My Post-9/11 Awakening: A Path to self-liberation and Unity

As this country approaches the new year excitement and trepidation are in the air, depending on how you view the status quo. This is a call for action without anger.

Last month the International Center for 9/11 Justice invited me to give the 2nd Annual Lecture in Honor of the late David Ray Griffin, an eminent scholar of the philosophy of religion and a pioneer of the 9/11 Truth movement. The event took place last week. You can view the proceedings here. What follows is the transcript of my commentary with some added passages for clarification.

---

INTRODUCTION

It is a privilege for me to offer my thoughts on this occasion to honor a truly honorable person, a man with a prodigious mind and patience, Dr. David Ray Griffin.

I had never heard of David Ray Griffin seven years ago when my wife casually showed me a 7 second video of the Salomon Brothers building dropping like a stone on 9/11. We were hosting an intimate dinner with two of our closest friends on a chilly New England evening in October.

I watched the clip over and over again in silence. I finally muttered, “It’s being blown up”.

“Yes. They blew up the twin towers too”, said our friend Nick. I pried my eyes off of my wife’s iPhone and looked at him.

“Who are They?”

“You know, The psychopaths in our own government and other governments. They’re part of a cult that has been slowly working to control humanity for centuries if not longer. You know, the illuminati? The CABAL?”

I looked him in the eye and asked,

“Dude, What the hell are you talking about???”

Two weeks later after learning everything I could about the official explanation and how it failed miserably to explain what was observed, the first thing I said to my wife was,

“Dear God. What are we to do?”

For the next week we would lie in bed at night, sheets over our heads wondering who else knows about this? And what might happen if we say something? If “they” could blow up three skyscrapers in Manhattan and get away with it, they surely have been silencing anyone who has tried to speak up about this, right?

It didn’t take long to realize that I wasn’t alone–that people have been very public about demanding an independent reinvestigation of those events. Those of you in the audience. Those of you participating in this round table. Piers Robinson, Kevin Ryan, Neils Harret, David Chandler, Ted Walter, Richard Gage, Steven Jones, Frances Shure, Graeme Macqueen. The list is very long indeed. And for every person who has had the opportunity to have their voice heard on large public forums there are ten thousand more who are aware and have been endeavoring outside of the public sphere to tell the secret and expose the truth.

However it was David Ray Griffin who led the movement to expose the machinations of those who operate behind the scenes, outside of oversight and with limitless impunity. It was his courage that allowed me to pull the sheets from off of my head and begin writing and talking about it without fear of reprisal or worse. By taking such a bold stand so early on Griffin offloaded the requirement for courage. After all, you don’t need courage if there is nothing to fear but public rebuke as opposed to a midnight visit from a SWAT team or a drone strike.

In the years since I have been most interested in understanding why when confronted with the same evidence, some will ponder it and ask more questions while others will discard it out of hand. I have spoken to more than my fair share of engineers who accept the absurdities of NIST’s final reports on the Twin Towers and Building 7. I am surrounded by medical professionals who continue to support the CDC’s PSAs around the need for Covid-19 boosters despite the fact that their guidance resulted in the worst Covid outcomes of any country.

I have also spoken with hundreds of people outside the medical field who met unrelenting pressure to inoculate against Covid with unshakeable resolve to not comply and folks without a mechanical bone in their body who have had no problems accepting the fact the twin towers did not fall down, they blew up.

David Ray Griffin is the primary example of how one doesn’t need to be a structural engineer to know what a building being blown to smithereens should look like. Why did it take a philosopher of religion to speak out against the pundits and talking heads so early on?

The most obvious reason is because we are living in a world that is defined by doctrine and not logic or objectivity. One that has been crafted not by science, as much as scientism.

In the end my best answer is this. It’s not a matter of one’s understanding of kinematics, exothermic chemical reactions or the pitfalls of transfecting our cells with modified RNA. Most people are not experts or even have a working knowledge of science yet they have to decide for themselves what is valid and what isn’t, what is information and what is disinformation.

For most the only way to do this is by asking “does it fit into my overarching model of everything, my world view”. But what is a “World View”?

For most, a world view is no more than a collection of beliefs around a limited scope of topics AND … trust. Trust in third parties. The government. The CDC. Their teacher. Their pastor. Their Rabbi. Fox News, The Washington Post. There is little chance that anyone would be able to recognize misinformation if most or all of these trusted voices champion the same false narrative.

This is precisely why David Ray Griffin was not thrown in the slammer for speaking the truth. It wasn’t necessary. They knew few would believe the truth if they heard it. That is why organizations like the International Center for 9/11 Justice are permitted to exist. That is why we are allowed to come together today and broadcast our seditious signal to those who have the ears to hear and the mind to understand.

The intent of my commentary today is to ask you, how can we transmit a more effective signal? I suggest that in order to tweak it, to make it more penetrating and transformative, we need to first take a closer look at what we are really up against.

We commonly consider the unnamed people who sit in institutions of science, media, the military industrial complex, foreign governments, central banking as our direct adversaries. But I believe that our real adversary is a distortion in our collective cognition. In other words, ultimately, we have to change the way people think about things at a very profound level before any enduring change is possible.

There is no question that the public is very confused. This fact is being used to weaponize censorship as the antidote for misinformation. There are many who buy into the idea that some signals need to be suppressed for the greater good. If we are not vigilant, there may be a time very soon when commentary like this may not be permitted to disseminate outside of small gatherings or conversations between trusted friends.

History has shown us that this can happen. And we don’t have to look far back in time or far from our own doorsteps. The last four years should have shown us that a public exposed to an intense fear campaign will be driven into a frenzy to act in irrational ways and demonize those who don’t go along. Highly credentialed and published physicians and scientists became pariahs overnight. They lost their affiliations, their board certifications, their medical licenses, their reputations earned from a lifetime of doing the right thing.

We may be wishing for an independent reinvestigation of 9/11 or accountability around the pandemic response, but ultimately if we have a population that cannot be discerning we will continue to be driven to act against our own inalienable right to speak freely and exist as sovereign individuals or be lulled into complacency around the status quo. What we are really up against sits deep in the psyche of the collective.

We are a planet of billions of individuals who believe that the world is too complicated to understand because that is what we have been taught. Trusting the experts and authorities is easy. It requires no effort. Breaking free from this way of thinking is not easy for most people.

This is why it is taking some time for the world to see things clearly.

My Own Story

Before getting too full of ourselves under an assumption that we have the whole picture and others do not, I am going to tell you a story, my own story, of what happened to me after that otherwise unremarkable evening in October seven years ago.

When it finally sunk in that there were forces that were, up to that moment, invisible to me my whole life that were orchestrating tragedies, misleading the public through their control of a media complex, I was struck by the fact that I was oblivious to something that big and pernicious for so long.

What else had I been unaware of? What else had I been taking as true out of trust?

I am going to take you down the rabbit holes that I explored and explain where it left me. A disclaimer: what I am about to share with you are my own opinions and conclusions, not those of IC911, or any other organization I am or have been affiliated with as an engineer and physician.

Another disclaimer, most if not all of what I am about to share is speculative and impossible to validate given our present abilities to measure and verify. But even more importantly, what I will be sharing is also impossible to invalidate for the same reasons.

And before we discount the utility of speculation, let us not forget that the first step of the scientific method is the formation of a hypothesis which is a purely speculative endeavor. A hypothesis, by definition, is an explanation that has no evidence to support it.

Forming hypotheses is how our understanding advances.

The rest of my commentary today is an invitation to see what comes up for you. No doubt that for some of you, everything I share has always been obvious. Some will find it new and intriguing. For others it may seem preposterous and almost blasphemous to even consider.

If you find you are in that last group, I suggest that you may be confronted with the same barriers that arise for those who cannot accept that we have been misled around the events of 9/11 when we attempt to offer them information that runs counter to their programming.

Please understand I am making no demand that you agree with me. My intent is not necessarily to change minds. My intent is to change the way we think and to challenge you to discover where you may be stuck and perhaps find compassion for those who cling to their ideas out of their need for certainty or safety.

So, with that said, I went searching for the real reasons for why a reasonably intelligent and educated person like myself had been wrong about very big things. It led to the first distortion: equating “Knowing” with “Believing”.

Knowing versus Believing

Is there a difference between the two? In the way I define it, there is a huge difference. For the purposes of this presentation and the discussion that follows, I define Knowing as being aware of an immutable fact. Believing is trusting in a third party or holding an opinion that can be refined or dismissed when more information becomes available. The problem I noticed is that if my beliefs do not change for a long while, I regard them as things that I “know”.

What’s the problem with that? The problem is that believing carries with it an element of uncertainty, the possibility that I could be wrong. That possibility, no matter how minute, offers me the possibility of shifting my understanding if necessary. Knowing, by my definition, offers no such flexibility. Remaining stuck is the price we pay for the comfort of certainty.

To demonstrate how easy it is even for an alert and careful mind to slip from believing to knowing, I like to refer to a poll conducted by the National Science Foundation in the United States in 2012. They asked approximately 2,200 Americans a series of questions, one of which was this:

Does the sun orbit the Earth, or does the Earth orbit the Sun?

26% of respondents answered incorrectly; they believed that the Sun went round our home planet once a day. To my friends in the UK, I am sorry to say that a different survey conducted in 2005 in the EU found that 1 in 3 got it wrong.

Though 26% seems like an embarrassingly large percentage of people who maintain an idea that Western societies have rejected for over four centuries or longer, my question to you is this: if you know that the Earth orbits the Sun which sits in the middle of our solar system, how would you prove it to the 25% who got it wrong, without referring to a third party?

If you are unable to at least describe how we arrived at this understanding, I suggest that you don’t know that the Sun is at the center of the solar system, you only believe it. You believe what you have been told by your teachers, your community or what Neil De Grasse Tyson says about it.

By the time I was in the fifth grade I had read every book on astronomy in our school’s library. While my classmates memorized stats of their favorite MLB players, I was able to cite the orbital periods of the planets and their approximate distance from the sun. I would do so unprompted, earning me the label of a nerd, a label that I secretly enjoyed.

In high school I worked at our local observatory, photographing and cataloging the constellations. As an undergraduate at MIT, my thesis was part of a project involving wide area X-ray CCD satellite cameras to make them able to detect celestial events automatically and relay the information to the ground when they happened. My first job out of college was with McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company which was tasked with building one large module of the ISS.

And yet I was in the seventy five percent that got it right but I still couldn’t fathom how anyone could prove, using their powers of observation from the surface of the Earth, which model was correct.

How were the early stargazers equipped with rudimentary telescopes able to prove that we live in a heliocentric, or Sun centered solar system? It’s a fascinating problem that has relevance to what we are confronted with today.

You see, it is impossible to know with certainty what is going on in the heavens purely from observations from the Earth’s surface alone. Although Galileo could show that Jupiter’s moons orbited the giant planet and not the Earth, this could easily be dismissed as an exception to an overarching concept, a world view–literally.

Four tiny dots clinging to a pale disk when seen through a looking glass is enough to topple the Earth from its exalted state in the eyes of God?

Microscopic particles of unignited explosives found in the dust at ground zero is enough to abandon my trust of my elected government and the free press?

That is why the central authority in Europe was able to insist, for 12 centuries, that they had it right and people like Kopernicus, Galileo and others who could use their heliocentric model to make predictions with increasing accuracy, were in fact heretics.

While a heliocentric model offers a far more elegant explanation which explains how relatively simple movements of our celestial bodies reconciles with what we can see in the night sky from our own backyards, the ascendant authority, the papacy, insisted that the Earth had to be in the center of God’s creation.

To put it in classic philosophical terms, the Church’s Earth centered universe was an axiom, or a statement that is so evident that it is taken as true without question. Two thousand years prior to Galileo’s day, however, a Greek mathematician, Aristarcus of Samos, also proposed that the Earth and other planets orbited the sun. At that time, there was no Church that decreed what could and couldn’t be questioned.

And so, Galileo was confined to house arrest at the end of his life because he would not recant. It took another fifty years before Sir Isaac Newton put forth his theory that we could reliably predict how objects with mass move and the Church was finally forced to concede. Interestingly, it is these laws of motion that undermine the official explanation of the destruction of the twin towers.

In other words, if you believe in the official explanation of the destruction of the Twin Towers in Manhattan, you may as well believe that all the planets, stars and galaxies orbit the Earth everyday.

Prior to Newton’s time, those who believed that the Church was infallible could not accept that they could be wrong about what was unfolding in the sky every night. The point is that authority must confine the way we think before they can confine the way we live. In this case, the people were sold an illusion not about what they were seeing but in how to interpret it.

Choosing a wrong axiom will result in a model that looks like this:

To describe this:

And so, as I put everything I knew up for reconsideration, I found that I knew almost nothing but had a broad understanding that was based almost entirely upon beliefs. This kind of deconstructive process was an effort to obtain what Zen Buddhists refer to as beginner’s mind, an attitude of openness, eagerness, and lack of preconceptions.

In my opinion, beginner’s mind is necessary to approach a subject like 9/11. Unfortunately, seeking beginner’s mind requires a gram of curiosity and a metric ton of humility. This is likely the reason why so many with letters after their names seem to be stuck.

As I sorted out everything, separating what I knew from what I believed I found that there were very few things that I knew. In fact there was only one immutable fact, something that was so evident that it could be universally accepted as true and unquestionable. It boiled down to a single axiom.

At any given time, I may know that I am hungry, tired, in pain or happy, but only if I am aware of such sensations and emotions. In other words, underlying everything that I know at any given moment is awareness itself.

Though we each are experiencing different things at any given moment we can all agree that if we are able to ask ourselves, am I aware, the answer will always be yes. I am aware. That is self-evident. When I got right down to it, that is the only thing that I know. In order to be aware of an immutable fact, I first must be aware.

Anesthesia and the Mind-Body Problem

Perhaps you are asking yourself, what on Earth does this have to do with 9/11 or David Ray Griffin?

I will tell you, but we must take one more step to unpack the statement “I am aware”. What do we mean by “I”? More specifically I am asking, are we biological systems that are aware? Or are we awareness itself inhabiting a biological system which we call our body?

This is where all the rabbit holes led for me. This is the axis upon which my understanding of reality spins. Here I am approaching a fundamental question asked by all philosophers from Descartes to Kant from Plato to the Buddha. In the West, this is called the mind/body problem. How are the mind and body related?

Are they two entities that influence each other? The answer must be yes. An emotional state can result in the production of certain neurotransmitters and signaling molecules in the brain and body. Similarly, injury or the introduction of a psychoactive substance into the body will influence a person’s thoughts and emotions.

There is no question that we have a body, but what exactly is the mind? It must exist, but can it be measured materially? If it cannot be measured materially, how then does it interact with the physical body? This is what philosophers and more recently neuroscientists have been scratching their heads about.

One of the last books David Ray Griffin wrote prior to the events of 9/11 was titled, “Unsnarling the World Knot: Consciousness, Freedom and the Mind-Body Problem”. I have not read the book and I am unfamiliar with his perspective on this topic. It turns out, coincidentally, that I had been contemplating this topic for some years prior to waking up to 9/11.

The mind-body problem in philosophy is at the core of perhaps the biggest mystery in medicine: the mechanism of anesthetic gases.

Anesthetic gases are of the oldest class of medications being used today. It was in 1846 when a dentist named William Morton gave the first public demonstration of anesthesia just a few miles from my home at the MGH. He anesthetized a young man with ether so that a surgeon could excise a tumor in his neck. When he came to and reported no recollection of the event, it is said that many of the surgeons in the audience wept after witnessing this feat.

Though some would argue that vaccines or antibiotics are the greatest contribution of western medicine to humanity, I believe it is anesthesia. Without it, none of the marvels of surgery could be possible, at least mercifully. From hip replacements to transplant surgery to heart bypasses, none would be possible without modern anesthesia.

The stunning thing is, 178 years later we still do not understand how a gas like ether works. To explain why this is, I must first explain what the word understand means to the medical orthodoxy. You see, western medicine is actually based in a philosophical doctrine called materialism, the idea that everything, including awareness, is the result of matter interacting with itself. It is an axiom decreed by the medical orthodoxy and challenging it expels you into the realm of pseudoscience.

The most logical explanation as to why we have been able to map our own genome but not understand how and why a person breathing one part in fifty of a modern anesthetic gas like sevoflurane is rendered unconscious is because awareness is not a material phenomenon.

Although we have identified certain structures in the brain that are active in awake people and dormant in the unconscious, that doesn’t necessarily mean that these structures are the source of awareness, they are better thought of as structures that are active when consciousness is present in the body.

When we apply the deconstructive approach of western medicine to our brains, we will eventually find molecules interacting with other molecules. Does it make sense that our dynamic, multisensorial experience of being awake could be expressed materially? 178 years of searching has gotten us nowhere because our assumed model is incorrect. When you go looking for molecules, that’s all you will ever find.

If we broadened our examination of human experience to consider more extreme situations, another wrinkle appears in the Western paradigm. Near Death Experiences (NDEs) are all characterized by lucid awareness that remains continuous during a period of time while outside observers assume the person is unconscious or dead. Sometimes patients who have experienced an NDE in a hospital or in the operating room can accurately recount what was said and done by people attending to them during their state of clinical death. They are able to accurately describe the event from an observer’s perspective, often viewing their own body and those around it from above.

There are thousands of such accounts which come from interviews with hospitalized patients who suffered a cardiac arrest. Dr. Bruce Grayson, Emeritus professor at the University of VA and others found that a significant percentage of patients who survived resuscitation could recall some of the event. A smaller but not insignificant portion had very detailed recollections that cannot be chalked up to mere coincidence.

This is more evidence that our bodies are not the source of consciousness AND that consciousness is not confined to our bodies.

And if that weren’t enough, we must contend with the work of Dr. Ian Stevenson and others.

Dr. Ian Stevenson was a physician and professor of psychiatry at the University of Virginia School of Medicine for 50 years. He served as the Chair of Psychiatry for ten of them. He is best known for his research into the study of reincarnation. During the course of his career he assiduously compiled over three thousand case studies of individuals who reported living on this planet as a different person prior to their current life.

What is fascinating about these cases is that the subjects are not adults that claim they were Pharaohs or Knights that served King Arthur in a “past” life. The subjects are children who caught the attention of their families when they were very young. They would insist that they had lived rather average lives before, had families of their own and recalled their previous name, details and location of their previous home and occasionally, the circumstances around their death. Often they would go ignored for some time but their dogged refusal to recant their peculiar tales was a matter of some curiosity to their families.

The fascinating part of many of the children in Stevenson’s extensive case series is that the child’s parents or others familiar with their story eventually stumbled across convincing evidence that the person the child claimed to have “embodied” in a previous life actually lived and died before their birth. Dr. Stevenson would attempt to authenticate the child’s account through interviews with the surviving members of the family of the deceased person the child claimed to have been. Sometimes extremely specific details of the previous life were confirmed, such as secrets that were kept between their old self and their spouse or physical details of their previous home that would only be known to those who lived there. When the child was “reunited” with the family of the deceased they could identify many of those in their old family, and pick out the imposters that Stevenson had planted to test the specificity of their recall.

His 2200 page, two volume tome, Reincarnation and Biology contained 225 case reports of children who remembered previous lives and who also had physical anomalies, like birthmarks, that matched those previous lives, details that could in some cases be confirmed by the dead person’s autopsy record and photos. More convincing evidence that we are awareness first and our physical bodies secondarily.

While we may dismiss Stevenson’s lifetime of work as unscientific or a scheme to confuse us with fanciful ideas, on what grounds would we do this other than our sacred beliefs? These beliefs may be sacred, but they are merely beliefs and not immutable facts.

Moreover, we are still confronted with the centuries old mystery of anesthesia. We can package genetic instructions into lipid nanoparticles that co opt our cellular machinery to crank out perfect spike proteins weighing 200 thousand daltons each, yet we don’t know why a simple molecule like diethyl ether puts us to sleep.

I’m an anesthesiologist, and I have chaperoned 20 thousand patients to a state of deep unconsciousness and back to their baseline interactive state using modern anesthetic gases like sevoflurane, also a relatively tiny halogenated hydrocarbon, without knowing how it works. I believe we will never discover its mechanism using the paradigm we have adopted.

I believe we as a species are reincarnating. It’s a belief. It’s not an immutable fact. It’s a hypothesis that reconciles our inability to identify the mechanism of inhaled anesthetic agents, NDEs, and the uncanny stories coming from the mouths of babes.

Given the fact that we can’t KNOW, what working model should we adopt, given the nature of the horrific events that seem to be unfolding with increasing frequency? 9/11 was the most audacious of a long series of false flag events that pit armies and ideologies against each other with devastating consequences for humanity.

Each subsequent tragedy galvanizes our idea that we are a belligerent species, that new wars must be waged to avenge the lives lost from previous ones. Warfare is perpetuated. Each conflict reaffirms that peace is just a pipe dream that can never really be achieved because of our differences, while at the same time each conflict reifies those differences.

Imagine what would happen if we collectively agreed that we have always been reincarnating. Those of us alive today would have been responsible for at least some of the horrific events in human history. Some of us here today would have been the victims. Some the perpetrators. Some the bystanders who thought they were powerless and watched it happen. The problem is that we cannot know who is whom. The only reasonable course of action would be to drop our weapons and the labels we use to separate us from them and forgive each other, because we really cannot know who is more culpable today. Doing anything different would be pure insanity.

The truth of the matter is that in order to reap the benefits of this world view we don’t have to know we are reincarnating, we just have to believe it.

It begs the question, what is in our way besides our own heretofore unchallenged beliefs about these things?

“The wish not to believe,” Stevenson himself once said, “can influence as strongly as the wish to believe.”

I am not an expert in the so-called secret societies that purportedly possess hidden knowledge they use to manipulate the rest of us. But if there were such societies and secrets, the understanding that we have been reincarnating might very well be a significant part of the hidden knowledge they possess. Imagine the power a small group could wield if it understood the intricacies of reincarnation upon a world that believed that death was the termination of their existence and that their identity was defined solely by their present race or religion.

At the very least, accepting that we are, in our essence, something that transcends the death of our bodies, offers us a potent weapon against the very real interests that use fear to extinguish our ability to reason so that we accept the only solutions they offer. A population that isn’t afraid to die is very, very hard to control.

Whether or not we are in fact reincarnating, it wouldn’t be in the interest of those who profit from the business of war, conventional or biological, for us to adopt it into our world view. I hope that that, in and of itself, will give us reason to pause and consider this openly.

There is another substantial benefit in accepting reincarnation. What kinds of decisions would we as a collective make knowing that it will eventually be we who will suffer the repercussions or enjoy the fruits of our policies a hundred or a thousand years from now? While we like to think that we act out of our concern for our children and their children, we really don’t.

The greatest attack on their prosperity is central banking, a diabolical system that allows governments to fund any expenditures they wish, especially wars. The price is always disproportionately borne by future generations, with their sweat and blood. We could dismantle central banks right now, but we don’t. Perhaps we would if we knew that we and no one else would be shouldering the debt that we are incurring today.

J.P. Morgan and Astrology

The Federal Reserve is the Central Bank of the United States. It was brought into existence almost exactly 111 years ago to this day through the efforts of the wealthiest men in the country. One of whom was JP Morgan. Morgan was a chief architect of the Fed and of the first false flag of the 20th Century.

The United States entered WWI after The Lusitania, a massive British liner with 195 American civilians on board, was sunk by a German U-boat attack. Prior to setting sail from New York, The Lusitania was loaded with tons of weaponry including six million rounds of ammunition purchased with funds raised for England through JP Morgan’s investment house. This was done in broad daylight with the ship’s manifest a matter of public record.

The German government protested that using such a ship to transport weapons was in direct violation of international neutrality treaties. The American government denied this was taking place. The German embassy then appealed to the American people directly, placing ads in newspapers urging them not to book passage on The Lusitania as it represented a strategic target that would fall under German attack. The U.S. State Department prevented these warnings from being run. Only one escaped the State Department’s censorship umbrella. It ran in the Des Moines Register:

At this time J. P. Morgan was profiting from selling English and French bonds to American investors to raise money for their war effort against Germany. In addition, the two countries spent significant sums on products purchased from companies in Morgan’s control. When it became clear that Germany was nearing victory through their control of shipping lanes in the Atlantic with their U-boats, Morgan’s income stream was threatened. England, France and the American investing house knew their causes would only be saved if the United States entered the war against Germany.

At the time this seemed a practical impossibility as Woodrow Wilson, approaching reelection, was riding a broad anti-war sentiment sweeping the country. This all changed when The Lusitania sank. The details of this disaster are disquieting. After crossing the Atlantic, the Lusitania was to be met with a flotilla of British destroyers to protect it from a certain U-boat attack. The destroyers never showed up and the fate of the ship, its civilian passengers was sealed.

Morgan had, in the meantime, purchased control over major segments of the media and flooded the public with pro-war editorial. The media and the USG worked together to see that America entered WWI on April 6, 1917. War expenditures were met by monetary expansion engineered by The Fed. Between 1915 and 1920 the monetary supply doubled and the value of the dollar dropped by nearly 50%.

Over 100 thousand American lives were lost in bloody combat or disease. Young soldiers who sacrificed themselves out of patriotism were in fact used, ultimately, to protect Morgan’s financial interests.

JP Morgan

One of the most intriguing aspects of the JP Morgan character was his interest in astrology. He has been attributed to saying,

“Millionaires don’t use astrology, billionaires do.”

Whether or not this individual with the ability to impose his will over geopolitics actually uttered these words is up for debate, however Evangaline Adams, an astrologer claims in her 1926 autobiography that Morgan consulted her regularly.

Of course, astrologers say that Morgan’s interest in astrology should be of no surprise because he had Uranus rising in Pisces, which of course means that he would have been naturally drawn to astrology and metaphysics…

How a planet’s position can influence an individual person’s emotions or motivations is beyond my understanding, and most probably beyond anyone else’s, astrologer or not. This is why I personally, treated astrology as no more than a curiosity only to be entertained while waiting for a meal to be served at a Chinese restaurant.

However astrology, in one form or another, can be traced back thousands of years to Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, Indian, Chinese and other cultures. Undoubtedly ancient societies could learn much from the sky about the rhythm of the seasons, when to plant, harvest or migrate. Advanced civilizations, those with the acumen to make more precise measurements, record them and most importantly, having the luxury of the time and freedom to raise their gaze from the shrubbery to the skies above and ponder, realized that the annual cycles of the seasons were part of much longer ones, where slow moving planets moved against the backdrop of constellations over centuries.

Perhaps it was only a matter of time before cultures began to superimpose their own deeper meanings to the movements of celestial bodies and the cycles that take more than a human lifetime to unfold.

My attitude towards astrology has shifted. I no longer regard it as a fanciful set of ideations to be dismissed out of hand. Instead, I am more curious, a good sign that I am on my way to beginner’s mind. There are two reasons for this.

First, by accepting that humanity has been reincarnating, I’ve opened my mind to the possibility that we, the souls on the planet, could be changing and evolving over many lifetimes. Could it be possible that the planetary positions that change over the centuries and the precession of the equinox over thousands of years are more like timekeepers that signal inevitable shifts in the way we think and organize rather than having some kind of psychic control over us?

Eclipse as seen from Vermont, 04/08/2024

Earlier this year I had the good fortune of experiencing a total solar eclipse. This kind of event has some significance in astrology. Says one astrologer:

“Eclipses are times of unexpected changes. They'll show you where in your life you've been holding on to something that is past its prime, trying to force something to go in a direction it's not supposed to…”

The very next day, April 9, a senior level editor and reporter at NPR, Uri Berliner, wrote a scathing article which criticized the bias in reporting he witnessed at the news organization favored by the intelligentsia in this country.

Within the next month at least three remarkable events took place. The New York Times published an article “Thousands believe they have been injured by the Covid Vaccine. Is Anyone Listening?” which acknowledged the possibility of Covid vaccine injuries for the very first time.

Former CNN anchor, Chris Cuomo who endlessly derided the unvaccinated and their foolish notions that Covid could be treated with repurposed drugs admitted that he was wrong and was taking Ivermectin to treat long Covid.

Peter Dazak, President of EcoHealth Alliance, the infamous organization funded by the NIH to do gain of function research was found guilty of obstructing investigation into the origin of SARS-COV2 by a congressional subcommittee.

Of course these could all be coincidences unrelated to the Solar Eclipse in North America. It did make me curious. What would happen to me next? Or what happened to me soon after I was witness to other solar eclipses in the past.

To my recollection, I witnessed two eclipses prior to the one this year. One was in May, 1994. Two months later, I quit my engineering job in Cambridge, MA, packed up my car, drove to Texas and began my education and new life in medicine.

The next occurred while I was in Maine on vacation. I remembered that I was riding a ferry boat between islands off the coast. I looked it up on Wikipedia. The date was August 21, 2017, once again two months before I became aware of something called the movement for 9/11 Truth.

More coincidences…

Last month, the former planet Pluto entered the sign of Aquarius where it will remain for the next two decades. To astronomers this is nothing to write home about. Planets (and lowly objects like Pluto) are constantly moving in and out of zodiac signs as they and the Earth orbit our Sun.

To astrologers, this represents an enormous shift in our collective psyche. They tell us that we are in for a ride. Pluto, they say, carries the energy of death, birth and transformation.

They say that the focus will shift toward dismantling outdated hierarchies, making way for a society that thrives on inclusivity, collaboration, and forward-thinking solutions. It’s a powerful push toward a future in which collective dreams take precedence over individual gains, challenging us to rewrite the rules and rally together for a better, brighter tomorrow.

Pluto into Aquarius signals a massive humanitarian revolution. Pluto in Aquarius has the potential to generate new government structures, groundbreaking technology and medicine, and social innovation that changes the course of history.

Is it all just feel-good gobbledygook? Maybe. However the last time Pluto sat in front of the constellation of Aquarius was at the end of the 18th century. Two decades that saw the rise of self-governance with the American and French Revolutions.

That period also saw the inception of the first vaccine, a new technology with enormous potential of protecting humans against deadly diseases. Pluto heralded a disruption in the hegemony of the ruling class and the idea that the only way a person can be protected from an infectious disease was to first survive it was challenged for the first time.

Is it just another coincidence that now both vaccines and self-governance are up for serious reconsideration? We are now waking up to the reality that neither are what we thought they were. Vaccines have the potential to both help and harm. Self-governance can liberate, but only if the individual isn’t fooled into advocating for restrictions upon their own freedom.

Finally, on a much grander time scale, humanity is entering the age of Aquarius. For the next two thousand years or so when we gaze East on the first day of spring it will be the constellation of Aquarius and not Pisces that will appear at dawn behind the rising sun.

Astronomically this gradual shift through the twelve zodiac signs over 26,000 years is due to the wobble of the earth’s axis, or axial precession. Astrologers have not come to any consensus about when exactly this new age will be upon us, if it isn’t already.

However there is agreement that the Age of Aquarius will see a rise in cooperative effort, an emphasis on the collective and not the individual. Intriguingly, this age will see a shift from top down to bottom up solutions to our problems.

Astrologers say that the tendency for the masses to follow leaders and institutions in the age of Pisces will be upended. I believe we are seeing this happen in front of our eyes. Trust in legacy media, political leaders and the medical orthodoxy is crumbling, making it necessary for us to make sense of things for ourselves. We are witnessing the growth of independent thought because the alternative is simply no longer acceptable as it once was.

The birth of the internet has made it possible for ideas to spread quickly outside of a hierarchical control. This is, perhaps the biggest bottom-up response to the control the top has had over the way we think. Sense-making no longer has to be outsourced to third parties.

Transactions which could until recently, only be validated by a centralized authority, can now safely, securely and anonymously take place through blockchain technology which leaves validation to the collective. It’s another bottom-up solution.

In other words, the arbiter of truth when it comes to the exchange of ideas and wealth will be the collective and not a third party. Authority becomes distributed and not centralized.

A massive shift is upon us and it is very possible that this shift has been inevitable. If the forces that have run the planet for the last two thousand years saw this coming, I suggest that their only play would be to see that the shift would work to their advantage.

Isn’t that why the WEF, which brings the most powerful and influential persons, politicians and private and public organizations together to set an agenda for the rest of us, has been talking about a Great Reset?

Top down solutions are quickly becoming antiquated. In order to cling to the old ways authority has only one strategy: to keep us divided and angry and fearful of each other.

Conclusion

I see obvious similarities between today and Galileo’s time when an inaccurate model of reality was being imposed upon a trusting public.

Today the public is being fed another inaccurate model of reality, that we live in a world that is divided by insurmountable barriers in the way we think, the way we live, the way we worship, the way we vote, the way we look. We have been programmed to think that these barriers make conflict unavoidable. If conflict is unavoidable, perhaps it is better to fight on our terms and not someone else’s. Preemptive strikes must be considered. Bombs and missiles become regarded as deterrents and not the instruments designed to destroy human life that they are.

If there were a way to achieve peace it would have to be through war, right? This insane model can only flourish in a species that has been deeply programmed.

Four hundred years ago the spell that the public was under broke because of a new understanding that came out of left field. Then it was the theory of gravitational attraction—an understanding that the objects in the sky were not just inextricably linked by an invisible force, but that they moved in concert with each other, with a predictable cadence in patterns that unfold over centuries or longer, in cycles.

What will be the radical discovery of our time that blows away the idea that war is necessary, that it is only logical to assume a competitive posture with everyone else?

Whatever it will be, it will undermine the idea that we are separate. That we are different from each other. Is there anything that transcends skin color, ethnicity, political affiliation and cultural identification? Whatever it is, it cannot be seen or measured. It has to be intuited.

Everything moves in cycles. All the stars we can see with the naked eye are the tiniest fraction of the billions of suns which all circle the center of our galaxy. The moon waxes and wanes over 28 days. Planets and constellations disappear behind the daytime sun until they reappear for another spell, over and over again. Is it so difficult to accept that we may also be appearing, disappearing and reappearing like everything else in nature? This is what some of the older souls on the planet are hinting at. These are the children whose recollections predate those of their own parents.

So to conclude, I want to say that I am extremely hopeful that we are headed for an incredible future. I think it is inevitable. It’s been only seven years since my eyes opened to the real state of the world through an open reexamination of 9/11. In that short time, I have seen a substantial shift in how people regard the idea that something fishy happened that day.

For those of you who have been on this road for two decades or longer, I applaud you and your persistence. 23 years is a long time, but I want to remind you that it’s only the blink of an eye when it comes to planet-wide transformations.

If the astrologers are correct, we have entered a new age where individuals will have to see things for themselves, using their own powers of discernment. How can we best nurture this shift?

We are trying to change minds on a large scale. What happens when we regard 9/11 not as a setback but as an event that has catapulted us ahead? Pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars to prove that their products exceed the efficacy of a placebo—a benefit offered by a mind that expects to feel better. It’s a powerful benefit, much to the dismay of Merck and Pfizer.

What might happen if we collectively accept that our efforts are not in vain but have been destabilizing to a power structure that is quietly in full retreat?

What happens if we drop our frustrations around the pace of our progress and instead know that we will enjoy the fruits of our work in this lifetime or the next?

We are the pioneers of this time; we have no predecessors. We must take this responsibility seriously.

The bad actors need to be identified to be held accountable, but how will we move forward from there? If we are connected in ways that we have not fully apprehended or understood, punishment and retribution may carry unexpected consequences for everyone, including the innocent.

When I envision our planet free from the influence of hidden interests it’s obvious that we won’t be fully liberated until reparations are paid and our thirst for revenge has been quenched. But is this even possible? How would we ever agree on what would constitute just punishment for the horrific acts conducted over just the last century? There is only one antidote to hatred. It’s forgiveness. Finding it may be the biggest challenge that we will face in the years to come.

Two thousand years ago during the last transition between astrological ages forgiveness was a radical idea. It still is. Are we finally ready to embrace it and leave judgement to a higher power? Or do we need another two thousand years of suffering before we concede that we simply do not know enough to proceed under our same model of reality?

Thank you all for your attention this afternoon. Thank you to UK Column and to my colleagues at the International Center for 9/11 Justice. And my deepest gratitude to Professor Griffin. I would like to think that you tuned in today too.