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.

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Are We Being Had... (again)?

Are We Being Had… (again)?

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


This is my considered assessment a little in advance of the imminent thirteenth anniversary of the unofficial initiation of the continuing horrid saga highlighted to date by the notorious state crimes actualized on September 11, 2001.

The question I’m posing in “celebration”, in light of current “event” sequences, is: Are We Being Hosed, or Had? And my own answer is: Yes, almost certainly.

I have repeated too many times to mention the refrain that all of our so-called “news” – not just all of our international news, not just all of our domestic “news”, not just some of our “news”, but ALL of our “news” is totally manufactured to suit the precise specifications of the “state” (“state” referring in this case specifically to the “New World Order” and, more precisely, the miniscule, totally psychopathic elite tightly perennially and all-but-imperceptibly directing that complex of complexes).

The “news” the “state” wants for the purpose of selling its long-term agenda and mollifying its controlled masses it will create as it goes along. And what is consequently the proportion of the relationship of the wholly-manufactured so-called “news” to the unbiased truth of what is actually happening in the world? It is essentially the same as the ratio between the pork in pork and beans and a cow.

To illustrate: Based on historical precedence primarily, and also on the superbly-informed alternative reportage of Dr. Michel Chossudovsky in his article I posted on this web site back on July 3, ISIS and the “Islamic Caliphate project” are extremely likely to be (just like al-Qaeda is now widely known to be) nothing more than tremendously hyped creations of the CIA and other western intelligence services. In the article I referred to, Chossudovsky informs of credible reports that the leaders of ISIS (or “ISIL”) were recruited from the more unhinged proto-Muslim fanatic elements out there and trained in the Jordanian desert in 2013 as clandestine “foot-soldiers of the western military alliance” to forward the western and Israeli goal of dismemberment of Iraq, respond to the desire for a continued and heightened role for private sector paramilitary forces, and provide renewed justification for projected “counter-terrorism operations”.

So, do all of the heinously murderous and generally na├»ve now comprising a reported great surge internationally of common recruits know of the western sponsorship of their cartoonishly loathsome “pro-Muslim” (disastrous for Islam) units of mayhem? Of course not. Does western (including U.S.) intel order beheadings of westerners, or of anybody? Not specifically – unless it would somehow serve them. But, a beheading like that of an American photojournalist last week automatically when widely-reported becomes a core of revulsion and sparks fear that ISIS, unlike al-Qaeda, our now more-visible sometimes ally, will soon pull something equally atrocious, or a 9/11, on a mass scale here.

No need for them to actually do it! It only needs to be made to look like they did to mobilize in convenient abject cowardice the vast majority of the population – something we in the budding (but never flourishing) 9/11 Truth Movement have warned they could pull on us again ever since 2001.

And now, if it happens, we must believe our own warnings and proclaim and report what the lockstep media doubtless never will.

Would our leaders, or who controls them, really do themselves or condone the despicable sorts of things ISIS is reported to have done? And would their (supposedly, our) media likewise denounce horrific western killings that are equally wicked and ugly? For the clear answer, read the other article that I posted on the web site today, by Gary Leech. Have any of you heard that unfathomably evil act and unknown numbers of others like it denounced on the nightly news or seen it/them splashed in red, bold headlines across daily newspapers from here to Trafalgar? No? Were such acts as these in some way less evil or did they leave their victims any less dead, defiled, or mourned by surviving relatives, if any? Were any of them actually ordered by the CIA? Probably not. But their equal counterparts selectively screamed siren-loud, emphatically: yes.

The headlines out of Ferguson likewise screamed: “Riots and Violence by Angry Demonstrators”; but the stories scarcely mentioned the crowds of peaceful protesters cowed by huge war machines and drenched on American soil into submission with tear gas, a horrific agent banned from use on foreign battlefields because it’s so withering and unsusceptible of countering or defending against. Okayed for use domestically against American citizens, but never fully reported.

Latest evidence again points at U.S. or, perhaps more likely, its ally, the military of the CIA-prompted gang that illegitimately displaced the elected government of Ukraine, having shot down the commercial airliner the U.S.-led west blamed hysterically on Russia. And, in apparent desperation, the U.S. administration last week ordered a Russian humanitarian aid convoy to leave the eastern part of Ukraine or face “serious consequences” – as if either eventuality was likely to happen.

And Gaza – don’t get me started!

So, do I suspect that ISIS is the real threat to our and world safety and continued existence, or more-of-same? More-of-same. Let us not be had ever again!

JH: 8/24/14

Gary Leech - It's a Matter of Reportage vs. Non-Reportage

Are We Not Savages Too? The Beheading of James Foley By Gary Leech August 23, 2014 "ICH" - "Counterpunch" - - Without question, the beheading of US journalist James Foley was an inexcusable and savage act of violence by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The killing of non-combatants should always be condemned. But there is a clear discrepancy in the response of both the Western media and the general public with regard to the killing of Western civilians compared to Islamic civilians. The number of Western civilians killed by Islamic militants pales in comparison to the number of non-combatants that have died at the hands of the US and its military allies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen. And yet, the outrage at the killing of these innocent Muslims, many of who are women and children, is virtually non-existent in the West. According to several studies, more than 1,000 Afghan civilians were killed by the US military in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom. The number of non-combatants killed by coalition forces surpassed 3,000 by the end of the third year of the occupation. The killing of civilians by the US military continued thereafter with drone strikes accounting for most of the deaths in recent years. According to the UK-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, some 2,400 people were killed by US drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during the first five years of Barack Obama’s presidency. The study claims that as many as 951 of these deaths were civilians and that almost 200 of the victims were children. These numbers are corroborated by another study conducted by the Columbia Law School which reports that approximately 600 people were killed by US drone strikes in Pakistan in 2011. According to the report, as many as 155 of those killed were civilians. Together, these two reports suggest that 30 to 40 percent of people killed by US military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan are civilians. This percentage corresponds with that reported in a study headed by public health expert Amy Hagopian of the University of Washington. Hagopian’s comprehensive study of civilian deaths during the US invasion and occupation of Iraq (2003-2011) reveals that Baghdad was at the epicenter of the violence for much of that period and that 35 percent of those killed in that city by US coalition forces were civilians. Some may argue that civilian deaths are inevitable in a war and that militants, not civilians, are the intended target of US operations. In accordance with such arguments we use terms such as “collateral damage” to eradicate the human factor and to justify the deaths of these innocents. But the rate of so-called collateral damage is extremely high if, as these studies suggest, 30 to 40 percent of those killed in US military operations over the past 13 years have been civilians. This means that when the US military plans an operation it can assume that approximately one out of every three people it kills will be a civilian. It is difficult to dismiss such a high rate of civilian deaths over such an extended period of time as merely accidental; clearly, military commanders are authorizing operations with the full knowledge that a significant number of civilians will be killed by US forces. President Obama addressed the issue of civilian casualties earlier this year when he stated that “we can take targeted strikes, understanding that anytime you take a military strike there are risks involved. What I’ve tried to do is to tighten the process so much and limit the risks of civilian casualties so much that we have the least fallout from those actions.” There are two troubling aspects to Obama’s statement. Firstly, the “risks involved” are not borne by Americans, they are almost 100 percent assumed unwillingly by civilians on the ground when operations involve drone strikes or aerial bombing, which have constituted the majority of US operations in recent years. And secondly, Obama’s use of the word “fallout” suggests that his primary motivation for reducing the number of innocents killed is the avoidance of bad press that might result from military actions rather than saving human lives. But the conscious killing of civilians by the US military cannot always be easily dismissed with such Orwellian doublespeak as “collateral damage,” there have been many cases in Iraq and Afghanistan where there was no question regarding the intention of US troops to murder civilians. In his book, Black Hearts: One Platoon’s Descent into Madness in Iraq’s Triangle of Death, Jim Frederick describes the 2006 extrajudicial execution of an Iraqi family of four—a father, mother and two daughters. According to Army Specialist Paul Cortez, his unit was on patrol south of Baghdad when Army Specialist James Barker suggested that they find an Iraqi woman to rape. “We’ve all killed Hadjis, but I’ve been here twice and I still never fucked one of these bitches,” Barker stated. Having chosen their target, the soldiers entered the house and locked three members of the Janabis family in the bedroom with Private First Class Steven Green standing guard over them. Meanwhile, Cortez took the 14-year-old daughter Abeer into the living room and began raping her. According to Frederick’s account: In the bedroom, Green was losing control of his prisoners. The woman made a run for the door. Green shot her once in the back and she fell to the floor. The man became unhinged. Green turned his own AK on him and pulled the trigger. It jammed. Panicking, as the man advanced on him, Green switched to his shotgun. The first shot blasted the top of the man’s head off. Then Green turned to the little girl, who was running for a corner. This time the AK worked. He raised the rifle and shot Hadeel in the back of the head. She fell to the ground. … As Green was executing the family, Cortez finished raping Abeer and switched positions with Barker. Green came out of the bedroom and announced to Barker and Cortez, “They’re all dead. I killed them all.” Cortez held Abeer down and Green raped her. Then Cortez pushed a pillow over her face, still pinning her arms with his knees. Green grabbed the AK, pointed the gun at the pillow, and fired one shot, killing Abeer. There is a term that US presidents love to use in their efforts to assume the moral high ground in international affairs. Both George W. Bush and Barack Obama have used it repeatedly in reference to Iraq and Afghanistan. That term is “the civilized world.” It is used to portray us Westerners as sophisticated and “civilized” and Islamic militants as barbaric “savages.” As with the term collateral damage, it is used to appease our conscience with regard to the brutal acts of violence that we repeatedly inflict on innocent people. After all, if we represent the civilized world then we must stand for all that is good. And if we stand for all that is good, then any innocent women and children that die from our actions must merely be unfortunate victims of a tragic occurrence. While we may be comforted by such rhetoric and self-agrandization, I doubt our self-serving attitude provides much solace to a Pakistani mother who has watched her child get blown to pieces by a missile fired from one of our drones. Every form of colonialism throughout history has given birth to a violent resistance movement. And it should not be surprising that the current imperialist model in the form of capitalist globalization has also spurred a violent response. There were no extremist groups in Iraq before the US invasion. It was the US invasion and occupation that opened the door to al-Qaeda’s entry into Iraq as part of the broader insurgency that rose up to liberate the country from its foreign occupiers. And it was this insurgency that gave birth to ISIS. Therefore, it could be argued that our widespread killing of civilians in Iraq helped to create a fertile recruiting environment for extremist groups such as al-Qaeda and contributed to the emergence of ISIS. There is no question that the beheading of James Foley was a barbaric and savage act. But was Foley’s death any more barbaric and savage than the rape and killing of 14-year-old Abeer? Is it any more tragic than the deaths of the many other Iraqi and Afghan civilians who have been summarily executed by US troops? Is it any more heartbreaking than the killing of thousands of civilians in aerial bombardments ordered by US military commanders fully aware that the targeting of residential areas would result in the deaths of many innocents? The lack of graphic video footage of the killing of innocent people by our bombs and missiles does not make these deaths any less brutal or horrific. So while we must condemn the tragic and gruesome killing of James Foley, we also need to take a good look in the mirror and reflect on our own complicity in the slaughter of innocent civilians. Perhaps then we will realize that we are not so civilized after all. Gary Leech is an independent journalist and author of numerous books including Capitalism: A Structural Genocide (Zed Books, 2012); Beyond Bogota: Diary of a Drug War Journalist in Colombia (Beacon Press, 2009); and Crude Interventions: The United States Oil and the New World Disorder (Zed Books, 2006). ). He is also a lecturer in the Department of Political Science at Cape Breton University in Canada.

Wednesday, July 30, 2014


Due Process – What We’re Missing Most

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


The unavoidable, irrefutable evidence that unelected but nevertheless ubiquitous powers-that-be, the ranks of the NWO’s worldwide organization, have their all-controlling murderous, larcenous and toxic hands in everything now, upending and permeating all but the protected with stench and wilt, has reached all but a declining coddled and time-warped minority.

It’s as if you spill a quart of month-old rancid broth on your counter en route to the InSinkErator and try to blot it up with a paper towel, all but a last little remnant of which has gotten fouled and saturated and remains for a moment unaffected – dry. The sad part of the analogy is that the part that has already become soaked – that is affected and cannot be exorcised – falls apart. Only aberrant fibers of some kind (you and I) actually strengthen and grow more resistant. And we must hope against hope that there are at least a few more aberrant, resistant fibers waiting in the ever-shrinking still-clueless dry reserve to stand united with us and respond with resolve and acumen to the enslavers’ putrid brew!

Because one clarifying moment of realization, one view of the face of the monster, could undo for everyone in the population a thousand mornings of their fog-machine and distorting mirrors, and full realization of the deadly evil is coming.

What is the one great gift that America has had the ability to bestow, and now in its absence, we’re missing the most since 9/11/01?

It’s not shared and attainable abundance, even though recent statistics show that the average American household’s net worth is down by 35% since 2003. For way too many of us, the milk has soured and the honey has dried up in the bottle, and 35% of 0 is still 0.

It’s not bric-a-brac and bling: luxury automobiles are still present in our lives, at least in TV ads. And a great many trip over their accumulative electronic gadgetry and sports and celebrity memorabilia on the way to their beer, wine, or aspartame of choice cooler.

Porno fills many a screen, radar or otherwise, while induced longing zaps a trillion hearts and untold hours of productivity annually. Pills industries and crack and quack consultants vie with fuels, war-games, and Wall Street. No, American culture is alive and unwell.

So then, what was it that America, at least arguably, legitimately once possessed the world’s top reputation for, but is shockingly bereft of now? It’s the expectation of diligent resolution of crimes. Fact is, America’s wide-open society has always been a champion generator of criminality. While refusing to restrain or legally guide conduct (and reliably yelling bloody murder whenever the least restraint was imposed, that elsewhere in the world would be swallowed as a matter of course), our system could be counted on at least to diligently seek resolution in the name of justice institutionally after the fact. Law enforcement was rightly regarded as a major component of our national security alongside a rascally overpowering good guy military establishment to subdue malcontents overseas. In consequence, even the most seemingly obvious suspects were entitled to have their day in court. No longer. Now, the real perps are never seriously prosecuted, but more often promoted and lionized.

And, beginning with 9/11, our biggest perpetrated crime ever, the establishment’s prosecution was framed and aimed, instead of toward judge and jury after thorough investigation, directly to the court of public perception on TV, substituting innuendo, selective exhibits, cooked or planted “evidence”, and often false or bought witnesses and “expert” testimony, in place of scientifically-gathered pristine real forensics and witnesses carefully vetted for authenticity and objectivity.

And that new populist template, attempted and failed a generation earlier by Senator Joseph McCarthy and generated from scratch to launch some of America’s most profitable wars, has been used in a number of major recent instances (Boston Bombing, Sandy Hook, overthrow of Ukraine) and is now nonstop daily fare: our new “Guiding Light” and “Days of Our Lives”. And if you are a patsy or in their way, you are going down, guaranteed. No balm in Gilead any more. Justice (like truth) is now an out-of-step matter for the rest, we can’t even remember what it meant. The NWO has arrived faster than light.

To stop this overwhelming trend toward planned institutional collapse and societal implosion in its tracks, our legal archaeologists and architects need to unearth and strive to restore the part of the Constitution’s First Amendment, in our justly-vaunted Bill of Rights (adopted from the Magna Carta), that reads: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” and somehow make that operational and normal as it has never been before.

JH: 7/30/2014

Friday, July 18, 2014

The Impeded Pace of 9/11 Truth

The Impeded Pace of 9/11 Truth

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


It’s starting all over again with the plane shoot-down in Ukraine! Once again, the alarms are blaring loud and crazy! The much complained-of slow pace of 9/11 Truth, to begin with as slow as the progress of most any other variety of truth (that is, slow indeed) is slowed even further by the whole explosion of the establishment, government, and information industry proclaiming in concert, over and over and over from the start a message contrived to convince everyone of a parallel unsubstantiated message suiting their precise purposes. Don’t wait for the evidence. If it indicates otherwise (as it usually does), ignore it. Talk over it. In the case of the Malaysian plane in the Ukraine, we know who did it – Putin! An investigation on the ground is hardly necessary! And in general in these cases, if you, John Q., don’t want family trouble, marriage trouble, employment trouble, friend trouble – stay far away from any “outrageous conspiracy theories”! We’ll tell you what happened, who did it! You saw it on TV for yourself, in most cases (though not necessarily in this one). What could be simpler? The case of the mis-identified toxic gas deployers in Syria comes to mind, as well as 9/11 itself. But, in this case, it’s Putin! Putin! Putin! That sort of thing has started up again now, the alarms are clanging, the hounds are out – and I find myself overcome by a raging fever of searing, severe doubt.

What anyone who has paid attention to the bad nightly (not to be confused with the Daly) theatre masquerading as our national/international news these past dozen and more years with no more than normal human skepticism has eventually come to realize is that the government/corporate establishment’s chief behind-the-scenes spinners of its nightly stories, typically purvey identical tales on every highly-financed TV network and outlet, and must really not be all that imaginative. In most instances of mega-events and mass-scale tragedies of whatever sort, the major outlines of the story seem to be virtually unchanged from one to the next, most following the same scenario. And, whenever possible, the story as told over and over and over and over, a hundred or a thousand or a million times a day to the exclusion of practically all else, will have a designated villain who caused whatever it is, who is positively or at least emphatically identified in practically the first five minutes, and whose name is spat out from then on, over and over and over – Putin! Putin! And the pudding’s proof is never produced.

And now, they’re saying already that the evidence in the field has been “tampered with”! Hedging! Their message? Don’t trust the evidence! Right from the beginning, we are told that the Malaysian plane that went down in that contested eastern part of the Ukraine – still in the absence of physical evidence – was shot down either by actual Russian Federation troops in the area or by pro-Russian rebels using a Putin-provided Russian missile and Russian equipment, and possibly on Putin’s orders. (When I hear – as I have – an “unconfirmed report” of pro-Russian rebels hightailing it out of the area early yesterday towing a missile launcher, it reminds me of the “unconfirmed sighting” of Santa Claus and reindeer I saw announced, with imagery, on the news last December!)

But no, it couldn’t have been Ukrainian militants who downed the commercial jet, we’re told, because after all, why would they shoot down a foreign airliner over their own country? Duh! Well, why would the pro-Russian forces shoot down a foreign airliner? (And what was a Malaysian Airlines flight doing in a completely verboten piece of war zone sky over there anyway?) There’s really no need for a ground investigation, we’re told. Blame the Russians and their surrogates on the ground! It’s a slam-dunk that they either did it or caused it!

And how convenient of them to do so, just on the very day the U.S. administration trots out, to a universal chorus of disgusted jeers, new, harsher sanctions against the Russian Putintate after being unable to get them (or him) to rush in and try to annex a large new chunk of Ukrainian territory, which presumably would have been enough to provoke unified NATO action to oust this monster (who, by the way, doesn’t exactly play ball with the international central banking regimes and has threatened to replace the dollar as the acceptable medium of payment for his enormous reserves of natural gas going to the west).

So, how on earth might one possibly read the situation if not just as the government and its news lackeys have been spending every minute of every hour since the crash contending? Well, try this – I go back to the fate of this Malaysian Airlines jet’s unfortunate likewise U.S.-made sister craft that vanished from the skies back in March, and now seems more likely than not never to be located. In that case, there was rather firm (though, of course, not confirmed) evidence of a mysterious nonverbal signal transmitted from the grid coordinate position of the U.S. base on Diego Garcia in the midst of the Indian Ocean and claiming to come from the lost plane. Suggesting the likelihood that the flight had been diverted there by Global Hawk remote control, presumably to prevent a certain passenger from transferring a critical technological prototype he had with him in his possession. The sophisticated piece of hardware had been developed in China, the subsequent account went, and the authorities wanted it. Certainly, whatever the case, the grand coincidence of a second plane from that same miniscule fleet of U.S.-made commercial jets cannot be overlooked.

And who’s to say that this plane, likewise manufactured to conform to the plausibility of Global Hawk diversion, was not likewise diverted, this time to a position 33,000 feet over eastern Ukraine, where it became the target of a clandestine NATO ground unit? Such a unit, if it existed (and such seem to be secreted everywhere) could even have been equipped with the identifying Russian BUK missiles, positive identification of which will presumably be regarded as the “smoking gun” tying the notorious shoot-down to the Russians and Putin – who thereby could be transformed fully into a pariah ripe for the usual drill – removal.

So, is that what really happened? Sitting here in the very midst of the Fruited Plain, with no evidence as yet analyzed in any case, how on earth would I know? But, such would fit the known M.O. of the NWO – and, of course, to hell once again with all those who died. False Flag? It would fit, and so very conveniently just now! Only one thing seems fairly certain – we’ll probably never know.

My question? Who calls the shots in such cases? Answer: Somebody, for sure, who has full-time to devote to weaving and choreographing harebrained deceitful plots (that at least seem to work), and whose day job must be to do so.

UPDATE: late tonight, it’s reported that a transmission was intercepted from rebels in Ukraine informing President Putin they had just shot down a plane. By cell phone, I wonder?

JH: 7/18/14

Thursday, July 3, 2014


The Islamic State Caliphate Project and the “Global War on Terrorism” By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, July 02, 2014 Url of this article: The Al Qaeda legend and the threat of the “Outside Enemy” is sustained through extensive media and government propaganda. In the post 9/11 era, the terrorist threat from Al Qaeda constitutes the building block of US-NATO military doctrine. It justifies under a humanitarian mandate the conduct of “counter-terrorism operations” Worldwide. Known and documented, Al Qaeda affiliated entities have been used by US-NATO in numerous conflicts as “intelligence assets” since the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war. In Syria, the Al Nusrah and ISIS rebels are the foot-soldiers of the Western military alliance, which in turn oversees and controls the recruitment and training of paramilitary forces. While accusing several countries of harboring terrorists, America is a bona fide “State Sponsor of Terrorism”: The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) –which operates in both Syria and Iraq– is covertly supported and financed by America and its allies including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Moreover, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham’s Sunni caliphate project coincides with a longstanding US agenda to carve up both Iraq and Syria into three separate territories: A Sunni Islamist Caliphate, an Arab Shia Republic, and a Republic of Kurdistan. The US-led Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) constitutes the cornerstone of US military doctrine. “Going after Islamic terrorists” is part and parcel of non-conventional warfare. The underlying objective is to justify the conduct of counter terrorism operations Worldwide, which enables the US and its allies to intervene in the affairs of sovereign countries. Many progressive writers, including alternative media, while focusing on recent developments in Iraq, fail to understand the logic behind the “Global War on Terrorism.” The Islamic State of Iraq and Al Cham (ISIS) is often considered as an “independent entity” rather than an instrument of the Western military alliance. Moreover, many committed anti-war activists –who oppose the tenets of the US-NATO military agenda– will nonetheless endorse Washington’s counter-terrorism agenda directed against Al Qaeda: The Worldwide terrorist threat is “real”: “We are against the war, but we support the Global War on Terrorism”. The Caliphate Project and The US National Intelligence Council Report A new gush of propaganda has been set in motion. The leader of the now defunct Islamic State of Iraq and Al Cham (ISIS) Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has announced the creation of an Islamic State: Fighters loyal to the group’s proclaimed “Caliph Ibrahim ibn Awwad”, or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as he was known until Sunday’s July 1st announcement, are inspired by the Rashidun caliphate, which succeeded the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh century, and is revered by most Muslims.” (Daily Telegraph, June 30, 2014) In a bitter irony, the caliphate project as an instrument of propaganda has been on the drawing board of US intelligence for more than ten years. In December 2004, under the Bush Administration, The National Intelligence Council (NIC) predicted that in the year 2020 a New Caliphate extending from the Western Mediterranean to Central Asia and South East Asia would emerge, threatening Western democracy and Western values. The “findings” of the National Intelligence Council were published in a 123 declassified page report entitled “Mapping the Global Future”. “A New Caliphate provides an example of how a global movement fueled by radical religious identity politics could constitute a challenge to Western norms and values as the foundation of the global system” (emphasis added) The unclassified NIC 2004 report borders on ridicule, it is devoid of intelligence, let alone historical and geopolitical analysis. Its fake narrative nonetheless bears a canny resemblance to the June 29, 2014 announcement of the creation of the Islamic State Caliphate by ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The NIC report presents a so-called fictional scenario of a letter from a fictional grandson of Bin Ladin to a family relative in 2020″ It nonetheless intimates that the Caliphate constitutes a real danger for the Western World and Western civilization. Its ultimate objective is to demonize Muslims with a view to pursuing a military agenda: The fictional scenario portrayed below provides an example of how a global movement fueled by radical religious identity could emerge. Under this scenario, a new Caliphate is proclaimed and manages to advance a powerful counter ideology that has widespread appeal. It is depicted in the form of a hypothetical letter from a fictional grandson of Bin Ladin to a family relative in 2020. He recounts the struggles of the Caliph in trying to wrest control from traditional regimes and the conflict and confusion which ensue both within the Muslim world and outside between Muslims and the United States, Europe, Russia and China. While the Caliph’s success in mobilizing support varies, places far outside the Muslim core in the Middle East—in Africa and Asia—are convulsed as a result of his appeals. The scenario ends before the Caliph is able to establish both spiritual and temporal authority over a territory— which historically has been the case for previous Caliphates. At the end of the scenario, we identify lessons to be drawn.“Mapping the Global Future”. p. 83 page 90 of the report This “authoritative” NIC report was not only presented to the White House, the Congress and the Pentagon, it was also dispatched to America’s allies. The threat emanating from the Muslim World (including the caliphate project) is firmly entrenched in US-NATO military doctrine. The NIC document was intended to be read by top officials. Braodly speaking it is part of the “Top official”(TOPOFF) propaganda campaign which targets senior foreign policy and military decision-makers, not to mention those scholars and researchers who continue to believe that Al Qaeda “Made in America” is a threat to the security of the Western World. The underpinnings of the caliphate scenario is the “Clash of Civilizations”, which provides a justification in the eyes of public opinion for America to intervene Worldwide as part of a global counter terrorism agenda. In the words of Dick Cheney’s 2004 remarks pertaining to the NIC’s report: “They talk about wanting to re-establish what you could refer to as the Seventh Century Caliphate. This was the world as it was organized 1,200, 1,300 years, in effect, when Islam or Islamic people controlled everything from Portugal and Spain in the West; all through the Mediterranean to North Africa; all of North Africa; the Middle East; up into the Balkans; the Central Asian republics; the southern tip of Russia; a good swath of India; and on around to modern day Indonesia. In one sense from Bali and Jakarta on one end, to Madrid on the other.” Dick Cheney From a geopolitical standpoint, the caliphate constitutes an area in which the US is seeking to extend its economic and strategic influence. What Cheney is describing in today’s context is a broad region extending from the Mediterranean to Central Asia in which the US and its allies are directly involved in military and intelligence operations. The stated aim of the NIC report was “to prepare the next Bush administration for challenges that lie ahead by projecting current trends that may pose a threat to US interests”. “The Lessons Learnt” as outlined in this authoritative NIC document are as follows: the caliphate project “constitutes a serious challenge to the international order”. “The IT revolution is likely to amplify the clash between Western and Muslim worlds…” The document refers to the appeal of the caliphate to Muslims and concludes that: “the proclamation of the Caliphate would not lessen the likelihood of terrorism and in fomenting more conflict”. [sic] the caliphate “could fuel a new generation of terrorists intent on attacking those opposed to the caliphate, whether inside or outside the Muslim World.” The NIC’s analysis suggests that the proclamation of a caliphate will generate a new wave of terrorism emanating from Muslim countries thereby justifying an escalation in America’s Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). What it does not mention is that US intelligence in liaison with Britain’s MI6 and Israel’s Mossad are covertly involved in supporting the caliphate project. In turn, the media has embarked on a new wave of lies and fabrications, focusing on “a new terrorist threat” emanating from the Muslim World. Needless to say the links of the jihadist terror network to Western intelligence are never mentioned. Copyright © 2014 Global Research

Friday, June 27, 2014


Nagging Questions

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


Live questions swirl and fly around like sparks these days filling the air in the matter of 9/11 and its slowly-focusing proper New World Order context, which many of us are concluding the former was used to launch virtually fully-formed out of the nest in initially wobbly but precociously brave functioning Orwellian mode.

Question 1 - “New World Order” is generally taken now to mean global government by its handful of mostly-silent sociopathic fomenters. So, the question arises naturally: “What’s wrong per se with global government?” Wouldn’t it be better to have the world all consistently run on some positive practicable principle, like sheer efficiency, instead of having it chopped up into hundreds or thousands of quarreling, half-educated (if we’re that lucky) polliwog sovereignties with varying hodgepodges of notions of everything? I.e., a sleek, handsome and healthy beast in place of a pail full of sqirmy sand-crabs and worms and a couple of flopping fish?

The antidote to such dangerously seductive thinking, as highlighted most famously by now almost-centenarian David Rockefeller in his Memoirs, as well as others, is that humankind doesn’t function well in bondage. So, the same telling critique the plutocrats apply to explain the impracticality of communism works even better as a damning critique of their own NWO utopia.

In fact, I see the NWO, with its inescapable unnamed (as far as we know) board of trustees firmly and immovably ensconced at the very top as definitely a throwback to centuries earlier, and not in any way an advancement. It’s a systemic throwback to the closed society of the crowned heads of Europe, who at the end, extended their coordinated domination imperialistically to span virtually the entire globe.

And their downfall as a ruling handful was finally concluded by a collection of victories at arms, but even more by reason and science (collectively called “The Enlightenment”) that recognized all of Man as naturally sovereign, free and equal, irrespective of bloodline, and finally of property and wealth. With inalienable rights, the enjoyment of which can be guaranteed only by self-government, casting the crowned gods of the ancient firmament aside – something the family-girt godlike class very much active today with the advanced wealth to buy and manage the world themselves manipulating the shells of nations couldn’t abide. And so, through scheming and buying their way, they retook control, and here we are.

And, big surprise! Governments at the national level today are acting troupes, the plots they portray narrated and written on consignment by ad men backed by psychologists and purveyed by criers, with cheer squads and choruses cajoling between them and a vast audience still half-deluded into thinking the show is interactive.

So, what is wrong with world government as already practiced now? It makes mere devalued and expendable props and water-carriers of the human race and, increasingly as proof, when we fail to make way for them and theirs, we’re unceremoniously squashed. We can scarce control our own affairs at a global level.

Nagging Question 2 – “Was it nukes?” People like Donald Fox of Veterans Today say unequivocally that it was. Only nuclear bombs planted in the WTC would have had the power to pulverize masses of concrete and hurl massive steel beams massive distances, they say. And, though without naming sources that should know one way or the other, claim a pandemic of cancers in New York since on causes “consistent with” 9/11 nuclear exposure.

So, what do such nuke theorists say about nanothermite being found in abundance in the Ground Zero dust? Interestingly, Don Fox says, verbatim, “Nanothermite doesn’t exist” and, in effect, no form or amount of thermite of any kind packs the explosive power to collapse a doghouse. Don Fox admits to being no scientist; he mentions the work of an alleged physicist in Russia. Meanwhile, when questioned, he has the spleen to contend, as it were, Neils Harrit, Steve Jones, and the other respected and seasoned scientists who researched and authored the now well-known peer-reviewed paper that described and positively identified nanothermite in the dust and, accordingly, positively implicated it in the crimes (begging the question, what else could it have been there for?) were, plain and simple, all wet.

It’s as if police weapons experts find a gun and matching bullet-holes in the victim at a crime scene and conclude that the victim was shot, and Mr. Fox comes along and says a machete was used and there was no gun, and the gun found and pictured couldn’t have killed anybody and didn’t exist. Implying that the weapons experts are daft.

Fox is quick to add that he “strongly suspects” the Israelis did the crime because they were on the scene. And his surmise may well turn out right at least to one extent or another. But, if it’s a game of numbers, what about there being incomparably more Americans on the scene? Wouldn’t that make it just as likely that a lot of Americans must have been causally involved?

But assuming for a moment that he is right and it was an Israeli operation committed on American soil via nukes planted in the basements of the buildings, would the American administration knowingly allow the Israelis to plant and detonate nuclear bombs in Manhattan? (Turning it around, would an Israeli government knowingly allow American special forces to plant live nukes in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv?) What if it had turned, either immediately or eventually, into another Hiroshima? I believe there’s something wrong with this picture, especially as urged by a non-scientist completely rejecting the professionally- undisputed definitive findings of a team of highly-reputable scientists. Though reserving final judgment, I think I’ll keep my money on Harrit, Jones, and company.

And finally (for now), Question 3 – I’m nagged by the mystery of how the consistent, seldom deviating tactics of deception employed by the NWO operatives (CIA and NATO in particular, with a nod to the FBI, which now operate worldwide as well) seem to more-or-less work over and over again with the public, and especially with other parts of the establishment. As with al-Qaeda, a reputedly rogue demonic gang of infinite proportions and capacities, to say nothing of budget, long-employed in fact as patsies, clandestinely clothed and fed and deployed variously from Washington and maybe London, now there’s ISIS (or is it ISIL?) same idea, fresh persona, now with a-Q turning up as a quiet ally in some places, a foe in others, the I group’s m.o., now given away to alternative news readers as well by confirmable eye-witness reports of their U.S. special ops training in Jordan in 2013. Nothing new, folks! When will they ever learn, indeed? And now they’re being employed in Iraq apparently to fulfill Israel’s long-held dream of permanently dividing that poor, misbegotten realm into quarreling segments, and in Syria possibly to give the U.S. a pretext to intervene or invade after all.

Not so very far away, meanwhile, the CIA has quietly gone into Ukraine and fairly transparently bankrolled and engineered the overthrow of its way-too-friendly-to-cousin-Russia government on Russia’s doorstep, and well within its centuries-long recognized sphere of influence, to proceed with a western central bank cooperating encirclement of the eastern nuclear giant. The CIA op in Ukraine looked just like the other so-called “color revolutions” engineered in neighboring ex-member countries of the old Soviet Union in recent years. No differences in formula. And all with the same sleight of hand that continues to work with and even beyond the ra-ra! crowd.

As I’ve suggested before, there’s a 9/11-size hole in recent U.S. history (maybe a pre-planned “memory hole”?) into which 9/11 per se and serious attempts to narrate and explain it in any detail rationally have fallen beyond sight in the works of standard U.S. historians “covering” the era of which it remains the defining event. There’s the before and the after, but generally no serious accounting in any comparable depth of what took place on 9/11/01 or its context.

And why not? Because most Americans – and apparently most historians – prefer to leave that interval in our national life murky, to sustain the myth of the U.S. as the always-good GI with the heart of gold (or, alternatively, to spare another favored NWO primary puppet, Israel, from the feared existential wrath of the world). And because there’s simply no rational way to detail the myth we are told about 9/11. And most who doubt it are still too heartbreakingly shy to say so.

Just remember: Only the worthy can receive the truth.

JH: 6/27/14