A LITTLE DIFFERENT HYPOTHESIS
by James Hufferd, Ph.D.
Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization
The greatest enemy of freedom from unrepresentative government and the ability to govern ourselves as a nation and other nations to govern themselves, is untrue information. I am almost certain that we have the Constitutional system in place right now to facilitate free expression and attainment through the government and its forbearance of exactly what the majority of the people want.
The problem is with the new definition of truth that is operating in this country. We say, “truth is always what the complete, unfettered evidence will indicate and prove.” Our stubborn and willful opponents in government now think of us and refer to us derisively and dismissively as “the evidence-based community”, an out-of-step minority. And, so far, they have won the argument. Why?
I submit that (most) people don’t recognize or pay attention or show interest in the convincing scientific proofs and common sense logical arguments supporting our contention that Muslim terrorists didn’t perpetrate and carry out 9/11 and its destruction and mass-homicide, as our government said. And that, instead, necessarily, insiders known to the highest echelons of our government did that. Because, most people just don’t and won’t think, period.
With all the deference in the world to Dr. Griffin and the great new film, I don’t think “nationalist faith” is the main problem. Sure, for many baby boomers and a relative minority of highly-ethical and community-minded others, it probably does play a large role. But, I don’t see the rest of the vast nation feeling that good about ourselves now.
Likewise, it’s often said that people are just too filled with fear, too terrified of terrorists attacking them to let up on the gas when it comes to blaming the perceptively awful Hun/savages (who we this time see as “Muslims”) and want to swat or slaughter them all. Yet, I haven’t talked to anyone in a long time who expressed fear of any foreign terrorists invading. Have you? I submit that that line of reasoning, at least at present, is another media/government construct, and doesn’t explain our problem getting through.
No, I think the main reason the opposition to and impatience with our message seems to be hardening now is, instead, an aspect of tribalism. (And, quite possibly, most of you won’t buy what I’m saying here because of it!) This is what I’ve found: People, by and large, don’t actually think. They (not wrongly) find the world just too bewildering and complex to even begin to figure out. So, instead, they simply take their cues and adopt their views from their perceived tribal leaders – adopting in this case the ready-made narrative referred back to every day, unanimously, by the news gurus of their choice and the spokespersons for every shade of orientation in the government, who all lip-sync exactly the same message (with slightly varying emphases) on the subject of 9/11.That’s an impressive lineup of supposedly-informed tribal leadership for a humble person here and another one over there to buck!
So, why do journalists, who are supposed to be truth-seekers and ferret out the real story, so consistently go along with this? Well, first, roughly half of their employers (news outlets) get the bulk of their news via a wire service called the Associated Press – which is reported to be majority-owned by the holdings of a single family whose name is something like Rockshells. The other half or so are fed by a different wire service, Reuters, owned largely by Rockshell family holdings also. As stated on good authority in an earlier posting here, upwards of $6 trillion (from a cash-flow not to be endangered) has been filtered upward from the humble folk to enterprises actively lubricating and operationalizing the Rockshells’ sociopathic wet dreams from financing wars and home-front operations in response to 9/11 since 2001. (Which is precisely why, by the way, you and I find ourselves in the financial mess we are currently in). And the Rockshells’ dream now coming to pass, I am fairly convinced, is of government conducted either openly or covertly by a worldwide Dick Cheney-style unitary executive.
And completely accordingly, the news organizations invariably weigh heavily on the individual journalists not to wander off on their own in search of stories. (And, at this late date, the journalists and analysts are so heavily invested in the preposterous official story that they could probably never remove the thick coating of omelet from their faces if they reversed themselves now. How could they ever face their incredulous fellows and their bosses like that? Such must be their thinking when tempted to interpret the evidence!
And, as for the individual “news” (or just daily culture) consumer – who wants to be labeled a “delusional, irrelevant, unpatriotic nut-job?”
Hang tough! We have our work cut out for us! If we can only get it to court…
JH / Sept. 21, 2011