Institutional Thinking – The Matrix, 1984 and The Allegory of The Cave

I saw this and thought it would be a perfect follow up to my last post. Thanks Ethan, and Waking Times for all the awesome information you put out there. (groovy picture below from google images). Keep in mind this was written around 380 B.C. so sadly, it’s safe to say enlightenment seems very slow in coming to the collective we. Does mankind really prefer to look at the shadows rather than look up at the light of the sun?

cavemen

Ethan ‘Indigo’ Smith, Contributor
Waking Times

Some philosophical work is so profound as to be influential for thousands of years. Plato’s ‘The Republic‘ is one such series of dialogues. It explains and explores the relationship between state institutions and individuals, and has provided humanity with lessons in politics, philosophy and individual enlightenment since it was penned some two thousand years ago.

One of the central dialogues in The Republic is called the Allegory of the Cave. The lessons the Allegory of the Cave provides to today’s world are numerous, and its depiction of our insidious societal structure is extremely accurate and insightful — despite often going unacknowledged as such.  Through its exploration of our political outer states, it also explores our psychological inner state as well.

The Allegory of The Cave proposes that what people take to be ‘reality’ in total is only a partial reality, or an all out illusion.  As is all similar philosophy, the allegory is layered, but it is partially about breaking from mainstream thinking and seeking individual knowledge; the ascension of  perspective; being in a cave and coming out of a cave. It’s about how we can ascend from the bottom to stand face-to-face with the golden Sun.

Socrates begins:  “Let me show you in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened Behold! Human beings living in an underground cave”.

The 4 Characters of the Cave

In the Allegory there are four character types.  Most people are chained, forced to watch images on a cave wall. Some however, the second character type, are unchained. They need no force; they are so transfixed with the imagery on the wall that the shadows are all they care about, and remain in the cave by choice. The images are cast on the wall by the third character type, the captors, who use a fire behind them to produce various shadows, to keep the prisoners entertained. The prisoners interpret the shadows and whatever noises are made as reality in total, for it is all they know. The fourth character type is the freed prisoner.

The narrative of The Cave hypothesizes what happens after the prisoner is released from the false imagery to which his society is subjected. In the film The Matrix, Neo is the freed prisoner; in 1984, Winston Smith dreams of being the freed prisoner.

The Freed Prisoner

The story of the freed prisoner goes that, after initial shock and distress, the prisoner learns to distinguish between reality and shadows, and sees the fire producing the shadows. When exiting the cave, he is first blinded by the light but eventually learns the basics of nature. He learns what is real, and what is shadow and reflection. He learns of Earth and Water and that all is dependent on the Sun, seasons and all life. After learning of the true reality outside the cave, free of the false images of his captors, the prisoner is inclined to return and inform those still confined to the cave of their present predicament… with unexpected results.

Similarly, the story of 1984 by George Orwell  takes place within an imagined dystopian future;  the allegorical cavern. The Telescreen, which constantly transmits as well as oversees, is equivalent to the shadows on the cave wall cast by the unseen captors, the Inner Party. Most people in 1984 are Proles; they are equivalent to the people chained in the cave, forced to accept false imagery as their reality. They have been prisoners their whole lives and do not notice the fact they are chained. The Outer party are the unchained, remaining totally transfixed on the party line told by the Telescreen. They are so loyal to the imagery and  narrative created by their captors that they will believe whatever they are shown, rather than observe for themselves. They will believe two plus two is five, as the saying goes, as long as it is presented as such on the Telescreen.

In the  dystopian world of  The Matrix, the same futuristic Allegory of The Cave is again explored. Neo is freed and seeks to free the others, and encounters the same archetypes and challenges.

Moreover the return of the freed prisoner can also be related to the ‘return of the prophet’ described in many theological constructs.

The Freed and the Scorned

The experience of the freed prisoner who returns to the Cave to free his fellow captors  is depicted in all three narratives; the Allegory of the Cave, 1984, and The Matrix.

In 1984  Emmanuel Goldstein (Emmanuel = God is with us, Goldstein = gold rock)  is a character who figuratively left the cave, or understood the Inner Party’s images were lies and attempted to get others to understand the institutional lies. Emmanuel is the supposed leader of the elusive Brotherhood in 1984, and is scorned, even hated by society. His attempt to enlighten his community to its captivity is met with disbelief,  resistance and scorn.

On-the-walls-of-the-cave-only-the-shadows-are-the-Truth-Plato-s-The-Allergory-of-The-Cave

The character of Winston Smith in 1984 is that of a person who attempts to leave the cave. He is privy to certain Inner Party lies and begins to question the Inner Party line  and seek alternate facts and perceptions. Winston’s end is not a happy one; akin to the return of the prisoner hypothesized in The Allegory of The Cave, he  attempts to leave the cave only to be shut in and beaten down – made to hold the party line by both prisoners and captors alike.

Similarly, today, individuals can transmute from dull repetitive ‘thought’ into ascended golden thinking, but as our minds are freed, one at a time, we ultimately find that our broader society is embedded with a series of norms and structures – of Matrices and Caves – that perpetuate false imagery, preserving the status quo from the ‘threat’ of  individual thinking.

Individuals and Institutions

Some fictional literature is so profound as to be relevant for decades (and centuries) and serves to expand humanity’s language and thought; its understanding of itself. George Orwell’s  1984 is one such literary work. It is a post WWII interpretation of the relationship between individuals and institutions, using the archetypal Allegory of the Cave.

The Allegory of the Cave, 1984 and The Matrix contain corresponding layers. Each explores a diabolical form of societal control; the control of thought through the presentation of selective information and images,  in combination with physical constraints of  strict surveillance and imprisonment. Sound familiar? In fact, the original title of 1984 was proposed as The Last Man in Europe. Certainly that is the way many of us feel – as if we are the last lone person – when we first become aware of lies and partial-truths that are presented as reality by those in control, and accepted in totality by seemingly everyone else.

George Orwell’s 1984 spawned new language for age-old structures of manipulation presented in the Allegory of the cave – the word “Orwellian” being one among many. This all-encompassing term is reflective of lies made to be truths, unlimited institutional surveillance, and logic so distorted as to not only convince the masses that two plus two equal five, but that war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength; and also to deny the very basic elements of nature… Just as we do today.

In reality, individual ignorance is strength to institutions. Everyone has their own personal caves and we are all figuratively held in larger societal caverns. Coming up with your own questions is the way get out of the cave and gain enlightenment. Questioning what seems like a lie, or an illusion in the cave, is the first step outside the cave.

The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall toward the earth’s center. With the feeling that he was speaking to… and setting forth an important axiom, he wrote: “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows”. ~  George Orwell’s 1984

Ethan Discusses ‘The Allegory of The Cave’ on Aquarian Radio

Click here  to listen to  Ethan discussing the Allegory of the Cave, and much more, with Janet and Sasha on the Planetary Oligarchy series (presented by Aquarian Radio).

About the Author

Activist, author and Tai Chi teacher Ethan Indigo Smith was born on a farm in Maine and lived in Manhattan for a number of years before migrating west to Mendocino, California. Guided by a keen sense of integrity and humanity, Ethan’s work is both deeply connected and extremely insightful, blending philosophy, politics, activism, spirituality, meditation and a unique sense of humour.

Ethan’s publications include:

For more information, visit Ethan on Facebook. (I follow him and enjoy his posts).

This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

Plato’s Cave: An Explanation of Reality and Awakening

Youtube Video – Here is an animated version of Plato’s Cave, the most popular, most insightful attempt to explain reality as we know it. The ‘cave’ represents the state of most human beings, while the tale of a dramatic exit from the cave means awakening.

The Seven Pillars of the Matrix

Seven-Pillars-non-esoteric
“No one is more of a slave than he who thinks himself free without being so.”
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Contemporary baptized, corporatized and sanitized man rarely has the occasion to question his identity, and when he does a typical response might be, “I am product manager for a large retail chain, married to Betty, father of Johnny, a Democrat, Steelers fan and a Lutheran.”

His answers imply not only his beliefs but the many responsibilities, rules and restrictions he is subjected to. Few if any of these were ever negotiated- they were imposed on him yet he still considers himself free.

But is free the right adjective for him, or would modern domesticated simian be more apt? He has been told what to do, believe, think and feel since he can remember. A very clever rancher has bred billions of these creatures around the globe and created the most profitable livestock imaginable. They work for him, fight for him, die for him, believe his wildest tales, laugh at his jokes and rarely get out of line. When domesticated man does break one of the rules there are armies, jailers, psychiatrists and bureaucrats prepared to kill, incarcerate, drug or hound the transgressor into submission.

One of the most fascinating aspects of domesticated man’s predicament is that he never looks at the cattle, sheep and pigs who wind up on his plate and make the very simple deduction that he is just a talking version of them, corralled and shepherded through his entire life. How is this accomplished? Only animals that live in hierarchical groups can be dominated by man. The trick is to fool the animal into believing that the leader of the pack or herd is the person who is domesticating them. Once this is accomplished the animal is under full control of its homo sapien master. The domesticated man is no different, originally organized in groups with a clear hierarchy and maximum size of 150- it was easy to replace the leader of these smaller groups with one overarching figure such as God, King, President, CEO etc.

The methodology for creating this exceptionally loyal and obedient modern breed, homo domesticus, can be described as having seven pillars from which an immense matrix captures the talking simians and their conscious minds and hooks them into a complex mesh from which few ever escape. The system is so advanced that those who do untangle themselves and cut their way out of the net are immediately branded as mentally ill, anti-social, or simply losers who can’t accept the ‘complexity of modern life’, i.e. conspiracy nuts.

DELUSION DWELLERS, Laurie Lipton, 2010

Plato described this brilliantly in his Allegory of the Cave, where people only see man made shadows of objects, institutions, Gods and ideas:

“–Behold! human beings living in an underground cave…here they have been from their childhood…necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance…the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets… and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall…”

It began with the word, which forever changed the ability of men to manipulate each other. Before language, every sensation was directly felt through the senses without the filter of words. But somewhere around 50,000 years ago language began to replace reality and the first pieces of code were put in place for the creation of the Matrix. As soon as the words began to flow the world was split, and from that fracturing was born man’s angst and slavery. The words separated us from who we really were, creating the first screen onto which the images from Plato’s cave were cast. Gurdjieff said it well, “Identifying is the chief obstacle to self-remembering. A man who identifies with anything is unable to remember himself.”

It’s no accident that in Hesiod’s ages of man the Golden Age knew no agriculture, which appeared in the Silver age, and by the time we reach the Bronze age the dominant theme is toil and strife. The two key elements to the enslavement of man were clearly language and agriculture. In the hunter gatherer society, taking out the boss was no more complicated than landing a well placed fastball to the head. Only since the advent of farming was the possibility of creating full time enforcers and propagandists made possible, and hence enslavement inevitable.

The search for enlightenment rarely if ever bears fruits in those temples of words, our schools and universities. Almost all traditions point to isolation and silence as the only paths to awakening; they are the true antidotes to modern slavery. As Aristotle wrote, “Whosoever is delighted in solitude is either a wild beast or a god.”

So from the institution from which we are mercilessly bombarded with words and enslaved to time, we begin our descent through the seven layers of the Matrix.

1981004006Education

There are things we are born able to do like eating, laughing and crying and others we pick up without much of an effort such as walking, speaking and fighting, but without strict institutional education there is no way that we can ever become a functioning member of the Matrix. We must be indoctrinated, sent to Matrix boot camp, which of course is school. How else could you take a hunter and turn him into a corporate slave, submissive to clocks, countless bosses, monotony and uniformity?

Children naturally know who they are, they have no existential angst, but schools immediately begin driving home the point of schedules, rules, lists and grades which inevitably lead the students to the concept of who they aren’t. We drill the little ones until they learn to count money, tell time, measure progress, stand in line, keep silent and endure submission. They learn they aren’t free and they are separated from everyone else and the world itself by a myriad of divides, names and languages.

It can’t be stressed enough how much education is simply inculcating people with the clock and the idea of a forced identity. What child when she first goes to school isn’t taken back to hear herself referred to by her full name?

It’s not as if language itself isn’t sufficiently abstract- nothing must be left without a category. Suzy can’t just be Suzy- she is a citizen of a country and a state, a member of a religion and a product of a civilization, many of which have flags, mascots, armies, uniforms, currencies and languages. Once all the mascots, tag lines and corporate creeds are learned, then history can begin to be taught. The great epic myths invented and conveniently woven into the archetypes which have come down through the ages cement this matrix into the child’s mind.

Even the language that she speaks without effort must be deconstructed for her. An apple will never again be just an apple- it will become a noun, a subject, or an object. Nothing will be left untouched, all must be ripped apart and explained back to the child in Matrixese.

We are taught almost nothing useful during the twelve or so years that we are institutionalized and conditioned for slavery- not how to cook, farm, hunt, build, gather, laugh or play. We are only taught how to live by a clock and conform to institutionalized behaviors that make for solid careers as slaveocrats.

ObamaGovernment

In the countries that claim to be democratic the concept of a government created to serve the people is often espoused. Government, and the laws they create and enforce are institutionalized social control for the benefit of those who have seized power. This has always been the case and always will be. In the pre-democratic era it was much clearer to recognize who had power, but the genius of massive democratic states are the layers upon layers of corporatocracy and special interests which so brilliantly conceal the identify of those who really manage the massive apparatus of control.

The functions of the state are so well esconded in dogmatic versions of history taught in schools that almost no one questions why we need anything beyond the bare essentials of government to maintain order in the post-industrial age. The history classes never point the finger at the governments themselves as the propagators and instigators of war, genocide, starvation and corruption. In Hollywood’s version of history, the one most people absorb, ‘good’ governments are always portrayed as fighting ‘bad’ ones. We have yet to see a film where all the people on both sides simply disengage from their governments and ignore the calls to violence.

The state apparatus is based on law, which is a contract between the people and an organism created to administer common necessities- an exchange of sovereignty between the people and the state. This sounds reasonable, but when one looks at the mass slaughters of the 20th century, almost without exception, the perpetrators are the states themselves.

The loss of human freedom is the only birthright offered to the citizens of the modern nation. There is never a choice. It is spun as a freedom and a privilege when it is in fact indentured servitude to the state apparatus and the corporatocracy that controls it.

patriotism-flag-respect-devotionPatriotism

Patriotism is pure abstraction, a completely artificial mechanism of social control. People are taught to value their compatriots above and beyond those of their own ethnic background, race or religion. The organic bonds are to be shed in favor of the great corporate state. From infancy children are indoctrinated like Pavlov’s dogs to worship the paraphernalia of the state and see it as a mystical demigod.

What is a country? Using the United States as example, what actually is this entity? Is it the USPS, the FDA, or the CIA? Does loving one’s country mean one should love the IRS and the NSA? Should we feel differently about someone if they are from Vancouver instead of Seattle? Loving a state is the same as loving a corporation, except with the corporations there is still no stigma attached to not showing overt sentimental devotion to their brands and fortunately, at least for the moment, we are not obligated at birth to pay them for a lifetime of services, most of which we neither need nor want.

Flags, the Hollywood version of history and presidential worship are drilled into us to maintain the illusion of the ‘other’ and force the ‘foreigner/terrorist/extremist’ to wear the stigma of our projections. The archaic tribal energy that united small bands and helped them to fend off wild beasts and hungry hoards has been converted into a magic wand for the masters of the matrix. Flags are waved, and we respond like hungry Labradors jumping at a juicy prime rib swinging before our noses. Sentimental statist propaganda is simply the mouthguard used to soften the jolt of our collective electroshock therapy.

PopeReligion

As powerful as the patriotic sects are, there has always been a need for something higher. Religion comes from the Latin ‘re-ligare’ and it means to reconnect. But reconnect to what? The question before all religions is, what have we been disconnected from? The indoctrination and alienation of becoming a card carrying slave has a cost; the level of abstraction and the disconnect from any semblance of humanity converts people into nihilistic robots. No amount of patriotic fervor can replace having a soul. The flags and history lessons can only give a momentary reprieve to the emptiness of the Matrix and that’s why the priests are needed.

The original spiritual connection man had with the universe began to dissolve into duality with the onset of language, and by the time cities and standing armies arrived he was in need of a reconnection, and thus we get our faith based religions. Faith in the religious experiences of sages, or as William James put it, faith in someone else’s ability to connect. Of course the liturgies of our mainstream religions offer some solace and connection, but in general they simply provide the glue for the Matrix. A brief perusal of the news will clearly show that their ‘God’ seems most comfortable amidst the killing fields.

If we focus on the Abrahamic religions, we have a god much like the state, one who needs to be loved. He is also jealous of the other supposedly non-existent gods and is as sociopathic as the governments who adore him. He wipes out his enemies with floods and angels of death just as the governments who pander to him annihilate us with cultural revolutions, atom bombs, television and napalm. Their anthem is, “Love your country, it’s flag, its history, and the God who created it all”- an ethos force fed to each new generation.

The Most Fanatic Supporters In The WorldCircus

The sad thing about circus is that it’s generally not even entertaining. The slaves are told it’s time for some fun and they move in hordes to fill stadiums, clubs, cinemas or simply to stare into their electrical devices believing that they are are being entertained by vulgar propaganda.

As long as homo domesticus goes into the appropriate corral, jumps when she is told to and agrees wholeheartedly that she is having fun, than she is a good slave worthy of her two days off a week and fifteen days vacation at the designated farm where she is milked of any excess gold she might have accumulated during the year. Once she is too old to work and put to pasture, holes are strategically placed in her vicinity so she and her husband can spend their last few dollars trying to get a small white ball into them.

On a daily basis, after the caffeinated maximum effort has been squeezed out of her, she is placed in front of a screen, given the Matrix approved beverage (alcohol), and re-indoctrinated for several hours before starting the whole cycle over again. God forbid anyone ever took a hallucinogen and had an original thought. We are, thankfully, protected from any substances that might actually wake us up and are encouraged stick to the booze. The matrix loves coffee in the morning, alcohol in the evening and never an authentic thought in between.

On a more primal level we are entranced with the contours of the perfect body and dream of ‘perfect love’, where our days will be filled with soft caresses, sweet words and Hollywood drama. This is maybe the most sublime of the Matrix’s snares, as Venus’s charms can be so convincing one willingly abandons all for her devious promise. Romantic love is dangled like bait, selling us down the path of sentimentally coated lies and mindless consumerism.

MoneyMoney

Money is their most brilliant accomplishment. Billions of people spend most of their waking lives either acquiring it or spending it without ever understanding what it actually is. In this hologram of a world, the only thing one can do without money is breath. For almost every other human activity they want currency, from eating and drinking to clothing oneself and finding a partner. Religion came from innate spirituality and patriotism from the tribe, but money they invented themselves- the most fantastic and effective of all their tools of domestication.

They have convinced the slaves that money actually has some intrinsic value, since at some point in the past it actually did. Once they were finally able to disconnect money completely from anything other than their computers, they finally took complete control, locked the last gate and electrified all the fences. They ingeniously print it up out of the nothing and loan it with interest in order for 18-year-olds to spend four years drinking and memorizing propaganda as they begin a financial indebtedness that will most likely never end.

By the time the typical American is thirty the debt is mounted so high that they abandon any hope of ever being free of it and embrace their mortgages, credit cards, student loans and car loans as gifts from a sugar daddy. What they rarely asks themselves is why they must work to make money while banks can simply create it with a few key strokes. If they printed out notes on their HP’s and loaned them with interest to their neighbors, they would wind up in a penitentiary, but not our friends on Wall Street- they do just that and wind up pulling the strings in the White House. The genius of the money scam is how obvious it is. When people are told that banks create money out of nothing and are paid interest for it the good folks are left incredulous. “It can’t be that simple!” And therein lies the rub- no one wants to believe that they have been enslaved so easily .

watch tvCulture

“Culture is the effort to hold back the mystery, and replace it with a mythology.”
Terence McKenna

As Terence loved to say, “Culture is not your friend.” It exists as a buffer to authentic experience. As they created larger and larger communities, they replaced the direct spiritual experience of the shaman with priestly religion. Drum beats and sweat were exchanged for digitized, corporatized noise. Local tales got replaced by Hollywood blockbusters, critical thinking with academic dogma.

If money is the shackles of the matrix, culture is its operating system. Filtered, centralized, incredibly manipulative, it glues all their myths together into one massive narrative of social control from which only the bravest of souls ever try to escape. It’s relatively simple to see the manipulation when one looks at patriotism, religion or money. But when taken as a whole, our culture seems as natural and timeless as the air we breathe, so intertwined with our self conception it is often hard to see where we individually finish and our culture begins.

download (1)Escaping the Grip of Control

Some might ask why this all-pervasive network of control isn’t talked about or discussed by our ‘great minds’. Pre-Socratic scholar Peter Kingsley explains it well:

“Everything becomes clear once we accept the fact that scholarship as a whole is not concerned with finding, or even looking for, the truth. That’s just a decorative appearance. It’s simply concerned with protecting us from truths that might endanger our security; and it does so by perpetuating our collective illusions on a much deeper level than individual scholars are aware of.”

Whoever discovered water, it certainly wasn’t a fish. To leave the ‘water’, or Plato’s cave takes courage and the knowledge that there is something beyond the web of control. Over 2,300 hundred years ago Plato described the process of leaving the Matrix in the Allegory of the Cave as a slow, excruciating process akin to walking out onto a sunny beach after spending years in a basement watching Kabuki.

How can this awakening be explained? How do you describe the feeling of swimming in the ocean at dusk to someone who as never even seen water? You can’t, but what you can do is crack open a window for them and if enough windows are opened, the illusion begins to lose its luster.

About the Author

Robert Bonomo is a blogger, novelist and esotericist. Download his latest novel, Your Love Incomplete, for free here.

This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

 

Alan Watts On Buddhism / website jesusneverexisted.com

Belief verses gnosis. Truth verses lies. Alan Watts on the religion of no religion. A wonderful 12 minute video clip that much better articulates my thoughts that the literalism of jesus is the foundation of ignorance. It’s the the lie upon which all other lies have been built upon.

 

 
PS:
I won’t apologize that good historical studies points to a mythical Jesus, all the real evidence points to this as the truth. Now to some this is not earth shattering news, but I did get a couple comments that I wasn’t able to reply correctly to, and I’m still short on time so ignore typos and ommissions. Yes, if a drunk is able to stop drinking by believing in an historical Jesus he has switched to one self destructive crutch to another crutch, but it’s still a crutch. He still BELIEVES a falsehood and misses the Gnostic message that the Church tried to destroy for 1,000 years or more. It’s the first and worse lie ever forced upon mankind using the most inhumane methods (avenge Hypatia). (I’d recommend The Dark History Of The Church for further reading). Look, I don’t like taking a cripple’s crutch from him. My mother is under the delusion of this mass hypnosis. It has been forced on us for so long it has possibly damaged our DNA. It is the worse disinformation and absolute silliest load of crap I’ve ever seen. So please don’t read further if you’re a cripple. Or ‘pick up your mat and walk again’ by KNOWING the truth! Why be a follower? The truth is within you. (”Don’t follow leaders, watch your parking meters” – Bob Dylan).

I should mention also that the Founder of AA, Bill Wilson, experimented with LSD to have a direct experience and entertained the idea that it would help drunks and addicts. It dissolves the ego boundaries and makes one see the big picture and inter connectedness of Gaia, Consciousness and what some call god. Too bad the government made even studying LSD illegal. The AA steps, designed to create a spiritual experience, emphasizes a higher power, or god as you understand him/her/it. AA is not affiliated with any religion. Would I force this gnosis on my mother? No, it can’t be forced on anyone. Religion can be forced on people, but not gnosis. I tried to talk to her and she shut down. It’s certainly not good to be so closed minded because of a lie, but like most she is so plugged into the matrix it’s impossible to have a discussion that’s goes deeper than talk of a TV game show. That’s what belief does. It fills in the knowledge void and then becomes “knowledge” to the “believer.” Believer verses Knower. I see nothing good in what happened to this religion. I would prefer to die like Aldous Huxley, with injections of LSD (which was given him by his loving wife), rather than hope I go to zombie heaven to see family members I really didn’t even like that much. I do know enough to know I can hit them on the head and kill them with my harp should they invade my cloud. (I’m kidding, I believe they’re down there smiling up at us right now). I prefer direct experience, it’s knowable at a deep intuitive level. I trust my own experiences, not someone else’s. Especially with something as corrupt as religion, and especially the most corrupted religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the religions of hate and war. Removing reincarnation from the bible was a direct order of Emperor Constantine. If you want to follow Constantine’s doctrines, go for it. I refuse to consume the flesh of that swine. Do I sound angry? I really hope not. I just prefer the truth. I’m so tired of being lied to by super-wealthy elites with an agenda to suppress mankind into being their servants. But I realize that they are only doing what we allow them to do. So much for faith in the masses. Remember the Roman Legal Maxim: “Let him who wants to be deceived, be thus deceived.” Truth never mattered to rulers, and this world is Rome 2.0. Scattered throughout the bible are golden nuggets of gnosis if you know how to find it. It’s poetry, the language of the ancients trying to describe an experience in order to share it.

Why even bring this up? Because it’s damn important! Belief is de-evolution of the human race! We need to cooperate with each other through gnosis of Love and compassion from a place of knowing. That’s very important! The mind control has to stop so we can evolve, so Consciousness can evolve and we don’t annihilate ourselves through lazy ignorance (ignore-ance, willfully letting ourselves be dumbed down. To be lied to by mainstream news (another example of belief based on something (propaganda) someone else said). To feel unhappy unless we buy stuff. To give up our freedoms and let our thoughts be spied on). Brave New World…get stuff, protect stuff from those without stuff. He with the most stuff in the end wins. Barf!

Gnosticism is supposed to work like this. The mythical Jesus (which is a symbol of the sun, the 12 opossums the 12 months, the 4 gospels the 4 seasons, blah blah blah) was introduced to Initiates as an historical person (like Santa Claus). They then got of the tit and stopped drinking infant milk and matured to have a spiritual/mystical personal experience with Consciousness. (It took much longer than a short 40 minutes a week in a brick church listening to someone else’s personal views. This was ancient physicists working hard with the only language available to them, poetic midrash).

It certainly got out of hand!

I would highly recommend interested people to take a look at the following:

 

Welcome to Enlightenment! – Religion: the Tragedy of Mankind. Articles by Kenneth Humphreys

Great Website:  Welcome to Enlightenment! – Religion: the Tragedy of Mankind. Articles by Kenneth Humphreys.

Islam

81604760

To debate God, you must first define God. I do not consider myself an Atheist, and if anyone thinks I’m singling out Islam for a good bashing,  I have also exposed zionism and chrisitnaity’s lies, fabricated history, hypocrisies,  acts of terror and falsehoods. This is where religion has taken us, into a fantasy land of separateness and hate. We mustn’t fear truth, we should fear false beliefs.  I am sure there are good people that belong to all religions, but since I started seeking truth and umcovering lies I have become more anti-religion, anti-superstition, anti-dogma, and anti-beliefs based on another human being’s imagination. A belief fills in the gap of not knowing and creates ignore-ance, causes division, delusion, feeds the ego, and induces violence. I really believe religion is bad for mankind. I think it’s time for a new paradigm based on the True Nature of Reality (which is what many of us refer to as God). If you call yourself a christian or muslim you set yourself apart from the rest of the world, do you see where this is going? I believe the entire cosmos and everything in it is of One Self. When we see ourselves as humans, made of stardust, interconnected and that we are each other, we will then end hunger, war, elitism, hatred, crime and so on. We need to understand that religion is manmade for political purposes, and spirituality is growth, not just personally but for the whole creation. I prefer John Lennon’s “Imagine NO religion” myself, but if we’re going to have such large numbers of entranced sheeple, Islam must at least reform. (What is it with people that makes them fear truth and cling to beliefs? We must and will evolve toward real enlightenment when religion becomes extinct). Any  anger felt by exposing the truth is based on fear. Follow that fear to it’s root then analyze it and let it go. Love will replace it.

The Muslim religion is obviously built upon the Judeo-Christian religion, but it is also a reaction to said religion, which excluded and vilified the various Arab cultures. Like their Jewish brothers and sisters, the Semitic Arabs trace their lineage to the biblical patriarch Abraham, who is depicted in the Bible as having mated with Hagar the Egyptian, producing the progenitor of the Arab race, Ishmael. While the Jewish contingent interprets this tale to justify its own ethnocentric ideology, Muslims interpret it to fit theirs, claiming that “God” would make of Ishmael’s people a “great nation” (Gen 21:18).

Typically, instead of searching for the truth about this tale, its proponents have turned it into a political competition for global domination. The Islamic world today is much closer to the kind of primitive Judaic society of 2000 years. It is a legal and political system. In the 21st century where many of us live at the apex of the scientific and technological revolutions of the last 200+ years, the “regressive,” overtly superstitious, primitive, religiously indoctrinated and (mostly) uneducated mind has a tendency to look back to the past and to consider some ancient prophet’s metaphysical and legal ramblings to be somehow more “enlightened” or even more “progressive” than that of a modern educated philosophical and political person. This is not a good sign.

Like numerous biblical characters, Abraham is evidently a mythological construct, not a “real person.” As scholar Barbara G. Walker states in The Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets (5-6) concerning Abraham:

“This name meaning ‘Father Brahm’ seems to have been a Semitic version of India’s patriarchal god Brahma; he was also the Islamic Abrama, founder of Mecca. But Islamic legends say Abraham was a late intruder into the shrine of the Kaaba. He bought it from priestesses of its original Goddess. Sarah, ‘the Queen’ was one of the Goddess’s titles, which became a name of Abraham’s biblical ‘wife.’ Old Testament writers pretended Sarah’s alliances with Egyptian princes were only love-affairs arranged by Abraham for his own profit—which unfortunately presented him as a pimp (Genesis 12:16) as well as a would-be murderer of his son (Genesis 22:10).

Abraham sacrificing Isaac; Rembrandt, 1635“In the tale of Isaac’s near-killing, Abraham assumed the role of sacrificial priest in the druidic style, to wash Jehovah’s sacred trees with the Blood of the Son: an ancient custom, of which the sacrifice of Jesus was only a late variant. Jehovah first appeared to Abraham at the sacred oak of Shechem, where Abraham built his altar. Later Abraham build an altar to the oak god of Mamre at Hebron. Even in the 4th century A.D., Constantine said Abraham’s home at the Oak of Mamre was still a shrine: ‘It is reported that most damnable idols are set up beside it, and that an altar stands hard by, and that unclean sacrifices are constantly offered.'”

Allah—Remake of the Moon Goddess

This description of Abraham’s origins means that Judaism is built upon hoary myths, such that neither of its offshoot religions, Christianity and Islam, can truthfully claim to be of divine or “inspired” origin. As concerns the god of Islam, Allah, Walker (22) has this to say:

“Late Islamic masculinization of the Arabian Goddess, Al-Lat or Al-Ilat—the Allatu of the Babylonians—formerly worshipped at the Kaaba in Mecca. It has been shown that ‘the Allah of Islam’ was a male transformation of ‘the primitive lunar deity of Arabia.’ Her ancient symbol the crescent moon still appears on Islamic flags, even though modern Moslems no longer admit any feminine symbolism whatever connected with the wholly patriarchal Allah.”

Indeed, the Koran verifies Allah’s lunar or night-sky status: “Remember the name of our Lord morning and evening; in the night-time worship Him: praise Him all night long.” (Q 76:23) And at Q 2:189: “They question you about the phases of the moon. Say: ‘They are seasons fixed for mankind and for the pilgrimage.'”

In Pagan Rites in Judaism (97), Theodor Reik states, in a chapter called “The ancient Semitic moon-goddess”:

“All Semites had once a cult of the moon as supreme power. When Mohammed overthrew the old religion of Arabia, he did not dare get rid of the moon cult in a radical manner. Only much later was he powerful enough to forbid prostration before the moon (Koran Sure 4:37). Before Islamic times the moon deity was the most prominent object of cults in ancient Arabia. Arab women still insist that the moon is the parent of mankind.

Horned goddess Ishtar“Sir G. Rawlinson traces the name Chaldeans back to the designation of the ancient capital Ur (Chur) to be translated as moon-worshipers. The Semitic moon-god was ‘the special deity and protector of women.’ The Babylonians worshiped the goddess Ishtar, who is identical with the great Arabian goddess and has the epithet Our Lady… She also has the title Queen of Heaven, which really means the Queen of the Stars. She was horned and was, as all lunar goddesses, represented by a heavenly cow.

“The Hebrew tribes, or rather their ancestors, were the latest wave of migrants from Arabia. The cult of their god was associated with Mount Sinai—the mountain of the moon. The experts assume that the name Sinai derived from Sin, the name of the Babylonian moon-god. In Exodus (3:1) Sinai is called the ‘mountain of the Elohim. This suggests that it has long been sacred.’

“In the Old Testament, which is a collection of much earlier, often edited writings, the moon appears as a power of good (Deut. 33:4) or of evil (Ps. 12:16). Traces of ancient moon-worship were energetically removed from the text by later editors. A few remained, however, and can be recognized in the prohibitions of Deuteronomy. In 4:19 the Israelites are warned: ‘And lest thou lift up thine eyes upon heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, and be led astray to worship them, and serve them,’ and in 17:3 the punishment of stoning is prescribed for the person who ‘hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven…’ The Lord predicts (Jer. 8:2) that the bones of kings and princes of Judah will not be buried, but spread ‘before the sun, and the moon, and all the hosts of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and whom they have worshipped.'”

In The Origin of All Religious Worship (25-26), concerning Arab astrotheology, which was a continuation of this ancient Semitic lunar tradition, Charles Dupuis states:

“The Moon was the great divinity Presidential flag of Turkeyof the Arabs. The Sarazens gave her the epithet of Cabar or the Great; her Crescent adorns to this day the religious monuments of the Turks. Her elevation under the sign of the Bull, constituted one of the principal feasts of the Saracens and the sabean Arabs. Each Arab tribe was under the invocation of a constellation Each one worshipped one of the celestial bodies as its tutelar genius.

“The Caabah of the Arabs was before the time of Mahomet, a temple dedicated to the Moon. The black stone which the Musulmans kiss with so much devotion to this day, is, as it is pretended, an ancient statue of Saturnus. The walls of the great mosque of Kufah, built on the foundation of an ancient Pyrea or temple of the fire, are filled with figures of planets artistically engraved. The ancient worship of the Arabs was the Sabismus, a religion universally spread all over the Orient. Heaven and the Stars were the first objects thereof.

“This religion was that of the ancient Chaldeans, and the Orientals pretend that their Ibrahim or Abraham was brought up in that doctrine. There is still to be seen at Hella, over the ruins of the ancient Babylon, a mosque called Mesched Eschams, or the mosque of the Sun. It was in this city, that the ancient temple of Bel, or the Sun, the great Divinity of the Babylonians, existed; it is the same God, to whom the Persians erected temples and consecrated images under the name of Mithras.”

Astrotheology at Mecca

One of the sites for this Arab worship of the “hosts of heaven” was Mecca. Regarding the Kaaba of Mecca, that holiest of Muslim holies, Walker (487) writes:

Black Stone (al-Hajaru-l-Aswad) in the Kaaba at Mecca, encased in a yoni-shaped silver frame“Shrine of the sacred stone in Mecca, formerly dedicated to the pre-Islamic Triple Goddess Manat, Al-Lat (Allah), and Al-Uzza, the ‘Old Woman’ worshipped by Mohammed’s tribesmen the Koreshites. The stone was also called Kubaba, Kuba or Kube, and has been linked with the name of Cybele (Kybela), the Great Mother of the Gods. The stone bore the emblem of the yoni (vagina), like the Black Stone worshipped by votaries of Artemis. Now it is regarded as the holy center of patriarchal Islam, and its feminine symbolism has been lost, though priests of the Kaaba are still known as Sons of the Old Woman.”

And a translator of the Koran, N.J. Dawood (1), says:

“Long before Muhammad’s call, Arabian paganism was showing signs of decay. At the Ka’bah the Meccans worshipped not only Allah, the supreme Semitic God, but also a number of female deities whom they regarded as daughters of Allah. Among these were Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Manat, who represented the Sun, Venus and Fortune respectively.”

Arabian Matriarchy

Concerning the nation of Arabia, prior to the encroachment of Islam, it was a matriarchal culture for over 1,000 years:

“The Annals of Ashurbanipal said Arabia was governed by queens for as long as anyone could remember….

“Mohammed’s legends clearly gave him a matriarchal family background. His parents’ marriage was matrilocal. His mother remained with her own family and received her husband as an occasional visitor….

“Pre-Islamic Arabia was dominated by the female-centered clans. Marriages were matrilocal, inheritance matrilineal. Polyandry—several husbands to one wife—was common. Men lived in their wives’ homes. Divorce was initiated by the wife. If she turned her tent to face east for three nights in a row, the husband was dismissed and forbidden to enter the tent again.

Mohammed watches women in hell being tortured by a demon; 15th cent., Persia; 'Miraj Nama,' Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris“Doctrines attributed to Mohammed simply reversed the ancient system in favor of men. A Moslem husband could dismiss his wife by saying ‘I divorce thee’ three times. As in Europe, the change from matriarchate to patriarchate came about only gradually and with much strife.

“…However, the history of early-medieval Arabia is nearly all legend. Like Buddha, Confucius, Jesus and other founders of patriarchal religions, Mohammed lacks real verification. There is no reliable information about his life or teachings. Most stories about him are as apocryphal as the story that his coffin hangs forever in mid-air ‘between heaven and earth,’ like the bodies of ancient sacred kings.

“With or without Mohammed, Islam succeeded in becoming completely male-dominated, making no place for women except in slavery or in the seclusion of the harem. Islamic mosques still bear signs reading: ”Women and dogs and other impure animals are not permitted to enter.’

“Nevertheless, traces of the Goddess proved ineradicable. Like the virgin Mary, Arabia’s Queen of Heaven received a mortal form and a subordinate position as Fatima, Mohammed’s ‘daughter.’ But she was no real daughter. She was known as Mother of her Father, and Source of the Sun…” ~ Walker

Who Wrote the Koran?

As for the Koran, the Muslim holy book:

“Mohammedan scriptures, often erroneously thought to have been written by Mohammed. Moslems don’t believe this. But many don’t know the Koran was an enlarged revised version of the ancient Word of the Goddess Kore, revered by Mohammed’s tribe, the Koreshites (Children of Kore), who guarded her shrine at Mecca.

“The original writing was done long before Mohammed’s time by holy imams, a word related to Semitic ima, ‘mother.’ Like the original mahatmas or ‘great mothers’ of India, the original imams were probably priestesses of the old Arabian matriarchate. It was said they took the scripture from a prototype that existed in heaven from the beginning of Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus, 'considered the single most fundamental writing about alchemy and the occult.'eternity, ‘Mother of the Book’—i.e., the Goddess herself, wearing the Book of Fate on her breast as Mother Tiamat wore the Tablets of Destiny. Sometimes the celestial Koran was called the Preserved Tablet. There was some resemblance between this and other legendary books of divine origin, such as the Ur-text, the Book of Thoth, and the Emerald Tablet of Hermes.

“As in the case of the Judeo-Christian Bible, the Koran was much rewritten to support new patriarchal laws and to obliterate the figures of the Goddess and her priestesses.” –  Walker (513)

In The Great Religious Leaders, Charles Frances Potter says of Mohammed, “It is very doubtful that he read any of the Bible: indeed, it has not been proved that he ever read anything, or wrote anything. He called himself ‘the illiterate prophet.'” Of course, much of the Koran is based on the Bible, both Old and New Testaments (including a lot of mistakes and mistranslations), combined with pre-Islamic Arab and other traditions.

Regarding the unoriginality of the Koran, Islam expert Dr. Daniel Pipes says (The Jerusalem Post, 5/12/00):

“The Koran is a not ‘a product of Muhammad or even of Arabia,’ but a collection of earlier Judeo-Christian liturgical materials stitched together to meet the needs of a later age.”

Biblical scholar Dr. Robert M. Price likewise concurs as to the pre-Islamic nature of various koranic texts:

“The Koran was assembled from a variety of prior Hagarene texts (hence the contradictions re Jesus’ death) in order to provide the Moses-like Muhammad with a Torah of his own….”

Islamic expert Dr. Gerd-R. Puin concludes:

“My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate….”

Thus, the Koran was not written by Mohammed.

The Yemeni Koran

Adding significantly to this important scholarship Koran hoard from Sana'a, Yemen; 7th-8th centurieswas the discovery in 1972 at Sana’a, Yemen, of thousands of parchment fragments from the Koran, consisting of possibly the oldest extant quranic manuscript ever found, dating to the 7th-8th centuries. Regarding these fragments, the professor who photographed them, Dr. Puin, remarks:

“So many Muslims have this belief that everything between the two covers of the Koran is just God’s unaltered word. They like to quote the textual work that shows the Bible has a history and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Koran has been out of this discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to prove that the Koran has a history too. The Sana’a fragments will help us do that.”

Concerning the texts and Puin’s conclusions, The Atlantic Monthly‘s Toby Lester states:

“…some of these fragments revealed small but intriguing aberrations from the stand Koranic text. Such aberrations, though not surprising to textual historians, are troublingly at odds with the orthodox Muslim belief that the Koran as it has reached us today is quite simply the perfect, timeless, and unchanging Word of God…. What the Yemeni Korans seems to suggest, Puin began to feel, was an evolving text rather than simply the Word of God as revealed in its entirety to the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh century A.D.”

Others weighing in on the value of the Yemeni discovery have included Dr. Andrew Rippin, a professor of Islamic Studies:

Fragment of the Quran from Sana'a, Yemen“The impact of the Yemeni manuscripts is still to be felt. Their variant readings and verse orders are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts say that the early history of the Koranic texts is much more of an open question than many have suspected: the text was less stable, and therefore had less authority, than has always been claimed.”

In this same regard, Islamic history professor Dr. R. Stephen Humphreys summarizes the importance of the study of how the Koran was created and the Yemeni hoard in this quest:

“To historicize the Koran would in effect delegitimize the whole historical experience of the Muslim community. The Koran is the charter for the community, the document that called it into existence. And ideally though obviously not always in reality Islamic history has been the effort to pursue and work out the commandments of the Koran in human life. If the Koran is a historical document, then the whole Islamic struggle of fourteen centuries is effectively meaningless.”

The evidence reveals that the Koran was created over a period of decades, if not centuries, by a number of hands, rather than representing a single, divine “revelation” from the Almighty to Mohammed.

Who Was Mohammed?

Mohammed riding his magical steed; from 'The Apocalypse of Muhammad,' 1436, Herat, Afghanistan; Bibliotheque Nationale, ParisLike that of Buddha, Jesus, Moses, et al., Mohammed’s historicity is questionable. He seems to be yet another religious figurehead invented to create a “state” religion. His “history” is full of fantastic legends, but even if we were to find a “historical person” there, it would not be one of very high or affable character. As Potter says:

“Of women, his taste ran to widows with a temper… For recreation he delighted in cobbling shoes. Perhaps his greatest joy was when he beheld the severed heads of his enemies.

“His dislikes were just as varied. He detested silk-lined clothes, interest charges, dogs, others’ lies, Jews and Christians. He hated poets, and said, ‘Every painter will be in hell.’

“He was inordinately vain. A clever woman poet satirized him. She was slain when asleep with her child at her breast, and the vengeful Muhammad praised her murderer. Once he tortured a Jew to find the location of hidden treasure and then had him killed and added the widow to his harem. Strange indeed was the character of the prophet. How could such a person inspire such reverence and devotion? It is one of the puzzles of history.

“It was not that he developed a great theology, either, for what little theology Islam has, worthy of the name, was built up after Muhammad had long been dead.”

According to the hadiths or hadees—records of the purported sayings and acts of Mohammed and his companions—the Prophet was indeed of a character that would repulse any decent human being. One after another of the hadiths discuss Mohammed’s insatiable sexual appetite, which included having sex with his “wife” ‘Aisha, who was 9 years old and had not even reached puberty. Various Islamic authorities have also claimed that Mohammed began “thighing” ‘Aisha when he married her at the age of six.

Mohammed with his followers enjoying a beheading; Turkish text 'Siyer-i Nebi,' 1338As to how such a character could inspire such reverence and devotion, we would submit that it was because Mohammed and Islam were created by yet another faction of “the brotherhood” for purposes of competition with Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism and other religions. As N.A Morozov says:

“…until the Crusades Islam was indistinguishable from Judaism and…only then did it receive its independent character, while Muhammad and the first Caliphs are mythical figures.”

Behind the creation of such ideologies are usually those who benefit the most, particularly “third-party” weapons manufacturers, since these divisive creeds are forever setting one culture against another.

 

 

Despite the unconvincing attempts by well-meaning individuals to assert the pacificism of Islam, the fact is that it is a desert warrior’s religion and was not spread by peaceful means. As Gerald Berry says, in Religions of the World (62):

“Partly because he needed funds and partly because his followers were not skilled in agriculture as were the natives of Yathrib, [Mohammed] organized fighting bands to raid caravans. Having no ties with the older religions, he sent them out even in the peace months. This started Arabia’s Holy War. Mohammed’s whole movement took on the character of religious militarism. He made the Moslem fanatic fighters by teaching that admission to Paradise was assured for all those who died fighting in the cause of Allah.”

”In the end, Islam, which means “submission,” is built upon older myths and traditions and was designed to usurp the power of Christians, Jews and women. While we have no quarrel with all Arabian culture, we do have a big problem with ideologies that are filled with half-truths and lies. Because of  arrogance and  bigotry, ancient cultures, along with their variety, justice and beauty, have become nearly obliterated. In effect, the Western monolithic religions represent a massive degradation of culture.

”If this planet’s inhabitants would simply become educated to the origins of their traditions in full, we could live in a world of tremendous beauty and knowledge, as opposed to ugly, superstitious and repressive ideologies that are exclusionary and bigoted. Islam arose because of the repression of Christianity and Judaism, as well as an unbalanced female-oriented culture. Like those traditions, Islam is utterly out of balance, and we may all suffer for it, particularly if the predictions come true that Islam will be the most dominant religion in the world in the next decades.

”As previously stated, there are few non-Muslim women or men who would wish to live in such a world. Because of this aversion, we would expect to see in the future innumerable ghastly battles and wars waged in the name of one god or another, as has happened far too often in the past, especially with these monotheistic Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All told, these three are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people, so why are they deemed “Great religions?” The “greatest” thing about them is their death toll.” – D.M. Murdock/Acharya S

 

72 virgins in the Muslim Paradise is borrowed pagan astrotheology

When Muhammad based his ministry and teachings on Moses, Christ and the Jews theology, he inadvertently incorporated the pagan’s astrotheology system whose remnants can still be found in Judaism, e.g. the “12 Tribes of Israel” referring to the 12 Signs of the Zodiac. Christianity contains far more Egyptian astrotheological concepts but of course it too has the 12 Signs which become in Christianity, the 12 Disciples.

“There are also 72 extra-zodiacal constellations known as the paranatellons. This is why Jesus is said to have officially had 12 servants with 72 others that also carried the message.

The 72 angels on Jacob’s ladder and the 72 nations in Genesis also relate to these 72 decans, 1 for every 5 degrees of the zodiac. It serendipitously takes 72 years to move 1 degree through the zodiacal precession of the equinoxes.

Hence Confucious (6th century BC China) had 72 initiated disciples and Set (ancient Egypt) had 72 accomplices in the death of Osiris.”

The Septuagint, the Torah/Tanakh in Greek was supposedly authored by 72 authors in keeping with the hidden astrotheology numbers.

And of course, the 72 Virgins in the Muslim heaven refers to this same pagan astrotheology number.

The Qur’an tells us: “not to make friendship with Jews and Christians” (5:51), “kill the disbelievers wherever we find them” (2:191), “murder them and treat them harshly” (9:123), “fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem” (9:5). The Qur’an demands that we fight the unbelievers, and promises “If there are twenty amongst you, you will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, you will vanquish a thousand of them” (8:65).

While claiming to be a religion of peace, Islamic doctrine is anything but “peace-loving,” as it constantly calls for the slaying of “idolaters” and “infidels” (e.g.,Q 2:191, 9:5, 9:73), among other harsh commentary in the Koran as well as other texts such as the hadiths. Islam is taken more literally than any other religion. It is actually a political movement/cult. All fundamental religions use brainwashing, so I expect muslims to be offended by truth, just as I expect the same from Christians. I am anti religion, anti belief, anti ignorance. If it floats your boat, that’s you. I have my own theory of reality, based on nature. You religious nuts have a doctrine other humans invented and that has NOTHING to do with god. So, dream on. You have a fantasy movie playing in your head written and directed by men for their own agenda. God is within you, It is your higher Self, you can talk directly with It.  Religious nuts are so violent that the Apocalypse will become a self fulfilling prophecy. WWIII might be fought between christians and muslims, and in the name of a loving god!

Female oppression and cultural bigotry is the hallmark of Islam. This religions teaches that there is some separate outerspace god who is exclusively male. In Islam, this god is interpreted through the minds of Muslims as being an Arab or Persian man who hates the Jewish man of the Judeo-Christian ideology. This racist, ethnocentric, culturally bigoted and sexist interpretation of any “infinite” “loving” “peaceful” god would appear to be complete nonsense. Yet, in what seems to be supreme arrogance and megalomania, many individuals would like the entire world to believe it is true. The lunatics are on the path.

Inventing a definition for God is after all what theologians do, and if I were to invent a definition a just and good “God” I think I could do a lot better than the ancient Israelites, Jesus or Mohammad.

“There is no god but man and woman”

 

Sources & Further Reading

main source: http://www.truthbeknown.com/islam.htm Acharya S
Internet searches and forums
Berry, Gerald. Religions of the Word. Barnes & Noble, 1955.
Dawood, N.J. The Koran. London: Penguin Books, 1995.
Dupuis, Charles. The Origins of All Religious Worship.
Glazov, Jamie. “The Yemeni Koran.” FrontpageMag.com
Potter, Charles Francis. The Great Religious Leaders. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1958.
Reik, Theodor. Pagan Rites in Judaism. New York: Farrar, Strauss, 1964.
Walker, Barbara G. The Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets. HarperSanFrancisco, 1983.

Quran Browser
The Non-Historicity of Mohammed?
Fitna: A Review
Cleric: Replace Capitalism with Islamic Financial System
Shariah Finance Watch

Quotes from the Koran
A Call to the Muslims of the World
The Massacres of the Khilafah
‘Islam is a Religion of Peace’
Allah the Moon God

 

What is faith? What path best promotes spiritual growth? Does religion good for us? What is our purpose? How does this reality work? Is to “BE” the better part of believe?

Quotes by Tom from this discussion: “Truth is universal”, “The Truth isn’t owned by an organization or religion”, “The reality we live in is a creative process” (explains why enlightened people from all disciplines are so in touch with the same larger reality?)

How to Reclaim Your Mind

162

 

This is an important piece for those that wish to begin walking their true path in life. Many, including myself, fall victim to advertising, propaganda, and poor food choices that all cloud our true thoughts and beliefs. There are many systems in place to gently steer the way we think until we find ourselves living a life that we are not happy with.

“We can judge our health by our happiness, and by our happiness we know that we’re obeying the dictates of our Souls.” – Edward Bach

The reason I used the words “true path” is that we are all here to experience certain things and learn from them. When one is on the true path, the lessons are not as difficult, nor are they often missed. This leads to faster progression, happiness, and a more fulfilling life. It is only when we have lost our way through false beliefs that we didn’t choose and foggy thinking that clouds decisions that we miss opportunity and eventually lead lives with more unhappiness. Oftentimes, having to repeat lessons over and over until we finally get it right and learn from them.

“Everything happens for a reason. Everything leads to something better.” – Dr. Richard Alan Miller

The art of reclaiming your mind can be split into parts: what goes in and what comes out. When these components are aligned, reclaimed, and optimized, you are truly living from free will and your life will change for the better.

Nutrition

This is meant to be your own personal cheat sheet to help you focus on key areas. First and foremost, stop eating gluten! It’s no longer difficult to avoid it. The market has listened to customer demand and products are abundant to seamlessly substitute your current gluten intake. Remember, not everyone has celiac disease, but everyone’s brain is effected by gluten. The book Wheat Belly by William Davis M.D., is a great place to start. While we are on the topic of diet, David Wolf’s book The Sunfood Diet is a further step in the progression towards detox and clarity. In it, he advocates a food triangle in which the corners represent chlorophyll (organic, non-GMO green leafy vegetables), fats (organic, non-GMO fatty fruits, nuts, seeds, coconuts), and sugars (organic non-GMO sweet fruits) all at a ratio of 33%. No mind clearing nutritional regime would be complete without addressing a fluoride detox program. To date, the best supplements out there appears to be Zeotex and Fluoride Shield. Although each should do their own further research. If you would like to stick with a whole food approach, this article link from TrueActivist.comcovers it all. Given the lack of integrity of pro-GMO companies and some disastrous research being released, I would suggest avoiding all GMO foods, period.

“Your food determines in a large measure how long you shall live – how much you shall enjoy life – and how successful your life shall be.” – Dr. Kirschner

Beliefs

Many of our beliefs were formed as children before we had a say in the matter. In addition, many of our early beliefs are no long applicable, or even functional, towards meeting our current needs and lifestyle directions. Regardless of what we believe, we will find a way to create consistency between our life and beliefs. For this reason, beliefs, for the believer, are always true. The brain is a powerful, goal seeking mechanism that will make anything we believe in come true. Or it will, at least, make it appear to be true which amounts to the same thing as far as our life experiences are concerned. Challenge your beliefs! Do not accept results that you don’t seek created by beliefs you did not choose. Face one fear or uncomfortable situation daily. Leaning to meditate makes us more consciously aware of what we are creating. The practice of meditation also has the benefit on mitigating the effects of the recent increase in solar flares impacting our mental, emotional, and physical bodies. According to Dr. Simon Atkins, this increase will be seen for the next 18 months. A float tank will fast track your meditation technique and is on record for the ability tounlock the creative centers of the brain, alleviate symptoms of depression and anxiety, and enhance the ability to stay focused and concentrate.

“The middle of the road is where the white line is – and that’s the worst place to drive.” – Robert Frost

Kill Your TV

There is no question this one is a major action step to reclaiming your mind. Watching television almost instantly switches your brainwaves into the alpha state (tranquility, relaxation, pleasure, suggestibility etc.). Is it any wonder that it’s called programming? Themind has no firewall security and is wide open. Watch a child as they begin to gaze upon the television. Their blinking becomes lessened, mouth drops open, body posture “melts” and they become unresponsive to outside influences such as having their name called. High definition television only amplifies this effect. If you watch TV, I suggest you stay away from the HD channels, mainstream media, and political speeches.

“I find television very educating. Every time someone turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book.” – Groucho Marx

Vaccinations

This is a debated topic and I will only be focusing on what are referred to as adjuvants. Adjuvants are chemicals that are added to the vaccines. Although I could focus on any one of a slew of toxic contaminants (adjuvants) found within each shot, mercury (thimerosal) and aluminum are in the cross hairs for this section. Mercury is toxic to the human body, period. It is a fact that it kills/degenerates brain neurons. Aluminum, is again toxic to the body but also makes the immune system overreact, sometimes for up to two years. The body had numerous filtering systems to protect toxic or poisonous substances from entering the bloodstream. If something toxic is eaten, it is typically eliminated or substantially weakened before it finally reaches the blood/circulatory system. However, with vaccines, that process is sidestepped by injecting the toxin directly into the bloodstream. This allows it free reign to cause damage to the areas it comes in contact with such as brain neurons. Don’t just take my word for it, the United States Postal Service classifies mercury as a class 8 hazard under section 348.21 Nonmailable Corrosives. For a comprehensive look at the entire topic of vaccines, please see the work of Dr. Sherry Tenpenny, Dr. Russul Blaylock, and Dr. Andrew Wakefeild.

“The greatest lie ever told is that vaccines are safe and effective. – Leonard Horowitz


About the AuthorJeffery Jaxen is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and an open source researcher and writer. In addition he serves as director of alternative & holistic health for the Awake & Empowered Expo. You can find his latest research, information, and work at the following websites: www.jeffereyjaxen.com & www.awakeandempoweredexpo.com. Follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/JeffereyJaxen or contact him directly at http://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/contact.html

This article is from Waking Times and is written by Jeffery Jaxen. Waking Times’ material is Creative Commons, meaning it’s OK to republish with author attribute and all links intact.

Beyond Left & Right: Escaping the Matrix

WIKI-Matrix-01

The defining dramatic moment in the film The Matrix occurs just after Morpheus invites Neo to choose between a red pill and a blue pill. The red pill promises “the truth, nothing more.” Neo takes the red pill and awakes to reality – something utterly different from anything Neo, or the audience, could have expected. What Neo had assumed to be reality turned out to be only a collective illusion, fabricated by the Matrix and fed to a population that is asleep, cocooned in grotesque embryonic pods. In Plato’s famous parable about the shadows on the walls of the cave, true reality is at least reflected in perceived reality. In the Matrix world, true reality and perceived reality exist on entirely different planes.

The story is intended as metaphor, and the parallels that drew my attention had to do with political reality. This article offers a particular perspective on what’s going on in the world – and how things got to be that way – in this era of globalization. From that red-pill perspective, everyday media-consensus reality – like the Matrix in the film – is seen to be a fabricated collective illusion. Like Neo, I didn’t know what I was looking for when my investigation began, but I knew that what I was being told didn’t make sense. I read scores of histories and biographies, observing connections between them, and began to develop my own theories about roots of various historical events. I found myself largely in agreement with writers like Noam Chomsky and Michael Parenti, but I also perceived important patterns that others seem to have missed.

When I started tracing historical forces, and began to interpret present-day events from a historical perspective, I could see the same old dynamics at work and found a meaning in unfolding events far different from what official pronouncements proclaimed. Such pronouncements are, after all, public relations fare, given out by politicians who want to look good to the voters. Most of us expect rhetoric from politicians, and take what they say with a grain of salt. But as my own picture of present reality came into focus, “grain of salt” no longer worked as a metaphor. I began to see that consensus reality – as generated by official rhetoric and amplified by mass media – bears very little relationship to actual reality. “The matrix” was a metaphor I was ready for.

In consensus reality (the blue-pill perspective) “left” and “right” are the two ends of the political spectrum. Politics is a tug-of-war between competing factions, carried out by political parties and elected representatives. Society gets pulled this way and that within the political spectrum, reflecting the interests of whichever party won the last election. The left and right are therefore political enemies. Each side is convinced that it knows how to make society better; each believes the other enjoys undue influence; and each blames the other for the political stalemate that apparently prevents society from dealing effectively with its problems.This perspective on the political process, and on the roles of left and right, is very far from reality. It is a fabricated collective illusion. Morpheus tells Neo that the Matrix is “the world that was pulled over your eyes to hide you from the truth…. As long as the Matrix exists, humanity cannot be free.” Consensus political reality is precisely such a matrix. Later we will take a fresh look at the role of left and right, and at national politics. But first we must develop our red-pill historical perspective. I’ve had to condense the arguments to bare essentials; please see the annotated sources at the end for more thorough treatments of particular topics.

Imperialism and the Matrix

From the time of Columbus to 1945, world affairs were largely dominated by competition among Western nations seeking to stake out spheres of influence, control sea lanes, and exploit colonial empires. Each Western power became the core of an imperialist economy whose periphery was managed for the benefit of the core nation. Military might determined the scope of an empire; wars were initiated when a core nation felt it had sufficient power to expand its periphery at the expense of a competitor. Economies and societies in the periphery were kept backward – to keep their populations under control, to provide cheap labour, and to guarantee markets for goods manufactured in the core. Imperialism robbed the periphery not only of wealth but also of its ability to develop its own societies, cultures, and economies in a natural way for local benefit.

The driving force behind Western imperialism has always been the pursuit of economic gain, ever since Isabella commissioned Columbus on his first entrepreneurial voyage. The rhetoric of empire concerning wars, however, has typically been about other things – the White Man’s Burden, bringing true religion to the heathens, Manifest Destiny, defeating the Yellow Peril or the Hun, seeking lebensraum, or making the world safe for democracy. Any fabricated motivation for war or empire would do, as long as it appealed to the collective consciousness of the population at the time. The propaganda lies of yesterday were recorded and became consensus history – the fabric of the matrix.

While the costs of territorial empire (fleets, colonial administrations, etc.) were borne by Western taxpayers generally, the profits of imperialism were enjoyed primarily by private corporations and investors. Government and corporate elites were partners in the business of imperialism: empires gave government leaders power and prestige, and gave corporate leaders power and wealth. Corporations ran the real business of empire while government leaders fabricated noble excuses for the wars that were required to keep that business going. Matrix reality was about patriotism, national honour, and heroic causes; true reality was on another plane altogether: that of economics.Industrialisation, beginning in the late 1700s, created a demand for new markets and increased raw materials; both demands spurred accelerated expansion of empire. Wealthy investors amassed fortunes by setting up large-scale industrial and trading operations, leading to the emergence of an influential capitalist elite. Like any other elite, capitalists used their wealth and influence to further their own interests however they could. And the interests of capitalism always come down to economic growth; investors must reap more than they sow or the whole system comes to a grinding halt.

Thus capitalism, industrialisation, nationalism, warfare, imperialism – and the matrix – coevolved. Industrialised weapon production provided the muscle of modern warfare, and capitalism provided the appetite to use that muscle. Government leaders pursued the policies necessary to expand empire while creating a rhetorical matrix, around nationalism, to justify those policies. Capitalist growth depended on empire, which in turn depended on a strong and stable core nation to defend it. National interests and capitalist interests were inextricably linked – or so it seemed for more than two centuries.

World War II and Pax Americana

1945 will be remembered as the year World War II ended and the bond of the atomic nucleus was broken. But 1945 also marked another momentous fission – breaking of the bond between national and capitalist interests. After every previous war, and in many cases after severe devastation, European nations had always picked themselves back up and resumed their competition over empire. But after World War II, a Pax Americana was established. The US began to manage all the Western peripheries on behalf of capitalism generally, while preventing the communist powers from interfering in the game. Capitalist powers no longer needed to fight over investment realms, and competitive imperialism was replaced by collective imperialism (see sidebar below). Opportunities for capital growth were no longer linked to the military power of nations, apart from the power of America.

In his  Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II  (see recommended reading), William Blum chronicles hundreds of significant covert and overt interventions, showing exactly how the US carried out its imperial management role.In the postwar years matrix reality diverged ever further from actual reality. In the postwar matrix world, imperialism had been abandoned and the world was being “democratised”; in the real world, imperialism had become better organised and more efficient. In the matrix world the US “restored order,” or “came to the assistance” of nations which were being “undermined by Soviet influence”; in the real world, the periphery was being systematically suppressed and exploited. In the matrix world, the benefit was going to the periphery in the form of countless aid programs; in the real world, immense wealth was being extracted from the periphery.

Growing glitches in the matrix weren’t noticed by most people in the West, because the postwar years brought unprecedented levels of Western prosperity and social progress. The rhetoric claimed progress would come to all, and Westerners could see it being realised in their own towns and cities. The West became the collective core of a global empire, and exploitative development led to prosperity for Western populations, while generating immense riches for corporations, banks, and wealthy capital investors.

Glitches in the Matrix, Popular Rebellion, and Neoliberalism

The parallel agenda of Third-World exploitation and Western prosperity worked effectively for the first two postwar decades. But in the 1960s large numbers of Westerners, particularly the young and well educated, began to notice glitches in the matrix. In Vietnam imperialism was too naked to be successfully masked as something else. A major split in American public consciousness occurred, as millions of anti-war protesters and civil-rights activists punctured the fabricated consensus of the 1950s and declared the reality of exploitation and suppression both at home and abroad. The environmental movement arose, challenging even the exploitation of the natural world.

In Europe, 1968 joined 1848 as a landmark year of popular protest. These developments disturbed elite planners. The postwar regime’s stability was being challenged from within the core – and the formula of Western prosperity no longer guaranteed public passivity. A report published in 1975, the Report of the Trilateral Task Force on Governability of Democracies, provides a glimpse into the thinking of elite circles. Alan Wolfe discusses this report in Holly Sklar’s eye-opening Trilateralism (see recommended reading). Wolfe focuses especially on the analysis Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington presented in a section of the report entitled “The Crisis of Democracy.” Huntington is an articulate promoter of elite policy shifts, and contributes pivotal articles to publications such as the Council on Foreign Relations’s Foreign Affairs (see recommended reading).

Huntington tells us that democratic societies “cannot work” unless the citizenry is “passive.” The “democratic surge of the 1960s” represented an “excess of democracy,” which must be reduced if governments are to carry out their traditional domestic and foreign policies. Huntington’s notion of “traditional policies” is expressed in a passage from the report: To the extent that the United States was governed by anyone during the decades after World War II, it was governed by the President acting with the support and cooperation of key individuals and groups in the executive office, the federal bureaucracy, Congress, and the more important businesses, banks, law firms, foundations, and media, which constitute the private sector’s ‘Establishment’.

In these few words Huntington spells out the reality that electoral democracy has little to do with how America is run, and summarises the kind of people who are included within the elite planning community. Who needs conspiracy theories when elite machinations are clearly described in public documents like these?

Besides failing to deliver popular passivity, the policy of prosperity for Western populations had another downside, having to do with Japan’s economic success. Under the Pax Americana umbrella, Japan had been able to industrialise and become an imperial player – the prohibition on Japanese rearmament had become irrelevant. With Japan’s then-lower living standards, Japanese producers could undercut prevailing prices and steal market share from Western producers. Western capital needed to find a way to become more competitive on world markets, and Western prosperity was standing in the way. Elite strategists, as Huntington showed, were fully capable of understanding these considerations, and the requirements of corporate growth created a strong motivation to make the needed adjustments – in both reality and rhetoric.

If popular prosperity could be sacrificed, there were many obvious ways Western capital could be made more competitive. Production could be moved overseas to low-wage areas, allowing domestic unemployment to rise. Unions could be attacked and wages forced down, and people could be pushed into temporary and part-time jobs without benefits. Regulations governing corporate behaviour could be removed, corporate and capital-gains taxes could be reduced, and the revenue losses could be taken out of public-service budgets. Public infrastructures could be privatised, the services reduced to cut costs, and then they could be milked for easy profits while they deteriorated from neglect.

These are the very policies and programs launched during the Reagan-Thatcher years in the US and Britain. They represent a systematic project of increasing corporate growth at the expense of popular prosperity and welfare. Such a real agenda would have been unpopular, and a corresponding matrix reality was fabricated for public consumption. The matrix reality used real terms like “deregulation,” “reduced taxes,” and “privatisation,” but around them was woven an economic mythology. The old, failedlaissez-faire doctrine of the 1800s was reintroduced with the help of Milton Friedman’s Chicago School of economics, and “less government” became the proud “modern” theme in America and Britain. Sensible regulations had restored financial stability after the Great Depression, and had broken up anti-competitive monopolies such as the Rockefeller trust and AT&T. But in the new matrix reality, all regulations were considered bureaucratic interference. Reagan and Thatcher preached the virtues of individualism, and promised to “get government off people’s backs.” The implication was that everyday individuals were to get more money and freedom, but in reality the primary benefits would go to corporations and wealthy investors.

The academic term for laissez-faire economics is “economic liberalism,” and hence the Reagan-Thatcher revolution has come to be known as the “neoliberal revolution.” It brought a radical change in actual reality by returning to the economic philosophy that led to sweatshops, corruption, and robber-baron monopolies in the nineteenth century. It brought an equally radical change in matrix reality – a complete reversal in the attitude that was projected regarding government. Government policies had always been criticised in the media, but the institution of government had always been respected – reflecting the traditional bond between capitalism and nationalism. With Reagan, we had a sitting president telling us that government itself was a bad thing. Many of us may have agreed with him, but such a sentiment had never before found official favour. Soon, British and American populations were beginning to applaud the destruction of the very democratic institutions that provided their only hope of participation in the political process.

Globalisation and World Government

The essential bond between capitalism and nationalism was broken in 1945, but it took some time for elite planners to recognise this new condition and to begin bringing the world system into alignment with it. The strong Western nation state had been the bulwark of capitalism for centuries, and initial postwar policies were based on the assumption that this would continue indefinitely. The Bretton Woods financial system (the IMF, World Bank, and a system of fixed exchange rates among major currencies) was set up to stabilise national economies, and popular prosperity was encouraged to provide political stability. Neoliberalism in the US and Britain represented the first serious break with this policy framework – and brought the first visible signs of the fission of the nation-capital bond.

The neoliberal project was economically profitable in the US and Britain, and the public accepted the matrix economic mythology. Meanwhile, the integrated global economy gave rise to a new generation of transnational corporations, and corporate leaders began to realise that corporate growth was not dependent on strong core nation-states. Indeed, Western nations – with their environmental laws, consumer-protection measures, and other forms of regulatory “interference” – were a burden on corporate growth. Having been successfully field tested in the two oldest “democracies,” the neoliberal project moved onto the global stage. The Bretton Woods system of fixed rates of currency exchange was weakened, and the international financial system became destabilising, instead of stabilising, for national economies. The radical free-trade project was launched, leading eventually to the World Trade Organisation. The fission that had begun in 1945 was finally manifesting as an explosive change in the world system.

The objective of neoliberal free-trade treaties is to remove all political controls over domestic and international trade and commerce. Corporations have free rein to maximise profits, heedless of environmental consequences and safety risks. Instead of governments regulating corporations, the WTO now sets rules for governments, telling them what kind of beef they must import, whether or not they can ban asbestos, and what additives they must permit in petroleum products. So far, in every case where the WTO has been asked to review a health, safety, or environmental regulation, the regulation has been overturned.

Most of the world has been turned into a periphery; the imperial core has been boiled down to the capitalist elite themselves, represented by their bureaucratic, unrepresentative, WTO world government. The burden of accelerated imperialism falls hardest outside the West, where loans are used as a lever by the IMF to compel debtor nations such as Rwanda and South Korea to accept suicidal “reform” packages. In the 1800s, genocide was employed to clear North America and Australia of their native populations, creating room for growth. Today, a similar program of genocide has apparently been unleashed against sub-Saharan Africa. The IMF destroys the economies, the CIA trains militias and stirs up tribal conflicts, and the West sells weapons to all sides. Famine and genocidal civil wars are the predictable and inevitable result. Meanwhile, AIDS runs rampant while the WTO and the US government use trade laws to prevent medicines from reaching the victims.

As in the past, Western military force will be required to control the non-Western periphery and make adjustments to local political arrangements when considered necessary by elite planners. The Pentagon continues to provide the primary policing power, with NATO playing an ever-increasing role. Resentment against the West and against neoliberalism is growing in the Third World, and the frequency of military interventions is bound to increase. All of this needs to be made acceptable to Western minds, adding a new dimension to the matrix.

In the latest matrix reality, the West is called the “international community,” whose goal is to serve “humanitarian” causes. Bill Clinton made it explicit with his “Clinton Doctrine,” in which (as quoted in the Washington Post) he solemnly promised, “If somebody comes after innocent civilians and tries to kill them en masse because of their race, their ethnic background or their religion and it is within our power stop it, we will stop it.” This matrix fabrication is very effective indeed; who opposes prevention of genocide? Only outside the matrix does one see that genocide is caused by the West in the first place, that the worst cases of genocide are continuing, that “assistance” usually makes things worse (as in the Balkans), and that Clinton’s handy doctrine enables him to intervene when and where he chooses. Since dictators and the stirring of ethnic rivalries are standard tools used in managing the periphery, a US president can always find “innocent civilians” wherever elite plans call for an intervention.

In matrix reality, globalisation is not a project but rather the inevitable result of beneficial market forces. Genocide in Africa is no fault of the West, but is due to ancient tribal rivalries. Every measure demanded by globalisation is referred to as “reform,” (the word is never used with irony). “Democracy” and “reform” are frequently used together, always leaving the subtle impression that one has something to do with the other. The illusion is presented that all economic boats are rising, and if yours isn’t, it must be your own fault: you aren’t “competitive” enough. Economic failures are explained away as “temporary adjustments,” or else the victim (as in South Korea or Russia) is blamed for not being sufficiently neoliberal. “Investor confidence” is referred to with the same awe and reverence that earlier societies might have expressed toward the “will of the gods.”

Western quality of life continues to decline, while the WTO establishes legal precedents ensuring that its authority will not be challenged when its decisions become more draconian. Things will get much worse in the West; this was anticipated in elite circles when the neoliberal project was still on the drawing board, as is illustrated in Samuel Huntington’s “The Crisis of Democracy” report discussed earlier.

Management of Discontented Societies

The postwar years, especially in the United States, were characterised by consensus politics. Most people shared a common understanding of how society worked, and generally approved of how things were going. Prosperity was real and the matrix version of reality was reassuring. Most people believed in it. Those beliefs became a shared consensus, and the government could then carry out its plans as it intended, “responding” to the programmed public will.

The “excess democracy” of the 1960s and 1970s attacked this shared consensus from below, and neoliberal planners decided from above that ongoing consensus wasn’t worth paying for. They accepted that segments of society would persist in disbelieving various parts of the matrix. Activism and protest were to be expected. New means of social control would be needed to deal with activist movements and with growing discontent, as neoliberalism gradually tightened the economic screws. Such means of control were identified and have since been largely implemented, particularly in the United States. In many ways America sets the pace of globalisation; innovations can often be observed there before they occur elsewhere. This is particularly true in the case of social-control techniques.

The most obvious means of social control, in a discontented society, is a strong, semi-militarised police force. Most of the periphery has been managed by such means for centuries. This was obvious to elite planners in the West, was adopted as policy, and has now been largely implemented. Urban and suburban ghettos – where the adverse consequences of neoliberalism are currently most concentrated – have literally become occupied territories, where police beatings and unjustified shootings are commonplace.

So that the beefed-up police force could maintain control in conditions of mass unrest, elite planners also realised that much of the US Bill of Rights would need to be neutralised. (This is not surprising, given that the Bill’s authors had just lived through a revolution and were seeking to ensure that future generations would have the means to organise and overthrow any oppressive future government.) The rights-neutralisation project has been largely implemented, as exemplified by armed midnight raids, outrageous search-and-seizure practices, overly broad conspiracy laws, wholesale invasion of privacy, massive incarceration, and the rise of prison slave labour. The Rubicon has been crossed – the techniques of oppression long common in the empire’s periphery are being imported to the core.

In the matrix, the genre of the TV or movie police drama has served to create a reality in which “rights” are a joke, the accused are despicable sociopaths, and no criminal is ever brought to justice until some noble cop or prosecutor bends the rules a bit. Government officials bolster the construct by declaring “wars” on crime and drugs; the noble cops are fighting a war out there in the streets – and you can’t win a war without using your enemy’s dirty tricks. The CIA plays its role by managing the international drug trade and making sure that ghetto drug dealers are well supplied. In this way, the American public has been led to accept the means of its own suppression.

The mechanisms of the police state are in place. They will be used when necessary – as we see in ghettos and skyrocketing prison populations, as we saw on the streets of Seattle and Washington D.C. during recent anti-WTO demonstrations, and as is suggested by executive orders that enable the president to suspend the Constitution and declare martial law whenever he deems it necessary. But raw force is only the last line of defense for the elite regime. Neoliberal planners introduced more subtle defences into the matrix; looking at these will bring us back to our discussion of the left and right.

Divide and rule is one of the oldest means of mass control – standard practice since at least the Roman Empire. This is applied at the level of modern imperialism, where each small nation competes with other for capital investments. Within societies it works this way: If each social group can be convinced that some other group is the source of its discontent, then the population’s energy will be spent on inter-group struggles. The regime can sit on the sidelines, intervening covertly to stir things up or to guide them in desired directions. In this way most discontent can be neutralised, and force can be reserved for exceptional cases. In the prosperous postwar years, consensus politics served to manage the population. Under neoliberalism, programmed factionalism has become the front-line defense – the matrix version of divide and rule.

The covert guiding of various social movements has proven to be one of the most effective means of programming factions and stirring them against one another. Fundamentalist religious movements have been particularly useful. They have been used not only within the US, but also to maximise divisiveness in the Middle East and for other purposes throughout the empire. The collective energy and dedication of “true believers” makes them a potent political weapon that movement leaders can readily aim where needed. In the US that weapon has been used to promote censorship on the Internet, to attack the women’s movement, to support repressive legislation, and generally to bolster the ranks of what is called in the matrix the “right wing.”

In the matrix, the various factions believe that their competition with each other is the process that determines society’s political agenda. Politicians want votes, and hence the biggest and best-organised factions should have the most influence, and their agendas should get the most political attention. In reality there is only one significant political agenda these days: the maximisation of capital growth through the dismantling of society, the continuing implementation of neoliberalism, and the management of empire. Clinton’s liberal rhetoric and his playing around with health care and gay rights are not the result of liberal pressure. They are rather the means by which Clinton is sold to liberal voters, so that he can proceed with real business: getting NAFTA through Congress, promoting the WTO, giving away the public airwaves, justifying military interventions, and so forth. Issues of genuine importance are never raised in campaign politics – this is a major glitch in the matrix for those who have eyes to see it.

Escaping the Matrix

The matrix cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Under the onslaught of globalisation, the glitches are becoming ever more difficult to conceal – as earlier, with the Vietnam War. Last November’s anti-establishment demonstrations in Seattle, the largest in decades, were aimed directly at globalisation and the WTO. Even more important, Seattle saw the coming together of factions that the matrix had programmed to fight one another, such as left-leaning environmentalists and socially conservative union members.

Seattle represented the tip of an iceberg. A mass movement against globalisation and elite rule is ready to ignite, like a brush fire on a dry, scorching day. The establishment has been expecting such a movement and has a variety of defences at its command, including those used effectively against the movements of the 1960s and 1970s. In order to prevail against what seem like overwhelming odds, the movement must escape entirely from the matrix, and it must bring the rest of society with it. As long as the matrix exists, humanity cannot be free. The whole truth must be faced: Globalisation is centralised tyranny; capitalism has outlasted its sell-by date; matrix “democracy” is elite rule; and “market forces” are imperialism. Left and right are enemies only in the matrix. In reality we are all in this together, and each of us has a contribution to make toward a better world.

Marx may have failed as a social visionary, but he had capitalism figured out. It is based not on productivity or social benefit, but on the pursuit of capital growth through exploiting everything in its path. The job of elite planners is to create new spaces for capital to grow in. Competitive imperialism provided growth for centuries; collective imperialism was invented when still more growth was needed; and then neoliberalism took over. Like a cancer, capitalism consumes its host and is never satisfied. The capital pool must always grow, more and more, forever – until the host dies or capitalism is replaced.

The matrix equates capitalism with free enterprise, and defines centralised-state-planning socialism as the only alternative to capitalism. In reality, capitalism didn’t amount to much of a force until the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution of the late 1700s – and we certainly cannot characterise all prior societies as socialist. Free enterprise, private property, commerce, banking, international trade, economic specialisation – all of these had existed for millennia before capitalism. Capitalism claims credit for modern prosperity, but credit would be better given to developments in science and technology.

Before capitalism, Western nations were generally run by aristocratic classes. The aristocratic attitude toward wealth focused on management and maintenance. With capitalism, the focus is always on growth and development; whatever one has is but the seeds to build a still greater fortune. In fact, there are infinite alternatives to capitalism, and different societies can choose different systems, once they are free to do so. As Morpheus put it: “Outside the matrix everything is possible, and there are no limits.”

The matrix defines “democracy” as competitive party politics, because that is a game wealthy elites have long since learned to corrupt and manipulate. Even in the days of the Roman Republic the techniques were well understood. Real-world democracy is possible only if the people themselves participate in setting society’s direction. An elected official can only truly represent a constituency after that constituency has worked out its positions – from the local to the global – on the issues of the day. For that to happen, the interests of different societal factions must be harmonised through interaction and discussion. Collaboration, not competition, is what leads to effective harmonisation.

In order for the movement to end elite rule and establish livable societies to succeed, it will need to evolve a democratic process, and to use that process to develop a program of consensus reform that harmonises the interests of its constituencies. In order to be politically victorious, it will need to reach out to all segments of society and become a majority movement. By such means, the democratic process of the movement can become the democratic process of a newly empowered civil society. There is no adequate theory of democracy at present, although there is much to be learned from history and from theory. The movement will need to develop a democratic process as it goes along, and that objective must be pursued as diligently as victory itself. Otherwise some new tyranny will eventually replace the old.

It ain’t left or right. It’s up and down.
Here we all are down here struggling while
the Corporate Elite are all up there having a nice day!

– Carolyn Chute, author of The Beans of Egypt Maine and anti-corporate activist

Footnotes:

1. Primarily Western Europe, later joined by the United States.
2. See “KGB-ing America”, Tony Serra, Whole Earth, Winter, 1998.

Recommended Reading:

Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalization Of Poverty – Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms, The Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia, 1997.

This detailed study by an economics insider shows the consequences of “reforms” in various parts of the world, revealing a clear pattern of callous neo-colonialism and genocide. Definitely red-pill material.

Jerry Mander and Edward Goldsmith, eds., The Case Against the Global Economy and for a Turn Toward The Local, Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, 1996.

This fine collection of forty-three chapters by knowledgeable contributors analyses the broad structure of globalisation, and explores locally based and sustainable economic alternatives. An excellent introduction, textbook, and reference work.

Richard Douthwaite, The Growth Illusion, Lilliput Press, Dublin, 1992.

A fascinating and wide-ranging look at growth and capitalism, their historical roots and their consequences. Offers a healthy dose of common sense, and a vision of stability and sustainability.

Frances Moore Lapp?, Joseph Collins, Peter Rosset, World Hunger, Twelve Myths, Grove Press, New York, 1986.

Another red pill. Debunks Malthusian thinking, among other things. Here’s a sample: “During the past twenty-five years food production has outstripped population growth by 16 Percent. India – which for many of us symbolizes over-population and poverty – is one of the top third-world food exporters. If a mere 5.6 percent of India’s food production were re-allocated, hunger would be wiped out in India.”

Hans-Peter Martin & Harald Schumann, The Global Trap, Globalization & the Assault on Democracy & Prosperity, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1997.

A best-selling European perspective on globalisation. Recommended for American audiences in order to understand more about the European context.

William Greider, One World Ready or Not, the Manic Logic of Global Capitalism, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997.

A tour by a superb journalist showing how the global economy operates in various parts of the world. Not much emphasis on political issues or economic alternatives.

James Goldsmith, The Response, Macmillan, London, 1995.

A critique of neoliberal thinking presented as a debate with those who criticised the author’s previous book, The Trap. It may be pointless for the author to attempt logical debate with matrix apologists, but the book is informative for readers.

Third World Resurgence, a magazine published monthly by the Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia,http://www.twnside.org.sg.

This magazine deserves widespread circulation. It covers a wide range of global issues, presents a strong and sensible third-world perspective, and is a very good source of real-world news. Martin Kohr is managing editor and a frequent contributor.

The New Internationalist, a magazine published monthly by New Internationalist Publications, Ltd, Oxford, UK, http://www.newint.org.

Another good source of real news and commentary, with a global perspective.

Holly Sklar ed., Trilateralism – the Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, South End Press, Boston, 1980.

This well-researched anthology explains the role in global planning played by such elite organisations as the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Bilderbergers. Examples from various parts of the world are used to show what kinds of considerations go into the formation of on-the-ground policies.

Michael Parenti, The Sword and the Dollar, Imperialism, Revolution, and the Arms Race, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1989.

One of many red-pill books by a prolific and well-informed author. Here he talks about the reality of imperialism and the matrix of Cold War rhetoric. For an insightful examination of how matrix reality is fabricated, see also his Make-Believe Media, and Inventing Reality, also from St. Martin’s.

Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, HarperCollins, New York, 1989.

A superlative and well-researched treatment of American history from 1942 to the present. The material on grass-roots social movements provides valuable lessons for present-day movement organisers.

William Blum, Killing Hope, U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II, Common Courage Press, Monroe Maine, 1995.

A comprehensive review of how the US government manages world affairs by force and intrigue when persuasion and economic pressure fail to do the job. A red-pill antidote for anyone who feels tempted to trust the “international community” to pursue “humanitarian interventionism.”

Covert Action Quarterly magazine, published quarterly by Covert Action Publications, Inc., Washington D.C. 1994, http://www.covertaction.org.

Keeps you up-to-date on covert activities, cover-ups, military affairs, and current trouble spots. Contributors include many ex-intelligence officers who saw the error of their ways.

William Greider,  Who Will Tell The People? : The Betrayal Of American Democracy, Touchstone – Simon & Schuster, New York, 1993.

This best seller shows in detail how the American democratic process is subverted at every stage by corporate interests. Greider was a highly respected journalist for many years at the Washington Postand his high-level contacts permit him to present an insider’s view of how the influence-peddling system actually operates. A chilling eye-opener.

Samuel P. Huntington,  The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Simon and Schuster, London, 1997.

Another classic by one of the foremost spinners of matrix illusion. In the guise of historical analysis, Huntington fabricates a worldview designed to justify Western domination under globalisation. According to The Economist, Huntington’s civilisation-clash paradigm has already become the “sea” in which Washington policy makers swim. The book reveals the backbone structure of modern matrix reality, putting day-to-day official rhetoric into an understandable framework. And it clearly reveals the real intentions of elite planners regarding the tactics of global management through selective interventionism.

Foreign Affairs, a journal published quarterly by the Council on Foreign Relations, New York.

The best source I’ve found to track the latest shifts in the matrix and to glean an understanding of current elite thinking. Some reading between the lines is called for, as the journal frames its analysis in terms of US national interests, failing to make the obvious links between geopolitical and economic regimes.

About the Author

Richard Moore, an expatriate from Silicon Valley, currently lives and writes in Wexford, Ireland. He runs the Cyberjournal “list” on the Internet. Email: richard@cyberjournal.org,http://cyberjournal.org. Address: PO Box 26, Wexford, Ireland.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 62 (September-October 2000).

If you appreciated this article, please consider a digital subscription to New Dawn.

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.

© Copyright New Dawn Magazine, http://www.newdawnmagazine.com. Permission granted to freely distribute this article for non-commercial purposes if unedited and copied in full, including this notice.

© Copyright New Dawn Magazine, http://www.newdawnmagazine.com. Permission to re-send, post and place on web sites for non-commercial purposes, and if shown only in its entirety with no changes or additions. This notice must accompany all re-posting.

Escaping the Imprisonment of Cultural Programming

quote-we-are-caged-by-our-cultural-programming-culture-is-a-mass-hallucination-and-when-you-step-terence-mckenna-252123

There is one truth that nobody can debate, and that is that we physically die at some point within the near future, relative to the life spans of everything else in the universe. However, it seems that many forget this fact of life and dedicate great amounts of time and energy towards icons, personalities, and ideas that are unconnected to their own day-to-day lives and do not matter in the grand scheme of things.

The intense (and sometimes violent) passion that sports fans experience, as well as the immersion of oneself into the “sleazy” world of celebrities are some ways in which cultures and societies divert our thoughts away from things in life that matter the most. Things which directly affect us and make lasting impressions upon our beings. By creating illusory focus points within reality for the masses to lock their awareness into, culture, and those who have enough power to dictate or influence it, becomes a hindrance to one’s own personal self-growth and self-actualization.

Think about the massive quantities of time that people spend on these things which have no direct connection to their lives…all that time which could have been dedicated towards something a bit more constructive or positive in experiential existence.

Our culture is an artificially-created box in which a seemingly-endless number of things exist that attempt to entice an individual towards giving away massive amounts of his or her conscious lives towards the focusing in on trivialities or things, which have no direct influence on his or her life and self-actualization. Terrence McKenna had mused on the same thought-form, which is that humanity seems to be imprisoned by its cultural programming. This programming is so intense and strong, that it seems to be the most imprisoning factor within our lives. Culture does indeed appear to be a mass hallucination.

There are numerous boundaries that exist within culture that have been erected by groups or individuals within society who (either knowingly or unknowingly) helped hinder any progress being made in peoples’ self-growth, self-actualization and/or self-realization. Things such as sports rivalries, clothes styles and various types of class systems are just a few of the boundaries that had hardly had any useful place in reality because they did not exist prior to us creating them.

Only by complete boundary dissolution can we revert to a more pure form of experiential existence, where the focus of one’s self is on one’s personal growth and growth of others. Boundary dissolution refers to deconstruction and dissolving of boundaries that have been created by humans and which have existed as long as the ego has influenced humanity.

The purpose of boundary dissolution is to do away with these falsehoods that separate humanity rather than uniting it. Societal boundaries and other boundaries based on the self-ish nature of the ego can be said to be the cause of many of society’s ills and problems.

With a good system, come good results, and the results and outcomes of boundary dissolution indeed are many. You can try for yourself to see this as being a reality. Instead of giving into cultural aspects that are unhelpful in shifting your consciousness to a higher level, have the idea of oneness within your mind and immerse yourself in things that unite, rather than divide.

By doing away with the constructs that separate you from others or create any bit of hostility, hatred or animosity between you and someone else and by letting go of the fear that hinders you from taking these actions, you will be freed from the overbearing grip of the ego. When you dissolve the boundaries that divide and separate you from others, you will have the ability to transform your world into one of serenity, tranquility and peace. Oneness will not be just a philosophical or utopian concept but a reality that will be experienced by the totality of the human race.

We must always have hope that this will become a reality because the future is yet to be determined. Possibilities are endless.

About the Author

Paul Lenda is a conscious evolution guide, author of The Creation of a Consciousness Shift, and co-founder of SHIFT>, a social community focused on anchoring in the new paradigm and assisting the positive transformation of humanity. With the drive to be aware of and experience the wider horizon of Reality, Paul has developed an extensive background in the spiritual and transformative elements of life; one that is both knowledge and experienced-based. Visit his website www.shift.is, follow him on Twitter or visit the Shift Facebook community.

 

The War You Don’t See (2010) (Sub español) HD

This is the story about a film which none of us were supposed to see. Not because the film wasn’t up to professional journalistic standards, or that it was of poor quality. It was neither of those. Against the odds and the establishment-owned international media syndicate, award-winning filmmaker and journalist John Pilger reveals one of the most damning indictments of American and British mainstream media. The content of this timeless film is stunning, and shows beyond any reasonable doubt, that our media are not only complicit in advancing conflict around the globe, but are actively engaged in pushing it on behalf of those who seek to profit from international conflagrations.

Documentary from John Pilger, laureate reporter with more than 25 documentaries, 11 books and countless articles published in media such as The Guardian, Daily Mirror, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, among others … The War You Don’t See, is a work that follows the influence of the media in shaping public opinion and how governments can manipulate it to benefit their own political agenda …

It’s a full length movie, but it is REALLY informing and well made. PLEASE bookmark to watch when you have the time, you won’t be disappointed!

Historic Breaking News: Canada, Vatican & Crown GUILTY of Genocide

Massive Deaths of Aboriginal Children in Canada is officially admitted, as Genocide Verdict and Kevin Annett’s work are finally vindicated –
“Canada, the British Crown and the Vatican stand guilty as charged as disestablished criminal bodies” – International Common Law Court of Justice, Brussels
A Special Report from ITCCS Canada with Commentary by Kevin Annett 
OPPT-IN-GUILTY
Vancouver, Canada:  March 31, 2014
Seventeen years after Rev. Kevin Annett publicly disclosed evidence that over 50,000 children died in Canada’s church-run “Indian residential schools”, Canadian governments have finally confirmed this genocidal mortality rate after releasing hitherto-concealed death records from the schools. (http://westcoastnativenews.com/tens-of-thousands-first-nation-children-died-in-residential-schools/)
Until this week, government and church officials have either denied or stayed silent about Rev. Annett’s documented estimate. But previously “segregated” statistics of the deaths of residential school children made public last Friday by different provinces indicate that “tens of thousands” of these children died in the facilities, which were operated primarily by the Roman Catholic, Anglican and United Church of Canada.
In British Columbia alone, government records indicate that nearly 5,000 children between the ages of four and nineteen died in the residential schools until 1956, although the schools continued in operation until 1996, putting the total death figure even higher. Rev. Annett’s research established that the high death rate of over 40% of the students was the result of deliberately infecting them with tuberculosis and denying the sick treatment. (www.hiddennolonger.com)
“This news officially confirms what our Court established in its lawful verdict of February 25, 2013” stated George Dufort of the International Common Law Court of Justice in Brussels today.
“Canada and its churches, the British Crown and the Vatican stand guilty as charged as disestablished criminal bodies and can no longer have any lawful or legitimate constitutional authority if the rule of law is to be followed”.
This week’s official admission of massive deaths in the Indian residential schools comes on the heels of shocking new evidence showing that a Vatican and Church of England child sacrifice cult known as the Ninth Circle operated at the same schools for over a century, including at the Mohawk residential school in Brantford, Ontario. (www.itccs.org, March 29, 2014)
Kevin Annett was reached at his home in Nanaimo, British Columbia today and provided the enclosed you tube commentary on the remarkable news.
“I always knew their lies would fall apart, and persistence would pay off” remarked Kevin.
“But I’m thinking now of all my friends who died after struggling to see this day come about, like Bingo Dawson, Billie Combes, Ricky Lavallee and Harry Wilson – some of the eyewitnesses to the Canadian Holocaust who went public at great personal risk. This is their victory, as it belongs to all the missing children. But it will only mean something if Canadians act on this final proof of Genocide by church and state to enforce the verdict and arrest warrants of the Common Law court.
“Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Queen Elizabeth, Joseph Ratzinger and twenty seven other officials belong behind bars. And more than that, it’s now time to establish a constitutional Republic in Canada that is free and independent of the British Crown and the legacies of Vatican-sponsored Genocide”.
Details of the plans to act upon this recent acknowledgement are discussed in Kevin Annett’s attached you tube commentary.
Issued by ITCCS Canada and ITCCS Central, Brussels-based
 itccs.org

 

I Am …

1239735_10151880948556286_1660799160_n

The primary Delusion of humans is our inability to see the way things really are. Because of a strong willful blindness we see things in a distorted way. We can only ‘know’ what we are told, and hardly any of that is true. We are easily exploited and victimized, and behave collectively much like a herd of stupid cattle (no offense to cattle intended). We are enslaved to a matrix of lies and are as if already dead. Why are we like this?  Did we decide to make our home in this lower dimension/vibration? What is our true nature?

The world is in reality one seamless dynamic unity,  a single living organism that is constantly changing and pulsating. Our minds try to chop it up into separate static bits and pieces, which we then try mentally and physically to manipulate.

One of the minds most clever creations is the idea of the person — and closest to home, a very special person each of us calls “I.” A separate enduring ego or self. In that instant this seamless dynamic universe is cut in two. There is now an I and there is all the rest. That means conflict because this “I” can’t control the vastness against which it is set, though it will try, for that is the nature of the “I.”

This isn’t to deny that the notion of an “I” works in the everyday world, in fact we need a solid stable ego to function in society. But “I” is not real in an Ultimate sense. It’s a name, a fictional creation that bears no resemblance to what is really the case. Because of this all kinds of problems arise.

Once our minds have constructed the notion of “I” it becomes our central reference point. We attach to it and identify with it totally! We attempt to do what appears to be in it’s best interests and we defend it against imagined threats. We look for ego affirmation at every chance to confirm we exist and are valued.

The preoccupations arising from all this absorbs us completely, to the point of obsession. This is a narrow and constricted way of Being. Though we can’t see it when we are caught up in a fit of ego, there is something in us that is larger and deeper: a whole other way of Being. This must become the point of focus. Like Astral Gardeners we need to care for the bits and pieces we mentally created and remember all is of One Self. And Love and nurture, with empathy and compassion, all the “other I’s” that seem ‘out there.’

Everything Is A Lie: The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High

You might think that it’s not important to question EVERYTHING. Where would it end, right? But, as human beings, our very existence depends on the accuracy of the information we rely upon. So, ask yourself – would you rather live AND die based on lies or on truth?

all-you-ever-kneww

From pollution to politics, the era of deception and duplicity has reached new heights and hijacked almost every form of media in the world. In the last frontiers for truth such as the internet, disinformation operations are in full swing to discredit and destroy any semblance of authentic and factual information available to the public.

How many more lies will people around the world accept as truth? Some say a global awakening is taking place, but at what cost? Will it take the destruction of most of the earth and its resources before people are enlightened?

The escalating media and political reports are so far fetched, cunning, and so beyond reality, it’s as if each is trying to top the other with one sinister plot after the next. To demonstrate the outright lies by national governments and the media, let’s take three examples from the last year alone, including the H1N1 scandal, airport body scanners and the BP oil disaster.

The H1N1 Scandal

Last year, the H1N1 scandal reached its pinnacle in the fall of 2009 when the world united on the internet with a consensus and practical understanding of the World Health Organization’s orchestratration to deceive the masses. From radio, internet, television, newspapers, magazines, outdoor posters, signage and promotions, you could not escape the flu hype campaigns so diligently pursued by all the malicious agendas at play who only wanted one thing – to promote a dangerous H1N1 vaccine. After hundreds of reports exposed the criminal activity by all levels of government, we left the same people in power to do it all over again.

According to preliminary reports, another round of pandemic vaccine campaigns are scheduled for the 2010/2011 season and they’re already underway. However, there appears to be a recombination that has changed the H1N1 lab created virus into a more lethal form and it is not a hoax, but it may be yet another CDC lab experiment.

The CDC has recently issued a Health Advisory in connection with two summer outbreaks of H3N2 in Iowa. Other reports from Russia and India indicate that a real epidemic may be upon us if the virus steadily recombines and acquires new genetics. Even though a new strain may have accidentally evolved in eggs, reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 has been a legitimate concern for years. The WHO first suggested the reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 in 2004.

If this is really the case, how will the public react after all the lies from health agencies who have sworn to protect us? Will they hype another vaccine and if so, will the public even respond?

Body Scanners

They’ve been approved all over the world and marketed as the next greatest airport scanning technology. The U.S., U.K., Russia, Australia, Europe and Canada have all installed airport body scanners which have potentially devastating health effects.

Many of these scanners are reportedly using terahertz (THz) waves, the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and infrared. Evidence suggests that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.

As the path toward rolling out wider use of whole-body scanners in U.S. airports ran through the White House, Obama expedited their deployment because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) didn’t need legislation from Congress to start using the devices at any of the 560 U.S. airports.

The White House ignored all the scientific evidence presented which suggested negative health effects. Politicians and regulatory agencies then covered up the bad publicity on naked body scanners and focused on the presumed benefits under the guise of public safety.

Privacy commisioners and airport authorities have also insisted that there were no risks of images being stored or personal details being revealed to security screeners. Now there’s new evidence to show that the scanners can do just that.

According to a CNET report, another federal agency, the U.S. Marshall’s service, admitted that it had actually stored over 30,000 images recorded by a full-body scanner used at a Florida courthouse.

A watchdog group called the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained over 100 of the images and states on its web site that, “The images, which are routinely captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices store and record images of individuals stripped naked.” The group has filed a lawsuit to suspend the deployment of body scanners at airports.

EPIC also discovered that the TSA actually specified to manufacturers that the machines have the ability to send and store images. The TSA says that these functions are only for testing and training and insists on its web site that the airport body scanners are delivered to airports with storage and recording functions disabled.

Again, the upper levels of the echelon are caught lying and deceiving, yet they are still left to their own devices to further manipulate and continue misrepresenting facts to the gullible public.

BP Oil Disaster

When news unfolded about the April 20, 2010 BP oil disaster, it went from bad to worse. Instead of immediately mobilizing for action in the face of a massive public health threat, the response was to cover-up, deny and respond with ignorance. After all the public will always believe them, or so they thought.

The Obama administration, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, U.S. Coast Guard commandant admiral Thad Allen, energy and climate-change policy adviser Carol Browner, BP and all their contituents conspired to deliberately mislead the public from the inception of the disaster to present day. What’s worse is they all agreed to further disseminate toxins in the Gulf by spraying 1.8 to 2 million gallons of the neurotoxin Corexit which was exposed by over a hundred scientists, toxicologists and other experts who have unequivocally classified the irresponsible aerial spraying of the chemical dispersant as a large-scale, uncontrolled non-consensual human and environmental experiment is being conducted in the Gulf region.

The media was grossly censoring the extent of the devastation in the Gulf. The poisons–oil and corexit are destined to spread globally, but honest reporting was and still is restricted, and many independent investigators have been arrested. Read 30 Facts Evidencing that The Gulf Oil Crisis Was Planned.

On June 12, 2010, The Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate (ISAC) released “Risk of Global Climate Change By BP Oil Spill“, a document detailing how the BP spill may cause irreparable damage to the Gulf Stream global climate thermoregulation activity. Read Gulf Loop Current Destroyed: May Lead To Shut Down of Atlantic Thermoregulation, Rapid Cooling.

According to Dr. Gianluigi Zangari, an Italian theoretical physicist, and major complex and chaotic systems analyst at the Frascati National Laboratories in Italy, the Loop Current in the Gulf of Mexico has stalled as a consequence of the BP oil spill disaster. Zangari notes that the effects of this stall have also begun to spread to the Gulf Stream. This is because the Loop Current is a crucial element of the Gulf Stream itself and why it is commonly referred to as the “main engine” of the Stream.

The concern now, is whether or not natural processes can re-establish the stalled Loop Current. If not, we could begin to see global crop failures as early as 2011.

Zangari’s assessment is based on daily monitoring of real-time data oceanographic satellite public data feeds called “Real-Time Mesoscale Altimetry” from the Jason, Topex/Poseidon, Geosat, Follow-On, ERS-2 and Envisat satellites.

These satellite feeds are captured and made publicly available by NASA, NOAA and by the Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research (CCAR) at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

The CCAR is now being accused of scientific fraud and tampering of data directly associated with the events surrounding the Loop Current phenomenon and its current anomalies. Various reporters have spear-headed the charge including radio personality Dr. Bill Deagle who has featured Dr. Zangari on his radio show The Nutrimedical Report where he detailed the events leading up to the destruction of the Loop Current in the Gulf.

Dr. Zangari has stated that he will no longer use CCAR data due to its unreliability.

Organized and Professional Disinformation Operations

Well-funded and highly-organized disinformation operations are in full-swing throughout the internet. From forums to comment boards and even professional websites that have only one purpose: Defame, distract, and destroy the truth.

However organized, the tactics are very predictable in a world filled with lies and half-truths. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation.

Disinformation campaigns are launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. The H1N1 scandal was a prime example of how hundreds of operations can be launched to sway opinions on the facts. For every fact-based article on the realities of the H1N1 vaccine, there were both very primitive and sophisticated counters on message boards, comment forums and hundreds of alternative and mainstream websites.

Stephen Barrett’s Quackwatch.com and supporters such as skeptic.org.uk and skepticblog.com are examples of websites which promote both synthetic and organic disinformation on almost any topic that does not concur with mainstream thought.

There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as H. Michael Sweeney has brilliantly detailed. Also included with this material are eight common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluation… to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid an a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant.

Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers.

Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man.

Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.

This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run.

In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

7. Question motives.

Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority.

Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb.

No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news.

A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.

Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just aren’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution.

Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.

Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions.

Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.

This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.

If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject.

Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.

If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’

19. Ignore facts presented, demand impossible proofs.

This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence.

Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.

Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. Manufacture a new truth.

Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions.

If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics.

If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish.

If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance

They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity

They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental

They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork

They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial

They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a News Group (NG) focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions

An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal.

But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation.

You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later — an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game — where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent

There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) Time Constant

There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

  • ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
  • When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to ‘get permission’ or instruction from a formal chain of command.
  • In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

Remarkably, even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.


Reference Sources 89, 152, 170, 183, 260

Source: PreventDisease.

The Great Cover Up of Christianity

223887

“Our new account of the origins of Christianity only seemed improbable because it contradicted the received view. As we pushed further with our research, the traditional picture began to completely unravel all around us. We found ourselves embroiled in a world of schism and power struggles, of forged documents and false identities, of letters that had been edited and added to, and of the wholesale destruction of historical evidence.”

The Great Cover Up (Except from Chapter 1)

(P.12) Our new account of the origins of Christianity only seemed improbable because it contradicted the received view. As we pushed further with our research, the traditional picture began to completely unravel all around us. We found ourselves embroiled in a world of schism and power struggles, of forged documents and false identities, of letters that had been edited and added to, and of the wholesale destruction of historical evidence. (P.13) We focused forensically on the few facts we could be confident of, as if we were detectives on the verge of cracking a sensational ‘whodunnit’, or perhaps more accurately as if we were uncovering an ancient and unacknowledged miscarriage of justice. For, time and again, when we critically examined what genuine evidence remained, we found that the history of Christianity bequeathed to us by the Roman Church was a gross distortion of the truth. Actually the evidence completely endorsed the Jesus Mysteries Thesis! It was becoming increasingly obvious that we had been deliberately deceived, that the Gnostics were indeed the original Christians, and that their anarchic mysticism had been hijacked by an authoritarian institution which had created from it a dogmatic religion – and then brutally enforced the greatest cover-up in history.

One of the major players in this cover-up operation was a character called Eusebius who, at the beginning of the fourth century, compiled from legends, fabrications and his own imagination the only early history of Christianity that still exists today. All subsequent histories have been forced to base themselves on Eusebius’ dubious claims, because there has been little other information to draw on. All those with a different perspective on Christianity were branded as heretics and eradicated. In this way falsehoods compiled in the fourth century have come down to us as established facts.

Eusebius was employed by the Roman Emperor Constantine, who made Christianity the state religion of the Empire and gave Literalist Christianity the power it needed to begin the final eradication of Paganism and Gnosticism. Constantine wanted ‘one God, one religion’ to consolidate his claim of ‘one Empire, one Emperor’. He oversaw the creation of the Nicene creed – the article of faith repeated in churches to this day – and Christians who refused to assent to this creed were banished from the Empire or otherwise silenced.

P.14) This ‘Christian’ Emperor then returned home from Nicaea and had his wife suffocated and his son murdered. He deliberately remained unbaptized until his deathbed so that he could continue his atrocities and still receive forgiveness of sins and a guaranteed place in heaven by being baptized at the last moment. Although he had his ‘spin doctor’ Eusebius compose a suitably obsequious biography for him, he was actually a monster – just like many Roman Emperors before him. Is it really at all surprising that a ‘history’ of the origins of Christianity created by an employee in the service of a Roman tyrant should turn out to be a pack of lies?

(P.15) To dare to question a received history is not easy. It is difficult to believe that something which you have been told is true from childhood could actually be a product of falsification and fantasy. It must have been hard for those Russians brought up on the tales of kindly ‘Uncle Joe’ Stalin to accept that he was actually responsible for the deaths of millions. It must have strained credibility when those opposing his regime claimed that he had in fact murdered many of the heroes of the Russian revolution. It must have seemed ridiculous when they asserted that he had even had the images of his rivals removed from photographs and completely fabricated historical events. Yet all these things are true.

It is easy to believe that something ‘must’ be true because everyone else believes it. But the truth often only comes to light by daring to question the unquestionable, by doubting notions which are so commonly believed that they are taken for granted. The Jesus Mysteries Thesis is the product of such openness of mind. When it first occurred to us, it seemed absurd and impossible. Now it seems obvious and ordinary. the Vatican was constructed upon the site of an ancient Pagan sanctuary because the new is always built upon the old. In the same way Christianity itself has as its foundations the Pagan spirituality that preceded it. What is more plausible than to posit the gradual evolution of spiritual ideas, with Christianity emerging from the ancient Pagan Mysteries in a seamless historical continuum? It is only because the conventional history has been so widely believed for so long that this idea could be seen as heretical and shocking.

Source: The Jesus Mysteries: Was the “Original Jesus” a Pagan God? Chapter 1 – p.12-15 Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy

It’s Okay To NOT ‘Fit In’ With Society

Do you feel like you sometimes don’t ‘fit in’ with society? Have you ever caught yourself looking at all of the unhealthy food in someone else’s shopping cart at the grocery store? When you see people blindly following others, does it make you feel a little uncomfortable? Are you more likely to follow your own path instead of what ‘everyone else is doing’? If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you are not alone!

Conformist Tendencies

People who strive to fit in and conform to society are some of the most subservient and controlled people you’ll ever meet. They tend to follow the flock and are highly influenced by other people’s opinions versus formulating their own regardless of what other people think. They seem to be more concerned about what other people think about them than how they feel to themselves.

For the conformists, the only critical thinking needed involves how other people may view their perceptions.

The Asch Conformity Experiment

We realize that most of everything we have been taught in history is either a lie or some form of propaganda. Much of our true history and origins have been hidden from us, despite concrete evidence showing that mankind has been on earth for hundreds of thousands of years. This is part of the brainwashing we receive through the indoctrination system commonly referred to as public education. If you question any official “story” taught to you in school, then you’re looked down upon because you are not conforming to governmental learning expectations through state sponsored propaganda.

As students, we tend not to question authority and willingly accept our teacher’s lessons as the truth. Our minds become conditioned to regurgitate these lessons in order to graduate each year.

In an experiment in conformity, most people will conform to group expectations even when they know the group is wrong. In psychology, this is known as the Asch Conformity Experiments:

When we attend school, not only are the students conforming to the teachers expectations, the teachers are conforming to the teaching of propaganda and agendas with little liberty to stray from the state sponsored textbooks.

The medical industry is no different. For example, according to Dr. Leonard Caldwell, there are over 300 cures for cancer but most doctors are required by law to use surgery, radiation or chemotherapy before any holistic measures such as the Rife Machine, THC Oil, etc..bBecause the physicians are not learning holistic medicine in college, they are trained to use archaic methods in conjunction with Big Pharma, which has not cured anything since polio.

If you trace who originally funded the medical universities in conjunction to Big Pharma, you will find one name: Rockefeller. Most physicians do not know the history behind the universities they attend, who is really behind Big Pharma and how the major players are hiding under the guise of philanthropy in order to receive tax breaks while protecting their family fortunes. Unless you’re a holistic physician or offer non-invasive options, then the majority of medical practitioners are also blindly conforming to societal expectations.

Media Complicity

Our media boils down to talking heads reading propaganda scripts with relatively no positive news items, yet those who “fit in” will watch the nightly news on a daily basis, followed by their favorite TV “programming” which takes them even further away from finding themselves.

Through reality TV shows and commercials, people are being told what to think, how to act, what to eat, drink, listen to and buy.

Television is responsible for conditioning the mind to think in ways that are not obvious as well. For example, a typical commercial will not only try to sell you a product, but an image and a societal expectation as well.

The following “In the Can” commercial is selling Bud Light Lime in an aluminum can, but is also selling sex, sexual innuendos, stereotypes, belief systems, value systems, the target audience they want to sell to, what the target audience typically does and how they’re “supposed” to look:

The same commercial is not going to tell you about the aluminum toxicity of the can or the genetically modified hops and barley that you’re consuming, along with the long term effects of the consumption of this product. They’re not going to show people who are not within their target audience and virtually everyone is always happy and smiling when they’re trying to sell you this product. These actors are usually participating in some sort of extroverted group activity, which subconsciously tells you that if you’re not a social extrovert, then you don’t fit in.

Why people belittle those who don’t follow the flock

In psychology, people often mirror that which they fear within themselves. For example, if someone says they “hate” another person, then it usually means that there’s something within that the name caller hates within his or herself.

gitinngin34

I posted the above picture on the In5D Facebook page and a woman commented one word: “stupid”.  When I looked at her personal Facebook page, virtually all of her “Likes” were celebrities and movie stars, which is basically the idolization of others and reflects the amount of time she spends watching TV. She also “Likes” expensive jewelry and high fashion, which relates to her materialistic tendencies. Both of the people she was “Following” are in politics. Who she pretends to be in front of others seems to be more important to her than finding out who she REALLY is, which is a spiritual being having a human experience. When the dollar inevitably crashes, it’ll hit people like her a lot harder than those of us who “don’t fit in”. Her ego, vanity, ignorance and failure to be open minded is a reflection of what she fears within herself. In other words, it’s easier for her to call other people stupid than to look in the mirror and see her own reflection.

Just be YOU!

Dr. Spock once said something along the lines of, “In an insane society, the insane appear to be sane.” To those who are awakened, does that statement sound like the truth to you?

Non-conformists are more likely to use critical thinking and will research topics to find a suitable answer versus assuming that our governmental agencies will always look after us and would never allow us to ingest harmful ingredients, such as aspartame and fluoride. Those who don’t conform are also more likely to look within for answers because the external answers are fabrications, lies or are unacceptable. If you feel like you don’t ‘fit in’ with most of society and your actions are respectful, responsible and love-based, then chances are, you’re on the right path!

Gregg Prescott, M.S., In5D Guest

Copyright Information: Copyright in5d and Gregg Prescott, M.S.. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in any form.

Citizen Corporation – The Mutation of ‘Personhood’

badges

If you gave a rock the same power to make important decisions as a person, the sentient ability of this inanimate object would cause less harm than giving a corporation the impetus to demand ‘rights’ the same as a human being. A rock lies still. It harms no one. A corporation makes lasting, possibly irreversible changes to our world that must be seen for what they truly are – abominable. As people of this sphere we are relegated to begrudge the incessant ecological and humanitarian trespasses which corporations inflict, and we seem cretinous about what to do about it.

The sophomoric assertion that we can ‘just focus on ourselves’ as the new age movement often suggests is part of the problem. Being ‘conscious’ does not mean everything is unicorns and rainbows. We can’t just brush aside public policies as if they can be peace-rallied into change. Realizing that the more than 100-year old legislation that gave corporations the same rights as people is what has brought about the numerous atrocities in our world – from nuclear economies (be they accidents or false flag events, outright war, or subtle eugenics) to the infiltration of government agencies by corporate interests (including the FDA, CDC, CIA, FBI, NSA, etc.) is the beginning of truly cutting the snake’s head off.

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” ~ Sun Tzu, the Art of War

You cannot grow without addressing the shadow. Our society is showing this to us very clearly. The corporation is a manifestation of the shadow, which must be dealt with. As J. Krishnamurti wrote, “An ideal is merely an escape, an avoidance of what is. An ideal prevents direct action upon what it is. To have peace we will have to love, we will have to begin not to live an ‘ideal’ life but to see things as they are and act upon them – transform them.”

Former Texas Congressman, and presidential candidate Ron Paul has said, “you lose total control” of the right to your own body when rights are given to corporations. According to Paul, the freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, etc. are a ‘property rights’ issue. He imagines that if our own bodies were considered our own property, and the laws protecting ownership of that property were more strictly interpreted, we would all be o.k. Sadly, even that notion is threatened as the government, in collusion with corporations again, plans to take even this right from us. Arguably, even the men who penned the Constitution really created a republic designed to protect property, not people.

The violations of these rights are not punishable in the Supreme Court because corporations have become too powerful. Precedence for ignoring pollution, allowing extravagant CEO wages, mistreatment of workers, and the bailout of banks and other corporations who are ‘too big to fail’ is the bottom line. It is accepted, though complained about vehemently by those who are paying attention. Corporate entities, in fact just ten of them, are still controlling almost everything you do, see, and buy.

Corporations are monsters devouring everything in their self-perpetuating wake. As Reclaim Democracy put it:

Our Bill of Rights was the result of tremendous efforts to institutionalize and protect the rights of human beings. It strengthened the premise of our Constitution: that the people are the root of all power and authority for government. This vision has made our Constitution and government a model emulated in many nations.

But corporate lawyers (acting as both attorneys and judges) subverted our Bill of Rights in the late 1800s by establishing the doctrine of “corporate personhood” — the claim that corporations were intended to fully enjoy the legal status and protections created for human beings.”

Fukushima happened because we gave corporations personhood. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars gave countless contractors the ability to hide behind legal rights meant for human beings – no corporation takes accountability or financial responsibility for the damage they inflict. The Deepwater Horizon Gulf spill perpetrated by BP was absolved. The ongoing fracking incidents are equally horrid, and carried out by multiple corporations. If a human being murdered all the people that these corporations had killed, they would be in jail for many lifetime sentences. As it stands, none of these criminals are jailed, or even put before their peers or a judge for a trial.

There is only one way to stop this beast. Corporations can no longer be considered persons. If they were a ‘person’, they would be in a straight jacket taking multiple anti-psychotic medications to keep them stabilized.

You can learn more about how corporations have changed our world, by watching The Corporation. Please add your comments and suggestions to reverse this ill-created concept of corporation as persons with the same legal rights as a human being.

About the Author

Christina Sarich is a musician, yogi, humanitarian and freelance writer who channels many hours of studying Lao TzuParamahansa YoganandaRob Brezny,  Miles Davis, and Tom Robbins into interesting tidbits to help you Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.

This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

via Citizen Corporation – The Mutation of \’Personhood\’ – Waking Times.

Is Everything in the Mainstream Media Fake? – 6 Examples of Media Manipulation

The world of television and modern media has become a tool of de-evolution, propaganda and social control. Since the reign of Edward Bernays and the rise of the Tavistock Institute in the early 20th century, nearly unlimited resources have been applied to understanding how to manipulate the human psyche through television and other forms of mass media. What we have today is an increasingly sophisticated full-spectrum assault on free will and psychological well-being, and we have come to a point where it is no longer even necessary for media institutions to attempt to hide their blatant work of manipulating public opinion, manufacturing consent, and creating winners and losers in the minds of the already brain-washed public.

Here are 6 examples where truth reveals that the impression the media is conveying to a dumbed-down, unsuspecting public differs greatly from what is actually happening behind the scenes. By looking at these examples in a single location, it is easy to see how the mainstream media is pushes ulterior motives on the public, and how important it is to be vigilant when consuming consumer info.

READ MORE HERE:  Is Everything in the Mainstream Media Fake? – 6 Examples of Media Manipulation – Waking Times.

Brain Washing, Social Control and Programming – Why You Should Kill Your Television

I got rid of cable TV about 4 years ago. I did get a Roku which allowed me to watch documentaries, movies, and some sit-coms, but it was when and what I wanted to watch. Netflix is ad free and the some have a 15 second commercial. I get news from Democracy Now and RT. I felt much better without TV. When I became a caregiver to my mother 6 months ago, she believes she needs cable TV. It’s back in my life and I hate it. I can see what it does to her. They sensationalize even the weather. Fear fear fear. Buy buy buy. Lie lie lie. But she is addicted, and if I plug in my Roku she’ll go to her room and watch mainstream ‘programming.’ I have the Roku in my room. I’m just saying that TV is really bad for you. You can get rid of it and the high bill by getting a Roku device. It has over 1,000 free channels and they add new every week. Check into it.

truth-turn-OFF-the-TV

Media Control

Schooling plays a big role in programming the population, but the most potent and prevalent educational tools are the mass media. These are devised to reach a large audience via the broadcasting of information through natural means (spoken or written language, posters) or technological ones (radio, television, cinema, the Internet). With time, the elite has come to control all the important mass media outlets and are now able to dictate their contents.

The trick is easy. All the elite need to do is repeat the same simplistic lies in all the media and the population will believe them without a doubt. This is how lies acquire an irresistible aura of credibility. A specialist of mass brainwashing, L. Wolfe, explains it further:

“As Tavistock’s researchers showed, it was important that the victims  of mass brainwashing not be aware that their environment was being controlled; there should thus be a vast number of sources for information, whose messages could be varied slightly, so as to mask the sense of external control.”

Wolfe specified that the contents had to be entertaining and leave the impression that the person always had the choice between various messages and sources. Therefore, the same repetitive information remains hidden behind different and appealing guises.

Tavistock

Around 1920, theTavistock Institute became the center for the study of human behavior, mind control, propaganda, and social manipulation. Created in London, it spread overseas with the financial help of the Rockefeller Foundation. Its influence increased when it combined the study of anthropology, economy, organizations, politics, psychology, psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and sociology. For example, Tavistock organized social phenomena such as the hippie counterculture and the use of mind-altering drugs. Its primary objectives were and still remain the organization of cultural changes through the imposition of chaos and the occult manipulation of special groups. With a 2012 budget of around 6 billion USD, it is now made up of 10 institutions, 400 subsidiary companies, and 3,000 study groups. In secret, Tavistock guides powerful multinationals such as the Rand Corp. (media, politics, commerce, health, education, defense), the Mitre Corp. (defense, revenue, national security), the Stanford and Hudson Institutes.

After 90 years of research, Tavistock’s main discovery concerns child sexuality. This has a great influence on the development of personality. Early sex stimulation produces adults whose emotional development is similar to that of a neurotic child. Their second discovery is related to stress. Tavistock researchers found out that people under controlled stress became more infantile and gave up strongly held beliefs under group pressure to conform to popular opinion. That explains why the mass media insist so much on sex, violence, and fear-inducing messages. We are being turned into scared, submissive children who try to evade the stress of daily life through emotional masturbation – television, radio, CDs, DVDs, movies, and video games.

Television

Westerners spend four plus hours a day, the equivalent of two months a year, or nine years in a lifetime, being hypnotized by a television screen without being conscious of the effects this activity has on them. They have nearly stopped interacting with friends, neighbors, community, and even family. Their free time is spent in imaginary relationships with fictitious characters on the screen.

A few US statistics will show us the extent of the phenomenon: 99 % of households own at least one TV; there are 2.24 TVs per family; the television remains open 7 hours a day; 66 % eat in front of their television sets. The addiction starts right after birth, since 30% of kids who are 0 to 1 year old and 47 % of the 5 to 8 year-olds have televisions in their rooms. A typical US child spends 3.5 minutes per week in meaningful conversation with a parent, but 1680 minutes per week in front of TV. Is this why television is called the “one-eyed babysitter”? By the time they are 65, most people have seen 2,000,000 TV ads. This phenomenon is becoming global.

The entire population of earth has become addicted to television. If one decides to quit the TV habit, they experience psychological withdrawal symptoms that can be as severe as those related to drug or alcohol abuse. There is a direct relationship between child obesity – which is severe for 11% of 6 to 17 year olds in US – and advertisements, since the most popular types of commercials are related to junk food. A study counted more than 200 junk food ads during four hours of cartoons on Saturday morning television in the US. When compared with radio listening, television is more impactful because there are pictures. The more there are to accompany a special news report, the more tangible it will seem and the lesser the chance of people questioning its accuracy. Media expert Hal Becker once said:

“I know the secret of making the average American believe anything I want him to. Just let me control television… You put something on the television and it becomes reality. If the world outside the TV set contradicts the images, people start trying to change the world to make it like the TV set images.

How is it that the elite have been so successful in achieving full control of television programming? Through the assistance of government. Politicians vote and impose laws that favor large TV stations over smaller ones and make it difficult for independent ideas to reach the airwaves. Better yet, most countries have their own sanitized State television stations. 

Mass Hypnosis and Mass Violence

Tavistock hastened to study the effects of television on human behavior as early as the 1940′s. Its researchers discovered that 30 seconds after one starts watching TV, the brain automatically begins to produce alpha waves, a modified state of consciousness. The viewer goes into a trance-like mode, a type of light hypnosis. All their attention becomes concentrated on the screen, while the rest of their environment is ignored. In this semi-conscious state, they become highly susceptible to the messages contained in the programs, especially the commercials, which are created especially for that purpose.

Television started becoming popular in the fifties, and the elite have now accumulated more than 60 years of experience spread over three generations of viewers. The results are staggering. People are no longer logical, as their opinions and ideas come directly from television. The images validate what they hear. This filter of tele-opinions gets automatically superimposed over their daily reality, and have become passive members of a plugged-in society, and can no longer think, talk, or write logically. For them, images and knowledge are synonymous.

In Europe, violence on television is as critical as in America. Specialized stations such as Baby TV and Baby First broadcast programs for babies 24/7. When toddlers are one year old, they are already watching at least one hour of television a day. Statistics from 1988 showed that during one week of TV watching, viewers witness 670 murders, 15 rapes, 848 fights, 419 shootings or explosions, 11 armed robberies, 8 suicides, 32 hostage takings, 27 torture scenes, 9 defenestrations, 13 strangulations, and 11 war scenes. Nowadays, these types of events are not reserved to late hours. For example, Quebec’s popular TQS station presented the movie Terminator at 6:30 pm – just in time for kids.

And it’s Getting Worse!

Ever heard of Silent Sound Spread Spectrum or SSSS? It is a secret Pentagon psychotronic technology that has been operational since 1990. In 1991, it was used during the first Gulf War to manipulate Iraqi troops into surrendering en masse. Like compliant children, 200,000 men came out of their desert bunkers and fell to their knees before approaching US troops.

The SSSS is now available in your neighborhood – free of charge. It is carried to your brain with the use of several technologies, including chemtrails, cell towers and high definition digital television (HD-TV). In this way, the elite is aiming for total mind control to insure the compliance of its sheeple. Now you know why the government was so enthusiastic about letting us get digital converter boxes for a cheap price, becaue they want us to have access to high-quality television images.

Big Brother goes even further with digital streaming video that allows any person with a personal computer linked to the Internet to access and watch popular television programs. This is available for free through companies such as Hulu. In this way, computer monitors and HD-TV screens broadcast SSSS and combine it with subliminally-pulsed images to bring about specific emotions and physical responses to all listeners or a selected type of DNA (Blacks, Orientals, women, etc.). If the elite has a sample of a person’s DNA, it can even target selected individuals. Experimentation has shown that it is effective – with varying levels of efficiency – with about 85% of the population, while the remaining 15% seem to be immune to such mind control attempts.

What Should We Do?

What should we do now that we know? Well, truth is useless if we do not change our actions.

Number one: throw out the television. Even without this new mind-control technology, the television has always been a “box of lies.” Watching TV lowers one’s intelligence, and many statistics are there to prove it. Forget the “good educational shows” that are simply there to misinform you.

Number two: limit the time you spend in front of the computer and on the internet, and never watch TV shows from the Internet.

Number three: avoid other sources of do not use cell phones (whether ‘smart’ or not). Basically, it is like putting your head in the microwave oven and pushing the ‘ON’ button. It is difficult to avoid chemtrails, but living a TV-free and cellphone-free life is possible – you get so much more time to read, think (for yourself), meditate, exercise, cook, and keep good company.

The elite have hijacked our brains with their technology, but we still have our free will. We can choose to use it or not to use it. Which one will you choose?

Resources:

– Brainwashing: How The British Use The Media for Mass Psychological Warfare, L. Wolfe

This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

Operation Northwoods

Information Center on Secret Operation Northwoods


President John F. Kennedy took many actions which upset his war-hungry generals and other top business and mafia leaders. One of the first and least-known of these was his putting a stop to plans of the Pentagon’s top generals to provoke war with Cuba. The plans were detailed in documents under the title of Operation Northwoods.

Follow the links provided below to the declassified Pentagon documents and an ABC News article on Operation Northwoods. Approved by the top Pentagon chiefs, Operation Northwoods proposed fabricating terrorism in US cities and killing innocent citizens to trick the public into supporting a war against Cuba in the early 1960s. Operation Northwoods even proposed blowing up a US ship and hijacking planes as a false pretext for war. First coming to light in the year 2000 through a Freedom of Information Act request, key excerpts from the Operation Northwoods documents are provided below.



Operation Northwoods on the ABC News website:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662


15 pages of declassified Joint Chiefs of Staff
documents on Operation Northwoods
as posted on the
National Security Archive
of George Washington University:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430


Instructions on how to access 181 pages of
declassified documents from Operation Northwoods
on the official website of the
US National Archives and Records Administration:

http://www.WantToKnow.info/operationnorthwoods 




Key quotes from Operation Northwoods documents

The Operation Northwoods documents were approved in writing by the Joint Chiefs of Staff – the top generals of each branch of the US armed forces – and submitted to the Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. The only reason they weren’t implemented is that the Kennedy administration rejected the plans. Below are key passages quoted directly from the Operation Northwoods documents. Page numbers are listed to assist in finding the quotes on the original documents. As you read, ask yourself if similar tactics to those listed below could have been used in regards to 9/11.




Page 1 of 15-page GWU file on Operation Northwoods (Memorandum)
(View original file at the link above at the bottom of the page. Note that this is a .pdf file requiring the free Adobe Acrobat Reader)

13 March 1962

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE     

Subject:  Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba

The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached Memorandum for the Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, which responds to a request of that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which could provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.

It is assumed that a single agency will be given the primary responsibility for developing military and para-military aspects of the basic plan. It is recommended that this responsibility for both overt and covert military operations be assigned the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Page 5 of 15-page GWU file on Operation Northwoods (page 2 of Pentagon report)

The suggested courses of action … are based on the premise that US military intervention will result from a period of heightened US-Cuban tensions which place the United States in the position of suffering justifiable grievances. World opinion, and the United Nations forum should be favorably affected by developing the international image of the Cuban government as rash and irresponsible, and as an alarming and unpredictable threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere.

Page 8 of 15-page GWU file on Operation Northwoods (page 5 of Pentagon report)

This plan … should be developed to focus all efforts on a specific ultimate objective which would provide adequate justification for US military intervention. Such a plan would enable a logical build-up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective.

Pages 10-11 of 15-page GWU file on Northwoods (page 7-8 of Joint Chiefs report)

A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

A. Incidents to establish a credible attack:

  (1)     Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
  (2)     Land friendly Cubans in uniform “over-the-fence” to stage attack on base.
  (3)     Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
  (4)     Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
  (5)     Blow up ammunition inside the base: start fires.
  (6)     Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage).
  (7)     Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base.
  (8)     Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
  (9)     Capture militia group which storms base.
(10)     Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires – naphthalene.
(11)     Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims.

A “Remember the Maine” incident could be arranged: We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.

We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington.

Page 12 of 15-page GWU file on Operation Northwoods (page 9 of Pentagon report)

Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions. Reasonable copies of the MIG could be produced from US resources in about three months.

Page 13 of 15-page GWU file on Operation Northwoods (page 10 of Pentagon report)

Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba.

It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday.

An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At the designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual aircraft would be converted to a drone.

The drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency a “MAY DAY” message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal.


What We Can Do

Remember that many government and military leaders think of this like a chess game. Sometimes you have to sacrifice your own pieces in order to win the game. Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor and co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, titled his 1998 book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. In this seminal book on American foreign policy, Brzezinski states that because of popular resistance to U.S. military expansionism, his ambitious strategy for “American global primacy” can’t be implemented “except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” (The Grand Chessboard, page 211).

Consider also that in September 2000, a think-tank named Project for the New American Century (PNAC) published a blueprint for maintaining global U.S. preeminence and shaping the international security order in line with American interests. Written before the 2000 Presidential election, this revealing report was commissioned by future Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz, and Florida Governor Jeb Bush. The report shows that the Bush administration intended to take military control of Persian Gulf oil whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. [See article in Sunday Herald, 9/7/02 or click here to download the report – Rebuilding America’s Defenses]

Considering the above information, is it beyond comprehension that tactics similar to Operation Northwoods might have been used in relation to the 9/11 attacks in order to create “a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat?” Could 9/11 have been the pretext upon which to build a War on Terror in order to “maintain global US preeminence?” Might the 9/11 attacks have been allowed to happen, or even facilitated and manipulated by elements of the U.S. government and military?

We invite you to explore a two-page summary of easily verifiable facts with links direct to major media sources which suggest a major 9/11 cover-up by clicking here. The highly revealing documentary “9/11: Press for Truth” also explores the above facts and much more. For additional empowering information on these and other reliable resources on the 9/11 cover-up, visit our 9/11 Information Center. We draw no firm conclusions in the resources we provide. We present reliable, easily verifiable facts and information with minimum interpretation, inviting you to draw your own conclusions.

We invite you now to join in making a difference in our world. By spreading this information far and wide, we can help many others to wake up to what is happening. Together, we can build the critical mass necessary to strengthen democracy, and to change this world for the better. We thank you for caring enough to explore this vital information. May we find empowering ways to work together to build a brighter future for us all.

via Operation Northwoods.

WantToKnow.info is a PEERS empowerment website

 

Cholesterol Lowering Statins Provide No Benefit: Study of 4 Million People

A population-based study in Sweden shows that the massive deployment of statins has provided no benefit. Three times as many statins were being taken by Swedish people in the year 2000 than in 1998. Yet, the numbers of people suffering or dying from heart attacks were unchanged by the increase!

Not only does this demonstrate that the massive push to press people into taking statins has been based on flawed science, it also turns the claim that randomized double blinded placebo controlled (RDBPC) drug trials are the gold standard upside down.

The study with the unwieldy name, “No connection between the level of exposition to statins in the population and the incidence/mortality of acute myocardial infarction: An ecological study based on Sweden’s municipalities”, was published today in Biomed Central’s Journal of Negative Results in Medicine.[1] We can count our blessings for this journal that produces reports of studies that did not get the expected results. The shame is that such results are not generally valued as highly as those that were expected. They are, after all, every bit as significant and important. The only usual problem with them is that they don’t support the results that Big Pharma wants to promulgate.

The authors’ conclusion is quite clear. They do not hem and haw about it:

Despite a widespread and increasing utilization of statins, no correlation to the incidence or mortality of AMI [acute myocardial infarction] could be detected. Other factors than increased statin treatment should be analyzed especially when discussing the allocation of public resources.

There is no truth behind the claims of benefit from statins.

Even though three times as many Swedish people between ages 40 and 79 were taking statins, there was no reduction in heart attacks. It’s unfortunate that the study didn’t also investigate the adverse effects caused by them. Then we would know how many people were harmed by these drugs that are known to cause muscle pain and destruction.

The study covered nearly the entire Swedish population aged 40-79 for the years 1998-2000. They included the data from 289 municipalities, which included all areas of the country, urban, suburban, country, industrial, and everything inbetween. The only one left out could not be included because of missing data. The total numbers were 1,926,113 men and 1,995,981 women—for a total of 3,922,094 people.

Here’s the study’s graph of results:

Graph-of-Swedish-Study-on-Statins

Incidence and mortality of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and statin utilisation in the Swedish population, 40-79 years
old, 1998-2002. DDD: Defined daily doses per 1,000 inhabitants and day.

Results from virtually the entire Swedish population demonstrated that the threefold increase in statins use provided no benefit.

Randomized Double Blinded Placebo Controlled Trials (RDBPC Trials)

So, what does that mean for all those pseudo-scientific RDBPC trials touted as being the gold standard in testing drugs? Obviously, it means that they’re worthless—at least in the way that they’re currently applied in pharmaceutical drug trials. Clearly, they are easily and routinely subverted.

The effects of a drug when the entire populace is examined are obviously more important than carefully designed trials, especially when they’re done by or for the people who stand to profit from them.

Adverse Effects

But the story is even worse than this study demonstrates, because it doesn’t address the adverse effects of statins, which can be quite severe. They include pancreatitis, rhabdomyolysis (muscle pain and wasting), hepatitis, angioedema, urticaria, shortness of breath, edema, pruritis, and blood in the urine. All of these can be life threatening or indicative of the onset of life-threatening conditions. It is, therefore, safe to assume that statins are among those drugs that do far more harm than good.

Gaia Health has been telling you the truth about statins, digging through the trials to point out the flaws and telling you about their risks. Based on these deeply-flawed studies, so-called experts have been pressing more and more people to take these devastatingly dangerous drugs. There’s even a push to put everyone over a certain age on them, and suggestions by doctors that they should be handed out like condiments at fast food restaurants.

The inherent flaws and corruption at the heart of modern medicine are demonstrated by this single incontrovertible study. They are exemplified by simply noting that:

Disease is not caused by a lack of drugs!

About the Author

Heidi Stevenson is Allopathy’s Gadfly. She’s an iatrogenic survivor whose prior career in computer science, research, and writing was lost as a result. She has turned her skills towards exposing the modern medical scam and the politics surrounding it, along with providing information about the effectiveness of much alternative medicine, without which she would not be here today acting as Allopathy’s Gadfly. Find her work on GaiaHealth.comwhere this article was originally featured.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. (CC)

Source:

  1. No connection between the level of exposition to statins in the population and the incidence/mortality of acute myocardial infarction: An ecological study based on Sweden’s municipalities

Chemtrails: The Real Reason

A history of lies and more lies…

Back in 2001, angry citizens had mustered enough physical evidence and thousands of photos and video tapes to make at least one congressman, Mr. Dennis Kucinich, include the phenomenon in a bill, (HR 2977) “The Space Preservation Act of 2001” where chemtrails were to be prohibited as an “exotic weapons system.” After some closed door discussions, the bill was re-introduced (HR 3615) with this portion of the prohibition omitted.

A review of the average surface temperatures over the last decade shows a decrease of 0.5F, while atmospheric temperatures have undoubtedly been rising. Scientists attribute this to chemtrails.

Non-scientists have noticed that beautiful sunny days are often turned into overcast by the crazy zig-zag flights of jets and wonder if this could also cause droughts or respiratory illnesses. It’s crazy, and no one in the government seems to want to address this.

The question remains unanswered: why won’t the government come clean with the chemtrails? Is it because the aluminum and other metallic substances has also been responsible for poisoning our water and air? Is it because the need to shield military, corporate and business communications was a higher priority than the wellbeing of the average people? We need answers and we need them now.

Please Read The Full Article: Chemtrails: The Real Reason.

Christ Myth

what-if-jesus-was-fake-and-god-is-real-thumb

I found the following in my notes. I cannot source any of it, I just found it and decided to put it on my blog. I encourage open minded investigation into the well proven and sensible fact that Jesus never existed as anything more than a religious mythical idea, an energy if you will,  but not a person in history. It’s very important to realize this fact in order to grow spiritually. The “Jesus As History” has become a religion unto itself, it is a doctrine of men, and not very good men at that. Myth doesn’t mean lie. It is a way of teaching something that is other wise beyond words. It’s Jewish Midrash and like all religions is based on Astrotheology (The Holy Science of ‘As Above, So Below’). The fact is that Rome actually did take the writings and artifacts from the earlier Jewish Gnostic Christian sect in 325CE and had a new story written and the original stories destroyed. It was a clever political move, however it’s very cleverness depended on the stupidity of the masses. Then as now, the stupidity of the masses is solid and reliable. Ignorant people are easy to control. It was a Roman legal maxim that read: “Let he who wishes to be deceived, be deceived.” My love of the bible and the mystical teachings of Christianity (and other religions) is not in question. I am not an Atheist. I am a Free-Thinker, a Mythicist, and a modern Gnostic. I see symbolism and allegory everywhere, and the biblical allegories and symbolism is amazing if read with the spiritual eye, which resides in the right side of the brain. ”Cast your net to the right side and catch more fish.” Part the Red Sea and enter the right brain. Meditate and activate the Single Eye, the Pineal gland and release the Christified Light from the kingdom of heaven. Where is this kingdom? ”The kingdom of heaven is within you.” Myth teaches spiritual truths, history is a whole other subject.

The idea that Jesus may not have existed is still very controversial. It is difficult to raise the subject and present argument and evidence because frankly, few people are willing to listen. ・Everybody has always believed in the historical Jesus・ or ・No serious scholars doubt that Jesus really lived・ or ・how can so many people be wrong?・ are usual responses.

1. There is no evidence for the Christ Myth theory.

The Christ Myth theory is considered groundless speculation because there is no physical evidence that Jesus Christ did not exist. This is like arguing that, because there is no physical evidence that a giant purple monster is not standing on my head, I cannot prove that there is not one there. It is based on a logical rule that you can’t prove a negative, or can’t prove something that wasn’t there.

The flip-side of this criticism, however, is usually that there is evidence for a historical Jesus. This is nonsense. If there were such evidence, there would be no controversy – it would be ridiculous to claim that Jesus Christ was a myth if there were irrefutable evidence that he actually existed. In actuality, there is no evidence for Jesus whatsoever that is not hotly contested, which only shows that both theories are equally based on groundless speculation; the Christ Myth theory, however, is able to explain and answer a great many questions and historical factors which proponents of the historical Jesus are forced to ignore.

2. The Christ Myth is just a “proof from silence”.

A common attack on Christ Myth theory is that it often starts from a “proof from silence” argument. Many Christ Mythers try to show that there are few historical references to Jesus, and insinuate that,had Jesus existed, there would have been more. Critics argue that silence alone proves nothing; there were no TV or news casters in those days, and anyway, Jesus “flew under the radar” by staying mostlyin the countryside. While I agree that the lack of historical references cannot prove anything about Jesus, I feel that critics miss the overall significance of this point. If there were any solid historical references to Jesus, then the Christ Myth theory is obviously untenable.While Christians have been, for at least 1,000 years, adamantly affirming the historical reliability of a few selected texts which they claim verify the historical Jesus, a Christ Myther, as well as any historianor secular scholar, (even those who believe that Jesus was historical,) can point out that these same historical documents are not reliable; their authorship and genuineness are continuing subjects of debate. Therefore, to even begin a Christ Myth hypothesis, it is highly relevant to show that the assumption of Jesus’ ministry being the “mostheavily documented event in the history of the world” is blatantly false. Only after we have cleared away the assumptions surrounding the historical Jesus can we begin to look for the Mythical Jesus.

3. Christ-Mythers are not scholars.

There have been only a small handful of marginally academic writers who have published on the Christ Myth theory, and critics point out that they are “out of their field.” They don’t have Ph.D’s inrelevant studies, they may not be trained in the rigorous investigation, clear logic and referencing that is now demanded in intellectual circles, and they may allow their passion for the subject to a) quote from sources they haven’t personally checked or b) make comparisons and assumptions that can’t beproved empirically. They may even (heaven forbid!) self-publish, or publish with an ill-reputed publishing company.

I’ll admit, as a “Christ Myther,” or someone who doesn’t believe in the historical Jesus, I can be accused of all the same flaws. I’m inexperienced, and sometimes don’t care enough to back up every statement with irrefutable evidence, because I have seen that there is no evidence that is irrefutable – whoever does not agree with your conclusions will begin by questioning your research methods, and after that, attacking your character.

In an attempt to tear apart the Christ Myth theory some critics will demonstrate that all of its proponents are uneducated attention seekers – and yet, the largest claims of the Christ Myth theory opens windows into Christian tradition which refuse to be shut again. In the proverbial “finger at the moon” story, a Zen master points at the moon and says “don’t focus on the finger – look at what I’m pointing to.”  Criticism based on undermining professional experience simply cuts off the finger, hoping that without it, the moon will disappear. As more and more people become familiar with the Christ Myth theory, and recognize in it some questions that cannot be swept away by criticizing the author’s biography, there may eventually be too many people looking at the moon to cut off all the fingers.

4. No “real” scholars agree with the Christ Myth.

I find this unfortunate, but can guess several reasons why traditional scholars have not yet supported the Christ Myth theory. First of all, the tendency of the academia is to focus on and study the specific, not the general. They may begin with a B.A. in Philosophy, then an M.A. in Religious Literature, and finally get a Ph.D. in “The Influence of Paul’s Theology on the Writing of Mark’s Gospel.” They may be the experts of the details, but the Christ Myth theory is really about the big picture – comparing and making relationships between many historical and literary documents, from many cultures and time periods, and analyzing their similarities and possible influences.

For example, a scholar might find the remains of a Roman crucifixion, analyze the wood and the nails,and determine with certainty exactly how the punishment was inflicted; these could be interpreted by other researchers as applicable to the death of Jesus Christ. The Christ Myther, on the other hand, will search into mythology and religious traditions to find stories that echo the biblical description of Christ’s passion, and then, finding an underlying spiritual theme, try to interpret the story as a metaphor and release its original meaning.  It is unfair to compare a historian with a Christ Myther because they aren’t really in the same field; Christ Mythers are primarily concerned with textual analysis and literary criticism. When placed in the field of “World Literature” or “Sociology”, their methods no longer stand out as being unempirical.

Further, it is ridiculous to dismiss the Christ Myth theory by trying to separate it from the Academic Community, because almost all scholars do agree that nearly everything in the gospels and in Christian tradition came from Pagan tradition. All professors of Religion or Theology recognize that Christianity developed out of previous traditions and that many of its ideas and symbols are not new.

Most scholars also agree that when we cut out all of the Pagan influences, there is virtually nothing left to be said about the historical Jesus. The only difference between Christ Mythers and the average scholar is that, faced with a complete lack of evidence concerning the historical Jesus, scholars engage in sorting through the wreckage, dusting off the pieces, and trying to imagine what the historical Jesus would have been like. If he was a carpenter, what would his shop have been like? If he was married, what would his relationship have been like?

In short, taking the Biblical testimony as a starting ground, they form a hypothesis and then try and support it through historical research. Allowing that their foundation is nothing more than the assumed historical Christ, is the Christ Myther any less credible? Lastly, I want to point out that the academia is not necessarily the best birthing ground for Truth. Being a researcher or a professor at a University is a public career, and depends on both innovative research and peer review. Backing a controversial theory is not a good idea for most scholars, who are concerned with career, status and nice things, just like everyone else.

5. Christ-Mythers make comparisons and connections that cannot be verified.

I find it amazing that Christians can discredit Christ Mythers as fanatics, whose theories are absolutely without basis, because they see similarities between Jesus and other miraculous, dying and resurrecting sons of god. Even if we ignore every modern attempt to compare Jesus with other traditions, it is more than enough to provide just one quote from Justin Martyr, a Christian apologist who acknowledged the similarities between Jesus and Pagan gods around 1800 years ago.

“When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter(Zeus).” Justin Martyr, First Apology

If, as Justin testifies, Christianity’s central articles of faith (crucifixion, resurrection, ascension) areidentical to Pagan mythology, is it any wonder Christ Mythers seek out more similarities, or questionwhere these similarities came from? And while it is the overwhelming conclusion of modern scholars that Jesus was a historical person, there is plenty of evidence, especially from the first several centuries BC, that there has always been a debate over the historical Jesus. There were many heresies, decades after the alleged death of Jesus, that claimed Jesus had been born in appearanceonly, and was never an actual human being. Why should we believe the tradition of our Christian heritage, rather than investigating the claims of those other communities? Is it irrational, or crazy, to try to understand history from another point of view? Everyone knows that history is written by the winners; is there any reason to assume that in this case alone, the history written was absolutely free from prejudice?

The Christ Myth theory is not a modern idea; it is a revival of a very ancient and very common criticism of Christianity: that Jesus did and said some things that other, earlier, Pagan god-men didand said. Critics try to knock down these similarities by either questioning the source, or calling them “coincidences” by playing up their differences. While Jesus was born of a Virgin, some other savior was born “without sexual union”.  While Jesus was crucified on a cross, some other savior was nailed to a tree, or a rock, or a T-shaped bar, or somewhere in the skies. The problem with focusing on the differences rather than the similarities is that, while it may work in one or two isolated cases, it cannot be applied to absolutely every proposed similarity without weakening in effect. And it also doesn’t work on more specific cases; like Jesus was called “son of God”, as were others, or born on December25th, as were others.

In response to these claims, critics will say that many of the so-called similarities really were added onto the story of Jesus by Pagan influences, but that these don’t change the core Christian message. Firstoff, if you agree that Christianity absorbed some of its symbols from mythological traditions, then you are a Christ Myther. Relegating our position to a simple “Jesus did not exist” is too easy:  what we intend to show is that the person worshiped by Christians, along with all of his miraculous titles and abilities, is indebted to earlier traditions. It is meaningless to argue that Jesus was a historical person, but that motifs like his birth date, the virgin birth, crucifixion and resurrection, his role as son of god and savior were added into the tradition (and into the Bible!) by Pagans, and also that Jesus is still the Way, Truth and Life. What good is using this argument against Christ Mythers, and ending up with a human Jesus with no divine attributes?

Critics will also argue that mythology may have prefigured Jesus in some way, but the things said about those Pagan gods were just stories, while Jesus was a real, physical human being. This doesn’t answer why there should be any similarities at all. The only argument ever used to explain the similarities between Jesus and early Pagan saviors, which is continued by Christians in many ways today,  is called “Diabolical Mimicry”. This argument can only be accepted through a faith-based Christian paradigm that believes in a struggle between God and Satan, and for a non-Christian, it doesn’t go far explain how a historical person mistakenly acted out the precise details of hundreds of diverse cultural mythologies.

6.) Christ mythers have an agenda: to disprove the existence of Jesus. They already thought of the end result and take material and twist it to fit into their hypothesis. All historians should know this is not how research is conducted. Again, this is an easy way to dismiss Christ myth theory without actually looking at the evidence it presents. Criticizing the methodology, the intention, and the characters of the people challenging traditional Christian history is like a magician’s sleight of hand – great at keeping your eyes focused on the wrong thing entirely because, if you were to look at the truth, the illusion would disappear.

I’m not beyond accepting that the Christ Myth theory may turn out to be wrong. It seems to me, given the available evidence, to be a very reasonable and highly probable version of Christian history, but I won’t be upset if further evidence later induces me to change my ideas. However, what I find both disturbing and dangerous, is any attempt to disprove or vilify a hypothesis without referring to the argument itself or the evidence provided. To assume that the Christ Myth theory is false, because it wasn’t convincing the first time it was given, and that every subsequent version of it is likewise false, shows an aversion to truth that is difficult to respond to.

This is not an attemptat trying to disprove God. Some things may really be beyond our ability to comprehend – but Jesus Christ was either there, historically, or not. This is not one of those unfathomable mysteries. There is convincing evidence that Jesus Christ never existed as a historical person, and it is possible to discover in the history of Christianity the process by which a mythical figure was accidentally mistaken for a real human being. Or perhaps, worse, intentional literalizing of gnostic Christian science.

We Should All Be Mad About What’s Happening To E-Cigs

Electronic cigarettes are shaping up to be nothing short of a miracle.  There exists a legally obtainable product in our free market that eventually kills around half its users.  Despite decades of anti-smoking legislation, tax hikes, counter-marketing programs, and scare tactics, smoking is still alive and well killing around 443,000 individuals (the population of Atlanta, Georgia) a year.  E-cig may be the one thing to finally stop this.

Anti-smoking efforts have not gone without any success.  The adult smoking rate in the United States has dropped from more than 40% in 1965 to around 18-19% now.  How much of that decline is a result of anti-smoking efforts and how much of it is a natural byproduct of people seeing what smoking does to friends and family is a topic very much up for debate.

One thing does seem clear, the lower the smoking rate gets, the harder it is to continue the decline.  Internationally, almost all countries that are actively fighting smoking rates have stalled at just under 20%.  Even before electronic cigarettes blazed into the scene, many smoking and public health experts agreed that the war on smoking needed a new weapon.  Most options — graphic warnings, further limiting access and use, and even higher taxes and age restrictions — tread very close to infringing on individual (and even commercial) liberty.

Article continues at Opinion: We Should All Be Mad About What’s Happening To E-Cigs | Ecig Advanced News.

 

BANNING THE E-CIG IS MASS MURDER FOR PROFIT. E-cig safety has been scientifically proven, see CASAA.org for the research. Mass media and corporate America is demonizing a life saving alternative that is 99% safer than smoking. Nicotine isn’t harmful in small amounts (nicotine can be found naturally in vegetables). The argument that kids will use them as a gateway to smoking is absurd. Young people still actually prefer real cigarettes, and view the e-cig as a stop smoking device. The only reason to over regulate or ban e-cigs is about money, not health!

I tried for a year to stop my 40+ year smoking habit with FDA approved methods. They didn’t work and have a poor track record for helping smokers to stop. I bought an e-cig in 2010 and haven’t smoked for 4 years. My elderly mother has asthma and COPD and can’t be around a cigarette even outside at a distance, yet I can use my e-cig in an enclosed car and it doesn’t bother her a bit. I believe it’s as safe as breathing air. Big Tobacco wants to corner the market and produce ciggy-like non-effective e-cigs and take away my choice to use a higher voltage vaporizer with flavored e-juice. The choice will again be quit or die. Not to mention the many small American businesses that will suffer, hurting the economy even more. there’s no good reason to not green light the e-cig business. To not is mass murder for profit.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and 9/11: A Scandal Beyond What Has Been Seen Before

911banner

by Matt Everett
The Journal of Psychohistory, Winter 2005, 32 (3): 202-238

“If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars.”
– Andreas von Bülow, former German governmment minister, author of “Die CIA und der 11. September.”

At the beginning of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld promised: “What will follow will not be a repeat of any other conflict. It will be of a force and scope and scale that has been beyond what has been seen before.” The invasion that ensued was, like all wars, destructive and resulted in the loss of thousands of lives. Yet Baghdad fell in a mere three weeks and just six weeks after the invasion commenced, President Bush announced: “Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.” Despite the death and destruction, it was hardly a war of a ‘force,’ ‘scope’ and ‘scale’ beyond what had been seen before.

However, before it began, there were indications that some people wanted a far more destructive war than that which ensued. For example, ridiculous as it may now sound, it was suggested that Britain and America might use nuclear weapons against Iraq. As The Guardian reported at the time:

From last year’s US defence review and the testimony of the Defence Secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, to the defence select committee last March it was clear that a major change in the US and UK nuclear policy was taking place.

For the first time Britain and America were contemplating using nuclear weapons against an enemy using only chemical or biological weapons.

Referring to “states of concern”, and Saddam Hussein in particular, Mr Hoon told the committee: “They can be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be willing to use our nuclear weapons.”

A month before the invasion, Hoon repeated his warning: “Saddam can be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be willing to use nuclear weapons.” As investigative journalist John Pilger points out: “No British minister has ever made such an outright threat.”

Thankfully, the invasion passed without our resorting to nuclear weapons. But it seemed the desire for a bigger conflict remained, with attempts beginning almost immediately to find a new, more formidable enemy. In particular, Iran and Syria seemed next on the list for ‘liberation.’ At a press conference in July 2003, President Bush issued a stern warning to both countries, accusing them of harboring terrorists. “This behaviour is completely unacceptable,” he said, “and states that continue to harbour terrorists will be held completely accountable.” Three months later, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton told journalists: “There is awareness of the threat posed by Iran and consensus that threat has to be eliminated.” Yet these warnings failed to capture much public interest.

Instead, there was a growing interest around the investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001. Previously, the press had largely ignored the work of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, better known as the “9-11 Commission.” When it held its second public hearings in May 2003 on the key issue of air defense, the New York Times and Los Angeles Times failed to write any articles about it. Suddenly though, in March 2004 the Commission became the center of attention when former White House security expert Richard Clarke publicly testified before it and criticized the Bush administration for failing to address terrorism when it first came into office. Since then, the 9/11 Commission remained a major news story and the book of its final report became an instant bestseller. However, the mass media were still overlooking the fact that increasing numbers of people were seriously questioning the entire official account of 9/11. More and more books had been released around the world giving evidence of possible U.S. government complicity in the attacks. Polls suggested that millions of people were suspicious: A Zogby poll in late August 2004 found 49 per cent of New York City residents and 41 per cent of New York citizens overall agreed that “some leaders in the U.S. government knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to take action.” A survey three months earlier found 63 per cent of Canadians believed the U.S. government had “prior knowledge of the plans for the events of September 11th, and failed to take appropriate action to stop them.” A July 2003 poll had found almost a fifth of Germans believed the U.S. government, or elements within it, were responsible for organizing the attacks.

With attempts at identifying a new ‘external enemy’ so far failing, I believe it is possible that, instead, this growing suspicion around 9/11 will develop into an unprecedented public scandal. But what are these suspicions about? Are they simply the result of rumour and ‘urban legend,’ or could some of the disturbing allegations now being made be found true in future? In this article, I will examine some of the arguments put forward by 9/11 skeptics, along with supporting evidence. Then I will examine some of the psychohistorical evidence that shows why we could be heading for a major scandal over the events of 9/11. Until the controversy around 9/11 is brought into the open and investigated properly, it is up to individuals to draw their own conclusions. However, in my opinion, the volume of evidence now gathered is enough to suggest a massive scandal is a real possibility. The implications of this would be extraordinary. As one of the most prominent 9/11 skeptics, former German government minister Andreas von Bülow, says: “If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars.”

THE FAA AND NORAD ON 9/11

The 9/11 Commission was established in late 2002 to provide a full and complete accounting of the attacks of September 11, 2001, and offer recommendations on how to prevent such attacks recurring. On June 16-17, 2004, it held its twelfth and final public hearing. Most revealing was the hearing’s second day, examining the federal government’s immediate response to the attacks. This looked at the actions of the two agencies responsible for the defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11: the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). The job of the FAA is to regulate the safety and security of civil aviation, whilst NORAD is the military organization responsible for defending the airspace over North America. The 9/11 attacks all occurred within NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector, known as NEADS. Below, I have summarised some of the new information that was revealed at this hearing:

  • The New York Times had previously reported that the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center, in contact with American Airlines Flight 11 (the first plane to be hijacked), knew around 8:20 a.m. on 9/11 that Flight 11 had probably been hijacked. However, the 9/11 Commission reported that Boston “did not follow the routine protocol in seeking military assistance through the prescribed chain of command.” Amongst other things, they sought help from a former alert site in Atlantic City, not realizing it had already been phased out. It was consequently about 18 minutes after they first suspected a hijacking, around 8:38 a.m., that Boston finally reached the military to ask for assistance.
  • In response, NEADS ordered to battle stations two F-15 fighter jets from Otis Air Force Base, 153 miles from New York City. These jets were in the air by 8:53 a.m. – after Flight 11 had hit the World Trade Center but 10 minutes before the second hijacked plane, United Airlines Flight 175, hit its target. However, NEADS supposedly did not know where to send them, so they were directed towards military controlled airspace off the Long Island coast. They were still in this ‘holding pattern’ ten minutes after Flight 175 hit the World Trade Center.
  • At 8:55 a.m., the controller in charge had notified a manager at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center that she believed Flight 175 had been hijacked. However when this manager at New York then tried to notify regional managers, they were told the managers were discussing a hijacked aircraft and refused to be disturbed.
  • After deviating from its flight plan around 8:54 a.m., the third hijacked plane – American Airlines Flight 77 – supposedly traveled east towards Washington, undetected for 36 minutes. When the FAA contacted NEADS at 9:21 a.m., they reported that the plane heading towards Washington was Flight 11, despite this plane having crashed into the WTC 35 minutes earlier. Furthermore, “NEADS never even received notice that American 77 was hijacked. It was notified at 9:34 that American 77 was lost. Then, minutes later, NEADS was told that an unknown plane was six miles southwest of the White House.” This left the military only one or two minutes to respond. But its fighters were in the wrong place to be of use as they were responding to a plane that did not exist.
  • The NEADS mission crew commander had ordered fighter jets launched from Langley Air Force Base towards the Washington area. Yet despite these being in the air by 9:30 a.m., the commander discovered several minutes later that, rather than going north as instructed, they had flown east over the ocean. So when the Pentagon was hit they were 150 miles from Washington – further away from the capital than when they had taken off.16 Furthermore, the pilots were never briefed as to why they had been scrambled, so when the lead pilot saw the burning Pentagon, he thought it had been hit by a Russian cruise missile.17
  • During the hearing, a tape was played of a phone call between the national Air Traffic Control System Command Center in Herndon, Virginia and FAA headquarters in Washington, DC, that took place at 9:49 a.m. on 9/11. They were discussing how to respond to United Airlines Flight 93 – the fourth hijacked plane. The Command Center asked: “do we want to think about, uh, scrambling aircraft?” An exasperated sounding man at FAA headquarters responded: “Uh, God, I don’t know.” This man then mentioned: “Uh, ya know everybody just left the room.”18 Why did everyone at FAA headquarters leave him alone at such a critical time? In fact, according to the Commission, no one at FAA headquarters requested military assistance regarding Flight 93. Supposedly, “The time of notification of the crash of United 93 was 10:15. The NEADS air defenders never located the flight or followed it on their radar scopes. The flight had already crashed by the time they learned it was hijacked.”19

This evidence seemed to depict an appalling level of confusion and incompetence by the FAA. However, the 9/11 Commission’s conclusion was that this was understandable considering the unprecedented nature of the situation. They said NORAD and the FAA “were unprepared for the type of attacks launched against the United States on September 11, 2001. They struggled, under difficult circumstances, to improvise a homeland defense against an unprecedented challenge they had never encountered and had never trained to meet.”20 To most, this probably seemed a fair evaluation. Yet for people familiar with previous accounts of 9/11, this new evidence added to a long list of contradictions and oddities in the official narrative. Amongst other things, the Commission had failed to mention that while hijackings are rare, the scrambling (immediate launching) of fighter aircraft to intercept civilian planes in emergency situations is a common occurrence.

FAA PROCEDURES

Quite often civilian planes stray from their pre-arranged flight course or else lose contact with air traffic control. For situations like these, the Federal Aviation Administration has established procedures for air traffic controllers to follow. Regulations in force on September 11 stated that controllers should “Consider that an aircraft emergency exists…when: … There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any…aircraft.”21 In addition: “If…you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.”22 To deal with these emergencies, fighter jets can be launched. As MSNBC describes: “If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from [its] course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button…. It’s considered a real emergency…. F-16 interceptors can fly alongside a plane to see who’s flying it. They can also try to force it off course.”23 This is a routine procedure that does not require White House approval: Between September 2000 and June 2001, the U.S. military launched fighter jets 67 times to chase suspicious aircraft. 24

It is important that controllers follow these procedures promptly and reliably. If it were otherwise, with thousands of planes flying over the United States at a time, an off-course plane could easily crash into another plane. In fact, this almost happened on 9/11 when, minutes after going off course, the second hijacked plane – Flight 175 – nearly crashed into another commercial flight.25 Paul Hellyer, the former Canadian minister of national defense, asked in a recent interview: “Why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors being scrambled from Andrews [Air Force Base]…right next to the capital?” He says: “with a quick-reaction alert they should have been in the air in five minutes or ten minutes. If not, as a minister of national defense, which in the United States would be the secretary of defense, I would want to say ‘why not?’” 26

What 9/11 skeptics find suspicious is that the routine procedure of quickly scrambling fighter jets to intercept wayward aircraft apparently failed four times in a row on 9/11. If it was the result of incompetence, why was this incompetence only evident on September 11? One man who addresses this point is retired Lieutenant Colonel Robert Bowman. Bowman served in the U.S. Air Force for 22 years. He has been Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the Air Force Space Division. He flew 101 combat missions over Vietnam and has personal experience of doing intercepts. Bowman describes the timeline for the morning of 9/11:

We look at the fact that contact was lost with American Airlines 11 at 8:13:50 a.m. That the transponder stopped at 8:20. That the airliner went off course at 8:20. That at 8:21 a stewardess reported the hijacking. So it’s reasonable to me to think that within five minutes somebody should have told NORAD and gotten those planes scrambled. The planes in short should have been scrambled at 8:26. They were actually scrambled at 8:46, 20 minutes later. They got airborne in 6 minutes, which is about as good as you can do…so they could have been airborne at 8:32. Based on going full-throttle, afterburner all the way, getting there in the shortest possible time, they could have intercepted American Airlines Flight 11 at 8:42 and been at the World Trade Center at 8:43. The first plane didn’t hit the World Trade Center until 8:46 and a half.

The timelines for the Pentagon, it’s even worse. Those planes made a U-turn and headed directly back for Washington, DC, without radio contact, without transponder, off their assigned course, and nothing was done. Again a stewardess reported the hijacking and still nothing was done. Two minutes after the stewardess reported: “Yes indeed this isn’t just a problem, this is a hijacking,” NORAD could have been notified. That would have allowed the F-16s from Langley Air Force Base to be scrambled, airborne by 9:04 and they could have been over the Pentagon at 9:18. That’s 19 minutes before American Flight 77 – if that’s what it was – something flew into the Pentagon at 9:37.

The conclusion to me, as a former fighter pilot, is this. If normal communications, common sense actions, had taken place between the airlines, air traffic control, FAA, NORAD and the interceptor bases, the interceptors would have arrived in time to save both the World Trade Center and the Pentagon with many minutes to spare. So while I conclude that the fighter pilots themselves were not culpable, somebody was. The question is who was it? 27

Bowman concludes: “No one has been court-martialled. No one has been reprimanded. No one has been demoted. No one is to blame. That only tells me one thing. The ones to blame are too high up to play scapegoat.” 28

WAR GAMES

The 9/11 Commission also almost totally ignored what may have been a crucial factor in preventing the successful interception of the four hijacked planes: On the morning of September 11, there was a series of war games being carried out within America. One exercise called “Operation Northern Vigilance,” commenced two days earlier, had U.S. fighter jets deployed to Northern Canada and Alaska to monitor an exercise being conducted by the Russian Air Force. 29 Another was a weeklong semi-annual training exercise conducted by NORAD, called “Vigilant Guardian,” that posed an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide. Lieutenant Colonel Dawne Deskins, the mission crew chief for Vigilant Guardian, reportedly thought: “It must be part of the exercise,” when the FAA called at 8:40 to report a hijacked aircraft.30 NORAD commander Larry Arnold says that when he first heard of the hijacking, “First thing that went through my mind was, ‘Is this part of the exercise? Is this some kind of a screw-up?’”31 That morning, three F-16 fighter jets assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, 10 miles from Washington, were involved in another training mission over 200 miles away in North Carolina. They only arrived back at Andrews some time after the Pentagon was hit.32 Furthermore, a drill was planned for 9 a.m. based around a corporate jet plane crashing into a building. The exercise was to be conducted by the National Reconnaissance Office, just outside Washington, which draws its staff from the CIA and military. 33

Pioneering 9/11 researcher and former LAPD narcotics investigator Mike Ruppert has investigated these military exercises for himself. He says they are what caused the failure to intercept the hijacked planes:

The wargames will tie Bush and/or Cheney and Rumsfeld directly into a complete paralysis of fighter response on 9/11. I have gone directly to many NORAD, DoD, NRO, and other sources and questioned them. I have knocked on many doors and I have even obtained some documents. I have obtained an on-the-record statement from someone in NORAD, which confirmed that on the day of 9/11 the Joint Chiefs (Myers) and NORAD were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercise (FTX) which involved at least one (and almost certainly many more) aircraft under US control that was posing as a hijacked airliner. That is just the tip of what I have uncovered. 34

Speaking at the prestigious Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, he elaborated:

In some cases false blips were deliberately inserted onto FAA and military radar screens and they were present during (at least) the first attacks. This effectively paralyzed fighter response because, with only eight fighters available in the region, there were as many as 22 possible hijackings taking place. Other exercises, specifically Northern Vigilance had pulled significant fighter resources away from the northeast U.S. – just before 9/11 – into northern Canada and Alaska. In addition, a close reading of key news stories published in the spring of 2004 revealed for the first time that some of these drills were “live-fly” exercises where actual aircraft, likely flown by remote control – were simulating the behavior of hijacked airliners in real life. All of this as the real attacks began. 35

According to Ruppert, Dick Cheney is a prime suspect in planning and carrying out the attacks, and on the morning of 9/11 he was running a separate command, control and communications system, which superseded any orders given by the National Military Command Center (NMCC) or the White House situation room. He did this using a Secret Service communications system based within or near a bunker below the White House called the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC). Ruppert says he has established conclusively that “in May of 2001, by presidential order, Richard Cheney was put in direct command and control of all wargame and field exercise training and scheduling through several agencies, especially FEMA. This also extended to all of the conflicting and overlapping NORAD drills on that day.” 36

Is it because of these wargames that the FAA appeared so confused and incompetent on 9/11? Is this why the standard procedure of intercepting off-course planes failed four times in succession? What is more, a major biological-terrorism drill called “Tripod II” had been scheduled for the morning of September 12, 2001, in a huge commercial warehouse on Pier 92 of the Hudson. As a result, an equipped and fully staffed Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), New York City and Department of Justice command center was conveniently ready to go into operation when the attacks occurred. 37

Yet another oddity surfaced during the final public hearing of the 9/11 Commission: The personal statement of Navy Captain Charles J. Leidig, Jr. revealed that from 8:30 on the morning of 9/11, he temporarily stood in as deputy director for operations for the NMCC within the Pentagon. In this key role, he was responsible for convening a Significant Event Conference, later upgraded to an Air Threat Conference, in response to the attacks. What is odd is that the regular deputy director, Brigadier General Montague Winfield, only requested the previous day that Leidig fill in a portion of his duty on 9/11. Even though Leidig had only qualified the previous month to stand watch in this post, Winfield only relieved him and resumed his duties around 10:30 a.m.38 In other words, Brigadier General Winfield allowed a newly qualified stand-in to fill his vitally important post for almost the entire duration of the attacks.

We also now know that six air traffic controllers at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center who were involved in dealing with the hijacks made a tape recording on September 11, describing the events that had occurred, with each controller giving a short statement. Yet, without the tape being transcribed or listened to by any investigators, an FAA quality-assurance manager destroyed it. Despite the FAA having sent an e-mail instructing officials to preserve all records, the manager reportedly “crushed the cassette in his hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in different trash cans around the building.” Neither this quality-assurance manager nor the center manager disclosed the tape’s existence to their superiors and its destruction was only revealed by coincidence when one of the air traffic controllers asked to review it before giving testimony for a report. 39

THE PENTAGON CRASH

One of the most bizarre of the controversies over what happened on September 11 is around what occurred at the Pentagon. According to the official story, the Pentagon was hit by the third hijacked plane, American Airlines Flight 77: a Boeing 757-200. This departed Dulles International Airport, near Washington, around 8:20 a.m., bound for Los Angeles. Some time shortly after 8:50 it is thought to have been hijacked. Then, around 8:54, it veered off course over Ohio, with its transponder going off a couple of minutes later. Around 9:30 flight controllers at Dulles Airport sounded an alert after noticing an unidentified aircraft flying at high speed towards Washington. Just before 9:38, this aircraft crashed into the west side of the Pentagon. 40

This would seem fairly straightforward. Yet what have aroused suspicion are the photographs taken soon after the Pentagon was hit. Skeptics say these pictures show that damage before the Pentagon’s west block collapsed – about 35 minutes after being hit – was way too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. The main damage was a hole at most just 13 feet wide and 26 feet high.41 Steve DeChiaro, the president of a New Jersey technology firm who was arriving at the Pentagon when it was hit, ran towards the impact point. He has said: “when I looked at the site, my brain could not resolve the fact that it was a plane because it only seemed like a small hole in the building. No tail. No wings. No nothing.”42 Photos clearly show that windows beside this main hole were unbroken. There is some additional damage across the building’s first floor, but this covers an area at most 90 feet in width. How was this possible? Research scientist and software engineer Jim Hoffman points out that a 757 is over 44 feet high; its wingspan is over 124 feet; and as the aircraft that hit the Pentagon approached at a 45-degree angle, he calculates that the damage a 757 would have made would be about 177 feet in width.43 According to air crash investigator François Grangier: “What is certain when one looks at the photo of [the Pentagon] façade that remains intact is that it’s obvious the plane did not go through there. It’s like imagining that a plane of this size could pass through a window and leave the frame still standing.” 44

The damage was so low in the building that, for Flight 77 to have caused it, it would need to have flown perfectly horizontally, barely inches above the lawn in front of the Pentagon. Yet photos clearly show this lawn was left perfectly intact, with no scorch marks or signs of gouging from a Boeing. Nor do any photographs show large pieces of debris recognizable as belonging to Flight 77.45 Apparently 60 tons of aluminum simply disappeared. April Gallop was working in the west block of the Pentagon on 9/11, preparing to take her infant son to the day-care center there. After the building was hit, she managed to locate her son, then crawled out of the wreckage and was driven to hospital. However, whilst there she was visited more than once by some men in suits. These men never identified themselves nor said which agency they worked for. Yet, says Gallop, they told her “what to do, which was to take the [Victim Compensation Fund] money and shut up. They also kept insisting that a plane hit the building. They repeated this over and over. But I was there and I never saw a plane or even debris from a plane.” 46

According to the FBI, the man who piloted Flight 77 was a 29-year-old Saudi called Hani Hanjour. The 9/11 Commission claims Hanjour “was perhaps the most experienced and highly trained pilot among the 9/11 hijackers.”47 Yet descriptions from those who met him contradict this. Months before the attacks, staff at an Arizona flight school Hanjour was attending reported him to the FAA at least five times, concerned that his English and flying skills were so poor that he should not be allowed to keep his pilot’s license. The manager of the school has said: “I couldn’t believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had.” She says his English was so poor that it took him five hours to complete a section of an oral exam meant to last just two hours.48 A former employee of the school has said: “I’m still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He could not fly at all.”49 Newsday describes what happened when Hanjour tried to rent a small plane one month before 9/11: “[H]e had trouble controlling and landing the single-engine Cessna 172. Even though Hanjour showed a federal pilot’s license and a log book cataloging 600 hours of flying experience, chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard declined to rent him a plane without more lessons.”50

How could this man who had never before flown a jet plane successfully navigate a Boeing across America without any assistance from air traffic control, then fly it into the side of the Pentagon? Here is how CBS News describes the final maneuver Hanjour supposedly performed:

Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes.

The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it’s clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed.

The jetliner disappeared from radar at 9:37 and less than a minute later it clipped the tops of street lights and plowed into the Pentagon at 460 mph. 51

According to Gary Eitel, an experienced military pilot, this maneuver would be beyond the capabilities of 90 per cent of the best, most experienced military pilots in the world. 52

Furthermore, video footage that would show the Pentagon being hit was promptly seized by the FBI and has never been made public. The security cameras of a nearby gas station and hotel caught the attack. But, says the gas station supervisor: “I’ve never seen what the pictures looked like. The FBI was here within minutes and took the film.”53 The Washington Times reported how the nearby hotel similarly had its security film quickly seized by the FBI.54

On the basis of this evidence and more, skeptics say the physical evidence of the Pentagon crash is more consistent with it having been hit by something smaller, like a missile or unmanned military aircraft such as a Global Hawk. Yet if this was so, why did many individuals claim they saw a Boeing 757 flying at the Pentagon that morning? There are two main theories attempting to explain this. The first takes a psychological perspective, examining the problems of eyewitness testimony: If an event happens very rapidly such that a person’s senses are unable to capture all its details, to make their perception more complete and coherent their brain might replace a poorly received sensation with another from acquired memory. Thus, if Pentagon witnesses heard on the news about Boeings hitting the WTC and later heard that it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, they might then report that they did indeed see Flight 77 there, when in fact what they saw occurred too fast for them to say with certainty that it was a Boeing rather than a smaller aircraft.55 The second theory is that there were two aircraft flying towards the Pentagon on 9/11. One of them, an American Airlines 757, was used to divert people’s attention. It flew towards the Pentagon then veered off, landing unnoticed at Reagan National Airport just a mile away. Approaching the Pentagon at the same time, but much lower, was a smaller aircraft, maybe a missile. It was this that crashed into the Pentagon whilst the 757 flew over the top. 56

Outlandish as it may at first sound to suggest a missile hit the Pentagon, this appears something that could well capture the public interest should there be a 9/11 scandal. For example, this suggestion featured prominently in two recent major articles in British publications about the controversy over 9/11. One of these was in Britain’s second most popular daily newspaper, the Daily Mail; the other, in a popular weekly magazine for young men.57 It was also a key subject of a book that became a record-breaking bestseller in France in 2002.58 If it were ever found that the Pentagon was indeed hit by something other than Flight 77, this would certainly ruin the official account of 9/11. Furthermore, we would be left with new and baffling questions. For example, if Flight 77 didn’t hit the Pentagon, what happened to it? What happened to the passengers? Who was behind this outrageous act? And why fly something like a missile into the Pentagon then claim it was a Boeing?

Let us next consider how probably the three most important people within the Bush administration behaved during the course of the 9/11 attacks and what they have done since in relation to the events that day. I am focusing on these three – Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush – because they are well known and therefore, I believe, were they ever found to be in any way complicit in 9/11 it would be particularly shocking to the general public.

DONALD RUMSFELD ON 9/11

As U.S. secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld was on 9/11 second in the military chain-of-command behind the president. Yet details of what he did during the attacks are sketchy and from what we currently know, he did nothing in response to the crisis until it was too late to make a difference.

According to Rumsfeld, on the morning of September 11 he was hosting a breakfast meeting at the Pentagon for some members of Congress. He told them that “sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department.”59 Soon after, someone walked in and gave him a note saying a plane had hit the World Trade Center. Yet Rumsfeld apparently was not moved to take action. “[W]e adjourned the meeting, and I went in to get my CIA briefing,”60 he has said. Whilst in his office with the CIA briefer, Rumsfeld says he was told of the second plane hitting the WTC. Yet he went ahead with a meeting in his private dining room at the Pentagon with his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz and U.S. Representative Christopher Cox, to discuss how to win votes for Bush’s defense plan.

During this meeting, Rumsfeld was apparently oblivious to the fact that an airplane was heading towards Washington. However, he made another prediction: “let me tell you, I’ve been around the block a few times,” he told Representative Cox. “There will be another event.” For emphasis, he repeated: “There will be another event.”61 Just minutes later the Pentagon was hit. Rumsfeld says: “I went outside to determine what had happened. I was not there long because I was back in the Pentagon with a crisis action team shortly before or after 10:00 a.m. On my return from the crash site and before going to the executive support center, I had one or more calls in my office, one of which was with the president.”62 Rumsfeld didn’t enter the National Military Command Center within the Pentagon though until 10.30. Brigadier General Montague Winfield says: “For 30 minutes we couldn’t find him. And just as we began to worry, he walked into the door of the National Military Command Center.”63 As the 9/11 Commission conclude: “The Secretary of Defense did not enter the chain of command until the morning’s key events were over.”64 Nor is Rumsfeld on the record as having given any orders that morning.

Yet, according to military procedure, if the Federal Aviation Administration were to notify the National Military Command Center of a hijacking, with the exception of “immediate responses” the NMCC was required to “forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval.”65 Of course, 9/11 would easily come under the heading of “immediate responses.” All the same, Rumsfeld has yet to be asked whether he was contacted in line with this military procedure and, if so, what did he do in response?

Interestingly, since 9/11 Donald Rumsfeld has made statements suggesting why he may have wanted an event like 9/11 to occur. For example, in a televised interview two years after the attacks, he described how he thinks about what a senior leader in the Gulf told him, that maybe 9/11 was “a blessing in disguise,” and a “wake-up call” for the world to deal with the growing threat of terrorism. Rumsfeld said he agreed with this, that 9/11 was indeed a ‘wake-up call.’66 He wrote a similar thing in his prepared testimony to the 9/11 Commission:

Think about what has been done since the September 11th attacks: two state sponsors of terrorism have been removed from power, a 90-nation coalition has been formed which is cooperating on a number of levels… All of these actions are putting pressure on terrorist networks. Taken together, they represent a collective effort that is unprecedented – which has undoubtedly saved lives, and made us safer than before September 11th. 67

DICK CHENEY ON 9/11

Based upon mainstream accounts, Vice President Cheney’s actions during the attacks appear less suspicious than those of Bush and Rumsfeld. However, there are some odd contradictions in the reports of what he did. On the morning of September 11, before learning about the attacks, Dick Cheney was in his office in the White House. According to the 9/11 Commission, just before 9 a.m. he was preparing for a meeting when his assistant “told him to turn on his television because a plane had struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center.”68 Cheney subsequently saw the second aircraft hitting the South Tower. Then, “just before 9:36,” the Secret Service ordered the evacuation of the vice president and agents took him down to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center, the bunker below the East Wing of the White House. “The Vice President entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37.” 69

However, according to White House photographer David Bohrer who was present at the time, this evacuation occurred just after 9 a.m.70 Furthermore, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta described before the 9/11 Commission how a young man had come into the PEOC to inform the vice president of the approach towards Washington of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon. According to Mineta, this occurred around 9:25 or 9:26.71 This suggests that the report of Cheney only reaching the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37 is incorrect. If Cheney were in fact evacuated soon after 9, why would it later be claimed this took place about half an hour later? One possibility is that it was to make the failure of the Secret Service to evacuate President Bush from his location that morning appear less suspicious. (See below.) Alternatively, if Michael Ruppert’s allegations about the vice president’s involvement in the attacks are correct, then this claim could simply be an attempt to conceal his complicity.

Soon after 9:15, Cheney spoke over the phone with the president, who was at a school in Florida that morning. Also, “sometime before 10:10 to 10:15,” he reportedly phoned the president to discuss the rules of engagement for the combat air patrol above Washington. Supposedly, he recommended the president authorize the military to shoot down any civilian airliners that might be under the control of hijackers. Bush later recalled his response being “You bet.”72 The president also emphasized in his private meeting with the 9/11 Commission that he had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft.73 This is an important point, because the shooting down of a wayward aircraft before it crashed into a populated area could save many lives. Yet, according to the 9/11 Commission, “there is no documentary evidence for this call.”74 Newsweek adds: “Nor did the real-time notes taken by two others in the room, Cheney’s chief of staff, ‘Scooter’ Libby – who is known for his meticulous record-keeping – or Cheney’s wife, Lynne, reflect that such a phone call between Bush and Cheney occurred or that such a major decision as shooting down a U.S. airliner was discussed.”75 According to Newsweek, some of the Commission’s staff were highly skeptical of Cheney’s account, with one well-informed source claiming some of them “flat out didn’t believe the call ever took place.”76 All the same, whether or not Bush authorized him to do so, “by the time Cheney issued his shoot-down order, between 10:10 and 10:15 a.m., United Flight 93, the last plane-turned-missile on 9/11, had already crashed in Pennsylvania (at 10:03 a.m.).” 77

Furthermore, it appears that Cheney – along with Bush – was reluctant for 9/11 to be investigated: When then Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press in May 2002, he said Cheney had, on January 24 that year, urged him not to investigate the events of September 11. Daschle added that four days later Bush made the same request. When the program’s moderator Tim Russert asked: “It wasn’t, ‘Let’s not have a national commission, but let’s have the intelligence committees look into this,’ it was ‘No investigation by anyone, period’?” Daschle replied: “That’s correct.” He added that the request had been repeated on “other dates following.” 78

GEORGE W. BUSH ON 9/11

September 11, 2001 was the most important day of George W. Bush’s life. As American president he was commander in chief of the U.S armed forces. His actions were crucial. According to the 9/11 Commission, the only people that day with authority to order the shooting down of a civilian plane if, say, it were heading towards a populated area (like the World Trade Center or the Pentagon) were the president or the secretary of defense.79 I have already shown that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld was apparently ‘out of the loop’ during the attacks. What then did Commander in Chief Bush do?

Before examining this question, it is important to recognise that the U.S. president does not travel alone. He takes with him an entire staff, including members of the Secret Service, who are responsible for his safety. The president’s travelling entourage have the best communications equipment in the world. They have contact with, or can easily reach, the cabinet, the National Military Command Center in the Pentagon, the FAA and other Secret Service agents.80 We might therefore assume George Bush would have been one of the first people informed of the extraordinary chain of events unfolding on September 11.

Furthermore, Bush’s location for that morning was made public four days previously, on September 7: He would be in Sarasota, Florida, to “continue his focus on reading and education.”81 We might assume then that once it was recognised that America was under attack, the president would have been considered a potential target and immediate action would have been taken to protect him and ensure the safety of all around him. Yet, despite the horrifying sequence of events in progress, Bush continued with his pre-planned visit to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, where he listened to a class full of children reading. He remained at the school until around 9:35 a.m.81 – nearly 50 minutes after the first plane hit the WTC and over half an hour after the second plane hit. Incredibly, the president’s support team, including the Secret Service, allowed this.

According to Philip Melanson, an expert on the Secret Service, Bush should have been removed from the school immediately after Flight 175 hit the second WTC tower. Melanson says: “With an unfolding terrorist attack, the procedure should have been to get the president to the closest secure location as quickly as possible, which clearly is not a school. You’re safer in that presidential limo, which is bombproof and blastproof and bulletproof.”83 Furthermore, considering the president’s responsibilities as commander in chief, Melanson adds that Bush’s limousine had key advantages: “In the presidential limo, the communications system is almost duplicative of the White House – he can do almost anything from there but he can’t do much sitting in a school.” 84

Bush was informed of the second plane hitting the WTC when, around 9:05, his Chief of Staff Andrew Card came across the classroom and reportedly whispered to him: “A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.”85 According to the 9/11 Commission: “The President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis.”86 Furthermore, “The Secret Service told us they were anxious to move the President to a safer location, but did not think it imperative for him to run out the door.”87 Yet this inaction could have had disastrous consequences. In the words of 9/11 researchers Allan Wood and Paul Thompson: “Why hasn’t Bush’s security staff been criticized for their completely inexplicable decision to stay at the school? And why didn’t Bush’s concern for the children extend to not making them and the rest of the 200 or so people at the school terrorist targets?”88 As the reporter Gail Sheehy concludes, the final report of the 9/11 Commission shows that on the morning of September 11, “the president and the other top officials in charge of the systems to defend the country from attack were, in essence, missing in action: They did not communicate, did not coordinate a response to the catastrophe, and in some cases did not even get involved in discussions about the attacks until after all of the hijacked planes had crashed.” 89

With the best communications in the world available to him, we might assume Bush would have been one of the first people informed of the hijackings and the first plane hitting the WTC. Yet according to official accounts, he remained oblivious even whilst millions of people saw what had happened on television. Strangely, there have been at least seven different accounts of when and from whom Bush first heard of Flight 11 crashing into the WTC.90 As Allan Wood and Paul Thompson note, Bush’s own recollections only add to the confusion:

Less than two months after the attacks, Bush made the preposterous claim that he had watched the first attack as it happened on live television…. On December 4, 2001, Bush was asked: “How did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?” Bush replied, “I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower – the TV was obviously on…. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.”91

Yet, as Wood and Thompson point out, “There was no film footage of the first attack until at least the following day.” They continue:

It’s doubly strange why his advisors didn’t correct him or – at the very least – stop him from repeating the same story only four weeks later. On January 5, 2002, Bush stated: “Well, I was sitting in a schoolhouse in Florida…and my Chief of Staff – well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on.” 92

On the morning of 9/11, Bush promised that he had “ordered that the full resources of the federal government go…to conduct a full-scale investigation to hunt down and to find those folks who committed this act.”93 Yet it appears more like he has tried to hinder investigations. As Salon reported in June 2003:

The White House long opposed the formation of a blue-ribbon Sept. 11 commission, some say, and even now that panel is underfunded and struggling to build momentum. And, they say, the administration is suppressing a 900-page congressional study, possibly out of fear that the findings will be politically damaging to Bush.

“We’ve been fighting for nearly 21 months – fighting the administration, the White House,” says Monica Gabrielle. Her husband, Richard, an insurance broker who worked for Aon Corp. on the 103rd floor of the World Trade Center’s Tower 2, died during the attacks. “As soon as we started looking for answers we were blocked, put off and ignored at every stop of the way. We were shocked. The White House is just blocking everything.”

Another 9/11 family advocate…was more blunt: “Bush has done everything in his power to squelch this [9/11] commission and prevent it from happening.” 94

After opposing the creation of the 9/11 Commission, the White House wanted to limit any appearance by the president to just one hour spent with two of the commissioners. A compromise was met such that George Bush did eventually meet with the Commission on April 29, 2004, but only under stringent conditions. Bush had to have Dick Cheney at his side, testifying at the same time; testimony was given in private and not under oath; no press coverage was allowed; and no recordings or transcripts were made of what they said.95 Further suspicion had been raised just over two weeks earlier, when the White House was forced to release a daily intelligence briefing given to the president whilst on vacation at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, five weeks before 9/11. The briefing was titled “Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US,” and stated: “FBI information…indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York…. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Laden supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.”96 Despite receiving this, according to the New York Times, “Bush broke off from work early and spent most of that day fishing.” 97

What is also interesting is that several key members of the Bush administration, including Cheney, Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, had been members of a neoconservative think-tank called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). In September 2000, PNAC wrote a report called Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, which they hoped would be “a road map for the nation’s immediate and future defense plans.” In it they complained: “The post-Cold War world will not remain a relatively peaceful place if we continue to neglect foreign and defense matters.” However, they added: “serious attention, careful thought, and the willingness to devote adequate resources to maintaining America’s military strength can make the world safer and American strategic interests more secure now and in the future.”98 They stated that to “preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades” America would need to undergo a “military transformation.”99 However, they wrote, this transformation would be “a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”100 [Italics mine] One year later, 9/11 happened. As George W. Bush wrote in his diary that night: “The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today.” 101

After this catastrophic, catalyzing event, actions proposed by the Project for the New American Century soon came into force. As John Pilger wrote of PNAC:

[In 2000] it recommended an increase in arms-spending by $48bn so that Washington could “fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars”. This has happened. It said the United States should develop “bunker-buster” nuclear weapons and make “star wars” a national priority. This is happening. It said that, in the event of Bush taking power, Iraq should be a target. And so it is. 102

Furthermore, during his 2000 election campaign and after, Bush repeatedly promised a budget surplus, except in the event of a recession, war or a national emergency. In the days after 9/11, he said to his budget director: “Lucky me. I hit the trifecta.” 103 (A ‘trifecta’ is a kind of bet that requires picking the top three finishers in a race.)

With so much suspicious evidence, one lawyer, Stanley Hilton – a former aide to Senator Bob Dole – has filed a $7 billion suit on behalf of the families of 14 victims of the 9/11 attacks, alleging that Bush, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld and others, actually ordered 9/11 to happen for political gain. Hilton says he has incriminating documents and witnesses showing this. Calling it “the biggest act of treason and mass murder in American history,” he claims that 9/11 was a ‘decoy operation’: “You make the people focus on the decoy to avoid looking at the real criminals. So they are focusing on these so-called nineteen hijackers and saying, ‘Oh, it must have been these Arabs.’ When, in fact, the guilty person is at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue – sitting in the Oval Office.” 104

I have already discussed White House attempts to prevent or hinder any official inquiry into 9/11. But another less known example, where there has been a lack of investigation and a suppression of important evidence relating to 9/11, is in the unlikely situation of the retirement community that is Venice, in southwestern Florida.

THE MOHAMED ATTA MYTH

Of the four alleged 9/11 suicide-pilots, three had been in attendance at two flight schools at the tiny airport in Venice, Florida: Huffman Aviation and Florida Flight Training. Both were owned by Dutch men who purchased the schools within months of each other, in 1999. Soon after they took over, the schools began training unprecedented numbers of Arab flight students.105 Yet Huffman Aviation and Florida Flight Training, along with the dubious characters who ran them, have so far avoided any serious investigation or media attention. One man who has tried to make up for this is investigative reporter Daniel Hopsicker, who spent two years following the attacks in Venice, examining the training of the alleged hijackers. He reports his findings in his book Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida. As well as describing evidence of large-scale illegal activity going on in and around the Venice Airport, this book casts serious doubt upon the official account of who the hijackers really were.

We have all heard how these 19 alleged hijackers were Islamic extremists. Yet evidence uncovered by Hopsicker, particularly regarding alleged ringleader Mohamed Atta, depicts unlikely personalities and lifestyles for a bunch of religious fanatics. For example, almost totally ignored by the mainstream press is that Atta had an American girlfriend for over two months whilst in Venice, with whom he would go out clubbing almost every night. At the time, this attractive young woman – Amanda Keller – had spiky pink hair and was working as a ‘lingerie model’ for an escort service called Fantasies & Lace. Atta is known to have been a heavy drinker who snorted cocaine. Local newspapers reported how in February 2001, along with Keller, he went on a three-day binge of drinking and drug taking in Key West. 106

Just days before 9/11, Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi (another of the alleged suicide-pilots) spent the evening drinking heavily at a bar in Fort Lauderdale. The bar’s manager later told reporters that the men “got wasted,”107 drinking “Stolichnaya and orange juice, and Captain Morgan’s spiced rum and Coke.” Bartender Patricia Idrissi concurred, saying: “Atta drank Stoli vodka for three straight hours…. They were wasted.” Amanda Keller describes a typical night out at a club with Atta: “Marwan [al-Shehhi] was in the reggae room drinking with a bunch of women at the bar, there were a lot of women around him, and he was just flaunting money.” As Hopsicker points out: “It’s one thing to hear Atta described as living it up with wine, women and song. But Marwan flaunting money at the bar pretty much puts the lie to the ‘Islamic fundamentalist’ tag.”10

Hopsicker suggests that, rather than being a fundamentalist Muslim, Mohamed Atta better fits the profile of a member of Arab society’s privileged elite and also a spy. Amongst many oddities contradicting the ‘fundamentalist’ label is the fact that his e-mail list included the names of several employees of U.S. defense contractors.109 More alarming, he and as many as six of the other alleged 9/11 hijackers appear to have trained at U.S. military bases. Hopsicker writes:

On the Saturday following the Tuesday attack, the Los Angeles Times broke the story in a long article on their front page.

“A defense official said two of the hijackers were former Saudi fighter pilots,” reported the paper, “who had studied in exchange programs at the Defense Language School at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas and the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama.”

The story went wide the next day, Sunday, September 15th. Newsweek, the Washington Post and the Miami Herald all reported as many as seven of the terrorist hijackers in the September 11th attacks received training at secure U.S. military installations.

“Two of 19 suspects named by the FBI, Saeed Alghamdi and Ahmed Alghamdi, have the same names as men listed at a housing facility for foreign military trainees at Pensacola. Two others, Hamza Alghamdi and Ahmed Alnami, have names similar to individuals listed in public records as using the same address inside the base,” the Washington Post reported.

“In addition, a man named Saeed Alghamdi graduated from the Defense Language Institute at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, while men with the same names as two other hijackers, Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari, appear as graduates of the U.S. International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, and the Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio, respectively,” the Post said. 110

Newsweek detailed how U.S. military facilities routinely trained pilots for other countries: “A former Navy pilot told NEWSWEEK that during his years on the base, ‘we always, always, always trained other countries’ pilots…. Whoever the country du jour is, that’s whose pilots we train.’ Candidates begin with ‘an officer’s equivalent of boot camp,’ he said. ‘Then they would put them through flight training.’” 111

Hopsicker explains how this crucial story came to be dismissed:

Someone was going to have to answer… for a lot.

“But Atta is a fairly common surname in the Middle East,” the Post quoted Laila Alquatami of the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee as saying, and the suspected hijacker’s first name is “probably the No. 1 name that is given to babies, in honor of the prophet Mohamed.”

The Boston Globe reported the Pentagon’s denial: “Some of the FBI suspects had names similar to those used by foreign alumni of U.S. military courses,” said the Air Force in a statement. “Discrepancies in their biographical data…indicate we are probably not talking about the same people.”

How easy was it to tell the Pentagon was lying? Think about it. It is neither plausible nor logical that the reports were false because of seven separate cases of mistaken identity. One or two, maybe. But seven? No way. 112

None of the newspapers retracted the story, yet it disappeared. One person who sought answers was Senator Bill Nelson, who faxed Attorney General John Ashcroft, demanding to know if the story was really true. However:

The Senator has still not received a reply, we heard from his spokesman, when we called his office eleven months later.

“In the wake of those reports, we asked about the Pensacola Naval Air Station but we never got a definitive answer from the Justice Department,” stated the Senator’s press spokesman.

“So we asked the FBI for an answer ‘if and when’ they could provide us one. Their response to date has been that they are trying to sort through something complicated and difficult.” 113

Deciding to investigate for himself, Hopsicker phoned the Pentagon and spoke with the public information officer who helped write and disseminate their original denial of the story:

“Biographically, they’re not the same people,” she explained patiently, using the same language contained in the Air Force’s press release. “Some of the ages are twenty years off.”

… Was she saying that the age of the ‘Mohamed Atta’ who had attended the Air Force’s International Officer’s School at Maxwell Air Force Base was different than that of ‘terrorist ringleader Mohamed Atta?’

Not exactly, she admitted. She could not confirm that – in this specific instance – they had different ages. What she could do was once again deny that the International Officer’s School attendee named Mohamed Atta had been the Mohamed Atta who piloted a passenger plane into the World Trade Center.

However, she could offer no specifics for her assertion, and repeatedly declined requests for biographical details about the Mohamed Atta who had trained at Maxwell Air Force Base. 114

After Hopsicker’s persistent questioning, she finally said in exasperation: “I do not have the authority to tell you who attended which schools.” Hopsicker reflects: “It was hard to read this as anything other than a back-handed confirmation. When she said that she didn’t have the authority, the clear implication was that someone else does… Somewhere in the Defense Dept. a list exists with the names of Sept. 11 terrorists who received training at U.S. military facilities. She just didn’t have the authority to release it.” 115 Furthermore, Hopsicker spoke to a woman who works at the Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama:

“I have a girlfriend who recognized Mohamed Atta. She met him at a party at the Officer’s Club,” she told us.

“The reason she swears it was him here is because she didn’t just meet him and say hello. After she met him she went around and introduced him to the people that were with her. So she knows it was him.”

Saudis were a highly visible presence at Maxwell Air Force Base, she said. “There were a lot of them living in an upscale complex in Montgomery. They had to get all of them out of here.

“They were all gone the day after the attack.” 116

Despite it being a key 9/11 crime scene, there has been a surprising absence of investigations into the goings on in Venice, Florida. In fact, to the contrary, “the FBI’s full attention seemed to have been engaged – not in investigating what had happened – but in suppressing evidence and even intimidating the witnesses who had seen and heard things that fly in the face of the ‘official story.’”117 For example, Mohamed Atta’s former girlfriend Amanda Keller says that even after she left Venice, the FBI called on her every other day for several months, telling her not to talk to anybody. Similarly, a woman called Stephanie Frederickson who lived next-door to Atta and Keller in Venice reported how she and other residents at the same apartment building were harassed and intimidated by FBI agents, to prevent them from talking to reporters. According to Frederickson:

The question [the FBI] asked was always the same. You aren’t saying anything to anybody, are you?

At first, right after the attack, they told me I must have been mistaken in my identification. Or they would insinuate that I was lying. Finally they stopped trying to get me to change my story, and just stopped by once a week to make sure I hadn’t been talking to anyone. 118

What is more, the FBI arrived in Venice just hours after the 9/11 attacks. A former manager from Huffman Aviation said: “They were outside my house four hours after the attack.” He added: “My phones have been bugged, they still are…. How did the FBI get here so soon? Ask yourself: How’d they got here so soon?”119 Within 24 hours of the attacks, records from Huffman Aviation, where Atta and al-Shehhi attended, were escorted aboard a C-130 cargo plane to Washington by Florida governor and brother of the president Jeb Bush. Similarly, according to a sergeant with the Venice police, the FBI took all their files and flew them to Washington with Jeb Bush aboard. (Presumably this was on the same flight as the Huffman records.) Hopsicker notes: “The important point was that taking files was a lot different than copying them. The FBI wasn’t taking any chances.”120 He concludes: “There is a demonstrable, provable, and massive federally-supervised cover-up in place in Florida.” 121

As this and my previous evidence shows, there are countless unanswered questions about 9/11 that at some point are going to have to be properly examined. Even an investigation into just a few of these questions, such as those around the war games on 9/11, could be enough to start a major scandal. However, as numerous writers and independent researchers have found, there are so many suspicious circumstances that the truth could be very different to what we have been led to believe. The human rights lawyer Richard Falk has written: “There are so many gaping holes in the official accounts of 9/11 that no plausible coherent narrative remains, and until now we have been staggering forward as if the truth about these traumatic events no longer mattered.”122 But if the mainstream press start investigating properly, it could lead to a completely unprecedented ‘9/11 scandal.’

PSYCHOHISTORICAL REASONS FOR A 9/11 SCANDAL

There are in fact specific psychohistorical reasons I have identified why there could be a major 9/11 scandal in future. I detail some of these in my previous article, “Killer Women Group-Fantasies and the 9/11 Controversy,” in which I examined signs of the current public mood in Britain and America.123 My evidence suggested both countries are in a state of particularly high anxiety and will need some kind of large crisis to make us all feel better. But with no new ‘external enemy’ having been found, I suggested we might instead be veering towards ‘regicidal solution’ – where we somehow ‘sacrifice’ our own leaders. For Britain this might mean Prime Minister Tony Blair at some point being forced to resign, perhaps if the situation in Iraq deteriorates further. And for the U.S., I suggested a scandal around possible complicity by some within the Bush administration, U.S. military and intelligence services in the events of 9/11. But what is the cause of the current public anxiety? And why have our leaders been unable to find a new ‘external enemy’ to invade?

Lloyd deMause describes how wars have generally occurred after periods of increased prosperity and social progress, especially when accompanied by more personal freedom. He has found that increased wealth and social change causes many individuals anxiety and discomfort:

That personal achievement and prosperity often make individuals feel sinful and unworthy of their success is a commonplace observation of psychotherapy ever since Freud’s first case studies of people “ruined by success.” Yet no one seems to have noticed that feelings of sinfulness are usually prominent in the shared emotional life of nations after long periods of peace, prosperity, and social progress, particularly if they are accompanied by more personal and sexual freedom. 124

As deMause points out: “‘wars between great powers occur during periods of economic expansion, while stagnation hinders their outbreak.’”125 Furthermore, “Wars not only occurred far more frequently after prosperous periods, but were longer and bigger after prosperity, ‘six to twenty times bigger as indicated by battle fatalities.’” 126

DeMause has found recurrent images of guilt and poison blood in the media, following periods of prosperity and progress. The progress and increased wealth are felt to have “‘polluted the national blood-stream with sinful excess,’ making men ‘soft’ and ‘feminine,’ a frightful condition that can only be cleansed by a blood-shedding purification.”127 DeMause continues:

Wars have often been thought of as purifying the nation’s polluted blood by virtue of a sacrificial rite identical to the rites of human sacrifice so common in early historical periods, when the blood of those sacrificed was believed to renew all the people. War, said those preparing for the bloody Finnish Civil War, purges guilt-producing material prosperity through the blood of soldiers sacrificed on the battlefield. 128

So, in the case of the 1991 Gulf War, once it was over:

The sacrificial ritual had been carried out exactly as planned: by a genocide of women and children. The nation had been cleansed of its emotional pollution. The President’s popularity rating rose to 91 percent, the highest of any American leader in history. The stock market soared…. The country had been united by slaughter as it had never been by any positive achievement…. We felt cleansed, purified, as though we had been reborn. 129

To summarize then, periods of growth and prosperity cause much discomfort to many people: feelings of guilt, sinfulness, being ‘soft’ or ‘feminine,’ etc. And one way that nations frequently relieve these unpleasant feelings is by going to war.

The 1990s and the beginning of the new millennium certainly rank as a period of prosperity and change. Along with increasing wealth and social change, we have experienced a technological revolution, with cheaper and increasingly powerful home computers, DVD players, digital cameras, and many other previously unavailable gadgets. For example, between 1991 and 2001, the number of UK households with a home computer increased from 21 to 50 per cent;131 between 1998 and 2003, the number of UK households with Internet access rose from 9 to 48 per cent; whereas just 16 per cent of UK households had a mobile phone in the 1996-97 period, by 2001-02 this was up to 65 per cent.132 One writer recently concluded: “We live in the freest, happiest, least bigoted, healthiest, most peaceful and longest-lived era in human history…. [W]e are richer and have the power to alter and control our environment in ways that would have seemed like magic 200 years ago.” 133

Considering deMause’s observations about wars correlating with change and economic growth, it seems the conditions have been right for a particularly large war to occur. Although we have had recent wars in Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003), these have been small in comparison to some key wars of the 20th century. For example, the Vietnam War lasted many years, from the 1960s through to the early 70s. During this conflict, the U.S. used weapons of mass destruction, spraying South Vietnam with a deadly chemical called ‘Agent Orange,’ which causes fetal death, congenital defects and cancer.134 Several million Southeast Asians were killed, along with around 58,000 American soldiers. The recent attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq pale in comparison. So surely we’ll need a bigger war than either of these, considering all the prosperity and change of the last decade. However, as I said at the start of this article, following the 2003 Iraq invasion attempts by Britain and America to find a new, more formidable enemy to attack have so far failed.

I believe the reason for this is because there are now larger than ever numbers of people opposing war. This in turn, I believe, is thanks to improvements in childrearing during the latter half of the 20th century. For years, psychohistorians have observed a steady evolution in childrearing that is now more rapid than ever before. Lloyd deMause writes:

Progress in childrearing evolution may be extremely uneven, but the trends are nonetheless unmistakable. The overall direction is from projection to empathy, from discipline to self-regulation, from hitting to explaining, from incest to love, from rejection to overcontrol and then to independence.

… Just the sheer cost of raising a child in dollars has been going up so fast that it now costs a middle-class American family $1.5 million for each child over 22 years, up 20 percent in the past three decades. The families I know in my section of Manhattan easily devote over half of their spare time and half their income to their children. Compare this to the small fraction of parents’ time and money given over to children in earlier centuries with children even spending most of their lives working for adults in various ways and one can begin to comprehend the overall direction of childrearing evolution. 135

Similarly, in 1998 psychohistorian Robert McFarland wrote: “Improvements in parenting practices can now be measured in decades rather than in centuries. Since Sweden banned hitting children in 1979, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Austria have followed.”136 And whereas in 1992 over 90 per cent of American parents hit their young children, by 1999 this had dropped to 57 per cent. 137

Due to this steady ‘evolution of childhood,’ the average level of childrearing experienced by today’s young adults in developed countries will have been better than that experienced by previous generations. Consequently there are now more and more people in the higher ‘psychoclasses’: individuals who, due to their more loving childhoods, have a higher level of psychological health. These individuals will be more able to enjoy their increased prosperity and the new technology that has become available over recent years, along with any increased personal freedoms. As a result, they will have less, if any, desire for war.

This relationship between childhood experience and support for, or opposition to war, has been found by, amongst others, political psychologist Michael Milburn. Milburn says:

We found that, particularly for males who had never had any psychotherapy, when they reported a high level of childhood punishment, they were significantly more likely to endorse a range of punitive public policies like…support for the use of military force.

… [T]he higher level of punitiveness among political conservatives is really strongly associated with experiences, generally, of harsh punishment from childhood. It’s not just going to be that they were spanked; there’s a whole family climate, and punishment is just going to be one of those indicators of that. 138

If a person who experiences a severe and punitive childhood is likely to grow up into the kind of adult who favours the use of military force, we might logically assume the opposite is also true: Individuals who had better childhoods will be less supportive of wars. Lloyd deMause confirms this, describing his observations of young adults today who have experienced far more loving childhoods:

[These individuals] are far more empathic and therefore more concerned about others than we ever were, and this has made them far more activist in their lives in trying to make a difference and change the world for the better, mostly involving themselves in local activities rather than global political changes. They lack all need for nationalism, wars, and other grandiose projects, and in the organizations they start are genuinely nonauthoritarian. There is no question that if the world could treat children with helping-mode parenting, wars and all the other self-destructive social conditions we still suffer from in the twenty-first century will be cured. 139

With the gradual improvement in the average level of childrearing over recent decades (in developed countries at least), we would expect a corresponding decrease in support for war. This was clearly evidenced by the unprecedented level of opposition to the 2003 Iraq invasion. In London, for example, on Saturday February 15, 2003, an estimated one to two million people marched in protest against the imminent invasion: the largest public demonstration ever to occur in Britain. The following month, 400,000 marched through London, the biggest protest in Britain against a war during wartime.140 Weeks before the war started, Tony Blair suffered the biggest Commons revolt of his premiership when 199 MPs rejected his direction over Iraq. As the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Charles Kennedy, observed: “Despite investing masses of political and parliamentary capital, the government has still failed to persuade a third of the House of Commons.” 141

According to leading political scholar and critic of American foreign policy Noam Chomsky, in an interview around this time:

There’s never been a time that I can think of when there’s been such massive opposition to a war before it was even started…. Even in the United States there is overwhelming opposition to the war and that corresponding decline in trust in the leadership that is driving the war…. If you compare it with the Vietnam war, the current stage of the war with Iraq is approximately like that of 1961 – that is, before the war actually was launched, as it was in 1962 with the US bombing of South Vietnam and driving millions of people into concentration camps and chemical warfare and so on, but there was no protest. In fact, so little protest that few people even remember. 142

Chomsky points out how even our governments are aware of this new reluctance towards war and have had to modify their actions accordingly:

[W]hen any administration comes into office the first thing it does is have a worldwide intelligence assessment – “What’s the state of the world?” – provided by the intelligence services…. When the first Bush administration came in 1989 parts of their intelligence assessment were leaked, and they’re very revealing about what happened in the subsequent 10 years about precisely these questions.

The parts that were leaked said that it was about military confrontations with much weaker enemies, recognising they were the only kind we were going to be willing to face, or even exist. So in confrontations with much weaker enemies the United States must win “decisively and rapidly” because otherwise popular support will erode, because it’s understood to be very thin. Not like the 1960s when the government could fight a long, brutal war for years and years practically destroying a country without any protest. Not now. 143

Although the peace movement failed to prevent the Iraq invasion, when the war began it seemed they had made a significant difference. As Jonathan Freedland wrote in The Guardian:

The campaign began not with “shock and awe” but a subtler knife, aimed at the surgical decapitation of Saddam Hussein and his regime. One night’s bombing of Baghdad lasted no more than an hour.

… There could be a stack of explanations for that initial deployment of the short, sharp blow…. But there may be another motive for the initial preference for short-and-sweet over shock-and-awe. The US might have wanted to avoid a wave of worldwide revulsion. A series of tight, well-aimed strikes at the regime would have confounded the global fear of colossal Iraqi civilian casualties. It’s as if Washington had heard the peace movement’s objection to this war – that too many innocents would die – and was attempting to heed it. 144

Freedland continues:

[P]erhaps the clearest proof of the anti-war camp’s efforts came from our own prime minister: “I know this course of action has produced deep divisions of opinion in our country,” he said, just seconds into his own TV message to the nation. No leader wants to go into a war admitting such a thing. But Blair had no choice. As with much else, the peace movement has changed the landscape for this conflict – and the men of war are having to deal with it. 145

What peace activists may well have achieved is the prevention of further invasions of ‘axis of evil’ countries. As Lindsey German of the Stop the War Coalition said: “does anyone think Tony Blair can ever stand up in parliament again and say the words ‘trust me’? As they talk up targeting Iran and Syria, do you think anyone will ever believe this government when they say we’ve got the intelligence to prove it?” 146

Maybe the improvements in childrearing over recent decades that account for this unprecedented opposition to war, will also mean there are now enough people less afraid to challenge authority and face unpleasant truths, so as to help bring about a 9/11 scandal. Compare this to, say, the truth about the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. We now know that President Franklin Roosevelt and his top military advisers knew in advance that Japan was planning a ‘surprise attack’ on America. Japanese radio messages had been intercepted and it was known when and where they would attack the U.S. Despite this foreknowledge, Roosevelt allowed the attack to go ahead so as to create a pretext for America to join World War II. Yet these facts only became more widely known in 2000, with the release of Robert B. Stinnett’s book Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor. 147 Robert McFarland points out: “While it was 58 years before Stinnett’s book made the facts about Pearl Harbor widely known, two important books about 9/11 came out within a year… Since these books came out quickly, we are apparently more willing to look at bad news than we were in 1941.” 148

While a 9/11 scandal would be a sufficiently large public crisis to help ease the particularly high level of public anxiety (‘growth panic’) among the lower psychoclasses, unlike a massive war it ought also be acceptable to the more peaceful higher psychoclass individuals. If we do have such a scandal, the emotional effect will undoubtedly be intense. Consider how the general public would feel if people start openly accusing some within the Bush administration of complicity in the 9/11 attacks. How would Americans feel who had voted for these men, trusted and respected them? I can imagine many people finding such events devastating. What if security camera footage of the attack on the Pentagon had to be made public at some point and it showed something other than a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon? Surely millions of people would feel horrified. The full implications of a 9/11 scandal would be colossal. It would be the emotional equivalent of a massive war. So maybe instead of the war “of a force and scope and scale that has been beyond what has been seen before,” that Donald Rumsfeld promised back in 2003, there is going to be a scandal of a ‘scope and scale’ that is ‘beyond what has been seen before.’”

ENDNOTES

1. David Hearst, “Nato directionless on nuclear policy.” The Guardian, January 19, 2003.

2. “UK restates nuclear threat.” BBC News, February 2, 2003.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2717939.stm.

3. John Pilger, “John Pilger investigates US plans for mini-nukes.” New Statesman, August 18, 2003.

4. Duncan Campbell, “Bush in new threat to Iran and Syria.” The Guardian, July 22, 2003.

5. Richard Norton-Taylor, “US hawk warns Iran threat must be eliminated.” The Guardian, October 10, 2003.

6. From Paul Thompson, “The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11.” Center for Cooperative Research. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essayairdefense.

7. “Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and ‘Consciously Failed’ To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals.” Zogby International, August 30, 2004. Online at: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855.

8. Antonia Zerbisias, “Poking holes in the official story of 9/11.” Toronto Star, May 26, 2004.

9. Michael Gavin, “September 11 conspiracy claims find large readership.” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 5, 2003.

10. Quoted in Kate Connolly, “German Sept 11 theory stokes anti-US feeling.” The Telegraph, November 20, 2003.

11. Matthew L. Wald, “Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It.” New York Times, September 15, 2001.

12. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, “Improvising a Homeland Defense: Staff Statement No. 17.” June 17, 2004, p. 5.

13. Ibid., p. 6.

14. Ibid., p. 7.

15. Ibid., p. 19.

16. Ibid., pp. 13-14.

17. Ibid., p. 28.

18. Ibid., p. 16.

19. Ibid., pp. 17-18.

20. Ibid., p. 29.

21. Federal Aviation Administration regulations, quoted in Paul Thompson, “The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11.”

22. Ibid.

23. Dr Bob Arnot, “What Was Needed to Halt the Attacks?” MSNBC, September 12, 2001.

24. “Scrambling to Prevent Another 9/11.” Associated Press, August 14, 2002.

25. From Paul Thompson, The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11 – and America’s Response. New York: Regan Books, 2004, p. 372.

26. Interview with Paul Hellyer, former defense minister of Canada. May 27, 2004. Online at: http://www.digitalstylecreations.com.

27. Dr Robert Bowman “A Fighter Pilot Looks Back at 9/11 and Forward to a Resurrected America.” Speech at the International Citizens Inquiry Into 9/11 in Toronto, Canada, May 30, 2004. Online at: http://www.snowshoefilms.com.

28. Ibid.

29. From: “NORAD Retains Northern Vigilance.” NORAD, September 9, 2001.
http://www.norad.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.news_rel_09_09_01 ; Scott Simmie, “The scene at NORAD on Sept. 11: Playing Russian war games…and then someone shouted to look at the monitor.” Toronto Star, December 9, 2001.

30. Hart Seely, “Amid Crisis Simulation, ‘We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack’.” Newhouse News, January 25, 2002.

31. Quoted in “Terror Hits the Towers.” ABC News, September 14, 2001. http://abcnews.go.com/onair/DailyNews/sept11_moments_1.html.

32. Paul Thompson, The Terror Timeline, p. 372.

33. John J. Lumpkin, “Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building.” Associated Press, August 21, 2002.

34. Michael C. Ruppert, “Tripod II and FEMA: Lack of NORAD Response on 9/11 Explained.” From the Wilderness, June 5, 2004. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060704_tripod_fema.html.

35. “Address of Michael C. Ruppert for the Commonwealth Club – San Francisco.” August 31, 2004. Transcript at: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/PDF/Commonwealth.pdf.

36. Ibid. The full details of Ruppert’s investigation of 9/11 are in Michael C. Ruppert, Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. Vancouver: New Society Publishers, 2004.

37. See National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, “Eleventh Public Hearing.” May 19, 2004. Transcript at: http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing11/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-05-19.htm; also Amanda Griscom, “Man Behind the Mayor.” New York Magazine, October 15, 2001.

38. See “Statement of Capt Charles J. Leidig, Jr. Commandant of Midshipmen United States Naval Academy Before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” June 17, 2004. Online at: http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing12/leidig_statement.pdf ; “Transcript: 9/11 Commission Hearings for June 17, 2004.” Washington Post, June 17, 2004. Online at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A49429-2004Jun17?language=printer.

39. Matthew L. Wald, “F.A.A. Official Scrapped Tape of 9/11 Controllers’ Statements.” New York Times, May 06, 2004.

40. From Paul Thompson, “Complete 911 Timeline: American Airlines Flight 77.” Center for Cooperative Research. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=aa77.

41. From Don Paul and Jim Hoffman, “‘9/11’” Great Crimes/ A Greater Cover-up. San Francisco: Irresistible/Revolutionary, 2003, p. 7.

42. Quoted in Ryan Alessi and M. E. Sprengelmeyer, “9-11 – One Year Later: An anniversary of agony at the Pentagon.” Scripps Howard News Service, September 11, 2002.

43. From Don Paul and Jim Hoffman, “‘9/11’” Great Crimes/ A Greater Cover-up, p. 7. Boeing 757-200 dimensions also available at: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/technical.html.

44. Quoted in Thierry Meyssan (Editor), Pentagate. London: Carnot, 2002, p. 36.

45. For more information and to see photos of the Pentagon crash on September 11, see Thierry Meyssan (Editor), Pentagate; Eric Hufschmid, Painful Questions: An Analysis of the September 11th Attack. Goleta: Endpoint Software, 2002, pp. 97-106. There are also numerous Internet sites examining the Pentagon attack. E.g. Killtown’s “Did Flight 77 really crash into the Pentagon?” http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html; “The Pentagon Attack Frame-Up.” 9-11 Research. http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentagon/index.html.

46. Quoted in Jim Marrs, Inside Job: Unmasking the 9/11 Conspiracies. San Rafael: Origin Press, 2004, p. 26.

47. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, “Staff Statement No. 4: The Four Flights.” January 27, 2004, p. 5.

48. “FAA Was Alerted To Sept. 11 Hijacker.” CBS News, May 10, 2002. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/10/attack/main508656.shtml.

49. Jim Yardley, “A Trainee Noted for Incompetence.” New York Times, May 4, 2002.

50. Thomas Frank, “Tracing Trail Of Hijackers.” Newsday, September 23, 2001.

51. “Primary Target.” CBS News, September 21, 2001. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/national/main310721.shtml.

52. Michael C. Ruppert, Crossing the Rubicon, p. 350.

53. Bill McKelway, “Three Months On, Tension Lingers Near the Pentagon.” Richmond Times-Dispatch, December 11, 2001.

54. Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough, “Inside the Ring.” Washington Times, September 21, 2001.

55. See David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor. Northampton: Olive Branch Press, 2004, pp. 36-37; Thierry Meyssan (Editor), Pentagate, pp. 42-44.

56. See David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor, pp. 38-39.

57. See Sue Reid, “The 9/11 X-Files.” Daily Mail, June 5, 2004; “Why Bush let 9/11 happen.” Zoo, July 9-15, 2004.

58. Thierry Meyssan, 11 Septembre 2001: l’Effroyable Imposture. Chatou: Carnot, 2002.

59. From “Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Larry King.” Larry King Live, CNN, December 5, 2001. Transcript at: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t12062001_t1205sd.html.

60. Ibid.

61. From “Chairman Cox’s Statement on the Terrorist Attack on America.” September 11, 2001. Online at: http://cox.house.gov/html/release.cfm?id=33.

62. From “Day One Transcript: 9/11 Commission Hearing.” Washington Post, March 23, 2004. Online at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17798-2004Mar23.

63. From “‘The Pentagon Goes to War’: National Military Command Center: A look at 9/11 at the Pentagon’s National Military Command Center.” American Morning With Paula Zahn, CNN, September 4, 2002. Transcript at: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/cnn090402.html ; “9/11 : Interviews by Peter Jennings.” ABC News, September 11, 2002. Transcript at: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/abcnews091102.html.

64. The 9/11 Commission Report: The Full Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Executive Summary. 2004, p. 15. Online at: http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911ReportExec.pdf.

65. See Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, CJCSI 3610.01A, June 1, 2001. Online at http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01a.pdf . Due to the fact that this new procedure was introduced just three months before 9/11, several individuals have questioned whether this new instruction, requiring secretary of defense approval in responding to hijackings, was introduced deliberately so as to hinder the interception of the hijacked planes on 9/11. However, this requirement was not new: The previous instruction for dealing with hijackings, dated July 31, 1997, also required approval from the defense secretary. See: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01.pdf.

66. The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, PBS, September 10, 2003. Transcript at: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec03/rumsfeld_09-10.html .

67. “Testimony of U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld Prepared for Delivery to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” March 23, 2004, p. 21. Online at: http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing8/rumsfeld_statement.pdf .

68. The 9/11 Commission Report: The Full Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. New York: W. W. Norton, 2004, p. 35.

69. The 9/11 Commission Report, pp. 39-40.

70. “Sept. 11 Scramble.” ABC News, September 14, 2002.http://abcnews.go.com/onair/DailyNews/sept11_moments_2.html .

71. “9/11 Commission Hearing.” May 23, 2003. Transcript at: http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.pdf .

72. Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, “America’s Chaotic Road to War.” Washington Post, January 27, 2002.

73. The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 40.

74. Ibid., p. 41.

75. Daniel Klaidman and Michael Hirsh, “Who Was Really In Charge?” Newsweek, June 28, 2004.

76. Ibid.

77. Ibid.

78. Meet the Press, NBC, May 26, 2002. Transcript online at: http://www.dashpac.com/home/agenda/speeches.cfm?SpeechID=12 .

79. The 9/11 Commission states: “Prior to 9/11, it was understood that an order to shoot down a commercial aircraft would have to be issued by the National Command Authority (a phrase used to describe the president and secretary of defense).” From The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 17. Previous news reports had said the president was the only person with the authority to order the shooting down of a civilian plane. See Jamie McIntyre, “Pentagon never considered downing Stewart’s Learjet.” CNN, October 26, 1999. http://edition.cnn.com/US/9910/26/shootdown/; Kevin Dennehy, “‘I Thought It Was the Start of World War III’.” Cape Cod Times, August 21, 2002.

80. From Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel, “Guilty for 9-11, Part 3: Bush in the Open.” The Emperor’s New Clothes, January 18, 2002, revised September 12, 2003. http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-3.htm.

81. “Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer.” September 7, 2001. Online at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010907-1.html#week .

82. From Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, “An Interesting Day: President Bush’s Movements and Actions on 9/11.” Center for Cooperative Research, May 9, 2003. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essayaninterestingday .

83. Quoted in Susan Taylor Martin, “Of fact, fiction: Bush on 9/11.” St. Petersburg Times, July 4, 2004.

84. Ibid.

85. The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 38.

86. Ibid., p. 38.

87. Ibid., p. 39.

88. From Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, “An Interesting Day.”

89. Gail Sheehy, “Who’s in Charge Here?” Mother Jones, July 22, 2004.

90. See Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, “An Interesting Day.”

91. Ibid.

92. Ibid.

93. “Remarks by the President After Two Planes Crash Into World Trade Center.” September 11, 2001. Online at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010911.html .

94. Eric Boehlert, “Bush’s 9/11 coverup?” Salon, June 18, 2003.

95. From Julian Borger, “Bush to face tough questions on 9/11.” The Guardian, April 29, 2004; “Hiding in the White House.” The Boston Globe, April 30, 2004.

96. This briefing is available online at: http://edition.cnn.com/2004/images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf .

97. Frank Rich, “Thanks for the Heads-Up.” New York Times, May 25, 2002.

98. The Project for the New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century. September 2000, p. iii.

99. Ibid., p. 50.

100. Ibid., p. 51.

101. Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, “America’s Chaotic Road to War.”

102. John Pilger, “Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround George W. Bush said what America needed was ‘a new Pearl Harbor’. Its published aims have come alarmingly true.” New Statesman, December 16, 2002.

103. “Remarks By Office Of Management And Budget Director Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. At Conference Board Annual Meeting.” October 16, 2001. Online at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/pubpress/daniels_conference_board_speech10-16-01.html .

104. From “Alex Jones Interviews Stanley Hilton.” The Alex Jones Show, September 10, 2004. Transcript at: http://www.serendipity.li/wot/hilton_interview.htm .

105. From: Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida. Eugene: The MadCow Press, 2004, pp. 171-182.

106. Ibid., pp. 68-69.

107. Ibid., p. 81.

108. Ibid., p. 284.

109. Ibid., p. 105.

110. Ibid., pp. 135-136.

111. George Wehrfritz, Catharine Skipp and John Barry, “Alleged Hijackers May Have Trained at U.S. Bases.” Newsweek, September 15, 2001.

112. Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland, pp. 136-137.

113. Ibid., p. 138.

114. Ibid., p. 139.

115. Ibid., p. 140.

116. Ibid., p. 141.

117. Ibid., p. 301.

118. Ibid., pp. 62-63.

119. Ibid., p. 150.

120. Ibid., p. 31.

121. Ibid., p. 301.

122. From his forward to David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor, p. vii.

123. Matt Everett, “Killer Women Group-Fantasies and the 9/11 Controversy.” Journal of Psychohistory 32(1): 2-39.

124. Lloyd deMause, The Emotional Life of Nations. New York: Karnac, 2002, p.17.

125. Ibid., p. 159.

126. Ibid., p. 141.

127. Ibid., p. 51.

128. Ibid., p. 52.

129. Ibid., p. 38.

130. Office for National Statistics, Living in Britain No. 31: Results from the 2002 General Household Survey. Norwich: HMSO, 2004, p. 49.

131. Office for National Statistics, Internet access: Individuals and Households, Norwich: HMSO, December 16, 2003.

132. Office for National Statistics, “Percentage of households with durable goods 1970 to 2001-02: Expenditure and Food Survey.” September 2003.

133. Michael Hanlon, “There’s no time like the present.” The Spectator, August 7, 2004.

134. See John Pilger, “Nuclear war, courtesy of Nato.” The Guardian, May 4, 1999; John Pilger, “Blair is a coward.” Daily Mirror, January 29, 2003.

135. From Lloyd deMause, “Childhood and Cultural Evolution.” Psychohistory Web site. http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/eln07_evolution.html .

136. Robert B. McFarland, “Improvements in Parenting are Real.” Journal of Psychohistory 25 (3): 237.

137. Tracy L. Dietz, “Disciplining Children: Characteristics Associated With the Use of Corporal Punishment.” Child Abuse & Neglect 24(2000): 1529, 1536. Quoted in Lloyd deMause, The Emotional Life of Nations, p. 339.

138. Brian Braiker, “See No Evil: A political psychologist explains the roles denial, emotion and childhood punishment play in politics.” Newsweek Web site, May 13, 2004. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4972441/site/newsweek/

139. Lloyd deMause, The Emotional Life of Nations, p.430.

140. Carmel Brown, “Weapon of mass democracy.” The Guardian, September 26, 2003.

141. Matthew Tempest, “Labour MPs revolt over Iraq.” The Guardian, February 26, 2003.

142. Matthew Tempest, “Full transcript: Noam Chomksy on the anti-war movement.” The Guardian, February 4, 2003.

143. Ibid.

144. Jonathan Freedland, “Peaceniks lost the war but changed the shape of battle.” The Guardian, March 22, 2003.

145. Ibid.

146. Quoted in Carmel Brown, “Weapon of mass democracy.”

147. Robert B. Stinnett, Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor. London: The Free Press, 2000.
148. Robert B. McFarland, “A Psychohistorical Comparison of the Pearl Harbor and September 11 Attacks.” Journal of Psychohistory 31(1): 75.

via Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and 9/11: A Scandal Beyond What Has Been Seen Before | 911Blogger.com. CC

Bipolar Christianity: How Torturing “Sinful” Children Produced Holy Wars

01sungodmanmyth

Who would not shudder if he were given the choice of eternal death or life again as a child? Who would not choose to die?”
– St. Augustine

THE SOURCE OF KILLER MOTHERHOOD IN CHRISTIAN MISOGYNY
That all human sin and misery came into the world through the first woman, Eve, is the founding belief of both Judaism and Christianity, and the origin of the most severely misogynistic cultures in history. When a girl was born, said early Hebrews, “the walls wept.” Girls were everywhere considered “not worth raising” since they would not carry on the family name, and so infanticide of girls by Killer Mothers by strangling, drowning, exposure and sending to wet-nurses was so common among Christians that high sex ratios (up to 400 boys to 100 girls and higher) were common even among the rich.1 Coleman found boys outnumbering girls up to two to one in a 9th century French tax record, and concluded higher infanticide of girls was the cause.2 Newborn girls, like Eve, “were considered as full of dangerous pollution…and were therefore more often killed, exposed, abandoned, malnourished, raped, and neglected than boys. Everyone agreed girls should be fed less than boys; as Jerome put it, ‘Let her meals always leave her hungry.’”3 Of the 600 families in Delphic inscription records, just one percent reared two daughters.4 Children watched their parents kill their newborn siblings and learned the first rules of misogyny: females are murderous and baby girls worthless, so boys had better not seem “female” (weak) or they too might be killed by their mothers.

As Christian girls grew up, they were constantly told of their worthlessness and sinful lustfulness. Women, said Tertullian, were “irrational, more prone to lust than men, and at every turn waiting to seduce men,” so husbands had to beat them all the time to keep them from sinning.5 “A good woman and a bad one equally require the stick” ran a Florentine saying, and medieval laws concluded: “Provided he neither kills nor maims her, it is legal for a man to beat his wife…”6 St. Paul said that women had to cover their heads in church because otherwise “lice-like demons would leap like sparks from female hair and poison the church.”7 Plus, of course, women were liable to turn into witches at any time and remove a man’s penis; as John Chrysostom maintained, “All witchcraft comes from carnal lust, which in women is insatiable.”8 Parents in early Christian families routinely beat their little girls badly from early infancy in order to punish their lustfulness. The historical records contain hundreds of descriptions of beating girls “to discipline them, as with this father who punished a little girl for four hours: ‘the little girl in the diapers would not receive her discipline. She cried and cried and he kept hitting her…He told me, you spank her till she breaks…But she didn’t break and, after four hours, he couldn’t continue.’”9 Teaching girls in schools was not allowed, Aelred said (1170), because the teacher might be tempted to show them affection. Teachers, he said, were “angry one minute and smiling the next, now threatening, now flattering, kissing one child and smacking another. When she sees one of them crying after being smacked she calls her close, strokes her cheek, puts her arms around her neck and holds her tight,” 10 producing a moment of forbidden closeness. Christian priests and nuns backed bloody beatings as necessary to punish the child’s endless sins, since, as Augustine put it, “If the infant is left to do what he wants, there is no crime it will not plunge into.”11 “Better that you should beat a child within an inch of its life than that they would be cast into the Lake of Fire for all eternity.”12

The constant sinfulness of all Christian children demands the maximum torture or even death as punishment. Moses told the Israelites that “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother…all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die.”13 Little changed in the next 1600 years of Christianity, as John Calvin decreed: “Those children who violate parental authority are monsters. Therefore the Lord commands all those who are disobedient to their parents to be put to death.”14 If a young woman should simply speak to someone who was not approved by her father, that was enough of a sin for Constantine, the first Christian emperor, to decree a penalty of “death by having molten lead poured down her throat.”15 It was in fact sometimes a practice during the Middle Ages to “bury an un-baptized infant with a stake through its heart so that it would not arise and injure many,” so full of sin it was at birth.16

Much more to read here Chapter 9: Bipolar Christianity: How Torturing \”Sinful\” Children Produced Holy Wars. Absolutely shocking true history of Christianity and war, which seems to go hand in hand. What happened to mankind? Religion happened! Literalistic, fundamental, orthodox religion that produced psychotic humans in a state of PTSD after 1,500 years of Dark Ages, Inquisition, Torture, ritual child abuse and more. Christianity wasn’t accepted by humans, it was beat into them over many years. Go this  website for more Psychohistory: http://www.psychohistory.com/

Constantine’s Cult of Christianity was stolen from Gnostic spiritual Jews (and Eastern religions as well) and turned into a history. Jesus is the sun. It’s Astrotheology. There was no man named Jesus, or King David, or Solomon, Abraham, Moses, etc. Those that knew were called heretics and killed. Rome’s new Mind Control religion was FORCED on mankind for political reasons, entire cultures wiped out, millions of books burned. There was nothing good or enlightening being spread over the earth by this cult! They removed reincarnation and took away our Divine Goddess and rewrote a book of dogma. No thing on earth has caused as much harm to the entire human race than this religion and it’s branches. They are the scribes and Pharisees described in the bible as a brood of vipers. The bible is a beautiful book of stories that need to be  understood in the correct way. I know I sound angry, and I am angry at the religious institutions and their cult members. I’ve had enough arguments with the brainwashed followers of Constantine to last the rest of my life. Their NEED to believe in the bible as history is ego based, not spirit based. They are willfully blind to the damage  their cult has done. I liken them to people insisting Humpty Dumpty was real. They miss the point of the story and worship it’s historical nature. This church has lied and invented false history to literalize spiritual mythology. It’s more than misguided, it’s evil. Yes, I am angry, but hopefully not coming across as hateful. It’s the cult members who are hateful, this is my reaction at this moment in time. My reaction to their wars, their stubbornness, their burning at the stake my brothers and sisters as Gnostics and witches. My sadness over Hypatia’s brutal skinning alive by a Christian mob that went on to burn the Library of Alexandria, destroying millions of books of ancient Egyptian knowledge setting back mankind a thousand years!  There are still Gnostic truths hidden throughout the bible, despite their re-editing over the years. Let those who have ears, hear, and those that have eyes, see those hidden nuggets of mystical Truths embodied in the mythical story of Jesus the Sun of god. Sophia and Lilith were removed from the Christian story and a patriarch put in place that exists to this day. The beauty I see in my daughter and granddaughters is pure, and what this sickened world might do to their innocent beauty pisses me off. Christianity is the lie upon which all other lies have been built. Well hey, it felt good to get that off my chest. I dedicate this anger to every comment troll, xtian apologist and stubborn cult of christ member I’ve ever had the bad time of meeting.

I have yet to talk about my personal spiritual experience while reading the bible in 1988 after being bedridden after a car wreck. I love the bible, the Nag Hammadi Gnostic scriptures, the Dead Sea Scrolls and their mystical teachings. I love the Gita, Buddhism, quantum physics and most of all I dig LOVE. I want to live again in the Golden Age. Are we there yet? Raise vibes, not flags :)

Imagine no religion, no borders, no war, and John Lennon’s big ole smiling face.