Why?

Update - This article, originally published January 7, 2009, was hacked and altered. I don't know by whom, nor when exactly, but sometime before July 2011. This blog post is currently (December 10, 2011) referenced by the Wikipedia article about me, and the reference is to the hacked, false version. I've been earnestly attempting to correct the Wikipedia article, but User Natty10000 is adamant about keeping the false info in the article.

I have no backup or record of the original version of this blog post. Below is a December 2011 rewrite, using the hacked version as a starting point. After the first two paragraphs, almost all of the rest of it appears to be the same as it originally was.

-------

On January 5, 2009, while on an interview show with Jim Fetzer, I pretended to shoot myself with a gun. I filmed this event, and it is the climactic ending to The Great American Psy-Opera.

My fictional handgun death was a work of performance art. The societal function of artists is to challenge the perceptions, to stimulate thoughts and emotions within audience members that might not otherwise occur.

There are two important messages intended by my "pseudocide" performance art, one of which should be quite clear enough just listening to Fetzer's radio show, and which I will discuss below. The other, even more important message, will best be understood in the context of the video version, which is now included in my film "9/11 - The Great American Psy-Opera".

Performance Art Message #1

I Give Up Trying to Use Scientific Facts and Reasoning on You People

Any sincere 9/11 researcher will eventually be driven to abject frustration.

Why?

Because most of the so-called leaders of the 9/11 “truth” movement are not the least bit interested in truth. Steve Jones, Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Jim Fetzer, Bob Bowman, David Ray Griffin, Webster Tarpley, Rob Balsamo, Dylan Avery, Jim Hoffman, John Lear, Killtown, Webfairy, Nico Haupt . . . every one has staked out a peculiar position, surrounding the truth, protecting the truth, diverting all comers away from the truth with spin, double think, half-truth, bizarre fiction, and a mountain of irrelevancy.

This, of course, is essentially the same conclusion reached by Gerard Holmgren over a year ago. Fetzer and others have commented on Holmgren’s foul mouth. But I knew Gerard before he went ballistic. Holmgren was intelligent and brave, and laid the correct intellectual groundwork for no planes. He was articulate and polite. Gerard Holmgren was driven over the edge, and down into obscenity by continually confronting the political spin machine that calls itself the “truth movement”.

I wrote the book

I have authored the definitive scientific treatise on the video compositing used to create the 9/11 airplane videos. It has not, will not, and cannot be debunked. In fact, it is the solution to 9/11. I present a rigorous examination of my own discoveries, and those of other researchers. In all, I bring 22 data points to test the video composite hypothesis against the real plane hypothesis, and the video composite hypothesis prevails overwhelmingly.

This should have brought cheers from the entire 9/11 “truth” movement, at least from the so-called “no planers”, but no. Instead, Killtown banned me from posting at his “911movement” forum, a hangout for no planers.

Why?

Why would Killtown ban me, the one person who actually went and made the scientific case for no planes?

Smear Campaign Against Me and My Work

Worse, a vicious smear campaign was launched against me and my wife. “People” such as Killtown, Fred BS Registration, OzzybinOswald, Ewing2001 and others began posting page after page of pure character assassination, claiming I was a Mossad agent, that I had stolen another person’s identity, that I was not really a musician, that I claimed to be a directed energy weapons expert, etc. See for example this, this, this, this, this and this. I am banned, yet Killtown allowed others to post a litany of scandalous lies about me.

Why?

Nobody knows who these “people” are, so nothing can be done about it. This actually goes back to around September of 2007, when I began to politely correct some errors that had occurred in no-planes research, including some errors of my own. Fred BS Registration, Killtown and others were actively advancing the idea that a building at 19 Rector Street was missing from the Hezarkhani video. I found the “missing” building, right where it belonged, and posted proof on Killtown’s 911Movement.

The correct response from Killtown and co. should have been to thank me, and to admit a simple mistake, and move forward. Instead, my threads were deleted and/or moved.

Why?

Using deceptive editing, Fred next introduced a video claiming that two different shots were “the same, only rotated and cropped differently”. Simply lining the two shots up and alternating clearly shows that they are NOT the same.

Somebody called “ThoughtCrime” came up with a similar claim, I was able to easily show that these two shots were also different, one looking up, the other looking down.

Anonymous No-Planer Disinfo

These “errors” have actually turned out to be a full-fledged disinformation campaign, now led by the likes of Simon Shack, creator of September Clues. They are falsely claiming that the 9/11 videos are completely animated. We hear claims of moving bridges, missing buildings, moving buildings, missing backdrops, CGI people, and on and on. The total animation theory can be, and has been soundly debunked. Yet the purveyors persist.

Why?

They are pushing the total animation theory simply because it is false. It also leads naïve supporters of this theory to reject the demolition videos as fake, a disguised hidden agenda.

Stepping back a little further . . .

The "Suicide" of Gerard Holmgren

During April-July of 2007, I participated in an email group that included Gerard Holmgren, Judy Wood, Jim Fetzer, Morgan Reynolds, Webfairy, Coffinman, and others. Holmgren had already had a long interaction with Morgan Reynolds, and had corrected him on an important point in the no-planes physics argument. At the time, Reynolds was referring to the entire mass of the towers, which is actually irrelevant to the outcome of a collision with an airplane. It is the strength of the impacted structure which counts, as Holmgren correctly lectured Reynolds.

We already see a problem. Gerard Holmgren is a musician, and Morgan Reynolds is an economist. Fortunately, mechanical engineer Judy Wood was in the group. Coffinman and Holmgren very politely asked the kindly Dr. Wood to offer some engineering calculations to support the no-plane crash argument. It was then that Judy Wood first revealed herself to be something other than what she claimed. Even though she was indeed a “no-planer”, Judy Wood flat refused to offer any support within her field of expertise.

Why?

Dr. Wood said that she was afraid others would simply present different calculations that disagreed with hers. What? Of course they would, that’s the whole point of scientific debate. Using her credentials, she could demand to see the data allegedly used to produce the Purdue animations. I highly doubt there is ANY such data, and Judy Wood could and should have led the charge to expose this fact. But no.

I smelled a rat, but I kept silent. I was becoming quite close to Judy and Morgan I felt. They had linked to my work quite often in their published papers, including many links to my song, “Blown to Kingdom Come”. I made a conscious decision to “play nice” with Judy, Morgan and Fetzer.

In June of 2007, I published my analysis of the velocity of the airplane image in Chopper 5. The darn thing becomes less stable after you stabilize the video, so it has to be fake. This, plus my “playing nice”, got me invited to speak at the Madison Conference. At the conference, I was approached by a nice gentleman called Stephen Goodale to direct a documentary movie featuring Judy’s work. Goodale hired me, and we formed a film group consisting of us two, plus Judy Wood, Jerry Leaphart, Morgan Reynolds, and some guy named Russ Gerst, who Judy wanted involed, for reasons unknown to me.

By then, Morgan and Judy had filed their lawsuits under the representation of attorney Jerry Leaphart. Morgan Reynolds was suing alleging no plane crashes! Wow! What a great thing, except for one tiny problem. Morgan Reynolds was suing everybody except the guys who actually DID it, that being FOX, CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC. Again, I smelled a rat. But I stayed cool with Reynolds, Wood and Fetzer.

Holmgren had already outed David Ray Griffin and Jim Fetzer as masters of double think. Planes both did and did not hit the WTC, A plane both did and did not hit the Pentagon, Flight 93 both was and was not shot down, etc. Reynolds too was a target of Holmgren’s justified wrath. Big Boeings somehow are subject to different physics than small Boeings, or airplanes from a different manufacturer. Holmgren had not-so-politely declined an invitation to speak at the Madison Conference.

Steven Jones Lied to Me

Just two days before the Madison Conference, Steven Jones published a hit piece on me written by Eric Salter. Though I immediately answered it on my website, and showed how he had cleverly avoided the scientific issue, I also contacted Steven Jones and requested the opportunity to publish a response to Salter in his “Journal of Nine Eleven Studies” (the JONES). Jones agreed, in writing, stating, “we would welcome your carefully researched response”. He asked if I had any objection to peer review, and I said no.

August, September and October 2007 were spent with me and Stephen Goodale flying around interviewing people about 9/11. We went to Toronto and spoke with Frank Greening who supports the official story and was trying to convince us that the hat truss “chewed up” the whole building and itself. We went to Indiana and spoke to the kindly Steven Jones, who blamed his lawyer for not including molten metal in his lawsuit. We went to Purdue and spoke with Mete Sozen who told Farmer Brown jokes and promised to release his data, and Voicu Popescu who pretended not to know what happened to the edited out portions of his airplane cartoon, and not to know how the floor assembly heals itself together after being ripped apart. Of course, I was expecting lies from the official guys like Sozen and Steve Jones.

It was also around this time I wrote a petition requesting broadcast-quality 9/11 videos from the networks. This is something that every reasonable person must support, regardless of their position on 9/11. Good science proceeds with the best data available. The only people who would not be in favor of my petition would be those not in favor of science. Morgan Reynolds, Mete Sozen, and Steven Jones all agreed to sign on as co-sponsors of the petition. I had an official story guy, a limited hangout plane-hugger, and a no-planer. I even have Steve Jones on video agreeing to support the action.

Then, strangely, the kindly Dr. Jones began making odd requests that I re-write his little mini-bio in the petition. I made one change for him, and republished it. Then he began insisting that I remove any mention of “BYU”. What? Jones is a former professor of physics from BYU.

In October 2007 we went to Jerry Leaphart’s house in Connecticut for 2 days, and talked to him, and Morgan Reynolds, and Judy Wood. It was interesting. Reynolds made sure to include a piece about how his wife had him tested for insanity, even though I didn’t ask. Judy had been bashing Steven Jones left and right in her emails with me, but refused to discuss Jones on camera. She basically just repeated her Madison presentation.

Judy Wood Lied to Me

In January of 2008, I certainly did NOT “stay cool” with Judy Wood. A few weeks prior, Judy had published her contention that the World Trade Center was blown up with a scaled-up version of the “Hutchison Effect”. The problem with that is that there is no such thing as any Hutchison Effect. Hutchison is a fraud who makes upside down videos and claims he has discovered a bizarre energy effect. Subsequently I have offered Hutchison $100,000 to reproduce his effect in my presence, and of course he can not do it.

But first I needed to determine whether or not Judy Wood actually believed in the legitimacy of the Hutchison Effect, so I made my own Hutchison-Effect videos by hanging a dollhouse upside down and holding things in place with a magnet, and letting them drop. Wheeeeee hoooooo. Then I sent an email claiming to have reproduced the effect. The silence from Judy, Morgan and co was absolutely deafening. Had Judy Wood actually believed Hutchison’s moonshine, she would have been overcome with curiosity. I had my answer.

Judy Wood has done a brilliant job of compiling the visual evidence of the nature and extent of the WTC devastation. She has correctly identified the reason why a more standard demolition was not used. But then she is associating this great work with utter nonsense, so that reasonable people will discard the whole thing. This is a pattern that I would observe in several others.

I was devastated. I had gone from being Judy’s biggest fan and writing a song about her, to smelling a rat, to becoming certainly convinced that she is a professional disinformation agent.

By then, January 2008, motions were being filed in the Wood and Reynolds lawsuits. With all the seriousness he could muster, Jerry Leaphart wrote and filed an affidavit in the name of John Hutchison about the Hutchison Effect. It was absolutely scandalous.

Morgan Reynolds Lost His Case On Purpose

Meanwhile, Reynolds appeared to be ignoring great evidence. While an economist arguing physics might not be particularly convincing, seeing as how the government can always hire a dozen engineers to counter anything, showing a judge a video with no plane in it would be completely undeniable.

Did you all hear me? Did you catch that?

There is a little video I like to call “Chopper 5”. It begins with a big wide shot that lasts over 5 seconds. There ought to be an airplane in that wide shot, and it is not there. This is evidence that any idiot can understand, even a Federal Judge.

There is also a little video called “Hezarkhani” or “Ghostplane”. The wing of the plane goes through the wall, but there is no damage. Not to the wall, and not to the plane. Later, there is a big gaping hole in the wall. But not when the wing of the plane goes through. Again, this is evidence that even a judge can understand.

Morgan Reynolds and former big oil attorney Jerry Leaphart refused to offer this evidence in their little lawsuit, but that’s OK, because they weren’t even suing the guys who did it! My frustration and anger were mounting. Daily. Wasn’t there anybody on the level?

Choosing the High Road

I announced to the film group that I was throwing out the script I had written and destroying what I had edited. My only moral obligation was to remain true to Stephen Goodale who had provided the money to fund the project. I asked him to allow me to re-do the film, according to what I know, and what I believe. I promised him that if he did not approve of the final result, I would repay him the money he put up. He agreed to that. I hate throwing away my work, but that’s what I did.

I decided to take a break from the film, and write a treatment proving video compositing of the 9/11 airplane videos. This could be considered the response to Eric Salter’s hit piece published in the Journal of Nine Eleven Studies, the one Steven Jones promised to publish. Except Jones broke his promise (surprise) and refused to publish it. Or, it could be the chapter in Jim Fetzer’s book “9/11 Controversies” that he promised. Except I highly doubt the kindly Dr. Fetzer will do so either.

A Very Modest Summary of Some of My Contributions

Before me, many people had commented about the fact that the airplane penetration videos look so fake. Webfairy termed the Hezarkhani video “Ghostplane”. But I was the first to create a specific proof of compositing in Hezarkhani. In one particular video field, the right wing of the plane has passed beyond the wall, yet no damage to the wall has occurred. A comparison to a later frame of video proves there is more than sufficient video resolution to see the hole, if it existed at that time.

I was the first to point out the lack of a wake vortex in the 9/11 fireballs.

Before me, many had commented on the nose-out in Chopper 5. But I was the first to actually demonstrate to the lay audience how compositing works, and how and why the nose out might occur in a live composite.

I was the first to measure the instability of the airplane motion.

I was the first to correctly explain the explosive flashes on the sides of the towers. They were real, and were absolutely needed in order to know where in time to place the airplane overlays.

I was the first to present a detailed explanation and demonstration of the techniques used in both the live and edited airplane videos.

I was the first to point out that the short edit in Naudet corresponds to the fade-to-black in Chopper 5.

I was the first to request, in fact demand, criticism and review of the no-planes evidence. Before my Hardfire appearance (1) and (2), there were simply NO official answers for the nose-out, the fade-to-black, the no wake vortex, and more. I was so frustrated at having those points ignored, I was willing to pay for myself and Steve Wright to fly to New York, with hotels.

I knew the Hardfire show situation was a setup. Steve Wright had been supplied with a list of everything I was going to say, while had no clue what his claims would be. But it was so important to actually get official answers down on the record, I did it, with my own money. I got video expert Steve Wright to admit that the resolution in Hezarkhani is good enough to see the hole, so he was forced to fabricate a ridiculous story about kerosene cutting steel.

All of this has taken a lot of my time, time not spent with my family. And yet, recent posters on Killtown’s forum have had the audacity to ask, “What has Ace contributed, other than a couple of YouTube videos?”

Why?

I have written the book. My treatise now stands for anyone to read. Except almost nobody cares. And I know why! People don’t care because they don’t want to know the truth. This was the real brilliance of 9/11, and the most profound thing I have learned in this ordeal. They thought up a deed so heinous that everyone would have to support it! The only, I repeat, the ONLY possible conclusion from 9/11 research is that government is illegitimate. Not THIS government, ALL government. We have the unalienable right to abolish our government, check the Declaration of Independence. But, people aren’t ready to hear that, and I doubt they ever will be. I am the one who doesn't belong here, and so I will leave.

Truth

I conclude people don’t value truth very highly. They value comfort, and beauty, but not truth. Not when it’s ugly or uncomfortable. So they hang out somewhere that is not the truth. When people encounter facts that conflict with deeply held beliefs, they often will choose to deny the facts. This is cognitive dissonance. Many members of the “truth” movement, especially the “leaders” are paid government operatives. Others begin sincere, but simply find the truth too nettlesome to endure once they touch it.

Rob Balsamo Lied to Me

Still, I pressed on, taking my treatise to the Pilots for 9/11 “Truth” forum, and one Rob Balsamo. There, I was pre-banned. I was forced to post in a subsection not viewable to the public. Nevertheless, I posted my entire book in a thread, and requested criticism and review.

Balsamo offered that he himself had experience with video, which I thought was great, but then he never discussed a single point from my work. Instead, he suggested that I contact some people he knows, pilots, who say they witnessed a plane crash at the WTC. I wholeheartedly agreed, but Balsamo was unable to produce any witnesses at all.

Meanwhile, some moderator called “DMole” was trying to get me to state what I thought was the ratio of faked 911 video to unfaked 911 video. I patiently explained why that was irrelevant. DMole then posted a dictionary definition of “ratio”, and claimed I was at odds with all of established mathematics. This was the best they could do at criticizing my treatise, and next thing I knew, I was banned (archived).

Why?

Dylan Avery Disallows the Mere Mention . . .

Speaking of banning, there’s Dylan Avery, creator of Loose Change. The original Loose Change was a good little movie. Avery knew there was something fishy about the airplane videos and the flashes, but fell for the “pod fires missile” meme, instead of understanding the planes are simply fake. Under “guidance” from “leaders” like Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin, the subsequent versions of LC stray farther and farther from observable truth, continue the plane hoax, divert attention away from the disintegration of the WTC, and onto matters such as the money trail.

Mere discussion of no plane theory is strictly forbidden at Loose Change Forum.

Why?

The number one piece of evidence proving no planes is the Chopper 5 video, with no plane in the wide shot, unstable motion, nose out, fade to black, etc. Dylan Avery is, in fact, the source of one (out of two) known copies of Chopper 5. This copy is of reduced size, and was frame blended, and had a fake airplane inserted into 3 frames of the zoom in. This airplane does not appear in the other known version. Nobody knows where Dylan Avery obtained his Chopper 5, and he has never replied to my repeated requests to please create a properly digitized copy so that we can analyze it better.

Why?

John Lear, Comic Genius

When you have essentially unlimited funding, as your government does, you can afford an endless stream of disifo agents. How about John Lear? Lear, son of LearJet founder Bill Lear, is an accomplished pilot, and an expert in aeronautics. He correctly explains that it is impossible for a 767 airplane to travel 550 mph at low altitude. This is far past its VMO (velocity maximum operating), the engines would act as brakes, the frame and wings would oscillate, and the craft would become uncontrollable and likely break apart.

Great stuff from the kindly Mr. Lear, who also will tell you with a straight face that there are large civilizations of people on the moon, and Venus, and Jupiter (I’m not making this up). He also contributes to 9/11 disinfo by claiming the planes were faked with some kind of hologram, when in fact it is impossible to project any sort of image into thin air. All projected images require something to reflect light into people’s eyes or into a camera. So yet again, we have another very intelligent man associating some piece of the truth with patent nonsense.

Why?

Truth II

I thought this was the truth movement. And that’s where I was wrong. I thought people were actually looking for truth. They aren’t. Holmgren was exactly right. And in a way, he committed suicide also. You should read some of Holmgren’s emails from late in his career. Profane and disgusting doesn’t even begin to describe them. Holmgren now will have nothing to do with anyone in the “truth” movement, including me. That may be because I stayed on the sidelines while he was duking it out with Reynolds, and Fetzer, and Wood. I don’t know, but whatever the reason, I don’t blame him.

Genghis I’m on the fence about. His 9/11 Taboo is a pretty nice piece of work, and he has certainly been out there yelling at Killtown and Dylan Avery, rightly so. He has recently done some great little videos debunking the total animation garbage.

But Genghis also supports the idea of a missile attack. This can’t be true. Genghis is now a great video editor in his own right, thus well-equipped to understand that it is currently impossible to reliably motion-track an incoming missile in real time. I’ve explained how this proves no flying object.

Genghis also supports the idea of thin air holograms. These are not possible, even in theory.

Forgive me if you are an honest and sincere 9/11 truther and I have neglected you. My film, 9/11 – The Great American Psy-Opera, will be finished without me. It’s the story of 9/11, what happened, how we know what happened, and all the people who are working so hard to keep you from believing what happened. It’s still going to take a while, it’s a very large piece. And it’s going to be the truth, like it or not. No doubt I and my movie will be slimed all across cyberspace. And I will laugh.

So yes, I am planning on ending my life while speaking on Jim Fetzer's radio show in a few hours. It is my little way of saying to hell with you, all of you. And congratulations, all of you. 9/11 was, and is, dead brilliant. Of all the 9/11 scoundrels, no one deserves it more than Jim Fetzer. Fetzer has been playing me, and playing every one the whole way.

I Can No Longer Conceal My Views on Jim Fetzer

Let’s consider two examples of Fetzer’s method. I busted John Hutchison on Fetzer’s show back a year ago in January 2008. The next day, he had on Judy Wood and Hutchison. Fetzer gave Hutchison the 3rd degree about his (lack of ) academic credentials, but failed to ask the obvious question: John, what is your apparatus?

Here we have a guy who claims to have discovered an energy effect in his bedroom with a pile of surplus army electronics, and we have a Ph.D. scientist radio host, supposedly skeptical of this claim, who doesn’t think to ask him how the hell he even did it? Nonsense. Fetzer was pretending to be mean, but actually playing softball. Later Judy would “complain” about the poor treatment.

Now please have a look at this Op-Ed piece by Jim Fetzer. After interviewing me at least 10 times on his show, and having me explain the evidence over and over to him, he lists the “top 5” reasons to believe in 9/11 video fakery. While he includes Simon Shack’s nonsensical “black gash was penciled in”, Fetzer ignores the very straightforward, powerful evidence – No plane in the wide shot, Nose out, Magically Healing Columns, No Wake Vortex, etc.

There is not a question in my mind, not even a tiny lingering shred of doubt, that Jim Fetzer is deliberately screwing up the evidence, just like the others. It pains me greatly to say it. Jim Fetzer has been very nice to me, and given me a lot of time on his show. He has shown compassion and understanding toward me in private conversations. I'm sorry Jim, I still think you're screwing it up, and I can't hold it in any longer.

People have warned me that my work of performance art might my credibility. That’s impossible, my credibility was already assassinated by Killtown and his crew. Nice job. A poster on his 911 movement forum a few days ago was commenting about my admission that 9/11 has taken me away from my family. He dismissed me as having not done much except for a couple of youTube Videos. And nobody cared to correct him.

Why?

The Societal Function of Art

My art is designed to get you to think about truth, what it means, and to force most of you to admit (at least to yourself) that you don’t actually value it much, if at all. You don’t. And that’s OK, this should keep you comfy. If you are one of those very rare people who value the truth, beware. Sooner or later, you will be denied. The forces protecting the truth are very well funded, and they don’t want you around.

The fact is, the mainstream news media inserted fake airplane images into video of the exploding twin towers. When someone like me comes along and shows you the truth, and proves it, it makes you very uneasy. You require doubt about 9/11 to maintain your comfort zone.

No hardworking honest person likes to learn that their service is not valued. My service was truth, I gave it to you, and you don’t value it. I accept that. I needed to find a way to express how deeply that hurts me, and I decided to make the ultimate sacrifice. At the same time, I needed to find a way to give back the comfort that I took away from you by presenting the truth. If you can dismiss me as a crazy person, maybe, just maybe, you can ignore the truth I have proven.

That is message #1.

Performance Art Message # 2

Message #2 is even more important than #1. Please watch Psy-Opera all the way through.

Sincerely,

Ace Baker

January 7, 2009