked more questions than it answered.  What I got was a very narrowing of the focus, like baiting a rabbit with a carrot.

Now I learn that Steven Jones was involved in burying the cold fusion research of Pons and Fleishmann in the interests of Big Oil and Ivy League hot fusion interests (which have spent billions of dollars and gotten zero benefit).  Would you care to explain to me how Steve could be involved in an oil war cover-up on one hand and "come to Jesus" on this issue (another oil war)?  It would appear to me that he has some ethical issues to answer to and if he is as innocent as he says, would debate these issues publicly with Fetzer, Wood, Reynolds, and Seigel.  It is my understanding that this forum has been made available to Dr. Jones via Fetzer's show.  I would welcome the debate to "let the chips fall where they may."

Last, I have included a member of the media on the carbon list just to insure that if I, my family, friends, or respected associates noted above become targets of harassment, someone will know where to look.  Might as well be on the record about such things.

Russ Gerst

Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:20:59 -0800
Subject: Re: The "Bathtub" and Space Beams
From: jeff strahl
To: Steve Jones
CC: hummux hummux, Ken Jenkins, Alex Floum, Robert Moore,
           Fred Burks, Kevin Ryan

Cut through steel "armaments", or "armour"? If you meant the first, which is the word you used, that's pretty insignificant.  Show us the REPORT. And how many of these devices would you need, esp if operating in pairs? And how would the thermite work in seconds, when it usually takes so long to get going, and how would all these be coordinated?

How much sulfur does it take to enable molten iron to steel be liquid at 600 deg C almost 900 deg C below iron's melting point? And why didn't the mixture melt the aluminum cladding it was flowing over?

Search the web under "thermite demolition", the debunking site comes up within the first page (of Google search), click and go to almost the end.

Can't rule it out just because it hasn't been used before? Isn't that exactly what you're doing with other technologies?

I know you're just trying to keep me busy jumping through hoops, but two can play this game.

on 12/27/06 2:59 PM, Steve Jones at wrote:

>   Jeff,
>   The patent points out that the devices can be placed on either side of
>   the steel, thus cutting up to about 4 inches.  This with thermite
>   using copper oxide (per the patent), but not sulfur -- sulfur will
>   enhance the cutting effect.
>   One cannot rule out the use of thermite or superthermite cutters for
>   the WTC just because it has not been used before for demolition.
>   I went to the debunking 911 site and found it interesting, but did not
>   find any mention of this "miracle device."  Since you cited this site,
>   would you then provide the URL for the PAGE on which this "miracle
>   device" is discussed?  Then I can take a look at it.
>   I have also found photos and a report of a thermite-cutter device used
>   to cut through steel armaments. Yes, actually used. The device looks
>   quite like the prototype I built and sent you photos of --  it is
>   larger, however.  If you're interested, I'll send these photos also.
>   Steve
>   On 12/26/06, jeff strahl wrote:
>>   And what happens when beams are thicker than 2 inches? Any PROOF
>>   this device
>>   has ever been ACTUALLY USED? Why is it that when one does a web search for
>>   thermite and demolition together, the only things that come up are your
>>   articles and references to them? These latter include (on the first page of
>>   returns) a debunking of your thesis at debunking911 (including this
>>   "miracle
>>   device"), which shows what a great job you're doing setting up the 9/11
>>   Truth Movement for a fall.
>>   on 12/26/06 10:46 AM, Steve Jones at wrote:
>>>   Thank you for the URL pointing to the patent, Hummux.  Yes, the
>>>   fluorine action with thermite-cutting is specifically mentioned in
>>>   this patent.  I also had trouble downloading the figures (today) but
>>>   give one figure from the patent (extracted earlier) in the attached
>>>   document.
>>>   I'm enclosing replies I put together today, specifically for Jeff Strahl.
>>>   Best wishes,
>>>   Steve
>>>   On 12/26/06, hummux hummux wrote:
>>>>   searchers--i've attached excerpts and a figure from patent #6,183,569,
>>>>   Called "Cutting torch and associated methods", 2/6/2001 which
>>>>   steve puts in
>>>>   his powerpoint slides.  this device is designed to produce
>>>>   horizontal cuts
>>>>   using thermite.  i've been unable to download the figures on my computer
>>>>   and
>>>>   would appreciate having them if any of you can download them.  go to
>>>> and put in
>>>>   6183569.

A new list of "Events" for Scholars for 9/11 Truth (

29 December 2006
Interview: Eric D. Williams, author of six books and webmaster for will be the guest of Kevin Barrett on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communciations Network,

30 December 2006
Interview: Theologian John Cobb will be the guest of Kevin Barrett on "Truth Jihad Radio"
6-8 PM/CT, Republic Broadcasting Network,

2 January 2007
Interview: Steve Jones, Judy Wood, and Morgan Reynolds have been invited to discuss 9/11 with Jim Fetzer on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

3 January 2007
Interview: William Law will be the guest of Jim Fetzer discussing his research  on the death of JFK on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

4 January 2007
Interview: Jeff Strahl will be the guest of Jim Fetzer discussing recent developments within Scholars on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

5 January 2007
Interview: To be announced will be the guest of Kevin Barrett on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

6 January 2007
Interview: Michael Andregg, author, On the Causes of War, will be the guest of Kevin Barrett on "Truth Jihad Radio"
6-8 PM/CT, Republic Broadcasting Network,

8 January 2007
Interview: Dave Slesinger, Civil Disobedience activist, will be the guest of Kevin Barrett on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

9 January 2007
Interview: Bob Bowman will be the guest of Jim Fetzer discussing
recent developments within Scholars on "The Dynamic Duo"          
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,            

10 January 2007
Interview: Richard Freeman will be the guest of Jim Fetzer
discussing current economic issues on "The Dynamic Duo"           
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,            

10 January 2007
Lecture:  Jim Fetzer present a lecture on "9/11:  What We Know Now", as the guest of the McClendon Group at The National Press Club, where his presentation will follow dinner and begin around 7 PM/ET

11 January 2007
Interview: Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds will be the guest of Jim
Fetzer discussing recent 9/11 research on "The Dynamic Duo"       
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,            

12 January 2007
Interview: Mike Berger,, will be the guest of Kevin Barrett discussing on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

13 January 2007
Interview: To be announced will be the guest of Kevin Barrett on "Truth Jihad Radio"
6-8 PM/CT, Republic Broadcasting Network,

15 January 2007
Interview: David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor and much, much more, will be  the guest of Kevin Barrett on "The Dynamic Duo"
3-5 PM/CT, Genesis Communications Network,

16 February 2007
Event:  "Truth Days of Action" to be held in Washington, D.C.
For further information,

19 February 2007
Event:  "Truth Days of Action" to be held in Washington, D.C.
For further information,

23-25 February 2007
Conference:  "9/11 Accountability" to be held at the San Marcos Resort, Chandler, AZ.  For further information, visit