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.

Tuesday, May 29, 2012



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

x          x          x

     What should be our tone when addressing the unsuspecting or spineless world with the truth we know from evidence? Language doesn’t matter, and facts are facts by any other name, right? Wrong. Language used expresses not only facts (and even better, non-facts), but is itself factual. In a world of intense human dispute, words are actions. Let us, then, take every precaution not to misspeak.

     “What, then, is 911 Truth about?” you will be asked. “Does it have to do with the 9/11 attacks?”

     Not if you give a damn, it doesn’t. The construction “9/11 attacks” could, philologically, designate a hit from any quarter. But, in practice, that phrase has been appropriated long since as shorthand for “attacks by foreign terrorists”. The phrase is emotive. It’s sort of a rallying cry, requiring no further explanation, against designated foreign S.O.B.s. And since we are privileged to know, from the evidence, that no foreign S.O.B.s were actually responsible for the cataclysm that befell this nation on 9/11, deliberately compounded by nonstop serial cataclysms following permitted by it and perpetrated both here and abroad ever since, our continued use of the term “9/11 attacks”, to refer to the original, main, catalyst set of cataclysms on that date, is wrong. Our continuing to so refer can only work counterproductively against our stated intended purpose of exposing the enormous lie and defusing its mega-force long train of aftershock-like horrors.

     So, if “attacks” is out, as far as truthspeak goes, what designator is in? Some suggest “events” – the “events of 9/11”, because that is neutral ground. Which might be fine if you want to remain neutral. (See “neut” in your standard dictionary.) If you want to be more accurate and effective, though, I suggest you adopt the phrase “crimes of 9/11” to designate those particular events. Why is “crimes” a better word for us to employ, consistently, than the not-unacceptable, but rather neutered word, “events”?

     Because “events” happen – more like “acts of god”. “Crimes”, on the other hand, are intentionally committed. They’re inescapably prosecutable. They are unacceptable and they demand expiation. The unconscionable, heinous, murderous and, indeed, treasonous acts of 9/11 are like that. Furthermore, referring to the “crimes of 9/11” knocks people back on their heels a bit – which it should. There’s no escaping what we mean if we use the term “crimes”. That the designation “9/11” itself carries a wallop is indisputable, the choice of that date – an echoing of earlier atrocities to boot – for committing the gross crimes associated and making them look to sheep and lackeys like “attacks” was part of the élite perps’ limited span of genius, manifestly intended to invoke a powerful response. And we want to reverse that reaction and employ it against the genuine perpetrators. Thus, we hurl the defiant word (in this case) “crimes” up against the criminals – the élite bandits of our lives and world – invoking the truth residing more than adequately in the abundant courtroom-ready evidence against the dazzling webs of myth and the befuddlers, as should have been done, as with any common crime committed, from the very start.

     Justice is served in our land by the powerful legal apparatus defined and mandated by our Constitution. And yet, in this mother of all test cases (9/11) justice has not been in any wise served. To say that the deception depicted as proper (sic) “payback”, in gangland fashion, when Usama bin Laden was purportedly murdered in 2011 was “justice for 9/11”, especially when there is no prosecutable or credible evidence of his guilt or involvement, was injustice six ways from Sunday. No more so than torturing Khalid Sheik Muhammad into agreeing that he shot Lincoln would have been.  Let the world know the cut of what the world-beating élite calls evidence and justice! Meanwhile, the crimes are still open to the operation of justice by the justice system we all trusted growing up. Justice is sometimes a long time coming. But don’t stop believing in it when crimes have been committed – no matter how smugly.

     Other words matter, too. Don’t call the real perpetrators “terrorists” or the “real terrorists”. Technically, they are terrorists. But, that word has been appropriated long, long since to refer to the 19 patsies designated, set up, and made to look to the inattentive multitudes like they did it. No, use the word “perpetrators” or “the planners” or “those who carried out the crimes”, so as not to confuse or invoke the long-since indelible false images purposely conveyed by the phrase “9/11 terrorists”.

     Be careful and don’t play their game. Make it about them (the perpetrators), and not about squalid, play-acting shills incapable of much else. Lackey shills and patsies who survived the day of the devastating crimes, because they were pulled out or kept out of the devious black op action, for which the world has paid far too much.

     Time now to clearly bring forth the facts. As with one clear voice.

jlh: 5/29/12

Thursday, May 17, 2012


Pros and Cons of Being a 911 Truth Activist

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


     Most activists, one supposes, are impatient by nature, but time-adaptable. The reason they (we) are activists is that they (we) are not satisfied with things as they already are and want to correct the shortcomings and glitches in reality that propel them (us) to activism. We are, most of us here, up the wall unable or unwilling to accommodate ourselves to the 9/11 crimes against humanity and every person and nation remaining not only unsolved, but with no serious attempt ever having been or being made to resolve and exact atonement for them on the part of any of our civil authorities – damn the Constitutional guarantees of due process that we were schooled to expect, take special pride in, and justifiably rely upon.

     And compounding the already much more than sufficient gravamen of our disquiet, we are, most all of us, white-hot perturbed and ceaselessly angered by the steadfastly-maintained web of patent lies and scientifically absurd cover stories and the accompanying incredible psych job that have so effectively lulled and pacified most of the domestic public, turning even most of the smartest, avowedly vigilant into (perhaps cowering or calculating, but certainly complicit) non-activists re both 9/11 and its procedural neglect.  We can count even the usually forge-ahead-regardless ACLU among the AWOL. The official cover story and lies have effectively solicited the vast majority’s silence and compliance even as our mounting trillions in tax dollars and good name have been trashed in fomenting mayhem in the Middle East and a militarized emergent police state at home. And this while the legitimate purposes of government at home as an organizer, arbiter, and abettor of civil society have effectively gone to hell.

     O.K. So, we’re activists about 9/11 to try to rally public support for imposing justice on enormous catalytic crimes that have been used to subvert and defeat the promise and good intent of our world. Accordingly, being justifiably convinced of what we are convinced of, we can all agree we have to do something.

     Since a simple phone call or letter to an authority to start the ball rolling have been more than amply proven in this case to lead nowhere, ever, for any of us, our next logical step is to pick up allies and increase our numbers, by education efforts aimed at our fellow citizens where necessary, to gain numeric and awareness power for effectively exercising our Constitutional right to petition for redress of our grievances.  And, certainly, the steadfast refusal of all Constitutionally-based civil authorities facing us as a mute and immutable stone wall to establish our safety by pursuing the Constitutional mandate of due process in a matter as grievous and consequential as 9/11, is the grievance of grievances of our time, meriting the rapt attention and continual activism of all of us who give a damn.  And no other logical or reasonable inference can be drawn.

     And so, we are right to be activists. More than right, and we should, seeing past our differences, do all that we can, together and separately, rallying in groups to do whatever we cannot do alone, to bring widespread awareness and always nonviolent force to our common endeavor of bringing justice to the still-ongoing crimes of 9/11 and their cover-up.

     But, at what cost? Well, if we choose to be more active, more responsible, as opposed to less, it’s going to claim more of our attention and time. That’s going to expose us to more of the very real public and social consequences, such as possible scorn and ostracism, job loss, severance or straining of relationships we cherish with those who find it immoral, wearying, and even psychologically questionable or objectionable not to just “go along”, but to fight. Probing 9/11 is challenging and exhilarating. It’s a non-stop battle, and it can also lead to new friendships and greater understanding of all that surrounds us. But it is also a wearing and frustrating occupation, testing our resolve. The attributes it calls for are persistence (above all), caring, patience with others, uncompromising honesty and fairness, uncompromised logical thinking, and a measure of selflessness, to let others, their discoveries, and their ideas also receive their due. We all need the capability to encourage, recognize, learn from, and support one another on our common journey. In other words, we are all called upon to be our best selves and an inspiration outward.  That’s what the world needs now. Our route to it, by perseverance, is clear. We need to turn the nation’s thought, as was done to end the Vietnam War. And then, we will win.

Jlh / 5/17

Thursday, May 3, 2012


The Non-Monopoly on Truth


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


     The basic nature of 911 (or 9-11, or 9/11) Truth is that none of its claims have been definitively proven, except for one – that the official story or stories of 9/11 are false. If we had tied up what we “know” (or “knew”) leaving out, of course, what were deemed merely scraps of innuendo and baseless trash) five years ago and put a pretty ribbon on it as our movement’s “consensus position”, what would we think of that once new and appealing package by now, its contents somewhat withered and most starting to smell a bit off-putting or at least moldy?

     It seems to me that 911 Truth, or whatever the proper tweakage of the name may be, cannot properly be dubbed a unified “school of thought” at all. Instead, it has always been, and must always be in order to remain alive – a movement – and ultimately productive, a rebellion against authority.

     Stating an opinion, even a wise opinion, that this or that idea or term doesn’t belong, or is mistaken, or not well-founded, is fine and can be enormously helpful. But trying to impose or require or punish miscreants or even bully, is to atempt to impose a new authoritarianism in place of the original “you’re either with us or…” else of the government/corporate establishment we rebelled against in the first place.  But, what about infiltrators (which some see everywhere)?  We’ll beat them ultimately with the truth – with science and logic and unrelenting integrity always. And the truth will out.

     “But, what about the American Revolution?” you might ask. “That was a rebellion, but it still mounted an army and organized a government.” Yes, but it also guaranteed free speech and freedom from authoritarian bullying.

     A bit more-inclusive version of the Toronto Hearings or what could be dubbed “9/11 Congresses” and held in different locations annually, wide-open to all, with sessions and talks on every side and proper debates, could be our own more-open version of a Continental Congress, with a bit more of the flavor of a festival or fair. Not unorganized, but inviting and accommodating and informing all. And maybe such a yearly staged rendezvous could even generate considerably more coverage (say C-Span) than I’ve seen from any of our hugely informative but decidedly more academic conclaves.

     To depict our situation in naturalistic terms -- Instead of being a well-cultivated and well-watered field in proper rows, we exist at present in more of a desert environment, with our relatively-thriving desert cedars and poplars, yes, but probably better characterized by our mesquites, yuccas, and wild sages. All members of this rarefied community stretch our myriad roots far by necessity in common search of the limited sustenance and moisture we are accorded within a hostile and in many ways poisoned environment.  Some of our deep-reaching tendrils yield goodly fruit to our quest and some end in alkali and brine. And sometimes only time and follow-up finds in the future can sort out which are ultimately which.

     Indeed, as we Truthers ourselves loudly proclaim, no one group or source can rightly claim a monopoly on the truth. All of us seek the truth. We all vehemently deny that our government/media has provided it. But, none among us has the whole truth, not even a select umbrella group that “scientifically” admits some and refuses others as too marginal or too “controversial” (as though Galileo wasn’t!) , under the watchful eye of the very highest of the high.  Some not admitted by those will surely be vindicated – just as some acceptable today by whatever council of consensus wouldn’t have been before, or would be by a differently-chosen or -constructed council.

     In fact, any grouping among us can claim, if they so wish, to represent the “position” or “positions” of the movement. But, to reiterate, except when it comes to rejecting the official story as having been proven false on scientific and irrefutable logical grounds, those whose 9/11-related findings fall outside the exclusive umbrella(s) need and deserve to make their voices heard just as boldly and loudly alongside those of the good cabal(s) that inevitably arise to select and set forth the creed and canon of 911 Truth orthodoxy to an eagerly-awaiting world.

Jlh / 5/3/12