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.

Monday, December 23, 2013

Revised Bottom Line: American "Defense" Ruse Imperative

Revised Bottom Line: American “Defense” Ruse Imperative by James Hufferd, PhD Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization #-#-#-# What’s the biggest or key realization to keep in mind from 2013? For me, it’s that the extreme, desperate and all-but-air-tight cover-up of 9/11 by the whole government/corporate establishment is not primarily maintained to protect the individual perpetrators of the operation, planners or operatives – more or less foot-soldiers or mercenaries for the real power hurling devastatingly lightning-bolt lethal directives daily as its M.O., but rather to protect the precisely-calculated super-effectiveness of their rationale and excuse for mounting the endless cycle of war that sustains them and uniquely serves their multiple radically anti-social purposes. The incalculably deadly everywhere fractiousness that we – nearly all of us – don’t want, that we hate and dread, is what our vulnerable cultures are tricked and endlessly cajoled to permit, with the alternative being to succumb to “them”, the other, devious, subhuman, inhuman, un-American aliens, shown to be, quite obviously, over and over on TV, desperate to devilishly murder YOU. So, we’ve got to combat them over there. And this cartoon-fashion ruse is carried out and much-repeated stone-faced in real time so that the lackeys of the true Mr. Big’s at the very top can be kept in line for the accelerated economic squeeze of every single dollar, pound, and shekel from the pockets of the piker and relatively-piker six-plus billion on earth to the coffers of the handful of Central Bank trustees by according those rich lackeys of the top dogs unrivaled war plunder and both-sides funding opportunities. To wit: Eisenhower’s “Military Industrial Complex” has yielded the upward transfer of profits unproductive to every-day humanity amounting to an estimated $7 trillion since 2006 alone. And if the public at large were ever to “get it” – to see through the sleight-of-hand to discern what was really happening (for instance, just for starters, that there were no “Muslim terrorists” as such on 9/11, but rather controlled demolition or bombs of whatever sort at the Pentagon and thrice at the WTC), the game would be over and the mechanism run over and knocked apart by raucous and uncontainable public demand, or else every recalcitrant, reeking carcass of a creature of administration and Congress would be ignominiously scorned and carried out bodily or by ballot. One thing we’ve got to get straight – the “cover up” may be as despicable as the root crime on 9/11, maybe more so, maybe less. But it’s still a separate crime, because 99.9% of all those involved and complicit in the cover-up were not among those responsible for the original crime. They are twin related, essentially separate grievous offenses against this nation and the world. No, the name of the game, the reason for the outrage itself, and all the aftershock outrages and ruses of every stripe since has been WAR. War to keep the supportive minions, the otherwise idle wartime investment class and military profiteers and all that bloody-handed ilk fat and happy and supportive of the rapidly progressing Big Squeeze by the very top-dog central bankster trustees who mandated the order that resulted in 9/11 (which wouldn’t have been authorized otherwise) and many other indignities to humankind before and more so since. The U.S. military is in fact their military, in liege to them. Even the real foot soldiers and grunts are hateful of the bloody, loathsome business they do and are quickly or slowly destroyed by it themselves – though less so when it’s got off by equally-lethal and heinous drones and high-enough altitude bombs. And the professional jackals at the top of the top-down moribund “anti-war movement” are complicit and drip blood, showing their true identities by their consistent spurning of any and all involvement with 9/11 Truth, which cuts to the Achilles’ heel of the perpetual war cycle. And meanwhile the reality of democratic (according with the popular majority) decision-making is avoided and thwarted by the political system, because, overwhelmingly, people detest and would end war in an instant if not psyched. And the media is afraid to tamper with, even note the mechanism of the game that signs its checks. Can’t have the whole house of cards crumble! The purpose is resoundingly not to win and end wars, but to have them and keep them going, and more coming. Which is why the almighty U.S. and Allied militaries are still “fighting the Taliban” after 12 years, the same Taliban the skimpy tribal “Northern Alliance” in Afghanistan routed by itself in a week just before. And why reasoned theories of what happened on 9/11 are derided without a glance. “Don’t you support the troops?” I’m sometimes pointedly asked. My response: “I never support gangs of brainwashed trained killers.” There’s no answer to that, ever. Pull on the thread of 9/11, press the evidence enough so people will get it, and the whole woof and warp of our insidious growing oppression (the World-Wide Whack) will unwind. Peace on earth! JH: 12/23/13

Friday, December 13, 2013

9/11: The National Sore-Spot

9/11 : The National Sore-Spot by James Hufferd, PhD Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * One of the great themes of modern literature is that of the Chosen, the few, the proud, survivors of a cataclysm or apocalypse. So, welcome to the party! You are The Redeemed! Let me explain before you go and blow it. It seems the emergent world (if that’s what it was doing) of rational humans ended on September 11, 2001. And you who stubbornly continue to apply the promising highest product of mind-propelled civilization, millennia-distilled principled scientific reasoning, to its ultimate test-case for most among us, at least in modern times, our understanding of 9/11, are in a real sense the survivors, the surviving seed for repopulating an evolved human culture on this planet. All others capable of apprehending mega-events remain in various phases of denial or still holed up in protective caves of their own construction, amounting in practical terms to the same thing. Meanwhile, myth-dependence and faith-based, as distinguished from evidence-based navigation as a mode of global- or cosmic-scale understanding, long thought to be dying out among the normally- or well-educated, seems to have received a spectacular shot of adrenaline as a protective reflex in the presence of what people are told, and the untrained eye construes as a terrifying, purely-evil alien attack, well beyond our capacity (we are told) to construe rationally otherwise: What you see is what you get, to quote Walter Mitty, or somebody. Hence, we’re told, it’s foolish (as well as unpatriotic, mischievous, and affording comfort to the enemy) to consort with anyone who’s such a blatant idiot as to not accept what couldn’t be more obvious. They are out to get us, and that’s that, it’s reasoned, shortsightedly, by nearly everyone for outward consumption. We know who did it and we saw what they did, leaving no need to quibble. Go sick ‘em! And beyond the simpleminded reluctance to critically examine society-wide, as Constitutionally-guaranteed due process would require, there is a profound fear dictating avoidance for most “good citizens” in the prospect of being seduced by heresy. Religious dissenters have traditionally been shunned and avoided by others, who want to claim and keep all the goodies, assurances, and comforts held out as rewards and inducements for conformity to community-wide consensual beliefs. If all else fails to dissuade from straying, resort is even made by those in gainful authority to ginned-up threats of eternal torment, based on “the Deity said…” And in the case of 9/11-related obedience to orthodoxy, all things quite literally work together for bad for you, at least superficially, if you seriously wander, and especially if you try to persuade others to deviate from the explanation that serves and suits authority. All other conspiracy theories are authoritatively declared “outrageous” (implying that the official conspiracy – OCT – is merely “rageous”, one must suppose). And if you deviate, you will lose or loosen ties with friends and relations. Many of your fledgling social contacts and prospective friends in particular will cut you off and avoid any and all contact. People will warn others about you. Your employer and public and private patrons, funders, and buyers of your services will set you adrift. Your career, if any, might well be toast, your perks gone. Another step beyond: many fear that FEMA camps that some warn of will turn out to be the new post-modern leper colonies, Gulags, or “resettlement centers”, mostly incommunicado, placed away from access to the herd in cold, isolated places with inadequate heat and dwindling edibles. I don’t personally know if the FEMA camp legends are true or to what extent. But I do know that 9/11 is a sore-spot in our scoured and myth-laced national record even to professional chroniclers and mainstream historians of all stripes, who conspicuously leave its details and origins either out of their otherwise just-coherent-enough narratives altogether or deliberately render it vague and indeterminate. Because they could easily simply plug in the official story (as a few do) to fill in these gaps, this maddening tendency of the balance of them probably means they secretly comport with our assessment that the truth has been covered up, but would fight to the death to avoid actually saying so – because they know the consequences. It’s a glaring instance of the “spiral of silence” spotlighted by German writer Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in her 1990s book by that title: don’t dare be caught naked alone. To tempt ostracism myself, even here (though I am not an atheist, and probably he isn’t), I quote the wisely-anonymous little boy who once observed, “Religion is believin’ what you know ain’t so.” And venture to opine that most people probably know down-deep lots of things they won’t let on and are unwilling to face head-on. But, in this case, what they refuse to embrace or believe can hurt and maybe kill them. Because the perpetrator strain are still at large and at work. Our national motto ought to be, “Say it isn’t so.” Which doesn’t change one iota the verifiable fact that it is. If there is a breaking point to come at which all of that deeply-held knowledge I posit exists will come whooshing out and can’t be bottled back up is anybody’s guess. JH/12/13/13

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Go a Step Beyond Deniability

Go a Step Beyond Deniability by James Hufferd, PhD Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization ______ As I have emphasized before, we serious 9/11 Truthers are properly embattled in the midst of a sacred mission, and we need to take that status far more seriously. Currently, we find our measure of steady success (at least from Starting Point Zero, as demonstrated by infrequent polls and our own viscera), challenged perhaps as never before by a new, forceful surge of disinformation and ad homonyms launched of late by a government/corporate establishment alarmed from all appearances by the lowest persistent, well-deserved ebb of constituent trust maybe ever in history. People might not tend to believe the government as much about matters such as the assassination of JFK and responsibility for 9/11, so in response, they bring on merchants of seeming deep research and seemingly unimpeachable expertise, writers of thick tomes like Vincent Bugliosi (Charles Manson’s prosecutor), and formidable mavens dripping scorn like a mother hen such as Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews to claim based on no evidence in particular, or very thin, that all of us disputants of their “reality” are just idiots. And, following the script, millions in the chorus (political center), wanting to be rid of the tiresome Cassandras and longing to recover the legendary country of yore, integrity and respect, agree. Of predecessors of note confronted officially and almost monopolistically by a solid wall of authoritative lies, Germans under Naziism were mostly too overwhelmed to push back. Soviet citizens, though, mostly knew the state was behind even the worst, but were brutally pinned down. But, at least, the people harbored few illusions, and long opted to accept on balance, having no choice. Now, they are appalled at us, believably claiming they would not have been fooled by internal political strokes that have duped so many Americans – or so the Americans profess. But we 9/11 Truthers, as principled disputants, although few and prone to squabbling pointlessly among ourselves, stand as the only really credible opposition, the “peace party” having grown flabby and sated with being ignored. And then, there’s the truth itself. The hard evidence of Dallas – the “magic bullet” and grassy knoll – and, for us Truthers, free-fall (admitted, no less!), laterally-launched hundred-weight steel beams, hundreds of thousands of ton moving clouds of concrete dust, scads and scads of nano-thermite, put options, a paucity of smoking-gun plane parts conspicuous in four if not five locations, and so on and on. “Nobody could have placed tons of explosives in the WTC,” as they tell us, gainsaid by nano-thermite being there – tons and tons of it. “They couldn’t have kept it quiet with so many involved.” Damn right! The evidence gives it away! “I saw the planes hit those buildings on TV.” But the aircraft only poked holes in the mammoth grillwork, and the subsequent fires neither could melt steel nor (especially) instantly pulverize the thousands upon thousands of tons of concrete. “Those who deny the official story are bat-crap crazy.” Don’t call me names! “Now, they wouldn’t kill 3,000 of their own folks.” Well, what about the up to 50,000 they consigned to malingering, miserable slow deaths a couple of days later by pronouncing authoritatively the dust at Ground Zero safe to breathe? What I’m saying is that, beyond ourselves and the small percentage we few have so far talked to and reached personally, scant few Americans even yet know or know of the evidence that would refute and effectively shield the collective inhabitants of our land from all of the lies spewed on and all around them like unending nonstop toxic clouds of dust – the still-descending residue of the greatest crime. The people (up to 99%, I’m thinking) don’t even know that. It remains up to us to provide them that shield – nothing but the facts. Because, until you’ve done all that you can, you haven’t done all that you can. JH: 11/24/13

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Unity: Our Other Sacred Task

Unity: Our Other Sacred Task by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * We 9/11 Truthers are not a faith-based community; we are evidence-based, and that is our strength. And what is a 9/11 Truther if not someone who, because of evidence duly considered, has come to disbelieve the official conspiracy theory (OCT) that Osama bin Laden (OBL) controlling the 19 profligate and unskilled flying minions who happened to be Muslim pulverized three mighty high-rises by flying into two of them, flew into a remote section of the supremely-defended Pentagon at ground-level going 500 mph, and also by the way flew an airliner straight into the earth, which swallowed it up entirely, while leaving pieces of itself scattered over 6 or 8 miles elsewhere? In fact, whatever evidence has convinced you to gravely doubt the basic accuracy of the OCT is what makes you a 9/11 Truther – because that’s what one is. So, let’s imagine someone who, from whatever sort of evidence, has concluded that the OCT is inaccurate and must have been deliberately devised to deceive, yet concludes from some or other bit or combination of evidence that an aircraft of whatever kind did, or at least may have, struck the Pentagon, while I myself seriously doubt that. I would be way off base, IMHO, to accuse that person on any sort of moral grounds of being an agent or tool of COINTELPRO or whatever Cass Sunstein’s successor program might be called. Or even of being a moron. In fact, if I were to accuse someone of being a fake Truther, an infil-traitor, or a mental defective or an egg-sucking dog, simply because after considering 9/11 from an evidentiary perspective, they didn’t agree with my conclusion on any single point or any number of specific points, yet still agreed on other grounds that the OCT is deceptive rubbish, then I think I would be the problem, not them. And if you slam others for not agreeing with your conclusions on different specific points of evidence – whatever they are – then it’s generally you who are the problem, and you who could well be a dangerous planted agent of division and chaos. Because, the number of us who not only believe on rational grounds that the OCT is erroneous and felonious, but are activists as well working to spread that conclusion at present is miniscule, and certainly inadequate to the task. And, consequently in large part, we have not, up to now, really gotten much of anywhere with our persistent attempts at changing the national dialogue to 9/11 rationality and responsibility. We simply can’t afford to dismiss or alienate anyone who sincerely agrees with our all-important general conclusion. If our goal of returning a good measure of justice, responsibility, and official integrity to our governance and society is as ultra-important as we say it is, then unity and embracing other Truthers we may disagree with on whatever specific points is our sacred duty to what’s right. That said, let’s keep our eye on the main point (and continue to research and discuss, but not sweat too much anything else). JH: 11/5/13

Friday, October 18, 2013

BUCKING RECEIVED WISDOM

Bucking Received Wisdom By James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization ^^^ Received wisdom is both inherited and renewed or increased from radically different sources for different individuals and groups. Muslims believe what Muslims believe because it’s the “truth” they received and continue to receive from their forebears and the culture surrounding them. Some question and dissent (or think, filling in the yawning blanks in their all-pervasive worldviews in that case on their own, and daring to share their deductions only circumspectly if at all). Hindus, observing Jews, Mormons, etc. – within their communities, perform much the same. And to cause significant change in the outlook or fundamental belief of any of those communities is nigh impossible – normally a lost cause from the start. Because what is deeply believed and fiercely defended in a community by its consenting majority is the paradigm by which it operates, coheres, and which lends the community members, to their minds, a handle on what they perceive uniformly as reality. As late as the 1950s, American culture was largely a fundamentalist construct from end to end, and to believe or think otherwise from the vast majority was to be marginalized and open to widely-sanctioned denigration. In most towns in America in the 1950s, to question or deny anything plainly in the Bible would mark the doubter, at least. Looking or dressing markedly different normally courted exclusion and, more often than not, anger and retribution. And authority figures – office holders, peace officers, school and church officials, media personalities – were carefully vetted by their financial backers to assure they could be trusted to safeguard the myths by which the community operated. And today, the façade is still shakily but determinedly maintained, and the dissenters, more numerous than before, are denied all access to the vetted media that still condition the community’s processing of what passes uneasily for information, now centrally provided. Thus, as we 9/11 Truthers all too well know, inconvenient, non-conforming facts are hurled away from the main structure as energetically as lengths of super-hefty steel beams were hurled outward from the Twin Towers on 9/11. And obtrusive, “inconvenient” non-conforming notions and claims voiced by dissenters are severely dealt with when, due to their virility, they can’t be simply ignored. We all heard today of a stenographer who interrupted the voting or deliberation in one of the houses of Congress on restarting the government with a loud lament about the evil unifying pacts of Freemasons being carried out. The result was that she was taken straight to a mental hospital for evaluation – just as was the common practice with dissenters in the good old U.S.S.R. – though her theory to explain the bizarre proceedings was probably as good as any. But we dissenters are not free from the delirious effects of received wisdom, either. If you gain a notion that pleases you in some way, and then reinforce it by reading or tuning exclusively into sources that reinforce it, and that notion, or a small, closed set of such, comes to condition your response to and expectations about most everything, you have in effect created your own small received wisdom cul-de-sac universe. And you have thereby rendered yourself unreliable for unbiased thinking by closing off your mind. KYBO = Keep Your Brain Open. Don’t sell yourself easily. Demand court-worthy proof for certitude. All crows are black? There are contrary cases, regardless of what you have read or heard or prefer to believe. Three of the very small handful of best sources I’ve ever encountered of 9/11 Truth evidence and information are Elias Davidsson’s remarkable new book, Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11, Counterfeiting Evidence, (New York: Algore Publishing, 2013), together with his more-recent You-tube interview with Hesham Tillawi, and Marine veteran Alan Sabrosky’s 2011 Press TV interview also on You-tube, “9/11 – An Israeli Mossad Job”. Judge for yourself. JH: 10/18/13

Friday, September 27, 2013

KABUKI AND THE UNANSWERABLE QUESTION

Kabuki and the Unanswerable Question by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization ** “Kabuki is a classical Japanese dance-drama. Kabuki theatre is known for the stylization of its dramas and for the elaborate makeup worn.” – Wikipedia Exactly! Not necessarily Japanese. See Ballywood. The dual purpose of such staged productions is to provide a storyline to replace utter chaos, so that too many don’t freak out and go stark-raving berserk, and to lull and perhaps move the audience in an intended direction. And thus, what was fleetingly billed as the Information Age has rapidly become a Stimulus Age controlled by the management. What I talked about last time was the indispensable and irreplaceable role of evidence for moving our agenda to change the narrative. Case in point: No matter how convinced any of us (or even all of us) might be that Israel and Israelis played the leading or exclusive operative role in 9/11, we must not give into the temptation of descending to doing exactly what the other side has done (and continues to do) and dispense with the need for evidence specifically tending to prove that this (or whatever other) theory we’re convinced of as unnecessary. This is true in part because our conclusion is simply not objectively self-evident to most, if at all. And we need only to recall that nearly everyone was so convinced OBL and the 19 had done it at the outset as to lead to the prevailing circumstance that an honest investigation and a trial (i.e., due process) was considered at practically every level of society to be an utter waste of time. And thus have lynch mobs been summoned and herds stampeded from the shadowy depths of time to this week. That’s not the sort of outcome we ought to seek. In this present case, those who are so sure of themselves regarding the Israelis or at least the Zionists as the driving force and chief operatives to be blamed for 9/11 could well be right. Circumstantial evidence appears to support that suspicion. But, those who scoff or sneer at the need to step back and wield specific gathered evidence of specific actions or involvement, and so rail at the suggestion that spot-specific evidence is seriously needed, simply cannot succeed in ever convincing anyone who’d rather not know what they claim to know. And so, they’ll fail, unless to rail is their only purpose. They’ll only convince themselves by their unsubstantiated insistence that their theory’s equal to a proven fact, and, in the process, taint and discredit our enterprise. And such is true only in part because there is another equally-suspected familiar cast of characters plausibly implicated. (I refer to Cheney, Rumsfeld, G.H.W. Bush, G.W. Bush, J. Bush, M. Bush ...) who are not all known Israelis and are known to be perfectly capable of dire deeds. It’s simply never a good idea to dispense with the requirements of due process, warranted though the suspicions of many may prove to be. Until someone enlightens me, one way or the other, I share the suspicions but have yet to see the convincing evidence of Israeli overlordship of the operation. (Actually, I think both the U.S. and Israel are puppets at that level – but I can’t yet prove it.) And I might add that my drawing attention to the matter of an apparently powerful Israeli connection of some sort would hardly qualify me as a Zio flak, or whatever it is, in any case. Part of our role, if we are to be successful, must indeed be to assemble proof of our assertions, if possible, that will sway the public as a whole, or at least any part that we can get to listen. And many among us continue to maintain that our role is only to demonstrate that the official conspiracy theory is impossible or highly suspect of so being – which is surprisingly easy, as I will explain at the end. And I believe we have another needful (and contributory) role to seek to fulfill, too. We need to strive to convince the public to be wary, to consider any and perhaps even virtually all major occurrences to be at least possibly productions of Kabuki instead of spontaneous. Regarding the Nairobi terrorist attack, an explanation circulated that’s superficially plausible is that the Somali attackers wanted to punish Kenyans for occupying part of Somalia. But then, there’s the implication by the U.S. media that Somali (Muslim) American immigrants might be involved, and that the whole thing might somehow or other be a proxy-attack on America. Hence, Americans might do well to keep their distance from and remain more-than-wary of Muslim-Americans. “Could the CIA (or other U.S. alphabet agencies) be involved here?” is what we’ve got to convince the masses to wonder and ask, every single time something happens. Because, such suspicions as that have proven supremely apropos, well-founded, and useful to harbor at all times in order to make even a little bit of sense of the post-modern world. Until that every-day sort of suspicion (note: not certainty necessarily) becomes well-implanted and routine, the public’s response to any related suggestion we make – and you can hear it from virtually anyone still these days – will, going forward, no longer be outright denial in a given instance, but something like, “What we don’t know can’t hurt us.” Huh? Or, “That can’t be, they wouldn’t do that.” Really? Or, from the more sophisticated, “What’s your source?” That one’s harder. I myself got blocked last week – I wish I knew how and by whom – from a discussion on Facebook started by, of all people, James Bamford, almost a legend in left guardian circles, for suggesting something to a “suit” who suggested we wouldn’t want uninformed people who didn’t follow the news voting. I suggested that, since it was reported that the world’s tip-top richest family owned both of the wire services providing our “news”, that he might not be as well-informed as he thought himself. Of course, he immediately accused me of anti-Semitism. And I denied it, telling him that “facts are facts” and providing a link, one of several available. Then, Bam! I was blocked from the island! If the noble family in question had been Methodist or Atheist or Wahabi, it wouldn’t have made a smidgen of difference – at least to me. True, the links to sources I managed to dredge up weren’t the most sterling imaginable, and perhaps the stunning suggestion I cited isn’t even literally true. Perhaps. Yet, I am convinced that any unbiased halfway-deep assessment of the worldwide financial system and media must reveal that, even if that commanding, top-dog family doesn’t actually own both of the wire services, the results of whatever linkages and arrangements are in place are substantially the same – rigid top élite control and total manipulation. Still, I wish I could find that elusive irrefutable source if that particularly engaging attribution of ownership is accurate. And, in fact, that’s the sort of irrefutable sources and links we all need to come up with – when they’re there – to make headway with what strike many as bold and startling claims – precisely the kind we have nailed down in some instances and still lack or need to strengthen in others. Now, what did I mean that proving the official story unbelievable is relatively easy? I meant that we can all begin to pose what I call the unanswerable question to those who refuse to doubt the Official Story. Here’s how: First, point out that, in western law, the burden of proof always properly rests on the affirmative (meaning that no one is obliged to prove the negative, that the Official Story is false – even though some of its claims can be proven physically impossible, etc.) Then, ask if your debate or discussion partner can provide even a single shred of credible evidence that the Official Story is true. They can’t, because it’s not. Accordingly, what evidence do they have that it’s true? They have none. And everyone should know that. JH: 9/27/13

New WTC Dust Study Looks Set to Confirm Nano-thermite

By Ziggi Zugam and John-Michael Talboo
911grassroots.org

September 26, 2013


Did you know that a recent survey concludes that nearly half of everyone that sees the video of the 9/11 collapse of WTC7 suspects controlled demolition? Now is the perfect time to remind you of the 2009 peer-reviewed paper by Harrit et al., called Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe. This is a summary of our extensive essay that covers the paper and the attempts to discredit it. We need your help to fund the completion of an independent study that is verifying the presence of nano-thermite in the WTC dust, so please donate to support chemical engineer Mark Basile.

The thermitic red layer of the reported tiny red/gray bi-layered chips found in the dust belongs to a novel class of energetic materials that government funded US laboratories have been developing since the 1990´s. Even the federal agency in charge of the supposed investigation of the collapsed towers helped to develop this type of material, which may help to explain why it refuses to look for evidence of it in the dust.

Our essay exposes unscrupulous internet sites that have been spreading false rumors to discredit Harrit et al., the paper, and even the publisher. The members of one such forum actually organized a study that was supposed to refute the paper on technical terms, but the resulting 2012 preliminary report by Dr. Millette remains unpublished because it is invalid, as we are about to explain. The essay is pending its second major revision (version 1.3) which will also include minor repairs such as the re-installment of missing pictures and graphs, but it is presently in five main parts plus the introduction and the final discussion:

- The introduction puts Dr. Harrit´s data into context and presents some of the experts behind the 2009 paper, their impressive credentials, and the unusually thorough peer-review process. Harrit´s paper is essentially flawless according to one of the referees that reviewed the paper on behalf of the journal, which explains why no-one has been able to challenge the explosive conclusion with published data. The introduction also gives you an insight into the mentality of the so-called "debunkers".

- Part One goes over the data and explains the process the authors went through to come to the conclusion that the chips are not paint. The red/gray chips have the required nano-thermite ingredients and they work like a thermitic material, hence the conclusion. We note that Harrit et al. document the sample collection and the chain-of-custody of the samples, so there never was any issue with the integrity of the samples or risk of  contamination, despite the rumors on certain internet forums.

- Part Two explains the importance of the molten iron spheres in the residue and distinguishes the opposite processes that lead to reduced iron spheres on one hand and oxidized iron spheres on the other. The red layer contains iron-oxide and aluminum before ignition, but upon ignition it converts those ingredients into molten spheres of iron and aluminum-oxide via an aluminothermic reaction. Conventional combustion would leave behind iron-oxide and we document many failed attempts to belittle or avoid this key evidence. Here is an update to part two, which expands on the debunking of Dave Thomas´s pseudo-scientific attempts to discredit the iron spheres.

- Part Three introduces the miserable saga of Rev. Chris Mohr and his attempt to hire "an independent scientist" to study the red/gray chips, and the resulting 2012 preliminary report by Dr. Millette. We highlight the main problems with the report, including the fact that neither the red nor the gray layers match Harrit´s chips when closely examined, and Millette´s refusal to even address the key evidence: the iron spheres. The main theme of this part is the suspicion that Millette has not been studying the correct chips, and this has now been confirmed (see update to part five below).



- Part Four is dedicated to the discovery of elemental aluminum in the red layer of Dr. Harrit´s chips. Dr. Millette does not clearly identify unbound aluminum in his chips, but he does not attempt to actually refute the aluminum data for the chips in Dr. Harrit´s study. Some authoritative members of the JREF 9/11 debunking forum have attempted to discredit Harrit´s aluminum data, but we refute them by taking a close look at their methods. This chapter reminds us that there is a big difference between valid data published in refereed journals and anonymous chit-chat on certain forums.

- Part Five addresses the key piece of evidence in Dr. Millette´s preliminary report: the FTIR spectrum. Our essay is pending updates, including an update to part five, but a recent article offers a sneak-peak and explains that Dr. Millette has not published his report because it is invalid. From the article Millette Chip Study Debunked and Buried: RIP

...I am happy to announce that the revision will include a positively identified Harrit et al. FTIR spectrum for the red layer. Rev. Mohr and his crowd have been clinging to Millette´s FTIR spectrum because it is supposed to debunk Harrit et al., so it is appropriate to use that crown-jewel of the report to render Millette´s preliminary report null and void. Ryan´s FTIR spectrum for the red material confirms the suspicions laid out in our article, as it is quite clear that it does not match Millette´s red layer FTIR, so Dr. Millette failed to study the correct red/gray chips, and Rev. Mohr has of course been notified.

Below: Kevin Ryan´s spectrum for the red layer studied in the 2009 Harrit et al. paper is the spectrum in the upper window below, where it is compared to the spectrum of a known nano-thermite material. Below that is Millette's FTIR.


- The discussion part of our essay sums it up and introduces Mark Basile´s study, which has already replicated and confirmed most of Dr. Harrit´s work. Basile will include additional tests and "blind testing" by an independent lab that will confirm his results. This new study is going to be a real game-changer because the replication is necessary to confirm controversial research conclusions in the world of science, so please donate at www.MarkBasile.org/donate. We have added a PayPal option that goes directly to Mark Basile, as demonstrated in a screen shot of a test donation. We did this for anyone that was perhaps weary to donate to a third party collecting the funds.

Monday, September 16, 2013

CALL-SHOT POOL AND EVIDENCE

Call-Shot Pool and Evidence by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization ---- Mark Twain advised us to “always do right – it will please some and astonish the rest.” For a 911 Truther, doing right means making only such assertions as can be backed by evidence. Don’t misrepresent of bring us, an important, even vital, though vanishingly rare, fortunately noisy minority of first-responders in the world of discourse, into disrepute by spreading innuendo, rumors, cheap shots, or divisions among fellow 911 Truthers. Always strive to establish a reputation of credibility by guiding people to real, solid evidence that what happened, going purely by the evidence, which relatively few of our fellow denizens of earth are acquainted with at all, was really what happened. And that what the evidence proves conclusively could not possibly have happened (though that’s what we’ve all been told) didn’t. Diluting the potent impact we can exert by wielding established evidence by adulterating it and assaulting our fellow bearers of it who happen to disagree with us on some point or other is a form of obstructing justice, impermissible, and frequently the mark of an infiltrator, not a fellow Truther. If you want to ostracize people for something other than being outright impostors and phonies, it should be for them attacking fellow 911 Truthers who deserve our support and thanks overall even though we might slightly disagree. As Kevin Barrett pointed out recently, it seems that, all of a sudden, with the coming of the controversy over the Syrian poison gas attack, the use of the term “false-flag” has become very fashionable at least among the American punditocracy and mid-level elected officials. This is in itself a very good development that weights in our favor, perhaps paving the way for the widespread or general association of the term 9/11. President Obama asserted last night on TV – and probably correctly – that the rebels in Syria lacked the wherewithal to have mounted such an attack on their own, as some have charged. And the Syrian government certainly has now admitted to having a sizable stockpile of such weapons. However, such assertions, though doubtless true, do not constitute proof or even strong evidence of guilt in this instance, as we are told to accept in lieu of access to the full evidence. For one thing, if both Iraq and Syria had stockpiles of poison gas at different points, it seems likely that numerous other countries have or have had such stockpiles as well, openly or secretly, without being guilty of deploying them. And so, we must ask, other than the Syrian regime, who else could have mounted the documented attack? And who – unlike the Assed regime, which manifestly didn’t want to bring American bombs down on its own head, especially after being warned, might have had an interest in perpetrating such an attack (and its attendant consequences for Syria)? Well, it seems interesting that the Obama administration would have telegraphed the incident out of the blue a year in advance – warning that such an evil deed, if it were to occur, would constitute “crossing a red line”. Amazingly accurate prophesy, I would say. Or else, the U.S. itself through its clandestine special forces (“special” because they specialize in things like that), or America’s “Grand Chessboard” ally, the Israeli Mossad, may have done it, per usual, as a false-flag pretext for retribution against Assad. If so, the scenario would follow the same pattern as that employed in the 9/11 attacks, where the open declaration of requiring a “new Pearl Harbor” was telegraphed by the plotters prior to the deed. Why they would ever have made such a startling declaration openly to a world that would have scoffed at the likelihood of such a thing materializing tailor-made without their in any way abetting it anytime soon has always been a mystery to me. But, as in calling the shot mysteriously seemingly at random many months in advance with Syria, they did! And, just from likewise narrowing the list with regard to the Syrian poison gas attack to those who might have been a) interested and b) capable, it may well have been the Mossad that done it. But, with regard to 9/11, as I have opined here previously (see “The Hot Rock of Zion”, www.911grassroots.org, 12/1/12), while the Mossad could conceivably have pulled the operation (including Larry Silverstein’s notorious Building 7), and while the evidence of Israeli foreknowledge is overwhelming, and while Israel may have been diabolical enough – for logistical and operational reasons, and due to lack of operational evidence, it seems to me more likely that, as Barbara Honegger speculated in her recent video “Behind the Smoke Curtain”, that key modern operation was done for and probably at the bequest of Israel, than by Israel. Because I have yet to see a shred of actual, credible evidence that the Israelis or Mossad did it. Please provide me the same, and I’ll feature it next time. JH: 9/16/13

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

TABOOS AND A SHEEPLE TRANSFIGURED

Taboos and A Sheeple Transfigured by James Hufferd, Ph.D. * At a crucial point in the Civil War, President Lincoln met with his cabinet and called for a vote on a matter he was pushing. Announcing the results, he said, “One Aye, nine Nays. The Aye’s have it.” We could see a repeat of that scenario with regard to the Congressional vote on whether to authorize the proposed military action against Syria, but probably for a different reason. Unlike Lincoln, Obama is almost certainly not his own man. The international bankers and financiers who get their way now on everything by one means or another are probably not chewing their nails over his or Congress’s decision. The U.S. military, like the covert operations capable of deceiving practically anybody about Assad or anything else, are part of their ever-more-precise mechanism. They (the central bankers, or, rather, their faceless Unitary Executive, to borrow a rather apt term) at the very top is the concentrated world “power that be”, the decider, the true commander-in-chief of our present age. And, looking around, such is hardly deniable. What it/he commands, be it in 2001 and the year of OKC, be it in the more-recent global rise and collapse financially, be it tonight, is pretty much decided and made certain in advance. That’s the beauty of a vehicle infinitely controllable – no suspense, no uncertainty for those in control – unless in case of a beaut of a solar flare or a stray comet or something undreamed. And a third component of the mechanism by which they keep tight rein on humankind and resources, alongside Arms and Intrigue, is Mythos, essentially thought control. And the fourth central bank monetary control itself, the key source of torque. Speaking from a point of logic, there are gigantic flaws in the operation and particularly the beneficence for humanity as a whole of all four components of the grim cubic mechanism of and for control, and none of them would ever come anywhere close to winning out if put to a fair popular vote. Hence they’re never debated openly as such and their meaning and operation as presently configured are simply taken as not up for discussion. Ever. Until one day we force the issue. Instead, rival systems and entities, whoever is our enemy or competitor of the moment, are saddled with the giant, disqualifying flaws the components of the NWO’s mechanism of control itself most clearly exhibits, in spades. Kill our own people? We won’t discuss or brook question of 9/11. Ever. That’s the rule. And maintaining the vital myth going forward is actually the main reason, far more important, obviously, than protecting their culpable (expendable) human agents. No, the others are always the bad guys, in the wrong. And we alone may use and legitimately threaten to use WMD, in WWII, in Vietnam aplenty, threaten to use “low-yield nuclear” against Iran and a couple of other times. And hardly anyone seems to notice the contradiction, and it’s not politely brought up. And if it is, while undeniable, it’s justified – because we’re different, exceptional. The U.S., and also Israel, are special cases for the puppet-master NWO, regarding whom, for one thing, UN resolutions are never enforced. And, of course, the U.S., despite the tenet of its creed that “all men are created equal”, can at times use WMDs on non- or un-Americans, just (supposedly unless it’s anthrax) not on its own people. A curious rule; but people, by and large, buy it. If there are a hundred killed somewhere, the pressing question is: “How many American dead?” And I wonder, by the way, if Israelis also enjoy special immunity from World Court actions, or if that has to come with Israeli-American dual citizenship. But, we’re apparently special because we’re the global repository of mass NWO international violent force and the myth maintains that public opinion counts for something here. We must be coddled and lulled; for it is feared that if the control mechanism were to be laid bare, the whole system would fail. And it might; and good riddance! The financial set-up with central bank control and its vassals’ sole benefit that overcomes and boggles our economy increasingly by forcing us to pay for every big thing twice as a nation, with our ever-worsening failure to stay apace enriching the faceless ones (in fact, chartered counterfeiters)in charge must never be questioned. Another taboo! If someone is impolite enough to bring it up, the warning is repeated that the whole economy would somehow implode without it. Crude control of the news outlets by having them all owned by corporate NWO affiliates is apparently not secure enough in itself, because there are always rogues and whistleblowers lurking. The cruelest punishments, leading often to “suicides” and fatal “accidents” must be meted for these, lest the leaks become unmanageable torrents. But still, this is not enough to keep the truth from the “peasants” (so-called, honest to goodness, in major insurance litigation documents). No, the two wire services that feed the information outlets must be absolutely in-house: hence, the world’s tip-top richest family owns both the AP and Reuters. (Look it up!) And whoever rules that family of overlords is my candidate for the world’s Unitary Executive ultimately responsible for directing from above all of the fore-mentioned crimes of virtual or actual enslavement and deprivation. They’re a family probably with a garage and a game room and a solarium, pets; probably without a mortgage. And to them should our plans reasonably be laid. Because their mechanism of control operates preposterously counter to the laws and flow of the universe, openly producing suffocation, smashing, and blockage; no wonder there are taboos! But there’s a song about a ram and a dam that favors us. JH: 9/3/13

Monday, August 26, 2013

PIG-HEADED DIVISIONS IN 9/11 TRUTH RANKS

Pig-Headed Divisions in 9/11 Truth Ranks by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization // Is it possible to be an ardent pacifist and a rabid sports fan? Yes! As Descartes might say, I know because I am. But, a selective sports fan and doctrinaire, militant pacifist. There’s no danger of my rabid fandom taking over my life, because I’m overwhelmingly a fan of one single college program or team, football and basketball, that’s posted at best a mediocre record year after year, decade upon decade in a powerful evolving conference since my youth and has yielded cherished moments of ultimately meaningless delight and more- frequent moments of agonizing near-depression annually since I was 10 years old, my only respite being when I lived far away. I don’t go to the games, except maybe one every several years, and they aren’t even always televised. But, even when they are, I turn down the sound and turn up my radio loud to hear the comfortingly familiar play-by-play, just as I did scores of years earlier. And let out a whoop no doubt audible down the block when my bedraggled, mostly discounted and despised team achieves something truly amazing, even at times rating headline-grabbing, in a momentous, twilight struggle against one of the several behemoths that years dot our tantamount-to-kamikaze schedule. It’s a little like cheering for Latvia must have been when they went up against Mother Russia in the old days, or maybe Vanderbilt vs. Alabama just about every fall. And, like my co-fans, barely predominant even within perhaps a 100 by 100-mile stretch around here, I’m always hopeful that this year, we’ll suddenly and startlingly rise up from obscurity and somehow overcome the whole murders’ row one-by-one-by-one and get into a major BCS bowl game (or its by-then equivalent) even without the big, splashy, competitive athletic budget, as one of our more lowly fellow conference schools seems to know how to do with some regularity. My die-hard co-fans pretty regularly fill our average-size stadium and I see our paraphernalia around a lot, sweatshirts, caps, and the like, and then we flash a smile at each other in anonymity, knowing. And, come to think of it, none of us ever says of another – even at a home game, “Sure, he claims to be a fan (or is a team-member). But, he’s also a Republican, or pro-gun, or anti-gun, or a Mason or a creepy Presbyterian or suspected Rosicrucian flak, pass-happy or anti-defense, or whatever.” No! No one cares or thinks about anything else but fandom (or player-dom). We’re just bonded and more than pleased to be bonded by our shared fanaticism, pulling and cheering with one accord and great voice for our mutually-beloved team and its however modest sometime success. We don’t much care if the wins come (when they do) via running or passing or penalties or defense or kicking skills. We just want our team to succeed against the odds, and don’t question, at least beyond the polite discussion stage, one another’s theories as to how it happened or should or maybe could have happened and why it didn’t materialize as hoped. Our goal is to score and win, if possible electrifyingly, shut the other teams down, and see our relatively low-budgeted team advance in triumph and fame nonetheless. Doesn’t that sound just a bit like 9/11 Truth and our far-more-salient goal of bringing about its general acceptance and triumph and new dawn of reason and accordant justice based on it, in opposition to what sometimes seems like dearly-bought injustice and hundred million-to-one odds? (Realizing that we, feeble and futile as we sometimes seem, possess that most powerful of weapons – the truth!) And so, then, do we, in seeking to advance the truth, cheerfully overlook our differences on relatively minor analysis and conclusions, even details, as to what really did happen and precisely who was ultimately responsible? Actually, no. But what makes us all “9/11 Truthers” is our shared conclusion that the story of the 9/11 crimes we have all been told is a lie, and the truth is demonstrably and necessarily something quite different. That much is firmly established by what we all know, whether the buildings involved (including the Pentagon) were destroyed or substantially damaged by nanothermite charges, mini-nukes, a combination, or something else again, matters far less. Or what hit or didn’t hit the Pentagon as long as it was provably insider-controlled. Those things matter far less, and certain pieces of the puzzle remain inconclusive because they are still unavailable to us. So, those differences (which obviously don’t matter as much) should not set us to shouting, denouncing, or not speaking to each other. If we could put away our turf battles and petty bigotries and not let trolls exaggerate our differences to divide us, and thus unify, I believe that that would instantaneously multiply our strength and attract like-minded others to our very noble cause. The contributions to our understanding provided by our extraordinarily able frontline researchers vary, and sometimes don’t quite mesh. And yet, all of their findings and presentations are learning opportunities, and not to be railed at. We simply cannot at all afford to be split and preoccupied by sub-basic disagreement – which we will inevitably continue to manifest – on relative details and unresolved aspects. And certainly, disagreements we will no doubt continue to have over unrelated or tangentially related issues, such as the Boston bombing, gun issues, and the like must not be permitted to divide and weaken our common firmly evidence-based stance and mutual support and common appreciation when it comes to 9/11, the mother of all issues going forward. Any tendencies toward division and internal rancor must be put aside, superseded by our main message and demand for the truth. May it ring clear and uncompromised and our mutual encouragement as co-battlers for the truth that makes us free emerge unquestioned. And may the successes of one be thoroughly enough probed and explicated, but nevertheless heralded and celebrated as the triumphs and benefits of all! JH: 8/26/13

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

What Being a Real 9/11 Truther Would Mean

What Being a Real 9/11 Truther Would Mean By James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization # I notice that several hundred people a week, mostly Americans, but worldwide, visit and, presumably, read the postings on this blog online. I fairly frequently hear from readers who to varying extents agree with the sentiments expounded or offer a suggestion, and sometimes from readers voicing a quibble with something or on occasion castigating my slipshod, hurried grammar or outrageous attempts at syntax. Fine. I try to answer all and mend my waywardness when it’s called out. Why there are seldom comments left on the web site or debates engaged in over the at times contentious points I raise is beyond me. I’m certain that, among the fair number of those who frequent must be quite a number who are not convinced 9/11 Truthers, but are either keeping an open mind and looking for new facts and thoughts to ponder, as well as a few regularly monitoring a variety of sites for one purpose or another, and at least one or two just curious as to what outrageousness path that confirmed crackpot is moseying down now. And then, there are (I imagine) the timid, who perhaps intellectually accept the powerful evidence that proves that the official version of what happened on 9/11, assumed correct almost everywhere else, is false and a libelous and calamitous lie that has led to a gigantic global lurch backward into once-unimaginable tyranny in our land, selfish cruelty, manipulation, and murder at home and abroad on a sca1e that could potentially reach hundreds of millions – worldwide slavery, decimation, and planetary shambles. This mentally-assenting segment of my not over-large readership knows all of that, but perhaps still chooses to remain silent. The immediate fear or job-related timidity are too strong to overcome at any particular point. And so, there are millions of closet “Truthers” scattered around everywhere, who know but, as silent witnesses, are isolated and practically worthless – that is, until they snap like popcorn! My word to them is: you have a right to remain silent, because you should know that anything you say will sooner or later be held against you. Guaranteed. I lost teaching posts on three campuses because I chose not to keep my mouth shut about 9/11. I could have, but I didn’t. Members of my own family are barely civil toward me, and not one of them dares consider 9/11 evidence (or, come to think of it, confront any other really challenging question unless literally forced to). Life can become scary at a certain point, of course, even if you opt not to face it head-on. Yet, avoidance is the most common strategy. For most, tough questions are like sleeping dogs. On the other hand, if you KNOW about 9/11’s damning evidence, you have no moral right to do nothing. Because, since we’re inescapably a communitarian, or collective-level species, drawing practically every fragment of our offensive and defensive wherewithal against intrinsically stronger forces of nature surrounding and inundating us to inventions, devices, and institutions provided to us by others, if you like to live, you have no right not to care enough to battle the wills and schemes of the psychopaths of our species who have wrested control. If you realize that 9/11, their hallmark single-day horrendous symphonic masterpiece to date, was a bald-faced false-flag contrived lie to trigger a planned Armageddon of mayhem and a concentric wave shackling of humanity, and nothing remotely resembling what they trumpeted it as being, then you have a moral obligation to, in effect, sell all that you have and join 9/11 Truth somehow with every fiber of passion you possess! Non-violently, to be sure, because who can hope to prevail against accumulated mountains of WMD? – but with your minds and your hearts, your mouths and pens, whatever you have to bring. If you think I’m wrong or way out of proportion in saying that the circumstances call for us all to exert ourselves to the fullest in response, set me straight. If, to the contrary, you’re with me in caring, get involved and let’s make sure truth and reason, hence justice, ultimately prevail to quell and right the earth. Am I a 9/11 fanatic? Given what’s at stake for all of us, sure! The question is: aren’t you? Let’s leave apathy to those we are so fond of accusing of it, and get going! JH: 8/13/13

Monday, August 5, 2013

9/11: SYMBOL & SIGN

9/11: Symbol & sign By James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization // If 9/11 were flashed across intergalactic space for a cacophony of alien colonies, terras, and mother ships to discover, with the whole tangle encrypted of depictions and references thereto since the events of Day Zero, what significances would be there for the variegated gaggle of alien intelligences to glean from that abundantly pregnant pulse? First, at the purely symbolic level, these recipients would doubtless be asking the question everyone asks at first blush. That is: does it have something to do with 9-1-1, the well-known universal call of distress on obsolescent by the time of discovery talkie apparatuses and mobile follow-ons? Everyone somehow suspects that it does. So, was it, after all, just a coincidence that the mythical terrorist pantomime punctuated by countless raucous explosions and lateral long-hurling of very weighty projectiles occurred on the calendar date so similarly designated? Or was the Mayan, or more likely Julian calendar (remaining in vogue in some remote, die-hard quarters even today) surreptitiously invoked by the plotters, insuring that the date of the operation would bear no actual significance in the least? Proceeding into (hopefully) more fertile terrain: if the various alien civilizations didn’t uncover much of relevance from delving into the symbolic level, aside from that date being laden (one way to put it) with associations from many past years’ operations pulled off by various actors, analyzing the designation (9/11) as a sign, or signpost, could reveal far more relevance, particularly going forward. That is: what have the events or crimes promulgated on the 9/11 front and center in this discussion, and not the various other years’ occurrences on that date brought up at times as diversions from the paramount matters of fact and meaning, meant and what do they continue to mean for all of us, the civilization that’s the collective source of the cosmic rendering flashed to the heavens? At this, the signpost level, the encrypted all-inclusive record would speak volumes. The intended and actual meaning of 9/11 as a signpost demarcating our collective continuing life as individuals and as a civilization is recognizable as quite definite and pronounced. Before 9/11, we had impactful elections, with some disparaged slippage over time away from that, but with our general direction set or affected by popular participation and understanding. Afterward, the same over all policy direction persists, regardless. Before, we benefitted from the presumption by everyone of an imperfect but real, tangible guarantee of due process to redress crimes and render justice. In the wake of 9/11, all of that is out the window. The expectation of safety and community, although it sadly didn’t pertain everywhere, was shattered and orchestrated public mob demands and trial on the airwaves conducted by unsworn “experts” and news commentators have become widely honored instead. Before 9/11, there was at least a naïve expectation of peaceful and public-spirited intent characterizing public policy. Afterward, there’s a growing acquiescence to brutality and outrageously demeaning and violent treatment of weaker , mostly darker-skinned nations abroad – a proclivity characteristic all along, but never so thinly-veiled or generally recognizable. Before, the economy, our protective security apparatus, internal and external, and the nation’s financial and physical infrastructure were presumed to operate at least generally in the best interest of the nation. Now, it is increasingly accepted that these controlling agencies cannibalize us and other nations routinely to forward their own nefarious purposes, with the approval and protection of government. And of late, even our weather is joining the list of increasingly controlled contexts manipulated to control and cow us. So, why should we concentrate on making 9/11 clear and exposed to everyone in the full light of day, rather than defensively attacking all manipulated manifestations of our intensifying national domestic violence dysfunction piecemeal and simultaneously? Because 9/11 is the explosive event used deliberately to break the dam largely restraining our abusers. And because virtually all of the controlling designers of our comparative misery and futility ever since as a nation manifested conveniently in that one infamous day’s coordinated criminal onslaught. As a friend put it to me once, “9/11 is the head of the octopus,” as opposed to its tentacles that slither everywhere. To expose it is not just to expose the tie that binds all the tentacles and offshoots, but the brains that coordinate and unite them. And that is what our dispassionate interpreters in the deep-space galactic abroad would uncover in analyzing the complete package of encrypted 9/11 and 9/11-referenced recordings. Any objective observers studying it would. JH: 8/5/13

Sunday, July 14, 2013

WHAT'S SO UNACCEPTABLE ABOUT WHAT WE REALLY WANT?

WHAT’S SO UNACCEPTABLE ABOUT WHAT WE REALLY WANT? by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * Can you imagine President Obama appointing a surprisingly-acceptable commission to go over all the substantive objections to the way 9/11 was handled in order to recommend, or not recommend, a whole fresh and objective re-investigation? I can. (Or, could). Regardless of his personal beliefs about the advisability of such a re-investigation (or simply, investigation), to so rule on the question would enhance his legacy for fairness – would actually place him in something of a category above and beyond his predecessors as an archon of justice and restorer of our tarnished (read trashed) justice system. While never an uncompromised supporter of Obama, neither am I a hater or believer in every innuendo or dismal supposition. I’ve never though him a sort of Manchurian candidate, but a skilled politician of middling morality who was cut a deal when unexpectedly successful by higher powers, dictating decisions in certain aspects of his mandate in exchange for his life and position – a pact accepted at the outset, reluctantly or not, by most presidents in our recent history. It remains to be seen whether he can walk the fine line all the way through, or will end up like JFK. Although, I don’t believe any president has ever been definitively terminated in his second term, Nixon was in a way. (Homework: say “definitively terminated” six times!) When Obama was freshly elected, back in 2009, some of you may remember that I wrote him a letter representing as best I could a cogent summary of the case for 9/11 Truth, and got over one-tenth of all who were on the 911 Truth Grassroots Organizers list to co-sign before mailing it to the White House. I did so because no one else thought it worthwhile to originate such direct communication. (I could see them saying later, “They never even asked us.”) And, surprisingly in retrospect, I received an answer, by telephone, via a lady in the White House Scheduling Office. I was told, simply, that “President Obama doesn’t have time to meet with you”. I then, acting on the advice of this communicant, re-sent the original communication, requesting a response to the substantive points it contained; but received none. Politically, to have re-opened (or simply opened) the process to a full investigation, or to have released it neutrally with a robust guarantee of witness protection to the regular organs of due process in the immediately-affected jurisdictions, would have been a clear winner with a public containing a large segment of doubters in the government’s recitation of events. After all, no part of our own life as a nation has suffered more of a loss from 9/11 than our presumed Constitutional guarantee of universal due process – in a way emblemic of the whole purpose of 9/11 Truth, because such would afford a means of redressing, or at least significantly addressing, all of our other losses through action of the people and organs of the people’s governance. So then, why was the matter not seen that way by Obama and the controllers of the system, if to do so would on its face have made them look so good? For the same reason that highly-placed people such as Wesley Clark, Bernie Sanders, Seymour Hersh (or substitute your candidates, if any, for probity and relative virtue if you reject mine – whom I’m not entirely certain of myself) refuse to raise a peep about 9/11. That is, because they belong to a sometimes fractious brotherhood that they themselves consider essential to the strength of the nation and so uphold, even if they don’t personally like everything it does. They’re not willing to take the risk of seeing that dark, core brotherhood ripped to shreds at the hands of a truly independent judiciary. And if a significant number of them were to step out of line, what we would have would be civil war among the powers-that-be, no doubt launching unparalleled WMD. And there’s no guarantee where something like that might lead. No, the closest we’re likely to get in the present dispensation to 9/11 Truth backers in the establishment are brave souls like Col. Bob Bowman and Peter Dale Scott. Because, for the consensus of the dark brotherhood of the leadership cabal, the last thing they want is the kind of government of, by, and for the people all of us were raised to revere – even if it was nothing but a sort of induced national wet dream to make us proud. (Don’t give up on it, but don’t die to protect what isn’t. Live to make it real!) Though a lower-level (read “ignored”) international investigation into 9/11 might be possible, as I’ve concluded many times before, our best, perhaps our only hope of triumphing is to spread the truth of the compelling forensic and circumstantial evidence until it pervades the public consciousness, displacing the increasingly-apparent bad joke of the Official Conspiracy Theory still widely voiced. And that we can continue, with ever renewed resolve, to accomplish. JH: 7/14/13

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

HUMAN NATURE, RATIONALITY, AND 9/11

HUMAN NATURE, RATIONALITY, AND 9/11 ^^^ by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization *** To the extent that societies aren’t holding together, they’re falling apart. And if the so-called centripetal forces that bind societies, countries, and civilizations into a cohesive, manageable unit become weaker and less-binding, the centrifugal forces that simultaneously operate to force internal splits, ruptures, divisions, and ultimately fragmentation or disintegration will win the eternal tug-of-war – as happens eventually in all empires, including fairly recently in Yugoslavia and the U.S.S.R., which continually threatens India, and on at least one occasion cast into doubt the permanent cohesion of Canada and of the United States. In our current age of collective managerial consciousness, great care is taken to impose and define the basis of unity within materially-advanced societies. Social psychologist Steven Pinker’s book The Blank Slate notes that state- and privately-subsidized North American social research academia over many decades has ruthlessly enforced the mental paradigm of the completely programmable mind, in effect giving the master manipulators a green light to design from scratch for whole populations the sort of uniformly content-filled universal mind that will submissively favor and forward controlling objectives and agendas, and thus produce broad communities of outlook sufficient to hold their societies together and direct them as the permanent control establishment demands. We, on the other hand, who perversely think, and thus inevitably dispute the wisdom or benefit of their chosen direction, are viewed as deviants, or as a bit of removable static irritatingly complicating implementation. (The Soviets regarded their deviants as mentally disoriented or disturbed and isolated them for re-education. Likewise, perhaps, are intented the persistently-reported FEMA camps.) The mantra of the “blank slate” proponents, in effect, is “blank equals equal”. Meaning, we are all equals in important respects, because we all start out naked and equally empty-headed. By contrast, I suspect that what Thomas Jefferson had in mind when he penned his famous assertion that “all” are “created equal” may have been that, by nature, there existed no divisions of humanity according to bloodline, as was an artificially maintained condition enormously affecting conditions in Britain and across Europe. And the “no-brainers” haven’t forgotten. We all recognize that other species, though displaying some differences between the behavior tendencies of individual members, display predictable species-wide regularities or traits – such as with rabbits tending to be timid and non-confrontational, horses susceptible to being spooked, and lions carnivorous and predictively aggressive. And because we’re calibrated in a certain way by our equally-distinctive DNA, physical make-up, and constraints, we humans tend to display our own broadly-shared, in-born nature, too – though also subject to individual differences. Our characteristic lack of big, sharp teeth and claws, our furless and upright vulnerability to the elements and animal (and plant) neighbors tend to make us characteristically a little more timid and cautious and a lot more cunning in order to compensate. And the fact that our existences demand daily a lot of mental activity to meet our needs by exploiting and out-competing neighbors who are often elusive or stronger or faster or better-armed by nature places stresses on us that are best resolved by borrowing devices and strategies long-since ingeniously devised by others. How many gun-owners would there be, for example, if each one had to invent and manufacture his or her own weapon? Off-the-shelf standard models and techniques serve us a lot better as a species, because we aren’t motivated or clever enough as individuals to continually improvise well enough to meet our enormous need to compensate for our physical shortcomings to compete and insure our survival. The same thing holds true of what we make of and how we respond to our cosmic and social environment(s). Precious few of us are truly free-thinkers, for example, when it comes to religious notions or politics. Here, too, it’s mostly off-the-shelf options that we adopt, to avoid having to even try to make sense of things for ourselves. It’s rather a question of what outfit’s or what set of ready-made ideas, concepts, or stories do we assent to and substitute for actually thinking and formulating for ourselves? For we are, of dire necessity, a severely collective species. (That’s why Bill Gates doesn’t drive a Gates. Yet, we 9/11 Truthers tend to blame others for not applying tried and true scientific principles to what we are accustomed to set apart and recognize as evidence, in order to test and see through the government/corporate-circulated myth designed to explain the origins and nature of the 9/11 crimes, something it never occurred to them to try to solve on their own. We usually don’t stop to reflect that most people don’t automatically stop to “think” about things we may recognize as important, but simply, unreflectively, adopt the standard, going version of what happened and what it portends – just as we all do concerning lots of other matters – if not religion and politics, then medicine and mechanics and a hundred other things we’ll never think about closely for ourselves. The only way we dedicated 9/11 Truthers can gain ground with a public that’s not accustomed to actually doing any active thinking about any public matters whatsoever, even concerning something we uniquely know needs to be correctly comprehended by our society as a whole in order to survive meaningfully and in freedom, is by continuing to poke big (expletive) holes in the demonstrably-preposterous myths spun expressly to serve as the society’s general understanding of 9/11. We’ve got to work hard and smart to convince enough people across the civilization that the conventional wisdom at least in this case is a real crock and a horrendous crime in itself. No one is going to do it for us! And I know that such can be done because it’s been done regarding other matters before (like the Warren Commission, whose findings are, pathetically, still touted obliviously today by gaggles of TV talking heads). We don’t necessarily have to convince the bulk of the population to think, especially scientifically, concerning the vital issue of what really happened on 9/11. We simply have to convince them that our general explanation is both far superior and (like it or not) true because, unlike the Official Conspiracy Theory, it fits the facts, plain and simple. The strategy of some of our own elites in the Movement of trying in particular to convince intelligent elites of the evidence of 9/11 inside crime and cover-up can only work in so far as those elites – often noted as our society’s thinkers and walking and talking repositories of knowledge – are then presumably recruited to stand as models to be emulated in their new conviction by millions of others who are not elites. It’s worth a try! But the rather conspicuous pitfall in such an otherwise-reasonable top-down strategy is that, while the luminaries being targeted might arguably be smart enough to find their way out of a paper bag, they are the most heavily and effectively incentivized people in the world not to acknowledge, and actually to ridicule, the rather easily-apprehended truth. And, so far, they have steadfastly refused to profess to seeing the light. So, to imagine for even a nanosecond that they, of all people, need to be apprised of the reality of sinister inside forces responsible is plain silly in 90%+ of cases! And presenting these targeted elites a chrome-plated, deluxe version of the plain evidence and physical facts isn’t likely to help very much. Instead, the targeted recalcitrants need to know that the public is no longer with them in their egoistic Know-nothing-ist stance. And, that, my friends, is our solemn duty to all we love and hold dear to bring about! JH / 7/03/13

Friday, June 14, 2013

LOST IN A FOG

Lost in a Fog by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * Here’s one overwhelming, and for us daunting, reason the media’s and officialdom’s portrayal of us 9/11 Truthers as delusional flakes and babbling nut-cases often finds nodding and even scornful resonance in and with the general public: a lack of common reference. 9/11 has been very selectively, following strict instructions I’m sure, referenced by folks in these same oxygen-deprived quarters – amongst our mass society’s giant talking-head gods on Olympus. For nearly a dozen years, 9/11 along with follow-up reminders has been presented (used) as a battering ram, a cudgel, a pseudo-patriotic rallying point, and an excuse for daylight robbery of the public and closing down the controls over and latitude of citizens a little tighter and a little tighter. Never do the cyber-age gods define 9/11 or dissect it or refer to any of its details. Never have, never will unless somehow forced. As a result, in the overwhelming public mind, the whole of 9/11 today is represented by one simple cartoonish mental image, most worthy of Beep! Beep! The Road Runner: that of an airplane flying straight into a high-rise building (and its nose peeking just a bit out the other side). Over and over and over and over, it’s the same. A variety of angles, but still the same. Nothing more ever – it speaks for itself. And probably over 99% of the U.S. public, despite our best efforts to date, has never, at least since 9/11/01 itself, or maybe a day or two after, seen any other arguably genuine images of the 9/11 crimes themselves except that one and the one-day inane leaked frame of the Pentagon. And then, suddenly, out of the blue, along there comes a brave 9/11 Truther, one of us, and asks Joe or Jane Citizen if he or she is aware that controlled demolition, not airplanes, actually is responsible for the collapse of those buildings in New York? Or if he (she) is aware that neither kerosene nor office-material fires can be hot enough to melt steel? Or that those buildings fell at virtual free-fall velocity neatly into their own footprint? Or even that Building 7 wasn’t even hit but fell anyway? It’s like someone you know (or not) approaching you on the street and asking you out of the blue if you know that Johnny Jukes, suspected of murder in Tishmingo, or Baghdad, AZ, has been busted for cocaine 12 times in 2 years? Or his wife had an affair with the alleged victim? Or, what’s your take on the Hindenburg verdict? And, you wonder why people pick up on the media’s and two administrations’ suggestion that we 9/11 Truthers more than might be “crazy”? The man on the street already knows what happened on 9/11 – he’s seen it with his own eyes at least a hundred times, thank you just the same! Now, if you ask if she (he) thinks the government/media could be covering something up about what happened on 9/11, you’ll get an answer like “probably” or “it wouldn’t surprise me” a high percentage of the time. Or, also if you ask the same question about Roswell, Area 51, Cyclamates, the Fed, or possibly bed springs or meal worms in Big Macs. I’ve been astounded by the course of an online debate I’ve been carrying on for two days with a guy who derided my responses to him as “Truther tricks” and “Truther shell games”, in comments on an Amazon.com review of David Ray Griffin’s Cognitive Infiltration. He said that all of the contextual circumstances convinced him that Osama bin-Laden had devised and commanded the 9/11 attacks by the hijackers to bring down the buildings, just as commonly portrayed. I responded that he needed to start with the easily-available forensic evidence of the crime, which, if examined, would prove that OBL and the 19 could not possibly have brought about the physical results of 9/11 using scalpels and airplanes, and it followed that they couldn’t have accomplished that result, period. When I provided a litany of the physical evidence proving that some form of energetic demolition, and not fires or planes, would have to have been employed to destroy in the way they were the three WTC buildings, he interpreted it as a “rant”. Then, mindful that the burden of proof rests always on the affirmative, I challenged him to provide me even a single shred of evidence that clearly supported the truth of the Official Conspiracy Theory. He declined, because I’d “never accept it”, and suggested that his standard of evidence was obviously higher than mine. He swore that he had already reviewed all of the “Truther evidence”, and kept referring to the Middle East situation as tending to bear out that the designated culprits had, indeed, been guilty of the atrocity. It finally occurred to me, from his seeming refusal to deal with or coherently comment on any item in my summaries of logical reasoning from evidence, and his failure to cite any contrary evidence, that he didn’t know what the term itself “forensic evidence” meant. (In the end, he responded, “oh, do you mean the way the buildings fell or something?”) Geesh! What does it take? It takes a shared basic point of reference, for one thing – something that’s been systematically obliterated for this particular pivotal piece of the nation’s heritage in order to reshape it into the most-powerful weapon of mass destruction in existence. We have our work more than cut out for us here, too, in devising a way to locate and tap into an instant shared recognition of some kind of our common property, the basics of what happened to us. Our awareness of this massive hurdle to be overcome and our thoughtful attention to it is needed urgently if we are to move forward as effective whistleblowers. JH: 6/14/13

Thursday, May 30, 2013

WHAT IS THE WAR ON TERROR?

What is the “War on Terror”? By James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization # # # Even non-interpretable views in the house of mirrors we all currently live in or moving shadows on the walls of a cave can at least clearly indicate that something is occurring. I can’t agree with people – even those with scientific credentials – who say that physical matter doesn’t actually exist because it’s all at base vibrating energy and most of it unimaginably vast empty space separating a few scattered particles, instead of all solid or liquid or whatever without gaps. Because all they’ve done in so observing is describe how what passes perfectly well as solid matter someone can safely sit on or use to hit a cricket ball or dispatch a fly is actually composed (or maybe even just one perspective on that). Matter is precisely whatever it is, not necessarily what we’ve been told it is, or always thought it to be, or say it is now. It’s the same with the so-called “War on Terror”. I have concluded from lots of stuff I’ve read, all of it researched and composed credibly by people I think are sane enough, honest, and know what they’re talking about, that al-Qaeda is basically a western asset invented by the CIA and White House 30 years ago to give disappointingly feckless tribesmen in Afghanistan adequate spine to counter the Soviets, and that it’s since been cultivated, funded, and called upon to do successive administrations’ (U.S. and British primarily) dirty work, including in Libya and Syria. But then, we all hear that al-Qaeda and Taliban, credibly alleged to be funded and in cahoots with the imperialists and Zionists, are the western allies’ intractable enemy (and thus, all of ours), and have been all along in unending pitched battles in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And meanwhile, the designated enemy’s top leaders, according to a likewise unending series of reports, are almost daily being picked off by drones, some of them, apparently with the more-fearsome names, killed over and over and then showing up again, like so many 9/11 “hijackers”. Soldiers coming back from over there swear they’ve been engaged and their comrades martyred in fierce firefights and via roadside bombs planted by the invincible Taliban and al-Qaeda forces and operatives, who simultaneously plot killings in the United States. So, the thing about al-Qaeda is that it is documented as being prominent to this day among pro-imperialist forces in various places as well as being the arch-enemy over there. The really odd thing about the Taliban, which the might of the U.S. and allied militaries find impossible to defeat even with their virtually unlimited ultimate doomsday weaponry, siphoning from our society trillions of dollars over time, is that it’s the same basic outfit, then actually constituting Afghanistan’s government, that the rag-tag “Northern Alliance” of Afghan tribesmen, jumping the gun against U.S. orders, routed and vanquished in about a week back in 2002.Huh? (Almost as intriguingly, the second most-reviled “al-Qaeda terrorist leader” of the time, more than a little bit comically, one Mullah Omar, an aging cleric, was reported at the same time by NPR to be leisurely sashaying across the country very openly from coffee shop to coffee shop unmolested, with Bush regime spokesmen and their Afghan toadies on the ground over there unperturbed. “We have plenty of time to round him up,” they said; then never did). So, what can be the answer to all of these simultaneously amusing and infuriating contradictions and conundrums? Though it may be too much to ask of the psychopaths in control what’s really going on, if the enemy on the ground that the U.S. and other militaries have been battling by now in a dizzying array of Middle Eastern countries for a dozen years and counting really are, as we’re told, anti-western, anti-American organized arch-terrorists, then how does that square with all of these truly weird enigmas? We know (I think we do) that western troops have been engaged in lethal combat against somebody. Then, against who? (And what if regular people are too busy living their lives and don’t want to know?) Well, ok then, let’s turn the scenario completely around, and imagine that our country is being massively invaded sometime in the future, and the Executive Branch and the invisible directors of the New World Order have ordered the U.S. military to “stand down” and not resist (not an unimaginable occurrence). Would that mean that the hordes of invaders pouring in would encounter no resistance whatsoever? Well, I should say not! All kinds of irregulars and unauthorized militia units would arise and organize all over the country to repel the horrid foreign invaders. And, these units could easily be bestowed with names by the controlling media such as “al-Qaeda in the Northeast”, or “al-Qaeda in the Rocky Mountains”, or “al-Qaeda in Dixie”. What I’m attempting to infer is that the so-called “enemy” forces reported in the Middle East and elsewhere are most likely just, or at least primarily, patriotic locals rallied to defend their homes and homelands from foreign attack, their numbers steadily, systematically increased by American drone strikes, atrocities, rumors, and mass bombings of noncombatant civilians to prolong the hatred and the war. And the “terrorist incidents” in Britain, the U.S., and elsewhere in allied countries are commissioned and staged as part of a new updated Operation Gladio, from among Middle Eastern lists of specially-groomed recruits bought and managed by western intelligence. I know someone is going to say to me, “You just figured that out now?” I’m thinking! I’m thinking! But, unless I’m profoundly mistaken, it’s not that the “War on Terror” doesn’t actually exist. It’s not a fraud in that way. Instead, it’s really more like the misnamed New Operation Gladio plus the Middle Eastern Patriotic Resistance, in my estimation, with perhaps a few odd Central-Casting recruited bad guys and fall guys thrown in. And with 9/11 squarely at the root of the whole mad and deadly bubble machine, it’s easily as bizarrely misbegotten and mad as the wars of Hitler ever were. If I’m anywhere near correct, how can they ever live it down? They have more than 9/11 to answer for now, and more to explain if publicly exposed. Anybody have a better theory? JH: 5/30/13

Thursday, May 23, 2013

WHY I WILL REMAIN A 911 TRUTHER TO THE END

Why I Will Remain a 911 Truther to the End by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * The reason I am a 911 Truther – someone who perceives the fact that the truth as to how the destruction and death episodically dealt on 9/11/01 was caused, and by and for whom, has been withheld and blocked from the public – can be distilled into two words. It has nothing to do with vengeance, nationality or political affiliation. The words are due process with the objective of serving justice for the ultimate consequential crime. Not social justice, which figures into the equation because, from the evidence I’ve seen, the several-part operation, or crime spree, appears likely to have been deliberately perpetrated by people belonging to or obedient to the beck and call of one narrow ilk of humanity. The victims and targets of the violence wreaked have turned out ultimately to be virtually all the rest of us on earth outside that limited-size clique. And the patsies and immediate targets were members of a different but infinitely-vaster human ilk who had little, and probably nothing at all, to do with the actual criminal conspiracy, but have been irresponsibly and diabolically hounded and murdered, their lives and homelands ravaged mercilessly as a result – in the name of self-defense! So, what is it that impedes the Constitutionally-guaranteed processes systematically leading to justice, the hallmark and lynchpin of the beguiling but false image America sells to the world, in this instance? It is undoubtedly the self-justifying assumption by the controlling élite that they are rightfully shielded from the class self-criminalization that would result if the damning evidence serious inquirers know exists proving what happened and what could not have happened were ever released into appropriate green-lighted legal proceedings. They, as a class, are able to block those proceedings and the accompanying admission of that evidence, so they do. In consequence, it is the infinitely-recited and replayed cover story, and pieces thereof, that many of those unwilling to question grab and hold onto. They hold tenaciously, despite the story’s apparent absurdity, even though it has been poked full of holes by assaults of hard evidence, revealed to anyone who will but look to be riddled with contradictions and impossibilities, in effect, sunk. But still, it is never publically permitted to be questioned. That being the case, why isn’t the public at large buying the unavoidable conclusion, following from the evidence that’s there for anyone to see? That being that the government and its mouthpiece media have lied from Day One and are shielding what can best be described as homicidal psychopathic criminals placed in key positions, for doing and daily covering up such a deed through a ruse intended to blame uninvolved and oblivious others? It’s precisely because the feckless public is largely comprised of idiots, in the original Greek sense. The root word for idiot in ancient Athens, with its effective form of democracy, designated venomously a “non-participant” in the direct government by citizens that materially affected everyone’s life. “Idiots” were people who, eligible to meaningfully participate, opted out because they thought it wouldn’t matter. The message? Definitely, don’t be one of those! But, weren’t there uninterested people like that around when the United States Constitution was enacted and put into effect? Yes, there were. But there were demonstrably fewer of them proportionately than now. So, has the intelligence level of the population changed? Apparently, it has. A study just released by researchers at the University of Amsterdam reveals that, with women of lesser testable intelligence steadily giving birth to by far the most offspring each generation since Victorian times, the average IQ of western populations has declined by about 14%. This would largely explain our catastrophic loss as an international population of the capacity and tendency to act and respond effectively. And, by that count, it’s small wonder our nations won’t wake up and resist the plundering of available funds and faux news generated daily via minutely choreographed business plan into an endless series of farcical charades diverting the public and spawning and shielding patent charlatans and traitors. The real reason practically none of the above will listen anymore to anyone without a dance cape and cane, even as HAARP manipulation crumbles, shakes, and bakes the earth to ooch us around, is because we’re living in an Age of Idiots! And it was no wonder, either, that the veritable utopia of Athens succumbed to chaos within a generation, if many didn’t bother to show up! But our good thing going, while down, has a little life yet. JH: 5/23/13

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

Who Are We? And Who Are They?

Who Are We? And Who Are They? By James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * The persistent, seemingly universal resistance to our message of Follow and Apply the Evidence (a resistance that never mentions the evidence it resists) has nothing to do with the truth, even with disputing it. It’s all about protecting the order, ultimately, of the cosmos as these people see it. For them, it’s about protecting the integrity of the whole, universal fabric of things, of a functioning economy of course benefitting them, of civilization, of culture, their put options and martinis (or lemonade if they are a little lower) in the afternoon, from all being ripped apart, the whole thing unraveling. We believe that people should promulgate and adjust their own conditions of life, on their own and through their representatives in government. They believe that everyone should fall into line behind the dictates of the few or even the One in command of the most vital money, regardless that few (or One) be self-indulgent, heartless jackasses – setting the tone for their followers. Ultimately, we in 911 Truth are challenging the oppression that has thus been foisted in obedience, iron-clad, over the earth, people and planet. This is an oppression that has blocked and muted our meaningful direct participation and intervention by voice in opposition to their psychologically-brilliant selling of all or most elements of their program of fact-replacement, coercion, plunder and murder as something desirable and necessary “to protect us”. They are the drivers of the New World Order, beginning in earnest with 9/11 and moving forward, shocking and impoverishing everybody else, based on that. They the spiders have anesthetized we the beetles, a precious few of whom, resistant, have woken up to recover a different vision. They have taken full, if bumpy, control of the world as we slept. They’re the real hijackers, deniers, shape-shifters. We represent their hated past and dogged present. They mustn’t give the facts a platform! But we probably won’t all be exterminated like the Cathars (although we could be swept up if too successful; that’s not our present problem). Evil probably can’t remain hidden forever; too many inquiring minds will suspect. And what we, 9/11’s “Truthers”, resisters of lies, will turn out, if noted at all, to be – guides or bywords - is up to us. JH: 5/14/13