The Un-Natural War - Blog Series

   As requested, here are the links to my June/July blog series entitled "The Un-Natural War", which covers some of the aspects of the unseen and man-made war against human beings. The blog series covers Chemtrails, HAARP, Exotic Weapons, Weather Modification, Fluoridation, Aspartame, Toxic Food, Vaccinations, Swine Flu, etc.

Enjoy!!

Part 1 - Chemtrails
Part 2 - Exotic Weapons
Part 3 - Toxic Goodness
Part 4 - Vaccinations

9/11 - Part 4: "Method In The Madness"

   The methods used to bring down the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre is a huge matter for debate in the truth community. These matters have been fuelled and compounded by photographic and video footage combined with eyewitness testimony. As the media began coverage of events, many individuals (including certain reporters) made claims about all manner of aircraft and hardware, with some showing no knowledge of the involvement of jet airliners: “A bomb has gone off” and “There has been a huge explosion” were the sorts of statements made.

   As events progressed, people were continually being corrected by news anchors: “It was high jacked planes!“ Eventually there were numerous people, cited as eyewitnesses, who were actually from certain institutional agencies and organisations. Some have even been exposed as ‘fake testimony’ (individuals claiming to be a certain individual when they clearly were somebody else!). These people were shown by the mainstream media repeatedly as reliable testimony, almost as if to reinforce an engineered consensus: “Two planes slammed into the towers!” (I will discuss the media’s role in 9/11 in a forthcoming post).

   Reconciling inconsistencies in the wealth of eyewitness accounts from 9/11, is difficult. There are a huge number of people who never actually saw planes, yet saw and heard the initial explosions. Some have subsequently filled in the gaps based on “general consensus”. Yet if pushed, they still cannot be 100% sure they even saw a plane. One or two witnesses have even claimed to have seen a plane, yet heard no explosion! Make of that what you will! Testimony from the moments before both the impacts and the collapses, also describe unusual sound anomalies. Droning, hissing and “thrushing” sounds were spoken off by several witnesses. The sound of military-like jets and missiles were also spoken of by others. It is difficult to imagine how the brain ultimately compartmentalises a first hand experience like 9/11. I believe the lack of consistency amongst these differing accounts, exposes the flaws in the ‘official’ story.

   More revealing, are numerous accounts of various differing aircraft. Some witnessed small planes: “It looked like a commuter plane” (Don Wright), “The plane appeared to hold 8 to 12 people” (Steve Patterson), etc. Anthony Bartolomey , in his interviews stated: “Numerous civilians were telling me that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane”.

   Former Republican Party insider Karl Schwarz began investigating oddities in the wake of 9/11. In running across the video footage in a French foreign film entitled The Barbarian Invasion (a film unrelated to 9-11), he noticed a 1 minute 52 second video segment, shot by an unknown amateur photographer at the WTC, which Schwartz says clearly shows a Boeing 737 airliner striking the south tower… rather than the government claimed 767. Schwarz said he also had evidence that the engine recovered in the WTC wreckage was a model type CFM56, which propels a 737, not a 767.

   There was even an account from Tom Wright (an operations manager at FAA’s New York Terminal Radar Approach Control - DRACON) of a Sikorsky helicopter that was tracked until it collided with the WTC at 8.27am on 9/11. He also claimed that it was “the only target that we saw in the vicinity of the Trade Centre”.

   It is conceivable that there would be numerous differing accounts. Despite the fact that, the FAA grounded all aircraft (including military) at 9.24am, various credible internet video footage shows passenger jets in the skies throughout the day. It has been confirmed that the Bin Laden family was flown out of the US after the lockdown, so how many planes were still in the air? Student video footage from across the Hudson River shows fighter jets speeding toward the Towers (between the initial ‘impact’ and collapse) and throughout the day. This poses the larger question of a military presence being able to prevent said ‘attacks’! Even at the moment of ‘impact’, video footage reveals both: a large commercial aircraft flying past the North Tower, as it was hit and a white aircraft behind the towers, as the South Tower was hit.

   There were also claims of military hardware: “I was convinced it was a missile”, ”We heard what sounded like a missile”, “One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building” (Anthony Bartolomey), etc. At 9.06am, PAPD Police Desk radio report, PA Channel W reported: “Units on channel W, this is 8581 Sierra. There’s been a reported missile launching from the Woolworth Building. CPD, if you are monitoring, get in touch with New York City. Have them check the Woolworth Building roof top".

   The debate about military vehicles and devices was blown open, with claims made about a ’pod’ attached to the underbelly of Flight 175. Subsequent study of numerous photographs and video footage has shown this ’pod’ to be visible from several angles. Researchers have studied the smaller amount of footage of Flight 11 and showed the possibility that it too had a ’pod’. Whilst it is difficult to quantify this theory given the ease with which footage can be doctored, it has fuelled truthers and sceptics alike. Those who follow the ’official story’ claim it is nothing more than shadows and light anomalies. Truth Seekers have been heartened by several independent successes with video analysis. Whilst experts don’t know what it is, they can rule out the shadows and lighting factors. It appears that it is very much a part of the whole vehicle. Combined with the ’flash’ footage that pre-empts the ’impact’, some believe that it is an Incendiary Device. Thus calling the nature of these two planes into doubt.

   Were they military in nature? FOX employee, Mark Burnback stated at the time: “There was definitely a blue logo with like a circular logo on the front of the plane, toward the… yeah, definitely toward the front. It definitely didn’t look like a commercial plane. I didn’t see any windows on the side… It was not a normal flight that I’ve ever seen. It did not look like it belonged in this area”. Footage from the time shows eyewitnesses initial observations. One woman screams: “That was not an American Airline” (repeatedly). One man said; “The plane wasn’t no airline or anything. It was a twin engine, big, grey plane”. With this in mind, you have to ask the question: If not Flight 11 and 175, what happened to the planes they claimed were used? Where are the passengers and crew? Considering the answer to this question is a chilling realisation…

   You would also have to ask, would those responsible have people prepared to fly vehicles into certain death? The Japanese did it in WW2! Those who believe in an agenda would loyally lay down their lives for, what they perceive to be, the greater good. However, what if these aircraft were unmanned? As crazy as that may sound, it has applications based firmly in reality.
In 1984, The NASA Dryden Flight Research Centre and the FAA flew a fully fuelled Boeing 720 via remote control and crash it into the ground. In 1994, An experiment at the Crows Landing NASA Facility in the Central Valley of California involved 110 landings of a Boeing 737 airliner using an experimental GPS navigation system. On April 24, 2001, The Global Hawk made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned, robotic aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean. On August 25, 2001, Raytheon (several of the listed 9/11 flight passengers were employed by Raytheon!) and the U.S. Air Force successfully auto lands a pilot-less FedEx Boeing 727 six times using a military GPS landing system that enabled ground control to take control of a hijacked airplane and force land it. They also successfully completed flight testing of a system providing accurate and reliable landing guidance for both rotary and fixed wing aircraft during low visibility (Category I and II) approaches, on September 6, 2001.

   All four planes hijacked were made by Boeing (a major defence contractor) and have virtually the same flight decks, can store an entire flight path plan, and can be automatically flown immediately after takeoff up until landing. It is strange when you consider that the two Boeing 767's that were claimed to have hit the North and South WTC Towers crashed at approximately the same angle, both hitting their targets tilting to the left. The technology to precisely fly planes by remote, avoiding obstacles and undertaking manoeuvres of near impossibility for a living pilot, is in commercial use today. Military technology is known to be at least 20 years ahead of that in commercial use, so it is certainly feasible.

   In examining the theory of unconventional weaponry use to collapse the towers, I must credit Dr Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson for their tireless research into the subject of energy weapons or means. Whilst I still have certain reservations about these matters, I am certainly open to the idea. Especially if you consider the 60 year or more history of classified research, development and testing of microwave weapons, exotic energy weapons and weather modification technology. I am convinced these means exist in some form and, with this in mind, it is not such a stretch of the imagination to entertain the notion of black technology usability in a false flag or covert operation.

   Many in the truth movement have lambasted these ideas and, whether you agree or not, the research into this theory is certainly worth taking the time to at least examine… instead of immediately dismissing out of hand. Whilst studying the “bubbling”, “foaming” and “dustification” effect, visible in footage of the collapses, they have also pointed to anomalies in the surrounding area. Upturned cars, bizarre scorching of vehicles, inconsistent fire damage of property and environment and ’cold fires’ (photographs show rescue workers walking through small fires with no effect on the person).

   Evidence of these unconventional methods to bring down the towers, may lie in the mystery surrounding Hurricane Erin, which was over the Atlantic Ocean and the longest-lived hurricane in the 2001 Atlantic hurricane season. The hurricane maintained peak strength for 18 hours. Erin should have made New York landfall on September 11, yet it rapidly decelerated and veered off in a totally different easterly direction. Although it could be argued that nature is, by it’s very nature (no pun intended), is unpredictable… is it just a bizarre coincidence?. If Erin had continued on course, we would not have had clear blue skies on 9/11 (for the footage!), flights may have been delayed or cancelled and we may never have had an event called 9/11. It may have been 9/14 or 9/26 (the numerological significance of the date would have diminished though!)… who can tell. However, anybody who knows the history of weather modification projects knows that altering the path of a hurricane is not so far fetched as it may appear.

The problem with examining the twin towers as evidence of a cover-up?
It is difficult to get close to solid proof. The Towers evidence (whilst damning) contradicts itself… left, right and centre.

Proof of something more tangible lay just down the road from the centre of attention though.
Whilst most people didn’t realise it, a confession of guilt was televised, live and for all to see….
At World Trade Centre Building 7.
To Be Continued…


Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html

9/11 - Part 3: "The Twin Towers"

   There are numerous perspectives on the methods, culprits and motivations that resulted in 9/11 being labelled as a cover-up or inside job. Certain groups of people have said that there is a cover-up, but this cover-up simply encapsulates a peripheral view of only certain aspects of evidence. This view proposes three questions: Did the US government know of an imminent attack? Could they have prevented it? Or worse, did they allow it to happen?

   Threats of terrorisms and plane hijackings, especially in the latter half of the twentieth century, are a matter of historical record. There are numerous accounts of individuals and groups planting bombs and seizing commercial airlines. Also, the notion of such acts have been a mainstay of popular literature, film and television for a long time. With this fact being so prevalent in the common political and cultural zeitgeist, it would be hard for any government (especially a global power) not to take such threats seriously.

  It appears, as early as September 1972, that such threats were. Richard Nixon formed a high-level, government panel at the time to develop methods to protect the US against the possibility of terrorist attacks (in various forms). Bureaucracy, Elections and Watergate eventually diluted the findings and purpose of the panel. Even as late as June 1995, President Clinton signed the PDD-39 Counterterrorism Directive in an attempt to increase the effectiveness of terrorism investigations, by placing the FBI in charge.

   It is questionable how effective such measures and warnings were, but it does show that such notions were taken seriously at the time. It does seem obvious from both records and events (pre- 9/11) that the US government was aware of the seriousness. Boeing 707, continental airline flight 11, was destroyed, mid flight, by a bomb in 1962. Four US bound airlines were high jacked over Europe in 1970 (3 of which were later blown up on an airstrip in Jordan). Private Robert Preston stole an army helicopter and flew it to the White House in February of 1974. Five days later, Samuel Byck attempted to highjack a commercial plane…with the intention of crashing into the White House and killing Nixon. The list goes on and on.

   Indeed, US officials had considered the possibility of planes being flown into the Olympic Stadium in Atlanta in 1996. In 1997, John O’Neill (the man who was killed on his second day of work as chief of security at the World Trade Centre on 9/11) warned, in his role as assistant director of the FBI, that imminent and organized terrorist attacks were possible and that terrorists were already operating in the US.

   More evidently, we have the foiled 1995 terrorist plot: ‘Operation Bojinka’, which alerted the US to plans that included hijacking planes to attack the Pentagon, WTC and CIA headquarters. There are also actual events like the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000. An event that was, ironically, associated with Osama Bin Laden.

 In August 2001, it was claimed that the US were warned by both French Intelligence authorities and The Taliban of an imminent terrorist attack against the US.
On August 6^th, the CIA drafted a memo entitled “Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US”. This document was reported by at least a dozen or so mainstream newspapers and TV news outlets, after 9/11.
On September 7^th 2001, the US State Department warned US citizens may be targeted by Al Qaeda associated terrorists

With all of this in mind, it is utterly staggering that in May 2002, Condoleezza Rice gave a press briefing where she stated:
“I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Centre, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."

   This is compounded by her claims that (pre 9/11) intelligence reports “did not contain specific warning information, but only a generalized warning“, and did not contain information that Bin Laden and his associates were discussing a “particular planned attack against a specific target at any specific time, place, or by any specific method.“.
In retrospect, specific documents and testimony combined with historical precedence almost overwhelmingly show that the powers that be, were at least aware of the possibility of a 9/11-style terrorist event.

   The 9/11 Commission Report was published in July 2004. Despite the CIA rebuking the final report, claiming that they regularly reported on “threats to civil aviation” and citing Osama Bin Laden as “a danger”; the 9/11 report exonerated both the Clinton and Bush administrations and their intelligence agencies of any blame. 

   It is interesting to note that that in December of 2003, Chairman Kean of the independent 9/11 commission pointed fingers inside the administration and ultimately insinuated that the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented. This brings us onto the second question: Did the US government, military, intelligence agencies have the capability to prevent the attacks? You only have to research the slew of operations that were planned and carried out in the year, months, weeks and days leading up to 9/11 (and on the day itself) to see that the capability of prevention was available.

   In October of 2000, The Pentagon conducted the first of two emergency exercises (MASCAL) involving mock crashes of passenger aircraft into the Pentagon. NORAD planned a similar practice scenario in April 2001, which they ultimately rejected as being “too unrealistic”! Oddly, in the same month, Fort Meyer conducted a Force Protection Exercise which included aspects of NORAD’s “unrealistic” scenario. In June 2001, NORAD admitted that it had scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 67 times since September 2000, proving that such military capability of interception/prevention was possible. Further exercises were carried out.

• NORAD’s “Amalgam Virgo 01” (June 1^st 2001),
•  “Mall Strike 2001” (June 16^th 2001)
• “Operation Dark Winter” (June 22^nd / 23^rd 2001 - which included scripted TV news naming Iraqi/Afghanistani terrorist groups as possible culprits),
• Another MASCAL exercise (June 29^th 2001)
• Mock terrorism drill at Buffalo Niagara International Airport (September 8^th 2001),
• NORAD’s operation “Northern Vigilance” (September 9^th 2001)
• “Vigilant Guardian” (September 10^th 2001 - a one-week exercise)
• Fort Belvoir’s “Garrison Control Exercise” (9/11)
• Fort Meyer’s “airport emergency operations” training exercise (9/11)
• NORAD’s simulated aircraft high-jacking exercise (9/11 - Source: Vanity Fair - 08/01/06).

There other exercises planned for 9/11 (& post 9/11) that were reported “cancelled”, including:

• Joint CIA/NRO exercise involving simulated plane crashes into buildings (Source: USA Today - 08/22/02), another force protection exercise for Fort Myer Military Community (Source: DC Military - 09/14/01)
• FEMA’s “Operation TRIPOD” (Sept 12^th 2001), which, coincidentally, had it’s command centre located at Pier 92 where the 9/11 command centre was ultimately located. 

 This leads us to the last question of culpability. There are some who say that a total ineptitude on the part of dozens of state departments, lead to the attacks being “unavoidable”. Even the evidence above makes that theory doubtful (not unless hundreds of thousands of civil servants, intelligence officers and military personnel had the skill level of the Key Stone Cops!) Others say that the left hand didn’t know what the right hand was doing, for example: real events were being mistaken for training exercises. Looking at 9/11 through this narrow perspective of US responsibility without considering huge amounts of other evidence is a bit like exonerating a criminal just because they have nice smile!

   It does beg the questions: If they had prior knowledge, if they could have prevented it and didn’t… Did they allow it to happen?

   You would have to ignore a lot of other aspects to make this argument work.
This leads us to the ultimate question: Were they complicit or even, directly responsible?

To Be Continued…


 
Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html

The Un-Natural War - Part Two: Exotic Weapons

  
   There are some things that I don’t know anywhere near as much I’d like to! Some things are just too damn hard to get to grips with. Take for example: Particle Physics or Seismology… I have a very basic grasps of the principles, but I wish I understood so much more. One of the reasons I do, is when I write about subjects like the following. I wish I could understand the science and say: “that could be plausible” or “that’s just too far fetched”.

   The Un-Natural War (grammatical error intentional!) goes on all around us, everyday. Before I come to the provable aspects of a seemingly intentional attack on our natural world and the human masses that dwell in it, I want to expand on something that I began to discuss (in part one of this blog) regarding the theory of Chemtrails: The notion of “Nature Modification” and “Exotic Weapons”.

   I know, as do most people, that something has started to go badly wrong with regards the weather and the like. You don’t need to work for the MET Office or have invented a new Earthquake detection method, the eyes in your head will tell you that things are changing. Everybody you speak to (of all ages) says that the weather never used to be like it is now. The sceptics will say that we’re just more informed in this technological age or it’s simply Climate Change. Well, we Brits love to watch and talk about the weather! We above all others would know if something was amiss! As for the Climate Change issue (a buzz phrase created by Agenda P.R. man and merchandiser of ideas, Frank Luntz), there is now a lot of good research to suggest much of it is riddled with scientific inaccuracies. The leaked emails from East Anglia University are only the tip of that particular iceberg (no pun intended!).

The increase in earthquakes and tsunamis is troubling, in and of, itself. In studying the subject, I’ve come across the ‘High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program’ (HAARP), near Gakona, Alaska. This is an alleged C.I.A. funded experiment that fires powerful radio waves into the sky creating a patch of ‘artificial ionosphere’, mimicking the uppermost portion of Earth’s atmosphere. For over 2 decades, it has probed Earth’s magnetic field and ionosphere, creating lights in the sky that are similar to the Aurora Borealis. It is dismissed by many as harmless, however the project has managed to induce strange bullseye patterns in the night sky. Team leader Todd Pedersen once remarked (re: this phenomenon),”This is the really exciting part - we’ve made a little artificial piece of ionosphere”. Mike Kosch, chair of Experimental Space Science at Lancaster University, UK, said: “It shows something completely different and new that we hadn’t expected. We didn’t know we could do that from a radio array on the ground”. This shows that the project is capable of creating a basic form of nature modification and begs the question: Is this all it can do?

   It is claimed that there are many more of these research stations dotted around the world and despite not being be able to fully explain the science; I was interested to see that several people of note have pointed a more ominous finger at these projects.

   On 21^st January, 2010, FOXNews (of all places!) ran a comment along it’s news tickertape from Venezuelan principle, Hugo Chavez. He stated that HAARP was an “Earthquake Weapon” and was responsible for the catastrophic quake in Haiti, killing over 200,000 innocent people! A Venezuelan news website subsequently claimed that a similar method had been used to trigger earlier quakes in Eureka, California and the 7.8 magnitude quake in China (which killed nearly 90,000 people in 2008).

   Even more bizarre is a video posted on Youtube showing an interview between investigator Benjamin Fulford and the former Japanese Finance Minister. The Minister claimed that the US had asked Japan to accept aid from the IMF. When this was refused, Japan was threatened with an "Earthquake Weapon"! The video has subsequently vanished from the net (some claim it can still be found, but I haven’t found it as of yet), but videos of Mr Fulford making this claim can still be found: YouTube - “Ex Japanese Finance Minister confirms USA have threatened with Earthquake weapon”. Sinister indeed!

   Further oddities add to this claim. In the weeks leading up to the Japanese Tsunami, thousands of people across the far eastern countries, filmed bizarre, “Auroral-like” light formations in the skies. Similar footage was filmed in the weeks leading up to the Boxing Day Tsunami, with researchers citing Indonesia’s unwillingness to open the Straits Of Malacca and join the international community in it’s fight against terrorism; as a possible reason for the following disaster.

   These accounts seem like the stuff of a Hollywood movie, however most people said the same thing about 9/11! Even that scenario has some very interesting questions that need answering. Many have pointed to the possible use of Energy Weapons to bring down WTC 1 and 2. I won’t say much about that here (I’ll be covering the whole gamut of 9/11 in the weeks leading up to the tenth anniversary), but if you want to understand more about this point of view, I would recommend Dr Judy Wood’s superior research source: “Where Did The Towers Go?”.

   The whole science behind “Exotic Weapons” is sometimes tough to get your head around. Not being very versed in this type of science, I don’t want to go about making claims that I might do an injustice to. There is some fascinating reading out there though. Please take the time to be open minded and give it a look. Some areas I might suggest are:

• Scalar Beam Weapons - invented in 1904 by Nicola Tesla. There are some oddities surrounding his (alleged) death in 1943, with claims that he was sped off to the UK as a result of his sabotaging an ONR “invisibility” project. An entire boxcar full of his research was shipped off to Los Alomos for storage after his death. His work suggests the possibility of all kinds of unconventional weaponry having fallen into the hands of the military in several countries over the years. Scalar Weapons were allegedly tested off the east coast of the US in 1977.
• Wilhelm Reich’s “Cloudbusting” experiments in Maine, USA in 1954. The idea of cloud seeding is a precursor to the idea of “Nature Modification”. Earlier this year, China was openly reported in the mainstream media as “Cloudbusting” in order to increase crop yields after droughts. If making rain is so easy, why is there still so much starvation through lack of crop growth? Is it also an explanation for the more bizarre flooding we see around the world? Example: Australia! There have been some very strange anomalies filmed in the skies above this continent, but I digress!
• The C.I.A. weather modification project over Hue, Vietnam in 1963, Cuba in 1966 and $21 million rain-making project over Asia in 1967.
• The ARPA (Advance Research Projects Agency) sponsored Walter Reed Army Institute in Washington DC. Set up in 1965 to study Electromagnetic Weapons. Also, subsequently, Pentagon’s “Project Pandora”.
• Dr Andrija Puharich’s "Global Magnetic Warfare”, published in January 1978, chronicles Soviet and US research as well as Tesla aspects. He was a veteran of MKULTRA, who disappeared under mysterious circumstances in 1978.
• The Soviet ELF Grid at Woodpecker Facility. Functioning throughout the mid and late 1970s. It was claimed, in the January ‘78 issue of Specula Magazine that the effect of the Woodpecker signals could create standing waves in the Earth, create earthquakes at a distant point and severe atmospheric disturbances over a target area (i.e.: The Tesla Effect). See also: The Russian Super Magnet of 1977, allegedly purchased from the US for use in weather modification & connections between Woodpecker and Chernobyl Disaster.
• 1988 Popular Science Article detailing US Super Magnets, each capable of 9 Teslas (180,00 times the strength of Earth’s Magnetic Field).

   There are also subtle references made to “Nature Modification” and the more nefarious agenda of population reduction in: “The Project For New American Century”, “Report From Iron Mountain”, “The Brookings Report” and “Silent Weapons For A Quiet War”.
Playing god is as much about us, as it is about our surroundings. That’s something I will look at in Part Three.

To Be Continued…


Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html