9-11 Epistemology: Steven Jones vs. Judy Wood By Zahir Ebrahim

 
By Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
September 19, 2016 | Last updated September 21, 2016
Click to enlarge WTC Waterfall Demolition September 11, 2001, 10:27 am. Photograph via NYC Police Authority Caption Click on image to enlarge WTC Waterfall Demolition September 11, 2001, 10:27 am. Photograph via NYC Police Authority
This analysis, an extension of my Open Letter to 9/11 Truth Chiefs, April 30, 2011, is extracted from Footnote [17] of my Comment on Judy Wood's 'The New Hiroshima'. The presentation in this addendum emphasizes the common problem faced by all the HOW detective chiefs of the 9-11 Truth in their respective calls for “New Investigation” of how the WTC towers were destroyed on 9/11. Over the past decade, each of them appears to have gathered around their respective HOW narrative, largely the type-2 demographics identified by Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf as the “useless for any form of positive work”. Just like the mainstream flock with whom they had parted company from, identified by Hitler as the type-1 demographics composed of “the crowd of simpletons and the credulous”, was, and still is, gathered around the officialdom's narrative. Their common problem – indeed for all calls for “New Investigation” – is epistemology. This analysis examines just one piece of exemplary evidence brought forth by both Steven Jones and Judy Wood, each arguing the opposite thesis, one says it was hot, the other says it was not, to advance the commonsense argument that all HOW exponents, regardless of their personal inclination, must first come to grips with the Epistemology of 9-11. The following question must first be answered: What is evidence? It is expanded upon below.
My earliest cached copy of Steven Jones' online version of his very first "peer-reviewed" "published paper", “Why indeed did the WTC buildings completely collapse?”, is available from archive.org.
Its timestamp in the PDF Summary is: September 7, 2006 (Created: 9/7/2006 5:04:13 PM, 48 Pages, 1.13 MB, Acrobat Distiller 7.0 Windows). As I had observed in my letter to my 9-11 truther co-alum from MIT back in February 2011, I had downloaded four copies of Jones' paper over 2006-2007, not realizing that each time I was saving a slightly different version which had been revised after the advertised publication date noted in the paper's footer: Journal of 9/11 Studies September 2006/Volume 3. This cached version is identical to the one cached and cited by Judy Wood as the source of her fig 6 (see below).
Steven Jones has cited this paper and its publication date –– as in the following citation in his subsequent much heralded "peer-reviewed" paper published by Bentham Open in: The Open Civil Engineering Journal, 2008, 2, 35-40 35 1874-1495/08 2008 Bentham Science Publishers Ltd., titled: Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction by Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti and James R. Gourley –– as follows:
"[13] S. E. Jones, “Why indeed did the WTC buildings completely collapse?”, Journal of 9/11 Studies, vol. 3, pp. 1-47, September 2006. [Online]. Available: www.journalof911studies.com [Accessed March 17, 2008]."
I have in my possession a total of four versions of that paper with that exact same September 2006 date appearing in the footer of the paper, and only one has 47 pages, the others have 48. Examining the paper carefully, it appears that all these versions are actually work-in-progress! A core dump of preliminary ideas at best, being carried out in public as “peer reviewed” “published paper”. And also cited as such. Here are the timestamps of each from the respective PDF Summary:
  • [a] September 7, 2006 (Created: 9/7/2006 5:04:13 PM, 48 Pages, 1.13 MB, Acrobat Distiller 7.0)
  • [b] October 9, 2006 (Created: 10/9/2006 2:40:43 PM, 48 Pages, 1.23 MB, Acrobat Distiller 7.0)
  • [c] November 14, 2006 (Created: 11/14/2006 1:30:21 PM, 48 pages, 4.79 MB, Ghostscript 8.53)
  • [d] January 25, 2007 (Created: 1/25/2007 2:11:11 PM, 47 Pages, 4.77 MB, Ghostscript 8.53)
The fig 6 of Judy Wood is present on page 18 of the first two versions [a] and [b], but it has been substituted by another photograph in versions [c] and [d] without intimating the reason for substitution in the paper.
Here are the Diff images of page 18 between the version cited by Judy Wood (which is identical to [a]) and [b] [c] [d].
Caption Diff between Version [a] and [b]
Caption Diff between Version [a] and [b]
Caption Diff between Version [a] and [c]
Caption Diff between Version [a] and [c]
Caption Diff between Version [a] and [d] - ([a] is on the right)
Caption Diff between Version [a] and [d] - ([a] is on the right)
As one can see, Judy Wood's fig 6 no longer appears either in that 47 page version issued on January 25 2007, or in the one issued before it, on November 14, 2006, but is present in both the September 7, 2006 and October 9, 2006 versions.
Why did Dr. Steven Jones quietly substitute that image in question without annotating any explanation in his paper? Did Jones discover it to be doctored? He gave no citation for that image. The citation link underneath the image: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1858491.stm, is evidently for the other image appearing on the top of that page and not the one he hath captioned: 'Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble'. That BBC News report link, as archive.org validates, never did contain that image in question. Where did Jones get that image from? He clearly suspected something was awry when he stated in the October 9 2006 version: “I am further checking whether these photos show the glow of molten metal, or of a bright light inserted into the hole.”
The credit is to Judy Wood's scholarly tenacity, or shall we say scholarly paranoia given that she knew she was in the domain of deception, that she did not shy from due diligence and unearthed the discrepancy in color temperature in the photograph on page 18 of the version of Jones' paper she evidently scrutinized and checked. As a diligent scholar, one presumes, she dutifully brought the finding to the attention of her peers in her fig 5 vs fig 6 comparison.
Figure 5. Original image. The fellow with the shovel, wearing a blue shirt, appears to be standing down in this hole.
(9/12/01)
Source (archive.org)
Figure 6. This is the image Jones captions “Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble.”
(9/12?/01)
Source (p. 18) (archive.org)
Caption Fig 5 and Fig 6 from Judy Wood's evidence stream Dirt4. Is the color temperature evidence of heat in fig 6? The super-fireman attired in short-sleeves displaying his bare forearms, visible more clearly in fig 5 as the one in blue shirt in the act of shoveling dirt from the rubble while standing in it, doesn't seem to care very much about that heat! Even if both images have unnatural color temperatures, the content of the otherwise identical images at least indicate that the fireman could withstand whatever heat there was in the rubble on his bare forearms. The brightness in the hole, as Jones had himself suggested in the October 9, 2006 version of his paper before making that silent image substitution in the November 14 2006 version, may have been due to bright (white) light.
Regardless of Jones' scholarly motivation for the silent substitution of the image, the color temperature shift in fig 6 in comparison to fig 5, is revealing of another even more significant and egregious matter that cuts to the very heart of the epistemology of 9-11.
Comparing fig 5 and fig 6 makes immediately apparent to even a novice person, how color temperature (and other content) can be trivially altered with Photoshop-like tools in cryptographically unauthenticated digital images unsecurely downloaded from the internet, and how easy it is to fool anyone of anything with photographs, presumably even of real events. In this instance, from the existential evidence of fig 6 and its attempted use by a scientist of Jones' calibre no less, it is clear that the debris can be made to appear hot just by changing the color temperature of the photographs because the public mind is attuned to associating hot with the glow of red from their daily experiences. Given this example, and one worthy example is usually sufficient to establish a rule as well as the exception, how can one be sure of anything about the rest of the photographic evidence of 9/11?
To mitigate such mischief and lend veracity to photographic evidence in court, authentication of images is done by inserting a cryptographic signature into the raw image record itself at the time of image capture in-camera, before the image leaves the camera body. It is the only authentication acceptable in a fair court of law for digital images, and is the holy grail of law-enforcement agencies who present material evidence in such fair courts for its admissibility. Digital camera companies make specialized camera versions with carefully scrutinized verification software capable of such cryptographic authentication of digital images captured by their device; that images remain untampered end to end when presented as evidence.
None of these publicly available images of 9/11 on the internet are authenticated as untampered after the images have left the camera, at least as far as I am aware. Most online as well as published writings use such publicly available unauthenticated images in reports and essays to convey respectable thesis. And propagandists of course do it for psychological warfare operations on the public mind. Judy Wood gave a definition of what Psyops means, quoting the Department of Defense just above that fig 5 vs fig 6 comparison in her Dirt4:
Psyops is an abbreviation for psychological operation.
Definition of Psychological Operations:
'Psychological Operations:  Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator's objectives. Also called PSYOP. See also consolidation psychological operations; overt peacetime psychological operations programs; perception management. ' US Department of Defense
So, demonstrating “hot” by way of color temperature is wanting of more empirical and material data to substantiate that assertion. The incongruity of the fireman in fig 5 (cited by Judy Wood as sourced from http://hereisnewyork.org/ whose Registrar Organization is listed by Whois: Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media, email address of Registrant: @gmu.edu), not wearing specialized attire for very high temperatures, and instead wearing only a short-sleeved shirt with his forearms bare, shoveling rubble while standing right at the edge, or inside, what is alleged “hot” by Steven Jones, arguably demonstrates that it cannot really be all that hot.
Tugging on just one loose thread unravels the best of knitted wool sweaters!
Here is a blowup of that photo in fig 5 from the source –– judge for yourself hot, or not hot.
Caption Can that brilliantly glowing substance really be hot like a blast furnace that melts structural steel into molten flowing lava?
Caption Can that brilliantly glowing substance in the rubble really be hot like a blast furnace that melts structural steel into molten flowing lava? The fireman in blue standing at the edge, or almost inside, of that glowing puddle is in short-sleeves, with his forearms bare! If that cauldron is indeed hot to melt structural steel, why isn't the fireman suitably attired for that temperature? In his short-sleeves, why isn't his arms scorched from that heat? Something does not add up. The firemen's oral reports cited by Jones in his paper say the rubble was hot. At least this photograph suggests not that hot, and the source of that bright glow is something else. Jones himself suggested it could have been light inserted into the hole. How to decide? What is evidence?
This analysis once again begs the question: What is evidence? Is an unauthenticated photograph evidence? Is an unauthenticated video recording evidence? Is an oral testimony evidence? Is logical reasoning evidence? Is two plus two making four evidence? Is deductive reasoning applied to data evidence? Is inductive logic applied to data evidence? Is commonsense applied to data evidence? What are the rules of evidence? And who, or which legal body, will decide this? The one who can shout the loudest? Or have the largest or most zealot fan following? Today, the establishmentarians, including their scientists, their logicians, and their experts across the board, reject commonsense and deductive reasoning applied to data as evidence.
When the world witnessed all the floors of a tall building collapse in near free-fall, at virtually gravity acceleration g, they still refuse to accept the commonsense observation that none of the floors experienced any resistance from below, and thus the logical deduction that all resistance beneath all floors must have been removed simultaneously. The conclusion this logical deduction leads to is only singular if two plus two is permitted to make four: the resistance beneath each floor that propped up that floor in its normal state must have been removed for all floors in a controlled manner simultaneously so as to bring the building down symmetrically into its own footprint. Pretty simple logic that takes one immediately to WHO: Who had the means, motive, and opportunity to plan and orchestrate such a precision controlled demolition with military-style secrecy of WTC-7, without the need for any further material evidence from the no longer existent debris field (see 911 The Sacred Cow of Science). But that reasoning is outright rejected! It is instead called “conspiracy theory” by the tallest and fairest intellects of the realm.
In an analogous manner, among those who continue to argue the detailed mechanics of the HOW in their dissent with the establishmentarians' version, some also reject what the world also witnessed the same day on their television screens: tall towers comprising millions of tons of concrete-steel structures turning to instant dust in a demolition wave that was also free-fall at gravity acceleration g per floor, or even faster, as it actually appears to be. They reject that the observation that millions of tons of steel-concrete structure turned to instant dust, is even a valid observation --- when it is right before their very eyes (See: Some of the principal data that must be explained, compiled by Judy Wood by observation) --- for that would again immediately take one to examining means, motive and opportunity without seeking further “material evidence” from the no-longer existent debris fields.
The two antagonists fielding opposite narratives seem to have common modus operandi – to avoid, by every means possible, going to means, motive and opportunity, the staple of forensic science, which would automatically identify the WHO: Who has the potential military science and technology capability to mutate millions of tons of steel-concrete structures into instant powdered dust, and plan and orchestrate that never before seen catastrophic decimation of WTC-1 and WTC-2 with military-style secrecy and military-style effectiveness in the most armed to the teeth sole superpower on earth with full control of the narrative? But the self-appointed detectives of dissent space of America still continue to endlessly debate the competing HOW modalities with almost religious fervor. None of them, evidently, have understood the political theory behind 9-11 which also explains their own behavior (see The Political Theory behind 9-11).
Thus we see that the determination of rules of evidence and rules of observation must be made ab initio, from first principles that were so forcibly introduced into the Western Mind by the Renaissance philosophers who put emphasis on intellectual reasoning and logic over faith in god's authority figures, as the principal means for understanding the world. They had borrowed that idea from the ancient Hellenic world to finally dispel their Dark Ages. Modern science, as a means for understanding reality, was born when this first principle was applied to empiricism and experimentation to make models and theories to explain reality, which others following the same principles could falsify (prove true or false) by their own observations and experimentation, and thus continually extend the domain of human knowledge. This first principle is the sine qua non of any sensible ex post facto (after the evidence has long been obliterated) scientific investigation of the HOW of 9-11.
But for some reason, faith in authority figures continues to dominate the Science of 9-11. This is also easily explained by the Political Theory behind 9-11 applied to Hitler's demographic classification for engineering both consent as well as dissent in Western Democratic societies that cannot ignore type-2 as Hitler had done under the bayonet of Nazi Socialism. It is examined in Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science.
And we are right back to the square-one epistemological problem of 9-11.
In the absence of the government having carefully preserved the crime scene, or the material evidence from it for forensic analysis of the real cause of the cataclysmic destruction of the entire WTC complex, all that latter day wannabe investigators and future historians are left with, are these unauthenticated photographs (including television news broadcast videos), and official narratives which have been canonized as “fact” by the fiat of power.
But there is something else left behind too: copious evidence of plans for aggression calling for a “New Pearl Harbor” to prime the public mind for “imperial mobilization”.
As we have unequivocally witnessed, these public photos, regardless of their source, are not beyond Psyops mischief of the social engineers, perception managers, and science hitmen of empire. Which makes logic and reasoning tools, including commonsense, and an acute understanding of the precedents of history to engineer the public mind, applied to whatever we do have, all the more pertinent as “material evidence” by themselves. A legal modus operandi which any shrewd public prosecutor will make a jury mindful of as the litmus test of credulity. It was also the standard established at Nuremberg Military Tribunal when the United States Chief Prosecutor replied to the incredulous protestations of the Nazi High Command that they had not known of Hitler's plans for aggression:
The plans of Adolf Hitler for aggression were just as secret as Mein Kampf, of which over six million copies were published in Germany” (Justice Robert H. Jackson, in his closing speech at Nuremberg, on Friday, 7/26/1946: Morning Session: Part 3, in Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal).
The sudden absence of all these multitudes of legal minds that litigious Westerndom, especially the United States of America, is famous for, from the 9-11 scene is again easily explained by the Political Theory behind 9-11. They are all cleverly substituted by endless calls for new “serious investigation” by those handful among the public who suddenly “woke-up” years later and stopped believing in the fairy tales of their government as they had previously done. By that time, the fait accompli of imperial mobilization had already been accomplished! Both Afghanistan and Iraq had been bombed back to pre-industrial times and their civilization lay in ruin. The arc of crisis had been craftily ignited. Fifteen years after 9-11, the fait accompli seeded when these brilliant stewards of dissent were asleep, has destroyed countless Muslim nations, caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands – but who is counting – and the world has moved towards a global police state. All explained by the Political Theory behind 9-11. But these type-2 sages of America of course only think in terms of Nobel peace prize for their new god who has now replaced their previous god, for his call for new “serious investigation”:
Press Release Jul 16, 2007
Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement
Contact: Richard Gage, AIA, Founding Member of AE911Truth.org
SAN FRANCISCO, CA July 16, 2007 -- San Francisco architect Richard Gage, AIA, founder of the group, 'Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth,' announced today the statement of support from J. Marx Ayres, former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council. ...
Shown below is Mr. Ayres full statement, which will be made available on the AE911T.org website with this press release.
Statement of J. Marx Ayres, MSME, P.E. July 16, 2007
"I am a consulting mechanical engineer with over 55 years of experience in the design and construction of all types of buildings including high-rise office towers. I am an expert in heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) and fire protection for buildings. I have authored 41 technical papers and I am a chapter author in 3 books covering HVAC systems, building and energy requirements, solar heating and cooling applications, thermal energy storage and earthquake damage to building nonstructural systems.
I support the work of Dr. Steven Jones. He has provided a scientific foundation for the collapse of the three World Trade Center (WTC) towers. I read the FEMA September, 2002 report, prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers, and initially accepted their theory of the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. As more information became available on the web, I was motivated to research the subject in a more rigorous manner. I have carefully studied the Jones 2006 paper, “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?” and concluded that it is a rational step-by-step study that meets the accepted standards for scientific building research. His critical reviews of the FEMA, NIST, and 9/11 Commission reports are correct. I have signed his petition calling for the release of all U.S. Government- held information regarding the events of 9/11/2001.
Steven Jones’ call for a “serious investigation” of the hypothesis that the WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fire, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges” must be the rallying cry for all building design experts to speak out. Dr. Jones is following in the footsteps of Dr. Linus Pauling of the California Institute of Technology, who rallied his fellow scientists to oppose the development of the Hydrogen Bomb and the testing of nuclear weapons. He was later awarded the 1962 Nobel Peace Prize for these efforts."
- ### -
What indeed is that fantastic Nobel prize winning discovery that Jones has brought forth in “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?” which this authority figure feels is: “rational step-by-step study that meets the accepted standards for scientific building research”?
This exemplary color temperature exposé sets a rational precedent, and is equally applicable to the rest of Jones' images in his write-up which he brings up as evidence of “hot”. It is not the color temperature of the photograph, but the effect of the object under consideration on the surrounding, that determines hot or not hot!
To generalize that commonsense, the (visible) effect adjudicates the presence or absence of the (often hidden) cause(s).
To exemplify that commonsense: If one observes in photographic and broadcast television data millions of tons of steel-concrete structure instantly pulverized into powdered dust, it is logical to assume a “force” that caused it. No 'conspiracy theory' there. No speculation there. Only simple logic.
To apply that commonsense: Both fig 5 and fig 6 show not hot because there is no heat effect on the arms of the fireman!
This self-evident logic makes all such unauthenticated photographic evidence where determination of effect on surrounding cannot be made, irrelevant, regardless of how warm or cool the color temperature is made out to be. Applying this logic based forensic yardstick to Jones' other “hot” photos on page 17 of his latest January 25 2007 write-up, makes them irrelevant, since the effect of the supposed heat on the surrounding cannot be ascertained!
There are other sets of imagery data available on the web where the effect on surrounding is immediately visible --- such as the WTC Waterfall captured in the photograph gracing Judy Wood's book cover. The WTC tower is observed to be instantly pulverized into dust top-down, in an ever expanding dust cloud that cascaded like a waterfall. In videos captured of this event which most people on planet earth with an internet connection must have surely seen, its steel-concrete floor structures is observed to almost pulverize into a cloud of dust in mid-air, in what appears to be a precision-timed, precision-controlled, top-down demolition wave which descends floor by floor, in an ordered manner, at an acceleration that simply boggles the mind. The effect on the surroundings by this dust field in which no particular effect of intense heat is seen anywhere, and which is all what appears to have remained of most of the millions of tons of steel-concrete structures that were there moments earlier, was captured by many television news broadcasts of that day.
ABC News had convened a special documentary a couple of years after 9-11, emphasizing this never before witnessed phenomenon of millions of tons of steel-concrete office building instantly pulverized into dust clouds which came rushing out from the epicenter with gale force winds, leaving behind no solid debris other than unburned office paper which was seen to be flying everywhere. There were no other remains of a typical occupied office building in the rubble after the dust had settled. It had also asked why.
Judy Wood's perceptive observations on the effect on the surroundings are curious in so far as she is evidently the lone ranger among the HOW crowd to persistently emphasize examining all the available evidence, and not just bits and pieces of one's preferred evidence in confirmation of one's pet HOW theory. See: Some of the principal data that must be explained, which lists effects besides those captured in photographic imagery. Which of these items is actually “evidence”? How shall one decide that, on which yardstick?
For the yardstick of credulity of photographic imagery, can a forensic scientist reasonably discard all unauthenticated photographic evidence as at best “non-conclusive” when it does not show effect on surroundings, maintain a maybe or circumstantial or something to be explained if other incongruities do not exist in them and the effect on surrounding make the matter self-evident, and at worst as deliberate red herrings, and search for other material evidence of intense heat that reasonable minds may postulate?
What is Jones' other material evidence for intense heat, other than the vicarious oral reports the 9-11 Truth chief assures us exist and make for reliable science?
Right – there is none, because the crime scene is gone!
The HOW problem is mathematically constrained by the removal of the crime scene. Game theory scenario employed in the planning of this dastardly deed would have also predicted that this crime could never be solved in this way in any ex post facto scrutiny if the crime scene and material evidence were quickly cleared away under suitable propaganda cover. And logicians and criminologists would know this. Those who ordered clearing away the crime scene in a hurry certainly understood it. Thus if any type-2 were to “wake-up” after the fact, and demand a new investigation from the government, the game-theoretic planning would have indicated that this crowd could easily be put on this HOW treadmill forever. While fait accompli would ensure the success of the ambitious 9-11 imperial mobilization project of “history's actors”.
Thus make all the demand for new serious investigation you want –– knowing fully well it won't go anywhere –– and occupy the minds and energies of the simpleton, the gullible, the credulous, and the malcontent, with “beneficial cognitive diversity” lest they collectively refocus their public energies on derailing imperial mobilization instead!
Even that derailing is years too late. That is the real power of fait accompli. An idea which few among the public ever entertain. It is timelessly captured in these imperial words of Machiavellian wisdom emanating from the Bush White House to the New York Times:
We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” (Reported by Ron Suskind, quoting a senior Bush White House advisor, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)




First published on September 19, 2016 4835 | Last updated September 21, 2016 02:00 pm 4835


9-11 Epistemology: Steven Jones vs. Judy Wood By Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org 15/15

The Political Theory behind 9-11 By Zahir Ebrahim

 
Caption A gestalt shift in perspective is required to understand primacy (Image courtesy of Desiree L. Rover's Presentation on Vaccinations, Aug 2009)
Caption A gestalt shift in perspective is required to understand primacy (Image courtesy of Desiree L. Rover, Aug 2009)
Swallowing The “Red Pill”
Since you have read this far, you have evidently decided to take the “Red Pill”. So let's swallow it to dive a bit deeper into the rabbit hole and see how primacy engages with political philosophy without a crisp understanding of which, you can never fully comprehend its apparent madness. It is anything but mad --- unless primacy itself is considered mad. It should not be. It is an instinct for unbridled dominance in the higher order primates and arguably underwrites some evolution of the same species on the natural time scale termed “survival of the fittest” through “natural selection” – the nineteenth century cause célèbre of Darwinianists. But social Darwinianists, the neo Darwinian predators who apply “natural selection” to themselves, the Übermensch exercising their “will to power”, wish to accelerate that natural process unnaturally through their quest for full spectrum dominance over all things, all life, all thoughts, and all systems. And that quest for primacy and social engineering poses a real danger to normal peoples and to their civilizations.
That predatory instinct should be treated as the most formidable enemy of mankind and its expression a ruthless virus. Unfortunately, the instinct for primacy has instead been made noble, its expression labeled “foreign policy”, its victims “useless eaters”, its pursuit “sagaciousness”, its scholars “intellectuals”, its strategists “think-tanks”, its authors “national security advisors”, its stooges “terrorists”, its justification just one short sentence: “Hegemony is as old as mankind.”, and its ultimate prize: one-world government. Who dare standup to all that “nobility”?
A majority of rational people among the public who are smart enough to recognize this “nobility”, just slink away from confrontation thinking to themselves that that's how all empires work. All empires throughout history have been driven by their so called “divine destiny”; have harbored no concept of morality except for controlling its public; and pursued their own best imperial interests which have only been checked by other empires doing the same. And they have all disappeared on the sands of time. This present empire is going to be no different, even if it flies the indomitable Stars and Stripes of Pax Americana today. How long will it last? So why bother with who's behind it? Instead, let's just go back to basics of what it means to be human and the purpose of life: to seek the promised Heaven beyond (if religious) and self-actualization (if secular). Either way it is far more productive than standing up to the predators of earth who have always existed, and always shall exist, and also far more rewarding if you go along with their agenda or don't oppose them. All you have to do is to make sure you aren't among the “useless eater” category and you are all set. Only fools with nothing to lose wage revolutions. And where has that got us? We are caught up in even more global tyranny today. So they reason, rather effectively too.
This is the pragmatic crowd of sophisticated survivors who well-understand primacy of the uber privileged class and wish to live for their own narrower self-interests without too much selling of their soul. They easily rationalize away their hearing no evil, speaking no evil, and seeing no evil. These are not ignorant or lazy peoples, but are just too poor in time and inclination to dig any deeper than just that general homey understanding. More often, the few pragmatists who understand the system are themselves so dependent on it feeding them that they have no choice but to be a part of it and to defend its very existence. So thanks for choosing the “red pill” --- if you don't know what that is, see the Hollywood fable “Matrix” where the character Morpheus offers to take the character Neo down the rabbit hole of reality if he took the “Red Pill”, and to let him stay in his dream world believing whatever he wanted if he took the “Blue Pill”.
As the effect of the “Red Pill” kicks in, which it evidently is since you are still reading this, let's dive straight into the rabbit hole to see how deep it really goes and why escaping from it has become so difficult. However, as the Oracle reminds the character Neo in the aforementioned fable: “you have to make up your own damn mind!”
When the absolute rule of gods on earth was challenged by plebeian norms, whereby individual rights and personal freedoms were equated by the Renaissance philosophers with inalienable rights; whereby the West, only just emerging from its Dark Ages, started to harken back to the democratic ideals developed by the Greeks at the zenith of the Hellenic Civilization of empowering the “demos”; and even young thinkers in the Middle Ages boldly started proposing end to tyranny of the gods on earth (for example, Etienne de La Boétie, in his 1523 The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude); Machiavelli was introduced to the Prince to enable exercising the same prerogatives as absolute kings but under public illusions of “freedom”.
Political theories from Plato to Hegel illustrate how the state can easily take over the public mind to govern it with an iron fist with even a measure of their own consent, if the reins of suzerainty are held in the hands of Übermensch. As Goethe, the German philosopher, had trenchantly observed: “none are more helplessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free”. Which is why Plato advocated the “philosopher-king” for governing a republic in the best public interest, with the highest moral standards of truth, reaching closest to divine truth, rather than in narrow self-interest. Nietzsche trumped Plato by killing God and advocating man become his own god with his will to power. Nietzsche's one tiny change to Plato's “philosopher-king” has made all the difference to political theories of primacy. It has lent primacy respectability!
Arguably, Nietzsche is effectively Plato except for that one tiny change to “philosopher-king” rule being closest to divine rule. The superman replacing God now defines “truth” itself, and thus its rule is itself “divine”! Reading Plato with that mental substitution of “philosopher-king” being the superman leads to the empiricism of today. Plato had warned of it in his Simile of the Cave where the controllers outside the cave subjecting the cave dwellers to total perception management are indeed Nietzschean superman. Reading Nietzsche with Plato in the backdrop explains a great deal of modernity. It would not be inaccurate to aver that our dystopic modernity is underwritten by the philosophical product of Plato and Nietzsche merged together. The role of state in The Republic was picked up by Hegel with the tiny modification that the state is not defined to serve the people in their own best interest (the platitudinous by the people, for the people, of the people, sold to gullible public), but the people are obligated to serve the state in its best interest. The state is supreme, over the rights of man, and run by superman. This is termed statism. Its continuous growth and expansion with the superman in the driving seat is only natural, and its culmination is automatically world superstate. But at times: (1) illusions of “demos” self-empowerment have to be maintained (“democracy” is usually a good bet); and (2) conflicts and revolutionary times fashioned and manufactured to destroy existing world order in order to raise a new world order from the ashes left behind in the age-old spirit of raising the Phoenix from its ashes (“Hegelian Dialectic”).
The superman often says with his lips exactly opposite to what he does with his hands without any moral compunction. I did not make that up. Here is Arnold J. Toynbee, Director, Royal Institute of International Affairs, (Chatham House) London, in 1931:
We are at present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world. All the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local nation states of the world is still a heresy for which a statesman or publicist can perhaps not quite be burned at the stake but certainly be ostracized or discredited.” -- Arnold J. Toynbee, The Trend of International Affairs Since the War, International Affairs, Nov. 1931, pg. 809
The alert of mind would immediately ask: (1) what is the Royal Institute of International Affairs, London? And (2) why are they speaking of wrestling away sovereignty in 1931 just as they have dismembered the Ottoman empire into small nation-states after the first World War, and are about to dismember the Indian sub-continent and Palestine in the same way after the next World War?
Well, the RIIA in London is the twin sister of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, both offspring of the defunct Round Table which played a crucial role in international geopolitics. in orchestrating war and peace, in the early part of the twentieth century as the privately funded oligarchic arm of Britannia, just like the East India Company was before it. The Round Table was replaced by its cross-Atlantic twins after World War I to better coordinate the oligarchy's manipulation of world affairs. And do you know what the Round Table was, if you have even heard of it?
Founded with Cecil Rhodes immense largesse to bring the wayward child across the Atlantic that had broken away so impetuously, the United States of America, back into the fold of the British empire; and to orchestrate world affairs for perpetual rule by the white Anglo Saxon race with the invisible oligarchy at the top of the rule chain. Once again, the financial oligarchy behind the scenes, the unaccountable superman, managing world affairs from behind the shadows of their political front-men who are groomed into positions of legislative power to do their private bidding by enacting public legalisms in their favor. That's what the Rhodes scholarship is all about for instance, to select and groom the worthy craftsmen of empire.
As for why speak of extracting sovereignty from nation-states on the one hand while these are being carved into existence from defeated empires and former slave-colonies of the British empire, one has to get deeply into the philosophy of conflict as a means of transformation, and the break-before-remake cycles to incrementally create the ultimate world order in which all nations have lost their sovereignty! Yes, one-world government, and that statement, as a reminder, is circa 1931, well before World War II, the Cold War labeled World War III, and this lifetime of Global War on Terror today which is labeled World War IV.
That should also answer the next question to pop into the alert mind: who is it that the famous British historian Arnold J. Toynbee is referring to as the director of RIIA? Who do they represent who “are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands”? The oligarchy that finances the organization through its tax-exempt foundations and private trusts. An alert mind may also wonder how they can lie like that and openly admit to it so unabashedly in specialized publications like International Affairs (and Foreign Affairs, its New York twin)? Because, these are typically only read by the elites involved in the game of international primacy who are more used to the higher order thinking of the higher order primates than the ordinary common man suffering his morals. But the agenda is not a closely held secret, it's all in the open. Yet the public mind is fed on the fodder of nationalism and patriotism in battle fields across the world while global governance is orchestrated behind the scenes by the oligarchic instruments quite openly.
The rich bibliography on this subject goes back to several hundred years, to the natural philosophers, but I am only aware of the actual evidence of conspiracy being unearthed going back to Adam Weishaupt of Bavaria in 1775, at the very founding epoch of the United States of America, and it shows a remarkable continuity of agenda, motivation, and secret cabals across generations and continents, all sharing in one common goal: global primacy of the superman. The empiricism du jour of the unrelenting drive towards global governance under the pretexts of managing crises and conflicts, speaks factually to that long running sport of the gods:
We are living through exceptionally difficult times. Financial crisis and its dramatic impact on employment and budgets, the climate crisis which threatens our very survival --- a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and lack of confidence. Yet these problems can be overcome, by a joint effort, in and between our countries. 2009 is also the first year of Global Governance with the establishment of the G-20 in the middle of financial crisis. The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the Global Management of our Planet. Our mission, our presidency is one of hope, supported by acts, and by deeds.” -- Herman Van Rompuy, EU Council President, press conference Nov. 19, 2009
And why not, as the superman argues? As god, the superman is at liberty to define the social values, laws, rules, morality, news for others, but not be bound by these himself – for he is no longer beholden to, or bound by, the ordinary moral standards of good and evil. He is beyond all that humdrum normalcy introduced by religions which interferes with evolution to create a higher order being and higher order society based on man's reason. He is above all others who subscribe to any divine prescription since he knows that God is dead. He, as god himself, can define morality for others, termed Secular Humanism, but not be bound by it himself as the age-old privilege of gods and supergods. We see that moral relativism in the statement of the United States Supreme Court justice quoted earlier. This is poignantly caricaturized in the Greek myths of the pantheon of gods who treated man as sport, to be played with, often for their own rivalries. Doesn't that have an uncanny resemblance to the gods of modernity, secular and religious, on the throne and the pulpit, elected and inherited, who demand obedience from man, create wars, pestilence, pandemics, financial boom and bust cycles, predictable financial collapses, as sport at the expense of the bewildered public who easily comply with their life and labor under illusions which have been carefully fed to them? Instead of rivalry among themselves, the gods today appear to be rather cooperative among each other in playing their game of primacy for the whole earth as the prize.
An episode of this sport of gods was even witnessed on live television in the Untied States in 2008, when the instruments of the oligarchy compelled the superpower Congress to bailout the financial institutions with trillions of dollars in public debt despite wide spread public resistance to giving such subsidy to the financial oligarchy at the public's expense. Few comprehended the game at that time for none of the financial experts and most read financial rags analyzed the real diabolical purpose for which the bailout was given legally by the United States legislature – to create such unpayable national debt, secured of course with public taxation, that the superpower and its public would forever remain in the clutches of oligarchic control, to be played at will. There is a diabolical Talmudic theory of interest on unpayable debt, forbidden in all religions except in predatory theology, that underlies the empirical control over state and political succession seen time and again throughout history until today:
Give me control of a nations money supply and I care not who makes it laws.”
The United States Congress and President participated in that sporting subversion of their own nation contrary to public interest – and it would not have mattered who were occupying those positions. Every set has, since the founding of the Federal Reserve System in 1913, and will in the foreseeable future, comply with the will of the oligarchy. That oligarchy today proudly extols the virtues of national debt on the US Treasury website as the price of liberty:
The United States debt, foreign and domestic, was the price of liberty.”
What can the hens do when all positions to guard the hen house are always held by foxes who legislate for the superman? No one can rise to those positions of political power except wolves and foxes beholden to the superman.
The financial bailout by the venerable American Congress is veritable proof of that empirical statement. Even the blind academic experts should be able to see it. But evidently don't. And for good reason. Here is W. Cleon Skousen, a former FBI agent, commenting on Carroll Quigley's revelations in Tragedy and Hope of the financial oligarchy orchestrating world government, and explaining how so few can so easily purchase the silence and cooperation of so many:
The real value of Tragedy and Hope … [is the] bold and boastful admission by Dr. Quigley that there actually exists a relatively small but powerful group which has succeeded in acquiring a choke-hold on the affairs of practically the entire human race. Of course we should be quick to recognize that no small group could wield such gigantic power unless millions of people in all walks of life were “in on the take” and were willing to knuckle down to the iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind the scenes. As we shall see, the network has succeeded in building its power structure by using tremendous quantities of money (together with the vast influence it buys) to manipulate, intimidate, or corrupt millions of men and women and their institutions on a world-wide basis.” -- W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, 1970, pg. 6
Like Plato had argued for his “philosopher-king” being the natural shepherd of the public 2500 years ago because of his virtue of being closer to truth, Nietzsche too argued in the 19th century that this modern superman knows best due to his higher intelligence and reliance on reason rather than superstition; except that the superman knows best in his own self-interest rather than necessarily public interest now that there is no God and no absolute code of moral conduct. And that is just natural selection at work. The superman is more intelligent, more self-empowering, more adept, than ordinary man. Therefore, he is naturally privileged to become the shepherd. Or, as some argue, the wolf, in sheep clothing. It is admitted openly by the wolves themselves: “some are sheep while others are wolves, we are the wolves”.
Here is one of the wolves at work constructing our “contemporary history” before our very eyes by putting all the preceding political theory of primacy to good use and expecting only rejoicing by future generations for what is ultimately to be raised from the ashes of “total war” – and hopefully you now understand what it is that the wolf claims “our children will sing great songs about us years from now”:
No stages. 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.” -- Michael Ledeen, speaking at the AEI (American Enterprise Institute), 10/29/2001, via historycommons.org
For the superman, ends justify the means. The calculus of primacy permits no moral considerations to interfere, which are left mainly as a lip-service for those too squeamish or feeble-minded to accept higher order thinking of achieving objectives in the military-style. The ends are therefore beyond the calculus of morality, beyond good and evil, and determined solely by will to power. Therefore, any means can be adopted to reach those objectives – because, by definition, the ends are now “noble” since these are defined as such by the new god, the Übermensch, using his superior intelligence and reason. Lies, deception, deceit, in that path is merely “noble lies”. Any mayhem is “noble mayhem”. The invasion of Iraq was based on such “noble lies”, for instance, and even admitted and dismissed by empire as merely an “oops – intelligence failure”! All of 9/11 narrative and concomitant acts of barbarism by empire is based solely on this “noble” ideology of the superman. It affords those flushed with the hubris of unassailable power the license for primacy as “legitimate” social Darwinianism. As they say, only the king can wear the crown, legally. And the king made that law himself.
Ask yourself: does a shepherd ever worry about slaughtering sheep if he has to supply mutton to his customers or for his own feast? The sheep is just a herd, a resource to be managed, bred, controlled, and harvested. And, for that matter, as the aristocratic British philosopher of the oligarchy, Bertrand Russell stylishly observed of the public mind that is reduced to serfdom: it is as likely to revolt against its chains as the sheep revolt against the habit of mutton eating!
Indeed, virtually all of modernity is run by supermen who have killed off God and rule for their own primacy objectives that are now global, by employing diabolical recipes laid out by political philosophers dating as far back as Plato, to Machiavelli, Nietzsche, Hegel, Leo Strauss et. al. These techniques span the full gamut of creating opportunities and situations in the form of crises, catastrophes, war; all harbingers of controlled chaos also called “revolutionary times”. Only during these revolutionary times what is inconceivable in normal times is made realizable. The control of the public mind is key to the successful harvesting of these opportunities for major social transformation. If the superman fails to capitalize on these rare moments, a whole world is lost. I did not just make that up. Here is David Ben-Gurion:
What is inconceivable in normal times is possible in revolutionary times; and if at this time the opportunity is missed and what is possible at such great hours is not carried out – a whole world is lost.”
There is more empirical reality captured in that short description of political theory of modern primacy than in the venerable platitudes of the Holy Bible and the Holy Quran combined --- that's tabulating the belief system of close to three quarters of the earth's population. For it explains virtually all of modernity which no Heavenly Book can. The divine theological prescriptions of virtue of every religion which seemingly occupy so much of man's time to escape from reality, do not claim to be political treatise on techniques of primacy. But rather, as for instance, the Holy Qur'an claims itself to be moral guidance for the virtuous, the Bible is claimed to be moral guidance for sinners, etc. You cannot really comprehend how the mind of modern infamy works by studying virtue. Those seeking to understand the twisted times they live in by studying holy books and in holy sermons, which evidently are many if full occupancy of mosques, churches and temples of every sort throughout the world in this resurgence of spirituality in the age of nihilism is any indication of how people are using their free time, may be better off studying political philosophers instead. Beginning with Plato's Simile of the Cave in The Republic, one would immediately realize that religion in the hand of superman is just another tool of primacy. Mosque occupancy since 9/11 for instance has increased many fold --- and what do they rehearse there? The 'good Muslim' vs. 'bad Muslim', 'moderate Islam' vs. 'militant Islam' Hegelian Dialectic (!) without a clue as to how that controlled narrative being broadcast from the pulpit is in fact the imperial narrative manipulating their mind. And consequently, controlling their behavior in getting the Muslim public alongside the world public “United We Stand” with empire's barbarianism.
Obedience is the operative watchword in whatever “ism”, statism, barbarianism, patriotism, nationalism, religionism, secularism, globalism, communism, socialism, and yes, also capitalism which is dominated by global MNC sharks today as the corporate army of Western power bloc much like the East India Company was an instrument of power for Britannia for over 200 years. Some argue that MNCs are indeed the new rulers of the world but they misperceive. The MNCs are only the supra-national instruments alongside the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, the WHO, by which the oligarchy rules not just our national but also our daily lives.
Insights as you have hopefully gained in this short space already, you cannot, do not, and never can, get in any normal academic setting, or from the news, or from the intellectuals of empire unless you are being groomed for the role of primacy, for all live off the largesse of empire manufacturing both consent and dissent to control the public mind. Normal people don't read any of that stuff, let alone understand it, but the superman does! Which is why it is hard for the public mind to fathom the mind of superman, or comprehend its tortuous scripts of mass behavior control.
A straightforward and rather objective litmus test of the real existence of this ubiquitous control system is readily available to anyone. After all, empiricism is an easily verifiable adjudicator of truth or falsity of any falsifiable proposition. Try pursuing a free inquiry into the HolocaustTM in any academic, professional, or arts and letters setting in any nation in the West. I believe in Europe and Canada you are still put in jail as of 2014 if you reach an intellectual conclusion other than the one legally sanctioned. In the United States you at least cannot find professional employment afterward if you can even survive the ordeal at the hands of the ADL. All the vaunted freedoms of the West which permit burning the Holy Qur'an, making fun of the Prophets of Islam, including Jesus, suddenly stop at the doorsteps of the HolocaustTM gas chambers. The same sacred cow sanctification process is being applied to 9/11. Apart from what the public is made to believe through ubiquitous narrative control, what they so easily subject themselves to at American airports is open for all to see. The added force of the President of the United States, Barack Obama, issuing a stern warning to skeptics hasn't quite helped that great intellectual and personal freedoms of the West being shoved down every nation's throat:
I am aware that there is still some who would question, or even justify the offense of 911. But let us be clear. Al Qaeeda killed nearly 3000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women, and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries, to try to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated. These are facts to be dealt with.” -- President Obama, Cairo Egypt, June 4th 2009
Few comprehend that diabolically scripted play of obedience training for complete conformance to authority in the new world order. In fact, virtually all choose to just accept it as the new fact of life without a second thought --- as expected, that from Act I, if you can get the public mind to accept absurdities, you can get it to accept any atrocity, including its own servitude, and those born afterward will know nothing better. It is already well understood by social engineers that none will even have the inclination to put it all together after it has been in play a few years as it would have become force of habit, sort of like Pavlovian training. Taking shoes off at long security check-posts automatically, without being asked, is evidence of the success of this instance of training. So is the number of protests launched with the TSA by the traveling public. The last time I checked the statistics reported on TSA website, which was in 2010 or 2011 I believe, shockingly less than 0.5 percent of the millions of people going through US airport body scanners or enduring the physically intrusive pat-downs and body searches, had filed a complaint.
The easy acceptance of that vile absurdity is an undeniable fact of engineered obedience training, like all the rest of social engineering the world has witnessed since 9/11. And it all began by simply accepting the official narrative of 9/11 of threat from “militant Islam” spun ubiquitously by the Mighty Wurlitzer and its assets. Just like the HolocaustTM before it, this too has quickly become a presuppositional axiom behind every public thought as well as public policy, both domestic and international, in virtually every nation on earth --- even including Iran and Russia which judiciously refrain from calling the Big Lie for what it is in all their opposition to the hegemony of the United States. I have never understood this --- if they were real antagonists of the superpower, this Big Lie is the singular Achilles' heel of all liars for any nation to call a spade a spade and initiate its effective take-down.
Its absence worldwide only indicates that all international enmities themselves are fabricated, controlled, synthetic, having freedoms only in saber-rattling and orchestrated warfare following the convoluted political theories of crisis creation which is pivotal in social engineering for seeding transformation. The manufactured crisis is real or remains mythological is immaterial as both require that the public mind believe it to be real and posing an imminent danger to its well-being. Its success relies on two plus two making five to the public mind. And all efforts are made in that direction. Therefore, two plus two making four is suppressed, just as we see is transpiring in the ubiquitous narrative control which is now global, across civilization and national boundaries. It is the one thing which unites earth minds today: the threat of 'al-Qaeda', once stateless, now rising in the form of 'IS'. Thus creating more opportunities for “total war” for Oceania.