Monday, December 26, 2016

Wayne Madsen goes off the rails over Orlando, Jack Ruby and the moon landing hoax

  
Jim Fetzer
Imagine my surprise to open my email and find this message from Dr. Eowyn, who maintains the Fellowship of the Minds blog and whom I regard as the leading expert on the incident at the Pulse Club in Orlando, known as "the Orlando massacre". Not only have I edited a book about it with fifteen (15) contributors (some of whom were writing about the Dallas "false flag" and others about Hillary's use of body doubles), but Dr. Eowyn's research on this subject has been so exceptional that I included thirteen (13) chapters that were authored by her.
Because I have held Wayne Madsen in high esteem--so much so that on a large number of occasions, I have referred to him as "our nation's leading investigative journalist"--that I was stunned to discover that he was attacking me for my work on Orlando (on the basis of his having neighbors whose kids have friends who are supposed to have died there) and Ralph Cinque for his research on Jack Ruby (which supports the conclusion that it was not actually Jack who shot Lee, but an FBI agent playing the role) as well as taking pot shots at students of the moon landing hoax. Egad! I even included an article of his about the father of the alleged shooter in our Orlando book.

Here's a two-hour video on the Orlando "False Flag" Shooting. The slides did not come out right, but the commentary explains many of the reasons we know that the shooting was not a real event but a hoax, including that the license for the club expired in 2013; that its legal occupancy was only 150; that it had only 11 parking spaces; that if 50 had been killed and 53 injured, there would have been abandoned vehicles all over the place; and more, such as that (as in the case of Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing), there was also no surge of EMTs into the building and no string of ambulances to rush the bodies to hospitals where doctors could pronounce them dead or alive: 

Here is the original email from Dr. Eowyn, which I received this morning, which details the specifics of his remarks and displays reckless disregard for the evidence, especially in relation to events that he himself has obviously not investigated, presumably because he had superior knowledge based upon, in the case of the Pulse shooting, reports from the parents of children who claim to have friends who died there and, in the case of the death of Lee Oswald, from a reporter who was there, but where his off-the-cuff comments on those who do not believe we landed men on the moon are especially egregious and raise serious questions in my mind about his role as an "investigative journalist": 





































Frankly, I cannot imagine why Wayne Madsen would attack research on JFK with which he has no familiarity at all! Has he mastered a new technique, such as searching within his soul (or crystal ball gazing or coin flipping) to determine whether a specific hypothesis is true or false? If Wayne Madsen does not believe in evidence-based research, what good is he? Because I have done overwhelmingly more investigation of the death of JFK than has Wayne Madsen (including three collections of expert studies and chairing or co-chairing five national conferences and over a thousand interviews about JFK) and find it impossible to dismiss the new hypothesis of Ralph Cinque--that someone who was impersonating Jack Ruby (specifically, FBI Agent James Bookhout) may have been the actual person who shot Lee in the basement of the Dallas Police Department--when I have studied the evidence and he has not, how can he dismiss it? 

The answer, of course, turns out to be that he knew a reporter who was present at the time and who told him that Jack Ruby had had to push him aside in order to shoot Lee. But since everyone at the time took for granted that it had been Jack Ruby--because that was something they had been told--how could Wayne Madsen know that his source, Ike Pappas, had not been fooled? After all, if Ralph Cinque has it right, then everyone not in on the deception was fooled, including Ike Pappas, assuming that he was not in on it himself. It's fine to take something for granted when it has not been challenged, but once the question has been raised and proof has been presented, it is no longer reasonable to continue to take for granted that what you have always believed to be the case was the case. I myself have had to do a double-take over this, but the evidence that Ralph has adduced is compelling:



It's embarrassing enough that Wayne Madsen, whom I have so long admired, would take for granted that the Orlando shooting was real on the basis of third-hand reports (by his neighbors based upon what they hear from their children about what other kids had told them), but for him to also dismiss research on JFK with which he has no familiarity at all is beyond the bounds of rationality. Here is the email that I sent in response to learning about his remarks, to which I have received no reply as yet--and may in fact never receive one. When someone who takes himself so seriously is caught with his pants down, it requires a great deal of integrity to acknowledge that you were wrong and to apologize for the offense, which in this case are multiple intellectual ones that go beyond ordinary mistakes and qualify as blunders:

James Fetzer
9:07 AM (4 hours ago)


to Wayne

On some recent remarks about Orlando and more

Wayne, 
I am a bit taken aback by some remarks you made 
regarding Orlando and my research. You claim to 
have neighbors who have kids who have friends 
who died there. Do you know their names? Have 
you seen their death certificates? Did you read 
their obituaries? Since you are diligent in your 
research, have you read the book I edited about 
Orlando entitled FROM ORLANDO TO DALLAS 
AND BEYOND (2016)? I am sure you would not
want to be talking off the top of your head without 
doing the requisite research. Send me your mail 
address and I'll send you a copy of the book. Or 
is your mind already made up and facts don't 
matter? Are you aware that the license for the
club expired in 2013? that it's legal occupancy
was 150? that it had only 11 parking spaces? 
that if 50 had been killed and 53 injured, there 
would have been abandoned cars all over the 
place, but they weren't there? that the Orlando 
Emergency Center has declared that it is not 
going to bill anyone for services rendered?  
that there are two "Dance Orlando" videos 
of doctors and nurses dancing and police 
doing the same? I am just a bit stunned that, 
if you had reservations like those you have  
expressed in these chat exchanges, you did 
not send me an email to ask about them. So 
send me your address and I'll send the book. 
Are you also an expert on the moon landings? 
Because it would be rather embarrassing for 
"the nation's leading investigative journalist" 
to have no idea at all what he's talking about.  
Jim
Dr. Eowyn has called out Wayne Madsen for his grossly insulting remarks, where she is well-positioned to call him out as the leading expert on what really happened at Orlando:



Indeed, the issues raised go far beyond the kinds of arrogance of those who discount the work of others on issues they themselves have not investigated, such as Orlando and JFK (in relation to whether Jack Ruby was the man who shot Lee Oswald). But he displays (what I can only describe as) astounding naivete when he suggests that anyone who doubts that we went to the moon "needs professional help"! Egad! The man must be a complete moron to have swallowed that one hook, line and sinker! The proof that we did not go to the moon--indeed, could not have gone to the moon because of the limitations of propulsion power, of computing power and of such obvious obstacles as the Van Allan Radiation Belt--leaves me speechless. Here is my most recent discussion of the moon landing hoax with Dennis Cimino, who simply hits this one out of the park:



I have shared all of this with two experts on intel and psyops. One of them replied, "Excellent letter, Jim. If Wayne fails this double litmus test, then he is still working for someone. And that can be identified quite easily. Just connect the dots and find out who he never criticizes." The other wrote, "Madsen is a government shill. I used to trust his shit but no longer do." He said more but in language more colorful than I prefer to repeat here. I am in a quandary. Madsen's expose of John Brennan as a Saudi mole and of attempts by Saudi Arabia to toss the election to Hillary are first-class, in my estimation. But his irrational attacks on those who have done research on Orlando and on the identity of the man who shot Lee Oswald, not to mention his gullibility about the moon landings, have left my confidence tattered and torn. Another idol, alas, turns out to have feet of clay.  


ADDENDUM

In case anyone thought that Wayne Madsen would respond by explaining how he knows that Orland was real (that Jack Ruby actually was the guy who shot Lee Oswald; that we really did go to the moon), brace yourself for the most juvenile response possible, where Madsen declares himself to be a "real journalist" as opposed to those who offer "conspiracy tall tales in order to grab a fast buck"! Believe it or not, that's what he declares in his "Wayne Madsen Report" for 29 December 2016 to 2 January 2017. If I had any lingering respect for the man, he has shattered my last illusions. He further demonstrates his incompetence when it comes to Holocaust revisionism, which he describes as one of many "far out beliefs", where he seems to have no grasp of Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing or the Holocaust (to cite a few), where the evidence is against him. Here is a recent discussion of mine about JFK, 9/11 and the Holocaust (from 2014):



For more on the most controversial of all, see "The Holocaust Narrative: Politics trumps Science"As though to complete his response, he adds (what he has to think is) a witty remark about some who obtained Ph.D.s in the '60s and the '70s because they thought it was a great way to get laid! I can only infer that Wayne Madsen suffers from an acute intellectual inferiority complex. Anyone who checks out my academic web site can determine for themselves whether that characterization fits me--even remotely! I am profoundly embarrassed that I have in the past regarded this man as "our nation's leading investigative journalist". What it tells me is that, in America today, even some of those who pass for our best are hopelessly immature and incapable of dealing with well-founded criticism, even about serious subjects that they haven't investigated themselves. Wayne Madsen turns out to be an astounding disappointment.


21 comments:

  1. although my suspicions of madsen are far more subjective, I am quite ticked that my subscription to his site was canceled without explanation, and my email inquiry about it was never answered. don't subscribe. after the episode reported here, I do not consider him a reliable source, if ever he was.

    ReplyDelete
  2. also, did ralph respond specifically to judyth's objections regarding ruby vs bookhout? I am trying to follow both sides of the debate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The extent of deception is staggering. I had great respect for Veterans Today, shaken by firing of Fetzer in 2015, and reduced again over blind support for Reptillary. Madsen has reduced his credibility, as has Alex Jones.

    History and current events are largely subjective, but science fraud has empirical evidence supporting objective analysis. The Scientific support for Fetzer positions deserve open debate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I hate to be the one to point out: "once an intelligent asset, always an intelligence asset." Whether this old adage is true or not I do not know for sure. However, anecdotal evidence seems to bear it out. The difficulty is that most of us are not in a position to know with cognitive certainty whether former assets have truly "retired." As always, careful analysis and time usually solve the quandary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Madsen's airy dismissal of Orlando Pulse and JFK assassination as false flags, in both cases and in his own words, is based entirely on hearsay -- that someone he knows was there, or worse, that someone he knows who knows someone who knows someone else was there. Even courts don't accept hearsay as evidence, but we are to believe his casual dismissal despite empirical evidence to the contrary. Some investigative journalist he is!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think Madsen was taken out because of his exposing Brennan. This is not his style at all, look at the ridiculous mention of "fake news" in the exchange. Someone is writing for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, unfortunately. I could sense it hasn't been Wayne writing on his blog for a while now. I'm so sad that they got him and are in the midst of trashing his integrity and legacy. May the force be with you Wayne.

      Delete
    2. "I could sense it hasn't been Wayne writing on his blog for a while now."

      Please explain and elaborate what the signs are which lead you to this conclusion. Thanks.

      Delete
  7. I lost all faith in Wayne Madsen after reading in his book, Jaded Tasks - Brass Plates, Black Ops, and Big Oil: The Blood Politics of Bush & Co, ©2006, on page 108 Wayne writes, " . . .following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, Osama bin Laden made his first trip to the border area of Pakistan and Afshanistan, a region he would become familiar with after he ordered the September 11, 2001 attacks on Washington and New York."
    By 2006 it was well known that OBL was the patsy who was set up to take the blame. At the moment that I read Wayne's statement, it occurred to me that if he is putting this disinformation out, then he could not be trusted in any other of his observations. I closed his book to never pick it up again until today, to refer to this ridiculous quote.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tried to tell you Dr. Fetzer that anyone affiliated with Alex Jones and Info Wars is a phoney, but this is one of those issues you seem unwilling to tackle.

    Info Wars is a subsidiary of Time Warner; the same company that owns CNN. For proof of this, simply head to YouTube and search "Info Wars Time Warner". There's plenty proof if you just take the time to see it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. InfoWars is a certain captured asset. I attended the IW/A&E Truth event, May 2009 and after through analysis did "Unequivocal 9/11 Nukes" with Fetzer, boycott by IW. I had "HOAX of the Century" at IW, Apr 2009 but Thermodynamics is now boycott info at IW.

    "Where is Eric Braverman" series on YouTube is best info currently.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have enormous respect for Dr. Fetzer's knowledge about the Kennedy assassination, and on most false flag ops,his information has been eye-opening. I have studied the Bookhout matter and disagree with Cinque's conclusions, but it's a matter that shouldn't cause a serious rupture among us. More serious is the moon landing matter. There are too many problems with the official version of things, where duplicity seems to have been the usual practice during the space race between the USSR and the US, so nothing stated or claimed by either side could be trusted by either side. Madsen may have turned, as so many have under strategically applied pressures (Gary Mack-pressure due to insecure finances...Anthony Summers --pressure from Dale Myers and his cohorts). I am not impressed by insulting language, which, when it takes the place of solid facts, reveals a lack of character. It is telling, indeed, that Bin Laden is Madsen's 9-11 bogeyman. So often we have a one-trick or two-trick pony, with one or two contributions to make, who then are trusted --but then they insert their particular brand of chaos, deception or falsehood into the mix. We should seek unity: when the net cast by Dr. Fetzer is spread out so widely, inevitably we will have some differences of opinion. There is no doubt that 9-11 is the grandchild of JFK 11-22. I prefer to focus on the root of our nation's descent into hell.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent commentary, Judyth. Thanks for posting. My point about the Ruby/Bookhout issue was not that Ralph is necessarily right and you wrong but that Wayne was not even willing to consider the evidence. I had sent him a separate email with several links suggesting there was something here worth considering. If you are right and it was Jack after all, that does not exonerate Madsen from the closed-minded unreasonable attitude he displays.

      Delete
    2. I too am not convinced by the visual evidence Ralph Cinque presents for Bookhout rather than Ruby being the shooter seen on TV shooting Oswald, but logic seems to say that in this setting the true assassins would never have given complete control to Ruby to get the job done and that Ruby's main purpose was solely to be the patsy, just as Sirhan Sirhan was the patsy for the real shooter that took the actual kill shot that murdered Robert Kennedy.

      Delete
    3. But back to the main point of Wayne Madsen's current shocking behavior and attitude, for which he deserves complete loss of respect (unless as someone suggested earlier it may not even be him and he may have been taken out), thank you Jim for your brilliant reply to him, so clearly laying out the truth and showing once again the despicable lies and deceit that these pompous and/or stupid fake news proponents latch onto for whatever reason.

      Delete
    4. "Wayne Madsen's CURRENT shocking behavior and attitude" says it all. The real Wayne Madsen's been taken out.

      Delete
    5. Wayne Madsen's post "Reality is found in real space, not cyberspace" (cont'd.)

      Don't tell those noxious fantasies to those who continue to gather at a make-shift memorial erected at the now-closed Pulse nightclub to honor their family members, friends, and colleagues who died on June 12. As 2016 comes to a close, several family members and friends of the victims are streaming to the Pulse site and paying their respects to their loved ones as a way to bid a bitter farewell to a year that brought them so much tragedy.

      As horrible as the death toll was at Pulse, many of the injured -- 186 in total -- may have died had it not been for the fact that the Orlando Regional Medical Center, with its top-grade trauma center, is just around the corner from the Pulse location. The scars of the massacre are still visible in the "Bohemian mix" neighborhood of primarily Latinos, gays, medical professionals, and African-Americans around South Orange Avenue. Many restaurants, service stations, and other businesses continue to display signs in remembrance of the victims. Drivers on South Orange still slow down and look over at the Pulse memorial of signs, photos, candles, and other memorabilia where mourners gather every day in stark silence. Throughout 2017, people will continue to gather at the corner of South Orange and West Esther. The city of Orlando wanted to purchase the Pulse property and turn it into a permanent memorial. The Pulse owners have not been willing to sell, however, so it remains up in the air what will eventually become of the location, which has become yet another memorial to wanton acts of jihadi terrorism in the United States.

      The pain of June 12 is still very evident today: (followed by photos of Pulse)

      Delete
  11. I sent Jim an email before the election about how Madsen was pushing a story that he got from a bartender who allegedly witnessed Trump accosting a 13 year old girl. Veterans Today is also a limited hang out op. Jim met me years ago at Vox Pop and was not happy when I brought up Russo's book SUPER MOB. But I remain a follower of his, although I think he should be careful about spreading himself too thin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Madsen was pushing a story that he got from a bartender who allegedly witnessed Trump accosting a 13 year old girl."

      And yet Madsen airily dismisses Pizzagate. Clearly, relying on hearsay is Madsen's idea of "investigative journalism".

      Delete
  12. As noted on another blog Jim, PLEASE, PLEASE, before posting any more blogs regarding the murder of so called Jews you must look up David Irving's talks on Operation Reinhardt. He does not support theories that are presented regarding Auschwitz but does present considerable documented evidence to support mass killings in eastern Poland in 4 camps. Your reputation requires that you take the time to do this. I do not support Zionism in any way shape or form, their philosophy or their actions in support of their philosophy, but history is history. Zionism is very likely indirectly responsible for what happened. Extreme revisionism, as Irving calls it, could leave your reputation in sheds and undo all the good work you have been doing. The Irish guy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Of course hundreds of thousands, even millions of Jews, Gypsies, Poles and others were massacred during WWII. That is not the question. What I specifically deny is that 6,000,000 Jews were put to death in extermination camps using Zyklon B. And that is the hypothesis, which has become the standard "historical narrative" about the end of the war, that I deny and have refuted from beginning to end. So I am not worried. No one has made the least effort to show that I am wrong--and for good reason.

    ReplyDelete