Will definately be checking this out...

Look forward to your report, many thanks and best wishes

PS... Thanks for the updates you provided during the weekend, kept us who sadly could not make it, informed...

im wary of anybody who bases their conclusions on secret NSA sources etc. and i think Prof Jones was trying to make the point at the beginning without being too confrontational that we have more than enough evidence right now to prosecute and come to logical conclusions about 9/11 without muddying the waters and/or slowing progress with theories about mini nukes etc. also, while i tend to agree that a pandemic is likely at some point,manufactured or not, i dont see why hes going on about it in that setting. again this just sounds like an attempt at muddying the waters to me. the towers were demolished, we know they were demolished and we dont need mini nukes to square that for us or anybody else. you dont have to be a physicist or structural engineer to grasp it. i confess i dont know a whole lot about Dr. Deagle though. anybody got a backround on the guy?

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

Wasn't too many months ago that NO PLANES/HOLOGRAMS/DEW and other junk ideas were being pushed pretty aggressively around the 9/11 rabbit hole. I was newer to 9/11 truth, and found some of these ideas to be at least pretty interesting in trying to piece together a "people's history"-style narrative of 9/11.

However, really all these ideas do is muddy a picture that has become very clear to reasonable minds. 9/11 was facilitated by mechanisms working in our federal government to serve a corrupt, multinational interest. The media blackout of WTC7 alone is beyond suspect. It is very real. Like Chris said regarding the Jimmy Smits meeting, a lot of people are still unaware not only of WTC7 itself, but also the nature of its tenants (CIA, NSA, Mayor's Emergency HQ, etc.).

Elementary physics is enough to prove that ALL THREE of the WTC buildings were destroyed via a high-output controlled demolition sequence. I am not a physicist by any means, but I understand that there is no way those buildings could fall so cleanly into their own footprints in the time that they did without clearing the under infrastructure first (90+ floors of highly reinforced UL-approved steel). I also frequently wonder aloud what happened to NORAD on that fateful morning. I oftentimes wonder about the abilities of these 'pilots', about Bush-bin Laden connections, about the secret, hand-in-hand, unsworn testimony Cheney and Bush gave to the 9/11 Commission almost 2 years after the crime, and the return-to-the-crime-scene, police-state nature of the 2004 Republican National Conference.

So as interesting as hologram airliners might be, or mini-nukes, or whatever, may be...they are basically best left in the notebook alongside the never-used lyrics. These ideas aren't even necessary to the prosecution of 9/11 war crimes against humanity. And that is what are working towards, no?

Frumpy academic conversations are fun in college. But in the real-time, real world, I personally have no time for such shenanigans. I love 911Blogger, I've been reading on here for the past year, posting only recently, but in my view, this site is more about action than speculation. I commend this site and its moderators/community for this, and hope that soon enough I never have to hear about NO PLANES/SPACE RAYS/NUKES ever again! Let's save it for after the trial!

"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a New World Order — can emerge..." - George H.W. Bush, 9/11/91

It's not just about which evidence is already strong (so ignore other evidence), it's about which evidence literally doesn't exist in any meaningful way or is non-scientific (i.e., hidden military technology cannot even be tested).

There's virtually zero evidence that the planes in NYC were "swapped," as Deagle claims.

People should also be aware that the "INTERNATIONAL 9/11 CITIZEN'S WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL" being announced at this conference also contains promotions of DEW and nukes -

"II. Overwhelming evidence exists that the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 were instances of controlled demolition, and/or of the application of exotic weapons such as land-based, air-based or possible space-based Directed Energy Weapons (DEW). But al-Qaeda operatives could not have obtained the needed access to the buildings to plant the explosives and would not have ensured that the buildings come straight down. Nor could al-Qaeda operatives have obtained command and control of advanced Directed Energy Weapons, Microfusion devices (4th generation mini-nuclear weapons), bunker-busters, or other exotic weapons alternatives that are known to be in the deployment or testing phase in the US Defense arsenal. The controlled demolition and/or Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) or exotic weapons application, therefore, had to be the work of U.S. Government and other insiders." http://peaceinspace.blogs.com/911/2007/06/international_l.html

We all want peace in space and we all are against space weapons. But this should not be used as a way to insert claims that space weapons were used on 9/11.

I say, show us the evidence in writing and scientific analysis that there were nukes or DEW, not at a public conference with public media. Refute Steve Jones - in writing. Refute the other physicists on the Journal (http://journalof911studies.com/). That's how actual science is done, not trying to get a crowd excited enough to part with their money for hoax media by SUGGESTING nukes and DEW - that's not science, that's stirring the masses for the sake of something other than truth, like selling stuff. Then we all lose and one person makes a few bucks.

If nukes/DEW were indeed used, the evidence would begin to surface through analysis and papers should be debated and flying back and forth between different camps and reaching consensus on that evidence. Eventually, through experiment and analysis of the existing evidence, someone loses and someone wins, and the winner goes public. That's how science works. Those who present claims without evidence directly to the public are quickly discredited by most, especially in the scientific community. There is a reason that the scientific community exists and why journals and grants and that whole process exists. To do science properly. Taking claims to the public without internal debate, discussion and evaluation helps no one.

All other issues aside, presenting claims of nukes (even the simple acceptance of claims about them without debate in our own community) at the public conference with public media will only harm our movement.

So the questions people ask on here about disinfo are meaningful. Most of those disseminating misinformation are sincere but misguided (i.e., trying to generate hype about any sort of speculation to get people involved). But not all are.