WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

By James Hufferd, Ph.D.

Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization

     The biggest, most-significant gridlock in America is not that in Congress, or between the Obama White House and Congress, but between the powers-that-be and the truth. Truth is verboten. No truth whatsoever is permitted either in the halls of Congress, nor in the administration, nor in the major or 99+% of the minor news or information outlets nor the courts nor published books, or periodicals, nor, in so far as possible, the private market of thoughts. It is the ultimate banned substance, vying with courage these days for rarity. For, once it (truth) is let in, and the mere possibility of its relevance acknowledged, even a smidgen, well, who knows what mischief, what unraveling, would follow? The whole universe could come down!  No! The Story As Told must be accepted, 100%! Otherwise, we’re finished!  It’s chaos!

     My proudest recruit to the 911 Truth cause to date is a splendid practicing neurologist, a gentleman and solid citizen and the nominee of one of the two major parties for Congress in my district a couple of cycles ago. In fact, I’m convinced he would have won handily, despite the money, but for his lack of name recognition at the time. I was convinced he was a good man, and he subsequently has proven it. He has to somehow get past his objecting life partner to come to our monthly meetings and other events, but, attend and contribute he often does.

     A couple of days ago, I received an email from him, stating he had submitted a letter to the editor of a sizable metropolitan daily in the area, in response to an article urging readers to solemnly observe the upcoming tenth anniversary of 9/11 as a major benchmark  of change in American life and culture.  My friend and staunch fellow Truther ( and far more of a solid member of the community than I) submitted a reply noting that the vaunted American system had failed to properly investigate and prosecute the crimes, resulting in misappropriation of the blame, two tragic and bloody wars, and the curtailment of our Constitutional rights.

     He shared with me that the opinion page editor – who he swears is “a nice guy” – contacted him offering to publish the letter if he would re-submit removing the reference to the government and media lying and covering up – likening that reference to the flap over Obama's’s birth certificate.

     After receiving this information, I took the liberty of emailing the editor of the opinion page, asking him how he could justify denying especially someone of the known integrity and depth of my friend a voice on this all-important issue, especially given that polls have shown that over 40% of the American public tends to doubt that the government is telling the truth about 9/11. I asked him if he could come anywhere close to matching the scientific qualifications of my friend to render a meaningful judgment, and how he could justify dismissing and silencing such a highly-respected person as, allegedly, a fringe thinker.  My friend told me my email would “just piss him off”. And that may be what happened, because I haven’t heard anything back.

     The question that lingers in my mind about this episode is, “what ready-made conclusions and what thought processes caused that opinion page editor to respond to my friend, someone whom he clearly knew, in the manner that he did?” Relatedly, why would someone in as responsible a position as the opinion page editor of a sizable newspaper – no doubt both a newsman and a person of some intellect – steadfastly refuse to consider any actual facts or evidence pertaining to the central event of our time? Was it really because he thought he had every reason to believe that someone of the stature of my Truther friend would submit and harbor an absolutely preposterous judgment regarding something he had clearly studied enough to form a judgment about? That doesn’t seem likely.

     Instead, I think the answer – in this case, and in numerous analogous cases of steadfast refusal to consider on the part of perfectly sane and intelligent people you have encountered as well, is that they simply refuse to own the consequences if we are correct.

     Many people refuse to let register in their minds the consequences of someone being murdered or tortured or verbally or physically assaulted in their presence for the same reason – because anybody admitting to be in the presence of such an act automatically has heavy responsibilities that they will not shoulder. Hence, they check out mentally.

     That, my friends, is where we are in America. All of the cover-up and disinformation that we continue to encounter daily only abets, only blesses the process. It’s a stupendous but classic case of co-dependency.

     And so, we continue to beat our heads against the solid wall – a wall more solid than the Berlin Wall or the Great Wall of China or the Iron Curtain or Hadrian’s Wall ever were.  We keep thinking, “if we can just make a break-through”. Let us guard lest the “break-through” we make is in our own head!

     And, what is our best chance? In my opinion, it’s that one faction of the psychopathic/ sociopathic mass-murderous insiders or mass obstructers of justice will eventually “rat out” another faction and all the linkages and the story will come pouring out. We already have seen some glimmers of that. Let us be strong and  ready to insist on justice!

     Happy 9/11, everybody! And, thanks a million for taking responsibility!

JH: 9/05/2011