9/11 Truth is an Inside Job
the controlled demolition of the 9/11 truth movement
"Truthiness" - a word coined by comedian Stephen Colbert that refers to wanting to believe that things are true even when they are not
Ministry of Truth: the government department in George Orwell's novel 1984 in charge of propaganda
On this page
- 9/11 truth activists vs. 9/11 truth
- Big Tent disruption tactic: all opinions are not created equal
- famous 9/11 skeptics:
politicians, military officials, 9/11 family members who want a real investigation
- Complete "No Plane"
the history of how the "no plane" hoaxes disrupted the 9/11 truth movement
- peace movement strategy
- unity: beyond false divides
- conspiracy gatekeepers: who promotes "no plane" hoaxes?
- No Planes and No Gas Chambers: Holocaust deniers infiltrate 9/11 truth
Initially, and to the credit of its first generation of leadership, the truth in "9/11 Truth" referred to its absence from the official record, and the need for an independent accounting. (A recent echo of this is heard in the title of 9/11: Press for Truth.) Now, it means the Revealed Truths of the vying catechisms of "Inside Job": almost exclusively demolition, missiles and TV fakery. So it isn't enough anymore to say the Official Story is a lie, though it is, since the popular unofficial stories are as well. And perhaps told by the same storyteller.
-- Jeff Wells, "Grassroots Wisdom" Rigorous Intuition blog, 2007-09-14
"If a history of this (9/11) movement is ever written, I think it should acknowledge how many of the original and the most effective/responsible people involved were marginalized as the disinfo freaks, big tent airheads, and ignorant fascistic elements took over."
-- "truthmod" post, November 19, 2008, www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/1310/page/2
While there are many views on precisely what constitutes "9/11 truth" among those who disbelieve the official conspiracy theory offered by the Bush administration, and the full story may never be precisely established, the common denominator for the "9/11 truth movements" is that 9/11 was not a surprise attack. Due to the successes of the 9/11 Truth Movements in shifting public understanding, the volume of parallel efforts that pretend to be part of a"Truth Movement" yet promote hoaxes increased substantially during the 2004 election season (see "COINTELPRO").
Stephen Colbert invented the word truthiness
There are two 9/11 truth movements - those who are trying to document serious evidence, and those that merely echo stuff they read on line or in books without making effort to verify the claims. Most of those pushing the no plane hoax(es) are sincere, but that sincerity doesn't make them any less wrong.
The 9/11 truth movements "peaked" in March 2004 at the International Inquiry into 9/11, held in San Francisco, California. Shortly after that, the flood of nonsense claims masquerading as investigations accelerated (most dramatically with release of the film "911 In Plane Site") and the "movement" split into two factions -- those that think the no-plane claims are worth including (some of them do persuade some people about complicity) and those who prefer to focus only on claims that have evidence. Perhaps the best way to determine whether a "9/11 truth" website, book, or movie is being careful or sloppy (or deceitful) is to see whether they understand that the "no plane hit Pentagon" claim was just a hoax to distract and discredit the skeptics. In a few cases, some authors and activists who previously gave some credibility to those claims have since retracted their support for them. If there is any hope for the "9/11 truth" movement, it will involve refocusing on the evidence that has the strongest proof, and excluding the hoaxes and those who push the hoaxes.
We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The "tide in the affairs of men" does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: "Too late." There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance of our neglect. "The moving finger write, and having writ moves on ..." We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.
-- Martin Luther King, April 4, 1967, Riverside Church, New York City
John Kennedy, Junior was asked (shortly before he went down in a plane crash) if his magazine was going to reopen the issues surrounding the murder of his father. His reply was too much time had passed for it to be politically relevant.
9/11 truth needs to be politically relevant in the very near term, not decades from now, to achieve the needed goals.
The JFK truth movement succeeded in one way - most people don't believe the Warren Commission report. But it ultimately failed, since it was unable to undo the damage caused by the coup in Dallas - and no President since has cut the military industrial complex budget. The JFK coup led to the Vietnam war, Watergate, October Surprise, Iran-Contra, Oklahoma City, 9/11, and now the permanent war for Peak Oil "that will not end in our lifetimes."
When the Patriot Act is repealed and Homeland Security reverts back to its pre-9/11 structures, perhaps then 9/11 truth would be considered a success. When a large proportion of the public accepts the paradigm of how "false flag" operations happen, and how terror events can be allowed to happen, they will no longer be a useful tool for bamboozling the public.
Tying 9/11 truth to civil liberties protections and the fundamental issues of Peak Oil is probably the best path for making 9/11 truth more practical for political change. Ideally, 9/11 truth could lead to reductions in the military budget so these resources could be used for permaculture solutions to Peak Oil and climate change.
Maybe not too late
In 1969, newly elected Nixon escalated the war on Vietnam. Many in the peace movement felt discouraged that their protesting and other actions were not slowing down the war. It was revealed years later that Nixon had secretly threatened north Vietnam with nuclear attack. The Vietnamese realized he was bluffing, he did not have the support of the US public to do that -- and they ignored the threat (and Nixon eventually stood down). It is possible that the collective efforts of the 9/11 truth movement have had positive impacts behind the scenes that we may learn about in the future.
Some 9/11 truth activists have wondered how this effort is going versus similar initiatives to expose the coup against President Kennedy. New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison was on the "Tonight Show" about 5 years after the coup in Dallas, although he was not treated well. NBC also did a show about him that was about as pleasant as the Popular Mechanics 9/11 article. He had a mix of positive reactions from ordinary citizens (who were skeptical of the official story) but never got the positive press that he deserved for his independent investigation.
Garrison's independent investigation was the ONLY legal process against any of the conspirators (a story told in the film "JFK" by Oliver Stone, although Garrison's auto-biography "On the Trail of the Assassins" is even better than the film). His prosecution was sabotaged by fake witnesses inserted into his legal strategy, similar to the "no-planes" claims that sabotaged our credibility (especially in the Washington, DC area).
9/11 truth activists versus the 9/11 truth movement
9/11 Five Years Later: How We Won, And Lost
Emanuel Sferios of septembereleventh.org (the original 9/11 truth grassroots outreach campaign) has written an excellent memoire of his involvement in the early days of 9/11 truth -- how we won (by spreading the information far and wide) and how we lost (no political changes have happened). He suggests one of the reasons for our loss is the massive propaganda barrage that has succeeded in associating 9/11 truth with the kookiest claims, instead of the best evidence.
9/11 FIVE YEARS LATER: WHAT HAVE WE ACCOMPLISHED?
An Assessment of the 9/11 Truth Movement
By Emanuel Sferios
September 11, 2006 (no longer on-line)
Five years ago--on my birthday--the shadow government of the United States murdered over 3,000 of its own citizens (and hundreds of others) in a "false flag" operation designed to galvanize public support behind a war for control of the world's last remaining energy reserves. Many of us quickly saw through the "big lie" of 9/11 and began a movement to expose it, to reveal the truth, in the hopes that this would bring an end to the War on Terror, a war destined--if it continues--to turn nuclear.
And now, five years later, what have we accomplished?
In short, everything and nothing. We began this movement to convince the American public and the world that the official story of 9/11 was a lie, and that ruling factions within our own government were the real perpetrators. This we accomplished. Opinion polls conducted over the last two years show that the majority of Americans believe the US government was complicit. We bombarded every mainstream and alternative medium available with information, from Air America to internet blogs. We handed out leaflets in cities and towns across the country, held signs on street corners, wrote letters to everyone we could think of. And you know what? It worked. Today it is rare that I talk to a person who doesn't believe the US government was involved in the attacks in some way. Compared to just two years ago, when people would look at us like we were crazy for suggesting such a thing, this is an amazing success.
Or so it seems. For at the same time, not a single perpetrator of 9/11 has been prosecuted, and the War on Terror continues unabated, as does the endless stream of lies and propaganda designed to keep us fearful and compliant. Why this discrepancy? What accounts for the 9/11 Truth Movement's seeming victory in shattering the American public's blind acceptance of the official story, and the stark reality that nothing has changed politically? In other words, why, in the midst of total success, have we failed?
This is the question I have been asking myself over the last few years. As co-founder of the first national activist organization for 9/11 truth, the 9/11 Visibility Project (http://www.septembereleventh.org), I devoted two full years of my life to building this movement. And to see it grow from a handful of struggling yet dedicated individuals into the enormous yet ultimately ineffective movement it is today, saddens me to no end. Thus for me this is not merely an academic question. I mean it honestly: why, in the midst of a seeming total success, have we failed?
The answer to this question, many have concluded, involves the lack of political will of the people of the United States. It is one thing to know the truth, and quite another to act upon that truth. Democracy Now is a case in point. A great many of us have had conversations with Amy Goodman and the other producers of Democracy Now, and they all know the official story of 9/11 is a lie. Yet except for a few segments we forced them to air as a result of our public pressure campaign (where they for the most part ridiculed us), they have chosen not only to ignore 9/11 truth, but to affirm the official story again and again in their programming.
Many other examples can be given, not only from the left media, but from senators, congressmen, Eliot Spitzer, etc. How many of these people know the truth, yet do nothing? (Cynthia McKinney may be the one notable exception). Where is the political will?
But to blame the American people alone for their lack of courage in opposing US imperialism fails to ultimately answer the question, for we must also ask why such a lack of courage exists in the first place. Certainly it isn't a lack of courage in general. The American population regularly demonstrates great courage and political will when it comes to social and domestic issues. And neither do I believe, as some cynical observers claim, that the majority of Americans secretly support US imperialism, that given the choice they would rather see millions of innocent foreigners die than reduce their own oil consumption and powerdown. If such was the case, there would have been no need for a 9/11, and there would be no need for the ongoing lies and deceptions. Simply citing the lack of political will among the American public thus begs the question, for the answer we seek is exactly that which accounts for this lack of courage when facing the truth of 9/11.
Here is my assessment. The reason for the discrepancy between what people know about 9/11 and what they are willing to do to stop the War on Terror; the reason we have ultimately failed, in other words, has to do with the scope and sophistication of the political and social control mechanisms used against us; namely, disruption and disinformaiton. I have been an activist for 20 years, and I have seen and experienced COINTELPRO-style disruption many times in the past. Yet never before have I witnessed it used on such a scale and with such precision as I have within the 9/11 Truth Movement. There are thousands of examples, but let me give you just a few.
1. When we launched our Democracy Now campaign, we asked activists and the general public to send them emails requesting they have David Ray Griffin on their show. We provided a sample letter, but encouraged people to write their own, and we asked them always to be polite. We also provided them the email addresses to send their letters, and we included our own email address in the mix, so we could see what kinds of letters Democracy Now was receiving. What happened was very telling. For every two or three emails they received that were respectful and well-written, they received one that was either highly insulting, vehemently anti-semitic, or down-right ludicrous. The timing and repetitive use of specific phrases among many of these emails revealed a coordinated effort to disrupt our campaign and convince Democracy Now not to associate with us.
2. When we launched our campaign to get the attorney General of New York State, Eliot Spitzer, to open a new investigation into 9/11, we began an online petition drive and received thousands of signatures. Shortly after our campaign website went up, another website was launched duplicating our campaign and promoting preposterous claims designed to make the 9/11 Truth Movement appear ridiculous. Thus a clear message was sent to Eliot Spitzer that opening a new investigation into 9/11 could easily destroy his reputation by associating with people who believe, among other nonsense, that the planes on 9/11 were merely holograms inserted onto TV screens.
And these are just examples of reactive disruption efforts (in response to things we do), which aren't even the primary methods they use against us.
Controlling Your Opposition by Becoming It
One lesson the shadow government has learned over the last 40 years is that the best way to defeat your opposition is to become your opposition, and like many of those phony socialist and anti-war groups on college campuses that suck rebellious student energy and dissipate it ineffectively, preventing the formation of a legitimate, effective opposition, so have they taken over a large part of the 9/11 Truth Movement itself, channeling new skeptics (and old) into endless debates around physical evidence and other ineffective actions. During my entire time within the movement, I never once named publicly any individuals or websites I thought were intentionally promoting disinformation, or leading us down useless avenues, nor will I now. (This is to protect myself from reprisals, to avoid the further disruption caused by the endless cycle of "snitch jacketing," and because you can never really prove who is an agent and who is simply duped by the disinfo itself, much of which is easily believable on the surface.) But to prove that agents are among us, and that they have succeeded in taking over the bulk of the movement, one needs to go no further than compare the number of people who believe no plane hit the Pentagon with the number of people who know about the simultaneous wargames that were taking place on the morning of 9/11, and that prevented NORAD from intercepting the planes before they hit their targets.
The former claim, widely believed, is perhaps the most successful and sophisticated disinformation campaign injected into the 9/11 Truth Movement. Supported by doctored video footage released by the Pentagon itself, it has almost single-handedly made the movement the laughing stock of Washington DC residents, hundreds of whom saw the plane hit the building, and thousands of whom have relatives or friends who did. And this was likely its intention, for it has successfully alienated from the movement precisely those DC professionals (senators, congressmen, federal judges, prosecutors, etc.) who hold enough power to effectively investigate and prosecute the crime. It has also been the primary wedge used to divide the movement from itself. While there is no space here to delve into the details of the "no plane at the Pentagon" hoax, I am forever indebted to Mark Robinowitz for having the stubborn persistency to keep challenging me back when I, too, believed the hoax. I am also immensely grateful to Jim Hoffman for his unparalleled analysis of the Pentagon physical evidence (http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon).
On the other hand, the wargames comprise the very heart of the operation. On the morning of 9/11 itself, the FAA and NORAD were occupied in air defense drills simulating none other than multiple airline hijackings. These drills included fake blips inserted onto their radar screens, as well as remotely controlled aircraft in the air posing as passenger jets. Thus the perpetrators of 9/11 (those overseeing the wargames) were able to incapacitate the US air defense system without having to order a stand-down, allowing the operation to succeed. Because of the wargames, NORAD personnel did not know where to send the fighter jets when the supposedly "real" hijackings took place (likely also being flown by remote control). They acknowledged this during the 9/11 Commission hearings, with no follow-up questioning of course.
How many people have heard of the wargames compared to the "no plane at the Pentagon" theory? How many 9/11 Truth websites make reference to the wargames compared with the Pentagon hoax? And how many 9/11 truth activist organizations do you know emphasizing the wargames as opposed to all the various physical evidence arguments? The answer to these questions will tell you a lot about the state of the movement, and who really controls it. (Incidentally, the world should be forever indebted to Mike Ruppert, who put the pieces together about the wargames and presented them in their proper light, first on stage to a small audience in Toronto, which included myself, and then in full detail in his book, Crossing the Rubicon.)
So we shouldn't place all the blame upon those individuals who willfully ignore the truth of 9/11. Certainly there is an element of cowardice involved, a lack of integrity, and a selling out. We know, for example, that Democracy Now received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Ford Foundation specifically to report on 9/11. But what would happen to Democracy Now if Amy Goodman chose integrity over money? The same thing, perhaps, that happened to Mike Ruppert? (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/081606_burning_bridge.shtml) This is not to excuse Goodman's willful ignorance, her selling out to the very government she professes to oppose. (I don't listen to her show anymore, but I read From The Wilderness every day.) I simply want to recognize the immense power of that government, a power that can murder 3,000 people and get away with it, a power that can induce good activists to sell out, and better ones to flee the country. (Living to fight another day is not so condemnable, after all.) Herein lies an important factor in our failure.
More About Disinformation
One of the characteristics of 9/11 disinformation a lot of people have a hard time grasping is that much of it is designed specifically to convince people of US government complicity in 9/11. This might seem like a contradiction, until one understands that 9/11 disinfo is part of a broader system of mass manipulation where the opposing perspective plays an essential role. The basic idea is to control both sides of the debate, and frame it in a way that makes the opposing side ineffective (not necessarily unbelievable). In the end it doesn't matter whether even a majority of the people believe the US government was complicit in 9/11 (this is already the case). What matters is only that the perpetrators can never successfully be prosecuted. Thus they pollute the body of evidence with red herrings and false lines of inquiry. If, in the process, they happen to cause some people to disbelieve the official story (as in the case with the "no plane at the Pentagon" hoax), all the better, because the end result is a weakening of any legal case that might be brought against them.
There is an important quote by E. Martin Schotz from his book, History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy. It is: "One of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed and nothing can be known." Conspiracy theories, in other words, provide the perfect cover for real conspiracies. When anything can be believed because the available information is a convoluted mix of truth, falsehood and probability; when the actual truth itself is convoluted, involving deception, mystery and illusion; then one is ultimately left to their own emotions to decide. And emotions, of course, can be easily manipulated. What do you *want* to believe? After all, it's up to you. You'll never know the truth, or at least you'll never be able to prove it in a court of law. Do you really want to be marginalized and ridiculed as a conspiracy theorist? You get the idea.
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2008
Seeking to Hire Ignorant Ghostwriter for Book That Already Exists
Beginning on the day of the attack, the 9/11 Truth Movement ran the same inevitable course repeated by domestic dissent and political critique so many times: formation, momentum, growth, penetration by unidentified representatives of the critiqued; disinformation campaigns; factionalization, and fizzle. It is always possible, however, to rebuild and extend the work of social repair that such movements represent. Apart from that utopian ambition, it’s inherently valuable just to make sense of the attacks and assassinations, the engineered coups des etats and the falsely triggered wars. That sense-making happens in paperback-and-podium argumentation pitched at various levels of sophistication for various audiences; it happens in documentaries; and it can happens in the arts. It cannot happen in the courts: published in September 2004, Mike Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon was a solidly documented, robustly argued legal case against Dick Cheney and others, constructed strictly around means, motive, and opportunity. Though it remains the 2nd or 3rd best-selling book on 9/11 after the Kean Report itself, Rubicon has been resolutely ignored by the mainstream media and gone unchallenged by any legal (or other) representative of those it accuses. The way to get media attention is to publish – wittingly or unwittingly – a true story mixed with a poison pill of disinformation.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Back to the Wilderness
These days in the 9/11 Truth demimonde, early and clear-eyed researchers like [Peter Dale] Scott, Paul Thompson and Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed are rarely heard over the likes of Morgan Reynolds and the thermate/"mini-nukes" debate, and rather than contributions such as the discovery of 9/11's concurrent war games we have "scholars for 9/11 Truth" tearing one another new impact holes over speculation on space-based beam weaponry. If you think that indicates progress, and that we're closer to 9/11 justice than we were three years ago, I don't know what more to tell you.
Anthony Lappe, GNN
from the foreword to
"The Big Wedding: 9/11, The Whistle-Blowers, and the Cover-up"
by Sander Hicks
Over the course of the last four years, the so-called "9/11 Truth Movement" has become a model of open-source citizen participation, engaging people from all walks of life from around the world in an inspiring collective search for the truth. But it has always been plagued by a glaring contradiction: it has relied almost exclusively on the reporting of mainstream news sources at the same time it rails against the mainstream press as players in the grand cover-up. But by far, the most troubling aspect of this fledgling movement lurks on its fringes. Thousands of hours are spent debating theories that defy rational thought and mounds of physical evidence. The planes were fakes! The passengers had been let off at a secret location, and drone planes flew into the towers. No, the planes were actually missiles! See look at the "pods" on the bottom of these blurry video stills. It has been nearly impossible for the responsible members of the movement to distance themselves from the lunacy.
Anonymous characters popped up with names like "Web Fairy," and were taken seriously by thousands of seemingly intelligent people. A bizarre alternative universe emerged in which the more outlandish the claim, the more it was taken as gospel. Those who questioned the podpeople and their equivalents were dubbed government stooges. It was farce that took on aspects of magical realism -- a fantasy world which one day will quite possibly be exposed as a deliberate disinformation program designed to taint the dedicated seekers of truth as paranoid "conspiracy theorists."
THE NY TIMES PUTS 9-11 QUESTIONS IN THE GRAVE
As Sad As It Was Predictable
Story Marks the End of a Sequential and Planned Campaign to Discredit Authentic 9/11 Researchby
Michael C. Ruppert and Jamey Hecht
[It’s pretty easy to deconstruct and demonstrate, step-by-step, how the 9-11 movement was led into the Valley of the Little Bighorn and massacred before the public eye. It’s too bad that so many of its self-proclaimed leaders acted as willing accomplices while the real 9-11 pioneers; skilled and experienced investigators, journalists, professors and academics could only sit back and watch the “assisted” suicide take place. 9-11 has been sent to the dustbin of history and the sad part is that it has all been done before.
Few would listen to our warnings. There are great lessons here for the future if another opportunity should present itself to break through into the mainstream. But that would have to be something as big as 9-11 and I’m not sure the remnants of this free nation could stand something like that. – Michael C Ruppert]
welcome to flight 77.info -
documenting the legal process to obtain government-held video recordings related to flight 77 on 9/11:
the 9/11 truth movement, today, is fueled by the theory that something other than a 757 hit the pentagon on 9/11. if you're interested in being a happy member of the group of people known now as 'the 9/11 truth movement' - you're going to have accept a few things: 1) no 757 hit the pentagon. 2) aliens may have been involved in the overall 9/11 plot. 3) if planes actually did hit buildings on 9/11, they were likely loaded with missiles... also, know your JFK assasination trivia well, and have an original theory to throw out to the group from time to time. you get special cool points for insights into JFK and aliens. [this is not a rip on the JFK assasination or UFO crowd]
this is the way it is NOW. i don't know how the 9/11 truth movement was originally. i got into the scene late (about 2 years ago). it doesn't really matter the way it was originally - now it is just an echo of hope that the truth will bring the real conspirators to justice. now, the 9/11 truth movement is a playground for people who prefer theories over accuracy, and a field filled with opportunities for profit.
now, there is very little actual on-the-ground, real-life investigation. those who prefer theories over accuracy don't want to spoil those theories with FOIA requests or other investigations that might actually lead to the uncovering of evidence. i've witnessed this from the 'inside', and have seen the flurry of panic to protect certain theories. but that's okay; that's people's lives. and if you're thinking of becoming a member of the 9/11 truth movement, don't fool yourself that you're joining a mission to bring truth to light.
Edited on Wed Mar-29-06 07:49 AM by bronco2121
i know it has become unpopular (for some reason) on DU to criticize the new direction of the... well, i wouldn't call it the '9/11 truth movement' anymore - it's now more like the 'big tent 9/11 anything-coulda-happened movement'.
so if you're the kind whose eyes might bleed if you read anything critical of either the 'scholars for 9/11 truth' or the happy shiny music video known as 'loose change'... DO NOT view these URLs:
they had some people speak who weren't on the list of speakers that I took great offense with ... I'm never going to go to another event like that again, that's for sure!
(from a well-respected speaker who went to several 9/11 truth events)
The movement has become a total joke now. It is really sad. It is all ego for people. They don't care about the truth. They just care about being popular. How else can one interpret the "excitement" over the NYT article? OR the number of speakers at the conference? IF all those speakers are bullshit it doesn't matter how many there are, after all. It's the sickness of our age... mass media and popularity dictate people's behavior. They measure success in terms of how much media coverage they get, how big their conferences are, etc. Very very sad.
(from an activist who spoke at the March 2004 9/11 Inquiry)
I have seen what Mike Ruppert and Jamie Hecht are saying coming. There is no doubt that the disinformation specialists have done a great job of divide and conquer. As increasingly wild theories bloomed, I shook my head in dismay. I wrote to a few people involved questioning why American's are so quick to scream at each other. Too many 'seekers of truth' were too easily suckered by the Pentagon distraction. Massive hole could have been blown in the official story at the WTC. The puppet masters have been very clever!
Fact is, some people, some groups have done an outstanding job of analysis. Fact is, the official story is the real CT. So many facets of it are sheer physical, mathematical, engineering impossibilities. There can be no doubt that this was an inside job.
In my view, those working in a professional way, those who are professionals in the disciplines that are relevant, should continue their work. There has to be recorded for history a through analysis of this type. Not because I have any hope that the perpetrators will ever be brought to account. I have come to understand very well that only a very few of us can see reality. Want to know the truth, however shocking. I know that the vast majority, with their condition minds, simply cannot grasp the issues. They prefer to believe the official fabrication.
Right now I do not see a good conclusion for the human race. At times I think the candle of hope is flickering badly. But somehow we have to keep that little flame going! If there is no hope, then we are all finished. I try and get through to a few people, to snap them out of their media induced torpor, to get them to understand the enormity of what we face. But, most people just don't want to know. It is too much to grasp. The implications are too frightening.
The lights are fading Mark. It is getting very cold.
(from an observer outside the United States)