“Any authentic search for peace must begin with the realization that the problem of truth and untruth is the concern of every man and woman; it is decisive for the peaceful future of our planet.”
Pope Benedict XVI
The most important purpose of political blogging is a search for truth in order to find a way for peace.
I truly believe that only truth can set us free.
Truth isn´t always easy or comfortable. Sometimes truth hurts, hurts badly, nearly rips up your soul.
You have to give up cherished beliefs and altogether leave your comfort-zone and risk becoming an outsider, somebody to be scorned or ridiculed.
But still it is absolutely essential to have the courage to face up to the truth, especially to face up to the truth about 9/11 and recognize the lies which this “War on Terror” is built upon.
When we are ready to actually face the truth, we will come to the conclusion, that the so-called “War on Terror” is a war on Middle Eastern people, a war on developing countries in Africa and South-America as well, a war on Islam and Muslims all over the world; and with all the new anti-terrorism laws reducing or even abolishing most of the Civil Liberties in all western countries, it actually is now a war on all of humanity.
We bloggers are searching for truth, knowing that some truths, like the spiritual ones, can only be approached and never be totally comprehended with our human understanding.
In the same way other truths, scientific or historic, will sometimes be presented in imperfect and even contradicting theories for lack of final conclusive evidence. We are never finished learning as individuals and as a human species. And therefore our imperfect theories have to be revised often.
The climate-gate scandal isn´t about errors in theories, which always can happen, but about deliberate falsification of data. However, there are truths concerning science or the most recent history which can be established with near perfect certainty, following the lead of testimonies, documentary and physical evidence and, of course real, and non-falsified scientific data.
Let´s take the “Global Warming” fraud which is unraveling at the moment. The real “inconvenient truth” here is that Al Gore was deliberately lying and “Hockey Stick” Mann and his clique were deliberately falsifying data and pushing those who wanted to be honest out to create the deceptive image that the “science was settled” on the issue. Mann and Co were in the employ of a powerful Malthusian elitist group, serving a political agenda not the pursuit of honest scientifically based truth.
Just like the science fraudsters among the climatologists, the official “scientists” from NIST (the National Institute for Standards and Technology), who were contracted to “investigate” the WTC towers collapses of 9/11 deliberately falsified data to fit presupposed political conclusions.
Let´s recap how the scientific truth movement began after 9/11:
It started with both photographic and eye-witness evidence contradicting in so many details the official account of what happened on 9/11/01 in New York that for more and more people it became altogether implausible.
And then there was Physics Professor Steven E. Jones, of BYU University, who did the first peer-reviewed scientific study, questioning the official story.
In his paper Jones came to the conclusion that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were most likely brought down, not just by the impact damage and the subsequent fires, but by the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges, using termite or one of its variants.
In public talks, in front of university audiences at first, and later given to the public Dr. Jones argued,
“that the physics behind the government’s explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11 do not make sense, and that a better (and perhaps only) explanation for their collapse was that they were demolished, exactly the way structural engineers bring down large buildings, by prepositioned explosive devices set off in precise sequences.”
He explained that the 650 degree Celsius temperature of burning jet fuel would not have been hot enough to even bend the steel girders of the WTC Towers, let alone to melt or evaporate them, as recovered beams indicate. And even if it was hot enough to evaporate the steel, the towers should not have collapsed as they did, pancaking so perfectly into their own footprints.
On the rare occasions when such structures had failed (always due to earthquakes), they had toppled over sideways. The towers had to have been perfectly sliced, at every point along a horizontal plane at exactly the same instant, for something even resembling a pancaking effect to occur.
And even if they did somehow pancake perfectly into their own footprints due to a structural failure, they would not have done so in the time it took for them to collapse, falling at essentially the speed of an apple dropped from the top of one of the towers, with nothing between it and the ground but thin air.
“The steel and concrete in the floors that collapsed should have taken some measurable time to break, and thus slowed the collapse somewhat as it unfolded.
And even if it did collapse, at super speed, phwack phwack phwack, floor by floor, as fast as an apple falling through the air, impelled by the weight of the decapitated structure above it, its solid steel frame severed like a head by a flaming guillotine, that does not explain the molten steel seen at the Ground Zero clean-up site many days after the event.
What could have caused such heat?”
asked Professor Jones
In time Professor Jones was joined by hundreds of other scientists and while he was fired from his job at BYU, he still received funding to do even more research on the subject.
And -with the help of New Yorkers living close to Ground Zero- Jones was able do an even more thorough investigation on the dust produced during the collapse of the Towers.
And last year he published the results of his investigation. He found clearly that there was indeed explosives residue found in those dust-samples Jones and some colleagues examined. Indeed they found clear evidence of military grade explosives.
Having the truth about 9/11 publicly accepted is the surest way to stop the bogus “War on Terrorism” and save the life of possibly millions of people in the world and prevent a Orwellian fascist global police state.
The unveiling of deliberate untruths and lies is absolutely necessary to overcome the manipulating influences of people in the highest positions over western societies who are influenced by a truly”evil” philosophy namely, that “the end justifies the means”.
It is now a fact, no longer to be denied, that the “War on Terror” is a tool to propagate a long-wearing war, lasting possibly for generations; a “Clash of Civilizations”. We now see clearly that the new Obama government has no intention of changing the Bush policies any time soon. Instead Nobel-Peace-prize winner Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan and started a new one in Pakistan.
The initiators of these war are an elitist group in or connected to the Bush government, but also today firmly embedded into the Obama government. Their world-view is Nihilistic, Social Darwinist, built upon the philosophies of Machiavelli, Nietzsche and Leo Strauss. Their motives and future plans are partly written down in a paper developed by their most prominent think tank the “PNAC”.
The thoughts that came out of the PNAC are absolutely shocking to everyone with even the slightest ethical leaning.
“Rebuilding America’s Defenses (RAD)” is a policy document published by a neoconservative Washington think tank called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Its pages have been compared to Hitler’s Mein Kampf in that they outline an aggressive military plan for U.S. world domination during the coming century…..
The building of Pax Americana has become possible, claims “RAD,” because the fall of the Soviet Union gave the United States status as the world’s preeminent superpower. Consequently the US must now work hard, not only to maintain that position, but to spread its military might into geographic areas that are ideologically opposed to its influence, waging “multiple simultaneous large-scale wars” to subdue countries that may stand in the way of US global preeminence. Rationales offered for going to war with other nations are the preservation of the “American peace” and the spread of “democracy.”
On Preserving American Preeminence:
“It is not a choice between preeminence today and preeminence tomorrow. Global leadership is not something exercised at our leisure, when the mood strikes us or when our core national security interests are directly threatened; then it is already too late. Rather, it is a choice whether or not to maintain American military preeminence, to secure American geopolitical leadership, and to preserve the American peace” (p. 76).
“The Cold War world was a bipolar world; the 21st century world is – for the moment, at least – decidedly unipolar, with America as the world’s ’sole superpower.’ America’s strategic goal used to be containment of the Soviet Union; today the task is to preserve an international security environment conducive to American interests and ideals. The military’s job during the Cold War was to deter Soviet expansionism. Today its task is to secure and expand the ‘zones of democratic peace;’ to deter the rise of a new great-power competitor; defend key regions of Europe, East Asia and the Middle East; and to preserve American preeminence through the coming transformation of war made possible by new technologies” (p. 2).
Policies advocated in “RAD” are being enacted with terrifying speed, such as denigration of the UN, importance of Homeland Security, abrogation of international agreements, revamping of the US nuclear program and the spread of American military power into all corners of the globe by preemptive engagement. In Iraq we have seen the embodiment of “RAD” directives that call for the subjugation of regimes considered hostile to US interests and the prevention of military build-up in countries that may challenge US power. Bush’s “Axis of Evil” nations Iraq, Iran and North Korea are mentioned numerous times as potential trouble spots and there is repeated insistence that the US establish military outposts in the Middle East and East Asia.
Most frightening is its complete isolation from any ideas of world unity and cooperative action. The authors appear to be intent on waging war as an answer to the problems of our planet, tragically imagining that peace can be won by enforcing American values on every other nation. A more chilling statement of the PNAC devotion to militaristic domination cannot be found than in Richard Perle’s concept of “total war”. “No stages,” he said, “This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq… this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war… our children will sing great songs about us years from now.”……..
Four Vital Missions
“RAD” lists four vital missions “demanded by US global leadership”:
. . . the United States . . . must counteract the effects of the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction that may soon allow lesser states to deter US military action by threatening US allies and the American homeland itself. Of all the new and current missions for US armed forces, this must have priority.
Second, the United States must retain sufficient forces able to rapidly deploy and win multiple simultaneous large-scale wars and also to be able to respond to unanticipated contingencies in regions where it does not maintain forward-based forces.
Third, the Pentagon must retain forces to preserve the current peace in ways that fall short of conducting major theater campaigns. . . . These duties are today’s most frequent missions, requiring forces configured for combat but capable of long-term, independent constabulary operations.
“Transform US Armed Forces.
Finally, the Pentagon must begin now to exploit the so-called ‘revolution in military affairs,’ sparked by the introduction of advanced technologies into military systems; this must be regarded as a separate and critical mission worthy of a share of force structure and defense budgets” (p. 6).
“. . . the failure to provide sufficient forces to execute these four missions must result in problems for American strategy. And the failure to prepare for tomorrow’s challenges will ensure that the current Pax Americana comes to an early end” (p. 13)……..”
Other motives for the “War on Terror” are:
- Increasing power, wealth and influence of the “Military Industrial Complex” and its main share-holders
- and the restructuring of Middle Eastern Countries into small units fractured along ethnic and sectarian religious lines, to make the area safe for Israel, as lined out by the policy paper:
““A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”written for right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This paper was also written by some members of the PNAC think-tank, namely Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser, who later became the war-planners for the Bush II administration.
9/11 was the “New Pearl Harbour” the major decisive event, mentioned in the PNAC strategy paper, to initiate this process, the process to achieve Full Spectrum Dominance