Update: Carol Brouillet has turned out to be dishonest:
Deception-Dollar.htm

But I think that most people reacted to the information by becoming disillusioned with America. The information upset them, and it reduced their morale, created a distrust of government, and increased their apathy. This large group of disillusioned people made the nation worse, not better. Look at American history from 1963 to today and tell me, as information about the US Government's involvement in the Kennedy killing spread throughout the population, can you see any improvements because of it? I see attitudes towards government becoming worse, not better. I see apathy increasing, not decreasing.

Discovering that our government killed Kennedy is like discovering our father is robbing banks. Some people might react by trying to make the situation better, but most people become upset and try to ignore the information.

Today the majority of Americans may suspect that Oswald had help in the killing of President Kennedy, but the lies persist in our history books and encyclopedias that Oswald was the only person responsible. The Kennedy investigators achieved their goal of exposing the scam, but what good has it done? Children are still being raised on the official government lies, and governments are still committing crimes.

For those of you who know about the Paul Wellstone airplane accident, consider that if he was murdered, that means our government is still murdering government officials. In which case, what good have the Kennedy investigators done?

The knowledge that Oswald was a patsy will not by itself correct our history books. Nor will that knowledge give us a better tax system, a better legal system, or better government officials. If we want a better nation, we must do something to make the nation better. The world's problems will not magically disappear just because we realize the Kennedy killing was a scam.

And consider the Oklahoma City bombing. It has been almost 10 years since that scam. Every day a few more people discover that it was a scam. But is that knowledge making the nation a better place? For all we know, as knowledge of that scam spreads, its main effect on the nation is to increase apathy and reduce morale.

Now consider the 9-11 scam. Every day perhaps hundreds of people discover that the attack was a scam. Information is traveling much faster with this scam because of the Internet, and because people in foreign nations are talking about it.

It's possible that by next year a few billion people will realize the attack was a scam. But will this realization make the world a better place? Will this realization cause somebody to correct the lies in our history books? Will it cause television reporters to give us honest news? Will it prevent the Al-Qaeda Navy from attacking us with nuclear bombs? Will it give us a respectable President in 2004?

The information about the 9-11 attack will not by itself make the world a better place. Information is an intangible entity. But an intangible entity cannot build better cities for us, nor can it give us better governments. Information is of value only if we do something with it.

If all we do is gather information about the 9-11 attack, we will never improve anything. We must do something with this information, but do what? And how can we figure out what to do if the 9-11 activists focus their attention on hating George Bush? Or if they focus their attention on finding every detail about the scam?
 

9-11 Car Mechanics

A week later you drop by the shop and ask if your car is ready, but they tell you they're still investigating. This goes on week after week. A year later you ask for your car, but they tell you they still have not finished the investigation. You point out that they've got so many books and videos already, but they respond that none of them are conclusive; that they need a better book, and they need more details.

Imagine this goes on for decades. At what point would you tell them that they've got enough information and that they should take what they've got and do something with it?

Wouldn't it occur to you that the car is never going to get fixed if all they do is investigate? Wouldn't it occur to you that they must take the information they've got, propose repairs for the car, and then let you decide which of those proposals to implement?
 

"No Opinions! No Speculation!"

What would you think if your car mechanics told you that they did not want to discuss possible repairs for your car because every time they tried to discuss the issue, they disagreed with one another and got into arguments.

During 2002 I would see remarks from 9-11 investigators that we should not discuss such controversial issues as explosives in the towers. We should keep the discussion to the possibility that Bush knew the attack was going to take place. Their reasoning was that nobody can prove that the towers were brought down by explosives, so if we discuss such speculative issues, we will create controversy and arguments. This in turn would cause people to avoid the 9-11 movement, rather than join it. Therefore, in order to attract people to this movement, we should keep the meetings focused on George Bush.

Fortunately, some of us refused to believe that nonsense. The PowerHour radio show, for example, brought me on their radio show a few days before my book became available. They were not concerned that discussing explosives in the towers were going to turn people away from the 9-11 movement. Instead, their attitude was to get this information out, and now. Some people in Austin, Texas also discussed this information on their access television shows. So why are some of these 9-11 activists trying to focus us on George Bush?
 
 

What Are They Afraid Of?

Are they worried that we might switch from complaining about Bush to complaining about the CIA? Are they worried we might realize that these secret agencies are the primary problem in the world, and that the founders of America would never approve of secret agencies that have no accountability?

If the CIA provided information to the government, then it could be a valuable agency. But they have already proven that they are not merely an information gathering agency. For example, in November 2002 a Predator drone fired a missile at a man in Afghanistan. The news reports told us that the Predator came from the CIA.

The US military also had Predators, but only for surveillance. They did not have any drones that were capable of firing missiles. If we can believe the US Military, that means the CIA had secretly taken surveillance aircraft and modified them to fire missiles, creating a new weapon system.

The firing of that missile proves the CIA is lying to us. They are not merely an information gathering agency. They have been secretly developing advanced military weapons. This should lead you to wonder... what other weapons have they developed that we don't know about?

How many times does somebody have to lie to you before you start questioning everything he says? How many times does the government have to lie before you start thinking that maybe there are more to America's problems than George Bush?
 

Is The CIA Helping The USA?

Life is most enjoyable when we never lie. Lying is unpleasant because it requires you to remember everything you said to every person. It puts stress on you. You cannot relax and say what you want; instead, you have to think about what to say in order to maintain the network of lies. The more lies you create, the greater the stress will be on you to remember and maintain those lies.

If our government is paying people to deceive us, I think it would be interesting to see what effect it has on their attitudes and their life. Can they maintain stable relationships? After many years of lies, do they sometimes lose track of what is real and what is a lie? Do they slowly become emotionally defective zombies who lose interest in life?

I don't have answers to those questions, but if it turns out that our government is paying people to lie to us, and if it turns out that those people are emotionally damaged from the lying, then we would be doing the CIA employees a favor by getting rid of the CIA. We would be liberating them from their miserable existence.
 

What Is The Motive For 9-11?

Some people suggest that a few rich families or corporations are doing this for money, but why would our military attack its own headquarters and spend tens of billions of dollars just so some rich people could make a few more million dollars? Other people suggest that the motive was to get oil, but what oil have we gotten? And who is getting it?

Some people think maybe the attack was to kill Arabs, but just look at the photos of the traffic jams in Iraq. Only a tiny percentage of the Iraqi population had been killed. So if the purpose was to kill Arabs, they failed miserably.

It's difficult to find a motive for this attack. The attack seems to be hurting America, not helping us. This has caused some people to come to the conclusion that perhaps the purpose of the attack was to destroy America, not help it. There are lots of theories that a small group of rich families or some secret society is trying to destroy all nations so that they can take control of the world. David Icke suggests that some reptilian race is trying to destroy the planet so that they can take control. A man I personally know has come to a conclusion that some type of alien force has gotten inside people's minds and is causing them to behave in a destructive manner so that it can eventually take control of the planet.

While it is possible that some secret society or alien force is trying to get control of the planet, it is also possible that the CIA and other agencies are dominated by people with mental problems. They may have truly believed that killing President Kennedy would make America a better nation, and they may have truly believed that 9-11 would help America. When their scams fail, perhaps they convince themselves that they actually achieved partial success, or perhaps they come to the conclusion that another scam will correct the mistake.

In other words, perhaps our government is full of lunatics who are taking us on a wild ride in a misguided attempt to help us. I find this possibility amusing -- to a certain extent.

Imagine that you just graduated from cooking school and you are starting a job as a chef in a fancy restaurant. You do your best to make wonderful dinners that evening. How would you feel if, at the end of the evening, a waitress mentions that some customers were wondering if the reason the food was so bad was because the chef was part of a secret society that was trying to take control of world, or that some alien force had gotten into the chef's brain in order to destroy the planet?

While a secret society may be trying to destroy the world, I suspect that a lot of the people who joined in on the Kennedy killing and the 9-11 attack were just ordinary citizens who thought they were helping America. Perhaps the secret society is deceiving government officials into thinking they are helping the world.
 

Most People Resist Unpleasant Information

I say we already completed the first step. In fact, we investigated more than we needed to.

The second step is to spread information but that is not as easy as it seems. The biggest problem with spreading information about 9-11 is that the majority of people do not want to learn about it because it upsets them. Information about Janet Jackson and Harry Potter spread around the world in a matter of hours because people enjoy those issues, but 9-11 information is not spreading quickly. Based on the people that I personally know, the majority of people simply cannot handle this information.

For example, my mother reluctantly watched my video, but she still has not told her brother or sister about 9-11 on the grounds that it would upset them because they are Bush supporters.

Compare my mother to Carol Brouillet. Carol reacted to Oliver Stone's movie by becoming politically active, and today she spends a lot of her time spreading information about 9-11 to other people. She also arranges meetings for us to get together. By comparison, my mother reacted to my video by pretending she never saw it.

Most people are like my mother. When the information reaches them, it stops traveling because they don't like the information, and they don't want to upset other people with it.

My mother wants to be a good girl who does what she's supposed to do. She believes that we should follow our government, not rebel against it.
 

People Follow Each Other

There are some people who appear to be extremely independent, such as the people who split their tongues or cut off their fingertips, but a lot of those "independent" activities are due to anger or self pity, not independence. Nobody can seriously describe himself as 100% independent. All of us alter our behavior in order to get the approval of other people.

This is not a characteristic that we should be ashamed of. If we had respectable leaders, then it would be OK for the majority of people to follow the leader. This characteristic is a problem only when our leaders are crummy.

My mother is so concerned about following the leader that there was a time when my sister was deviating from a recipe, and my mother complained, "Stop it! The recipe does not call for that!"

How can we expect a woman who has trouble deviating from a recipe to deal with something like the 9-11 attack?

Trying to educate people about 9-11 is difficult because most people are like my mother. Most people want somebody else to make decisions for them. Most people want to follow recipes, not create their own. Most people want to know what the latest clothing styles are -- they don't want to start a new style.

If you wander away from the crowd, you risk criticism for being different. By comparison, if you remain with the crowd and mimic other people, if somebody criticizes your clothing or opinions, they are criticizing the entire crowd, not just you.
 

Praise/Criticism ... Good Cop/Bad Cop

People are also easily manipulated with praise, smiles, and entertainment. This technique is often used in politics and business. The successful businessmen and politicians praise people and make them feel good.

For example, at the supermarkets in my city the cashiers usually say hello to the customers and ask if we found what we were looking for. Your first reaction to these friendly cashiers is that the cashier really cares about us.

There are certainly times when a cashier is in a talkative mood, but most of the time when the cashiers talk to us it is because the corporate executives ordered them to fake friendship.

Next time you get off an airplane, notice that the crew members stand near the door and say goodbye to you. Certainly some of them are occasionally in a talkative mood, but most of the time when they say goodbye to you it is because the corporate executives are demanding they fake friendship.

The successful businessmen have noticed that they can attract customers by faking friendship. Some people care more about money than the society they live in, so they don't care that they are making life awkward for the employees who are forced to fake friendship.

How absurd does this situation have to get before you complain about this behavior? What if airline stewardesses were told to fake a romantic interest in us? What if the stewardesses were told to wink at the passengers and create the impression that if we fly a few more times we might get a date?

Or what if the supermarket cashiers were ordered to occasionally fake orgasms as we go past their checkout counter?

How absurd does this situation have to get before you complain that employees are not tools for businesses to use to manipulate us? When will we consider the possibility that there is something wrong with America's attitudes towards money, life, and people? When do we stop complaining about George Bush and start realizing that this nation is seriously messed up?

I bring this subject up to point out that people are suckers for praise and friendship, even if it is fake friendship. Also, I want to point out that people avoid criticism. These qualities allow us to be manipulated. For example, the government will praise the people who follow the official theories and criticize the others as conspiracy nuts.

Spreading information about the 9-11 attack is difficult because people such as my mother have a low tolerance for criticism. She even complained that she was insulted by the image in my video of the sheep with a human face.

The information about the 9-11 attack is more upsetting than my mother can handle, so she wants to forget that she learned about it. How are we going to spread information about this attack when so many people are like my mother?
 

We Must Experiment With Our Nation

Are we just going to get together once in a while to discuss the scam, as the Kennedy investigators do? Is this 9-11 movement going to become nothing but a social club?

I have nothing against forming a social club. In fact, it may be a lot of fun to get together to socialize. But I was hoping that we could have a beneficial effect on the world.

Talking to each other about the scam will never cause our crummy train systems to vanish and be replaced by trains that are as nice as European trains. Nor will creating more 9-11 web sites reduce corporate corruption, reduce car theft or rapes, or give us more intelligent television news.

We must do something with this knowledge in order to make the world better. We must analyze the problems we face and propose repairs to our society. Then we have to be brave enough to implement some of those proposals and watch the nation to see if those changes are making our situation better or if they are making it worse. We have to be willing to experiment with our tax system, our educational system, and election system in order to make it better. This is what engineers do when they design products, so why are we afraid to do this with our nation?
 

Quit Pouting; We Aint Helpless!!!

The voters are responsible for their crummy government, but humans do not like taking responsibility for our problems. Whenever something goes wrong in our lives, we look for an excuse. We might blame some intangible entity, such as society or poverty, or we might blame some mysterious groups of people, such as rich families or the CIA.

Many people respond to me that the voters have no choice during the elections because the elections are controlled by the CIA or the secret societies. They tell me that in the 2000 election, these mysterious people forced us to select between Al Gore and George Bush, and in the 2004 election, these mysterious people are forcing us to select between John Kerry and George Bush. But this is nonsense.

It may be true that a few rich families selected Al Gore and George Bush to be candidates in the 2000 election, and it may be true that some small group has manipulated the 2004 elections to get John Kerry nominated, but those rich families cannot force you to vote for their candidates.

Just because some secret society put Bush and Gore on the ballot doesn't mean you had to vote for either candidate. In fact, I remember some people advocating new elections with new candidates. But those people were a very small percentage of the population. Millions of people truly believed that Gore and Bush were qualified to be President.

My mother, her brother, her sister, and many of my neighbors were certain that Bush was an intelligent, responsible man who could lead this nation. Some of my other relatives were certain that Al Gore was a qualified leader. There were only a few people scattered around the nation who were complaining that neither of those guys was suitable for President.

The voters are not helpless. The voters even have the freedom to write a person's name on the ballot. The voters could have elected you as President simply by writing your name on the ballot.

No matter what I say, most people come back with an excuse to prove that they are indeed helpless. Some of them bring up the dispute over the votes in Florida and point out that Bush stole the election. They imply that it makes no difference who we vote for because the entire process is controlled.

But how does anybody know what sort of cheating was going on during that election? I suspect that both sides were cheating, and the cheating was occurring in many different states, not just Florida. Al Gore supposedly got more votes overall than Bush, but how many of Al Gore's votes were illegal? If we could subtract the illegal votes from both candidates, we might find that Bush actually had more votes than Gore. When two candidates are cheating, how can we seriously accuse the winner of stealing the election?

Even if the Gore team was honest, and even if Bush cheated his way to the presidency, the voters could have refused to accept Bush. The voters are not helpless. Rather, most of them have no desire to put serious thought into the election. They want to follow the crowd, not do their own research or thinking.
 

When Do We Complain About The Voters?

Now imagine that Dahmer gets elected President. And during his presidency he kills and eats some of the interns at the White House. But despite the rumors that he is eating government employees, about 50 percent of the nation continues to support him.

Now comes the issue for you to think about. Would you be complaining that President Dahmer should be arrested? Would you complain that the elections are a farce and that the voters are helpless?

Or would you be staring at your fellow citizens and asking yourself, what is wrong with these people for tolerating an election between Bush and Dahmer?

During the 2000 elections I was wondering how my mother, my neighbors, and other seemingly intelligent people could vote for Bush or Gore rather than demand new elections with new candidates. Today I wonder how most voters can continue to regard Bush as a great leader.
 

Can We Stop The Manipulation Of Voters?

When boys use a retarded girl for sex, most people would say the girl is a victim and the boys are committing a crime. But what do we say when millions of voters are deceived? Is a crime being committed? If so, by whom? Are the candidates committing a crime when they lie to the voters? Are the voters helpless victims of dishonest candidates or the CIA?

Most voters are deceived on a routine basis by political candidates. Every election we hear the same promises, such as no more taxes and reducing the size of government. But every year the government gets larger and taxes increase.

What do we do to stop this abuse in the future elections? The first time a voter falls for this deception we could say it is because he is naive, but what happens when he believes the same lies over and over and over? Do we set up a committee to watch over the elections and make decisions on when the voters are being manipulated? If so, who watches that committee to ensure they are honest?

It's possible that this problem would be reduced dramatically if our schools would teach children about voting, deception, and what to look for in a candidate. However, the attitude in America, and I suppose in other nations also, is that people inherently know how to vote. Supposedly, voting is as natural as breathing. Supposedly, there is no way to help people become better voters.

Compare our attitudes towards voting to the attitude a personnel department of a corporation has when it must hire managers. A personnel department will look at the past performance of a job applicant and try to determine if he has shown signs of having leadership abilities. They also interview him.

If George Bush had been born into an ordinary family and applied for a management position in a corporation, the personnel department would have dismissed him as soon as they glanced at his resume because they would notice that he never did anything during his life. They would not even bother to call him for an interview. By comparison, most voters don't care about the past performance of a candidate, nor do they have any desire to hold in-depth interviews with candidates.

Is there really a difference between citizens who are voting for government leaders and corporations that are hiring people for management positions? I don't think so. In both situations a group of people are trying to select leaders.
 

Why Should People Be Pressured To Vote?

If you were in control of a corporation, would you demand every one of your employees vote on which job applicant gets selected for top management positions? And if some employees resisted voting, would you tell them that is their duty to vote?

Some people have proposed fines for people who don't vote. But pressuring people into voting makes our situation worse because it helps incompetent candidates get elected. The reason is that the people who are forced to vote are not likely to pay much attention to the election. They are more likely to select a candidate according to what he looks like, or what sort of promises he makes, or whose name appears first on the list.

Some 9-11 activists complain that this subject is not part of the 9-11 movement, but I say the reason the scams occur year after year is because our governments are crummy. I say the 9-11 activists are fooling themselves if they think that analyzing more photographs of the Pentagon attack or electing John Kerry is going to improve our situation. I say we need to spend time discussing how to get voters to do a better job.

This 9-11 movement has done a good job investigating the scam, and it is doing OK with the dispersal of information. But the 9-11 movement is not learning anything about why these scams occur, nor does it discuss what we can do to prevent future scams. All we are doing is showing that the attack was a scam. This is equivalent to a car mechanic who tells you that your car has problems but who refuses to discuss how to fix the car.

We ought to be proposing changes to our nation, such as teaching children about voting. Children should also be taught to stop feeling sorry for themselves and that they are not helpless victims of a few rich families or secret societies. Children should be taught that they are responsible for themselves and their nation, and that their life and our nation is what they make it.
 

A Society Is A Reflection Of Its People

A good way to understand this concept is to a imagine that a billion copies of you were manufactured and put on a separate planet. Of course, since your duplicates would be the same age and sex, you would all die together and you could not have children, but ignore the unrealistic aspects of this scenario.

I bring this up only to let you think about what life would be like on a planet that is full of people exactly like you. What sort of laws would you need? Would there be car thefts? Would you build any gambling casinos? How many fistfights would be on that planet? How many wars? What would the television shows be like? How much corruption would there be in business? How many of you would be struggling desperately to become billionaires? Would airline crews be forced to stand by the door and say goodbye to people as they walked off the airplane?

If each of us were put on our own planet and a billion duplicates of us were created, we would find that each planet is slightly different. The reason is that each planet would be a reflection of the person who was duplicated.

After you've thought about what a planet would be like full of people exactly like you, compare that to America. Corruption has always been widespread in both business and government, and slavery reached extremes that no nation has ever seen. There have also been tremendous problems with alcohol and other drugs. Gambling is a very large industry. The books in most bookstores are at the twelve-year-old intellectual level. And there is a tremendous craving for money and fame. Businessmen manipulate their employees and customers on a routine basis, and they try to find ways to exploit our laws.

Would a planet with a billion duplicates of you be better or worse than America?

The American people make America what it is. If the American people truly were better than all other people on the planet, then this nation would reflect their superiority.

No nation is a helpless victim of a few rich families or secret societies. Rather, most people don't want to accept responsibility for themselves. We want to blame some small group of people or some mysterious force. I'll explain this concept with television news.
 

"But Jews Control Us! We're Helpless!"

Some people complain that the Jews are not giving us any alternatives, but we have lots of alternatives. First of all, we can chose to avoid their products. Second, there are alternative radio stations and television shows. We have options. We are not helpless victims of a few executives.

We also have the freedom to start our own newspapers, television shows, and radio shows. Many large cities have special channels set aside for the public to produce their own television shows at no cost. How much better can our situation become?

Unfortunately, the people who have produced serious television shows have discovered that only a few people will watch them. When given the choice between watching serious news or CBS news, most people prefer the sexual titillation and intellectual simplicity of the CBS news. It's like giving children the option to eat cookies or vegetables.

CBS, NBC, and ABC are gigantic, highly profitable businesses with an enormous audience simply because they provide television shows that millions of people want to watch.

The television companies are always experimenting with their shows in an attempt to attract more viewers. The experiments have shown that most people do not want to think. Rather, they want to be entertained, praised, and sexually titillated.

Our television executives are analogous to a doctor who has discovered that he can make a lot of money by offering his patients prescriptions for codeine or Vicodin.

We have laws to stop doctors from behaving in this manner, but we do not have laws to stop television executives from behaving in a similar manner.
 

How Many People Can Handle Freedom?

By not having laws to regulate television news, we end up with immoral businessmen fighting with each other to provide the public with entertainment and sexual titillation rather than news. That in turn results in children who are raised in homes where CNN and Newsweek are the source of knowledge.

Also, because these television executives have such low moral standards, they are more likely to support government scams by mixing CIA propaganda into the news. The end result is that millions of children are raised on entertainment, sexual titillation, and government propaganda. And because school textbooks also contain government propaganda about Kennedy, Oklahoma City, and other issues, schools are also deceiving children.

Allowing the government to regulate the news and school textbooks might seem to be a solution, but our government is so incompetent they would make the situation worse. Before we consider allowing the government to regulate school books or the news, we must provide ourselves with a respectable government. But how can we get a respectable government when the voters are so incompetent and ignorant?

American television news is a reflection of the American people. Our news is idiotic because this is the type of news that most Americans prefer. Some people believe that the disgusting aspects of our television news is due to a few Jews who are deliberately trying to destroy America.

However, the people who blame Jews simply do not want to face the possibility that the American people are incapable of handling the freedom to select their own television shows. Rather than describe the American people as irresponsible and immature, the Jews are blamed for forcing us to watch idiotic television shows.

Most American simply do not want to take responsibility for the problems in this nation, so they look for somebody to blame. The drug problem is one of the more obvious examples. Throughout my entire life I've been listening to Americans complain that foreign drug dealers are making Americans take drugs. When I was a child, the Afghans and Turks were frequently blamed for making Americans abuse drugs. Today most Americans blame Mexicans and South Americans. The American people simply refuse to take responsibility for their drug use.

Each of us is responsible for our behavior. Nobody is making us do anything. There are no magic drug dealers to make us abuse drugs, there are no magic Jews to make us watch CBS news, and there are no magic Skull and Bones members who can make us vote for George Bush or John Kerry.
 

Ignore The Secrect Societies!

I would say the main lesson we should be learning from 9-11 and other scams is that we can do something to make the world better if we stop feeling sorry for ourselves, stop blaming small groups for controlling us, and start discussing this issue of what do we do with this nation.