Robert David Steele, Dr. James Fetzer on Thinking, Truth, JFK, False Flags, Fake News, & Censorship

Robert David Steele

Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. James Madison, Founding Father

Dr. James Fetzer, a Marine Corps artillery officer in the Viet-Nam era who then went on to earn a PhD in the history and philosophy of science, is one of America’s most proven and substantive critical thinkers, with twenty-three academic books focused on how to create intelligence (decision-support) with integrity. A few representative titles: Scientific Knowledge; Principles of Philosophical Reasoning; The New Theory of References; The Place of Probability in Science.

As with most of us, he was shocked by the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and undertook a rigorous scientific investigation, bringing together multiple world-class experts and ultimately producing several books that documented beyond any reasonable doubt that the government narrative was false.

He has received many honors for his non-fiction investigations, and is today the Distinguished McKnight University Professor Emeritus for the University of Minnesota.

When 9/11 occurred he was again shocked. What had seemed like an isolated incident was now back in much larger form. He applied the same critical thinking and expert crowd-sourcing skills.

In 2012, after the US Government changed the Smith-Mundt Act to permit active propaganda against the US public using taxpayer funds, a series of event occurred in which there were allegedly many victims, the police were empowered to go door to door without warrants, and America became a land of fear.

For each of those events, Dr. Fetzer recruited experts, conducted a scientific analysis, and published a book of conclusions, generally edited — presenting the work of many minds.

He was now a target for dark forces seeking to censor him. Today over five of his books are censored on Amazon and he has been subject to cyber-stalking and malicious legal actions one of which is likely to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

Robert David Steele, his interviewer, is a publicly-known former CIA spy who both ran a false flag operation for the CIA, and also ran a global media influence operation for the CIA. Approaching the truth and lies from a different path, Steele is a top non-fiction reviewer in the English language, with over 2000 reviews across 98 categories.

Together Dr. Fetzer and Steele examine three approaches to citizen investigation and reflection on catastrophic events in which the government narrative simply does not make sense.

To read Kevin Barrett, “The Legal Lynching of a Truth-Seeker“, click here.

Steele concludes that false narratives persist in the USA because our Congress, our judges, state governors and legislators, have been bribed and blackmailed, while our FBI is now worthless as a counterintelligence organization because it has been politically neutralized by the a Congress that works for the Deep State, not for We the People.

Steele ends with a challenge to all: get back into politics as a citizen. #UNRIG!

Donate to non-profit and receive email from me:

For serious research on “false flags” and conspiracies, visit


Please follow and like us:

25 thoughts on “Robert David Steele, Dr. James Fetzer on Thinking, Truth, JFK, False Flags, Fake News, & Censorship”

    1. Really, contraindications, which are not necessarily inconsistencies. For example, there is a noticeable absence of chopper debris at the Kobe crash site. The key camera video would not have been activated by a helicopter passing over head. The debris is on a path where it could easily have been dumped by a truck. The data from the site does not cohere with solid proof of the crash said to have killed him. We did a show about this. Let me track it down and return with a link:

  1. Hello James. Thanks for you work. I’m new to your blog but have followed you work for years. Do you have any work on the global pedophile cabal running through the highest levels of Church, State and Monarchies, among others? Any links you may follow would be great as well. Again, thank you for your desi to truth. ✊✌

    1. Would I could direct you to links on the Illuminati/Bilderbergers/ and the like. I haven’t quite arrived. Lots on Israel’s control of America and our Zionist-controlled media, but others are going to do more on that level of control, which may or may not track back to the Vatican. I have sources telling me that sort of thing, but I have yet to be convinced. On 9/11, JFK, Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing and other specific events (which turn out to have been grossly misrepresented by the government and the press), however, I am your man. Most of my videos are archived at by Gus Chambers, but many are also accessible via the menu bar here. And I also tweet @jimfetzer.

  2. Hey Jim: your system for comments seems to be way more stable. Lately. Major improvement. I came close to not bothering participating ever again. My two cents seemed to be cock-blocked constantly. There was times it happened so fast, it was robotic. Robert DS has great ideas like the open source on the Gov’t spending saving 90%. Remember the outrage over ninety dollar hammers and $250 toilet seats way back in the 80s? The outrage lasted a couple days and nothing was ever done about ripping off Uncle Sam. Perhaps the open source idea should be applied more broadly into Medicine and Insurance and on and on.

  3. The half hour interview was way too short; The singing your praises part a bit too long. Perhaps Robert felt the need for his audience to run through all your qualifications. That cut into the meat and potatoes of such a short time frame. I ran into another mass shooting religious zealot skiing yesterday. He jumped into a conversation I was having describing the actors used to play witnesses to mass shootings on news coverage. He jumped in with how stupid it was to think no one died at mass shootings. I had not even mentioned that yet. I was describing how they keep using the same lady over and over again and how horrible an actress she is. You know the one with the glasses that claimed to have a son killed at Pulse Nightclub and was also at Boston Bombing and Sandy Hook. Her portrayal of the grieving parent was simply not believable. This guy was getting on me about having some free thought on the subject. I told him to shove it and look up the Constitution maybe read the first amendment. This is America Pal and there’s this thing called free speech… deal with it. This is a strange phenomenon, these people that become instant zealots about mass shooting being the truth and nothing but. They simply can’t allow any free exchange of ideas, the shootings have become a religion and me the blasphemer who dares to call bullshit on it.

  4. Just placing this on the top story……wonderful Raw Deal tonight in regard to the possibility that nukes do not exist. One must say that possibility opens up a can of worms that may never be re-contained, eh?
    One possibility that comes to mind related to the power Israel has over the US. Many see that power as Israel having nukes in strategic places as a blackmail scenario…NOW, we may consider that Israel knows the truth of the non-existence of nukes and uses the threat of that revelation as blackmail.
    Of course it also puts a damper on the 911 nuke idea, eh?
    In any case, do not muss a re-run of that program on

    1. My step father went to Japan as an officer with duties instructing the men on duties and as translator. It was real. This no nuclear bomb is like the flat earth stuff, it makes the truthers look stupid.

      1. Bill, I am going to feature an expert on nukes and their role in 9/11 on the show very soon. I think John is entirely sincere, but I nevertheless do believe that nuclear weapons–alas!–are very, very real. And even Flat Earth arguments have to be addressed, which I (and others) have done in the past (but not on “The Raw Deal”).

      2. The argument has been that they could have just napalmed Japan instead of the atom bomb. So why do you reverse the argument and say it was not atomic, but napalm? Then how did the towers pulverise to dust? Are you suggesting Judy Wood’s directed energy? It was how Jim says it. The towers were nuked on 911.

      3. BillAu……I have no idea where the napalm idea came from. I did not mention it and do not remember it being mentioned on the Raw Deal…but it is possible I missed it. My purpose in that comment was to bring attention to an alternative possibility in regard to nukes. That idea has been kicked around for many years on various sites, not the least of which is Crrow 777. I am not ready to dismiss nukes, since I still believe that is what brought the towers down …not DEW and certainly not thermite or thermate….both of which are incendiaries and not explosives as far as I know. …and not kerosene (which would mean all kerosene heaters would be a pile of melted metal). If anyone knows of another power that can turn steel to dust and melt granite, I would be highly interested in hearing about it.

        But, I keep my mind open to all possibilities until proven otherwise.

        I do the same for flat earth and until I see a REAL picture of a globe earth from one of the myriad satellites or even the Hubble telescope in orbit, I will continue to support that theory.

  5. Dear Will,

    Check Rudolf Steiner Archives online
    for English texts at Books online texts
    GA002 Chapter 4 (conflict)
    GA004 Chapter 4 (naive Realist and contradiction).

    PS: I am only reflecting on the first of the four. So don’t unnecessarily complicate, please! The first is already complicated enough!

    Contradiction in formal logic usually refers to the relationship of two judgments, but
    in GA004 text refers to perceptions (Wahrnehmungen).

  6. Dear Will,

    Check Rudolf Steiner Archives online
    for English texts at Books online texts
    GA002 Chapter 4 (conflict)
    GA004 Chapter 4 (naive Realist and contradiction).

    Contradiction in formal logic usually refers to the relationship of two judgments, but
    in GA004 text refers to perceptions (Wahrnehmungen).

  7. How does first step “puzzlement – does not fit in” relate to conflict and contradiction?

    “Does not fit in” – what does “fit” mean?

      1. Dr. ……In regard to the Four Stages of Scientific Reasoning…..Item (3)…’would confer the higher PROBABLY upon the available…
        …Should that not read ‘probability’?

      2. I re-read those four stages a few times in an attempt to understand Peter’s inquiry…….which I can still say I do not fully understand.

      3. Will, I fixed the slide. The point is that an hypothesis that, if it were true, would confer a higher probability on the available evidence is preferable to its alternatives; and, when the evidence has “settled down” and points in the same direction, is acceptable as true in the tentative and fallible fashion of science. The reference I cite, “Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories’: 9/11 and JFK”, can be downloaded here:

      4. Thanks for that info, Dr….I’ll check out that pdf. BUT, my consternation is more with Peter’s “does not fit in” relate to conflict and contradiction?” than your Four Stages of Scientific reasoning….and his German phrases (the first of which Google translates as ‘Everyone is aware that his thinking in conflict with reality

        is kindled’, as interesting as they may be, are just adding to the confusion.

      5. Yet again, my pointer went wild and posted that comment before I was done.
        Just to add, I will read that pdf to see if it clears up anything…and thank you for correcting that typo.

      6. Thanks, Jim. I’m working on this.
        Here’s a little German to keep yours from getting rusty:

        Jedermann ist sich dessen bewusst, dass
        sein Denken
        im Konflikt mit der Wirklichkeit
        angefacht wird.

        R. St. 1886/1924 Kap. 4
        Feststellung des Begriffs der Erfahrung

        Er [der naive Mensch] hält
        diesem Glauben

        andere Wahrnehmungen


        R. St. 1894/1918 2. rev. Auflage
        Kap. 4 Die Welt als Wahrnehmung

Leave a Reply