Individuals willing to be contacted for information and/or leading groups of activists striving for truth around the crimes of 9-11-2001. To request your name be added to this list, or to change or remove your information, please utilize the Contact form linked at the righthand column.

Friday, June 24, 2016

Paul Craig Roberts - Brexit EU Vote Anti-U.S. Control

The Brexit vote. What does it mean?
Hopefully, a breakup of the EU and NATO and, thereby, the avoidance of World War III.

By Paul Craig Roberts

The EU and NATO are evil institutions. These two institutions are mechanisms created by Washington in order to destroy the sovereignty of European peoples. These two institutions give Washington control over the Western world and serve both as cover and enabler of Washington’s aggression. Without the EU and NATO, Washington could not force Europe and the UK into conflict with Russia, and Washington could not have destroyed seven Muslim countries in 15 years without being isolated as a hated war criminal government, no member of whom could have travelled abroad without being arrested and put on trial.

Clearly, the presstitute media lied about the polls in order to discourage the leave vote. But it did not work. The British people have always been the font of liberty. It was the historic achievements of the British that transformed law into a shield of the people from a weapon in the hands of the state and gave accountable government to the world. The British, or a majority of them, understood that the EU is a dictatorial governing mechanism in which power is in the hands of unaccountable people and in which law can easily be used as a weapon in the hands of unaccountable government.

Washington, in an effort to save its power over Europe, launched a campaign, willingly joined by presstitutes and the brainwashed left-wing, who flocked to the One Percent’s banner, that presented the effort to preserve British liberty and sovereignty as racism. This dishonest campaign shows beyond all doubt that Washington and its media whores have no regard whatsoever for liberty and the sovereignty of peoples. Washington regards every assertion of democratic rule as a barrier to its hegemony and demonizes every democratic impulse. Reformist leaders in Latin America are constantly overthrown by Washington, and Washington asserts that only Washington and its terrorist allies have the right to choose the government of Syria, just as Washington chose the government of Ukraine.

The British people, or a majority of them, gave Washington the bird. But the fight is not over. Perhaps it hasn’t really yet begun. Here is what the British can likely expect: The Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, Bank of Japan, and George Soros will conspire to attack the British pound, driving it down and terrorizing the British economy. We will see who is the strongest: the will of the British people or the will of the CIA, the One Percent, and the EU and neocon Nazis. The coming attack on the British economy is the reason that leave supporters such as Boris Johnson are mistaken in their belief that there is “no need for haste” in exiting the EU. The longer it takes for the British to escape from the authoritarian EU, the longer Washington and the EU can inflict punishment on the British people for voting to leave and the more time the presstitutes will have to convince the British people that their vote was a mistake. As the vote is nonbinding, a cowardly and cowed Parliament could reject the vote.

Cameron should step down immediately, not months from now in October. The new British government should tell the EU that the British people’s decision is implemented now, not in two years and that all political and legal relationships terminated as of the vote. Otherwise, in two years the British will be so beat down by punishments and propaganda that their vote will be overturned.

The British government should immediately announce the termination of its participation in Washington’s sanctions on Russia and hook its economy to the rising nations of Russia, China, India, and Iran. With this support, the British can survive the Washington led attack on their economy.

Friday, June 17, 2016

Activist Post - FBI ENTRAPMENT, ORLANDO

www.activistpost.com/2016/06/fbi-entrapment-fuels-terror-not-stops..

Of course, in FBI custody is when he would have been programmed. -JH

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

PUBLIC LOBOTOMY BY FEAR AND STEALTH

by James Hufferd, Ph.D.
Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization

\\///\\\//

The last vestiges of public deliberation and consideration are being sliced out of American governance, leaving the government Lincoln once fought to the death to preserve a broken, fading relic.

My last posting, two days ago, at www.911grassroots.org, bore the title, “Likeliest Explanation For Frequent Mass Assassinations”, in response particularly to the awful incident in Orlando, suggesting, with four links to a relevant video and articles, it was most likely, along with a spate of other such horrific domestic events over the past number of years, carried out by agents of the U.S. national security state to intensify fear and sanction renewed or continued U.S. militarism.

And I stand by that assessment, though I am neither an investigative reporter nor a forensic detective. Note, I didn’t say that such was positively proven, just most likely. Because, even though I am no scientist, properly speaking, I am capable of conducting the occasional thought experiment worth considering.

Like this one: Let’s say, hypothetically, that there are 900 known more-or-less youthful individuals scattered across all 50 states, whose height is in excess of 6’9”. Even allowing that quite a number of these might have no interest at all in basketball, wouldn’t it be astounding to learn that only 3 or 4 of these individuals took part in shooting hoops over the course of any given year, year after year after year? Wouldn’t you expect the number who shot hoops or played a bit of basketball, of these particular 900 individuals, to be more like several hundred, or at very least, several score individuals? I think that outcome would be far more reasonable. Don’t you agree?

Now, bear with me. Conservative pundit Hugh Hewitt, much in the know, stated yesterday on TV that the FBI knew of and was tracking some 900 Muslim individuals scattered across all 50 states considered susceptible to recruitment by and thought to be in touch with radical Middle Eastern groups like ISIS. Mr. Hewitt characterized that precise situation as a “malignancy that has to be confronted” – in other words, a powder keg next to the fire.

In accord with this thinking, which coincides with and defines the long-prevailing theory in this country, that American Muslim populations, including recent and non-recent immigrants, radicalized in whole or in part online by Islamic terrorist groups in the Middle East, are solely responsible for at least the vast majority of destabilizing domestic terrorist attacks within this country.

But, if that theory were true, and the presence of 900 or far more impressionable young Muslims hanging around in the U.S. like so much dry tinder susceptible to being ignited by malevolent mad imams at will, were really the source of the deadly attacks, wouldn’t there far more likely be at very least scores of such mass-casualty attacks in any given year, instead of just the 2 to 4 (thank heaven!) that do occur in any typical year? (Come to think of it, I hope the “national security” folks never think of that, lest we be in for a lot more!) And, toward what end? Futility and certain death? As for my theory (shared by slowly growing numbers), there is a clear motive, and there are lots of clear precedents, besides. So, spread the word!

Does my conclusion jibe with Donald Trump’s provocative statement in a speech yesterday, chiding President Obama for allegedly doing little to stop domestic terrorism or the ISIS (ISIL) menace, that “something else might be going on” (insinuating, according to clairvoyant media types that Obama secretly favors the terrorists)? The answer is no, unless Trump means that the secret settled policy of the U.S. government for at least the whole of this current president’s life has been to establish and support “enemy” terror groups (like Gladio after WW II, like al-Qaeda, and like ISIS, the truly Frankensteinian al-Qaeda on steroids), in order to carry out super-scary debaucheries and false-flag attacks – now right here at home.

Another thing that bothers me just as much or more is the probability of massive voter fraud carried out in several of the recent U.S. presidential primary elections under the nose of the Democratic National Committee. (See www.https://youtu.be/MoGeDGHmwJU).

In ancient times, when things really went haywire, people used to conclude in all seriousness that “the gods are angry and/or fighting”. Today, in the U.S. (and quite possibly elsewhere), we must remind ourselves constantly and to the point of maddening ourselves – that we are not made for the sport of those tiresome gods, or goddesses, placed over us. We can’t let our lives be easy pickin’s for their theft and aggrandizement more than ever. No way.

The people are the giant – once we get it together. And they tremble at our combined great power, animal cunning, even now – even as they plan and move to subdue us permanently, airbrush us out, lobotomize us, change us to eunuchs.

JH: 6/15/16

Sunday, June 12, 2016

Likeliest Explanation for Frequent Targeted Mass Assassinations

The Assassin - Derren Brown (MK-ULTRA Mind Control) - YouTube

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/06/12/orlando/

www.zengardner.com/5-reasons-question-official-story-orlando-shooting

http://www.globalresearch.ca/selected-articles-orlando-shootings-terrorism-or-false-flag/5530675

Saturday, June 11, 2016

This Is How It Works - All In Your Name

The US Is Preparing to Oust President Evo Morales
By Nil Nikandrov

June 11, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "SCF" - US intelligence agencies have ramped up their operations intended to remove Bolivian President Evo Morales from office. All options are on the table, including assassination. Barack Obama, who sees the weakening of Latin America’s “hostile bloc of populist states” as one of his administration’s foreign-policy victories, intends to buoy this success before stepping down.

Washington also feels under the gun in Bolivia because of China’s successful expansion in the country. Morales is steadily strengthening his financial, economic, trade, and military relationship with Beijing. Chinese businesses in La Paz are thriving – making investments and loans and taking part in projects to secure a key position for Bolivia in the modernization of the continent’s transportation industry. In the next 10 years, thanks to Bolivia’s plentiful gas reserves, that country will become the energy hub of South America. Evo Morales sees his country’s development as his top priority, and the Chinese, unlike the Americans, have always viewed Bolivia as an ally and partner in a relationship that eschews double standards.

The US embassy in La Paz has been without an ambassador since 2008. He was declared persona non grata because of his subversive activities. The interim chargé d’affaires is currently Peter Brennan, and pointed questions have been raised about what agency he truly works for. He was previously stationed in Pakistan, where “difficult decisions” had to be made about assassinations, but most of his career has been spent handling Latin American countries. In particular, Brennan was responsible for introducing the ZunZuneo service into Cuba (an illegal program dubbed the “Cuban Twitter”). USAID fronted this CIA program, under the innocent pretext of helping to inform Cubans about cultural and sporting events and other international news. Once ZunZuneo was in place, there were plans to use this program to mobilize the population in preparation for a “Cuban Spring”. When reading about Brennan one often encounters the phrase – “dark horse”. He is used to getting what he wants, at any cost, and his tight deadline in Bolivia (before the end of Obama’s presidency) is forcing Brennan to take great risks.

Previously, Brennan had “distinguished himself” during the run-up to the referendum on allowing President Evo Morales to run for reelection in 2019, as well as during the vote itself. To encourage “no” votes, the US embassy mobilized its entire propaganda machine, roused to action the NGOs under its control, and allocated considerable additional funds for the staging of protests. It is telling that many of those culminated in the burning of photographs of Morales wearing his presidential sash. A record-setting volley of dirt was fired at the president. Accusations of corruption were the most common, although Morales has always been open about his personal finances. It would have been hard to pin ownership of “$43 billion in offshore accounts” on him, as was done to Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro.

Brennan also has agreements in place with Washington about other operations to compromise the Bolivian president. An attack was launched by the CIA agent Carlos Valverde Bravo, a well-known TV journalist and former agent with Bolivia’s security services. In his Feb. 3 program he accused Morales’s former companion, Gabriela Zapata, the commercial manager of the Chinese company CAMC Engineering Co, of orchestrating shady business deals worth $500 million. Insinuations simultaneously began circulating on the Internet about the Bolivian president’s involvement in those, although Morales completely broke ties with Zapata back in 2007 and has spared no individual, regardless of name and rank, in his battle against corruption.

The “exposés” staged by the US embassy continued until the day of the referendum itself on Feb. 21, 2016. The “no” votes prevailed, despite the favorable trend that had been indicated in the voter polls. Morales accepted defeat with his Indian equanimity, but in his statements after the referendum he was clear that the US embassy had waged a hostile campaign.

The investigation into Gabriela Zapata revealed that she had capitalized on her previous relationship with Morales to further her career. She was offered a position with the Chinese company CAMC and took possession of a luxury home in an upscale neighborhood in La Paz, making a big show of her “closeness” to the Bolivian leader, although he played no role in any of this. This was the same reason she tried to initiate a business and personal relationship with the president’s chief of staff, Juan Ramón Quintana. He has categorically denied having ever met Zapata.

Gradually, all the CIA’s fabricated evidence disintegrated. Zapata is now testifying, and her lawyer has holed up abroad because his contacts with the Americans have been exposed. The American agent Valverde Bravo has fled to Argentina. Accusations against Morales are being hurled from there with renewed vigor. The attack continues. It’s all quite logical: a continually repeated lie is an effective weapon in this newest generation of information warfare. The latest example was the ouster of Dilma Rousseff, who was accused of corruption by officials whom her government had identified as corrupt!

The US military has been increasing its presence in Bolivia in recent months. For example, Colonel Felando Pierre Thigpen visited the department of Santa Cruz, where there are strong separatist leanings. Thigpen is known to be involved in a joint program between the Pentagon and CIA to recruit and train potential personnel for American intelligence. In commentary by Bolivian bloggers and in publications about Thigpen, it is noted that the colonel was dispatched to the country on the eve of events related to “the impending replacement of a government that has exhausted its potential, as well as the need to recruit alternative young personalities into the new leadership structure.” Some comments have indicated that Thigpen is overseeing the work of diplomats Peter Brennan and Erik Foronda, a media and press advisor at the US embassy.

The embassy responded by stating that Thigpen had arrived in Bolivia “at his own initiative”, but it is no secret that he was invited to “work with youth” by NGOs that coordinate their activities with the Americans: the Foundation for Leadership and Integral Development (FULIDEI), the Global Transformation Network (RTG), the Bolivian School of Heroes (EHB), and others. So Thigpen’s work is not being improvised, but is rather a direct challenge to Morales’s government. Domestically, the far-right party Christian Democratic Party provides him with political cover.

The US plans to destabilize Bolivia – which were provided to Evo Morales’s government by an unnamed friendly country – include a step-by-step chronogram of the actions plotted by the Americans. For example: “To spark hunger strikes and mass mobilizations and to stir up conflicts within universities, civil organizations, indigenous communities, and varied social circles, as well as within government institutions. To strike up acquaintances with both active-duty and retired military officers, with the goal of undercutting the government’s credibility within the armed forces. It is absolutely essential to train the military for a crisis scenario, so that in an atmosphere of growing social conflict they will lead an uprising against the regime and support the protests in order to ensure a peaceful transition to democracy.”

The program’s first fruits have been the emergence of social protests (recent marches by disabled citizens were staged at the suggestion of the American embassy), although Evo Morales’s administration has evinced more concern for the interests of Bolivians on a limited income than any other government in the history of Bolivia.

The scope of the operation to oust President Morales – financed and directed by US intelligence agencies – continues to expand. The Americans’ biggest adversary in Latin America has been sentenced to a fate of “neutralization”. Speaking out against Evo Morales, the radical opposition has openly alluded to the fact that it has been a long time since the region has seen a really newsworthy air crash involving a politician who was hostile to Washington...

Thursday, June 9, 2016

WHAT IS PATRIOTISM?

by James Hufferd, Ph.D.
Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization

%%%

Look at one’s reaction to 9/11 as a litmus test.

Here’s the proposition: Beyond “getting” the evidence, how you respond to 9/11 and follow-on events depends completely on what kind of patriot you are.

1. If you are a U.S. citizen, whether immigrant or native-born, who is blinded by the myth of America as the big country of open arms, always best-intentioned, successful, and subject to resentful attacks from wolves and fiends, you’re going to push away any suggestions portending otherwise.

2. If you’re a citizen who unquestioningly falls in line and gratefully follows the instructions of leaders as your civic duty in light of supreme sacrifices others have made, you will politely decline to hear of anything impeaching the integrity of the invested leaders.

3. If you view America’s course and mission, however waveringly carried out, in religious terms, as a centuries-long progression of light transforming a world of darkness, then 9/11 as a desperate evil attack fits the larger narrative. Enough said.

4. If you view people in general as simpering fools, unfit to live independently, who must be indoctrinated and manipulated though whatever strategies by their wiser and stronger betters, then 9/11 – however they did it – was probably purposefully orchestrated and a neat trick.

5. If you are narrowly focused on work and family or entertainment only, or have given up on anything good, or just never pay attention beyond anything but the neighbor’s dog in your yard or old movies, you’re unlikely to be aware of the meaning or any details of 9/11.

These are the states of mind bulking unmoved in front of all truth movements. The truth is often not that hard to grasp – unless you are disinclined to attempt to.

The percentages of the citizenry in each category (admittedly, crudely drawn and somewhat overlapping) could be about – 1. – 25%, 2. – 20%, 3. – 10%, 4. – 5%, 5. – 25%.

6. Those who “get it”, in general terms of “who did it”, “who actually didn’t commit the act(s)”, and the dire meaning of it all – whether moved to activism (rare) or just knowers and supportive, I would put at about 15%.

But, as I’ve taken pains to indicate here before, “the times they are a-changing”, the public – even those you’d least expect – are fed up and restive and will demand to know what is being withheld. And so, all bets are off, and these percentages should change dramatically as grassroots mass attempts at correction and reform are thwarted, mass suppression or no.

JH: 6/9/16