Discussion took place at the Vancouver 9/11 Truth


With Prof Steve Jones and Dr William Deagle - 24th June 2007


Transcript by Andrew Johnson

Footnotes mainly by Andrew Johnson, with additional comments by Prof Judy Wood.


This is quite an extraordinary discussion in many ways - and in my view, clearly demonstrates that neither Jones or Deagle are being completely honest in their discussion.


You will hear them:


· Claiming to be discussing the evidence, but in reality they don’t discuss any evidence.
· Deagle claim Seattle has been pre-wired with mini-nukes.
· Jones suggesting that if there is a nuke-attack, 9-11 truthers should get dust samples and send them to Deagle or Jones.
· Deagle claiming he has evidence of mini-nukes from “contacts” but he hasn’t completed testing his samples - even though he is very concerned to find out what they will use for the next attack.
· Deagle claims he is 100% sure thermate or superthermate was used to destroy the towers
· Deagle describes the effects on toasted cars as being potentially from an EMP pulse, but he dismisses the evidence for DEW.
· Jones gets Deagle to agree that the evidence of no planes hitting the WTC towers is “ridiculous”
· Deagle claims micronukes were used in the Oaklahoma bombing
· Deagle doesn’t know whether they are fusion or fission nukes
· Jones mentions WTC Iron quite a few times.
· Both Jones and Deagle talk about an Isotope of Iodine 110 - but this is extremely obscure (the stable Isotope of Iodine is 127)


Even though Deagle suggests there is going to be a multiple nuke attack in the USA, Homeland Secuirty don’t seem to have expressed an interest in this.


Listen to the audio or read the transcript.


Transcript with footnotes, audio, and video links:

Deagle


Backup link:
Steve Jones and Bill Deagle have a VERY interesting discussion | 9/11 Researchers


==============================================

CB's opinion:

Steven Jones continues to out himself... first as a Cold Fusion fraud in 1989 who discredited free energy research to keep the world addicted to oil Steven Jones’ Contributions to Science, Humanity and the Planet | 9/11 Researchers , and now as a 9/11 fraud who distracts us from the real evidence of directed energy weapons at TV-Fakery at the World Trade Center. Is it coincidence that Jones worked at Los Alamos where directed energy weapon research is conducted?


Jones/Deagle agreed that the "discussion should be evidence-based". So why did Jones say, just a few seconds later, "I don't think this is the place to go through all the evidence"?

Why didn't they discuss the clean surgical cut on the north wing of WTC 4, in which all the building material on the other side of this cut is missing? Why didn't they discuss the fact that the cut was in the same path as the South Tower's north wall? The South Tower was pulverized, and so was all WTC 4 material on the other side of that cut. Sounds like evidence of a directed energy weapon to me!




Yellow/red box below locates north wing of WTC 4.
As can be seen, the wing was “cut” in the path of the north face of WTC 2:





Nor did they discuss the round cylindrical holes in WTC 5/6, further evidence of directed energy beams!




They conclude that no planes at the towers is "ridiculous". That's some scientific analysis, huh? One must wonder why they didn't discuss the actual evidence for no planes instead of jumping to conclusions.

For instance, they didn't discuss an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone being swallowed up by a steel/concrete building:












Notice how Deagle talks about nukes in Seattle. This is a scare tactic, directed toward the Truth movement. Does the movement really need to lean on his shoulder? Perhaps we should look at information for ourselves instead of trusting "mild mannered sounding" people.....

Scare tactic???? Could be a warning??? They are the folks trying to debunk the official 9/11 story are they not??

WTF

Jones/Deagle are government plants put in place to distract people from the real 9/11 evidence of directed energy weapons and TV-Fakery.

Interesting theory. But even listening to the audio from them speaking and reading the transcript one cannot gain such insight.

If you are basing this opinion on the fact that they have not investigated planes NOT hitting the building, they could just be focusing on the hard evidence left behind. Not just video film (which isn't very concrete).

Try checking the links I gave.