Letter to an old friend

[Keith Mothersson]

XXXXX is an old and dear friend, and a close colleague in various contexts since the early 70's, who works in the global peace movement.

Dear XXXXX,
That was a lengthy evening phone call after a longish gap (which itself reflects the increasing 'stickyness' of our dialogue about global peace issues these days). I should have cleared a decent chunk of time with you in advance, and for that I apologise.

The thing I find hardest is that when I keep coming back to the [url]Three[/url] buildings hit by [url]two[/url] planes falling at virtually freefall speed albeit through themselves (path of max resistance) so many people keep diving off in different directions - e.g. you went to

a) 'rival experts' (I replied that the parameters of height of buildings, speed of collapse etc are not in serious dispute nor the laws of physics, and children of ten know intuitively that stuff takes longer to fall through stuff than through air),

b) to all the other confusing aspects of the things concerning which there are lots of different theories about what happened that day [which incidentally I don't deny, though we can , I would say, conclude on several of them, e.g. the Pentagon hole is too small; the 'put options' traced to Buzzy Krongard's CIA-linked company; and the presumptive GUILT (not just 'Unanswered guestions') to be ascribed to with-holding of CCTV, computer and forensic records] - to which I replied that that the internal demolitions in Manhattan are the crux of what killed the vast majority of 2,900 people, so deserves to be central in our analysis. (Incidentally according to Andrew Groves of Project Constellation the Pentagon attack knocked out the office with the records concerning the 2.3 trillion dollars which the Pentagon had just admitted the day before were missing from their accounts).

Other people go off into:
c) apriori dogmas about how such large conspiracies aren't possible, but as I argue here Physics should logically trump sociology in such a case:
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=2218&highlight=#2218

Still others go off into:
d) 'high-level' arguments about the importance of institutional and historical analysis of 'structural' factors in world affairs (like economics, class, global caste/race, patriarchy), which is counterposed (in our view totally unnecessarily) to what sociologists would see as 'social action theory' (or 'conspiracy theory' as it is pejoratively called): i.e. what gangs of guys get up to (why we need to include gender in our model of para-politics, and para-politics in our model of FRATriarchy).

e) low level ad hominem arguments about how come we 911 people think what we think (as if there isn't an obvious counter concerning what makes believers in the Official story believe what they believe: the whole discourse about the 'conspiracist mindset' is obviously reversible in so far as we would say that to believe the official conspiracy theory is to clutch at a simple solution of trouble coming from an identifiable bad guy, Bin Laden) - but to be sure there is a danger of me and others becoming obsessively focussed (the force behind the 'cult' charge) on what others are arguably just as obessessively not-seeing (interdependent origination, Buddhists call it).

Of course you also differ from me in your water-under-the-bridge assessment of the degree of political work it is appropriate now for us to put into this issue. In my view these iconic-for-us triple towers remain an indispensable and standing open goal which we all need to shout about and shoot at!

Sensibly integrated into other campaigns and analyses 911 can help us defeat not just this one network (in first instance) but the whole Debt-Money driven fanatical Growth compulsion and Oil Frat Global Suicide Cult (like Jonestown and Easter Island) which has hijacked our world and shows no signs of letting go so long as this savage Goya-style 911giant is still staggering on bloodied but unbrought down (or, to mix metaphors something rotten, this mythic global fount of their War on terror Cult is still flowing - and giving rise to regional subsidiary myths).

But when (okay if and when) the 911 Myth itself falls then we are hoping many people will want to join us in pressing home a whole bunch of other questions: what else haven't we been told the truth about? what about chemtrails, aspartame, rfid, HAARP, etc; what about Bali, Madrid, London? [see Appendix]

And more generally, why should society not withdraw from the established owners and controllers of the media the right to call themselves newspapers, news channels? - they who for five (six or whatever) years stopped any serious debate about these matters, as if we were living in the Pravda [Official Truth] world of Stalinist Russia.

So 911 is not just a neocon open goal, its also potentially a huge systemic 'own goal'. And for society to awaken to this lynchpin psy-op could portend nonviolent revolution, X, and last time we talked about it that was something we both believed in. This isn't 'exploiting the memory of the vicitims of 911' , it is honouring them with the truth and doing whatever it takes to ensure that such lawless unaccountable frats can no longer operate in the future, nor consciously repress the truth if they do.

Moving back from our wider perspective on 911 to the frustrations we both experienced in discussing it, I reckon one of the ways confusion reigns is when we keep oscillating back and forth (without agreed protocol, clear signalling, skilful chairing, etc) between

a) historical and arguments about what happened (and what can be known by us?) and

b) pragmatic arguments about can what we know be generally known in society (can the Internet and dvd-copying defeat centralised media?) .... which easily elides into

c) arguments about the political significance of 911 and other false flag events: Is there added value? Is 911 truth-telling vital solidarity for victimised Muslims or a 'vulnerability-incurring 'distraction' liable to get 'us' ridiculed' [who this 'us'?] ?

Finally you may like to look at my own reflections on Denial – and Denial about Denial! at http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=24483&highlight=#244 83)

More widely on Truth Telling – toward a more rounded view of Truth and ‘Right speech’, you may like to look at http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=38250&highlight=#382 50


I will send you Loose Changes (shown in 40 countries to date, and an hour ago I just heard RTE has bought it to show in Ireland), and 911 Eyewitness which is very moving, filmed from across the water and narrated by the regular American businessman guy who filmed it, with inserted Physics material where relevant. You can see explosions and hear the booms which go off several seconds before the buildings collapse, with accompanying eddying up of huge clouds of smoke from ground level.

We can argue about what to do about 911, whether and how much added-value it brings or could bring to all our various struggles, e.g. climate change. But please don't take refuge in not knowing, XXXXX.

If it was any other little criminal, like some local drug syndicate, accused of bringing down the buildings, everyone would take one look at the way Buildings 1, 2 and 7 fell and say, sure it is obvious: inside job.

It is only because this touches on POWER (and touching on Power can get Power touching on us) - that society is so damned jumpy and desperate to zoom off into other hypotheses, post-modern confusionism (aided by an army of CIA cyber-warriors and jaded pundits and academics), and silently grant 'coincidence theorist' benefit of non-existent doubt for fear of incurring Power's 'Watch-it!' branding as a 'crazy conspiracy theorist'.

This is what I mean by needing to work on and dissolve our 'collective overself', to struggle deeper to get back in touch with our original 'communal underself' whereby we can stand in intuitive and instinctive solidarity with those being attacked, framed, threatened - and no longer 'need' to fear seeing what is in front of our eyes, because we no no longer experience any (inner) 'need' (compulsion) to continue over-identifying with Power. (okay that's my ad hominem take on those who deny 911 was a clear inside job).

I don't expect a reply, I am sure you will think about our coversation, as I will think about things you said. Certainly I am worried by the isolating psychic costs of this struggle, but I swear it ain't just me!

This is a sticky time between us. This too will pass.

take care for now, XXXXX

Keith

Appendix:

On Bali the following by the incomparable Joe Vialls makes the case that it was a micronuke (first quarter of this long article, with the rest detailing the absurd media stories and police frame-up) http://www.vialls.com/nuke/bali_micro_nuke.htm

On Madrid please see the blog of Luis del Pino investigating 'the enigmas of M11'
http://www.libertaddigital.com/bitacora/enigmas11m/
or the following in English:
http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/007961.php.

On the London bombings www.julyseventh.co.uk has for the past year been under new management, and I think you will agree it is now much more tightly fact based. I will include my article published with editing in Indra's Net (UK engaged Buddhists) which, like the full page ad in the Independent doesn't even mention the 'Kingstar' van (Masonic sounding name of a firm which offers specialist explosions to their clients) which bizarrely happens to be placed five feet from back of bus just when it blows up (or a second or two earlier or later? - wouldn't we like to know!, but the (working) traffic cam footage is being withheld.)

Nor did I mention the offices of ICTS, which overlook the scene of the explosion in Tavistock Sq, about 40 yards distant. ICTS stands (I think) for International Consultants on Transport Security; it works closely with the London Resilience consortium (corporate crisis management) and was quite possibly hosting the Peter Power exercises that morning 'at precisely the same locations and times as actually happened'. It was started by people who had left Shin Bet (Israeli Military).

To mention the Kingstar van or ICTS is to risk getting accused of anti-semitism - even though it is Zionism which one wants to aim at when the cap seems to fit, and Mossad is obviously one of the most active frats in the world, along with MI6, which serves the City and the Crown/Cabinet office/Monarchy, and various US agencies and privatised trans-national networks as per Webster Tarpley. (Less actively aggressive are various other secret services of course, including Iran, Russia, etc who may at times also do false flag events. But at present I think that the automatic presumption of Equidistance - both sides as bad as each other - is as unfruitful now as it was in the eighties.)