Jump to content
The Education Forum

What happened to Fetzer?!?!?


Recommended Posts

He now believes the Charleston shooting never happened and is a false flag just like Sandy Hook. I guess all those grieving families are faking it.

I truly hate this crap- it detracts in a major way from legitimate conspiracy issues. It makes us look like the tin foil hat brigade.

I met Fetzer in person, ironically, on 8/11/01, exactly one month before 9/11- he just showed up unannounced at my place. He was pretty lucid and was all excited about Nigel Turner wanting to film me and so forth.

9/11 ruined Jim- "conspiracies-in-your-soup" syndrome. Actually, 9/11 started to infect everyone's thinking- every major event is now seen as fake, staged, false flags, etc.

Silly...and sad

Edited by Vince Palamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think this may belong in the Political Conspiracies forum, but here is Fetzer's article:

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/06/south-caroolina-church-shooting-10.html

Now what are we to make of such claims? Example, his Exhibit 3, the alleged photoshopping of the shooter's jacket. Were the incriminating patches on the jacket photoshopped in as Fetzer claims, or were they actually photoshopped out (in order to make the claim they were photoshopped in)? Anyone have any idea?

Edited by Ron Ecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He now believes the Charleston shooting never happened and is a false flag just like Sandy Hook. I guess all those grieving families are faking it.

I truly hate this crap- it detracts in a major way from legitimate conspiracy issues. It makes us look like the tin foil hat brigade.

I met Fetzer in person, ironically, on 8/11/01, exactly one month before 9/11- he just showed up unannounced at my place. He was pretty lucid and was all excited about Nigel Turner wanting to film me and so forth.

9/11 ruined Jim- "conspiracies-in-your-soup" syndrome. Actually, 9/11 started to infect everyone's thinking- every major event is now seen as fake, staged, false flags, etc.

Silly...and sad

Someone on aaj linked to a new book by Fetzer, in which he claims everything under the sun is a conspiracy. As I remember it, he even claims the "Paul is Dead" hoax was true, and that the current Paul McCartney is not the original. Go figure.

When one looks back over Fetzer's career as a CT, it seems clear he had some desperate need to be at the middle of the research community. When time passed, and the recognition for his achievements proved slow in coming, he began wandering out to the back pastures to feed. If I remember it correctly, he even went to Iran to lecture on the evils of the U.S. Government and Israel.

It's a pity. All that energy wasted on all that nonsense.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

good assessment, Pat.

It sort of reminds me of the late Harry Livingstone- his book jackets always said he had "long lead the investigation" into the assassination, yet he was reviled and had no followers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(and there were crickets when Harry passed [unfortunately], THEN the news of his passing was totally overshadowed, ironically, by the passing of Vince Bugliosi)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad to hear you say this, Vince - I have been kind of liking his approach until I came across his website of acute paranoia and I felt 'cheated', in a way. I want to think a person is credible when his theory sounds quite reasonable and his research is obviously well done, but then he starts talking about this other stuff, and I don't know what to think.

Tells people who are unfamiliar with a person that caution is next to godliness. Or something like that.

[the edit] - maybe i can enjoy his pre-9/11 theories and disregard the post-apocalyptic ones...

He now believes the Charleston shooting never happened and is a false flag just like Sandy Hook. I guess all those grieving families are faking it.

I truly hate this crap- it detracts in a major way from legitimate conspiracy issues. It makes us look like the tin foil hat brigade.

I met Fetzer in person, ironically, on 8/11/01, exactly one month before 9/11- he just showed up unannounced at my place. He was pretty lucid and was all excited about Nigel Turner wanting to film me and so forth.

9/11 ruined Jim- "conspiracies-in-your-soup" syndrome. Actually, 9/11 started to infect everyone's thinking- every major event is now seen as fake, staged, false flags, etc.

Silly...and sad

Edited by Glenn Nall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just about to post about this at DPF and here but first I wanted to listen to Fetzer's video on facebook. So doing was slowing down my husband's computer as he prepares for the second half of a trial this afternoon and needs to be able to quickly access his email. So without seeing any of Fetzer's evidence, aside from a FB story yesterday that the church needed repairs, I wanted to make a few comments. I find this beyond outrageous. I consider Alex Jones and James Fetzer agents now. They did the same thing with Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon shooting. While good investigative researchers like Russ Baker and others were quick to point out many problems with the Marathon story only people like Fetzer said the victims were all actors and had no injuries, or - at Sandy Hook- not killed. While driving to court this morning the news reported that some of the Marathon victims spoke at the sentencing, and mentioned one in particular who had a prosthetic leg, and another who had lost one leg and has serious damage to the other. I also heard on the news that people were viewing the dead body of the Pastor. So does Fetzer think this Pastor is just playing dead? Or that it is a dummy in the casket? Has he flipped his lid totally or is he doing this in order to make all conspiracy researchers look silly? It is certainly unsettling to see all those who are agreeing with him on facebook.

An angry young man killed black people in prayer. It happened. No one here was a "crisis actor".

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're fairly new here, Glenn, so let me give you a little background. Fetzer was a member here for a number of years. He was always trying to connect his research on the JFK assassination to his research into other areas--on the moon landing, on the death of Paul Wellstone, 9-11, the history of Israel, etc. Whenever someone would say something like "Your bizarre theories are an embarrassment to the research community" he'd immediately fill up the JFK assassination discussion forum with cut and paste articles on Wellstone, the moon landing, the Jews, etc, and insist he had the right to do so. He declared that if he was attacked on a JFK Forum, then he could respond on a JFK Forum, even if his response entailed dozens of pages of info unrelated to the JFK assassination. In any event, this went on for years.

Then something happened. For his books, Fetzer had propped together a group of researchers who actually had little in common. This dissolved on this forum. When first released, Fetzer was the number one cheerleader for Doug Horne's books on the ARRB. Inside the book, Horne sought to distance himself from the 9-11 truther community. This led Jack White to denounce Horne. Then John Costella joined the fray, and said Horne's claims about the Zapruder film were at odds with his own findings, and that Fetzer couldn't support both. Then he denounced Horne.

In his support for Horne, and his belief Kennedy's body was altered before the autopsy, moreover, Fetzer had taken a stand against Gary Aguilar's writings...which had been published in Fetzer's books. When I pointed this out to him, he denounced Aguilar, and disavowed Aguilar's article in Murder in Dealey Plaza.

Fetzer then dropped Horne and started pushing the authenticity of Judyth Baker's story. This upset Jack White, and David Lifton, who considered Baker to be a fantasist, or fraud. Rather than take a step back, Fetzer attacked each one in turn. He publicly disassociated himself from each on this very forum. He said Jack White was no longer a friend, and posted images created by White for Harvey and Lee which Fetzer claimed had been altered to make it appear there had been two Oswalds, when there had been but one. He claimed Lifton had turned against him over a money dispute, and started writing more and more about the history of the Jews, as if David's "Jewishness" was what led him to be angry over not receiving a cent from the sales of The Great Zapruder Film Hoax.

He then embraced Ralph Cinque's claim the Lovelady figure in the Altgens' photo was really Oswald after all. As opposition to this position grew, he once again became more and more entrenched, so much that he started claiming the CIA had had a portable photo alteration trailer in Dealey Plaza, and that films showing Lovelady on the front steps or in the police station had all been faked. Well, this caused Greg Burnham to take pause, and try to bring Fetzer to his senses. To no avail. He once again publicly denounced someone who had once been a good friend. If I recall, he even said something bad about Greg's wife.

It was a slow unraveling, with much of it carried out on this forum. A lot of the problem, IMO, was exacerbated by Fetzer's awareness of the then-impending 50th anniversary. Fetzer desperately wanted to be a part of something he could present on TV as a major breakthrough in the case. At one point, there was a thread, on this very forum, on who should represent the research community on TV in the 50th anniversary coverage. I, and others, tried to make the point that it should be people with some credibility, who weren't associated with anything most would consider "fringie". I think I voted for Jim D, Josiah T, and maybe even Jeff M. This really bothered Fetzer. He really felt that he should be the spokesman for the entire research community, and that his forays into other areas of investigation, which could be used to discredit him with a mainstream audience, were of no consequence, and only added to his credibility.

Anyhow, that's my perspective. If you're reading this, Jim, I wish you peace.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good assessment, Pat.

I remember thinking that 9/11 would be the community's undoing because the JFK case would be considered ancient history, yesterday's news, 20th century stuff, etc. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine that the silliness that surrounds 9/11 would be the community's undoing in a different sense: all the tin foil hat outrageous silliness and the start of every major event since being labeled as fake, a conspiracy, a false flag, etc.

Fetzer is a real casualty of all the paranoia. He picked up where Livingstone took off. Both men thought the Z film was a cartoon and seemed to imagine themselves being the leader- the king- of the entire research community. I have fond memories of Harry, a couple of his books are still valuable, and he did some good work. Fetzer really hasn't done anything- anything of value in his books are from OTHERS

"edited by James Fetzer", indeed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first off, thank you Pat for making me feel welcome enough to share that with. That is kind of nitty gritty family drama not meant for the public, in Fetzer's interest as well as the rest of the community.

Yep, he seems to have unravelled. My only experience of him really is a few written words and his oral presentation opening Film Hoax, '03. And he comes across as quite lucid and knowledgeable. As I've learned, people are perfectly able to exhibit both genius and absence. His association with Costella made me feel ok, but Jack White made me nervous, too - so when i saw Fetzer's website, wow. golly. I'm still a patriot and i CANNOT allow myself to think that of either 9/11 or Baseball. right?

i'm also watching a video by Josiah, and enjoy his delivery and intellect. He goes a bit far, for me, with the film trickery, but what do i know...? (I'm hoping that's not an opening for DV--- nope, i'm not gonna say it).

I'm glad to hear he's respected in here. It's funny, when traversing this JFK universe, everything you read is mostly opinion - some of it's about JFK, much of it's about other people. It's safe to say if one does not have any enemies, he could become a JFK fanatic and gain plenty.

I know who Morley is, i look forward to finding out what he's all about.

thanks for the info. As I've stated, I may sound like I'm trying to teach at times, but I really am simply learning by expression (does that make sense? sometimes a person has to write/read what he thinks to know if that's really what he thinks...? - I'm not crazy, and I won't share with ya'll what I really think about the 1986 Mets)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He now believes the Charleston shooting never happened and is a false flag just like Sandy Hook. I guess all those grieving families are faking it.

I truly hate this crap- it detracts in a major way from legitimate conspiracy issues. It makes us look like the tin foil hat brigade.

I met Fetzer in person, ironically, on 8/11/01, exactly one month before 9/11- he just showed up unannounced at my place. He was pretty lucid and was all excited about Nigel Turner wanting to film me and so forth.

9/11 ruined Jim- "conspiracies-in-your-soup" syndrome. Actually, 9/11 started to infect everyone's thinking- every major event is now seen as fake, staged, false flags, etc.

Silly...and sad

The pity is that people like Fetzer makes all of us CTers look like crackpots when in reality only about half of us are.

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the terms "conspiracy theory" and "CT" should be avoided by everyone who comes here in good faith. These terms are labels that obscure rather than enlighten, and they are demeaning.

There are provable facts, asserted but not provable facts, and opinions. Period.

IMO, Fetzer presents a mix of the three.

If one wants wheat not chaff, one must be a good sifter.

If you write off Fetzer entirely, you aren't willing to do the sifting.

Put another way, if Fetzer is correct 1.0% of the time, it's probably important to know what that 1.0% is.

In any event, provable facts trump opinion every day of the week.

Is Fetzer right about Sandy Hook or Charleston? I doubt it. But I'd bet he's got some provable facts.

Edited by Jon G. Tidd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Fetzer right about Sandy Hook or Charleston? I doubt it. But I'd bet he's got some provable facts.

One provable fact is that the Charleston suspect's jacket has been photoshopped. By whom? A hoaxster? The authorities? If the latter, I think that is worth knowing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon, i agree, that's what i was trying to say earlier, only not nearly so clearly. He probably is worth the effort at separating good info from bad.

Ron - i saw that jacket pic, thought wow looks photoshopped, then blew it off. It may be, but that's a million miles from faking the racially motivated shooting of 9 people in a church. It's worth knowing. maybe. what a leap, tho... wow. It probably became connected because someone on the internet posted it and said look, this might be connected! and a million sheep believed him.

not calling you a sheep. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...