Axiom

Yes ,correct , thank you Jaydon .

EVERYONE SHOULD READ IT AND BOOKMARK IT !

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

antichrist

I am treating the 33 number as a conspiracy, coz is also age of JC when strung up, is one third of a hundred, is a repeat number, is a derivative of 666

Axiom

YEAH ? TRY THIS - "Harmonic 33" by Bruce Cathie !

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Thank you for outlining the bleeding obvious .But you missed the bleeding obvious.
Most of those conspiracies were spoken about prior to entry into the public domain , and even if none were , it shows how woefully ill informed we are by our precious academia/media.culture anyway.

Reflect on your own ingrained blindness and on the elephant .


Well of course , whats your point ?

How in any way does that relate to the fact that most dont know these 33 conspiracies even exist in the first place !!?
Yet you blindly continue to cheer lead this ignorance in defending the very ignorance-forming institutions that propagate this ignorance !!

See how your response is indicative of someone completely missing the overall point ??

The excellent and profound work of the '33 conspiracies" piece , powerfully shows the level to which we are uninformed ( even, AFTER these stories came to light !)

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Internet Censorship: Major Truth-Providing Websites Blocked By Asia Netcom To New Zealand Users

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Ridicule of Conspiracy Theories Focuses On Diffusing Criticism of the Powerful

Washington’s Blog
Thursday, February 11th, 2010

The label “conspiracy theory” is commonly used to try to discredit criticism of the powerful in government or business.

For example, just this week – after Tony Blair was confronted by the Iraq Inquiry with evidence that he had used lies to sell the Iraq war – Blair dismissed the entire Iraq Inquiry as simply being part of Britain’s “obsession with conspiracy theories“. (Not only did Blair know that Saddam possessed no WMDs, but the French this week accused Blair of using of ‘Soviet-style’ propaganda in run-up to the Iraq war).

Of course, the American government has been busted in the last couple of years in numerous conspiracies. For example, William K. Black – professor of economics and law, and the senior regulator during the S & L crisis – says that that the government’s entire strategy now – as during the S&L crisis – is to cover up how bad things are (”the entire strategy is to keep people from getting the facts”).Similarly , 7 out of the 8 giant, money center banks went bank rupt in the 1980’s during the “Latin American Crisis”, and the government’s response was to cover up their insolvency.

And the government spied on American citizens (even before 9/11 … confirmed here and here), while saying “we don’t spy”. The government tortured prisoners in Iraq, but said “we don’t torture”.

In other words, high-level government officials have conspired to cover up the truth.

And Tom Brokaw notes:

All wars on based on propaganda.

A concerted effort to produce propaganda is a conspiracy.

Acceptable Versus Unacceptable Conspiracy Theories



Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials and judges have been found guilty of conspiracy. See this, this, this, this and this.

Indeed, conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven by the evidence.

But – while people might admit that corporate executives and low-level government officials might have engaged in conspiracies – they may be strongly opposed to considering that the wealthiest or most powerful might possibly have done so.

Indeed, those who most loudly attempt to ridicule and discredit conspiracy theories tend to focus on defending against criticism involving the powerful.

This may be partly due to psychology: it is scary for people to admit that those who are supposed to be their “leaders” protecting them may in fact be human beings with complicated motives who may not always have their best interests in mind. And see this.

For example, Obama’s current head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs – and a favored pick for the Supreme Court (Cass Sunstein) – previously:

Defined a conspiracy theory as “an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role.”

He has called for the use of state power to crush conspiracy allegations of state wrongdoing. See this, this and this.

Similarly:

In other words, prominent neocon writer Kelly believes that everyone who is not a booster for government power and war is a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Similarly, psychologists who serve the government eagerly label anyone “taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, … and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook” as crazy conspiracy theorists.

This is not really new. In Stalinist Russia, anyone who criticized the government was labeled crazy, and many were sent to insane asylums.

Using the Power of the State to Crush Criticism of the Government

The bottom line is that the power of the state is used to crush criticism of major government policies and actions (or failures to act) and high-level government officials.

Pay attention, and you’ll notice that criticism of “conspiracy theories” is usually aimed at attempting to protect the state and key government players. The power of the state is seldom used to crush conspiracy theories regarding people who are not powerful . . . at least to the extent that they are not important to the government.



Michael Kelly, a Washington Post journalist and neoconservative critic of anti-war movements on both the left and right, coined the term “fusion paranoia” to refer to a political convergence of left-wing and right-wing activists around anti-war issues and civil liberties, which he claimed were motivated by a shared belief in conspiracism or anti-government views.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

There are No Conspiracies Because Daddy Will Always Protect Us

Washington’s Blog
Friday, February 12th, 2010

Yesterday, I wrote:Ridicule of Conspiracy Theories Focuses On Diffusing Criticism of the Powerful

Indeed, long-term psychological studies show that approximately one-quarter of the American population has an “authoritarian personality“, where they look for a “strong leader” to protect them (that’s why even after his lies were exposed, Bush still stayed at approximately a 25% approval rating).

Authoritarians not only don’t want to hear that the most powerful people might be acting against their interest, they will aggressively defend against any such information.

But it’s not just the quarter of the population that can be said to clinically suffer from authoritarian personality disorder.

All of us - to one degree or another – have invested tremendous hope in the idea that our leaders and institutions will protect us.

As just one example, Americans have traditionally believed that the “invisible hand of the market” means that capitalism will benefit us all without requiring any oversight. However, as the New York Times notes, the real Adam Smith did not believe in a magically benevolent market which operates for the benefit of all without any checks and balances:

Smith railed against monopolies and the political influence that accompanies economic power …
Smith worried about the encroachment of government on economic activity, but his concerns were directed at least as much toward parish councils, church wardens, big corporations, guilds and religious institutions as to the national government; these institutions were part and parcel of 18th-century government…

Smith was sometimes tolerant of government intervention, ”especially when the object is to reduce poverty.” Smith passionately argued, ”When the regulation, therefore, is in support of the workman, it is always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters.” He saw a tacit conspiracy on the part of employers ”always and everywhere” to keep wages as low as possible.



Similarly, many Americans have tended to naively believe that our leaders are selfless folks. They forget, of course, that the Founding Fathers loudly warned against relying on the charitable intentions of leaders, expressly set up a government based on the rule of law instead of the rule of men, and warned that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance in holding the feet of the powerful to the fire.

Networks of influence spanning governments and corporations are starting to be discussed by the left. See this, this, this, this and this.

But both the left and the right are still very timid about openly examining whether those in power in government and business are working to help us or to exploit us.

By understanding that everyone – to varying degrees – has psychological resistance to such an examination, based upon the need to assume that the “big people in charge” will protect them and would never hurt them, we can begin to break through their defenses.

With the authoritarians, be prepared for passionate defense of their world-views. But for the other 75% of the population, you may break through by challenging their beliefs in benevolent parental figures and institutions.

You might need to wake some people up by saying something like “Do you assume that Daddy will always protect you? Or do you think we may need to assume responsibility for helping to run things ourselves?”

But beware: you will be touching on very deep emotions, and may be met with a backlash. However, if done right, you might plant seeds for future reflection which will lead to real change.

It is scary for people to admit that those who are supposed to be their “leaders” protecting them may in fact be human beings with complicated motives who may not always have their best interests in mind.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Newsweek: Powerful People Do Bad Things? “Too Silly To Discuss”


Newsweek has published what undoubtedly amounts to the most feeble, sophomoric, and embarrassing hit piece ever written, penned by an intern fresh out of college who pathetically attempts to dismiss manifestly provable conspiracies with one sentence throwaway jibes that sound like the fodder of an immature and misinformed middle school debate team.

The author of the hit piece, entitled Know Your Conspiracies, NEWSWEEK’s guide to today’s trendiest, hippest, and least likely fringe beliefs, is one David A. Graham, a 2009 graduate of Duke University and a Newsweek intern since August, a fresh face obviously keen to prove to his bosses that he’ll make for a good journalistic whore so as to seamlessly blend in with the rest of the corporate hacks at the magazine.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Leading Austrian Economist: Some Conspiracy Theories Are True

Many people are starting to appreciate the Austrian school of economics, and its recognition that unrestrained bubbles lead to economic crashes.

But many of those who respect Austrian economics dismiss all “conspiracy theories” as being crazy.

But in fact, leading Austrian school economist Professor Murray N. Rothbard wrote in 1965:

It is also important for the State to inculcate in its subjects an aversion to any “conspiracy theory of history”; for a search for “conspiracies” means a search for motives and an attribution of responsibility for historical misdeeds. If, however, any tyranny imposed by the State, or venality, or aggressive war, was caused not by the State rulers but by mysterious and arcane “social forces,” or by the imperfect state of the world or, if in some way, everyone was responsible (”We Are All Murderers,” proclaims one slogan), then there is no point to the people becoming indignant or rising up against such misdeeds. Furthermore, an attack on “conspiracy theories” means that the subjects will become more gullible in believing the “general welfare” reasons that are always put forth by the State for engaging in any of its despotic actions. A “conspiracy theory” can unsettle the system by causing the public to doubt the State’s ideological propaganda.

And in 1977, Rothbard wrote:

Anytime that a hard-nosed analysis is put forth of who our rulers are, of how their political and economic interests interlock, it is invariably denounced by Establishment liberals and conservatives (and even by many libertarians) as a “conspiracy theory of history,” “paranoid,” “economic determinist,” and even “Marxist.” These smear labels are applied across the board, even though such realistic analyses can be, and have been, made from any and all parts of the economic spectrum, from the John Birch Society to the Communist Party. The most common label is “conspiracy theorist,” almost always leveled as a hostile epithet rather than adopted by the “conspiracy theorist” himself.

It is no wonder that usually these realistic analyses are spelled out by various “extremists” who are outside the Establishment consensus. For it is vital to the continued rule of the State apparatus that it have legitimacy and even sanctity in the eyes of the public, and it is vital to that sanctity that our politicians and bureaucrats be deemed to be disembodied spirits solely devoted to the “public good.” Once let the cat out of the bag that these spirits are all too often grounded in the solid earth of advancing a set of economic interests through use of the State, and the basic mystique of government begins to collapse.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

BREAKING: Sarah Palin 9/11 truther controversy makes hypocrite of Glenn Beck

Aaron Dykes & Alex Jones | Glenn Beck and the media cretins who followed his lead are hypocritical in dismissing Medina for not immediately belittling 9/11 truthers while ignoring similar statements by GOP darling Sarah Palin.

Chris Matthews Mimics Glenn Beck’s Talking Points

Paul Joseph Watson | “Liberal” MSNBC host apes “conservative” Fox host in regurgitating Medina “truther” smear, proving left-right paradigm is a fraud and real battle is between the establishment and the grass roots.

Is Biden’s Terror Attack Warning Related to a Possible Assassination Attempt on Obama?

Kurt Nimmo | VP Joe Biden is not worried about a concerted al-Qaeda attack against the United States. He is concerned about a lone individual.

Neo-Con Hierarchy Launches Dirty Tricks Campaign Against Real Constitutionalists

Paul Joseph Watson | Exclusive: Establishment neo-cons have resolved to attack Debra Medina, Alex Jones and Ron Paul because they are terrified of losing control of the Tea Party movement.

Another Newsweek “Conspiracy Theory” Claim Debunked

Paul Joseph Watson | Former Mexican foreign minister calls for North American Union, Amero currency.
Sex Pistols, Smashing Pumpkins members discuss HAARP, GM Foods, Illuminati

James Corbett | “The common frustration of the common man is that things don’t work, but then after a while you start thinking ‘Well, maybe they don’t work for a reason. Maybe they want things to break.’”

Climategate Scientist Accuses Skeptics Of “Hijacking” Peer Review Process

Steve Watson | Hypocrisy of climatologist who vowed to “redefine” academic standards to exclude contrary evidencel.

Governments ADMIT That They Carry Out False Flag Terror

Washington’s Blog | You can’t call it a conspiracy theory when the government itself admits it.

Beck On POW Captured in Pakistan: “Just Shoot Him in the Head”

Kurt Nimmo | During a segment of Fox and Friends, Glenn Beck was a little confused on the facts.

Google Bans DVD Critical Of Obama Administration

Paul Joseph Watson | Google has sensationally banned all sales through its shopping merchant of a DVD critical of the Obama administration.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Fox News scrambles to discredit CPAC after Ron Paul wins presidential poll

Stephen C. Webster
Raw Story
Monday, February 22nd, 2010

Remember the big conservative conference Fox News has been hyping over the past 10 days?

The Conservative Political Action Conference’s presidential straw poll, a key marker of the mood among conservative voters, apparently didn’t mean anything to the network. And if it did mean something, the only real result is bragging rights for the individual candidates who were so well exposed. And hey, even Dick Cheney showed up.

Or, at least that’s how Fox News characterized the poll, after it was reported that Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) had won it by a wide margin.

CPAC participants voted for Paul as their favored candidate by some 31 percent, giving him the largest margin of victory in recent years. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who has won the vote over the last three years, was the runner up with 22 percent. Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was third with seven percent.

Over 10,000 people attended CPAC this year. Among them, 2,395 voted in the straw poll.

Fox News scrambles to discredit CPAC after Ron Paul wins presidential poll 190110banner4

“It is way early, it is unscientific,” said a Fox News host, even as the split-screen showed Glenn Beck on stage at the conference. “Perhaps it offers nothing more than bragging rights, uh, through the course of this year. But, it is quite a, uh, enthusiastic crowd. What a difference a year makes.”

What a difference a year makes, indeed. Paul himself said something quite similar a day prior, when he spoke before the largest, loudest audience of any other presenter.

He asked if the crowd remembered when he was the guy “off in the corner” predicting doom, and none in the media paid him any serious mind.

“All the sudden, the crash that I had predicting all along: it came,” Paul said. “And now, Fox News TV has had me on about 60 times since the campaign was over.”

On its Web site, Fox News said that the vote is “not necessarily a good forecaster” of conservatives’ leanings nation wide.

Jake Gibson, micro-blogging for Fox News’s Live Shots, wrote that Paul’s win was “surprising” and caused very audible booing throughout the crowd. Meanwhile, Live Shots writer Kelley Beaucar Vlahos characterized the poll as an annual competition between the Republicans’ “bright lights.”

Paul is now, apparently, counted among them. Or is he? National Review praised him, jeering “Feel the ‘Ronmentum,’” thus triggering a sharp response from Robert Costa.

“Some older CPAC attendees don’t seem to care much for the Texas congressman, sure, but many young activists seem to regard him as a hero of sorts,” he wrote. “When he talks about the debt, like he did on Friday, calling it a ‘monster’ that will ‘eat up’ our future, it was with a passion that you can’t fake in politics. He also didn’t mind challenging many of the room’s security hawks on foreign policy.”

Indeed, Costa touched on a key undercurrent at this year’s CPAC: youth. According to the straw poll’s detailed breakdown [PDF link], 48 percent of the participants were students. A full 80 percent of respondents said their number one issue is “to promote individual liberty” and “reduce the size of government.” Sixty-four percent of participants were male.

Conservative blog Hot Air questioned whether the poll could be taken seriously, adding: “53 percent say they wish the GOP had a better field of presidential candidates. Is that an outlier produced by the Paulnut contingent too, or genuine proof that there’s room for a dark horse?”

Huckabee, now a paid Fox News contributor, joined other conservatives in kicking sand on Paul’s victory, telling one of his coworkers that he abstained from CPAC because it had been taken over by libertarian activists.[ oh no , we can't have the slaves seeking liberty ! - Ax-Ed.]

“CPAC has becoming increasingly more libertarian and less Republican over the last years, one of the reasons I didn’t go this year,” he said, according to Politico.

He also knocked the conference’s relevance this year in particular, with so much activity around the tea parties.

“Because of the way that it solicits sponsors, it’s almost becomes a pay-for-play,” he said, taking a shot at the group’s credibility as a whole. “It’s kind of like, who will pay money to be able to be a sponsor and get time in the program. That’s one of the things that has hurt its credibility in the last couple of years.”

FireDogLake noted that even Ann Coulter told a CPAC crowd that she agrees with Paul on everything, except his foreign policy. “Or, put another way,” wrote FDL user Blue Texan, “Coulter and the neoconservatives that have taken over the Republican Party want Ron Paul’s pre-WWI, pre-Fed, pre-Social Security, pre-IRS federal government — to go with LBJ’s Great Society military.”

Among the poll’s participants, 98 percent said they disapproved of the job President Obama is doing. Sixty-eight percent said they approved of congressional Republicans’ actions.

In 2009, CPAC was arguably the biggest event in conservative politics all year, featuring right-wing all-stars like Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter and many more. In 2008, pollsters were shocked when Romney beat Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) by just one percent of the vote, even after announcing the suspension of his presidential campaign.

That year, Paul tied for third with former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee with 12 percent of the vote. In the same poll for 2009, Ron Paul again came in third place, this time with 13 percent of the vote. He was bested by Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, at 14 percent, and Mitt Romney, with 20.

“I believe we are on the verge of something very significant,” Paul told CPAC in 2010.

Strangely, in The Washington Post’s Monday coverage of the GOP’s 2012 presidential contenders, the congressman from Texas was not mentioned once. Staff writer Chris Cillizza instead plugged Romney as the party’s “nominal front-runner.”

Watch Paul’s full CPAC speech here. Fox News scrambles to discredit CPAC after Ron Paul wins presidential poll

This video is from Fox News, broadcast Feb. 20, 2010, as culled by watchdog group Media Matters.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Great job Alex !
As he smashes the attempt to smear real truth seekers . The MSM wouldn't dare allow him a lengthy time on air !
you really gotta love Alex Jones

Alex Jones on Geraldo: Media sought to demonize 9/11 truth with Pentagon incident link


Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
March 7, 2010




Alex Jones exposes key information about the Pentagon shooting and the Christmas Day Bombing during a live segment with Geraldo Rivera on FOX News this Saturday. Geraldo asks if the Pentagon shooting incident “will stick to the 9/11 Truther people”, almost as if someone had intended a smear. Alex responds in anger about why the media moved so quickly in attempt to demonize 9/11 Truthers– who broadly include, polls show, a majority of Americans and 6 out of 10 9/11 Commissioners who question the official story.

“Why is there such vitriol by the establishment against 9/11 truth?” Alex asked.

After all, Alex makes clear in the segment, it was no more than one hour after the incident that major national news outlets were reporting the connection– how were they so ready to report, and why were they so focused on Bedell’s apparent postings about 9/11? What makes the establishment so uncomfortable about 9/11 questions that its media tools work overtime to denounce it? Pundits like Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck and Chris Matthews constantly hype up the “hurt feelings” the movement causes or its alleged potential for violence. Then when random, lone nut acts occur, news teams dash to explain the supposed anti-government motivation behind the acts, whether seeking to link it 9/11 truth in this case, or to the Tea Party movement in the case of the IRS plane crash mentioned by Geraldo.

How can they have any idea if Bedell’s reported belief in 9/11 truth motivated his behavior? Geraldo asked what aspect of his life motivated his behavior? It may as well have been some prescription drug he was on after being diagnosed as manic depressive.

The snap-reaction of reporting Bedell to be a 9/11 truther within one hour of the incident is a smoking gun that media forces intentionally sought in order to link “violence” with those asking questions about 9/11 (who have been demonstrably non-violent) and to damage the movement via induced public anger over the incident.

Alex also exposes, for the first time on national television, how the Underwear Bomber was helped onto the plane prior to his attempted Christmas day bombing and given clearance by the U.S. State Dept. on orders of intelligence officials– despite the fact that his father had warned government authorities well in advance that his son posed a danger. Though outrageous, this behavior is part of a pattern, and frankly, part of history. From the staged Gulf of Tonkin incident that led to the Vietnam War to the now declassified Operation Northwoods documents and more, the U.S. government has proposed and carried out deceptions– including deadly lies that cost Americans lives– in order to sell the public on an agenda.

Side-pundit Kimberley seemed altogether ignorant of the very existence of false-flag terror.
“No,” she said to the entire array of declassified U.S. staged-terror. “What evidence do you have to support any of that?” Any of that, as if history itself can be shelved and packaged into the same ‘kooky, insane’ category as allegations that the 9/11 atrocity was a false-flag event. It demonstrates the frightening societal ignorance of our own history, for after all, those ignorant of history are said to be doomed to repeat it. With hundreds of incidents on the books and new suspicious events happening day by day, it is time to learn the truth and stop what is happening.

For his part, Geraldo was fair in giving Alex Jones time to speak, and even stepped in to back up Alex when Kimberley questioned “what evidence” he had for his serious allegations that the U.S. had carried out false flag attacks in the past. The “Gulf of Tonkin is very well documented,” Geraldo points out.

TRANSCRIPT:

Geraldo: Once a star student at San Jose State, 36 year old John Patrick Bedell, the man who opened fire in front of the Pentagon last week was a manic depressive pothead fascinated with conspiracy theories involving 9/11. We still don’t know why he shot two Pentagon guards before being shot and killed himself. But we do know a blog connected to him suggests that a criminal enterprise run out of the government could have staged the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. And that connection to the so-called 9/11 truthers is making their movement seem even more like a part of the lunatic fringe. But is that fair?


Geraldo: Joining Kimberley and me from Austin, Texas, the same town, incidentally where a tax protester recently crashed his plane into the IRS building is radio host and a leader of the ‘9/11 was an inside job’ movement, Alex Jones. Welcome.

Geraldo: The tea party people shook off that IRS plane crash incident after a couple of days. Do you think you’ll be similarly successful or will Bedell’s misdeeds stick to the 9/11 Truther people?

Alex Jones: Well, the plane crash guy had been a Democrat and was angry at the government, and this Bedell guy, look he had hundreds of different beliefs and some polls show half of Americans, 6 of the 10 9/11 commissioners question the official story. There’s a wide spectrum of different beliefs. Most people just question the official story, prior knowledge and other issues. But the bigger question is, why within one hour was national news reporting that the Pentagon shooter was a 9/11 truther? I mean, why is there such vitriol by the establishment against 9/11 truth? Right here I have ABC News U.S. Military wanted to provoke war with Cuba; U.S. military drafted plans to terrorize U.S. cities, stage terror attacks.

Alex: We know the Gulf of Tonkin was staged. So we know governments allow attacks to happen, we know that governments sometimes stage attacks. We know that the Underwear Bomber on Christmas day, the State Dept. admits they were ordered by U.S. Intelligence to let him on the plane, and helped him get on the plane. So, in a lot of cases they open the door. That’s what 9/11 truth is saying is that this is being used to demonize us. So we don’t know what the truth is about this guy. He was into marijuana…

Geraldo: Ok, let’s bring Kimberley into the discussion. The guy was into pot, he was a manic depressive, but is Alex over-reacting or is the 9/11 connection relevant?

Kimberley: Right. I think its an over-reacted, but also you’re making some serious allegations against the U.S. government saying that they stage attacks, they allow them to occur in the United States against U.S. citizens.

Alex: That’s declassified.

Kimberley: No. What evidence do you have to support any of that.

Geraldo: Well, Gulf of Tonkin is very well documented, but–

Alex: I mean, what are you talking about. Hold on. It’s in Army Field Manuals to stage false-flag attacks, declassified 2004. But separately, why, within 1 hour were scores of newspapers and TV,

Geraldo & Kimberley: Why?

Alex: Why within 1 hour of the shooting–

Kimberley: What’s the answer?

Alex: They were demonizing 9/11 truth. Why are they so scared about 9/11 truth? Why did they do that? Why within one hour did they bring 9/11 truth out? Why did they blame the plane crash with Joe Stack on the Tea Parties.

Geraldo: Alex, just back up a second and take a deep breath. Why would he attack the Pentagon? What aspect of his life what make him manifested with that kind of violence against the Defense Department establishment. Why? Why there. Why not the Health and Human Services Department?

Alex: Let me tell you. Here’s FOX News. His parents, two weeks before, warned the government, nothing was done. Same thing with the Fort Hood shooter, same thing with the Underwear Bomber. I mean, the guy was obviously a complete lunatic. Look at video of the guy. He looks like a nut from central casting. He obviously had millions of screws loose here, okay. Maybe he was a lone nut, maybe he is. The point is, within one hour, to try and demonize 9/11 truth. This stinks to high heaven. That’s what we cover at Infowars.com, Geraldo, and I’m glad you covered this.

Geraldo: Ok, Alex. We’ll continue to stay in touch. Kimberley, thank you, see you tomorrow night.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Alex Jones Websites Under Massive And Sustained Attack

Zombie computers worldwide launch denial of service assault on flagship Internet freedom websites

Alex Jones Websites Under Massive And Sustained Attack 090310top3

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Alex Jones’ websites were assaulted by a massive, organized and sustained attack today which is still ongoing as zombie computers around the world were used to launch a denial of service attack which is undoubtedly related to our ongoing efforts to expose the government’s Cybersecurity agenda as the gargantuan threat to Internet freedom it represents.

“It appears to be a Distributed Denial of Service attack, utilizing “zombied” (or hacked) computers all over the world to overwhelm our servers, disabling them from serving normal traffic,” states our Infowars systems administrator.

As Wikipedia explains, a DoS attack consists of “Saturating the target (victim) machine with external communications requests, such that it cannot respond to legitimate traffic, or responds so slowly as to be rendered effectively unavailable. In general terms, DoS attacks are implemented by either forcing the targeted computer(s) to reset, or consuming its resources so that it can no longer provide its intended service or obstructing the communication media between the intended users and the victim so that they can no longer communicate adequately.”

This is precisely what happened to Prison Planet.tv and Infowars.net today, while flagship websites Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com have also come under attack but are still holding up at time of press.



Alex Jones Websites Under Massive And Sustained Attack 090310banner1

The last such attack occurred around the time that we were exposing the swine flu scandal last year, but today’s attack even dwarfs that in terms of scope and sustained assault.

The most likely source for the attack is obviously the inner sanctum of the military-industrial complex that we have been exposing for months as they rush through their Cybersecurity initiative which represents a massive threat to Internet freedom.

Over the last few years, the Pentagon has developed an “offensive” cyber capability against “adversaries,” including DoS attacks. In the Pentagon’s “Information Operation Roadmap” document, it is stated that the military “must fight the Net.” The Pentagon believes the internet needs to be dealt with as if it were an enemy “weapons system.”

We are now witnessing intensified efforts to attack and remove from the world wide web sites like Cryptome.org and others which pose a fundamental threat to the anti-free speech agenda of the elite.

It is at times like these that we really need your support to bolster our servers in order to fend off these kind of attacks, either by getting the DVD’s or becoming a Prison Planet.tv member.

As is our habitual response, every time we are attacked we only grow stronger by beefing our servers and launching another website – which is exactly what will happen tomorrow with the birth of the Real Coffee Party initiative.

The enemies of freedom will be defeated in their continual attempt to silence free speech and their attacks will only make us close ranks and become stronger in the fight against the new world order.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

antichrist

Hey Ax, it seems that the Herald has beaten you to the punch on reporting about the CIA putting a whole French town on LCD in the fifties, to see how it would effect them. They all went crazy - a bit like you and me in our downtimes.

But KB and Bill does not have such