'JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters' is a brilliant title and top-rated book.

How about why investigating 9/11 matters...

Answer? Because it leads to critical thinking about Sandy Hook through to Christchurch.

And why do particular claims matter? If proven correct, amount to an acknowledgement and the depths of the con and corruption. The kept under the rug critical mechanism in the enslavement cycle.

The triangular equation goes; false-flag and the media response for Government-based action.

Believe manufactured terror -- along with child abuse -- keeps the seen and leading US etc. warring away.

All kinds of war. Hot and cold ones, back home and at free-thinking. Overseas for business and military to reorientate all nations into prescribed subservience.

A gathering of destroyers led by the US, UK and Israel.

Behind enough of these nation's leaders to matter is a cabal. The Cult. The broadest of definitions around named families whose allegiance isn't about nation-building. Into a world-transforming religion.

Transnational banks do their bidding. Rogue employees of secret services work to their commands. With mercenaries and operatives infiltrating business, military and civic structures. Inside the Press and Media. By and large, shaping the important narratives and running the show.

All ramped up with populist encouragement when 'terror' comes. For the 'war is peace' broadcasting. Calls for allies and partners to unite as nations and step-up to join the march.

Reassurance the battle is on and we know whose side 'we' are on.

As for including 'lone shooters' and not said to be 'terrorist' all serve the purpose. All about projection and fear. All that's needed for a jolt and towards the silencing of dissent. Reassurance and the fight against the threats and escalation.

Side benefits include political divide and conquering through a mainstream mouthpiece. On to an acceptable to the masses alternative.

An 'opposition'. For Left -or- Right, and Islamic violence arguments. Capitalism vs. Socialism. Nazis or Commies.

Never discuss, or allow the slightest divergence and what happened when said-radicals hit?

Keeping quiet in what's considered a tactical lie about you-know-what. Nothing about the crime scene.

Blunt derision about "conspiracy theorists". While considering themselves alternative and 'woke'. With an eye on wider appeal and the dangers of dealing with the difficult.

Not 'awoke to...' and transitional thinking. 'Woke' -- which now includes, all who self-define and for any reason.

Thinking and talk that might break the chain that locks the UK and parts into the political madness?

If enough and the right-on crowd get provoked to speak out. Deciding to begin and explore wider possibilities. The vulnerable to opening up getting angry enough to bust through the Overton window.

Summed up in the latest from Pilger where he writes:

The glimpse of Julian Assange being dragged from the Ecuadorean embassy in London is an emblem of the times.

The key thought: ...an emblem. 'An object or a representation that functions as a symbol.'

And Julian carried one.

A book. Is it at all possible he took the one he happened to be reading? Could be. More likely a well-considered decision. Gore Vidal, so why him and why this book?

Says what?

Here's what the co-author says about 'History of the National Security State'.

Did the book make a splash when it came out? Did it sell well?

No. Vidal used to be a completely mainstream pundit, as well as obviously a very famous author and playwright and movie writer and scriptwriter and so on. But over the years, I don’t think Gore changed all that much — maybe his critique of empire and militarism became sharper — but the politics and the media moved to the right and he got more and more marginalized. So by the time I was interviewing him, he was almost never being interviewed on television anymore.

And this continued for the most part until his death.

Gore Vidal is the only major literary figure to do this. To say something that outrageous as part of the prevailing intelligentsia. Recorded in 2005 at a university. Here's the Prince on TV talking Chemtrails moment:

I‘ll plug a book, not my own, which I’ve been reading in the car coming down here, it’s called; The New Pearl Harbor...

For all his literary achievements this re-defined his profile and was never forgiven. Somewhat backtracked but never enough. At his death, those you'd assume would have a good word couldn't hide their need to put down.

He broke ranks. Today the pressure is on.

The reaction today about all the Leftie sell-out talk and for more honest politics. Progressives are where the action's at.

All about attitude and openness.

Where the emerging space moves onward and one day allowing for discussion about 9/11 etc and why matters.

The movement and action are on the bridges or borders. Next step and an opening up about henceforth denied inside-jobs and terror.

The difficulty for those involved is personal pride. And of course, breaking ranks and banishment and being a leader stepping up to face the backlash.

The ever bolder splits among progressives and liberal types are beginning to push.

Trouble is there's a whole lot to put them off those talking flags and hoaxes. The detrimental aspect in that hotchpotch of false-flag-calling outposts is the intransigent attitude. Seems the main aim for far too many is prove not to be wrong and show-up who reckon-is.

Frustrations manifest in all sorts of unattractive ways.

In thinking about the scarcity of 'I was wrong about...' and signs of developing thinking, came upon:

'Assange Arrested! Why I Was Wrong About Julian' by Jay Dyer.

Good stuff. What a breath of fresh air. For me, the tone and power of his presentation, enhanced by the admission. Regardless and yes, go with the analysis.

Can't quite believe the complete 'Assange is something altogether else'.

Sure and many historical dodgy claims about Assange. The suspicion all smoke and mirrors, yet can't be sure-sure what's what? A genuine puzzle. Much of it looks to be troublemaking in the right sense, while in the past there have been some bad and lame moves.

But why carry out 'this' book. Not only here but somehow able to read away in the Courtroom.

(Gotta go.)

End on: Talk and the emblematic? Pilger an epitome of the scene where the movement rolls. Ends his Assange piece with something that speaks for itself:

In the 1970s, I met Leni Reifenstahl, close friend of Adolf Hitler, whose films helped cast the Nazi spell over Germany.

She told me that the message in her films, the propaganda, was dependent not on "orders from above" but on what she called the "submissive void" of the public.

"Did this submissive void include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie?" I asked her.

"Of course," she said, "especially the intelligentsia.... When people no longer ask serious questions, they are submissive and malleable. Anything can happen."