Probable Cause with Sibel Edmonds- Project AJAX, CIA, False Flag Ops & the Illusion of Home-front Sanctity

From the 1953 Iranian Coup to toppling Guatemala’s Guzmán, Turkey’s 1980 Military Coup, Operations Condor & Northwoods … and the list goes on

Welcome to our thirteenth episode of Probable Cause. Today we are continuing with our previous subtopic- deep state coups via synthetic terrorism, false flag operations and propaganda. For this episode I am going to continue this sub-topic and provide you with a different context and examples in order to illustrate some common themes, similarities and parallels. We are going to revisit Iran. I say revisit because I have presented to you an entire episode on the 1979 Revolution in Iran based on my own direct experiences. For this episode we are revisiting Iran, but we are going back 62 years. We are going back to 1953: The 1953 Iranian coup d'état.

After our brief presentation of the 1953 Coup in Iran and discussing the common threads, uncanny similarities and parallels between the Iranian coup and the 1980 Military Coup in Turkey, and after a brief overview of other similar coups and operations (Operations PBSUCCESS, CONDOR, Northwoods, Gladio), we will delve into our macro questions such as: How can we recognize our government and deep state powers as murderers, who have in the last half century murdered millions of people, hundreds of thousands of innocent children, hundreds of thousands of innocent elderlies, through overt wars, covert wars, declared wars, undeclared wars, false flag operations, synthetically created terror plots, chemical weapons and atomic bombs … yet, believe that this monstrous and murderous entity would recognize some sanctities?

As always, our next episode will be based on your reaction, critique, responses and questions posed in the comments section below.

*To listen to our previous episodes on this topic click here

Listen to the full episode here:


Show Notes

The 1953 Coup D'etat in Iran

From Anglo-Persian Oil to BP Amoco

History of Iran: Oil Nationalization

History Used and Abused

The 50th Anniversary of the CIA Coup in Iran: The Day Democracy Died

CIA admits role in 1953 Iranian coup

C.I.A. Destroyed Files on 1953 Iran Coup

"CIA document mentions who ordered the 1953 coup" (PDF)

"Overthrow of Premier Mossadeq of Iran, November 1952-August 1953," March 1954, by Dr. Donald Wilber.

How a Plot Convulsed Iran in '53 (and in '79)

The Iranian Accord

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.


  1. CuChulainn says:

    just today i gave some acquaintance a printed copy of this–
    and it had a visible effect in helping them face up to certain realities. one person turned around and showed it to a policeman, who took an interest.
    why did this article overcome their “cognitive dissonance”?
    because Nafeez Ahmed is rational, meticulous, scholarly in his approach. his narrative is not a screed, a jeremiad of the kind the Chris Hedges and other dubious characters produce in volume, but a serious article with references to the relevant sources and documentation of facts.

    Sibel opened my eyes to certain realities i was resisting, in part from personal identification with certain public institutions
    why was Sibel persuasive, while for me Tarpley, Alex Jones and others were not?
    because Sibel had credibility, based on my years of following her case, based on the many intersections in our personal experience, and because she did not come off as a “truther” (as though the truth could be known and brandished like a flag) but as someone who spoke truthfully about her own personal experience, and sought in good faith to inform others, without sensationalism but with what appeared to be more concern for the general welfare than for her own ego.
    this brings back the vipassana theme of equanimity–if we are not equanimous–this means sober, calm, benevolent, rational & evidence-based in our discussions with others–we can never be persuasive. our awareness of certain realities, realities that all of us found deeply disturbing when we first encountered them, can only spread to others if we have equanimity equal to our awareness.

    • Mandela says:

      Yes CuChulainn, the qualities you describe are effective for those who are able to think critically, have developed a modicum of maturity, and trust their internal judgment of ‘experts’. Most people though require some sort of a tipping point of acceptance of a perspective before they can even consider it. So much of what is taught in schools is presented as truth to be accepted. It starts when students are too young to have the tools or experience to question what is being taught. Over time it leads to most choosing between mainstream narratives instead of working to discover truth. Without having developed a personal culture of finding what one thinks for him or her self through personal investigation, most don’t have what it takes to believe differently than those around them.

      I can’t see a movement towards accepting the ideas discussed here without some form of societal collapse that destroys government and media credibility in a very graphic way. In the meantime the brilliantly engineered slow boiling of us frogs is working as planned. I marvel at how the plan continues as the generations pass. The other big problem is that when public opinion does start to question that which they have believed their whole lives, there is no one there with a comprehensive explanation of what went wrong or how to make things better.

      • Well said, Mandela.

      • “The other big problem is that when public opinion does start to question that which they have believed their whole lives, there is no one there with a comprehensive explanation of what went wrong or how to make things better.”

        Excellent. Turning that around, the powers ALWAYS have an explanation, a plan and a program in their pocket (“Never let a crisis go to waste” – Rahm Emanuel).

      • David Carlson says:

        I agree it is difficult to see any tangible change without events catastrophic to global civilisation as we know it and that would have such terrible consequences even the least sober of us would not wish that. So what is to be done?
        I think what happens here on sites like this is little more than recording an alternative objective reality for posterity. That we are historians not revolutionaries. And little is said that rightly or wrongly does not fulfill the confirmation biases we seek. Preaching to the choir is easy but the convertion of new adults, getting them to swallow the red pill is more or less a waste of time and effort. As you point out most adults are victims of a comprehensive diseducation that not only blinds them to the truth but that removes the cognitive toolkit that is a prerequisite for actual enquiry. So its basically a waste of time. We really need to get to kids from 5 to 15 and give them the tools of critical thinking and to question at all. And we have to do this in an environment where the monitoring of educational materials is rigerous. So it has to be done with some dexterity.
        Most people that are truthseekers tend to have no concept of what would replace this society and its structures and many of those that do argue for the kind of small government that could only be called utopian if you see a Mad Max style dystopia as utopia. In a global society where population is set to plateau at 12 to 14 billion we will need a lot of governance. It is a shame that the NWO puppeteers have no intention of even attempting global governance otherwise I might actually welcome them as a lesser evil to a greater good. However their agenda is to foment chaos and manage it with brute technological force. And that is the model of civilisation building that we have used as a species throughout the historical record. Clearly the method is fundamentally flawed. We cannot have a realistic chance of an equal society for all in a perpetual feudal landscape dominated by warlords.
        Though there are many issues to be resolved and the movement itself has perhaps more dreamers than practical thinkers for me the only alternative for global governance would have to contain many of the core principles of the Zeitgeist movement. A moneyless, transactionless society dependent on technology designed to aid our way of life in harmony with our natural world. Where our interests and vocations are entirely voluntary and need have no purpose but that individuals pique. Despite the population doommongers faulty logic our planet combined with our technology can easily sustain 20billion people with minimal impact on other extant natural ecosystems. Of course these ideas seem an impossible goal at the moment. And it will not happen in the lifetime of anyone alive today. But we cannot sit back like bitter old people on our rocking chairs and just criticise the ‘news’. We have to get to the kids and plant the seeds of change there. And to find innovative ways to do so that bypass or hijack the official narrative in such a way that a critical mass can be achieved. But is that even possible? Global average IQ has gone up some 20% in a century so this suggests there is a huge latent capacity for critical thinking to be quite suddenly the latest trend. A principle our populations understand and respond to with breathtaking speed. Only by making critical thinking de rigour amongst the masses can we begin to have the consent of the people wrested from the naive and false assumptions of both capitalism and representative democracy. So we must focus on priming our children. They have to be not just ready but eager to demand self empowerment not as a selfish and superficial lifestyle choice but as something we share with everybody else in a demand of freedom from dependency on money and the corrupting pathology of wealth.
        Applying critical thinking holistically with scientific analyses to inform decision making is what our kids need to learn. Which is exactly why we see a two tier education system in every country where the elites get it and the masses do not. But we also know where we should perhaps make a special effort to reach the children who will be tomorrows elites. They are few and their educators fewer yet the impact of reaching them could profoundly alter the wiggle room required to change the whole education system.
        As a Scotsman I was struck by the passionate embrace of individual responsibility for our collective destiny the youth of this country displayed in the Scottish independence referendum. The YES campaign was robbed of victory by unambiguous but near unreported electoral fraud so the social experiment of succession by ballot was never going to happen anyway. Yet the energy that was realised during the campaign is proving a genie that refuses to go back in the bottle. If you are not from Scotland you might think that the main political party is the ideological driver of the independence goal. And that is euro-friendly and embracing of the hegemonic cleptocracy that is the current paradigm. Such a view would be deeply in error. What has actually happened in Scotland is probably the most progressive debate on the nature of freedom since the the formation of the United States, whose constitution and bill of rights was in no minor part informed and crafted by pragmatic atheistic Scots who’s influence was crucial. This is not a homage to some Scots exceptionalism but being Scots by accident of birth you are born into a certain rather cynical yet doggedly optimistic society that has a small population with an impressive education system. In the coming UK wide election on May 6th be prepared to see the price the UK pays for not letting us go is to really have us so slighted. I digress. The point is when you energise the youth it has a kick on effect through every social strata and builds a momentum that makes things happen beyond the control of the puppet masters. So we need to get talking to or becoming teachers and encourage them in a subtle, under the radar methods of critical thinking training.

        • David,

          I don’t think anyone would disagree with the general points you made so eloquently. I do agree with you on: the importance of our children-the youth, the coming generation. And guess what: I believe everyone in this forum does that; one way or another. I do- with my child. But if we go back to your point re: preaching to the choir, how could we have this done when the majority of the parents/educators/teachers are on the other side of this fence? What I’m trying to get at: we can’t reach the youth and implement what you rightfully point to, when those children are completely under the ‘other side’s’ parenting/indoctrination/schooling trend. This was one of the points we tried to delve deeper into with our discussion of ‘homeschooling’ and or ‘other alternatives’- we may address those who are within the 1-% segment, but the general trend remains in place. The question: how do we go about achieving what you state when the majority of the parents and almost education institutions are on the opposite side?

        • steven hobbs says:

          “That we are historians not revolutionaries. And little is said that rightly or wrongly does not fulfill the confirmation biases we seek. Preaching to the choir is easy but the convertion of new adults, getting them to swallow the red pill is more or less a waste of time and effort.”

          Can one not be both a historian and a revolutionary? Marx quickly comes to mind. Actually I’m a psychologist / philosopher inspired toward truth praxis. I do get into the streets sometimes too. It’s been calculated that it only takes 3% of a population fully committed to a revolution to make it happen. Polls have identified that 40% of US population has doubts about the veracity of the official 9/11 story.

          To suggest it is a waste of time getting adults to open their minds to the truthiness of the things we speak her at BFP is doing exactly as the powerful wish — roll over and not talk about it passionately. I refuse. If we do that we dis-empower ourselves and collude with the deep state, see 2 below.

          I’m still catching up with ProbCaus.
          [Transcript 27.5] “Those people [gov actors] will never do that to us.”
          [Referring to the quote above] Sibel states, “Is it another example of cognitive dissonance, or is it another example of American exceptionalism? Is this view of American’s separating us from them? Those other people? Is it due to blind nationalism, and unquestioning loyalty to the state as God? Or, is it plain and simple denial? Denial on both the conscious and subconscious level? Finally, whether it is ignorance or denial, or cognitive dissonance, or American exceptionalism, how do we go about countering it? Necessary first step toward the needed changes. How?”

          Sibel, you end with a question of power (as stated somewhat of a Rorschach Q). Offered nominalizations are enticing – like a rabbit hole. Thank you for providing this great forum for intelligent rants.

          Maybe you intended that your query (above) to be ambiguous for purposes of discussion. “It,” the one we study to counter, may be dissected into: 1) inclusive of pre, post, and modern brain structures giving rise to action, belief and thought described from the outside observation; 2) intra-psychic an experiential state, described by Pogo, “I met the enemy and he is us.” ; 3) A process, procedure, or set of practices and manipulations that produce 1 and 2. So when you ask, “How do we counter it?” Do you ask about 1, 2, or 3? When you say, “How do we change it?” Well, comprehensive considerations are advisable, definitive definitions preferred, along with verifiable postulates. Lets’ stay specific 1, 2, or 3.

          These complex issues deserve distinct articulation. How do we counter “it”? Becoming knowledgeably articulate regarding “it” seems the first step. It seems this is part of our project.

  2. thymesup says:

    have been trying to pay an annul subscription but having trouble. also cannot listen to march 4 ‘probable cause’ without trouble. lynn bradbury

  3. 344thBrother says:

    It amuses me that the CIA uses communist/character assassination techniques while calling Mossadeq a communist. He had communist/socialist supporters, in your opinion was he actually a communist?

    The CIA hires criminal thugs and buses them in to do their dirty work. “Anti-communist guerrillas, terrorists and spies, gee… another pattern.

    Mossadeq supporters were imprisoned and tortured… Do I see a pattern developing here?

    Rallying ultra religious demonstrators… pattern.

    August 15, 1953. Fake communist revolution. Public revulsion.

    Shah supporters CIA employees, starting mass demonstrations against the fake communists and the real communists.

    General Schwartzkopf Sr. organized Savak…

    Royal Dutch Shell is owned by queen Beatrix of the Netherlands who is the sister of the queen of England, right? Or related by marriage, so Royal Dutch Shell displaces BP, both owned by the same royal family. Is that correct?

    Eisenhower… Kermit Roosevelt (CIA Stooge), Nazis…ugh another pattern.

    CIA Bombing Muslims while posing as communists.

    CIA Destroyed or lost the documents on Ajax. I smell GHWB all over this.

    Threats against the rest of the Middle east after destroying Mossadeq. Bragging.

    “our name has not been an honored one in the ME” yeah but a feared one. Question, was Saudi Arabia already fully coopted before the Mossadeq overthrow? Or did they fall into line afterward?

    Yes it’s all a huge pattern and one we can see developing in the USA. People in the USA who think “It can’t happen here in America” haven’t been paying attention to all the things that have been ramping up here. People who think that “They could never get our military to kill Americans”, should take a look at our militarized police who have been killing over 1000 people per year for over a decade.

    It seems to me that with all the smaller “Terrorist plots and attacks” getting all the press, and things like ISIS dominating the news and taking hold of the American psyche, that they would keep on doing these sorts of smaller false flag attacks as long as its working and perhaps hold any 911 level (or worse) in reserve as an ace in the hole when they’re really backed into a corner, just before they bail or go into their fortified compounds.

    they’ve been getting away with it here in so long that I don’t blame them for thinking they can get away with anything right in our faces. I also think that as psychopaths, they LOVE to do that right in our faces. It validates their thoughts of superiority and amuses them.

    I think in Americans it’s a combination of Ignorance, denial, cognitive dissonance and exceptional-ism. These are factions within the population. Ignorance (fed by the media). Denial (A psychological process brought on by fear and shock especially post 911), Cognitive dissonance where they shut down and “Don’t want to hear it, in order to avoid the shock and fear. And exceptional-ism also pushed by the media and politicians and at major sporting events. Hunter S. Thompson called it Flag Sucking.

    I guess it’s good news that I see things polarizing. It forces people into (unfortunately warring) camps, (them and us) and it also forces people who are on the fence to at least make some decisions to take sides and prepare for the worst, but it also may help us to identify our friends and supporters easier. On the other hand, polarization is what the CIA loves to exploit by co-opting both sides and getting them fighting as a justification for “Homeland Security” and all that Unconstitutional idiocy.

    People who believe that it will never happen here and who won’t stop believing it will be the first people to die in any massive civil uprising. They believe it because it’s been kept away from the USA all this time and it’s only since the internet that there’s been a wider understanding of what the psychopaths have been doing. I think it’s taking a lot of time for the enormous ignorance to sway one person at a time through the barriers of denial and cognitive dissonance and exceptional-ism.

    How. A very difficult question to answer.
    1. Keep informing people any way we can. Dangerous in that it exposes us but safer than the alternative of slapping people around. And it’s legal.
    2. Keep accusing the psychopaths by name and incident in order to keep them ducking and weaving and too busy or possibly paranoid to do anything too heinous, while our numbers continue to build up. Also dangerous, it’s like poking a maddened bear in a cage with a sharp stick while fooling with the lock, but it is legal.

    3. Keep those you love close and prepare for the worst.

    I can’t think of anything else short of stupidly doing something illegal, which would just play into the plan that “Americans are terrorists”. So, I don’t really see any way around hoping for the best, keeping the informatin war going and preparing for the worst.


    • Dave,
      “He had communist/socialist supporters, in your opinion was he actually a communist?”- No, he was more of a socialist/liberal nationalist. In our 1970 revolution episode I briefly covered the various political segments. Mosaddegh had support of moderate liberals, liberals, socialists and communists.

      ‘Tudeh’ was the Marxist-communist party. Again, within Tudeh you observed a range of political views. Was there some level of support by the Soviet Union for Tudeh? Yes, but very little. Russians don’t operate like us; they have a totally different M.O. For example:” The west sends money and arm to its guerillas (within religious or mafia segments), while the Soviet sent tons of books, pamphlets!! Seriously. Of course it goes into ‘propaganda’ category but how in the world do you defend yourself against tanks, bullets and bombs with books?!!

      By naming the culprits: do you mean deep state players/interest? As in Lockheed, SAIC, Northrop …? Or do you mean those lower in hierarchy: known neocons, neoliberals?

      • 344thBrother says:

        The culprits. I was thinking about people like Kissinger, the banking elite, people who pull strings and create plots like GHWB, and sure the neocons/neoliberals at the top like Wolfovitz, Perle, war criminals.

        Anyone high up enough in the power structure to be sweated into naming names and organizations and plots. As high as possible to avoid the problems of compartmentalization and blaming the little guy. People with names and faces who can be hated and reviled and outed. Rumsfeld. Any of the obvious 911 criminals and PNAC signitories. The Gods if you will.

        Most of these people are obviously guilty of crimes including mass murder and treason. In a perfect world, all it would take is grabbing them for the worst of their crimes and putting them on trial in PUBLIC. Sort of a public trial combination with the pillory. Let the American people throw a lot of rotten fruit at them metaphorically speaking.

        It would also show the world that “we Americans” don’t support what these bastards are doing.

        Thanks for your reply and the reminder of Mossadeq’s political stance. It’s hard for me to keep track of all the details sometimes.

  4. 344thBrother says:

    Pure speculation:
    IF (Big if) the powers wanted to do something massive while hiding behind a “Natural event” which would be big enough to claim that all the previous problems in the USA (Economy, social unrest, eieio) were precipitated by it, I’m guessing they’d do something sneaky like a big penetrator munition from high altitude, at night, during some unforeseen interruption in the air traffic grid into the new hot dome in Yellowstone lake.

    Deniability, effective and could easily justify all the “Protective” measures that they’ve been gearing up for, to keep us safe doncha know.

    Lets hope not.

  5. arealjeffersonian says:

    I can see how the episodes are building up – coming together. It think it is very ingenious of Sibel to take this approach – starting with the macro concept of change, from there going to indoctrination & propaganda. Then moving to Deep State methods – building up to coups, false flag operations & 9/11. It’s coming together marvelously – keep it up Sibel – lead us.

    • Jeffersonian, Thanks.

      It is to approach the main building blocks … rather than tackling one case here, another there. Or, tackling a massive topic-taking it as one big chunk… Am I making sense here? Maybe not.

      Leading? No. I think we are sharing an interesting interactive journey. Learning together, from each other. Exchanging ideas: growing & widening the scope.

      I know we have achieved our first main objective with this podcast series: interactive & organic. And I hope I am keeping it from getting ‘too boring.’ Am I?

      Now, let’s see where it’s going to lead us … Filled with anticipation;-)

  6. Sibel, Episode #13 in my not so humble opinion is excellent, the best to date. Keep up the good work

  7. kariflack says:

    boom and Sibel breaks out the “e” word! it is exceptionalism. there are industries dedicated to instilling this, and i agree that it is “subconsciously” done as well — i don’t know that i trust that term enough to wield it, but we are told only so much about how our brains function by the scientists who are of course the most valuable to the fascist state. there are many ways which information is fed to people via different forms of media in conscious and sub-conscious ways. in many aspects i feel the focus should be on telling people why they should unplug before that’s not even a possibility (internet of things, etc). at this point, most people know that they are just getting total crap from the ruling class’s outlets, yet they are still reliant.

    • Kariflack, glad to see you’re back, and hope all is well.

      Exceptionalism: It is very ‘American.’ In other countries, let’s say in Iran or Turkey people don’t have this “Oh, they won’t do it to ‘us'” This is the only country I have seen with this level of ingrained ‘exceptionalism.’ That’s why for me, in my humble opinion, is a very ‘American. thing.

      • kariflack says:

        🙂 i am happy to observe and keep quiet when others with more knowledge have interesting things to say! trying to break that american conditioning you know…

        • Please no- break that silence, and do so regularly. The more perspectives, the more the variation in expressing those perspectives, the better. I have to admit, compare to some people (and their level of eloquence)here I sometimes get that intimidation feel, but it doesn’t last, because I am able to relate and I feel that connection: when you understand, and you know/feel that you are understood. It is so rare. Two months and 7 months here in Bend, and I have not felt that mutual understanding with anyone here. Sometimes it feels as if we are different species, speaking different languages.

          • kariflack says:

            different languages yes, i feel this often. and i’ve had to break off some relationships.

          • Mandela says:

            I read today in a medical context that when presented with alternative therapies that have tremendously helped those who the Drs. were unable to do anything for, the docs would say that the patient must have never really had the disease, or getting better was just from the passage of time. Then he said something interesting. He said that the docs mistake the map they were taught for reality. They interpret everything presented to them from within the theoretical underpinnings of their studies. I think that this is an example of why there are so many things we cannot talk to others about. When faced with that which doesn’t make sense in relation to their implicit assumptions about the world they reject the facts or explain them away in nonsensical ways. We on the other hand look for the assumption that makes the fact impossible and then try our best to align our assumptions and understandings with reality. How can we carry on conversations about vital, important, life changing stuff with people whose understanding is that you would excuse only in a child or mental deficient?

  8. Ronald Orovitz says:

    There is an episode of the 1950’s spy drama series “Passport to Danger” that I was hoping would be online, and it almost is… -except that that is actually the Tangiers episode. In any case, the Teheran episode originally aired on July 20, 1955 (, and in a very oblique way makes reference to Operation Ajax. Our hero Steve McQuinn (Cesar Romero) arrives in Teheran only to be shot at. He learns upon arrival that his friend Blake who he was to meet has been killed, and that he has inherited the rich oil field discovered by Blake. McQuinn is then pursued by a honey pot who is the wife of a wealthy oilman named Fabian (as in Fabian Society? This “Fabian” is the murderer of “William Blake,” McQuinn’s friend). McQuinn then receives a letter from Fabian requesting lunch at his mansion, where Fabian will make an offer for control of the oil field. It is here that the dialogue is most telling…

    McQuinn “I understand that all Iran’s oil is controlled by the government. You can’t exploit this field.”
    Fabian: “Sometimes, Mr. McQuinn, governments can change, most unexpectedly.”
    McQuinn: “I see.”

    What it took the CIA 60 years to officially admit then had already been disclosed, in a very roundabout way, on a popular TV show not even two years after the fact.

    Of course, our hero Steve McQuinn is portrayed as just the innocent bystander to the Machiavellian scheme of a ruthless European billionaire, and is on the side of truth and justice in a very cynical world. This is of course where the deception comes in. But it typifies how Hollywood has portrayed its CIA heroes through “heart-throb” actors from Cesar Romero to George Clooney and Kiefer Sutherland. How these are basically just really good all-American boys with a heart, who are cast into a world of dastardly villains and so sometimes they are forced to bend their principles in such an ugly world, but only so they can do the right thing.

  9. Mandela says:

    I’ve always thought Mohammad Mosaddeq’s story was one of the saddest. My memory was that he was an ardent student of the US constitution and believed in it in much deeper ways than those who governed under it. Many think that it was his idealism as much as his poor judgment that lead to his overthrow. One irony was that he offered to pay the British for the oil they were nationalizing utilizing the way Britain calculated payment when they nationalized industries. He just didn’t understand, he believed the propaganda that the US and UK taught in their schools. Such naiveté wedded to deep idealism and nationalism was bound to lead to a bad end. It would be interesting to hear what he was thinking during those years of house arrest. How much did he understand by the time he died or did he die still an idealist at heart?

  10. 344thBrother says:

    Boring? Never. I’m easily bored by shallowness and group-think and illogical fallacious argumentation and propaganda. I see none of that here or in your podcasts. What I see is a ton of very sharp points being made with excellent examples from your own experience and from your expert analysis and from the other posters as well. Plus I enjoy the camaraderie and the pleasant sharing and polite debate I see in here. It’s the opposite of boring for me.

    Using your building block analogy and following up on my discussion of who I think we should be targeting for criminal charges, coupling that with the obvious pyramidal shape of the NWO structure:

    It’s a lot harder to take down a pyramid one block at a time when you start at the bottom. There are a lot more blocks. The weight of the entire pyramid bears on the foundation. The blocks at the bottom have no relation to the capstone at the top. It takes more labor and more time. The levels above the lower blocks tumble onto your head.

    If however you start at the capstone. The entire management structure below it falls. There may be jockeying for position as the new capstone, but not without destabilizing the rest of the structure and without a lot of work and time in an environment where the up and comers know they’re making themselves vulnerable. Those under the top will be more likely to scatter, or hide, or roll over on those around them.

    So, this is a pretty clunky metaphor I’m using, but basically it’s the old, cut off the head and the body dies. The real enemy is at the head of this colossal pyramid and I believe that is where we need to concentrate our energy. Name names. Make charges. Squeeze them and sweat them and expose them and make them flee for cover. Leave them no safe place or sanctuary. Turn them against each-other. Let their weak and corrupt underlings see that they no longer have top cover and that they are vulnerable. Get them to turn state’s evidence. Imprison them. Vilify their names. Nullify their power. Degrade their support system. Arrest their co-conspirators. Scoff and jeer at them. Revile and deface and laugh at their symbols of power and authority.

    Never let up. Never. Poke them square in their “all seeing eye” by exposing the truth bravely and with the facts and FORCING them to pay for their crimes and pay fully and with the full weight of the law on them and all their criminal buddies.

    To me, this is the only way I can see to actually win without creating a big civil conflict between those at the bottom who are well meaning but who depend on those at the top for their livelihood. (Even though they may not know it.) Keep hammering away at the uneducated masses but keep chipping away at the rulers of the world at the same time. Make THEM fear the knock at the door, not us.

    OK I’m off the soapbox now.
    peace freedom truth justice
    are not just words

  11. doublek321 says:

    The “they would never do that here. They would never do that to us” attitude is incredibly amoral. Do people who think that way feel like it’s okay to kill/main/torture people as long as they’re in some other country that most people probably don’t care about? It’s interesting how being amoral like that would ultimately bring about one’s own destruction (when “they would never do that to us” proves to not be the case). It’s one thing to be a sheep with a good heart but entirely another to be a sheep who only would care about stuff like this if they were affected by it. We have to dig deep and look at ourselves in the mirror for ways that we would accept such stuff (e.g. being “willfully ignorant”).

    • You summed it up perfectly, doublek321. I join you in appropriately characterizing it as amoral. Sometimes it is hard to distinguish between apathy and ‘exceptionalism.’ But in many instances I have observed this exceptionalism as clearly distinguishable. I have lived in Turkey, Iran, Azerbaijan, Vietnam, and for a short while in NZ and AU. I have traveled extensively around the globe. I’d say this level exceptionalism is unique to the United States-Americans. Based on what I have read there are some parallels with Germany under Adolph Hitler:That perception and belief in superiority and exceptionalism that leads to willingness to accept all sorts of monstrosity.

    • CuChulainn says:

      “The “they would never do that here. They would never do that to us” attitude is incredibly amoral.”

      but no more amoral than capitalism. this kind of thing has been happening for not decades but centuries. capitalism is not nasty when it comes to sweat shops, prostitution, human organ, narcotics, and weapons trades, but nice in middle class suburbia and the world of small shopkeepers. which is not to say that capitalism does not have many positive and liberating aspects. but to imagine that one can have one side of this Janus-faced creature without the other requires self-deception.

      exceptionalism rises organically from the need to NOT SEE the contradictions inherent in capitalism. this correlates naturally with the desire of leading capitalists to not be seen (“don’t let them see what we are doing!”)

      as long as we cling to the myth that capitalism is or can be an unmitigated good thing we shall have to deceive ourselves by creating a moral double standard, an ideology of chosenness to rationalize the predations intrinsic to capital. so yes United Statesers are unusually exceptionalist in their thinking (Marx described the USA as a nation with a jewish soul) but they are also unusual in their belief in capitalism. elements of exceptionalism (narcissism, really) can be found in any person or group who identifies with capital.

      • Mandela says:

        Karl Polyani thought that the creation of money, the potential of unlimited wealth, destroyed much of what was good and human in society. Before money the pursuit of wealth creation was limited to that which one could use and protect. Money destroyed the concept of enough for many.

        Capitalism has lead to a dark place, but what alternatives do you propose that don’t, given the current state of humanity? Marxism, socialism, and communism also have brought out the dark side of mankind. I read some Debord on your recommendation, thank you!, and found brilliant philosophical distinctions and insights, but nothing of practical use. I’m sure that I missed much and if you feel moved please summarize, but to move a populace from a world of spectacle where the image, the representation has more meaning than the reality, where all experience has devolved into fragmentation as opposed to wholeness seems as idealistic as Mosaddeq’s vision. A beautiful, true vision, but without possible successful application.

        • Mandela, In 1993 my husband and I went to Russia and lived there for 6-9 months, and worked with a children hospital (St. Petersburg. You are absolutely right about the dark side of mankind on that side as well. Saw and experienced it first hand. It was so bad that makes it impossible for me to compare the two (the extreme here vs there) and determine which one is worse. During my youth (age 9 to 18) I had this ‘romantic’ notion of that side. I’d say 75% what I read was Russian literature (from poetry to philosophy to fiction) … Of course some of it dissipated over the years, but the real awakening came when I went there, lived there and got to see and experience many things first hand, got to know many Russians.

          I agree with Cu re: the poisonous side of excessive greed and consumerism. But when you delve into the alternative models (such as Marxism/communism) you see equally disturbing darkness.

          • You were in Russia during its worst days when the country was being raped from without and within. That time was not representative of anything other than Russia and Russians trying to survive during a brutally orchestrated economic and societal collapse. If you have never read anything that contextualizes that period, you might want to read at least the beginning of the following article
            I know that there is still horrible corruption and propaganda in Russia, sometimes alternative forums are so positive about Russia that I think that they must be Russian tools, but there always has been much beauty and brilliance from there in the arts and the sciences. Don’t let your childhood infatuation be totally colored by your 1993 experience.

        • CuChulainn says:

          thanks Mandela–when Mihiri Lim says that the most important thing is consciousness, i can only agree–this is the fundamental insight of Hegel and Marx.

          western philosophy since Spinoza has defined human being by the will. the rehabilitation of Nietzsche by Walter Kaufman after WWII was no accident–as Lukacs prophetically showed in _the destruction of reason_, Nietzsche and Heidegger are vanguard thinkers of capitalist decadence, intrinsically bound up with the irrationalism of nazism and post-wwii US hegemony. not only in Iran were former nazis instruments of US policy, but also in Greece & in gladio networks generally.

          Hegel and Marx show that what is real in us is not will but consciousness. the dialectic is a liberation from false consciousness, from misperceptions of reality based on partial views.

          Sibel says, if i recall, that USAers are always looking for a white hat, when the reality is that both sides (at least) wear black hats. this is a dialectical insight–any choice, life itself, involves us in negation.

          all of us are more or less unconscious. E. Tolle can talk eloquently about Meister Eckhart, but on current events he advises us to trust the BBC. for most mention of Marx seems to evoke as Pavlovian a response as criticism of Greenwald at MoA, as though one’s impression of the Soviet Union were some reflection on Marx, as though John Calvin’s stock exchange was a reflection on Jesus Christ.

          one can only repeat what Marx himself affirmed, that the only thing he knew for sure was that he was no Marxist, that Bolshevism was not merely the antithesis of Marx’ thinking but in fact the most effective weapon capitalism has deployed against it. but what good does it do to talk about Marx with those who not only don’t read him, but are convinced they understand him? one might as well learn about Islam from Sean Hannity. this is a shame because, despite Marx’ own premature activism, his work is more directly relevant to the 21st century than it was to the 19th.

          i mentioned Marx because his line of thinking seems useful for understanding USA exceptionalism. Debord is more useful than any contemporary i know for understanding the world we inhabit. without such awareness we cannot act, we can only react.

          • “… but what good does it do to talk about Marx with those who not only don’t read him, but are convinced they understand him? one might as well learn about Islam from Sean Hannity.”- Point well-made; rock solid logic applied.

          • Mandela says:

            Hegel and Marx show that what is real in us is not will but consciousness. the dialectic is a liberation from false consciousness, from misperceptions of reality based on partial views.

            Well, CuChulainn, the above is also a good summary of my understanding of human reality, but I must confess ignorance that Marx and Hegel also thought that way. Obviously Debord’s writing shows that he understands that. Thank you for sharing this. Any references that would show me how they wrote about this? I hope that they realized that they too suffered, as we all do, from false consciousness from misperceptions of reality based on partial understanding.

          • CuChulainn says:

            Assume man to be man and his relationship to the world to be a human one: then you can exchange love only for love, trust for trust, etc. If you want to enjoy art, you must be an artistically cultivated person; if you want to exercise influence over other people, you must be a person with a stimulating and encouraging effect on other people. Every one of your relations to man and to nature must be a specific expression, corresponding to the object of your will, of your real individual life. If you love without evoking love in return – that is, if your loving as loving does not produce reciprocal love; if through a living expression of yourself as a loving person you do not make yourself a beloved one, then your love is impotent – a misfortune.|

          • Thank you for the link CuChulainn. I like the last paragraph which you pasted below the link the best. The rest which makes money the problem, not so much. With that sort of reasoning we can make guns, food, sex, booze, and all sorts of things which can be misused into villainous poster boys. As you said the problem is liberation from false consciousness and I would add in relation to money, power, and all of life. Thank you again for opening me to this aspect of Marxism.

          • CuChulainn says:

            Mandela, this statement by Alexei Mozgovoi– is really a gloss on Marx’ treatise on money linked above. no wonder they tried to kill him yesterday–

          • Just finished watching it for the second time. Thanks for the link, CuChu.

          • Mandela says:

            If Mozgovoi is the representative of a modern day Marxist, then I’m impressed. At least in this video, he is a revolutionary with an understanding and vision of what is happening in the world, what is important for a better future, and what is fueling the stand and the risks that he is taking. Thanks Cu! It is inspiring to see that there are people like him in the world.

          • steven hobbs says:

            Thank you for the reference (Lukacs) . My Political Philosophy folder grows more rapidly than time, after ProbCause addiction. Philosophy as poetry is well appreciated in authors’ and readers’ context. I’ve found value in both Nietzsche and Heidegger, and recognize their expropriation and their daemonic possessions.

            On a cursory examination of Lukacs: “It now grows quite clear how Nietzsche carried on the irrationalist tradition in comparison to Schopenhauer and Kierkegaard. These authors, in contesting idealist dialectics as the highest form of the bourgeois conception of progress, had likewise to oppose the dialectical self-agitation of Being and to fall back on a contrastingly mythical, only intuitively apprehensible Being.”

            IMHO he’s correct in his criticism of Nietzsche (and the even more) the inscrutable Heidegger. What Lukacs is missing (maybe he covered it someplace else) is what now we have evidence of from AI, cognitive science, and fMRI 1) learning and knowledge are image based; 2) knowledge is comprehended metaphorically (basis of stories that persuade and evoke emotion); 3) the mythopoetic is profoundly integrated into primitive and advanced brain structures and activities.

            Both Nietzsche and Heidegger would have done well to read Martin Buber, just as Freud would have done well to read Durkheim.

  12. SIBEL: As I was listening to you I was thinking about what is now going on in Kiev, Ukraine. The madness of those bloody days about one year ago when the Nazi “Right Sector” jumped in; and there were hired shooters(snipers) firing at anyone in the crowd. Several days of explosive violence with small false flags flying every which way. At the very early start of this mayhem there was the neo-con Victoria Nuland passing out cookies to insane Nazis! And pitiful John McCain giving high fives to these Nazi thugs. SICK!!
    Victoria Nuland is married to another neocon, Robert Kagan –another f**king psychopath with zero conscience(zero conscience is part of the psychopathy!–an important psychological dynamic for them) who is thrilled by this bloody chaos. Well it turns out that Robert Kagan has a brother, “Fred Kagan is another neo-con foreign policy launderer…and Fred Kagan’s wife, Kimberly Kagan has been involved in helping to formulate disastrous US policies for the military occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.” Wayne Madsen(12-12-13) continues with this WHOPPER of a Quote: “No family in the history of the U.S. with the possible exception of JOHN FOSTER DULLES AND ALLEN DULLES, has had more blood on its hands than have the KAGANS.” There you have it! In one sentence Madsen makes an incredibly timely statement about DEEP STATE creatures! I was amazed. The 1953 Iran coup d etat was a “watershed” event for the psychopathic evolution of the CIA and the DEEP STATE—a wicked template, if you will.

    With regard to the difficult question of “Why can’t the masses–Americans in this case–see what was and is going on?’ “What is wrong with them?” The “best” answer would require at least 80 pages to even get into it. Why? Well, for me, everything we do begins with the BRAIN. All the things you mentioned; denial, fear, conformity, cognitive dissonance, indifference, apathy, etc., etc. I had to learn this the hard way. I realized that I had to do more research in neuroscience. Believe it or not, this question, is still being studied. Why do people vote AGAINST their best interests? Why does one’s inner programming by family, tribe, MSM, etc. create simple raw emotions which trump logic for soooo many?? I cannot begin a serious answer other than to suggest to people similar to us that they have to go deeper into this question. I have known many a radical who gets pissed straight up-immediately when they are convinced the people should act decently when given the facts!
    Here’s a fact: an estimated 203 million people were killed, slaughtered in wars and violence in the 20th century!! And my guess would be a couple of BILLION either wounded or left with PTSD. For me, this raises very serious questions about our species. I’m starting to favor canine lupus(dogs) over homo sapiens. I have never heard of a dog deep state(I have to use humor at times, otherwise I would’ve been insane or, most likely dead(shot) by now.)

    • 344thBrother says:

      Hey ron.
      Let’s not forget that billions have been spent since WW2 and the Nazi mind control experiments on exactly how to MAKE us act against our own best interests and all the rest you mentioned. America has been under attack mentally more so than any other country. We’re basically like a bunch of lab rats in this country. So far we’ve been mostly left alone as far as dealing with war on this continent and we’ve been prevented from knowing what all our running on the wheel that generates dollars for the MIC is doing in other countries. So, we’re kept in the dark, fed BS, actively manipulated and our money is stolen to use to kill people in other countries.

      I can’t figure out exactly why the powers that be wanted to shock us with 911, it seems like they could have just let us keep running on that wheel forever. Now some of the rats are chewing on the bars.

      We’ve been heavily influenced for over 50 years, it takes time to undo that programming, but some of us are doing it. Have heart!

    • steven hobbs says:

      “Why do people vote AGAINST their best interests?”

      Let’s examine the question “why?” Human behavior is over determined. There are too many factors influencing human organisms to identify all the determinants. So, whatever you come up with as an answer to “why” regarding human behavior will be lacking.

      The problem with “why?” (regarding human behavior) is it (usually) assumes a linear causal logic. Works well for billiards, but not humans. If you ask “why” of someone usually it’s assumed that there is something wrong. Otherwise you would not be asking the question. If you have an assumptions of linear causal logic, and something wrong, what do you arrive at other than a whole bunch of wrong things. Not going to make you feel better (exception: confirmation bias), or be particularly helpful. The one place that “why?” may be helpful is with motivation, instead simply ask, “What motivated you?” What did you have in mind? What were you intending?

      It appears, from cognitive science, that people vote against their personal economic interests because of a larger mythopoetic identity crises that requires them to act in a ‘moral’ manner with their votes. In this instance maintaining a sense of self, a ‘moral’ self, trumps economics.

  13. The false-flag terrorism show they’ve been staging for decades puts me in mind of the WWE. Imagine the WWE incarnation of ISIS into a cartoonish character, ‘ICE-COLD’ ISIS, with a beheading knife in one hand and a flamethrower in the other. ARMAGEDDON ‘AL’ QAEDA, with a box cutter in one hand and an RPG in the other. TERRIBLE ‘TALI’ BAN, with an IED in one hand and a rope in the other which is dragging around a young girl who’s being perpetually flogged for daring to go to school.

    We’re supposed to stand on our seats and boo and hiss as they enter the ring. Then comes Captain America, to body slam them over and over while we cheer. His victory is never quite complete though, and the bad guys crawl and slink away to regroup and put on another matinee show tomorrow.

    I could go on and on with the WWE analogies to characters AND enthusiastic ‘fans’, but I just don’t have the heart for it.

  14. Castillonis says:

    Thank you Sibel for producing these excellent podcasts. I am giddy with excitement every time I see a new blog entry. Please keep them coming. I will try and make a better effort to contribute to the conversation. ( My boss hounds me at all hours of the day. )

    Pearl Harbor / domestic fodder and subterfuge
    I highly recommend the book and audio book ‘Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor’ by Robert Stinnett. He discusses McCollum’s eight acts of provocation memo to FDR. The fact that all of the Japanese codes had been broken. One admiral refused to move the Pacific fleet to Honolulu and was forced to resign. Admiral Husband Kimmel and General Walter Short who were commanders in Hawaii were not given intelligence about potential attacks.

    Chile 9/11 1973
    Chapter 5 and 6 of Christopher Hitchen’s ‘The Trial of Henry Kissinger” covers the Chilean coup of 1973. Chapter 6 mentions the release of agency documents in September 2000 that were required by the **Hinchey ammendment to the Intelligence Act for 2000**. There is so much I could say, but it would be better to read those two chapter, or even the entire book. The kidnapping and death of General Rene Schneider who was the Chief of the Chilean General Staff who does not believe in interfering with elections and supports the constitution. The lack of support from the outgoing president Eduardo Frei a Christian Democrat ( one of the three parties ). These coups in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay resulted in military dictatorships until 1985.

    Also, wikipedia mentions the 1949 Syrian coup with support from the America mission and the agency. Here is an article written by Clark University history professor Douglas Little.

    I listened to a significant amount (chpt 5) of the Stephen Kinzer’s ‘The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen …’ by Stephen Kinzer. The interview on Fresh Air by Terry Gross is much different than the reading of the book. If I was not so interested in the topic, I would have stopped listening. It had the tone of a 1940s Air Force ganda film. Eventually, I started to benefit from the audio book.

    I have read about half of Douglas Valentine’s excellent book on the Pheonix program, but I am starting to have difficulties keeping the Vietnamese names organized just like I did when I first read Agee’s book when I was a young teenager. ( I had not learned Spanish yet ) Ironically, I pulled Agee’s paperback off of a shelf of free paperbacks. It has taken much life experience to peel back more and more layers of the Onion.

    It is difficult to watch what is happening in eastern Ukraine. I have an aquaintence who is from that area and fully aware of the situation. Other friends who are from Russian and China, did not appreciate the true face of the empire. One of my Russian aquaintences is starting to appreciate what I tried to explain.

    Also, many of the people who reside in the newer developments in the hills of Bend, do not have much in common with long time residents. They tend to be very affluent and would not necessarily welcome more than ripples in the water. You might find more understanding people in the Portland area.

    • Castillonis, thank you for sharing the book list- You hit 4 out of 4: great books; eye-openers.

      NW Bend: ‘Little boxes, on the hillside, little boxes …’ Every time I encounter a resident, the tune keeps playing inside my head-over, over and over again!!!;-) I’ve never seen such a concentration of numb-dumb-amoral people.

    • I have an inlaw whose folks are from western Ukraine. I cant talk to him about this subject at all. He wont hear it. Many Ukrainians are still stuck in the mindset of what Stalin did to their country.

      On the subject of books, “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” is a good summary of this methodology. I think the model may have been tweaked since then, but this gives a good insight into how it was done in South America and Saudi Arabia. (I dont know if this is a cliche book or not, but no one has mentioned it in this thread so I thought i might)

      • CuChulainn says:

        yes Mike, i have lost friends from Ukraine over this issue–the fascist culture found in Lvov is heavily represented in the US and especially Canada; emigré culture esp. in North America is generally right wing, not just among ukrainians. but there are many in these areas of ukraine who do not share this radical ideology, and a few have even made their way to Donbass
        the background, systematically obscured in the western media, is the memory of WWII–those whose grandparents fought with the nazis are now in power, while those whose grandparents fought with the Soviets generally are not enthusiastic about the new regime. the destruction not only of Lenin statues but also of WWII memorials commemorating the USSR victory is a hallmark of the new government, and the May 9 celebration is a point of contention–here the Ukie nationalist appointed mayor of Kherson tried to persuade the crowd on May 9 2014 that Hitler came to free them from the communists, the crowd is not buying it– as Sibel’s mentionened re. Iran, the US has systematically relied on Nazi supporters–

  15. Mihiri Lim says:

    Sibel- Thank you for all these invaluable podcasts. I read all comments and listen to all the podcasts but don’t often comment. English is not my first language so I also need to pluck up the courage to participate. It is disheartening to see the same theme repeated over and over again around countless parts of the globe by the same powers without any hindrance. This is because the minds of the the masses has been prepared to accept these for many generations without question through media, education, encouraged apathy and induced fear. I have shared much of this information with my friends and family but to limited effect. Questions that comes back often are “ yes I can see this- its awful but what can we do? How are we going to oppose these powers? Even if we do topple them after much pain and suffering through revolting what happens after that? Who can do better governing a country? Won’t they end up the same corrupt powers that we toppled? If not capitalism, socialism or anarchy then what will work? Doesn’t power always corrupt and used to accumulate more power and control over its subjects as repeatedly shown throughout the history of the world? I have to say I falter at this point and say that it not the ideology rather it is the people’s interpretation of that with their limited consciousness and awareness that lead to extremism. There’s nothing wrong with all existing ideologies and structures and agencies in themselves but what is missing is the enlightened human being, the human being who sees clearly.

    • Mandela says:

      Mihiri, welcome and thank you for your beautiful post. It may have been challenging to write, but as a native English speaker I can say that you express yourself very well!

      Your friends and family ask wonderful questions, at least I think so because I share them, each and every one of them. My personal answer to these questions is to stay informed and hopefully figure out how to stay at least one step ahead of what is happening so as to protect my family and loved ones and maybe if possible contribute to positive change with others who understand what is happening. One possible answer to your friends and family might be to invite them to join you here so that they could better understand the forces that so disturb them and join others who also deeply want answers to these questions as they explore searching for directions to take.

      • ‘Mihiri, welcome and thank you for your beautiful post. It may have been challenging to write, but as a native English speaker I can say that you express yourself very well!’- I agree, Mihiri. Plus, it is not limited to the two of us, we have dozens of members from non-English countries; Turkey, Iran, Holland, France, Slovenia …

        One of the hardest thing (for me) has been the ‘idioms.’ Interestingly most idioms are used for the exact same meaning/conclusion globally, in different languages, but with slight variations. So, when I switch between four languages (it happens automatically; inside my head), ‘funny’ things happen. Sometimes the brain plugs in a different word, but with the same application/meaning. For ex: the English idiom of ‘Pot & kettle’: Pot says the kettle is black. That same idiom is used in Farsi & Turkish (Iran-Turkey). In one of them it involves two pots, and there is no kettle; something like a pot says to another pot … Or, the idiom ‘Right Arm man.’ The same idiom is used but in one language it is ‘right hand man.’ What happens with multi-lingual people is this: when you are talking spontaneously (or writing), subconsciously, your brain does this switching and shuffling (your brain is simultaneously thinking in 3 or 4 languages even though you are speaking/writing only in one), and often, results in some funny/strange outcomes. I may be saying, ‘oh yah, that person was my right-hand man when I worked there.’ Native English speakers go like, ‘what the heck was that?!’ but they usually get what it is you are trying to express. A few days ago I was writing and put down ‘there is more than one way to skin a CHICKEN.’ Of course, my husband (native English speaker who speaks only English-despite all my attempts) found it ‘cute’ and ‘hilarious.’ After I told him about the existence of this same idiom in another language but with an involvement of a ‘chicken’ the conversation took a whole different turn—– He countered it by saying, ‘well, if they use ‘chicken’ shouldn’t they be using ‘plucking’ instead of ‘skinning.’

        Anyhow. I know it is totally outside our discussion area, and some of you may be wondering: ‘why is she sharing these details here?!!’ The reason: during our discussions here you will be encountering those ‘peculiar/funny’ idioms from me- so I just wanted to explain it little bit;-)

        Finally, re: ‘Your friends and family’: One approach that has worked (a bit) for me: give them little bites rather than a big chunk. It is similar to gorging someone with too much food all at once (especially if it is a totally new dish that they have never tried before; let’s say spicy ‘Indian’ food)- the chances of throwing up is reduced and it gives them a chance to gradually acquire a taste for the dish. Example: I casually show them PNAC and talk about it a little, and then move to 9/11, and say: ‘Isn’t that amazing. Here it is, a year or two after, they got exactly what they asked for to get what they want. Is it all coincidence? Luck?’ Then, if they are receptive, start sharing the $$$$$$$$$ that came with it: the spending for XYZ went from this to this; the XYZ war/overthrow that they specifically urged for took place ### months after this … I call it ‘the warm up.’ I use that approach, and I provide them with ‘Classified Woman,’ and sometimes it works. At least it gets some of those rusty wheels turning.

  16. 344thBrother says:

    It can’t happen here… Well, lets give the Nazis that we imported after WW2 some credit. Dr. Joseph Mengele was the Nazi Doctor who would stand at the unloading dock and point right or left (Gas chamber-Internment camp) and who also kept the twins for his own personal heinous experiments. He was a model of personal cleanliness and Doctorly concern while he would remove the breasts from one twin and graft them onto another. (For instance). And, his “Patients” idolized him, worshiped him and feared him at the same time. Read “The Nazi doctors” for lots of details.

    Mengele was directed by people within the USA while he was in Germany, released from prison during Operation Paperclip and came to the USA to work at Cold Springs Harbor for years until it got too hot and he had to flee to Paraguay I believe, where he still may reside, probably somewhere near where the Bush family and Sun Myung Moon have their haciendas.

    So, point being, take Mengele and his mind control/fear and horror based techniques, add TV which was used first and most ubiquitously in the USA, complete with the subliminal text images implanted in the sign off/Star Spangled Banner (I’m not kidding) every night with people nearly unconscious on their couches, control the media so people can’t see what’s happening in other countries, lie like hell through the media and the politicians “Americans are gooooood, Americans are kiiiiiiiiind Americans are speciallllllll” over and over and over for 50 years and then when the internet starts up and some people start getting a clearer story, demonize them, shout over them, minimize them, threaten them, arrest and kill them as necessary.

    So, I don’t blame the “Sheeple” they’ve been stampeded and bamboozled and barked at and lulled to sleep all these years and that programming is incredibly hard to reverse. The more times you repeat a message the deeper it gets implanted. Also proven during MKUltra and all the other MK secret programs that followed.

    One of the things that Aldous Huxley had to say that was interesting to me was that 20% of the world’s population can be hypnotized literally by the snap of one’s fingers *snap* and 20% cannot be hypnotized without extraordinary measures (Torture? Trauma based mind control ala 911?) and the other 60% can be hypnotized by the use of repetitive and strong techniques as long as you keep at it. This was demonstrated in the money back offers that were included in the subliminal self improvement tapes (Stop smoking now! Lose Weight! Feel better about yourself!). They found that 20% sent the tapes back with no results, 60% said they got some relief and were encouraged to “Persist!” and 20% had excellent results.

    Point being, with all the subliminals and sleepy TV watchers how many of the so called sheeple were actually hypnotized and mind controlled… “By the rockets red glaaaaaare the bombs bursting in aiiiiiiiiiir gave proof through the night that OUR flag was still there…” It brings tears to your eyes until you realize that they had subliminals running behind the words of the song scrolling along in front of Americas sleepy eyes. And the idea that people won’t do anything under hypnosis that they wouldn’t do when they were awake is just ludicrous. Seriously. Make them think that they’re under a threat or that they’re patriotic or saving the world and they’ll do what they’re programmed to do and not even know it.

    Then there’s all these people acting out insanely bizarre and violent dream states under the influence of Prozac class SSRI drugs and usually not remembering what they did… Coincidence?

    Ugh my soapbox is collapsing. I apologize. These things just anger me.

    So, Exceptional-ism, it’s been programmed into those of us who accept the programming, and like it or not we’re stuck with them. For the 60% who may not have been as heavily influenced, there’s still hope for them but they have to keep hearing the message until there’s a *SNAP* in their mind and they wake up. And those at the top, they are the ones who need to fall for it.

    So, I don’t blame Americans, while the rest of the world was under attack with bombs, Americans were under attack by Media deception, by MKUltra mind control techniques and subliminals from the Television, by everything in our “Exceptional society” telling us over and over how special we were and how much everyone loved us. All thanks to the CIA and Operation Paperclip and the people who directed, funded and ran those ops.


    • Thanks for bringing this up, Dave. I too have developed a particular aversion to those who use the term “sheeple”. Yes, ultimately, we are each responsible, but what you point out is the level of outright deception and propaganda that is constantly at work against one gaining an understanding of how things really operate and the dark alliances involved. Without empathy we are no better than those we wish to expose and dis-empower, and using a term like “sheeple” plays right into that. We all awake in our own time and it’s not a competition, but a goal.

      • Dave & Peter: I think it is a very important point. While I agree with you on: name-calling can only backfire + in ‘some’ cases we are dealing with the ‘victims’ not the ’cause’ + It shouldn’t be about establishing ‘superiority’ or competition …

        I think I am a good example of that ‘awakening’ process. Sure: I had all the experiences (internationally), activism background, academic credentials … but was I naïve or what? How many was I wrong during the WB journey? Dozens of times. With all its corruption and past record (I knew all about it): I actually worked hard to accomplish things via ‘Congress.’ So yes, awakening is a process (but it has to start somewhere).

        With that said: there are clear instances when choices are made consciously and intentionally. And in some of these cases it boils down to ‘accepting responsibility.’ I have problem with people who shrug all responsibilities, ‘They are doing it. There is nothing I can do or say that would change anything.’ It may sound harsh, but I do not have any tolerance for people who always shrug responsibility. It is not only in politics- it is with everything. I know mothers who are fully aware of all the ‘side effects/damages’ of arbitrary medication, yet, despite the knowledge they medicate their kids (it calms her down and makes my life easier). I don’t care what justification she or others may be using- I directly blame those and find them ‘responsible.’ I won’t let anyone defend them with lame lines: ‘They were brainwashed by the advertisement and big pharma’ or ‘they are part of a bigger trend’ or …

        I guess it comes down to ‘justly’ balancing the two: tolerance and understanding (forgivingly) vs demanding responsibility and accountability.

        • What it comes down to in terms of responsibility, in probably over-simple terms, is the genuinely unaware as one category. That would include children, the “slow”, and certain personality types which are simply incapable of dealing with the full spectrum of reality.

          Another category of responsibility is those who should be aware, but are keeping themselves inside a bubble of denial. Their logic is basically thus;” As long as reality allows my bubble to remain intact, I’m entitled to stay in it.” As if that is some rule of the game. Bombardment with sufficiently strong evidence can often dismantle those bubbles, at which point the individual falls through to the reality level where we live.

          At this level where we dwell, all acknowledge more or less the same grim reality. The differentiation at this level is how the individual engages the reality, or not. Some disengage themselves by shrugging their shoulders and saying resistance is futile, the bastards have the game rigged from birth to death, might as well go through life with no expectations of positive change. I’ve found these disengaged types are often the ones who most virulently resent and attack those who attempt to engage reality head-on. It’s somewhat of a death camp mentality – Be quiet! Keep your head down and your mouth shut, so we all will perhaps have one more day of subsistence.

          If only I knew how to make it very much worse for everyone with a snap of my fingers. Sincerely. Because that is really our best hope in the short term – a gross miscalculation on the part of the scum-on-top, which bursts all the bubbles and forces the disengaged to engage as part of a survival response.

          You’re probably thinking, hold on, no need for Armageddon, we should stick to raising awareness and winning bit by bit. YES! By all means, because any success in this endeavor constitutes more pressure applied to the scum-on-top, which in turn may lead to that gross miscalculation. Every step taken in the right direction gets us closer to a threshold we probably won’t perceive until after we cross it.

          People with young children and people who just want to be left alone in their little enclaves have a strong rationale for resenting those of us who would push their world over the edge. This consequence is a core issue of our responsibility. It’s an inescapable question to be faced – can one who seeks to upend the world as it is, afford empathy for those who unwillingly suffer consequences?

          I know where I am on that. I think I know where Sibel is, or at least where she’s headed. Curious to hear others, particularly in terms of if they choose to respond with one syllable, or trace out a line of nuance.

          • Mandela says:

            Knarf asked, “It’s an inescapable question to be faced – can one who seeks to upend the world as it is, afford empathy for those who unwillingly suffer consequences?” Hell yes! History is full of disastrous revolutions in which it was felt that the ends justified the means. Where a self proclaimed elite knew what was best for all and became worse than their former oppressors. Those revolutions that have been at least somewhat successful worked to create a just world for all citizens. When empathy is lost so is humanity.

          • I’m inclined to agree with Mandela here, Knarf. In my opinion, we must never lose our moral integrity and our sense of empathy for others.

            But I would add this nuance; seeking to ‘upend the world as it is’ does not necessitate having no empathy for those ‘who unwillingly suffer [the] consequences’ of that upending.

            We can surely do both.

            And to your comment, Knarf, ‘If only I knew how to make it very much worse for everyone with a snap of my fingers’, I would respond… although I agree with you that an en masse dislodging of comfort zones would force ‘all the disengaged to engage as part of a survival response’ in the ‘reality’ as we here claim to see it, I do not agree that we should hope for or wish that upon others. This is a moral point of difference for me.

            I prefer Sibel’s position which seems or be to do that which is in our power to do.

    • Well-made points, Dave.

      But you see the circle? We keep coming back to: indoctrination/programming via schools and academics, media, entertainment paired with institutions for controlled opposition (For the 90% of the 20% who are resistant to the hypnosis) … Seeing this, well, does it lighten up the dark tunnel in which we are maneuvering? Are we going back to: concentrate on each individual, our children, those we have some level of connection to? Or, find ways to cut the snake’s head? Starting from the bottom and put all concentration there, or the top, or both?

    • Dave, do you have any suggested links or books which go into the ‘star-spangled banner’ subliminal messaging? I’ve never encountered this before and it interests me.

      • I am (a) not Dave and (b) ignorant of the S-SB subliminal messages, but would like to recommend to everyone the excellent book on the brainwashing power of TV (with or without subliminal effects), aptly named “4 Arguments for the Elimination of Television” by J. Mander. It is old, probably suppressed, but well worth searching for!

    • steven hobbs says:

      Thank you adding: “One of the things that Aldous Huxley had to say that was interesting to me was that 20% of the world’s population can be hypnotized literally by the snap of one’s fingers *snap* and 20% cannot be hypnotized without extraordinary measures (Torture? Trauma based mind control ala 911?) and the other 60% can be hypnotized by the use of repetitive and strong techniques as long as you keep at it. This was demonstrated in the money back offers that were included in the subliminal self improvement tapes (Stop smoking now! Lose Weight! Feel better about yourself!). They found that 20% sent the tapes back with no results, 60% said they got some relief and were encouraged to “Persist!” and 20% had excellent results.” It’s near Lakoff’s cognitive research and fMRI conclusion: 26% on side of fear based, 26% open minded, and a great open middle with complex metaphoric and moral maps.

      From my familiarity with this topic, “And the idea that people won’t do anything under hypnosis that they wouldn’t do when they were awake is just ludicrous,” is not claimed by hypnosis researchers. What is claimed: hypnosis (alone) is inadequate for manipulating subjects to violate strongly held values. Mind control studies, however, have demonstrated that if an environment is controlled ethical values can be violated, i.e., “brainwashing.”

      • steven,
        As demonstrated by the Milgram experiments, most people will behave in an unnatural, even heinous fashion in obedience to a perceived authority. To include NOT thinking critically when the authority of the media and government sends them the message that questioning the official narrative is “kooky”.

        I don’t know if this kind of influence is properly categorized as mind control, when it amounts to nothing more than taking advantage of spinelessness. I think it’s part and parcel of learned helplessness, such as, “I didn’t want to do it, but I had to go by the rules and instructions I was given, you know…”

        I have a friend who knows as well as I that we are swimming in a sea of lies. He’s committed to playing the role of helpless victim, and as such he’s not interested in pursuing even the tiny rebellion of asking questions. Gaining the truth imparts responsibility, but he rationalizes that his self-imposed ignorance gives him a pass.


        • steven hobbs says:

          All good points. The pervasive indoctrination toward obedience and submission potentates the demand characteristics of even common social interactions. What is expected (by dominant power) to think, believe, and be curious about is known and felt. Some, like your friend, recognize the ruse and think going against group authority not worth the cost. There are others who are will-fully ignorant and have an inkling that something is going on, but will never look behind the curtain. And, still others still literally can not see whats staring them in the face, due to the power of cognitive dissonance.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Knarf & 344,
      As a student, and professional practitioner, of hypnosis I’d like to point out that Huxley’s views are dated and have some inaccuracies. Also, I may have left the wrong impression when I mentioned the approximate 26% fear based and 26% open minded as related to personality. These numbers are not to be confused with hypnotizablity to which Huxley was rightfully referring (Stanford research). The 26% refers to brain structure and activity — not hypnotizablity.

      For the purposes of our dialogue my preference is not to conflate “hypnosis” with “persuasion,” “indoctrination,” or “mind-control” (brainwashing). Each of these is distinct, but overlapping sets of knowledge base, experiences, and procedures. “Hypnosis,” alone is inadequate to describe them all.

  17. Sibel,

    I don’t think you can select one reason Americans ignore the truth of what is happening around them. All the examples you stated in this episode are certainly involved. How to overcome this situation is thus not easy to find in one solution.

    Most of what you covered in these 13 segments was known to me – gathered from various sources over many years. I say “known” to me in the context of reading a historical document. Certainly growing up in the US, since its beginning, was being bombarded by examples of exceptionalism, and being told that this is the bastion of freedom – a place that the whole world would love to imitate or migrate to. It’s a hard lesson to learn – that this is not the case. One needs to experience dialog with real people from other nations and their views – not just read texts. As able as I am to digest historical documents on some level in a personal way, its not enough to really slam it home to most in a personal way, unless you can relate to the ‘others’ as real people with the same basic beliefs and needs to protect their family and provide them with nourishment (both physical and spiritual), and medical services, as well as loving their own countries. What I am trying to say here is your approach this time, your vocal podcast, as a person who has wide-ranging experience with other counties and belief systems, brings the message home. I find your words much more personal and powerful in this way than simply reading a text. It’s coming from a real person. Some people relate to audio stimulation more, some with visual. Often the combination is very powerful – as in your series of video’s on Gladio.

    It has been said, correctly I think, that Americans have devolved to the point where they want to see a good story, not ‘news’ – to gather their thoughts and emotions from movies or TV shows. Making the sickening Shock & Awe news shows certainly created a lot of gee-wiz interest and funneled thinking to the good guys taking out those WMD’s everyone knew were in Iraq. It was the same with 9/11 of course. Who can forget the images? My point is perhaps to use this idea as an opening – a way of reaching people. The so-called “9/11 Truth Movement” really took off with free or very low cost DVD’s being distributed with a lot of different theories than the government theory. Too many of us smelled the powerful odor of mendacity floating around in the smoke of the images first presented to us. Many who to this day do not know exactly what went on that day, because of those other theories, rightly conclude the government’s conspiracy theory is the weakest. Is there a way to get this info out there in a similar fashion? A full report of all the Gladio episodes on DVD? A CD version of these episodes when concluded? Members purchasing them and passing them out to those they feel need to know?

    I thought it worth asking. Some people are great presenters because of something in their voice, or personality, that rings true to others – that makes a human link immediately and personally. I think we have all seen or listened to those people. Many have made a fortune with that gift. Most actors have wished they had this gift of “presence”, because those who have it, be it on stage or film, have all eyes focus on them intently when they enter a scene and speak. Actually, Sibel, you are also one of those people. You have a gift of talking truth to those who respect truth. It’s in your voice and in your “presence” on video. Can we use that to get the interest out there to non-members?

    • “It has been said, correctly I think, that Americans have devolved to the point where they want to see a good story, not ‘news’ – to gather their thoughts and emotions from movies or TV shows.” – so very true.

      DVD & CD: I think it is a great idea. I will definitely make our podcast series available in CD. On it. As for the Gladio series, DVD, I’ve wanted to do it for over a year, and been trying to get Corbett to do it. He owns the series (it was for his site, created by him), and we need to have him on board to make it happen. It is a shame that it has not happened to date. I will send him an e-mail/reminder.

  18. Once in a while I get a comment or a note/e-mail that makes my day (and coming days).

    Today I got an e-mail from a BFP community member. Here is a partial excerpt:

    On a positive note, a protest I helped plan and which in part was inspired by your Probable Cause podcast, is gaining some traction:

    See, what I mean? I don’t care about the ‘magnitude’ or immediate results z(or lack of). What I care: people trying, each in their own way. That, instead of doing and saying nothing.

    • Sibel, I think this is an appropriate quote from journalist John Pilger along these lines:

      “The responsibility of the rest of us is clear. It is to identify and expose the reckless lies of warmongers and never to collude with them. It is to re-awaken the great popular movements that brought a fragile civilisation to modern imperial states. Most important, it is to prevent the conquest of ourselves: our minds, our humanity, our self respect. If we remain silent, victory over us is assured, and a holocaust beckons.” —

      Maybe we should all start wearing “Guantanimo orange” all the time until due process is restored?

      “Orange is the new Black(site)”

      • All wear Guantanamo orange” …I like that suggestion, even though I don’t like orange!
        I hope this isn’t out of line, but in the interest of not colluding with the warmongers I am going to recommend, because I believe it is urgent (especially if you have children) that everyone get involved in the fight against geoengineering, which poses an imminent threat, including that of dumbing us all down (as a direct result of adding aluminum and other heavy metals to our biosphere). I honestly don’t think there will be a planet left to fight for, if we don’t turn this runaway train around soon. is the best resource for information. And one doesn’t need to be an expert to understand the issue.

    • Great news Sibel – and thanks to the Worcester Protesters for their efforts!

    • That is great news, Sibel. Congrats to the Worcester crew.

  19. Mike Mejia says:

    Another excellent podcast! As long as we’re on the subject of 9/11, I wonder what anyone here might think of the work of Daniel Hopsicker on the topic? I tend to stay away from theories of controlled demolitions and remotely controlled airplanes and stick with the mainstream stuff like Sibel, Paul Thompson etc,, but I have to admit Hopsicker’s work had me intrigued back in 2004) I never bought his 9/11 book though because a lot of his work seemed to be based on local rumors and whisperings in Venice, FL, and I just wasn’t sure what could really be verified.

    One of the prinicpal claims Hopsicker made was that the guy who ran the flight school where the hijackers trained, Rudi Dekkers, was involved in drug smuggling and may have had intelligence connections, thus opening the possibility the hijackers themselves were U.S. intelligence assets While interesting,.it didn’t seem to me Hopsicker had much proof of that claim at the time, so I never explored it much further. Just a few days ago though, I did a Google search on Rudi Dekkers, and it turns out Dekkers was arrested for attempted drug smuggling in 2012, exactly as Hopsicker’s work would have prredicted.
    To me, this gives Hopsicker new found ‘street cred’ and I am going to buy his 9/11 book before it goes out of print. Has anyone else here read it?

    • Mike, the drug connection was based on making solid connections.

      I may not know Hopsicker well (or his other work), but he did some amazing work on Boston Bombing. He was the first to expose the documented/evidenced connection between Graham Fuller (Welcome to my SSP Gallery;-) and the uncle … That was a bullet proof journalistic work:

      • Ronald Orovitz says:

        Oh yes, I recently read Hopsicker’s “Barry and the Boys” and “Welcome to Terrorland” -the first of which was published just before 9/11and for the latter, Hopsicker had the benefit of a front row seat since he lives in the vicinity of these airports which are a crucial part of the infrastructure of the deep state networks that encompass drug-running, terror-patsy priming, as well as extraordinary renditions (in one of his later scoops, Hopsicker found that the same plane involved in a drug bust was also used for extraordinary renditions) and even pedophile networks – the latter is suggested in a recent story of Wayne Madsen’s where he noted the coincidence of the same tail number for different aircraft, one which belonged to Jeffery Epstein and the other being contracted to Dyncorp from the State dept.

        I believe both books are still available from Hopsicker’s website, though “Barry and the Boys” is a bit pricey, but it is well worth it to read both as together they demonstrate the continuity of these deep state networks from those involved in the Kennedy assassination to Watergate, Iran-contra, 9/11 and finally with his recent scoops, to the Boston Marathon bombing.

        One complaint about Hopsicker however: he is too dismissive of other researchers work, particularly of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, even as he admits his non-expertise in this field. This is why your (Sibel) stance on this controversy is appreciated -you basically say ‘I’m not an expert on this so I can’t say one way or another’.

        Hopsicker as a journalist in SW Florida has the benefit of a front row seat to one aspect of the networks; Sibel as a former FBI translator and through NSWBC has the benefit of a front row seat to other aspects of the networks; Wayne Madsen as a former NSA employee and his many sources has a front row seat to yet other aspects, and so on…

        For us – meaning the curious public, though we be too far and few in between, who want to see these networks uncovered – it is a matter of synoptically combining the reports coming in from these various “front-row seats” and in the process getting a clearer picture of how these networks operate.

        • “…you basically say ‘I’m not an expert on this so I can’t say one way or another’.”- And that is true. I think a theory supported by 100s of architects and engineers deserve attention. On the other hand, I am neither: an architect or engineer. One of the most frustrating elements: people with zero or very little background/expertise/knowledge forming opinion and then going out there advocating for something they know nothing or very little about. That discredits any theory/any movements.

          • dancingbrave says:

            Sibel I understand up to a point when you say ‘I am neither: an architect or engineer.’ and give credit ‘ I think a theory supported by 100s of architects and engineers deserve attention.’ You are leaving that line of enquiry up to the experts in that field?

            Also I understand Ronald Orovitz ‘For us – meaning the curious public, though we be too far and few in between, who want to see these networks uncovered – it is a matter of synoptically combining the reports coming in from these various “front-row seats” and in the process getting a clearer picture of how these networks operate.’

            I am a delivery driver and never have been and never will be an architect/engineer/former FBI so I am one of those ‘people with zero or very little background/expertise/knowledge forming opinion and then going out there advocating for something they know nothing or very little about’. How can I spread the word? I imagine you mean experts should only stick to their area of expertise? This is where I agree to a point but would have thought there needs to be some crossover as your experiences would have much less importance if Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth were wrong? Maybe you have information from other architects and engineers that conflicts with what Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth say? For me Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is one of the best way to open peoples eyes because they can listen to experts and see with their own eyes, if people can not believe their own eyes in my opinion they will not be very interested in the who’s and the why’s. Also if people do not have any who’s or why’s then they will be less inclined to believe there own eyes. A good idea which has been suggested at BFP is giving people a copy of Classified Woman, I will be doing this myself.

            This is the first forum I have ever been on and there are very intelligent and knowledgeable people at BFP so I count myself lucky to be able to listen and learn from them. I am hooked on the podcasts and get to read nearly all of the comments. Great work Sibel please keep it up.

          • To dancingbrave: March 7, 2015 at 6:23 am

            In regards to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, I am at least encouraged they seem to be paying more attention to the molten steel phenomena than some years ago. Nonetheless I have little doubt they’re infiltrated and are being intentionally steered towards overkill theories in order to diminish their credibility.

            Credentials for knowing how to build things does not automatically confer expert credibility for knowing how to deceive and destroy. I’ve worked closely with engineers and and “experts” for decades, and my personal definition of an “expert” is, One Who Makes The Most Expensive Mistakes.

            In an operation of the deep state on the scale of 9/11 and the JFK assassination, it should be automatic to assume the deep state will deploy a comprehensive and well-planned program to control the direction of “conspiracy” theories and investigations, while it simultaneously propagates the implausible “official” theory. In the JFK case, how many thousands of man hours and millions of dollars were spent pondering and investigating the non-existent grassy knoll shooter?

            I was disturbed by the dogmatic tenacity of one the Architects and Engineers members I knew. He had the TRUTH, and anyone who did not agree with every jot and tittle of his TRUTH was a dupe, or worse. His TRUTH was that because the collapses looked like standard controlled demolition to him, they WERE standard controlled demolition and these demolitions were carried out with exactly the same pre-weakening techniques and number of charges as would have characterized a commercial controlled demolition. End of (his) discussion. We had nothing to talk about except why he was precisely correct and any question of his TRUTH was heretical. In other words, we had nothing to talk about.

            Because of the doubtless infiltration and mis-direction, and over-reliance on the mystique of experts, I have doubts that group will achieve a majority consensus which Occam’s Razor does not dice up, within my lifetime. Will be delighted to be utterly wrong about that.

          • Knarf,

            “We had nothing to talk about except why he was precisely correct and any question of his TRUTH was heretical. In other words, we had nothing to talk about.”- So very true. This, unfortunately, has become the classic pattern with so many other forums/groups. Just a few minutes on forums/websites dedicated to these issues, and I find myself running for ‘air/oxygen to breath.’ I also agree that to a large degree the movement became a victim of ‘self-destruction.’ Of course, some where planted and acted as trolls, but for the most part, it became a victim of self-destruction.

            To give you an example: When we, as NSWBC activists, with all our government whistleblowers with respect-worthy credentials, organized speaking events, various segments (those mentioned above)would show up/pop up in our meetings, and begin throwing some nonsensical claims delivered in the most bewildering styles that would inevitably discredit the entire movement. Guess what? If we had any reporters/media representatives present, their coverage of our event would mainly focus on these discredited individuals’ and their outrageous claims/actions. This also tuned of so many credible experts/witnesses/whistleblowers: they didn’t want to have anything to do with the case due to these groups.

          • “You are leaving that line of enquiry up to the experts in that field?”- Always have, and always will. I do exactly the same thing on many other topics. For example: when people ask me to comment on the issue of ‘the Federal Reserve.’ Despite all the research I’ve done in the past three-four years, despite having listened to many interviews … I am still in ‘learning’ stage. I would never theorize and comment with certainty on the issues I have to deep/real expertise on. Same for S. America politics: Unlike Middle East/Caucasus/etc. I know very little about the history/context/dynamic in the region, thus, I refrain from ‘guru expert opinion and conclusion statements’ on issues like that.

            “Maybe you have information from other architects and engineers that conflicts with what Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth say?” – Interestingly, I have not come across anyone from that side countering the claims with scientific/logical and in-depth argument/stand. Those who just point out to 100s of these experts and say, ‘Oh, that is crazy. That is conspiracy theory. That is bs…’, well, they are not presenting a counter argument. Dismissing paired with ‘ridicule’ and ‘name-calling’ is an indicator of ‘not having solid and well-reasoned counter argument.’ Also, those I consider partners, well-read/researched people like Peter B and James Corbett have spent time and effort to provide coverage for that aspect of 9/11 truth movement.

            I hope we’ll get to see and hear from you regularly, and often. I hope ‘dancingbrave’ will be among those I can quickly cite when I think of our regular and determined commenters here @ BFP.

          • CuChulainn says:

            “Dismissing paired with ‘ridicule’ and ‘name-calling’ is an indicator of ‘not having solid and well-reasoned counter argument.’” As RB pointed out recently, the readiness with which ad hominem arguments are now deployed and accepted is a real indicator of cultural and intellectual decadence, though this hysteria seems to me more broadly based than just the women’s movement.
            I am not very interested in ad hominem attacks on Marx, but ad hominem is the normal form of modern propaganda. It certainly works, and again, the women’s movement is responsible for the change in Western cultural sensibility that makes post-modern ad hominem attacks possible, because previous mores would have dismissed them with contempt…

        • Mike Mejia says:

          I definitely can’t say one way or another whether it was possible for those buildings to fall they way they did without a controlled demolition. All I can say is that WTC-7 fall looks highly suspicious. However, I did query a colleague of mine; she is married to an architect who has worked on high rises before. I asked her to show him a video of the WTC-7 and ask him if it was possible to fall in free fall without a controlled demolition. She returned the next week and told me he stated ‘Yes, it was possible’ and then gave me the rationale.

          He could be totally off base, and just hawking the party line. My lack of expertise makes it difficult to argue with him (it also would have helped if I could have talked to him directly).

          • Mike,

            “My lack of expertise makes it difficult to argue with him.”- That’s the position I find myself in; every time. Another reason: for the big picture it is important to investigate and documents every single particles of 9/11. But for the bigger picture, it is crucial to look beyond the trees, and see the forest as well. On the other hand, I agree with people who believe that to see the bigger picture, we must find and with certainty establish every single related piece of puzzle. That’s why I think it is good that some groups (in this case-the engineer/architect experts) place their focus/energy/attention on a specific angle/aspect. Their work may/will become a significant part of the big picture. For example, another extremely important sub-area: Anthrax attack- the ever-changing narrative, the remaining mystery and unanswered questions, the timing, what already has been concretely established as facts …

            For me, after 13+ years, when I try to do my part for ‘that’ awareness, the most productive approach has been: history, context, established track records, established MO, well-established facts (pointing to the major holes in the fantasy-narrative), and trying to get the wheels turning-even if only a little bit.

          • dancingbrave says:

            Thank you Knarf, Sibel and Mike for responding
            Sibel I will take a look at Peter B and James Corbetts take on that aspect of 9/11.

            Knarf you said ‘I was disturbed by the dogmatic tenacity of one the Architects and Engineers members I knew. He had the TRUTH, and anyone who did not agree with every jot and tittle of his TRUTH was a dupe, or worse. His TRUTH was that because the collapses looked like standard controlled demolition to him, they WERE standard controlled demolition and these demolitions were carried out with exactly the same pre-weakening techniques and number of charges as would have characterized a commercial controlled demolition. End of (his) discussion. We had nothing to talk about except why he was precisely correct and any question of his TRUTH was heretical. In other words, we had nothing to talk about.’ I am not sure I fully understand , are you saying that this member you know could be wrong about ‘controlled’ demolition’ per se or because he was saying it was a ‘standard controlled demolition’ therefore not giving enough attention to say the molten steel which would prove it was not standard? Are you saying he was unprofessionally or sinisterly offering a weak argument to leave it open for attack so as to weaken Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth as a good source. I am a little naïve as I did not consider Architects and Engineers to be infiltrated as there reports conflict with NIST but do get the point that they would be worth targeting. As a matter of interest are you an architect or engineer?

          • Ronald Orovitz says:

            I consider the main contribution of A & Es for 9/11 Truth to be the argument that the official explanation can’t work as to how the towers and building 7 were brought down. When it comes to explaining what did bring down these structures… Well, that is where it gets complicated because the possibilities of technologies that may have been used are unknown to us. There is a vast lacunae in our (the general public’s) knowledge of black budget tech – how advanced are directed energy weapons and micro-nukes? – both of which have been offered as explanations for the towers’ destruction. We can’t say for sure and neither can A & Es for 9/11 Truth. This why I think they cautiously stick to the nano-thermite explanation since this is in the realm of the known and there is evidence of its presence.

            One part of your whistle-blowing Sibel that might provide leads to some of the more exotic explanations however is the fact that Turkish and Israeli intelligence had managed to get moles into research centers like Los Alamos and had exfiltrated documents and materials relating to classified tech. If memory serves correct, that was in the London Times article? Correct me if I’m wrong since I’m going off of memory.

            As for the “infiltrators” who discredit the movement. It’s hard to say if these are really “agents” or are just loopy people who will inevitably show up. It is frustrating how theories like “no planes” will get mixed up with the sound questions and possible explanations as to how the towers fell. One of the main proponents of the more exotic theories (DEWs and micro-nukes) is Jim Fetzer who, as a PhD philosopher of science, would seem to have some credibility on the subject. However, he also veers into the video-fakery theories. I once had the opportunity to ask him about this. My argument against video fakery was that, from the perspective of the would-be perpetrators, it would make no sense to even attempt to fake images of planes flying into buildings in such a camera saturated environment as lower Manhattan. You can fake one or two or a dozen videos, but you can’t rule out that someone who filmed what actually happened will surface. In philosophers lingo (I have some background in philosophy of science as well, but as a mere MA), you cannot prove an universal with an existential. One or more videos can be faked, but not necessarily all of them. What was Fetzer’s response to this? He admitted I made a good point, but then said that possibly holograms were used! Well, how to respond to that? I guess I cannot 100% rule out holograms (the epistemic lacunae being what it is), but really…

            In any case, perhaps videos were faked and you can prove it. But, do you know the motivation for the fakery? Were they faked to hide something or were they faked in order to divert researchers/activists and discredit their reputations? This is a trap that I think many have fallen into without their being witting “agents”.

          • Ronald,

            “Turkish and Israeli intelligence had managed to get moles into research centers like Los Alamos and had exfiltrated documents and materials relating to classified tech….” Yes. The networks also uses universities to get their PhD candidates assigned to these centers … The number one university in the network: MIT. It is not only foreign government connected players, but mainly black market traders: the info goes to the highest bidder, whether it is Pakistan or Israel, or Turkey or…

      • Mike Mejia says:

        Sibel, thanks, yes that is a great article. I am going to get his books and pore over them as soon as I am done reading LG. It’s really pathetic anyone doing real actual journalism is marginalized and even when their reporting is vindicated, no one pays them any attention.

  20. Mandela says:

    Speaking of American Exceptionalism, here is a video showing how in OK there is a movement to change how history is taught so as to make exceptionalism, patriotism, and religion the backbone of the history curriculum.
    We could look at this as the anti critical thinking movement.

  21. kariflack says:

    i’m listening to someone speaking on the constitution being borne of fraud, and it most certainly was from the start. yet some radicals will still hearken back to it, as if truly exercising “our” rights using this piece of paper will make us free — of course, such “radicals” could easily be snakes in the grass to subvert movements as you’ve already discussed on the podcasts and comments have reflected. this is a certain sort of exceptionalism for sure: sure we can admit that the founders were slave owners, hoarders of wealth while mostly everyone else starved, but really guys! this document makes our country special.

    • I think the Bill of Rights are something special though I’m no “Constitutional scholar” as our Commander in Chief (cough) is said to be. The 5th & 8th, for instance, are clear statements against legal recognition of torture and torture testimony. The 4th is clear on privacy and the requirement for warrants. And the 1st is unambiguous on free speech, etc.. That said, the courts have lately attacked and dismissed the clear language therein. That said, your general point is well taken and correct to my understanding.

    • steven hobbs says:

      True that! Sound as if you are familiar with “No Treason: Constitution Of No Authority:

  22. Thank you for reference to Hopsicker. His importance in the exposure of 911 and deep state deceptions is rich and rare; and I agree regarding his inability to recognize AE and David Ray Griffin. I have posted comment on his site stating that. Everyone has a blind spot, and these appear to be his.
    Now, speaking of bright spots; Nils HARRIT is about to contest slander against him in the Danish Courts. As with Sibel, these are the leading edge activists piercing the bubble of Lies the creatioNISTs have blown, and will be forever remembered for it. Go Nils !

    • I think Griffin made the point somewhere that the evidence converges, or I like to think cascades, in the dismantling of the official narrative. So many contributors in so many areas as you point out.

  23. “The most important kind of freedom is to be what. you really are. You trade in
    your reality for a role. You can trade in your sense for an act. You give up
    ability to feel, and in exchange put on a mask. There can’t be a revolution
    until there is a personal revolution on an individual level. It’s got to happen
    inside first.” –Jim Morrison of “The Doors”

    SIBEL: I am a bit off topic, but I feel the urgency to make some key points now.
    —All of us on this particular thread/format are affecting people globally in real time!!. I’ve seen episodes pop up during web search. I am beginning to see the possibilities of this thread–now some 13 episodes deep.
    BORING?? Hardly!!If we stay with this particular paradigm, there will be a potential for synergistic emergences through time which will be revolutionary in nature. Also, it is clear to me that this thread is revolutionary, as such, NOW!
    —An Idea: 1 year from now you/ we could create an ANTHOLOGY. The form could be thus:
    -Episode 1: Topic articulated by you…..list 6-8 comments(you and Benjamin judge, for example)…the names can be withheld or not…for me, I’d go with real name–others choose what they wish(anonymous, etc..)
    -Episode 2: Use same form/approach as above…
    -Episode 3: ” ” ” ” ” ”
    -ETC., ETC….
    This assumption is based on a 1 YEAR THREAD, at least. This thread is UNIQUE(can’t fail) because it features the INDIVIDUAL. We(IMO) must remain as individuals—We would be smudged away IF we became COMMITTEE-like and/or too “GROUPIE’ sounding. We must urge more people to comment and be somewhat careful of getting a little too “IN”, so to speak. From past experience, a person who is a little shy, but interested, will indeed shy away because we appear like a group. We are not a group, per se. We have no EXPERTS, we are equal here, are we not??!! If criticism occurs, let it play out among the commenters.
    Be watchful for nuanced peer group pressures. For example” we both have known Sibel for years and blah, blah..”.We actually need to be aware of NOT having LEADERS who wish to “sum things up.” I am familiar with that bit(ouch!!) We actually need a certain type of tension and must struggle to articulate facts—-this format(we) is GLOBAL.
    In addition ,I as commenter cannot expect a deep dialogue. I learn through the comments of others as the comments flow through time. Sometimes it feels like 3 steps forward and 2 back. Result? 1 move deeper episode after episode.
    I’ll end this with another quote which relates to the here and now.
    “Societies in decline have no use for visionaries”…..Anais Nin
    Postscript: One man, the journalist I. F. Stone, self- published a weekly(I F STONE’S WEEKLY) and it affected millions of activists in the 60s, 70s—-one man!!

  24. Ron,

    Jim Morrison: what a great quote you picked; sums it up perfectly.

    “We must urge more people to comment”- Absolutely. I love what we have been creating here. Believe me or not I have (inside my head) voices that go with your names (and screen names). We need more voices people. We need to show how this is becoming a movement; right here. One way to show it: adding your name/screen name and voice. Please do that. Please don’t shy away. For some reason, for some people, it is hard to be among the firsts. Well, now we have made it easier for you. You are not alone. Your opinion/your view/your voice counts; it counts here: so let us hear you. Without looking up I can name a dozen or so people here @ BFP community, people I consider ‘keens’: REMO, Ron, Dennis, Dave, Mandela, Cuchu, Knarf, kariflack, Peter M, Andie, Jeffersonian, Tony Wicher, John Filip, Mike Mejia, Ronald … Andie (?) hmmm, forgive if I left out your name!! See, without looking up I named 16 of you here. This means so much people. I hear you, you hear me, you hear each other. So please, come and join our discussion. Next time I want to be able to list at least 25 regular voices … and after that 42 …

    “We have no EXPERTS, we are equal here, are we not??!! “- Most definitely. The comments here reek with sincerity, frankness, respect, passion , dedication … the desire: desire for truth.

    “I learn through the comments of others as the comments flow through time. Sometimes it feels like 3 steps forward and 2 back. Result? 1 move deeper episode after episode.”- My husband and I were talking about this the other day. It seems like making circles, but we are not ending up in the same exact spot. We keep coming back to: individual level deep understanding and resolve, overcoming the obstacles (from schools/indoctrination to media/propaganda to controlled opposition …).

    • CuChulainn says:

      why were Boudicca, Olga, Blenda, Gráinne O’Malley and Joan of Arc such potent motivators of resistance? a woman’s bravery shames men into action. and a little sex appeal doesn’t hurt the cause.

      • ChuChulanin: I was moved by the link to Mozgovoi”s Direct challenge. It can drive one crazy to see such poignant realism while MSM ignores this! It should have 5 million hits! This feeling of going mad towards tears, because most people have no idea of such sadness is deja vu for me. THANKS for posting it!

        • CuChulainn says:

          thanks Ron & Mandela, the tragic conflict in SE Ukraine is presented by most in the West as binary (NATO’s Kiev/Moscow), but the human element, as expressed by Alexei Borisovich, abhors this false binary and is willing to give everything to live in a human community. in Orwell’s _Homage to Catalonia_ this aspiration ends in tragedy–Moscow and anti-Moscow combine to crush the POUM. this history is remembered in Novorossiya, where Spanish volunteers have joined Prizrak. Mossadeq, Sankara, the Kennedys etc. paid for similar aspirations.
          the humanities as disciplines are under attack in the contemporary university, in part from failure to articulate their function and purpose, which i would summarize as destruction of the false binaries promoted by the society of the spectacle, and the substitution of a human alternative. this is what Mozgovoi is doing, in real life.

          • Mihiri Lim says:

            I share the same sentiment as Ron above after seeing Mosgovoi speak. Thank you! The irony needing a vehicle to save people when on the otherside ISIS parade on hordes of brand new toyotas killing people! moved me to tears.

  25. Mandela @ March 6, 2015 at 7:24 am

    My point was, is, that if we have empathy for people who are 100% invested in not upsetting the apple cart, we have effectively paralyzed ourselves. We have to accept that change will have casualties and collateral damage. Not directly inflicted by us, I should certainly hope and insist, but rather by the PTB when they sense the tide is turning, if by some miracle such a thing actually happens in our lifetimes. “They” could literally do anything and everything to keep their bloody grip on the reins of power.

    Even contemplating these consequences can only be justified if there is no reasonable doubt that doing nothing will change nothing, and continue us down the path which has led to over 100 million violent and/or premature deaths in the past century. Simply reasoning that any such consequences will be, of course, unintended on our part and that we will really, truly feel awful about it, does not absolve us of the need to anticipate what might happen and have moral clarity going in.

    Without moral clarity, we will easily be paralyzed by ruthless actions of the adversaries. “Oh, gee, I didn’t think THAT kind of thing might occur…,maybe we should forget this whole idea…” If someone is at such a place of moral ambiguity about what they’re doing, which actually pre-positions them to be effectively neutralized at the first sight of blood, they have no business starting anything in the first place.

    • “My point was, is, that if we have empathy for people who are 100% invested in not upsetting the apple cart, we have effectively paralyzed ourselves.” – That’s the position I’ve had since … about 2007. I know it sounds ‘harsh’ to most people, but after demanding accountability, fighting for it with everything I had, targeting the elected representatives/courts/etc … I realized that it goes both way: top-bottom & bottom-top. Especially when you look at the degree of malice coming from it, the high-price being paid (people’s life), the consequences of ‘the majority’ and its position … well, I just can’t and won’t. Believe me, I have been having this argument/discussion with my husband for years. He is far more ‘tolerant,’ ‘accepting’ and ’empathetic’ than me. For me, it is like: ‘Accessory to a heinous crime’ such as murder/rape. Under the legal system those who have been accessory to crime like that (including bystander who does not report the crime and watches it as it unfolds) are liable. Why should this be different? When people read the articles/watch the news that say: ‘our drone bomb killed 21 people who were attending this weeding, 6 of them children, 8 of them elderly, all of them innocent,’ and then, they go about their life, knowing that they have directly contributed to this murder (their tax $$$$ and their votes and their silence and their lack of action), well, they are ‘GUILTY.’ They have knowingly and acceptingly participated in the murder. Period.

      Again, I know some of you will consider this too harsh, too intolerant, too … But this is my frank/sincere/honest opinion and belief. This is how I view it, and this is how I feel: Experiencing wars first hand (with 90+% burned babies & arms/legs turned to stumps), experiencing CIA-directed torture through my father … going through my own WB journey after learning certain things first-hand/directly.

      You know something, at night, when that father, who lost her three children and wife to American bombing, goes to bed, he cries, and asks ‘why?’ and he questions: ‘what kind of peo0ple would do such things?’ and then asks, ‘What kind of people would support these murderers with their money, votes and consent?’ and then he prays: ‘May God damn them all.’ Anyone who demands or expects ‘tolerance’ from millions of victims of our nation is out of touch with reality. Must be out of touch with realities.

      Now, I’ll go and cool off a bit. And after that, I’ll be playing ‘Sight Words Level I Bingo’ with my daughter, who now can read around 200+ sight words:-)

      • Acting out of anger without a clear plan that has a chance of winning something worthwhile is just throwing a fit.

        • You are right it would be if it is without a good clear plan.

          ‘They’ had a clear well-executed plan: For weeks and months, as they showed the images of WTC coming down, the images of body parts, the images of people throwing themselves down from the top floors, the image and the sound of crying orphans and widows, together with the dramatic background music, paired up with the voices of deep state tentacles … as they were doing all that: they began planning to attack/bomb Iraq, they began rounding up/kidnapping/indefinitely detaining and torturing …

          Who is showing the other side? How many people (currently apathetic/silent and indifferent) would pause and take notice if we were: showing the images of charred babies/children, telling the stories of the widows and mothers who lost their husband and or children, telling the stories of the children who lost their mothers and fathers, showing the pictures of those with stumps, exhibiting the wreckage and rubbles of once homes … paired up with our poems/essays/talking points, paired up with the sound of their cries … and as we do all that: tell them we are ‘All’ responsible, tell them we are ‘All’ accessory to all this murder/destruction, tell them stopping ‘all’ this is up to ‘us’ the people, tell them that their voices and actions will count.

          Yes. I consider that a plan. A plan worth trying for. A plan worth working towards. Does it come with guaranteed outcome/results? Of course no. But I tell you what: Not holding people responsible and help them towards holding themselves accountable, will not get us either.

          By the way: not a single part of the above plan comes with violence or bloodshed. We all agree on: informing. What I am saying is: add to that ‘informing’ the knowledge and acceptance that we the people are ‘directly responsible,’ and that we have been, are, ‘directly’ accessory to these crimes and murder, thus, we must be held accountable, and that accountability translates to: real action.

          Now. Everyone else: What are your action-plan proposal on this?;-)

          • CuChulainn says:

            for the dark side, “remember 9/11” was a battlecry for some years afterwards; in recent years that seems to have become inoperative, and the alleged murder of Osama may have been the turning point that allowed open support al Qaeda in Libya and Syria. so the cry “remember 9/11” could indeed become a rallying cry for the people. but this will only happen if sober, authoritative voices like Richard Gage and Sibel can be heard, rather than the hysteria of advocates who discredit themselves by their own shrillness.

          • CuChulainn,

            ” …the hysteria of advocates who discredit themselves by their own shrillness”- … they have done so much damage to the cause and the pursuit of ‘the’ truth. I know with certainty: some of them were planted and by design. Others: an ignorant bunch inflicting the damage by their ignorance and attitude.

          • Mandela says:

            I was rushing out and replied without reading fully. Your plan is one that I fully resonate with, especially if the rationales for the actions are shown for the specious rattletrap that they are.
            Here is a quote from an open letter from an American Activist to Alexi Mozgovoi, who is leading a military group in Eastern Ukraine to create a free society there. thanks Cu! He wrote the following out of deep respect for how Alexi is proceeding in his struggle and wanting to share the lessons learned from a lifetime of activism.
            ” I am writing as an American activist, about patience and responsibility. Revolutionary patience, and revolutionary responsibility.

            A revolutionary outlook transforms the color of everything. There is revolutionary anger and revolutionary love, revolutionary principles and revolutionary clarity. There is another vital distinction which those newly caught up in a revolutionary process may not yet know, understand or even see the need for: revolutionary patience.

            Revolutionary patience. It has to do with knowing and living in the love of the people, believing in the power of an organized people, knowing that growth and change take time and organization takes work, knowing that processes unfold organically, and trusting that the arrow of history is on our side. Trusting that things are changing beneath a seemingly calm surface and when enough pieces are in place they will burst forth. Being ready to strike hard when the moment is right, but hold back and wait when it’s not. The patience to refuse a gambit, and the humility to play for the team, not to be the star.”

          • “Revolutionary patience…Being ready to strike hard when the moment is right, but hold back and wait when it’s not. The patience to refuse a gambit, and the humility to play for the team, not to be the star.”- Excellent and timely quote. I for one need to be reminded of this frequently. Mandela, please make sure I am reminded. Patience is something I have to work at … consciously remind myself, psych myself to exercise. A reminder like this helps.

      • Sibel, did you see the Men in Black movies? Sometimes I fantasize that someone could come to me with the “flashy thing” and say, “Just look into this for a moment and you will forget everything you know about The Darkness. From now on you will have no deeper concerns in life than how your favorite sports team is doing and getting out the vote for the politician who promises to save the baby seals. Results guaranteed or double your money back.”

        It would be tempting as hell. Maybe science will catch up to science fiction and we will be able to have our minds washed as easily as getting our clothes dry cleaned. At that state of affairs the only people even remembering the issues we discuss here, would be living in tiny shacks deep in the woods, with only a few treasured banned books and some squirrels for company.

        • “At that state of affairs the only people even remembering the issues we discuss here, would be living in tiny shacks deep in the woods, with only a few treasured banned books and some squirrels for company.” :-))) Don’t forget: with our tin foil hats on;-) I see what you are saying, and I know it is not about reflecting some absolute pessimism. AND, the visualization makes me smile: we have to hold on to humor and break the grimness we face with our macro subjects.

          Have you seen Corbett’s video post on the Italians and their reaction to ISIS fear mongering on twitter? He makes a great point: we have to laugh, make fun of them, when faced with their ludicrous attempts. It goes further than foaming at the mouth, yelling obscenities. Some people ask: why in your video series with James Corbett you keep smiling /laughing, when the subjects are so grim and infuriating? My answer: One of many ways I have learned to cope and respond to the beast. During my early WB journey, ‘they’ were waiting for me to throw fits, yell/scream, and hysterically cry, so that they’d point at me and say: ‘You see, you have to be crazy and nuts and hysterical to blow the whistle on ‘us’ and claim these reports…’ It was awfully hard to hold back tears and to try to keep my voice level from rising …. try hard to keep the boiling anger controlled . After 2008, I began to add the smile and laughter. It is not fake. Some of their narratives and operation modes are so ridiculously obvious/transparent that it is hard not to laugh (maybe it is a sad laugh). So yes, I try to breath deeply, smile, and sometimes even giggle/laugh.

    • Knarf, I totally get and respect where you are coming from and would agree if I saw this as a situation that was amenable to traditional images of revolution. Homeland security with enough armor piercing bullets to kill every man woman and child in the country multiple times, the local police forces armed with tanks and other war weapons, the national guard makes the USA armed as no sovereign nation has in history to deal with domestic uprisings. And now with the spying power of the NSA’s PRISM program plus the spying and killing capabilities of drones, I wouldn’t want to see this country go down the path of a people’s revolt, especially since they/we have no idea what we are revolting for. At least I have seen no manifestos proclaiming what would be necessary for a free and just order. If the present order was overturned now we would most likely just get new rulers who would over time bring us to a new but also bad place. Freedom from tyranny is tough to maintain over time.
      Before meaningful change can occur the ground must be tilled so that more people get what is happening and what is necessary for things to be different. Only then can anything good and lasting result. Plants can only grow healthfully when all the necessary conditions are present. I think that a healthy body politic is no different. We need to explicate those conditions!
      I’m really rushing now as I have to get ready to go away for a couple of days. I hope that this gives you at least a taste of where I’m coming from.

      • Mandela, the problem is the other side doesn’t play fair. They can change the dynamic to at least the optics of a “people’s revolt”, if not the real thing, by use of agent provocateurs and almost total control of the mass media.

        We should anticipate such a thing, or worse, if what you and I and Sibel want to happen, starts to happen, namely a significant shift in consciousness and awareness of what the hell is really going on. “They” aren’t likely to let their power paradigm just slip away from under them without resorting to shock and awe.

        What Sibel has seen and is passionate about, will just bounce off people unless they “get it”. So here we are, Square One. More people have to “get it” before any of the other dominoes can start falling.

        Marches – waving signs – wearing orange jumpsuits – automatically causes most people to think, Those people are the Other, they are Radicals. Personally I suspect most public demonstrations are staged or heavily influenced by moles, with the purpose of attaching a “radical” label to something the deep state wants to discredit.

        WE have to be as insidious and persuasive as the Big Lie. As each new set of eyes is opened wide enough to see around the Big Lie, eventually will come the moments of realization of their shared responsibility for the plummeting people on 9/11, the charred babies, the weddings and funerals bombed for the purpose of creating more willing walking bombs. One person at a time, who learns, and then hopefully learns to cope, before eventually finding another set of eyes they can cause to open.

        I really don’t know how else it can be done.

        • Knarf,

          Remember ‘Jessica Lynch”? How they went about methodically creating a made-up script/story, and then used their media tentacles to play it out for weeks? And then what- when the real deal was exposed? You’d think anyone with a shred of logic and thinking ability would pause and question ‘all’ their stories. That, this was one of so many other staged and scripted narratives marketed and sold via their media operatives. Yet, so many, willingly, want to believe that it was an anomaly … rather than a case that exposed the powers’ classic modus operandi.

          “…Marches – waving signs – wearing orange jumpsuits – automatically causes most people to think, Those people are the Other, they are Radicals.”- You are right. That’s been my observation as well. And you are right, back to square one, a couple of levels deeper from the membrane.

        • kariflack says:

          “WE have to be as insidious and persuasive as the Big Lie.” yes, i think this an important, serious mission for people who have this understanding to carry out.

    • steven hobbs says:

      Knarf & Sibel,

      “My point was, is, that if we have empathy for people who are 100% invested in not upsetting the apple cart, we have effectively paralyzed ourselves.” I concur. For this, Socrates called himself a gadfly (to mix a metaphor), and later chose hemlock. (Drinking hemlock made a mythic, memorable, and poetic martyr.) Are we a swarm of gadflies, sans hemlock? Appears, there’s a lot of that here at BFP. I feel right at home. Thank you.

      Still, there are problems with such a generalized statement: 1) How do you really know this person is 100% invested. It seems we would need to test such a conclusion. Let’s think about how we would do that in various contexts, and with various people, being mindful the demand characteristics of the common social context of testing. 2) Are we assuming that “upsetting the apple cart” will be persuasive, i.e. gain consensus is (not demonstrated, proven, or necessarily well-reasoned). One might feel good about upsetting smug complacency out of sheer frustrated agency, but what’s the real results and the difference it makes? 3) Maybe, this hypothetical person, is only 95% or 35% invested in not upsetting the apple cart. Just maybe, if we approach them with elegant empathy, and a persuasive narrative (DVD CD), they will be willing to be a little upset and then be OK with it, and consider upsetting the cart at the end of the street.

      We have all been called, so to speak, and feel quite passionately [save infiltrators]. We seem to be (mostly) old white guys, and few intelligent women. We also, it seems (speculatively), to have a high level of self and academic education. We are likely to be open to new information and change, and less authoritarian or fearful than a random sample. This may be accurate or not. In any case, it’s unreasonable to expect others to respond to information as we do.

      Also, let’s finally bury the unfounded enlightenment idea that political opinions are based on rational self-interest. Reason, and logic are not necessarily the initial, primary, or even tertiary reasons people act.

      • Certainly there’s a spectrum of “investment” in the General Mainstream Illusion. Some people appear to be very near 100%. Whatever the extent, I was just trying to say we can’t be constrained by concern for their sensibilities in the final analysis, past the point of trying to win them over.

  26. arealjeffersonian says:

    No one has to wonder what you believe/feel – you let it all out. And so should we all. I’m with you 100+% – there are no excuses. We are ALL responsible for ALL the actions taking place – they are after all taking place in our name, the “government of the people by the people for the people”. If this is really so, that the U.S. is a “government of the people”, then it follows directly that ALL the people of the U.S. are directly responsible for ALL actions that take place under the control of the “government”. Perhaps a simplistic statement, but it gets to the point that none of us, either those of us here, or the vast majority that we believe to be asleep or drugged when it comes to acceptance of the horrors being visited upon the world by “us”, “the government of the people”. So, no excuses, no rationalization that somehow the majority can be excused because “they don’t really understand”, “they’re busy with their lives – providing for and raising their families”, “they believe the lies, the propaganda”, etc. etc. etc..

    Each citizen of a “government of the people” has the inherent responsibility for the government’s actions, has the responsibility to be informed, has the responsibility to hold accountable those who commit murder, mayhem and horror in our name. Has the responsibility to find, select, support and elect those who will act responsibly in our name. That responsibility can’t be shrugged off, can’t be forgiven, can’t be passed on to someone else. So no excuses. If we don’t demand responsibility of each and every citizen, we will never, ever get it.

    Well, off the soapbox for now, but in complete support of your position Sibel. TJ would be proud of you.

    • Arealjeffersonian: Yes! The whole damn thing is connected and most/some of us here see that “I am responsible for the suffering of starving people in distant lands…my shoes, my shirt, my pens, my computer parts…I have blood on my hands!” I said something like this about a year ago to my sister-in-law and brother. She could not sleep that night because of a rant which I now seldom perform.

  27. Mihiri Lim says:

    Sibel- It certainly does feel like going round in circles but I think it’s more like a spiral. You go around but end up slightly higher in awareness than the previous one. What I have noticed in myself is that the more I become aware of myself, my prejudices, distortions, masks, conditioning, hate, blind spots etc.. the more aware I become of others, society, politics, lies and conditioning. It maybe that those that are at a lower rung of the awareness spiral that are unable to critically evaluate themselves let alone the matrix around them. Powers that be uses this to their advantage and gives exactly what the masses want -however even with all the indoctrination and mass conditioning they still needed events like 9/11 to implement major changes. To counter this we will also need to work with this knowledge. Yes -we are all responsible and must be held accountable for what we do and don’t do. There comes point in ones’ life that not doing something becomes too uncomfortable and be moved to make changes. My action plan would be to bring at least a few people (apart from my children who are already reading your books at 14)to this point. Like the old parable some seeds may fall on fertile soil to produce a much larger crop.

    • Mihiri,

      “It certainly does feel like going round in circles but I think it’s more like a spiral. You go around but end up slightly higher in awareness than the previous one.”- ‘Spiral’: Excellent analogy. Exactly what I was trying to convey when I said: ‘going in circles, but not ending up in the same exact spot-but somewhere higher, somewhere deeper.

      “It maybe that those that are at a lower rung of the awareness spiral that are unable to critically evaluate themselves let alone the matrix around them.”- Another great point, and I believe it to be true. We can plug in the ‘highly-medicated society’ as well: Rather than going deep and searching for the causes of their depression/anger/unhappiness/lack of fulfillment … reaching out for those medication bottles, the pills. And yes, I join you in your observation; it is 100% connected.

      “Like the old parable some seeds may fall on fertile soil to produce a much larger crop.”- There it is, ‘the spiral.’ The main reason I began the podcast series with our children vs. the indoctrination/schooling system.

  28. Some very insightful comments from our members – as usual. Especially covering the area of responsibility. I can’t comment on all here – but I thank you for your thought provoking expressions. Let me respond to yours Sibel, since this same theme was expressed by others:


    “By the way: not a single part of the above plan comes with violence or bloodshed. We all agree on: informing. What I am saying is: add to that ‘informing’ the knowledge and acceptance that we the people are ‘directly responsible,’ and that we have been, are, ‘directly’ accessory to these crimes and murder, thus, we must be held accountable, and that accountability translates to: real action.

    Now. Everyone else: What are your action-plan proposal on this?’;-)

    A lot of good thoughts from others on “responsibility” also. Right after 9/11 (though even then the terrorist theory stunk to high heaven), there was a huge energy bubble of the powerful emotion of grief over the US and much of the world. I remember thinking: What an opportunity! So many people gathering together in their grief. Powerful actions come from such a thing – if the right questions are asked. Like – if this was a terrorist attack – WHY? Could we Americans be responsible for creating such ill will that terrorists would be willing to give up their lives to bring it to the attention of the world? Many questions like this could have led to a dramatic change. Then “W” made a lot of what appeared to be stupid comments – but were, I’m sure, cleverly used to defuse any such introspection. We had the President of the United States, standing on ground zero, addressing a grieving nation, telling us basically – don’t worry, be happy – to “go shopping”. I will never forget the fury that rolled over me at that moment. How dare he negate the grief we felt! That, coupled with other like comments about the terrorists, successfully turned the grief into anger at the supposed terrorists. Mission accomplished. He effectively destroyed any possibility for many people of taking back their personal power – something that has been systematically eliminated over the years. I’m not condoning it. Some of us got it and became irate. We know that personal power only comes with taking responsibility. It’s good to share with like individuals here.

    My action plan? I’m on it Sibel! You’ll know it when you see it. 😉

    • Dennis,

      I share your observation with ‘Right after 9/11.’ W also absolved all Americans from ‘all’ their responsibilities. Remember that infamous quote: ‘They did it because they hate our freedom and our way of life.’ It was administering that tranquilizer: to this date, almost 14 years after 9/11, I hear that line being parroted by many I encounter: “They are terrorists who hate us. They hate our democracy … they hate Christianity … they want to destroy our way of life…” As you say: “He effectively destroyed any possibility for many people of taking back their personal power – something that has been systematically eliminated over the years.”

      “You’ll know it when you see it!”- I love this- looking forward to something like this:-)

      • ‘They did it because they hate our freedom and our way of life.’
        I almost choked and threw up when he said that. What an insult to all the incredible diversity of beings in this world. To make it even worse, as you say, people actually believed that – which I naively was surprised at. Live and learn, eh? 🙂

      • SIBEL: Just a short, but important point . This thread is revolutionary in the sense that it will cause ripples in the awareness of certain individuals who read it seriously…a resonance phenomenon. It will cause some to evolve in a different direction, so to speak. We are actually talking about a REVOLUTION OF CONSCIOUSNESS. This thread contributes to this form of revolution which is THE DEEPEST FORM of revolution.
        I had a discussion many years ago(50+). The question? Who/what has a greater affect on people in terms of a “change” in a way that promotes greater awareness? Is it A. — A well-meaning group/NGO/committee with clout or is it– B. An individual deeply interested in her/his own evolution of consciousness who wishes to communicate to individuals? We mulled it over and agreed on B.
        At this stage of my life, I only have anecdotal “evidence”, but, for me, it’s not even close. It is “B” straight up! The one who is evolving and can relate to virtually anyone of any class/race leaves RIPPLES. And there is no way to predict when they take effect. It may take 50 years, then, a realization, an insight. This is what this thread can provide. As Knarf noted, the insanely massive police state in which we are embedded rules physical existence. More blood spilled is senseless. However individual minds can evolve with a little help.

  29. To dancingbrave: March 7, 2015 at 1:29 pm

    With a reasonably good idea of how standard large building demolitions are done, I’m confident they don’t involve exothermic reactions which keep pools of steel molten for weeks. You would not have a happy customer.

    I understand physics well enough to know very large constructs have weaker integrity as a total construct (this is a nuanced concept) than smaller constructs. This is because they have a higher ratio of internal volume (mass) to surface area (rigidity). Big things are inherently different than smaller things, scale DOES matter. For that reason it simply wasn’t necessary to rig the twin towers for standard demolition to have confidence they would fall down, if the core steel on just one or two floors could undergo several years of exposure to a corrosive agent (become heavily rusted) and then be subjected to exothermic reaction during the conflagration. In fact, if it had been a commercial demolition, it would be considered a botched job, because very large pieces of the twin towers fell well outside the building footprints and inflicted major damage on surrounding buildings. Because a standard demolition outcome was not necessary or even desired, the perpetrators had no reason to take the enormous operational risk which would have been required to rig a standard demolition.

    As for Building 7, I really don’t have a clue. I doubt it fell down naturally, but I can’t say how they pulled it off. Probably a different team using something very clever.

    As for the A & E member I knew, he was very angry and bitter about the slaughter, and I think his emotions were coloring his technical approach.

    I’m neither an architect or engineer, I’m just a very experienced hands-on guy with the “knack” for finding root cause evidence for failures and frauds.

    • Knarf: Best possible answer: Thermite was placed at precise angles on every floor–all wired together like a string of firecrackers. Then “Pull” the switch and they cut/fire inward in sequence–hence an implosion and the bottom steel beams/floors must be “cut” cleanly , so the upper floors begin to “free fall” precisely into the “footprint” of the building. That’s the essence of it. No other way to bring 7 down to footprint in slightly under 7 seconds.

      • Ron, when and how did they apply so much thermite to WTC 7? Even assuming some form of exotic thermite could be used as a precisely-timed cutting charge.

        We know when, who and how for the twin towers. In the wet batch spray-on “fireproofing”, starting in the late 90’s. Eating into the steel for years, creating oxidised iron for the exothermic reaction. The twin towers may well have fallen down some time after 20010911 even if there had been no fires, just from corrosion. Once they had the stuff sprayed on, they were committed.

        Search Youtube for Blaze Shield II, videos showing the application techniques. All that was necessary was mixing certain chemicals into either the dry mix or the water supply. Or possibly having a hidden dispensing mechanism in the mixer output pump. No exotic technology required in any case. A FEMA metallurgy report and eyewitness descriptions of “swiss-cheesed” structural steel were indicative of both pre-fire corrosion and exothermic melting during the fire.

        For the twin towers, this approach eliminated the need for detonators or wiring. They had to be certain of the impact points so the fire would be deployed on the correct floors for initiating the exothermic reactions, but’s that’s just a matter of precise terminal guidance.

        I think something completely different was done for WTC 7, but I’m not persuaded as to what exactly it was.

        • KNARF: How can I say this without huge speculations?
          I’m just stating the necessary implosion design/ strategy needed to create the implosion sequence which would allow an actual INSTANT of “free fall”. It is my strongest hypothesis. The less than 7 seconds was not free fall the whole time, but there was an instant of free fall. I have studied gravity a great deal over the decades. “Free Fall” =pure gravity. Gravity(in this case, specifically “1G”) is an Accelerating Field(Einstien call it a “geodesic”); which means the floors at one instant are accelerating into Bldg 7’s “footprint”. This level of internal/implosion/demolition is akin to one of the most precise ‘Pulls” of a steel-framed skyscraper(Bldg 7=47 strongly reinforced floors) in the history of the planet! If it were not so evil, it could be called a work of art.
          I do not know who and when and how they actually set it up. For me, this is the 64 million $ question!! My position is simply based on what I know of physics and studying/hearing many Architects/ Engineers for years. I always bring up Bldg 7 because I want to trigger intellectual curiosity, since even until NOW an amazing number of people have never even heard of it.

          I have absolutely no desire to persuade you about the event. This is strictly my best possible answer. But I sense that we would agree that something happened and important information is being withheld. Bldg 7 represents a possible move to a “critical mass” moment for Americans. For me, it is one of the events that can be leveraged.

  30. Good podcast, good discussion. I’m glad people are thinking about this weirdness we call American Exceptionalism. This is the main thing that fascinates me these days, which my PhD research is focusing on with respect to what we take as reality instead of spectacle. We’re willing to believe any nefarious thing about other countries; or about things our country does to other countries; or about things our country has done in the past.

    The one glaring blind spot is: here and now.

    I find that most people, even the ones vehemently opposed to dirty interventions (Iran, Chile, Guatemala, etc.), don’t have a “reality problem” with those because they accept that the CIA/power elite are doing their dirty deeds ultimately for the benefit of the United States. For us. Some object to it and think the CIA is misguided, others think they’re just doing the tough jobs, but mostly they share the idea at bottom that they’re doing it for us.

    They have a fundamental unwillingness to consider that these same powers are doing those things not for us but *to* us, because they do not work for us, they work for an elite. We’re not special. We’re the same as Vietnamese villagers, or Latin American peasants, only somewhat better protected. That’s a rubicon many people can’t seem to cross, even though it snaps into coherent order a lot of otherwise nonsensical and contradictory evidence in the world of events.

  31. CuChulainn says: 3:13
    The main enemy we, the people, have is our passivity, our inactivity, our lack of understanding of the fact that people *are* the power.

  32. Double edged sword, this “leaving things to experts” idea. Very wise of Sibel not to go outside of her direct knowledge, because she is basically a public figure, a valuable witness, and there are many all too eager to attack her credibility. Stick to the facts, for sure.

    But “leaving things to the experts” is also problematic for ordinary purposes. You don’t need to be an expert in architecture or engineering to understand two things:

    1) Regular fires (yes including jet fuel) cannot melt steel.
    2) Steel was melted in all three of those buildings.

    FEMA, USGS, and Deutsche Bank’s insurance company have all documented the molten steel. It’s not just hearsay from firefighters and first responders, it’s not just “apparent” from video evidence.

    Steel melted. NIST ignores that.

    We don’t need to be scientists to smell a rat.

    • Ribbit-Mark says:

      I am glad that john jumped in here with his thoughts on the “leaving things to the experts” posit.

      It was refreshing to hear Sibel’s candid thoughts on what she feels she is qualified to comment/not comment on re: various 9/11 events.

      I personally have a science education background and so am very comfortable in understanding all of the physics/science behind what occurred on 9/11, including that which is analyzed by A&Efor9/11Truth.

      john makes a very valid point about not needing to be an expert in any particular discipline to see that the official 9/11 story has gaping holes in multiple areas.

      The point I would like to make here is that we don’t need to “solve 9/11”. By that I mean, we don’t need to figure out every last detail of what occurred on that day and how it occurred.

      A layman can hang his/her hat on any number of holes in the official story (holes that shouldn’t be there) and that is sufficient to join the team.
      It would be wonderful if all team members had like minds and were in agreement with every aspect of what happened/didn’t happen on 9/11.
      But again, not only is that unrealistic, it is not necessary to move forward.

      I am a ‘big picture’ and ‘detail’ type of guy, at the same time.
      However, the big picture will always trump the details, in terms of importance.

      • Well-said, Ribbit-Mark.

        It is my intention to keep this community together with macro-view and macro-issues. I hesitated in starting this subtopic, and now, I get this feeling that says, ‘You were right, Sibel.’ For those people who are interested in focusing on and talking about ‘buildings’ and ‘termites’ and steel and concrete and matches and melting points and mice and rats … There are 100s of websites out there with 1000s people you can join and sing with. That model, getting drowned in some details and disagreements, is not for this website. And even though it may offend some people here, I have to say, many of ‘those’ people have damaged the pursuit of the ‘truth.’ Over half of my government whistleblower witnesses to 9/11 related ‘truth’ became so disgusted by ‘those’ people, their ugly manners, their narrow and ignorant minds, their lack of class and respect … and quitted.

        I guess this is a good test for this sub-topic. If I detect even a shred of the characteristics present in many 9/11 related sites, I would exclude the topic all together. I know so many good and knowledgeable people have stopped even talking about this topic due to those ‘deranged’ behavior, taking away credibility from the entire movement. I say ‘credibility’ and I mean it and stand by it. ‘Respect & Credibility’: Keys.

        • Sibel, I have no dog in the fight, will never be passionate about the means and methods. I’m no expert so in that sense I don’t what I’m talking about, just speculating.

          Termites is funny, though. If you can’t laugh…

          • 🙂 You are right. One of the keys to keep our sanity in this insane world- the hall of smoke and mirrors: humor, and ability to maintain the smile, and laugh.

  33. Free Fall says it all .

  34. chris bagg says:

    Kudos to Sibel for this new discussion format. You seem to have hit a nerve with this subject matter as evidenced by the numerous and insightful comments. Sorry if mine is a little late and long winded.

    Excellent points made here about American Exceptionalism and the central lie behind the war on terror: the absurdity that “they hate us for our freedoms”. This is the palliative that absolves Americans of the responsibility for the violence and mass murder that their government unleashes upon the world. It is one of the most insidious and damaging lies ever told to a people by their government. It bears a family resemblance to the Nazi’s “We are the master race” lie. Americans need to understand that this lie is more than a breach of trust, it is a kind of violence directed at those it deceives. Lies told by governments are a species of metaphorical violence against “us” that enables real violence against “others”.

    Of course, our government also commits real acts of violence against its citizens, such as the atrocity that was 911. Clearly a great many people died, and many more were put in mortal danger not only by the bombs in the buildings, but also by the toxic cloud of dust that they created. The evidence is unequivocal: all three buildings were deliberately destroyed by controlled demolition. There is no other way to explain the free fall and the molten metal. This stark fact ought to be enough to galvanize Americans into action, so why hasn’t it? AE911Truth has put the basic information out there, yet the implications of this information have not yet coalesced in peoples minds. Why is this?

    My feeling is that the starkness of this truth has been blurred by disinformation in both the mainstream and the alternative media. The mainstream continues to dismiss such thinking as the work of “Conspiracy Theorists”, while phony “researchers” continue to publicize improbable and off-putting theories involving such things as “space based energy beams”, and “micro nukes”. What is needed here is an evidence based consensus about what really happened. This is how we really get the ball rolling. Even in forums like this one it is important to reach some kind of evidence based consensus so that readers can see that the facts are quite simple, and the implications unavoidable.

    That said, it can occasionally be useful in seeing the big picture to speculate a little so as to explain some of the anomalies present, such as the above mentioned “Why did they have to blow up building 7 too?” What was in there that was so damning that they had to risk blowing the building up in broad daylight with no apparent explanation? Some have suggested that the CIA had files inside which would have been compromised by the chaos of that day. This is hard to believe, as the site was quickly secured by gun toting soldiers. Another motive might have been to destroy the SEC files relating to the Enron and World Com scandals. Perhaps. Far more likely IMO is the possibility that the demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 were radio controlled from within building 7. The bulky equipment would have been a smoking gun, and the planners wanted it destroyed. Keep in mind that the director of the emergency command center in building 7 was one Jerome Hauer, whose area of special expertise was the study of building collapses. What are the chances?

    Of course we might remember that building collapses were on peoples minds in the aftermath of the 93 WTC bombing. So perhaps it made sense to have an expert like Hauer on the premises. After all, the “masterminds” of the 93 bombing plot had intended to topple one building onto its twin, causing a fantastic number of casualties. Here is a quote from a 1994 copy of Newsweek magazine which also goes to great lengths to try to link Saddam Hussein to the bombing:
    “Consider the World Trade Center bomb. It was huge- 1,200 pounds of explosive material, topped with three cylinders of hydrogen gas. The plotters intended to topple one WTC tower into the other, killing tens of thousands. After the bombing, engineers worked feverishly to shore up the building’s weakened support columns to avoid a collapse.”
    In fact, this notion that the buildings almost collapsed is quite untrue. The bomb itself was placed in the parking garage of a hotel in the complex, and was not directly under either tower. The idea that one tower almost collapsed into the other was a complete fabrication.

    But perhaps it was a very useful fabrication. I read somewhere that both Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Pearle were quite enamored of the book written by the author of this quote, a woman named Laurie Mylroie. The book, “A Study in Revenge”, argued that the falling towers would have killed 250,000 New yorkers. Could this “threat” have been used as a rational for placing demolition charges in both buildings? It could well have been argued by the Stratesec operatives running WTC security that the fireproof demolition charges would only be used as a last resort, to save lives in the event of an immanent collapse of one or both towers. I mention this both by way of speculative explanation, that is, how they did it, and also because it provides a potential excuse to the perpetrators should the presence of demolition charges ever be proven. With this rational in place, the Bush neocons and the deep state were emboldened to execute their extremely risky scheme.The prophylactic demolition charge excuse would have been plan B, the rock under which they planned to hide, should the truth ever become known and undeniable.

    • Chris, good to gear your voice- have your comments.

      “It bears a family resemblance to the Nazi’s “We are the master race” lie.+- Absolutely. How they’ve used this lie, and its consequences are parallel to the Nazi state. Motherland, Fatherland … and here comes the Homeland Security Department. NSA and Stasi; did you watch ‘the lives of others’? They had Stasi- we have NSA, FBI, DHS … + the technological advancements making the impact a million times worse.

  35. “Free Fall. An ideologically neutral fact (act) as consequential as the shift of the tides. There it is ! Neutral fact. Evidence based . Not speculative. NIST HAVE BEEN FORCED To that Admittance by CITIZEN INVESTIGATION and challenge. ( thank you David Chandler) Again. Nils Harrit is about to do legal combat to prove this very point in a Danish court hopefully UN-influenced by Alvin Hellerstein, although I am certain tentacles will be at work . Empirical evidence based contest. Free Fall . This is where it begins. In one hundred and eight feet of free falling 81 column’d steel framed high rise. That 2.25 seconds is where the consensus begins. at “impossible”. The “impossibility” of steel framed structures to behave as observed without incendiary/explosives. ‘As consequential as the shift of the tides’.
    The 911 consensus group have done excellent work establishing forensic/scientific start points to this contest. The work of Kevin Ryan David Griffin, Harrit, jones, McQueen Richard Gage and his entire team most emphatic toward science base challenge WHEN that paradigm sift occurs….y’know, that shift the ENTIRE superstate is guarding against.

    Not necessarily wanting to enter into Speculation, but happy to, given the amount of reading and thinking done on the matters; reasonable to presume Salamon #7 was supposed to detonate DURING destructive sequences of one or two. We would never have known had the dust cleared and it was already down. Or never have known with the CERTAINTY afforded by its being pulled at 5:20.
    Speculative; it miss fired. Hence the team recorded coming out telling us to’keep your eye on that building, it’s coming down soon’. Hence the full column damage run up the hidden-from-all-view (but one) South face.
    Barry Jennings was in no doubt weakening blasts were going off all morning. That is evidence. Never recanted.

  36. Leaving it to the experts is a very problematic notion for me also.

    In the case of the destruction of the WTC, which experts do I believe? Those who prepared the NIST report? Or those who post articles on websites such as AE for 911 truth?

    Another example. Vaccines. Do I believe the hype put out by the pharmaceutical industry telling me how wonderful vaccines are and that my health is at dire risk without them? And this story is backed up by “authority” figures such as the FDA and it is also backed up by the “education” system demanding that children be vaccinated or they won’t be allowed to attend school. Or do I believe the information put out by “natural” health practitioners who tell a very different tale and warn how damaging to health vaccines can be, the latter story being backed up by so many mothers who have seen their children die immediately after being vaccinated or be turned into unresponsive autistic shells of their former selves? Oh, yes, the mothers would not classify as “experts”, but I’ll let you guess whom I believe!

    I am an engineer by training and one of my former fellow PhD students often used to say to me “For goodness sakes, use your women’s intuition!” Strange comment for someone so heavily educated in the scientific method! And interestingly enough I regarded him as an expert in his field of research, and he spoke with great authority and inspired confidence in his views. He was a great mate and I am not denigrating him for one minute. However, it was only a couple of years later when my own work forced me to take a close look into his field of research and I realised that one conclusion that he had reached was completely wrong and the opposite was true and I backed up my conclusion by experiment. The “expert” sometimes has a very narrow field of vision and that in itself can prevent the “expert” seeing the bigger picture and thereby reaching a completely wrong conclusion.

    The take home message for me is to be wary of so-called experts, they can be wrong and often are, and I think my friend was right in this – you have to also rely on your “women’s intuition” even in spite of what some lofty expert with credentials coming out the yin yang might be telling you.

    BTW in the land of Oz one of the definitions of an “expert” is a “drip under pressure”! I don’t know whether that translates into US vernacular!

    • Hi Doc,

      First, welcome to our discussion- happy to see a new voice here.

      It depends on how you interpret the statement I me re: experts. You brought up vaccines, so I will expand upon my stand/statements based on that example. A few weeks back I posted a great/sound article-analysis written by Doctor Donald Miller. I have tremendous amount of respect for him. Despite his incredible credential and reputation, after blowing the whistle on issues such as vaccines/perverted food pyramid, he has come under ‘fire’ by the medical industry (Big Pharma and their little goffers-fellow doctors). Now, for the last seven years or so I have been an avid researcher on children and vaccines and I have a pretty strong position on the vaccines and the big pharma industry. I proudly published Dr. Miller’s article, and I am in 100% agreement with his position/opinion. On the other hand, I would never, ever, sit down and write an article/analysis on this issue despite having a fairly strong opinions (and minority stand as an anti- most-vaccinations). It would be highly preposterous, ridiculous, ludicrous, self-defeating. !- I am not an expert; 2- I am not armed with required education/knowledge/training/experience to defend one position/theory against another, and do so soundly and scientifically acceptable. Period. Does this prevent me from having an opinion? No. Does this prevent me from resisting and opposing the vaccination-pressure? No. Do I have a stand and apply that stand to myself and my family? Yes.

      The same principle applies to Federal Reserve as a topic/an issue, engineering-related topics/cases, housing and mortgaging related issues.

      So, no, I believe people can’t believe, accept, support … but personally without having credential/expertise/experience/training. On the other hand, I never read articles written on issues that require scientific knowledge/experience/training by some ‘Joe’ who has a strong opinion (right or wrong).And I never write or go interview about something I don’t consider myself reasonably knowledgeable …

      And add to all this: my past experiences (12+ years) with staunch activists in this area (building collapse) have been, unfortunately, very unpleasant. This is one of those 9/11 activism areas where ugliness, rudeness, ignorance, vulgar-ness , stupidity … tend to show up a lot. In fact, one of the first thing my husband said when I began recording for this subtopic: ‘I hope you won’t end up with some of those very ugly people showing up here as new subscribers, filling up the space/pages with rant and ugliness, and then being forced to clean up the house/forum.’ And this is coming from someone who hasn’t even seen 1% of the ugliness I have within many of these forums.

      And finally, I would like to see people focusing on our macro topics, context and examples. If I see this forum/podcast episodes being hijacked by ‘those’ who have caused nothing but damage for the cause, I would have no choice but to politely ask them to vacate their spot, and go join one of the hundreds of trenches out there that are dedicated to their ’cause’ and swim with their buddies in the same swampy water.

  37. Hello to y’all who need to comment. BLDG 7, BLDG 7, BLDG 7????!!!!

  38. arealjeffersonian says:

    Sibel, I understand where you’re coming from here. As you say, there are many, many sites out there where those who are so inclined can present and discuss their theories, imaginations, whatever, re 9/11 “details”. We don’t need to and should not muddy the waters here with that. Lets not let the trees get in the way of seeing the forest – stick with macro topics.

    • Thanks, Jeffersonian.

      You are right. We will be staying with our macro issues and causes.

      Thank you for using the Forest-trees analogy: I see it exactly the same way. I have said it several times: I will never put up, accept, the ultra-ugly dynamics present in majority if ‘those’ forums. They are out there, free and open to all, let them tackle those topics, and let us do what we have been doing here successfully (so far!;-)

  39. Hello Ronald, thank you for the information regarding Wayne Madsen – his work is new to me. I just read his 8 part series on Epstein-SexSlavePilot-NM. Fascinating. I also read the aricle where he links the same ‘Tail Number’ used on Epstein’s helicopter with 2 other planes, one of which was used by Dyncorp. I believe this article to be the one you referred to when you said…

    ‘Hopsicker found that the same plane involved in a drug bust was also used for extraordinary renditions) and even pedophile networks – the latter is suggested in a recent story of Wayne Madsen’s where he noted the coincidence of the same tail number for different aircraft, one which belonged to Jeffery Epstein and the other being contracted to Dyncorp from the State dept.’

    For me this information has been a fascinating discovery, beginning with Mike M and Sibel discussing Hopsicker’s writing – in spite of it being somewhat off-topic to Sibel’s current podcast. In particular, the link to Australia and the tenuous but plausible connection that Hopsicker suggests between the Australian plane drug-bust, pedo rings and CIA drug trafficking.

    As this informs part of the research I am doing at present, I would welcome any other suggestions from BFP subscribers to authors and investigators who follow this particular thread.

    Sibel, I am thoroughly enjoying your podcasts. Please keep them coming.

    Thank you, all.

  40. Personal statement: Until I had encountered and digested the more structured and documented contributions on the macro picture by people such as Peter Dale Scott, Sibel, Doug Valentine, various astute observers/commenters, among others, I really didn’t understand what I was looking at. Now I feel I have a fairly accurate picture of how and why things work in the world, both in front and behind the scenes.

    I have tasted some of the vile condescension that Sibel has eluded to witnessing on OTHER sites and I agree that it’s poisonous. We are being treated here to first hand accounts of real import combined with sharp commentary from ALL and agree we should take care NOT to “lose the forest for the trees.” My 2 cents.

  41. I am ashamed to admit my total lack of expertise in absolutely everything.

  42. Looking back with a POV informed by this marvelous place and Sibel’s books…what now jumps out at me about the post-9/11 anthrax mailings, is the target list. Media organizations and a couple of senators who someone wanted to give a warning to? “Stay in line…or else.”

    Just a thought.

    • Yes. Have you read “The Anthrax Deception” by Graeme MacQueen? Recommended. MacQueen well integrates and documents what was a disturbing though largely fragmented story.

      • Now it is on my list of to-read books. Thank you for the recommendation- I didn’t know about this book.

      • Thanks Peter, will get it immediately and read it next. Not from Amazon though, they and I are OVER. I tried to send a number of copies of Classified Woman to special friends, but every order was cancelled at least twice, for utterly specious reasons. ONLY THAT BOOK. Orders I had in process for mundane items had no issues.

        That, after my being a customer since 1997 and never having a problem during the course of hundreds of orders. Somebody was sending a message with the subtlety of a 2×4 upside the head…

    • Definitely. From the timing to the targets … to everything that aspired afterwards. We all know about false flag and designed-staged events, but what a sloppy job they did with this one … YET, they were able to sell it to the majority. Pair this up with another one: OBL killing. As if they intend to prove that ‘you can sell to the public even the most ridiculous and badly-designed and executed narrative!’

  43. A heads Up: Getting ready to record our coming episode: Deep-State Manifestos, from AJAX and Northwoods to PNAC & 9/11.

  44. So true. How in gods name they swing these narratives is an act of magic to me. Again. Karl ROVE quote..”we (they)create new realities….while we (out here) get to talk about what they do”
    And. In terms of this ability to create narratives, ISIL, ‘they’ manage absolute control over the existence of evidence of Superstate / ISIL by blanket suppression. So creation of false flags, creation of commission reports and outright silence are all method .I look forward to Marie Harf avoiding (while giving Brad the ‘prom’ nod) answering why two US., one Israeli, and one ‘Arabic speaker’ “advisors” Were captured by Iraqi/Iran forces with ISIL. Outright denial??
    So they not only pretend major events DO happen., they also pretend major events DON’t.
    TEHRAN (FNA)- A senior Iraqi legislator lashed out at the western countries and their regional allies for supporting Takfiri terrorists in Iraq, and said he is in possession of irrefutable intelligence documents showing that ISIL is receiving arms aids from Israel as well as a number western and Arab countries.
    “We have intelligence which shows Israel and some major western and regional states have supplied weapons to ISIL,” Al-Qad news website quoted member of the Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee Abbas al-Khazali as saying on Monday.
    Its interesting, this. I passed these news reports on to a close friend working a national radio network who is interested in discovery, and as soon as ‘Fars=Iran connect was made, said straight away the news dept. Would automatically dismiss “Iran? Propaganda!” ….while reading out the next sentence feed from BBC /CNN scripting Putin/aggression/Ukraine. That old stuxnet virus implosion…A priori .censorship from the inside.
    Adding gravity to the understanding that 911 is an INSIDE job .

Speak Your Mind