Saturday, August 19, 2017

Carl Herman: The History of a Rogue State Empire (Part 3 of 4)

Carl Herman/Jim Fetzer Discussion Series on illegal wars, debt slavery, “official” lies. Essential education for American adults to recognize and end US .01% rogue state empire (3 of 4)

Carl Herman

Carl Herman is a National Board Certified Teacher in Government, Economics, and History, also credentialed in Mathematics. Jim Fetzer (podcasts herehere) is Distinguished McKnight Professor of Philosophy Emeritus of the University of Minnesota Duluth; Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth; Editor, Assassination Science; and Co-Editor, Assassination Research. Jim and Carl contribute nearly 100 years of academic training and professional experience in this four-part series to reveal among the most obvious lies of omission and commission keeping Americans ignorant of ongoing .01% US rogue state empire.
Jim and Carl factually assert an Emperor's New Clothes condition that Americans can easily see for themselves, if they care to look.
4-part series, with linked documentation:

Part 3: US public education: Bullshit to train stupefied work animals


Note: I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History, with all economics factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences (and here). I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.


Carl Herman is a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History; also credentialed in Mathematics. He worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at

Note: has blocked public access to my articles on their site (and from other whistleblowers), so some links in my previous work are blocked. If you’d like to search for those articles other sites may have republished, use words from the article title within the blocked link. Or, go to, paste the expired link into the box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive. I’ll update as “hobby time” allows; including my earliest work from 2009 to 2011 (blocked author pages: herehere).

Christof Lehmann: Interview with Philosopher of Science Dr. James Henry Fetzer

Editor's note: Having inadvertently run across this interview from 2012, I thought I would share it to lend perspective to my research.

A former Marine Corps officer, James Fetzer has published widely on the theoretical foundations of scientific knowledge, computer science, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and evolution and mentality.  McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, Dr. Fetzer has also conducted extensive research into the assassination of JFK, the events of 9/11, and the plane crash that killed Sen. Paul Wellstone. The founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, his latest books include The Evolution of Intelligence (2005), The 9/11 Conspiracy (2007), Render Unto Darwin (2007), and The Place of Probability in Science (2010).
Christof Lehmann: Dr. Fetzer, you are one of the most renown, and some would say one of the most controversial U.S.-American scholars. Beside your extensive work in philosophy and cognitive sciences your leading role and extensive work on the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy and 9/11 has afforded you wide-spread recognition, but it has also afforded you the attention of powerful enemies among politicians and your peers. Can you recall a formative or catalyzing experience that has led you to investigate and to speak out where the majority of American scholars remained passive or silent, and what has your scientific background meant for you in that respect ? 
James H. Fetzer: The event that crystalized my commitment was the appearance of George Lundberg, the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of the AMA, making a television appearance and denouncing Oliver Stone’s “JFK” as “docu-fiction” and every serious student of JFK, from Mark Lane to Robert Groden to David S. Lifton and Charles Crenshaw, M.D., which forced me to the realization that, if someone of his stature was abusing his position to promote false information about the assassination, perhaps someone of us like myself who have special background and training needed to become involved to contribute to getting things straight. I noticed a letter to the editor of JAMA by a member of the AMA, David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., who was objecting to the abuse of the journal for political purposes, so I wrote to him and suggested we collaborate on a long article or a book. Others learned about our efforts and asked to join us. I wrote about this in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), which included David’s discoveries that the autopsy X-rays had been altered and the determination by Bob Livingston, M.D., a world authority on the human brain, that the brain shown in diagrams and photos could not be that of JFK. 
Christof Lehmann: Dr. Fetzer, much of the most cutting edge research at University Institutes in capitalist societies today is funded by private corporations while it is largely government-funded in socialist societies. In fundamentalist religious societies it may be influenced by religious bias. In the USA we witness that creationists and Darwinists are delivering each other pitched battles. What are the consequences for humanitarian sciences ? What are the consequences for material sciences ? Does free intellectual inquiry exist, has it ever existed, and if it does not exist to the degree one may expect, what are the consequences for science and for humanity at large ? 
James H. Fetzer: From 35 years as a member of the faculties of a wide range of institutions of higher learning, I have come to appreciate that most faculty fear nothing more than embarrassment–whether that be by another scholar, by their own students, or by the public. For that reason, they tend to avoid controversial issues, even when they are of enormous importance to the public and its best interests. That is certainly the case with JFK and, if anything, even more so in relation to 9/11, where the evidence that the events of 9/11 were fabricated or faked is even more extensive than in the case of JFK. Many aspects of the “official account” of 9/11 even violate the laws of physics and of engineering. In the case of the Twin Towers, for example, the fires burned neither long enough nor hot enough to cause the steel to weaken, much less melt. The top 14 floors of the North Tower, moreover, represented only 1.4% of the mass of the steel. The very idea that such a modest mass could overcome the resistance of the 98.6% of the lower floors is absurd–and it is indicative of the degree of corruption of scientists who work for government agencies that NIST supported the claim that the Twin Towers collapsed! Compare “New 9/11 Photos Released” and “20 reasons the ‘official account’ of 9/11 is wrong” for additional examples of the indefensibility of what we have been told. I have felt that I was among the very few academicians who have understood the role of tenure in supporting research on controversial issues. 
Christof Lehmann: Subsequent to 9/11 and the onset of the war on terror the world has witnessed a deterioration of international law. The convention against the use of mercenaries is circumvented by using the term contractors for companies like Blackwater or XE, the conventions against torture are circumvented by the use of constructs such as enhanced interrogation techniques, the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia and the UN Charter which define the sovereignty of nations and the principle of non-interference into the internal affairs of sovereign states are circumvented by constructing the terms Humanitarian Intervention and Responsibility to Protect. Both social scientists, lawyers as well as medical doctors and psychologists are actively taking part in circumventing these laws with extreme atrocities and human suffering as a consequence. What is your response to this development from the perspective of a philosopher of science, and from your perspective as life long advocate for peace, justice and truth ? 
James H. Fetzer: I find it astonishing at the lawlessness that has been engendered by the Bush/Cheney administration by its violations of international law, the UN Charter, and even the US Constitution, with regard to its invasions and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq in its attempts to take control of the natural resources of those nations–including oil, most obviously, in the case of Iraq and, less obviously, in the case of Afghanistan, precious metals, including one of the world’s greatest deposits of lithium, used in computers, nuclear triggers, and for electric car batteries. The invasion of Afghanistan began less than one month after 9/11, on 7 October 2001, which had to have been planned well in advance, even though discussion, even at cabinet meetings, was focused on Iraq. The PATRIOT Act was passed with the assistance of the anthrax attacks on Senators Patrick Leahy and Tom Daschel, who wanted to hold hearings about it but which never came to pass. I do not know of anyone who actually read it before voting on it. And it turns out that Cheney was running an assassination ring out of his own office, which was revealed by Seymour Hersh. I wrote about it in “Has Cheney been murdering Americans?” and later in Veterans Today. One target was Sen. Paul Wellstone, whose death I have research extensively. See “The Sen. Wellstone Assassination (YouTube) and “The NTSB Failed Wellstone”. Others appear to have included Pat Tillman, Beverly Eckert, and (even) Mike Connell, an anti-abortion fanatic who had assisted Karl Rove in stealing the 2004 election by manipulating the vote but was going to testify about it. 
Christof Lehmann: Dr. Fetzer, in a recent article Dr. Henry Kissinger argued that a military intervention in Syria might not violate the provisions of the Treaty of Westphalia which regulates the sovereignty of nations and the principle of non-interference into the internal affairs of sovereign nations. Kissinger is arguing that the borders of most countries in the Middle East have been arbitrarily drawn by the former colonial powers. The only exceptions, so Kissinger, are Iran, Egypt and Turkey, who all have a long documented history that predates European colonialism. While Kissinger explicitly argues that an intervention in Syria would not violate the provisions of the Treaty of Westphalia, he fails to mention Israel, which also has borders that have been arbitrarily drawn by former colonial powers and while Israel time and time again uses disproportionate military force against Palestinians. As a philosopher of science, what do you have to say about Kissinger’s reasoning, and what would you say about the legitimacy of the state of Israel ? 
James H. Fetzer: Henry Kissinger has become a mouthpiece for the Council on Foreign Relations and other entities that exert excessive control over US politics and especially foreign relations, rivaled only by the influence of Israel and its representatives who lobby Congress to promote its interests at the expense of those of the United States. The Bushes have long had the policy of using other people’s money to make themselves handsome profits, just as Israel wants to use another nation’s resources to conduct its dirty work for it. The infestation of American administrations, especially in the Department of Defense, was instrumental in planning and staging 9/11, where the agenda was oil, Israel, and ideology–in this case, that of the Project for the New American Century. Israel wanted to weaker the strong, sophisticated Arab states, especially Iraq, to acquire uncontested domination of the Middle East, which neo-cons such as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pearle, Donald Feith, and others–with the intellectual support of Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer–promoted the Zionist agenda, even though its was not in the best interests of the United States. My first political speech addressed this issue during a Ron Paul “Freedom Rally” on the grass of the Capitol of the United States on 15 April 2008, which would be published with the title, “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda”, where I explained that it was irresponsible to allow persons with dual citizenship to hold decision-making and policy-formulating positions and call for the resignation from government of anyone with joint citizenship, including US-Israeli, since no once could possibly know their allegiance to the other nation did not outweigh their allegiance to the US, which was clearly the case here. 
Christof Lehmann: We are today witnessing an almost Orwellian control over the political information that is provided to populations through main stream media. During the Iraq war the U.S. Defense Department send daily talking points and advise on how to spin certain information to so-called specialists and experts who were used by the American main stream media. We see the Pentagon annually investing in the British BBC. There are serious doubts whether the news footage about the events on 9/11 has been manipulated. War correspondents are embedded with the American troops. In other words, since electronic mass media have become widespread the function of control over populations has shifted from control over the body by brute force to control over the mind. Are we today living in the worlds largest prison, the prison of our mind, and if so, what are the consequences and what can we do to break free ? 
James H. Fetzer: William Colby, a former Director of the CIA, observed that the agency owns everyone of significance in the major media; and before him, Bill Casey, Ronald Reagan’s campaign manager, who arranged for Iran to keep the hostages until after the inauguration of his client, thereby depriving Jimmy Carter of a well-deserved reelection, and who became Reagan’s director, explained to its members that the agency would have proven its success when everything Americans believe is false! Today more accurate information about current affairs and foreign relations can be found on Russia Today and Press TV than in The New York Times or The Washington Post. Even small papers, like the Duluth News-Tribune, appears to have been infiltrated, where it requires a certain degree of sophistication to surf the web to find sources of information that can be compared with other sources to figure out what’s going on. Your own nsnbc has proven to be one such source, where I must complement you on the excellence of your reporting. Sorting out the authentic from fabricated evidence has proven to be the key to understanding what happened to JFK and the atrocities of 9/11. See, for example, “9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings I and II”, “Mini-Neutron Bombs: A Major Piece of the 9/11 Puzzle”, and “9/11 and Zion: What was Israel’s role?” On JFK, see MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003), and articles on Veterans Today. 
Christof Lehmann: Dr. Fetzer, I am recalling a conference of more than one hundred and twenty scholars from over one hundred countries at Harvard in 1997. The general consensus then was that the ruling elites of the countries which are comprising the so-called third world perceive the USA as the single greatest threat to their societies. While the majority of these nations ruling elites did not perceive the USA as a direct military threat, almost all of them perceived the USA as a menace to the integrity of their society, their autonomy, freedom and prosperity. The average perception of the USA was that of an interventionist, hegemonic, exploitative and hypocritical nation that implied double standards in what was generally described as financial and intellectual colonialism. Do you believe that this perception of the USA is correct and if yes, why ? What do you believe, are the long-term consequences of this perception of the USA with regards to international peace and justice and do you believe that the recent world-wide popular protests against the anti-Islam movie ”Innocence of Muslims” is related to this perception of the USA ? 
James H. Fetzer: It is tragic to report that the US and Israel have come the greatest aggressor nations in the world today. Go back to our intervention in Chile, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos, and now Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syrian and Iran. Gen. Wesley Clark, our former Supreme Commander of Allied Forces Europe, has reported that, after 9/11, he was presented with a plan to topple the governments of seven countries in the Middle East and Africa in the next five years. The assault on Libya by NATO was an especially striking example of the perversion of an organization that was originally conceived to provide a collective response to a Soviet invasion of Europe but have been perverted into an instrument of US aggression. It was obvious something was wrong with the “uprising” in Libya when the first act of the “rebel” group was to found a new central bank. The Israelis have a long history of “false flag” attacks, which extend from the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 to the attempt to sink the USS Liberty in 1967 and up to multiple events in Argentina (which I have written about with Adrian Salbuchi, “False Flag attacks in Argentina: 1992 and 1994”), where 9/11 was the most spectacular of them all. With the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, the military-industrial-intelligence complex needed a new boogie man to keep the money for armaments and ammunition flowing. What better than a shadowy terrorist organization that could be claimed to have performed “terrorist attacks” at an time it would be useful for them to occur? They created the perfect villain in Osama and al Qaeda, where bin Laden was “our man” in Afghanistan and al Qaeda, such as it was, assisted in driving the Soviets from that country with our assistance. 
Christof Lehmann: At closing; Dr. Fetzer, what is in your opinion the most important message you want to convey to young aspiring scholars in the USA and throughout the world today ? 
James H. Fetzer: Take nothing for granted, especially when it comes to your own government. Even those we most want to trust have demonstrated their capacity to deploy false information for political purposes. In relation to the US, THE WARREN REPORT (1964) and THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT (2004) are sterling examples. In relation to the UK, “7/7 Ripple Effect” and TERROR ON THE TUBE (2009) have shredded the “official account” and demonstrated the complicity of the government, where an alleged “anti-terror drill” was taken live with patsies in the wings. My own experience being interviewed by the BBC revealed its methods of deception, which I have documented in “The BBC’s instrument of 9/11 misinformation”. The control of information is cheaper and more effective than the use of standing armies, which makes it the preferred method of controlling a nation’s population. But other techniques are always available, as necessary and appropriate. For stunning evidence of the absence of a domestic terrorist threat in the US, see “Fusion and Fear in America: The non-existent ‘terrorist threat'”. Yet the preparations for military action against the civilian population proceed unabated. For more, see “Homeland Security: Preparing for Massive Civil War”. The parallels with the rise of The Third Reich are both astounding and disturbing. I am sorry to say that we live in an Orwellian world where black is white, false is true, and the good are evil. We live in dangerous times. 
Dr. Fetzer, thank you very much for the interview.

Patricia McCarthy: Charlottesville and Its Aftermath: What if It Was a Setup?

The ridiculous campaign by virtually every media outlet, every Democrat and far too many squishy Republicans to label Trump some kind of  racist and Nazi sympathizer is beginning to have the stink of an orchestrated smear.   The conflagration in Charlottesville is beginning to feel like a set-up, perhaps weeks or months in the planning.  Planned by whom?  Time may tell.  We know that Michael Signer, the mayor of Charlottesville, declared his city to be the "capital of the resistance" just after Trump's inauguration.  We know that Gov. Terry McAuliffe is a corruptocrat, joined at the hip to the Clintons.  He pardoned sixty-thousand felons in order to ensure he delivered his state to the presidential election of Hillary Clinton.  We know he would like to run for president himself.

We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C. home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative agenda.  None of these people care about the American people, or the fact that Trump won the election because millions of people voted for him.  They suggest those deranged persons who gathered in Charlottesville as members of one of several fringe groups, Unite The Right, neo-Nazi or KKK, are Trump's base -- as if there are more than a few hundred or thousand of them throughout the country.  There are not enough of them to affect anything or elect anyone.  Those who are actual members of these small groups are most likely mentally ill to one degree or another. Trump has disavowed them all, over and over and over again.  Liz Crokin, an entertainment reporter and no fan of Trump, wrote in 2016 that she had covered Trump for over a decade and  in all that time, no one had ever suggested he was racist, homophobic, or sympathetic to white supremacists.  That all began after he announced his campaign.  It is as fake a narrative as the "Russia collusion" meme.  The left set out to defame Trump from moment one.  When he won the election, their shock, dismay and intolerance for every opinion that differs from their own shifted into hysterical overdrive.   They mounted their crusade to destroy his presidency on Nov. 9, 2016.

Jason Kessler at Charlottesville City Hall, August 13, 2017

What if Signer and McAuliffe, in conjunction with Antifa and other Soros-funded groups like Black Lives Matter, planned and orchestrated what happened in Charlottesville and meant for events to unfold roughly as they did?  If they did,  it was icing on their sick, immoral cake.  If this was all part of a plan, one would hope those behind it suffer for their part in and responsibility for the tragic death of a young woman, Heather Heyer.  The "founder" of Unite The Right, Jason Kessler,  was an activist with Occupy Wall Street and Obama supporter. 

He sees himself as a professional provocateur. What if he was a ringer, a phony who revels in riling up some crazy people for some political purpose?  We know the left is skilled in all manner of dirty tricks.  That sort of thing was Robert Creamer's job for the Hillary campaign, hiring thugs to incite violence that could then be blamed on Trump supporters.  Think of Ferguson, Baltimore, Berkeley, etc.  Antifa and BLM are every bit as fascist as any of the supremacist groups; they are more violent and there are more of them.  Why is the left so afraid to admit this fact?  Even Peter Beinart did in the Atlantic, written before last Saturday.

Since that day, the call to remove the statues on display that honor any members of the Confederacy has become shrill and  frenzied.  Erasing American history benefits no one and only condemns us to repeat past mistakes.  The supremacist groups had a permit; they had applied months earlier.  The Antifa and Black Lives Matter groups did not have a permit.  The local police at some point, on whose order we do not know, turned the pro-statue groups toward the Antifa and BLM groups, many of whom were armed with lethal weapons - soda cans filled with cement, bottles filled with urine, baseball bats and boards with screws protruding to do maximum harm, and improvised flamethrowers.  These are the people who initiated the violence.  How was this not a planned melee?  Pit groups of demented racists  -- all of them on both sides are certainly that -- against each other and violence is sure to occur.  (Certainly, there were decent people among the protestors and counter-protesters who had no affiliation with the supremacist groups or Antifa or BLM. Heather Heyer was among them.)

Trump spoke out on Saturday and his statement was perfectly fine given the known facts at the time.  But the media reacted as though he had defended the supremacist groups.  He did not; not even close.  It was as though no matter what Trump said, they were going to attack his remarks as being insufficient.  When he reiterated his horror of the brawl the next day and named the groups present,  they again reacted as if he had defended the supremacist groups because he said there was mayhem committed by both sides.  He correctly stated that there was violence perpetrated by members of all the groups present.  The media was apoplectic even though they surely knew what he said was true.  Reporters on the scene saw the police stand down.  Only one of them reported that truth.  One has to wonder if talking points were distributed before the event took place and before Trump said a word about it.

The Democratic Party is no longer liberal, it is leftist.  It is not progressive, it is regressive and repressive.  It seeks to overturn the First Amendment.  It means to indoctrinate, and has, successive generations via public and private education.  It is becoming ever more fascist by the day.  Along with groups like Antifa, BLM, and the host of anti-democratic groups George Soros funds to protest all around the nation, the media and the Democrats in Congress seek to overthrow an elected president in order to impose their vision of some sort of socialist utopia which of course will never exist.  What will result if they get their way is a Venezuela-style two-tiered class system, the ultra rich and the very poor who are kept in their place by economic and social control.  The millions of people who see the left for what it has become see this.  It is why they voted for Trump. 

It is disheartening to see so many American elites, privileged in wealth and position within the media and/or government be so completely of one, unthinking mind.  They all have braces on their brains (Auntie Mame).  So afraid to buck the rigid mindset of their peers, they have become mouthpieces for their own group identity.  Do they believe the nonsense they spew?  Who knows?  Those in Congress, all the Democrats and the anti-Trump Republicans essentially care about one thing and one thing only: getting re-elected.  They cannot afford to offend their donors or the lobbyists whose largesse fills their coffers.  So they trip over each other getting to the nearest camera to align themselves with whatever opinion they think will put them on the right side of the money people.  They are wrong so often.

Finally, Trump's press conference on Tuesday made the left's heads explode.  Why?  Because everything he said was absolutely true.  He does not play by their tyrannical PC rules.  He said what was true and that room full of puerile reporters shouting insults at him could not handle the truth.  They want what they want to be true but it just is not.  This entire episode, the behavior of all those protesters in Charlottesville and the bizarre behavior of the media will likely drive future voters to Trump, not away from him.  Millions more than those who voted for him are as likely to be sick to death of the self-righteous preening of the talking heads:  Chuck Todd, Jake Tapper, Don Lemon, Shep Smith, etc.  There must be a contest to see who can appear to be the most egregiously triggered by what Trump did or did not say. 

So were the events of Saturday the result of a despicable plan to further undermine Trump? There was plenty of time and Charlottesville is the "capital of resistance."   If it was, it was evil and deadly and the people involved need to be prosecuted.  Or is this a wild conspiracy theory?  Perhaps. But the pieces fit.  Will the DOJ and the FBI actually investigate the many mysteries that surround the events of that day?  Not likely.  The left in this country has long been and seems to remain above the law.  But someday, maybe someone will come forward and tell the truth.  What is certain is that the violence could easily have been prevented with the common sense strategies civilized cities put in place.  America deserves much better from its media and its elected officials.  The only person remembering why he is there is Donald Trump.