'Truth' OP

COINTELPRO "Truth" OP
History lesson by
By Gerard Holmgren and Nico Haupt
July 21, 2006


Even before Nico’s post below, there was certainly plenty of circumstantial evidence that Jones is either cointelpro or else being used by them to the extent that it makes little difference whether he’s actually getting a pay cheque.

Lets go through that evidence.


First, we have proof that the “truth movement” in general is controlled at the highest levels by cointelpro forces. The single most identifiable fact of that proof is David Kubiak. The executive director of “911truth.org” is on record as telling the NY times that Sept 11 was *not* an inside job.


How does an openly declared supporter of the *full* official story, become executive director of an organization which claims to be the umbrella movement for all those seeking the “truth” of the event?

Incompetence ? Accident ? Oversight ?

This is rather like observing the behavior of US officials on the morning of the attacks, even before solid evidence came to light.



“ What we have here is either stupidity and incompetence on the part of the movement on a criminal scale, or else treason and complicity.”

The movement must now be subjected to the same standards of scrutiny. How does someone who has openly declared to the mainstream media that S11 was *not* an inside job, become a high profile leader of the “movement” supposedly attempting to prove that it was?

“Ah well, we didn’t know. When he became executive director we didn’t realize that he held these views.”

And what about after the NY times interview ?


Ah , well .. 911truth.org is not really that interested in mainstream media coverage you see, so were unaware of the comments.”



And why hasn’t been expelled since you became aware of them?


“Well , we don’t talk about internal inquiries, but we can assure you that a full assessment of the situation will be carried out, and if there is any evidence of inappropriate behavior , it will be dealt with in the appropriate manner”.

When?

“Well , I don’t think its helpful to put artificial timetables on these sorts of matters. If there is an issue there, then it will be fully dealt with in the appropriate manner”


Does this sound familiar ?


How did Ken Jenkins deal with this situation ? He said that movement tolerates minor differences of opinion.


I see. In a movement dedicated to proving that S11 was an inside job, then saying that it was not an inside job is a minor difference of opinion ? And not just tolerated. Rewarded ! Executive director, no less !


And you thought that Kissenger as chairman of the 911commission was a joke ? That was credible compared to this.


But while the assertion that it was not an inside job is only a minor variation on the assertion that it was an inside job, the idea that it was an inside job involving TV fakery inspires a furious barrage of apoplectic frothing at which any flag waver could only stand and admire.


Given that, then anyone who is enthusiastically promoted by this movement becomes suspect.


That in itself is circumstantial in relation to Jones, but it is only the opening shot.


With that as background, now let us examine Jones’ contribution to proving demolition.


…OK, we’ve done that now. That is – nothing. Zero, naught, zilch, zip, bugger all, a big fat donut.


Well, that’s not a crime in itself. Those incapable of research (even in the fields of their professional expertise) can always provide publicity –even if it’s better late than never.

When was the demolition case wrapped up as proven ? Early/Mid 2002.


When did Jones first appear ? Mid Late 2005.


3 ½ years later.


Remarkable! A physics professor who took 4 years to work out that the law of gravity still works ! Even though any interested person with a junior high school level of scientific understanding could have had this drawn to their attention simply by surfing the net – for the last 3 ½ years !


So either Jones is a complete idiot – or else he’s an opportunistic coward who hid in the shadows and waited for other people to do the work and take the risk, and take the endless attacks dished out by the “movement”.


The movement – which it must be remembered, fought tooth and nail *against* the demolition evidence for years.

What could have been achieved in 6 months in terms of public demolition awareness took 4 years, due to the movement deliberately obstructing it.


Let me give you an example. SF has a big “truth” scene, right ? Since about 2002, one SF resident , Jeff Strahl, completely of his own initiative, set up a little stall at the Saturday market in Berkley for the purpose of talking to people about the demolition. Every weekend – for years.

Not one person from the SF truth scene helped him. In fact he was attacked ,ostracized, and expelled from “truth groups”. He was ridiculed, called a nutcase, discrediting the movement (does any of this sound familiar). He became a pariah from the “movement” for his efforts on the demolition.


BTW, Jeff himself is a uni lecturer, so he was also risking his career.

What was Steven Jones doing all this time ?

Hiding in the shadows, letting people like Jeff take the heat, not only from the flag wavers, but also the movement which treacherously united with them against the demolition evidence.


Jeff wasn’t the only one. This is just one personal story of those who had to fight the movement every step of the way on demolition, right up to about mid 2005, when it quite suddenly became a matter of religious obsession with them.


What should have taken 6 months took 4 years, due to obstruction from the movement


And then.as the ministry of truth suddenly declared – “Controlled demolition is the only issue. Controlled demolition has always been the only issue.”


The chocolate ration went up from 70 grams to 50 grams.


About Mid 2005, Winston Smith was doing lots of overtime on the newspaper back issue editing department.


Winston’s job ? To erase the memory of the fact that the movement had fought *against* demolition evidence with everything it had – right up until Mid 2005.


A few months after this miraculous conversion, enter Steven Jones.


Jones’ first act was to attempt to plagiarize the old demolition work. The only previous researcher who he credited was NSA spook Hoffman, who himself has plagiarized it all, having also ciontibuted a big fat zero.


Not surprisingly, the only other thing of note in Jones’ appearance was to launch an attack on the no planes evidence. In his *very first* publication. In a paper which purported to be a scientific paper relating to demolition, Jones somehow wandered off the track to attack “junk science” which had zero to do with the work which he was attempting to claim as his own.


In response, I beat Jones up so badly on this, that he withdrew his attack in a humiliating back down, and hasn’t dared to renew it since.


After licking his wounds in relation to the beating he got in response to his ill fated attack on the no planes evidence, Jones continued to set about becoming demolition hero.


He was embraced with cries of ecstasy by 911 truth.org – you know, that organization which has an executive director who tells the media that Sept 11 was *not* an inside job.


But Jones made a curious slight of hand with his plagiarism campaign. One would think that both scientifically and strategically the first port of call would be to prove that it was a demolition, before going into details about the exact techniques used.


After all,


“it *doesn’t matter* whether it was thermite, or conventional explosives, or some exotic weaponry. The first thing is to agree that a crime was committed .”


Isn’t this the normal cry of the unity movement ? Oops, sorry ! Just slip in “no planes” instead of “thermite”. Whether or not there were planes doesn’t matter, but whether it was thermite or not is seemingly of extreme importance.

You see, in his paper, Jones took an extremely cautious line on whether it was a demolition. He simply concluded that it was “plausible” and urged a series of “tests” in order to examine the “hypothesis.”


Rivetting stuff - 3 ½ years *after* demolition had already been proven.


Please, if anybody is claiming that demolition was still only a “plausible hypothesis” in August 2005, then do let us know.


Nevertheless, being cautious and slow to the point of stupidity is not a crime, as long as it is applied with consistent standards, and the journey continues at whatever agonizing pace the Professor’s intellectual capacity will allow.

So the movement – that same movement which fought the demolition evidence for years - breathlessly waited for the “tests” with which our hero would prove the demolition. Well… they sort of got forgotten about. He skipped over that part, and then suddenly became obsessed with thermite as the *method* of the demolition which he sort of forgot about proving to begin with.


Funny how someone who was claiming only that demolition was “plausible” should skip the “proof” part and suddenly become obsessed with the method – something which is totally superfluous as to the basic question of whether it was a demolition.


Even more curious that the movement which is always bleating “it doesn’t matter whether there were planes or not” isn’t similarly on Jones’ back.


“Look, Jonsey. Shut the fuck up about thermite. It *doesn’t matter* exactly what demolition technique they used. The first thing is to prove that it was a demolition. The rest can come later. This kind of hair splitting only distracts our energies and divides the movement.”


If any truthling has delivered this rebuke to Jones, please to point me to it.


So there we are , a crowd of Truth Goblins, chanting “Jones ! Thermite ! Demolition!”


As a result, the flag wavers are having a field day with Jones. And rightly so. He has done more to damage the demolition argument in the public mind than anyone. His work is rubbish. Absolute rubbish. The only parts which are sensible are those which he plagiarized from 2002 demolition research – which was nearly all done by the same no planer people, who are now getting the same kind of crap over no planes as the truthlings dished out to them for years over the demolition issue, before suddenly having their religious conversion.


There are many examples of this, but one the sickest was Jones’ use of the WTC 7 squib footage. Guess who found this footage and made the enlargements ?


Rosalee. The Webfairy.


You know – the idiot who knows nothing about video, but at the same time manages to be a cunning a cointelpro agent who single handedly faked all the tower hit videos herself and fooled the networks into using them instead of the real footage?

At the same time as being a dippy well intentioned idiot manipulated and used by master Israeli spy Holmgren, who’s contelpro resources are so huge that his website is one of the ugliest and most amateurish on the net from a pure webmasters POV, and hasn’t yet managed to put out a single book or video on the subject, nor hire a hall anywhere for public talks.

Yeah, I can tell you the cointelpro budget is huge downunder. I mean you only have to look at my work to see the masses of money and Govt resources behind it, and the huge promotion budget.


Yes, the Webfairy – who’s video work is so appalling on the planes but so excellent on WTC 7, that we can’t let anyone know that it was her work.


Apart from the work which he ripped off , Jones is nothing but appalling trash, swaggering around behind the title of “Professor.”


I now get emails almost every day from flagwavers attacking me, triumphantly pointing to Jones’ bullshit about thermite.


I have to spend half the argument telling them that Jones is considered an idiot by anyone who is serious about the demolition evidence, and that while he is broadly correct in asserting a demolition, his appalling standards of unscientific drivel should not be considered in any way representative of the argument. What little sense he makes is not his own work.


I hardly manage to actually argue the evidence any more because I have to spend the whole conversation disassociating myself from Jones.


/*If/* Jones is cointelpro, then he is certainly not an idiot. He has done a masterful job of sabotaging the credibility of the demolition evidence.


And this of course is why he is the darling of the Truth Goblins. Because the entire movement is one big cointelpro op.





From: Nico Haupt [mailto:nicohaupt2@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, 21 July 2006 3:32 PM
Subject: Steven Jones, David Kubiak- The Los Alamos connections (more dirty past?)



Steven E. Jones -part of the original 9/11 WTC weaponry team?
Plus the Jones-Kubiak(911truth.org) Los Alamos connections


unreflected, refreshed compilations by ewing2001- draft
(July 21, 2006)


...is the end of the 9/11 truth movement nearby by taking out "controlled demolition" or the movement itself?


a last minute check on Steven E. Jones and David Kubiak -the current leaders of this movement.


Some of us, criticial on the infiltration of the 9/11 truth movement
suggested very early, that Steven E. Jones could have been
planted into this movement to control the outcome.
He even needn't really to know about 'his role' by himself.

Similar suggestions had been made regarding the role of
David Ray Griffin and the cultification of 911truth.org, also
the infiltration of URANTIA into ny911truth.org


Others including myself started to wonder if Prof. Jones maybe created
a "limited hangout" against the research for the part of "unconventional weaponry"
regarding the collapses.
In critical circles about the movement the joke or speculation is getting louder that Jones is US Intelligence.

But maybe it's even "more". Please read on....


Jones didn't really speak out yet on the possibility of nanothermite (nanonergetics inc.) or additional combinations of exotic weaponry. He also didn't disclose yet, where his source on the air sample, janet mc kinley,had her samples.

Last weekend, on the Webster Tarpley Radioshow, Prof. Jones finally ruled out the possibility of thermonuclear weapons, based on just the result of these samples.
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Tarpley06.html

Why?

Why is the "controlled demolotion" and the 9/11 scholars so extremely popular in US Media, even on US TV, however worldwide almost barely noticed at all? (with some exceptions in scandinavian and italian papers).
Even german press, usually quick by reflecting the latest on the 9/11 truth movement was silent on Kevin Barrett and the latest hype on the 9/11scholars on US TV.

Why?

Why at the same time closing into the 9/11 anniversary, "WW3-5" becomes the distraction from any kind of 'political opposition'?
Was it all designed and synchronized in the first place?
Who is really playing this movement in the media right now?

Why is the hostility against the findings on 9/11 TV fakery so intense?
Why is it INDEED NOT hurting the movement at all, at least not in US Mainstream media, because the findings aren't reflected there either...

Why is controlled demolition really such popular but noone really is investigating on it anymore?
With one 'exception': Steven E Jones.


Maybe we should even go a few steps further in our speculations on Jones!

What is if Steven E. Jones, "religiously briefed", is not only a (passive/active) military intelligence 'officer' undercover, but was part of the crew who developed the weaponry for the collapses in the first place?

Jones owes us some answers, why he stopped his scientific investigation on the unconventional part of the collapse, the part which forced the pulverisation of the Towers and all its content?

What happened with the investigation on the pulverization??


Does he really think, that his audience buys into the use of conventional thermite and thermate to produce these results?

Why did he never pick up my compilations on nanothermite and nanoenergetics?
Or my earlier speculations between 2002/03 on thermobarics?
What about scalar weaponry or other possibilities etc.. etc....?



Why is it that the current media outrage about 9/11 scholar Kevin Barrett is so intense, yet the originator of the scientific paper in the first place is nearly untouched in US Media?

What is Steven E. Jones' real background regarding his Cold Fusion research?

What was his role and content regarding the TRIUMF laboratory and TRIMUF experiment in Vancouver? TRIUMF is partnering with 30 international nuclear laboratories worldwide.


Is Jones somehow also connected to Russ George, the best buddy of 911truth.org director David Kubiak who both worked on Cold Fusion in Japan?

Why did the 'wedding' between 911truth.org and ALEX jones really took place?
(at a time, when WING TV and others revealed their shady and obscure background and both lacked reputation)


Why is Prof. Jones still backed by Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, Sandia and the high elite science society "Sigma Xi"?

Where is the international outrage against him being aware of his highly sensitive military knowledge from the past and today?


Was Steven E. Jones' research on Sonoluminescence part of the program for the weaponry for the additional weaponry for the Twin Towers collapse?

Or TRIUMF?



Is that the real reason, why he's controlling the outcome now?

Let's take a look at some of Steven E. Jones military research fields, beginning with an interesting letter from 1995, clearly written by himself (as seen in initials and connection with Brigham Young).

Please follow the fact, that Sonoluminescence is described as 'exotic physics' which can produce temperatures "as high as 10^8 K" - enough to melt some steel???


Steven E Jones is also mentioning his friend and former partner Terry Bollinger.
Bollinger is now with MITRE:


http://old.goscon.org/panels
Terry Bollinger
Analyst
MITRE Corporation

Terry Bollinger is an IT Analyst at the MITRE Corporation. He works for the Pentagon on issues related to selection and funding of advanced software research, and on how to encourage faster, more effective military use of emerging private sector information technologies. Terry researched and wrote a widely quoted 2003 MITRE report that documents widespread U.S. military use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), and which identifies examples of how open source software contributes positively to national security...



http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/physics/Cold-fusion/fd-latest/thruFD3398

1995.03.02 / jonesse@vanlab / RE: Sonoluminescence and Fusion Originally-From: jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: RE: Sonoluminescence and Fusion Date: 2 Mar 95 13:32:16 -0700 Organization: Brigham Young University Dear colleagues: There have been several postings lately regarding sonoluminescence(SL), and a possible connection to fusion. Our work continues on searching for neutron emissions associated with bubble cavitation in sound fields, using our sensitive neutron detectors, deep underground, in Provo Canyon (Utah). I should report that we have not yet detected any neutron emissions from SL, in deuterium-filled bubbles in aqueous solutions. We have, however, achieved both multi-bubble and single-bubble (clock-like) SL using D2 bubbles.

Terry Bollinger and I suggested a possible connection between SL and fusion back in 1992 on this net, and I spoke briefly on the subject at the ICCF-3 meeting in Nagoya in October 1992. But nothing has panned out yet. We have not given up still. Below I send updated information from a previous post to s.p.f.: I would like to call your attention to two interesting articles on sonoluminescence (SL). The first was written by Lawrence Crum of the Univ. of Washington, one of the true gentlemen of modern science. His article appears in this month's issue of Physics Today (Sept. 1994). Appended to this post find an earlier commentary on Prof. Crum's colloquium at BYU in January 1994 and related ideas. Note that in that post the notion of fusion during bubble cavitation in SL is advanced -- indeed, this idea was discussed here on s.p.f. as early as 1992 (Jones, Bollinger, etc.). Well, Prof. Crum is bold enough to advance the idea in his Phys. Today article: "The strong probability that SBSL results from an imploding shock wave has now made this curious phenomenon one of considerable interest. ...This spherically symmetric implosion has the potential for creating some exotic physics... Calculations suggest that temperatures as high as 10^8 K are to be expected...

Steven E. Jones and Cold Fusion