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.

Friday, January 31, 2014

Not My Problem

Not my problem by James Hufferd, Ph.D. Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization * * * “Not my problem” seems to be the national if not the world slogan these days. People by the billions have apparently given up all hope of the world ever righting itself, after the programmed shellacking we’ve all gone through since sometime back in the 20th century, now accentuated and accelerated beyond all hope of even keeping track of since the nightmarish spectacle of 9/11/2001. And that strategy, of just minding your own business and keeping your head down, really isn’t as stupid as it’s often made out to be. A person should still be able to do that if he/she wishes – not concern oneself unduly with abstruse world-scale affairs – without fear of getting clobbered by unearned and certainly undeserved sudden out-of-the-blue gargantuan financial obligations stemming, say, from vengeful unread fine-print emanating from who-knows-where on documents tangentially dealing with your house fragmenting your future, or bombs or guns in the hands of dark-side mad men or misguided ladies at any moment blowing away you and/or your family. Such once was, of course, the common plight of those whom ill fortune trapped in the derelict deep rotten cores of inner-cities, in sterile canebrakes or hollers away out in the country, or in some crazed, far-off or targeted seldom heard from realm of psychopath dictators with oil or an H-bomb cache suspected clear across the globe, viewed dimly on your grainy 13-inch TV. But now, the psychs are operating closer at hand, nearly everywhere, as a matter of fact, and the random acts and cyber-hits, or what not, are either custom-planned or the result of fully-intended policies designed to screw everything up for clever and/or bumptious reasons or rabid agents, to destabilize or distress. If I tend my yard, you reason, and take the kids to ballet and inquire politely of the neighbors over the fence tending their yards, and don’t make any noise at all or rattle the chains, maybe the hubbub of the killing and wrecking machines won’t even find me. But now, they are increasingly calibrated for finding everyone and the game’s almost up. But, it’s not quite over yet. And that’s roughly the strategy of your neighbor, too, who knows well enough (when he knows or thinks anything at all) that 9/11 knocked virtually everything out of kilter, just like you say it did, and probably was part of an ongoing program in truth appearing a lot more evident since. But it’s still “not my problem”, because I can’t do anything about it. And the likes of Greg Palast and Chris Hedges, obscenely-famous and sold-out public intellectuals, who never, in years and years and years, have had time, they invariably tell anyone who inquires, to delve into the most consequential and easily key event of all of our lifetimes to even form a reasonably-informed opinion as to whether it could have been a false-flag operation – a set-up by powers out to trick and control us – or not. It was either a heinous happenstance, totally beyond the control, influence, or prior knowledge of anyone native to North America, or the blow-out grand opening number of a new and endlessly accelerating enslaving and killing spree launched by powers who were in control of our own government. And none of these paid-to-be-smart clowns (Palast, etc.) have yet found time in their busy schedules or vaguely hermetic lives to check out even the first clue about it. Hence, the second practically unanswerable national and world slogan: “I’m not convinced,” the refuge of many. By now, those of us who are for real and sane in this one way are yelling into an unrelenting gale, that is, those of us who’ve been fool enough to look into what’s been driving us all steadily back and reporting what we saw. They call us crazies, and we obviously are, to take the abuse attaching to our staunch stubbornness! Only the crazies among the Greeks questioned the tales of the gods who supposedly were pulling their strings and messing with nature. To attest to the often-stated fact that we have to be a little bit different ourselves – teched, or touched, I believe, is the old-fashioned word – to dare to look straight on at all the gargoyles and medusas and elementals of 9/11 as into the sun, in the face of nearly-universal ridicule dealt out to dissenters these days, to openly blame the infamous acts at Ground Zero, Salomon Brothers, and two other locations on fiends not foreign but domestic, flies in people’s faces and questions damn near everything they thought they had a handle on. Thus, there aren’t many of us crazy scary enough left – and we shouldn’t be too surprised. We lost the last of the faddists and swells some time ago, and are left a small cadre defending the Alamo with the one great weapon we have and have had all along – the verifiable truth. I can’t get together these days a decent quorum or anywhere near it for the once-thriving 911 Truth group I started here in the middle of the middle, at one time the wonder of the Movement. “Not my problem. The dog needed a bath, so I stayed home,” is something like what I regularly hear now. “Lord, give me power to change what I can, grace to endure or accept what I can’t, and wisdom to know the difference,” goes the old prayer. We, the few still battling mightily upstream, obviously don’t know the difference! But we should still know that it doesn’t matter what you know or say, if no one is listening! Yet, it’s not over. For then, there comes along Pete Carroll, the coach of Seattle Seahawks in the Super Bowl, who let slip last week that he’d grilled a returned Iraq War higher-up general as to whether 9/11 was an inside job, and how on earth it could have been otherwise, given what he, Pete Carroll, knew. “Carroll’s a very good coach, so how can he be so crazy?” one article reporting this tidbit quipped. A few more such reverenced crazies spewing the taboo words of not-so-difficult understanding and courage by someone who really gets it and cares, and there’ll be enough to fill a teacup. And then, perhaps, we’ll seriously be in business! How do I know it isn’t over yet? Because, when it is, it will no longer matter to them what any of us think. We won’t matter; they’ll just go ahead and plow us under, which has been their way from Day 1. As they’d say in Casablanca – You must remember this, the truth is still the truth, the lie is still the lie! The world must learn to tell the difference, as time goes by! JH: 1/31/14

Friday, January 17, 2014


Wishful Thinking While Ambiguous by James Hufferd, PhD Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization ___ *___ Welcome to 1984 + 30! A few days ago, I got an unsolicited email from a group mysteriously calling itself “The Peace Team”, offering a free review copy of their ambitious, highly-touted new 1.5-hour feature film, entitled “The Last War Crime” to any peace activist in a position to review (and I presume promote) it for a chunk of folks. Being a staunch Smedley Butler-ite, a real walking embodiment of that reformed general’s heartfelt motto, “to hell with war”, I felt both qualified and curious. Supposing this to be some “left-gate” outfit, I was shocked to see prominently displayed at the very top of a short list of linked websites on the film’s own site a certain, a site friendly to us (actually, a 9/11 Truth web site). Accordingly, I would very much have liked to be able to honor the generosity of The Peace Team to me personally by posting a glowing review useful to them for PR. But, on watching the movie yesterday and today, I found myself jotting down in my notes a whole passel of reservations and precious few accolades. First off, the film struck me as well-casted, well-choreographed and filmed, if not stunningly original or chock-a-block with memorable scenes and lines. (It was not.) I found the storyline a bit jaded: I felt I’d heard and seen it all before – and so, I’m sure, have you. It’s about an attack, from inside or outside not made clear, a breaking of the law of civil society at barbarous war, and a grand jury of dissenters acting out in response. What stood out for me was the singularly difficult to maintain POV (point of view) displayed, which I would best characterize as Wishful Thinking While Ambiguous. But then, all’s well that ends well, right? It all came out in the end just as all of us would probably wish – with the local indicting grand jury from the other end of the continent (acting on the grounds he had admitted to illegally fomenting outlawed waterboarding) marching up to the podium at an √©lite black-tie event presumable in DC, where Cheney was the speaker and, unimpeded, taking him into custody, snarling and leering at his antagonists. Cheney arrested by mere citizens? Unimpeded? I asked myself if The Peace Team somehow hadn’t heard of Mr. Splitting the Sky up in Canada? Hadn’t they researched the subject as practiced at all? Did they really suppose that Dick D. Cheney would drive or take the bus to such an event alone? (Apparently, he did!) And what, indeed, was deemed “the last war crime”? That line, at least, was memorable: it was “when the last shot is fired in the last war”. Sounds reasonable to me, though the connection is a little vague; really, since I can only recall word of Cheney himself having fired a shot once. When I traded emails with The Peace Team rep, trying to get hold of the promising film in the first place, he/she noted my blog name/affiliation, and remarked that “The Last War Crime” was not particularly about 9/11 itself, but instead focused of its repercussions and aftermath, the great “catalyzing event” only being referenced to set all of the rest up. I replied that that was fine, I wanted to see how it was that they managed to causatively link the two mega-event sequences, thinking the former might be considered blow-back for what befell before, with the latter seen blow-back itself, tit-for-tat-for tit and only by misdirection veering to punish Iraq (although, of course, there were attempts to more literately or plausibly link there, too). Even though the website quite prominently flaunted an association with, as stated, the film itself comes across as more than a little ambiguous on the question of a possible false flag derivation deviating from the official and media narrative. The celebrated PNAC document is cited, longing only shortly before for an “extraordinary catalyzing event, a new Pearl Harbor” – which it is just barely plausible to believe that those selectively chosen (or contracted representative) enemies of the United States from the precisely desired obscure corner of the world would have lottery-winningly-conveniently contrived to attack unprompted with extraordinary panache and circus-worthy choreography and skill, precisely on cue. How very dastardly of those irrational Muslim savages to do that! However, of course, the result for most non-brainwashed, normal-minded people would likely be, instead, to raise a lot of suspicions, at the very least. But this singular film, I suppose, attempts to appeal to the lowest common denominator of peace-seekers, and so rather bafflingly does not come down squarely on either side, and actually manages to embrace hints both scenarios – Muslim attack and Muslim-blaming false flag attack! For instance, Dan Rather’s rather famous (and, I think, telling) observation that morning about “getting at the under infrastructure of a building and bringing it down” is played in the film as background. But then, right away, hijacker pilots are shown in a cockpit chanting “Allah acbar”, while a flight attendant is shown in the passenger section talking graphically on a cellphone from a proven-impossible altitude – something a bit of research would have shown to be not only impossible, but the sole spurious source for the myth of Muslim hijackers aboard airliners in the first place. Another glaring contradiction: the sourpuss then-Vice President is shown uttering a commandment that all hijacked planes are to be shot down forthwith, and then, almost immediately afterward saying to the young messenger in Norman Mineta’s famous 9/11 Commission testimony, when asked “Do the orders still stand?, “Have you heard anything to the contrary?” presumably assuming that the former had not heard Cheney’s order to the contrary just prior. And so, what, then, was the link the film cited between 9/11 and, specifically, its focal war in Iraq? Well, interestingly, when that particular question is posed to a light-hearted self-confessed “kidder”, President G.W., his answer is that it doesn’t matter, because “What the American people want is a big, loud bang”. That’s it! And Cheney’s only high crime cited by the citizens’ grand jury convened in Las Vegas (germane because that jurisdiction suffered casualties as a result of the war), abjuring 9/11 itself, is that he promoted water-boarding to extract desired confessions. Reason enough, I should think. And the only reason Cheney and not Bush is targeted is because a sitting president can’t be prosecuted, whereas a de facto one can. Watching this film, from a perspective I found myself at pains to divine, was a curious, thought-provoking experience I recommend you avail yourself of for yourselves. And an object lesson as well in thinking clearly and researching fully (not so much). Finally, I’m still not sure just what this movie – touted for home viewing by study groups and viewing parties – conveys that wasn’t already firmly-established in the national mind. I hope they still have time for revision. But we all do want peace. And justice. JH: 1/17/14