Who is J. McMichael?

[ref]

Who is J. McMichael? I'm doing more research for my 'Truthers Exposed' article. It seems this guy and his these articles:

Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics! Part I (http://911review.com/articles/jm/mslp_1.htm)

and

Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics! Part II (http://www.911review.com/articles/jm/mslp_2.htm)

are the starters of many bad things.

The first article was originally published on October 21st, 2001. It has all the gems, like:

Using jet fuel to melt steel is an amazing discovery, really.
by 9:03 a.m. (which time was marked by the second plane's collision with the south tower), the flame was mostly gone and only black smoke continued to pour from the building. To my simple mind, that would indicate that the first fire had died down, but something was still burning inefficiently, leaving soot (carbon) in the smoke. A fire with sooty smoke is either low temperature or starved for oxygen — or both.
all the joints between the platter and the central columns would have to be heated at the same rate in order to collapse at the same time — and at the same rate as the joints with the outer columns on all sides — else one side of the platter would fall, damaging the floor below and making obvious distortions in the skin of the building, or throwing the top of the tower off balance and to one side.
Whatever irregularities caused the top of the tower to tilt, subsequent pictures show the tower falling mostly within its own footprint.
This situation would soon become unstable and the top 30 floors would topple over (to use Loizeaux's image) much like felling the top 600 ft. from a 1,300 ft. tree.
No concrete that I have ever known pulverizes like that. It is unnerving. My experience with concrete has shown that it will crumble under stress, but rarely does it just give up the ghost and turn to powder. But look at the pictures — it is truly a fine dust in great billowing clouds spewing a hundred feet from the collapsing tower.
When the platters fell, those quarter-mile high central steel columns (at least from the ground to the fire) should have been left standing naked and unsupported in the air
In a hundred years of tall city buildings, this kind of collapse has never happened before.
And then, as though demonstrating how normal this "building collapsing" phenomenon is, WTC buildings Six and Seven "collapsed," tooSound familiar? It is like a hot spot for all truther claims. It sounds like a David Ray Griffin handbook. It really has most of the WTC claims in it. And it was written on October 21st, 2001 by this mysterious J. McMichael.

Why is this important?

Jim Hoffman started doubting the official story in March 2003, after reading this article.

Steven Jones started investigating the WTC collapses after reading Jim Hoffman's work.

You get my point. This article is the original influence for a LOT of stuff out there even today. But who is this guy/girl?

[Brainache]

Not me. I was busy that day. (just a bump really, because I'm curious too)

[Foolmewunz]

You could get yourself a proxy server and email him as an interested party.

jmcmichael@care2.com

jmcm5@lycos.com

[ref]

Not me. I was busy that day. (just a bump really, because I'm curious too)

You know, you were my number one suspect. Damn.

The website that originally published that article http://world.care2.com/jmcmichael/files/index.html doesn't exist anymore.

2 different mail addresses are listed for him/her. jmcm5@lycos.com (jmcm5@lycos.com) and jmcmichael@care2.com (jmcmichael@care2.com), I haven't tried them out at least yet, but I doubt they exist anymore. I can try them out once I get home. A search of McMichael at www.care2.com (http://www.care2.com) does not bring anything up. Someone could probably try the last name here http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/, I can't do that at work.

Maybe it's Alex Jones in disguise :cool: At least it's someone, who put a lot of effort in this nonsense, giving life to multiple truther claims.

[Foolmewunz]

I believe we were posting at the same time. I can't get to the original site - banned by my server at work.... but maybe they have some biographical info.

[ref]

I believe we were posting at the same time. I can't get to the original site - banned by my server at work.... but maybe they have some biographical info.

I suppose we were posting at the same time indeed :) The original McMichael pages do not exist. It only gives this:

Page Not Found.

Sorry, the page you requested does not exist or has been moved.
Please check to make sure that the URL you entered is correct.



Even the domain http://world.care2.com/ doesn't exist anymore. www.care2.com (http://www.care2.com) however does exist, but finds nothing on him. I think all we have left are those two mail addresses, if they somehow still happened to work. I won't be home yet in at least 7 hours. Anyone care to try them even anonymously before that, just to check if they exist?

[Foolmewunz]

I suppose we were posting at the same time indeed :) The original McMichael pages do not exist. It only gives this:

Page Not Found.

Sorry, the page you requested does not exist or has been moved.
Please check to make sure that the URL you entered is correct.



Even the domain http://world.care2.com/ doesn't exist anymore. www.care2.com (http://www.care2.com) however does exist, but finds nothing on him. I think all we have left are those two mail addresses, if they somehow still happened to work. I won't be home yet in at least 7 hours. Anyone care to try them even anonymously before that, just to check if they exist?

I'm also at work, and besides, I'm a chickens**t! (Actually, I'm on an expat contract over here and everything I own, including computer, IP addresses, etc... is paid for by the company, so I never play around with the miscreants, 'cuz the last thing I need is some hacky-whacky trying to get into the corporate server.)

[MikeW]

The website that originally published that article http://world.care2.com/jmcmichael/files/index.html doesn't exist anymore.

2 different mail addresses are listed for him/her. jmcm5@lycos.com (jmcm5@lycos.com) and jmcmichael@care2.com (jmcmichael@care2.com), I haven't tried them out at least yet, but I doubt they exist anymore. I can try them out once I get home. A search of McMichael at www.care2.com (http://www.care2.com) does not bring anything up. Someone could probably try the last name here http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/, I can't do that at work.
McMichael's original page still exists at archive.org, see http://web.archive.org/web/20020221070838/http://world.care2.com/jmcmichael/files/index.html

You'll see he links to Carol Valentine, who should also be in your list, as she's saying the bin Laden confession video is fake & the Ummat interview is true, as well as pushing a "remote controlled planes" idea. And all this in late 2001 - it's really amazing how far the inside job movement hasn't come.

Re: care2, there's one Jim McMichael listed on the site, address "Carl Fisher, FL, US", who is "Male, age 53", "Speaks English" and joined the site in October 2001. He's a member of the group "Race for the Rain Forest", has a birthday on July 14th 1953, and that's all there is. If you register (it's free) you can read the same at http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/profile.html?view=personal&pid=205592472#tabs

[ref]

McMichael's original page still exists at archive.org, see http://web.archive.org/web/20020221070838/http://world.care2.com/jmcmichael/files/index.html

You'll see he links to Carol Valentine, who should also be in your list, as she's saying the bin Laden confession video is fake & the Ummat interview is true, as well as pushing a "remote controlled planes" idea. And all this in late 2001 - it's really amazing how far the inside job movement hasn't come.

Re: care2, there's one Jim McMichael listed on the site, address "Carl Fisher, FL, US", who is "Male, age 53", "Speaks English" and joined the site in October 2001. He's a member of the group "Race for the Rain Forest", has a birthday on July 14th 1953, and that's all there is. If you register (it's free) you can read the same at http://www.care2.com/c2c/people/profile.html?view=personal&pid=205592472#tabs

Thanks Mike. I'll have to add people to my list, and I might actually do a separate history page as well.

Good that you pointed out the Carol Valentine story. Here is in brief what I have found, regarding the history of some theories. Correct me, if I'm wrong.

First NORAD stand-down implication:
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/treason.htmSeptember 15, 2001. Article called: CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE OR TREASON? Commentary on a NY Times article on 9-11, by Jared Israel.

First no hijackers involved/no arabs on passenger lists, which lead to remote control theories:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Ppuzzle.htmlOctober 12, 2001. Article called: THE PERPLEXING PUZZLE OF THE PUBLISHED PASSENGER LISTS, by Gary North.

First serious truther analysis of the WTC collapse, including melting steel, falling into own footprint, everything has to fail simultaneously, pulverized concrete, design loads etc:
Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics! Part I (http://911review.com/articles/jm/mslp_1.htm)October 21, 2001. Article called: MUSLIMS SUSPEND THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, by J. McMichael.

First free fall speed analysis:
The article by J. McMichael was discovered in January, 2002 by a young Australian guitarist, Gerard Holmgren, who ran the collapse times through some very basic 'physics' (The Law of Falling Bodies which resulted from the works of Galileo and Sir Isaac Newton), and came to the conclusion that those Towers did, indeed, drop at Free-Fall speeds, and that could only result from Controlled Demolitions.

First WTC 7 truther analysis:
In the beginning of 2002 by Rosalee Grable of www.thewebfairy.com (http://www.thewebfairy.com), that was publishing information which pointed out that the Towers fell due to Controlled Demolitions. One of the things that led Rosalee to this conclusion was that, after poring over single-frame video 'captures' for hours on end, she noticed the WTC7 'squibs'. (This was where Gerard Holmgren 'discovered' Building 7).

First non-conventional explosive theories:
Jeff King (PlaguePuppy) was the one who took apart every aspect of the demolition for detailed examination, and also did a lot to pioneer the recognition that it wasn't just conventional explosives. Gerard Holmgren found Jeff King in early 2002, gave Jeff the 'falling bodies' insight, and Jeff was supposedly the first to publish that insight. Joined by Scott Loughrey, Gerard and Rosalee started to point this out to other people.

[Alzke]

Interesting stuff. Good work

[ref]

Thanks.

Just for the information, Gerard Holmgren & Rosalee Grable have nowadays been joined by Nico Haupt, Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood and others. They have come to the conclusion that there were no commercial airliners involved in 9/11.

:rolleyes:

[ref]

This Jared Israel guy has also left his footprint.


First 9/11 related Operation Northwoods mention:http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-int.htm

December 10, 2001. Article called: NORTHWOODS: A PLAN FOR TERROR TO JUSTIFY WAR, by Jared Israel.

[MikeW]

Thanks Mike. I'll have to add people to my list, and I might actually do a separate history page as well.

Good that you pointed out the Carol Valentine story. Here is in brief what I have found, regarding the history of some theories. Correct me, if I'm wrong.
Looks good to me, although the raw ideas for many of the theories appeared even quicker. Read this, for example:

How did each tower implode?

Demolition experts will tell you that towers are the most difficult buildings to bring down in a controlled manner. A tower tends to fall like a tree, unless the direction of its fall is controlled by directional charges.

Each Trade Center tower was perfectly "smokestacked" - its fall was completely contained by the boundaries of its foundation. This could not have happened coincidentally. It must have been accomplished by strategically placed and precisely timed internal charges. Video coverage clearly shows internal charges precipitating and accompanying the controlled demolition of each tower.

Why does the official story not recognize the implosion?

Why is the media not demanding an answer to this most important question?

Who could have placed the charges?

Completely standard, yes? Should have toppled like a tree, fell into its own footprint, videos clearly show internal charges, use of the term "official story", use of the phrase "controlled demolition" and the word "implosion", questioning the media response. I could be quoting something that appeared on 911blogger this morning. But actually this appeared online the day after the attacks (see http://web.archive.org/web/20011026022532/http://www.jimduensing.com/article091201.html). And ironically he retracted it 24 hours later (http://web.archive.org/web/20011026022532/http://www.jimduensing.com/article091301.html), doubtless proof that someone "got to him".

Anyway, the point is how I found this, which was by doing a Google Groups search for the terms WTC and "controlled demolition" (see here (http://groups.google.co.uk/groups/search?q=wtc+%22controlled+demolition%22&start=50&sa=N&scoring=d&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&num=10&as_drrb=b&as_mind=11&as_minm=9&as_miny=2001&as_maxd=20&as_maxm=12&as_maxy=2001&)). Articles that appear on the web often get reposted on Usenet, so it might be worth trying similar searches for NORAD and "stand down", WTC and thermite just to see if anyone else thought of it first, etc etc.

[ref]

Looks good to me, although the raw ideas for many of the theories appeared even quicker. Read this, for example:


Completely standard, yes? Should have toppled like a tree, fell into its own footprint, videos clearly show internal charges, use of the term "official story", use of the phrase "controlled demolition" and the word "implosion", questioning the media response. I could be quoting something that appeared on 911blogger this morning. But actually this appeared online the day after the attacks (see http://web.archive.org/web/20011026022532/http://www.jimduensing.com/article091201.html). And ironically he retracted it 24 hours later (http://web.archive.org/web/20011026022532/http://www.jimduensing.com/article091301.html), doubtless proof that someone "got to him".

Anyway, the point is how I found this, which was by doing a Google Groups search for the terms WTC and "controlled demolition" (see here (http://groups.google.co.uk/groups/search?q=wtc+%22controlled+demolition%22&start=50&sa=N&scoring=d&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&num=10&as_drrb=b&as_mind=11&as_minm=9&as_miny=2001&as_maxd=20&as_maxm=12&as_maxy=2001&)). Articles that appear on the web often get reposted on Usenet, so it might be worth trying similar searches for NORAD and "stand down", WTC and thermite just to see if anyone else thought of it first, etc etc.

You're correct. The raw ideas emerged almost immediately. But those posted above seem to be the first more thorough analysis of the specific topics, as well as being the first articles that actually influenced people.

For example, Jared Israel's article was followed by many more articles suspecting NORAD on the emperors clothes site. McMichael's article influenced Gerard Holmgren at first in 2002, and then later on in 2003 Jim Hoffman, who really made this demolition theory widepread knowledge. It was the first so called 'serious' analysis which go the attention of many. And Gary North is credited for the no arabs -finding. I don't know if anyone thought of that one before, but his article was the first actual article and got the attention of others.

And thanks for the search tip :)

[MikeW]

You're correct. The raw ideas emerged almost immediately. But those posted above seem to be the first more thorough analysis of the specific topics, as well as being the first articles that actually influenced people.
Sure, I wasn't criticising your approach, just saying that it's surprising how the very early thoughts (from people we've never heard of) still manage to incorporate so many still current ideas. But certainly it's good to follow the more published people. The early role of Carol Valentine should be documented by anyone exploring the links between the inside job movement & holocaust deniers, for instance.

[ref]

Sure, I wasn't criticising your approach, just saying that it's surprising how the very early thoughts (from people we've never heard of) still manage to incorporate so many still current ideas. But certainly it's good to follow the more published people. The early role of Carol Valentine should be documented by anyone exploring the links between the inside job movement & holocaust deniers, for instance.

I didn't take it as criticism :)

It is indeed very surprising, how these early ideas still exist almost exactly like they were first presented. The truth movement is a stuck movement. Stuck to past. I have to look into Carol.

[bje]

Ref, excuse me if you have already seen this as a resource:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/070618professorsquestion911

Lots of quotes.

[ref]

Ref, excuse me if you have already seen this as a resource:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/070618professorsquestion911

Lots of quotes.

Thanks bje. I have seen that yes :)

The look on Bruce R. Henry's face never ceases to amaze me.

That site btw says, that Griffin got into truther stuff after reading the 9/11 timeline. However, I have seen a mention that he got into the truther stuff after a trusted friend sent him an e-mail in April of 2003, that included information. Maybe that e-mail he received mentioned that timeline.

[ref]

The full name is confirmed as Jim McMichael.

Here is one e-mail from him.

http://cryptome.org/wtc-crimes.htm

ETA: He has also written a post called: America is screwed! This can be found in the midsection of this page:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_homeland.htm

As well as a post: WTC, A History of US Complicity. Found a little way down this page:

http://www.apfn.org/APFN/WTC_history.htm

[Brainster]

This Jared Israel guy has also left his footprint.


First 9/11 related Operation Northwoods mention:http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-int.htm

December 10, 2001. Article called: NORTHWOODS: A PLAN FOR TERROR TO JUSTIFY WAR, by Jared Israel.


Actually when I went back and looked at the Usenet Newsgroup hierarchy alt.conspiracy, I found that Operation Northwoods was one of the first (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.new-world-order/browse_thread/thread/2602893283f8c86b/78abe78132aa7884?lnk=st&q=Northwoods+group%3Aalt.conspiracy&rnum=2&hl=en#78abe78132aa7884) elements of the CT to be discussed, as early as September 17, 2001:

11 Sept 2001 - Another Operation Northwoods?

The following excerpt from James Bamford's "Body of Secrets: Anatomy
of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency" (Doubleday, 2001)
provides very disturbing information that is directly relevant to the
events of September 11, 2001.

Indeed, we must wonder if the inexplicable intelligence and defense
failures claimed by US Government agencies are simply part of some
elaborate cover story. Even worse, we must consider the possibility
that the September 11th attacks on New York and Washington were
simply a bigger, badder version of the Gulf of Tonkin "incident,"
which was successfully foisted upon a gullible US public to push them
into supporting the war against Vietnam.

Posted by someone whose nick was "All the News That Doesn't Fit", citing something called the NY Transfer News (http://www.blythe.org/), which appears to be something of a radical news collective, judging by all the Cuba-related material. Maybe this is why they caught onto the Northwoods connection, because they are Cuba-centric?

[ref]

Actually when I went back and looked at the Usenet Newsgroup hierarchy alt.conspiracy, I found that Operation Northwoods was one of the first (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.new-world-order/browse_thread/thread/2602893283f8c86b/78abe78132aa7884?lnk=st&q=Northwoods+group%3Aalt.conspiracy&rnum=2&hl=en#78abe78132aa7884) elements of the CT to be discussed, as early as September 17, 2001:

Posted by someone whose nick was "All the News That Doesn't Fit", citing something called the NY Transfer News (http://www.blythe.org/), which appears to be something of a radical news collective, judging by all the Cuba-related material. Maybe this is why they caught onto the Northwoods connection, because they are Cuba-centric?

Thanks for that piece of info :) Maybe Northwoods involving Cuba had something to do with it then, like you said..

[Matilda]

Double post, sorry.

[Matilda]

I've listened to what is apparently Alex Jones' radio broadcast on September 11th. It's a weird, weird experience. He mentions Northwoods a couple of times (not by name, but he outlines his version of it, and names the book he got it from). His rantings are broad, and he suggests many culprits, but repeatedly implies it's the NWO, either the US government, or Europe (because of the Euro :czwacky: ). He makes lots of comparisons to Oklahoma, and I think that would have been significant to his listeners. In no way is he putting forward anything like a coherent conspiracy theory (if there is such a thing), but he's putting forward a lot of stuff that has been incorporated into 9/11 CTs. A scattergun of paranoia, if you will.

The reason I said 'apparently' from the day is because the broadcast is bizarre. He goes on and on about how he predicted it, and to my ear sounds almost gleeful on this particular point. Elements like that which seemed out of place made me think that perhaps this was some later broadcast, but everything else in the broadcast makes me think it is from that day. I don't know how many people would have heard his programme, but he was certainly sowing the seeds of CTs on Spetember 11th. Clearly he had some listeners becuse they were ringing in, and he may have had archives up. In which case what he said may have sparked some of the very early CT ideas, but I suspect there were others with a similar mindset coming up with the same stuff on their own at the time.

[ref]

I've listened to what is apparently Alex Jones' radio broadcast on September 11th. It's a weird, weird experience. He mentions Northwoods a couple of times (not by name, but he outlines his version of it, and names the book he got it from). His rantings are broad, and he suggests many culprits, but repeatedly implies it's the NWO, either the US government, or Europe (because of the Euro :czwacky: ). He makes lots of comparisons to Oklahoma, and I think that would have been significant to his listeners. In no way is he putting forward anything like a coherent conspiracy theory (if there is such a thing), but he's putting forward a lot of stuff that has been incorporated into 9/11 CTs. A scattergun of paranoia, if you will.

The reason I said 'apparently' from the day is because the broadcast is bizarre. He goes on and on about how he predicted it, and to my ear sounds almost gleeful on this particular point. Elements like that which seemed out of place made me think that perhaps this was some later broadcast, but everything else in the broadcast makes me think it is from that day. I don't know how many people would have heard his programme, but he was certainly sowing the seeds of CTs on Spetember 11th. Clearly he had some listeners becuse they were ringing in, and he may have had archives up. In which case what he said may have sparked some of the very early CT ideas, but I suspect there were others with a similar mindset coming up with the same stuff on their own at the time.

Thanks for the info, Matilda. Alex Jones has a habit of endorsing every single conspiracy theory or hypothesis out there. I wouldn't be surprise at all, if he spilled out all that stuff on the day of 9/11. It's his bread and butter. And yes, he credits himself for predicting 9/11 two months before it happened :rolleyes: This is the strategy he always uses. He cries out so much different stuff all the time, hoping to hit something sometime. I wouldn't credit him for much though. I don't think he has brought up anything original. If he said Northwoods on his show, it was probably one of a thousand things he threw in the air that day. People were saying demolition pretty soon, it just took some time before some actual truther analysis came to surface. But when it comes down to who has mentioned any particular conspiracy theory for the first time, I'm sure Alex Jones is pretty much on top of every list. It's just the thing, that when you do that all the time to everything, it kinda looses it's flavor.

I'm not sure if I want to listen to that particular 9/11 show. But good post Matilda :)

[Matilda]

If he said Northwoods on his show, it was probably one of a thousand things he threw in the air that day.

It really was.

But when it comes down to who has mentioned any particular conspiracy theory for the first time, I'm sure Alex Jones is pretty much on top of every list. It's just the thing, that when you do that all the time to everything, it kinda looses it's flavor.

Exactly.

I'm not sure if I want to listen to that particular 9/11 show.

For anyone who does, the link on his site for that archive isn't working. I found the show as a bittorrent here:

http://www.mininova.org/tor/534886

It's not something I want to listen to again. Because he's so prominent in the twoof movement, I wanted to see how early he was coming out with this stuff after 9/11. It's not easy listening (nothing from that day is, but this has its own unique difficulty).