Tuesday, June 30, 2009

RED ALERT: The Total Takeover Of America Enters Its Final Phase

Full frontal assault on every aspect of freedom kicks into high gear as the elite twist the knife into the rotting carcass of the United States

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 29, 2009

The wholesale looting of America and the transfer of wealth and power over to a private banking elite who are setting up a world government, along with the complete obliteration of any remaining freedom to protest, resist, or even speak out against this agenda, is now entering its final phase as numerous different pieces of the jigsaw puzzle fall into place and portray a clear picture of tyranny.

We are about to sound the death knell for the United States if every one of the following attacks on our liberty, free speech, sovereignty, and right to not be ruled over by an unelected banking dictatorship is not fiercely opposed and crushed.


The passage of the "Climate Bill" by the House and its likely approval by the Senate represents the entrée for the complete and total subjugation of any freedoms we had left and the beginning of nightmare regulation and suffocating control over every aspect of our personal lives by millions of green stasi tasked with enforcing impossible to attain goals of 80% carbon dioxide reduction - all based on the manufactured threat of global warming.

This bill will also sink the economy and create a new great depression, effectively obliterating America’s first world status. It represents a transfer of power and wealth from both the U.S. government and the American taxpayer over to the system of world government and global regulation now being erected by means of the climate change hoax.

This is far worse than just a "new tax" as Republicans are complaining - this is the total takeover of the American economy by private banking interests through the carbon trading system.

As we have attempted to warn, the major beneficiaries of the climate bill will be the elitists who own the carbon trading systems that will be used to handle the ‘cap and trade’ program, namely Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering.

We must rally now to lobby members of Congress who voted for the legislation and demand they change their vote before July 2nd. Failing that, we must demand that the Senate does not rubber stamp this nightmare legislation. Failing that, we must support and organize to craft more legislation based on the example of Arizona, who recently passed state Senate legislation refusing to comply with insane climate laws coming from the federal level.


The seemingly endless economic "bailouts" represent the wholesale looting of the American taxpayer and the grand theft of trillions of dollars by private banking interests who refuse to even disclose where the money went.

Not satisfied with stealing tens of trillions, under the Obama administration’s new regulatory reform plan, the Federal Reserve is now trying to enrich itself with dictator powers that will give it complete control over the U.S. economy, handing them the authority to "regulate" and shut down any company whose activity it believes could threaten the economy and the markets.

We must rally now and lobby more members of Congress to support Ron Paul’s H.R. 1207 bill to audit the Federal Reserve and highlight the fact that Bernanke is spewing financial terrorism when he threatens an economic collapse should the Fed be opened up to scrutiny.


Federal hate crimes legislation, which in reality would criminalize "thought crimes," has cleared the House and now faces the Senate as S.909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (officially, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act).

S.909 is a direct violation of the First Amendment. It allows the federal government to prosecute people involved in "hate speech" transmitted over television, radio, and the internet.

The House version of the bill states:

"Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce [radio, TV, internet] any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. (HR 1966, SEC 3, Sec. 881a)"

In other words, if a talk show host engages in "hostile" speech against a person or persons of the above mentioned federally protected group that talk show host will face federal prosecution and the prospect of a two year prison term.

The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act would similarly criminalize free speech on the Internet if it can be deemed in any way to have been "harmful" to an individual. This represents the end of political blogging and free speech on the world wide web.

If both bills are not opposed and thrown out then the First Amendment will become nothing more than a relic of a bygone age.


The Senate bill S.787, otherwise known as the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA), would replace language in the regulatory act currently using "navigable waters" with "waters of the United States."

What this means is that "the government would essentially be able to regulate everything from standing water in floodplains to creeks that run behind business and residences," according to an Environmental Leader report.

This represents a complete takeover of private land and waterways by the federal government, a total assault on private property rights and a complete federalization of America’s land and water.

"In a letter to Senate Environment and Public Works Chair Barbara Boxer and ranking member James Inhofe, the American Farm Bureau Federation said that the proposed law would "extend to all water — anywhere from farm ponds, to storm water retention basins, to roadside ditches, to desert washes, to streets and gutters, even to a puddle of rainwater," stated the letter. "For the first time in the 36-year history of the act, activities that have no impact on actual rivers and lakes would be subject to full federal regulation."

If this bill becomes law, it will empower the federal government to seize private property on a whim, using similar powers that Communist China employed during Chairman Mao’s "great leap forward," where landowners had their property violently confiscated and stolen by the government.

If this bill passes the Senate, private property rights in the United States are effectively null and void and the federal government would legally have the power to bulldoze families from their homes as routinely happens in Communist China.


Amongst the myriad of assaults on the Second Amendment rights of American citizens undertaken by the Obama administration during the course of its first year in office, the one that stands out as the most alarming is the attempt to ban people who appear on the terrorist watch list from buying guns.

But isn’t stopping terrorists from buying guns surely a sensible measure to take? The problem is that the terrorist watch list, sometimes called the no fly list, is not a list of likely terrorists, it is a sprawling database of of innocent people that contains the names of over one million Americans.

This is a rise of 32% since 2007 alone.

Members of Congress, nuns, war heroes, reverends, the former assistant attorney general, toddlers and children, the ACLU administrator, people with difficult names and all American names like Robert Johnson and Gary Smith, have become caught in the vast tentacle of this list, documents the ACLU.

Moreover, once a person is included on the terrorist watch list it is virtually impossible to get off it.

The terrorist watch list is an ever-expanding tool with which to deny Americans basic rights as well as to strip them completely of the Fourth Amendment.

Now it is being used to prevent law-abiding citizens from purchasing firearms. Legislation sponsored by the The Government Accountability Office seeks to "close the gap" and prevent victims of the terrorist watch list from being able to purchase firearms.

This represents a new end run around the Second Amendment and a concerted effort on behalf of the federal government to classify millions of innocent Americans as potential terrorists, thus stripping them of their Constitutional right to own firearms.


Our right to protest against any of the egregious assaults on the Constitution that are listed above is itself being removed by new law enforcement and Pentagon training manuals and guidelines that define protesting as domestic terrorism.

Current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.

Over the last few years we have documented countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists and domestic terrorists.

The fact that the government is now treating people who merely criticize its conduct as domestic terrorists is the clearest signal possible that the United States has entered a period in history similar to Germany in the early 1930’s and that it can only be a matter of time before the right "emergency" provides the justification for dissidents to be targeted for round-ups and mass imprisonment.

No one can claim now that this is merely a paranoid delusion - the government itself is training its law enforcement and military arms that protesters and people who use their First Amendment rights are domestic terrorists. The last time this happened was under King George shortly before the American Revolution.


If we don’t stand up in unison and exercise our right to protest and free speech now more than ever before, while pointing out that the real terrorists are those who would seek to destroy the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights, then we may find ourselves doing our protesting behind the barbed wires and the concrete blocks of an internment camp.

The hour is late, the clock stands at one minute to midnight, and the federal government, through all the examples documented above, is on the verge of implementing nothing less than a total environmental, financial and societal dictatorship and killing what once was the United States of America.

Almost identical programs of total enslavement are also being pushed through in almost every other major western country at the same time.

If we don’t stop obsessing about the minutia of life and actually concentrate on the imminent destruction of the very principles of our livelihoods, the bedrock freedoms that allow us to operate in relative comfort on a daily basis and be reasonably secure in our own homes, being able to pay our bills, put food on the table, earn money, and air our grievances when government threatens to impinge on those basic freedoms, then there will be nothing left but a rotten hollow carcass and a memory of what America once strived to be - land of the free, home of the brave - not land of the thief, home of the slave.

Monday, June 29, 2009

Liberals support climate bill, call truth tellers about the global warming myth “fearmongers” and “outrageous”

Pat Buchanan finally gets it right (about global warming) and liberal website Crooks and Liars claims there is no science behind the opposition to man-made global warming

by Larry Simons
June 29, 2009

Conservative wingnut Pat Buchanan was on MSNBC on Saturday discussing the new climate bill (passed on Saturday) with MSNBC anchor Alex Witt. Here is part of their exchange:

Witt: Why doesn't anyone want to call it a climate bill?

Buchanan: Well, because the science is suggesting that maybe all of this isn't really happening or it's not really dangerous or it's not really man made. Barack Obama, the President is right when he said we shouldn't be afraid of the future. That is how this bill got passed through fear. We're all going to change. The climate's going to change. The oceans are going to rise. Our cities are going to be under water

But more and more scientists are coming forward to say this is a hoax and a scam which is designed to transfer wealth and power from the private sector to the government sector and from the government of the United States to a world government. Which is what we're going to get in Copenhagen when we get this Kyoto two agreement

Wow, Buchanan finally got it right…this time! It’s easy to assume that Buchanan would say something insane or ridiculous when that’s what he does 99% of the time, but on this issue, he’s correct.

watch the clip

Meanwhile, over at Crooks and Liars, the liberal Obama-loving buffoons, because of their overwhelming contempt for Buchanan (and rightly so), are blinded from seeing the truth on this particular issue. One of the writers at Crooks and Liars just named ‘Heather’, says this:

"Alex, no one believes you didn't fully expect Buchanan to say something outrageous before you and your producers allowed him on the air. Don't go whining after it's too late about getting nasty emails for doing it. Buchanan fails to specify, and Witt fails to ask him just who these scientists are"

Yes, it’s true. Buchanan shouldn’t have claimed there were scientists who claim man-made global warming is a myth if he was not going to back that up. Pay attention Pat, this is the only time I will bail you out, pal. Here are just a few of the experts and scientists who deny global warming is man-made or it exists at all:

Canadian scientists Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick uncovered a mathematical flaw in the computer program that was used to produce the results of a study linking climate change to human activity

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says warming is due to changes in the sun and not man-made

French scientist Claude Allegre, says most of the warming comes of natural phenomena

Professor Bob Carter, environmental scientist at James Cook University, says the accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998

Paul Reiter, professor at Pasteur Institute in Paris, said a 2007 UN report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (said to have been backed by more than 2,000 of the world's leading scientists) a "sham" given that this list included the names of scientists who disagreed with its findings

University of Copenhagen Professor and scientist Bjarne Andresen flat out says global warming is a myth

Even John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel, says global warming is the "greatest scam in history"

There’s your scientists and experts ‘Heather’. You’re welcome, Pat.

Naturally, ‘Heather’ conveniently left out of her story that 44 Democrats voted against the Democratic bill and that
Congress was not allowed to read the bill.

Click here to read Paul Watson's article about Buchanan's comments

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Andy Ostroy’s new low: Vilifying and convicting the deceased Michael Jackson

Hypocrite Ostroy says “Don’t judge Jackson”, then proceeds to judge him, AND convict him!

by Larry Simons
June 27, 2009

No less than 24 hours after the death of legendary pop star Michael Jackson, our favorite left-wing hypocrite and proven fraud, Andy Ostroy, was posting his latest installment, a “eulogy” to the late superstar. Could it possibly be free of fraudiness? Not a chance.

It didn’t take long for our liberal fraudster to deceive. That begins in the title, “The Death of Michael Jackson: Time for Compassion Not Vilification”. Ostroy writes:

“Michael Jackson, like Elvis, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain, Anna Nicole Smith and countless others before him, were extremely tortured souls. They died miserable. Lonely. Drugged. Hating life. And for this they deserve our compassion, not our scorn. Now is not a time to vilify Jackson for his alleged child molestation crimes. We should have it in our hearts to forgive his past transgressions, no matter how despicable, and simply mourn his passing with dignity and sympathy."

Hating life?” “Miserable?” Ostroy knows this? Then comes the best part, when Andy, no less than three times in the article, says we should show compassion for Jackson and not scorn him, and in the very next breath scorns him by mentioning the child abuse allegations in death. Wouldn’t the best way to show compassion be to not even mention the allegations that Jackson was acquitted of?

Then, Ostroy says, “We should have it in our hearts to forgive his past transgressions, no matter how despicable”. What transgressions? The ones a jury found him not guilty of? True, I will admit that just because juries acquit alleged criminals, doesn’t mean they are innocent. Case-in-point: O.J. Simpson. BIG difference between Simpson and Jackson. Jackson’s case hinged on allegations, which means it could have happened or it might not have. In Simpson’s case, murders did happen. It was just a question of who, not if.

Ostroy continues:

“I know I'm not alone when I say I feel as though a little piece of me died Thursday as well. It's ok to feel that way. It doesn't excuse the horrible crimes against children he may have committed. It just means we're human. And we can feel pain and sorrow even under such difficult, incomprehensible, unconscionable circumstances”

Do you see what Ostroy is doing here? By continuing to mention Jackson’s alleged child abuse crimes, he is convicting Jackson of the crime. Guilt by repetition. By writing that Jackson allegedly committed crimes against children over and over, he is really saying that Jackson did commit the crimes.

Good ole’ psychological repetition. It’s the same technique Bush and Cheney used every time they linked Iraq or Saddam to 9-11. Saddam/9-11, 9-11/Saddam, Saddam/9-11…..it’s obvious! Saddam orchestrated 9-11! See? Ostroy is utilizing the exact same stunt Bush used for 8 years. The very same stunt Ostroy condemned ad nauseum on his blog. Now he’s using it to convict Michael Jackson of molesting kids in a story in which he asks his readers and the rest of the world to not vilify Jackson.

What a hypocritical, deceptive fraud.

Now, to the part in which I laughed out loud. Ostroy continues:

“My dear late wife gave me many gifts, one of them being an ability to feel compassion for and to forgive those who have said and done hurtful things. "Rather than be mad at them," she'd say, "maybe we can try to understand why they did or said these things." She believed that they acted out because they were in such emotional pain and turmoil that they couldn't help themselves. Feel sorry for them, she'd say, instead of feeling anger. Wise little sage, that Adrienne was. I've since lived my life according to that principle. And it's made me a much kinder, happier individual. Perhaps we could all use a little of this compassion today.”

“I’ve lived my life according to that principle?” Really? I can’t judge Ostroy’s personal life to know if that’s true, but one has to see the blatant, mind-numbing hypocrisy in that statement just by viewing Ostroy’s blog over the past 2 years. I would count how many times Ostroy has attacked and spewed hate-filled comments at Republicans, but I really don’t have two weeks of free time to jot them all down. Where was that kind, happy individual in the plethora of stories in which he's attacked others? Funny thing is, I have agreed with nearly all of his anti-Republican tirades, but I’m not the one who claims that my wife turned me into Gandhi either.

Ostroy continues:

“Make no mistake, Jackson was a very disturbed, sick man. And no amount of fame and fortune was able to change that.”

More guilt by repetition. Translation: Jackson is guilty of molesting children because he’s a “disturbed, sick man”.

And yet, again. Ostroy writes:

“Today is a day to celebrate Michael Jackson's incredible talents and the many gifts he left as part of his iconic legacy. But it's also time to recognize that a mother lost a son. That children lost the only parent they know and love. We must feel the same compassion for them as we do for the children Jackson allegedly abused.”

Since Jackson was acquitted of the child molestation charges, what compassion is there for children who were not abused? Again, the mentioning of the words, “….children Jackson allegedly abused”, were meant to be the only words his readers focused on and remembered. This article was meant to be a subliminal message, not a compassionate eulogy. That subliminal message?: Jackson was a child molester, but I don’t want to talk ill of the dead, so I will use words like “compassion” and “forgive” to hide my personal feeling that Jackson should be in prison.

I’m not defending Jackson or even saying he’s unequivocally innocent. I’m saying he was acquitted by a jury, and since it was an allegation, we have to assume his innocence since, unlike the O.J. case, there’s no DNA evidence, bloody gloves or blood inside of vehicles.

Ostroy’s article is insulting, deceptive and inflammatory. If he would have written a blatantly negative article about Jackson, I would have been less insulted by it. At least we would have known for sure where Ostroy stood, rather than to be subjected to six paragraphs of deceptive, two-faced psychological guilt-by-repetition word trickery.

I left a lengthy post on Ostroy’s blog. Naturally and unsurprisingly, it was not approved. Most of my long comment was mentioned in my article above, but I ended my post with this:

“You need to either re-write this article, omit things or apologize. But, you wont. You wont even post my comment. That’s OK Andy. I’ve saved my post as well as your hate-filled article about Jackson, and you will be exposed once again on my blog. It was a very cruel and shameful article. Maybe since you were preaching forgiveness and compassion you shouldn’t have mentioned his ALLEGED child abuses at ALL?”

Ostroy now stands alone as the clear front-runner for the 2009 Fraud of the Year award (the Fraudie) with the help of this shameful article.

Andy Ostroy………still a flaming FRAUD

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Michael Jackson: 1958 - 2009

by Larry Simons
June 25, 2009

I was a moderate Michael Jackson fan at best. So moderate that calling me a "fan" might be pushing it. The songs I did not like, I really didn't like. The songs I liked, I really liked. It's the way I felt about his lifetstyle as well. At times, he was a facinating entertainer, other times, I could care less if I heard one word about him. One thing is very clear about Michael Jackson: like him or hate him, he was a superb talent and the likes of him we will never see again.

Jackson died today of cardiac arrest in Los Angeles. He was 50 years old. This is perhaps the biggest blow to the music industry since John Lennon was gunned down in NYC in 1980.

I seldom use this blog to write about things outside of lying and fraudulous media figures and politicians, but certain things transcend the format of my blog. Whether they are not so well known people that pass away whose accomplishments have personally touched my life, or iconic figures like Jackson who I moderately admired and profoundly found impressive, they will continue to find their way onto my blog.

Figures like Jackson are unavoidable to talk about. They transcend race, politics, religion and nationality. News of his death today struck me as shocking and yet, not so shocking. Shocking because of his obvious young age and the fact that he did so much in such a short period of time. Not so shocking because of his bizarre, secretive lifestyle and behavior. Not Chris Farley-bizarre, Jim Morrison-bizarre. No shocking news of Jackson was...shocking. His death was just another chapter in the strange/not-so strange world of Michael Jackson.

Jackson was a pioneer. When we first heard RUN-DMC collaborate with Aerosmith on "Walk This Way" in 1986, it was not the first time non-rock and roll black performers merged with rock and roll icons. It was Jackson who set that trend with collaborating with Eddie Van Halen on "Beat It". We had never heard that before. Setting trends was the norm for Jackson, when multitudes of others before him and since either have failed or were too afraid to attempt anything risky. Jackson did it with ease.

No doubt one of my favorite songs by Jackson ever

1988's "Man In The Mirror"

Neo-Cons Are Cheerleading For A Terrorist Who Helped Kill Hundreds Of U.S. Marines

The new "patriotism" - Phony conservatives throw their support behind Butcher of Beirut who directed bloody terror campaign against U.S.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 24, 2009

The horrible irony to arise out of the riots and protests in Iran is that many Neo-Cons and phony conservatives, in their unified effort to enthusiastically embrace the Anglo-American establishment’s agenda for regime change, are cheerleading for a brutal thug who directed a terrorist campaign that killed hundreds of U.S. Marines in the 1980’s.

This once again proves that slack-jawed Neo-Con twits, ditto-heads for phony conservative media whores like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, have no loyalty whatsoever to America, but only to the corrupt power structure which they like to believe they are a part of.

Apparently, the new form of ‘patriotism’, the new incarnation of ’support the troops’ - is to support someone who helped massacre hundreds of U.S. troops just two decades ago.

We are referring of course to Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the former Prime Minister of Iran who directed the bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983.

Sold by the media and hailed by Neo-Cons as the avatar of Iranian democracy, Mousavi was also "fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack," reports CQ Politics.

Regarding the Beirut bombings, which killed 220 U.S. Marines, CIA Middle East field officer Bob Baer wrote in TIME Magazine that Mousavi, "Dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah," who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was "the man largely held responsible for both attacks."

As Paul Craig Roberts writes, "The American media’s one-sided and propagandistic coverage of the Iranian election has made an American hero out of the defeated candidate, Mousavi."

This charade has been vigorously amplified by phony right-wingers. As Raw Story notes, Neo-Cons have sided with the opposition against the boogeyman Ahmedinajed, to the point of grunting with delight at scenes broadcast by Fox News of police being beaten to a pulp by rioters. This makes for an odd contrast to their usual sentiment, towards anti-war protesters in the U.S. for example, for whom their newly found concern about police brutality towards demonstrators goes out of the window.

Similar feigned concern for demonstrators is being played out by TV talking heads across the networks. Take this former CIA agent for example, who informs Wolf Blitzer of his worries about how the Iranian Revolutionary Guard are treating protesters, warning that dissidents will be "disappeared".

Oh the irony! For it was the CIA that trained the brutal Savak security force, copying techniques used by the Nazis to train the Gestapo, following the CIA’s overthrow of the democratically elected Mosaddeq government in 1953. Savak engaged in the systematic torture, disappearance, and execution of thousands of the new puppet regime’s opponents before the 1979 revolution, all with the blessing of the United States government.

Neo-Cons and establishment media figures have also seized upon the tragic death of "Neda" as another reason why regime change is needed, aghast at shocking scenes of an innocent women dying. This new found emotion at the sight of Middle Easterners bleeding to death on the streets was strangely absent during "shock and awe" and the eight year combined occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, during which hundreds of thousands have died in similar circumstances.

In a Free Republic thread about possible CIA involvement in Iran - which is a proven fact and not even up for debate - "Freepers" express their desire to see a little more meddling by way of CIA support for the opposition and the demonstrators - presumably by way of more money for Al-Qaeda offshoot terrorist groups like Jundullah and Mujahedeen-e Khalq to carry out more bombings and kill more people as part of the CIA’s now public destabilization program in Iran.

Of course, the talking heads, the establishment media whores, and the Neo-Con morons don’t really give a shit about the protesters or the opposition in Iran and indeed probably want them to be beaten and suppressed so that their real cause can be advanced - the demonization of the current Iranian government in the eyes of the world and a greasing of the skids for military invasion on behalf of the U.S., Britain and Israel.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

New Feature: Lifestyles of the Religious Nutball

Note: I’m going to have lots of fun with this new feature, for there will be a smorgasbord of stories to pick from with this topic. Maybe I won’t choose. I might just post every single story I read about the insane actions and views of the religious right…and boy are they plentiful! I should have started this feature before Sarah Palin came along

Queens mom and religious nutball sets daughter on fire to “drive out evil spirits”

by Larry Simons
June 23, 2009

OK, this story is so insane and ridiculous, that I will give you portions of the story followed by my response (in purple). Apparently, a 29-year-old mother in Queens decided that she was going to put her 6-year-old daughter, Frantzcia Saintil, through a bizarre voodoo fire ritual called “Loa” to “cure” her of evil spirits. This story gets weirder and weirder.

Here’s what the nutball mother did: Inside their Queens Village house back on February 4 of this year, the child’s mother, Marie Lauradin and grandmother, 70-year-old Sylvenie Thessier poured rum in a circle and lit it, then poured rum on the small child’s head and pushed her into the circle of flames. The child was then engulfed in flames. Even as the child screamed and cried, the mother and grandmother did nothing because they were “focused on summoning the 'Loa' spirit”. It gets worse.

With burns covering the small child’s body, the mother and grandmother did not take her to the hospital, but put her to bed instead. It wasn’t until the next day when relatives begged the mother and grandmother to take the child to the hospital. The child would be in the hospital for 55 days. Near death, the child was placed in a medically induced coma. It wasn’t until the child was placed with a foster family (where she now currently is) that she told the truth about the incident.

One neighbor, Henry St. Jean, said, “I used to hear them scream at [Frantzcia]. They would tell her to get on her knees for a couple of hours.”
(OK, then why didn’t you report it or call the cops, you dickface?)

Lauradin told police it was accident and that she spilled boiling water on the child when the child startled her. Lauradin also claims that she didn’t even know the child was burned until they got to the emergency room.
(The girl was in the hospital for 55 days. In that near 2-month period, why didn’t ANY of the doctors or specialists know the burns were caused by fire? Wouldn’t that be easy to find out? The mother claimed she didn’t know the child was burned until after they arrived at the hospital, but yet she admitted spilling boiling water on the child? You’re burned instantly from that, whether it’s visible or not!)

The girl’s grandmother said, “I didn't see it [the boiling water incident], but I saw a lot of water on the floor. I took the child to the bathroom and got cold water for her.”
(If the child was burned legitimately, why wasn’t she taken to the hospital right away and why did relatives have to beg for you to take her?)

The lawyer of the mother, Jeff Cohen, said, “She denies these allegations…my client would not hurt her.”
(Again, back to the “doctors should know they were burns by fire rather than water” thing. If the mother is acquitted of the charges of setting her daughter on fire, in my opinion, this would fall under the negligence of the doctors)

The mother, if convicted, faces up to 25 years in prison. She is also being held in lieu of $50,000 bail and she has been barred from having any contact with her daughter.

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Proposed Law Allows AG Holder to Block Gun Sales to Over a Million Americans

Kurt Nimmo
June 21, 2009

New Jersey Democrat senator Frank R. Lautenberg (pictured above) plans to introduce legislation designed to cancel the Second Amend rights of well over a million U.S. citizens this coming week, according to the New York Times. "Mr. Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation on Monday that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists," the newspaper reports.

Lautenberg is a notorious gun-grabber. He introduced a similar measure in 2007. Lautenberg’s action comes in the wake of statistics compiled by the Government Accountability Office drawing attention to an "odd divergence" in federal law that allows erroneously designated terrorists to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms but prevents them from getting on a plane or getting a visa.

Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel has promised to deny Americans their Second Amendment right if they end up on the government’s error-prone terrorist watch list

The Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center — the FBI-administered organization that consolidates terrorist watch list information in the United States — had over 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007 and that the list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month, according to the ACLU. In March of this year the list hit the one million mark, a 32% increase from 2007.

The actual number may far exceed one million entries. The FBI says the number of names on its terrorist watch list is classified. In addition to the National Counterterrorism Center watch list, the FBI keeps a list of persons said to be domestic terrorists, according to ABC News.

Lautenberg said he was frustrated by an FBI refusal to disclose to investigators details and specific cases of gun purchases beyond the aggregate data included in the GAO report, the Times notes.

Earlier this year, a Department of Homeland Security report on "rightwing extremism" designated advocates of the Second Amendment, pro-life and anti-illegal immigration activists, and returning veterans as "terrorists." It is not known if members of these groups are on the so-called terrorist watch list, although it is a fair assumption to conclude they are.

On May 15, 2007, then Illinois representative Rahm Emanuel, speaking at the annual Stand Up For a Safe America event sponsored by the gun-grabbing Brady Center, said that if your name appears on the bloated and error-ridden terror watch list your Second Amendment right should be denied (Emanuel’s comments are included in the Alex Jones clip below).

Obama chief of staff Emanuel’s promise may soon carry the force of law if Lautenberg’s proposed law makes it through Congress. According to the New York Times, however, the Justice Department is "noncommittal" about whether it would develop guidelines if Congress moved to give the attorney general discretion to block gun sales.

Lautenberg’s proposed bill is one of several now working their way through the labyrinth of Congress. On April 29, with little fanfare or corporate media coverage, H.R. 2159 was introduced and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The bill would "increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist." Another bill, H.R. 1022, sponsored by New York Democrat Carolyn McCarthy and 67 co-sponsors, would provide AG Holder with the ability to ban guns at will.

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, told WorldNetDaily that H.R. 2159 will be used in conjunction with the DHS "Rightwing Extremism" report. "By those standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists," Pratt said. "This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists."

Lautenberg’s proposed bill would go one step further and allow Holder to deny the Second Amendment to officially designated enemies of the state.

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Ron Paul on MSNBC discussing Obama’s regulatory reforms and giving the Fed more power

Ron Paul: They're (The Fed) more powerful than the Congress

by Larry Simons
June 18, 2009

Ron Paul appeared on MSNBC today to oppose those who claim "it was lack of regulation" that caused the financial problem. "We had a ton of regulations, and they failed", asserts Congressman Paul. Then Paul says, "The (Obama) administrtion is digging a bigger hole for us."

Congressmen Paul then tells NBC's Chuck Todd, "The regulations should be on the Federal Reserve. We should have transparency of the Federal Reserve. They can create trillions of dollars to bail out their friends, and we don't even have any transparency of this. They're more powerful than the Congress."

Then Todd says, "...one thing about this new plan from the administration is that they actually do want to try to bring some more transparency and accountability to the Fed. I know it's not as much as you'd like to see, but is it not an improvement?"

Paul responds, "No, no, they're giving a tremendous amount of more power to the Federal Reserve--the very institution that created our problem. That's about the way Washington works. Too much regulations to begin with, so they give it more. The Federal Reserve creates the problem, so we give them more power. It's fiat money that's the problem, so we allow them to double the money supply....you can't solve the problems that way. That's like saying you can take care of a drug addict by just giving them more drugs."

For those who call this talk of the Federal Reserve having more power than Congress a big "conspiracy theory", this video is for you. It's former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan telling Jim Lehrer, "the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means, basically, that, uh, there is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take." (It's at the 7:48 mark in the clip). I know it's a long clip, but it is for the buffoons that love to cry "he was taken out of context!"

Related articles

Federal Reserve To Be Given Sweeping New Powers

Obama Regulatory Reform Plan Officially Establishes Banking Dictatorship In United States

The Life and Times of ObamaBush: New definition of "transparency": Secrecy

In yet another act of betrayal to those who voted for "change", Obama dishes out another dose of George W. Bush

by Larry Simons
June 18, 2009

Wanna know who's visiting the White House? Too fucking bad, buddy. Seems the Obama administration's promises of transparency and open government has taken on a whole new meaning: secrecy. That's right: Dick Cheney-style secrecy. Obama has adopted the Bush policy of blocking access to names of visitors to the White House. The next time someone tells you that Obama has not accomplished anything, you tell them "Not true, pal." He has single-handedly transformed himself from the man of "change" into Darth Cheney in just 5 short months.

The Obama administration says that the White House visitor log is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act because they are presidential records, despite the fact that the Bush administration argued the same thing, but a federal judge rejected that argument twice.

Requests made by MSNBC and a non-partisan watchdog group named CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) for access to White House visitor logs were denied. On Tuesday, CREW filed suit with the DHS (Dept. of Homeland Security) claiming that the Obama administration is "following the same anti-transparency policy as the Bush administration when it comes to White House visitor records. Refusing to let the public know who visits the White House is not the action of a pro-transparency, pro-accountability administration."

On the White House's website, under 'transparency and open government', Obama says this in a memorandum:

"My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government."

I guess he forgot to add, "Unless you request the White House visitor log, then you're fucked."

In his Address to White House staff on January 21, 2009, Obama said this:

"Information will not be withheld just because I say so." (I guess, that was then, this is now)

watch the clip

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Glenn Beck equates state separatists with “angry, violent” people, then DENIES having anything to do with them!

Hypocritical fraud and liar Glenn Beck says people who want to secede from the Union are “angry” and “violent”, then DENIES he was a part of the “secede from the Union” crowd when video and audio tape reveal otherwise

by Larry Simons
June 17, 2009

Disinformationist and blatant lying fraud Glenn Beck, on his program last night, made a very poor attempt at damage control. Attempting now to detach himself from the “anti-government/angry,violent vigilante” crowd, he said this:

“Did you catch the New York Times this weekend? They published the third -- count it, three -- the third op-ed in the New York Times blaming Bill O'Reilly and me, or Fox News in general, of spreading hate and inspiring people like the killer of Dr. Killer, uh, Tiller, in Kansas. Also, we were the inspiration apparently for the guy at the Holocaust Museum last week.

You know, there are groups out there that preach hate and violence and racial violence. There are groups out there so fed up they want to secede from the union. But we ain't one of them!”

Here’s the clip

In light of the recent holocaust museum shooting on June 10, Beck, no doubt is probably well aware that since the shooter, James von Brunn, had many anti-government ideologies, that Beck’s own anti-government tirades of the past few months will now be under the microscope. So, unless Beck goes on the air now and does the only thing he can do: completely lie his ass off and flat out deny his anti-government positions (that he was very clear about, by the way), it will come back to bite him in his neocon ass!

Maybe, since the holocaust museum shooting, Beck was reminded by FOX News execs that his own professed rants on live TV are specifically detailed in the DHS right wing extremism report. He may have even been notified that he is being sued for defamation by Florida CLA and 9/11 truth activist Greg Hoover.

Now, in panic mode, Beck is reduced to blatantly lying and saying that he, nor anyone else at FOX News for that matter, never associated himself with the ‘evil, anti-government’ secession issue.

My personal amazement is not that Beck lies (he does that quite often), but why he makes exposing his blatant lies so easy?

Back in February of this year, this is what Beck said to NH State Representative Dan Itse on the issue of secession from the Union:

“I read the founding fathers. I know what they believed, and it makes no sense that you couldn’t back out of the Union if they started trampling on those rights, it would only make sense…”

watch the clip

This past March, in an interview with Chuck Norris on Beck’s radio show, Beck had this exchange:

GLENN: Chuck, you live in Texas.

NORRIS: Yes, I do.

GLENN: Somebody asked me this morning, they said, you really believe that there's going to be trouble in the future. And I said, if this country starts to spiral out of control and, you know, and Mexico melts down or whatever, if it really starts to spiral out of control, before America allows a country to become a totalitarian country, which it would have under I think the Republicans as well in this situation; they were taking us to the same place, just slower.

NORRIS: It was slower, yeah.

GLENN: Americans will, they just, they won't stand for it. There will be parts of the country that will rise up. And they said, where's that going to come from? And I said Texas, it's going to come from Texas. Do you agree with that, Chuck, or not?

NORRIS: Oh, yeah. You know, Texas is a republic, you know. We could actually --

GLENN: It was a country before it was a state.

NORRIS: Yeah, we could break off from the union if we wanted to.

GLENN: You do, you call me.

Here’s the audio clip of it

The irony of all this is, is that Beck is correct about state secession. It can be done. It IS Constitutional for states to secede. But the fact that Beck, on numerous occasions, has advocated state secession blatantly on the air and is now detaching himself from the “hate and violence groups that promote secesssion”, not only makes Beck a complete and utter liar, but a spineless traitor as well.

Also, the fact that he now denies being with the state secession crowd makes it unequivocally clear that he is not only afraid of being a target of the DHS report, but that he now gives credence to the report in which he condemned on several occasions…like this time, on April 16, 2009

and this time, with Billo a few days later

The message from Beck is more clear now than ever before: Glenn Back is a complete, lying, fraudulent coward and traitor

Here is Texas Congressman and Constitutionalist Ron Paul discussing secession

Thanks to PrisonPlanet for posting this story

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Alex Jones interview with Greg Hoover, who is suing Glenn Beck for defamation

June 17, 2009

9/11 truth activist Greg Hoover talks to Alex Jones and goes into detail on the Hoover VS Beck lawsuit. Hoover is suing FOX News’ Glenn Beck for linking 9/11 truth activists with white supremacists, al Qaeda and holocaust museum shooter/holocaust denier James von Brunn.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

9/11 Truth Activist Sues Glenn Beck and Fox News for Defamation

Washington’s Blog
June 12, 2009

An East Coast 9/11 truth activist is preparing to file a defamation lawsuit against TV / radio personality, Glenn Beck, the producers of the Glenn Beck Program, and the Fox News Channel.

Specifically, Greg Hoover will be suing the above-described defendants in Federal Court for Beck’s having repeatedly broadcast statements characterizing those who question the government’s official version of the events of 9/11 as, "anarchists," "terrorists" and as persons denying the Holocaust.

The complaint will note that - on October 22, 2007 - Beck suggested that those identifying themselves as associated with the 9/11 truth movement are "dangerous" "anarchists" who deny the Holocaust, and are "the kind of group that Timothy McVeigh would come from."

The suit will also note that during Beck’s June 10th broadcast Beck linked the murder of the Washington D.C. holocaust museum guard with "9/11 truthers."

As I have previously written, suing people for defamation who falsely claim that 9/11 activists are terrorists could be a good way to stand up to these bullies.

Hoover told me by email:

Copies of my actual initial filings will be available for media distribution within the upcoming week…
I do so having now cast off all other personal concerns. Having chosen sides… I’ll stand with the patriots.

Godspeed, Mr. Hoover.

I will update this post with links to Mr. Hoover’s complaint as soon as it is available.

Note: Mr. Hoover has not requested either legal or financial assistance. However, if you are an attorney experienced in defamation claims, please let me know, and I’ll pass on your name.

Friday, June 12, 2009

The left-wing’s evidence Von Brunn was right-wing? He was a white supremacist. WTF?

Left-wing wingnuts and disinformationists Andy Ostroy and Dave Neiwert resort to lies, spin, omission and accusations without proof in their reporting of the holocaust museum shooter

by Larry Simons
June 12, 2009

Left-wing blogs exploded yesterday with assertions and unequivocal conclusions that the holocaust museum shooter, James von Brunn, was a right-wing extremist. Their proof? He was a white supremacist. Disinformationists Dave Neiwert and Andy Ostroy were among those who offered no proof whatsoever that the holocaust museum shooter was a right-wing extremist and omitted information from reports that the shooter had left-wing ideologies.

Nowhere in Ostroy’s article entitled, "The Holocaust Museum Shooting: Another Right-Wing Psycho Turns to Murder. Maybe Now Conservatives Will Listen to Janet Napolitano" , does Ostroy prove von Brunn was a right-winger. As with nearly 100% of Ostroy’s articles (that the left wing blog The Huffington Post publishes with ease), he provides, no links, no sources, no researched references, no documented findings…..just his words.

Ostroy begins his article with mentioning other shootings that have occurred in the past three weeks. One in which involved a four man "terror cell" from the New York that the FBI arrested last month for planning to blow up a Jewish temple and shoot down military planes. What Ostroy conveniently leaves out is that these four men had been under FBI surveillance for over a year and that they were provocateured by an FBI informant who supplied the group with fake weapons, which led to their arrest. But Ostroy won’t stoop so low as to let facts get in the way of his ideological agenda of deifying Obama and anyone in his administration.

Ostroy loves to use quotes from the DHS report, but only when they are used to makes his points, despite the fact that the direct quotes he uses from the DHS report don’t prove his point.

Ostroy uses this quote:

"White supremacist lone wolves pose the most significant domestic terrorist threat because of their low profile and autonomy — separate from any formalized group — which hampers warning efforts." Nowhere in that quote is their any proof linking white supremacists with right-wing conservatives.

Here’s a quote from the same DHS report that Ostroy chose to not share with his brain dead readers:

"The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment."

"No specific information?" Then on what grounds is the entire report based on? "The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment?" How would they know this? What’s the precedent for this? There’s never been an African-American president before. Yet, there have been four presidents that have been assassinated and 13 attempted assassination attempts. Guess what? They were all white, yet there was never any such report issued from a government agency targeting specific individuals after the assassinations/attempts of our previous presidents....until now.

Ostroy also leaves out this quote from the DHS report:

"Threats from white supremacist and violent anti-government groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past."

I guess the phrase "…largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts" did not sit too well with Ostroy’s attack on right-wing "extremists". Isn’t it interesting that the quote mentions only right-wing extremists as ones who could be affected by unemployment, real estate foreclosures and the inability to obtain credit. No left-wing people lost their jobs or homes?

Dave Neiwert, on the other hand, when he isn’t trying to prove his points by linking to his own stories within his present story, he flat out lies by playing the ole ‘switcheroo’ in order to give credence to his points.

For years now, right wing conservatives like O’ Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck have dubbed people who believe in "conspiracy theories" as "far-left loons" and "kooky". But when people on the left, like Neiwert, want to distance themselves from people like von Brunn after the media reports that he believed in "anti-government conspiracy theories", what does Neiwert do? He simply plays ‘switcheroo’ and calls "conspiracy" people RIGHT wing! He writes:

"As I tried to explain in the case of the shooting of Dr. George Tiller, when you spread far-right conspiracy theories through mainstream channels the way Beck does with such abandon, it not only validates their beliefs, it rather hyper-validates them."

Ahhhh, I see. The right calls "conspiracy" people "left", and the left calls them "right". A prime example of how the false left/right paradigm is continually used to classify people into a particular group, when in reality, it’s not about left/right at all. It’s about individual people who hold some genuine left/right views [like how they feel about abortion or religion] who are angry about Constitutional violations of our government. Mix that anger in with a person’s mental instability and presto, you get your von Brunn’s.

The irony here, in the case of von Brunn, is that in acting out in such a violent way and committing murder, he becomes a part of [rather than the solution to] the social and governmental injustices and corruption that he claimed to be against.

One glaring omission in Ostroy and Neiwert’s articles is the fact that von Brunn was against several of the right-wing figures and establishments that they themselves have written very angry articles about (I would provide the actual angry articles, but since there are so many, for the sake of space, go to Neiwert's website here and Ostroy's website here and read them all. You will quickly discover after reading angry article after angry article from these two bloggers about right-wing figures and organizations, that if we are to accept their claim that angry rhetoric leads to violence and murder, then Neiwert and Ostroy themselves should turn into future 'lone wolf' gunman). People like both George Bush’s and John McCain were on von Brunn’s shitlist, as well as news outlets like FOX News were literally on von Brunn’s target list of places to attack.

MyFoxDC.com reported, "Law enforcement sources told WTTG/MyFoxDC.com that during a search of a car that is believed to belong von Brunn, investigators found a notebook with information about six to nine locations in the D.C. area, including the National Holocaust Museum. Other locations on the list included the U.S. Capitol, the White House, the Washington Post, and a FOX News location."

The fact that von Brunn apparently hated FOX News, neocons like both Bush’s and John McCain did not deter Ostroy and Neiwert from continually calling von Brunn a "right-wing extremist." So, a right-wing extremist would attack a right-wing news outlet like FOX news? A right-wing extremist hates right-wing politicians? What sense does that make? It makes NO sense. But, lies, spin and omission are no enemies to liberal propagandists like Ostroy and Neiwert.

One other major fact that Ostroy and Neiwert conveniently omit from their spin-ridden articles is that the DHS Right-wing extremism report was actually created during the Bush administration!

One can easily see for themselves when the DHS report was created by clicking the PDF link to the DHS Extremism Report, then after it is downloaded to desktop, right-click the icon and scroll down and click "properties", then click the PDF section. You should see this:

As one can plainly see in the PDF section of ‘properties’, this document was created January 23, 2007 and modified on April 7, 2009. In other words, created under the Bush administration and modified under the Obama administration. So, where do left-wingers like Ostroy get that we should have "listened to Janet Napolitano"? In January of 2007, she was still the Governor of Arizona. What in the hell did she have to do with this report? Where does the right-wing get that the DHS report was a creation of the Obama administration in order to target them?

My guess is that all of the right-wing talking heads like O' Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, Bill Bennett and Pat Robertson who threw a fit over the DHS report 2 months ago simply didn't do their research to find it was created in January of 2007. The right wanted to blame Napolitano and the left wanted the DHS report to be an Obama accomplishment. Both were wrong.

Writer Kurt Nimmo adds, "In other words, the document is not a reflection of the supposed sinister political coloration of the Obama administration, said by many "conservatives" to be socialist or Marxist. It is a document produced specifically as part of a larger effort to demonize and eliminate all opposition regardless of political persuasion."

Two other articles by Neiwert, here and here, in the past few days failed to link white supremacy or even holocaust denying to “right-wing extremism”. These two articles also, not-surprisingly, omit any mention that von Brunn hated neocons and FOX News and that the Bush administration created the DHS report. Amazing how someone can write so much and yet say so little.

Another tactic used by both the right and the left is to smear 9/11 truth activists by attempting to link them to people who commit violent acts or murder like von Brunn. It was reported shortly after the holocaust shooting that von Brunn was a “9/11 truther”. In an attempt to associate people who believe in government complicity in the events of 9/11 to lone wolf “nutballs” who go on shooting sprees, FOX News’ Glenn Beck said this just 2 days ago:

“Our country is now vulnerable…..those people who would like to destroy us — our enemies like Al Qaeda. They’d like to destroy us, and they will work with anyone. There are also people like white supremacists or 9/11 truthers that would also like to destroy the country. They’ll work with anybody they can.”

Yesterday, writer Kurt Nimmo said this, “In other words, the 9/11 truth movement, according to Beck, will work with al-Qaeda. If you read between the lines, Beck is calling for the government to dish out the same kind of violent response to the truth movement the CIA-created al-Qaeda received in Afghanistan or at Camp Gitmo. Beck is calling for murder and torture of people who disagree with the government.”

On October 22, 2007, Beck — then a host on Prime Time News — viciously attacked the 9/11 truth movement, describing the whole movement as “insane” and branding 9/11 activists as “dangerous anarchists.”

These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation’s foundation, tear us apart and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us” said Beck. He later said the 9/11 truth movement is “the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from,” insinuating the movement is intent on violence.

The incredible irony of Beck’s statements is that it has been Beck himself that sided with the “conspiracy” people on many occasions on his show. Beck has claimed there are FEMA detention camps in the United States, has talked about Martial Law and seceding from the Union. Yet when it comes to questioning the government on 9/11, Beck chooses to buy the official version hook, line and sinker.

Many of Beck’s on-air ideological confessions have been warning signs that are listed in the DHS Right-wing extremism report. The DHS report does not name “9/11 conspiracy theorists” specifically, but rather lumps it into one central group, calling them “conspiracy theories characterizing the U.S. Government’s role as either complicit in a foreign invasion or acquiescing as part of a “One World Government”, but it does mention specifically the ideologies Beck has professed to believing. The DHS report warns against people who believe in:

“...conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy.”

In other words, Beck himself is a right-wing extremist, but yet he attempts to fool his mush-brained audience into believing that there is huge leap in difference between the ideologies he professes and 9/11 truth. There’s not, of course. There’s only one conclusion Beck can come to: the DHS report is a made-up fairy tale that is used as a tool to target government dissention and has nothing to do with factual evidence that ideologies in and of itself lead to violence or murder.

Beck cannot say 9/11 truthers are dangerous and in the same breath say that he is not dangerous. The DHS report lumps us both together in their report. So, the DHS report is either 100% valid or 100% bullshit. He can’t have it both ways.

One blogger from PrisonPlanet, named “Storky”, wrote this:

“9/11 challengers are neither left nor right, they are merely suspicious of the myriad of inconsistencies and the speed with which the “crime scene” was cleaned up and the evidence disposed of.”
What I find amazing is that left-wingers like Neiwert and Ostroy continually call people like me "right-wing extremists" because I’m "paranoid" about things like a New World Order conspiracy, Obama taking away guns, the loss of liberty, an emerging police state and the threat of martial law at our doorstep at any given moment, yet the DHS report on "right-wing extremism" is littered with paranoia about the following classes of people:

*Disgruntled military veterans
*The unemployed
*Those who cannot get credit
*Those who have foreclosed on their homes
*"New World Order" ‘conspiracy theorists’
*White supremacists
*Those who see a threat to U.S. sovereignty
*Those who fear guns will be confiscated
*Those who fear a "one world government"
*Those who fear "citizen detention camps"
*Those who fear a complete economical collapse
*Those who fear the suspension of the U.S. Constitution
*Militia members
*Those who fear government inaction on illegal immigration
*Those who stockpile food and weapons
*Tax protestors

In other words, unless you accept everything the government spoon-feeds to you and follow and obey without one iota of dissent, you are a right-wing extremist. It never ever occurs to the left wing that there actually could be people in this country that are NOT violent or crazy who do not believe one fucking word our government tells them and who bases their views on documented evidence that many of the listed things above, like a coming New World Order [mentioned over 20 times at the G2 Summit] are actually happening. No one like this exists to Ostroy and Neiwert.

To them, you either love the government and think Obama is the best thing since Gandhi, or you want to kill everyone. There is no in between.

Let's make this clear. Not that I give a rats ass that anyone would call me a 'right-wing extremist', but let me share my personal views on the issues the DHS report mentions along with additional issues so my readers will clearly know my stances. My answers in below in burgandy.

Pro-choice or pro-life?

Do you believe in God?
(I am agnostic, which is the belief that God may or may not exist and even if he does, there's no way to prove it)

Do you believe in a 'New World Order'?
(It's not a belief. It's a fact. Many world leaders have talked about it openly---as recently as at the G2 Summit)

Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job?
(No. I know it was)

Do you think Obama plan is to take away our guns?
(I believe he is setting things in motion to. I'm not sure whether he will succeed)

Do you think the income tax is unconstitutional?
(I know it is)

Do you pay taxes anyway?

Do you believe there is a plan to merge Canada, the U.S. and Mexico?
(People have openly talked about it, so asking if I "believe" it is disingenuous. Whether it will be implemented is another story. There is already a European Union)

Do you think martial law will be declared?
(The stage is set for it. It could happen as easily as gas prices rising)

Are you a white supremacist?
(Hell no. This has always been silly to me, that grown men and women think one race is more supreme than others)

Did the holocaust happen?
(Of course it did)

Did 6 million die in the holocaust?
(How could anyone know that for sure? I'm convinced a very, very large number did. Until I see evidence otherwise, I'm sticking with 6 million. I'm also convinced that Hitler did not act alone. He had financial help from other countries including England and yes, the United States)

Worst President the United States ever had?
(George W. Bush, Abraham Lincoln a close 2nd)

Best President ever?
(Thomas Jefferson, John F. Kennedy)

How do you feel about illegal immigration?
(All illegal aliens should get the hell out...period. I am against work visas, sanctuary cities and against children living here who were born to illegal immigrants. If the parent never should have been here and is an illegal alien, then the child is illegal as well and both should go. Obviously, you can't seperate them so they would have to leave as a family. Bottom line: If you are not born in the United States or not born to a U.S. citizen, you are not a U.S. citizen and you need to get the hell out)

What is your view of gay marriage?
(I don't care if gay people marry, at all)

Are there FEMA detention camps in the United States?
(Yes. They have civil unrest exercises in America all the time. Readiness Exercise 84 [Rex 84] is the name of the plan to detain large numbers of citizens due to civil unrest. If they have exercises and the Rex 84 plan to detain people then they have to have the facilities for the detainees!)

I will add more questions as they come to me

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Vulgar Commentators Pounce On Shooting To Justify DHS Extremism Report

Right and left at each others throats in coarse and pointless point scoring exercise

Steve Watson
June 11, 2009

In an utterly disrespectful display of vicious political point scoring, bloggers and commentators have jumped on yesterday’s tragic shooting at the Holocaust museum in Washington DC, insinuating that it justifies the Department of Homeland Security’s recent classification of gun owners and veterans as dangerous right wing extremists.

One case in point is Washington Post blogger Ed O’Keefe’s column, which is today titled "Does Holocaust Shooting Validate Homeland Security Report?"

"Did that controversial Homeland Security report on right-wing extremists get it right?" O’Keefe asks, referring to the recently leaked Homeland Security intelligence assessment that characterized millions of American citizens as potentially violent terrorists who are a threat to law enforcement.

All the usual politicized groups that masquerade as "civil rights" organisations, while at the same time lobbying for the complete elimination of liberties have pounced on the incident in their droves.

"I think this latest round of killing once again shows how ridiculous the criticism from the right of the Department of Homeland Security report was. That whole brouhaha was absurd," said Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center, the group cited as a research source in the recent MIAC report, which characterized Ron Paul supporters as extremists.

"We felt the DHS report was pretty right on," said Deborah Lauter of the Anti-Defamation League. "Clearly the election of Obama, the current financial crisis, and the discussion of immigration reform –those things have certainly fueled the right wing extremist movement in this country….There are clear indications that the rhetoric is manifesting. We hope it’s not the tip of the iceberg."

The fact that the 88-year-old shooter, James von Brunn, was a retired veteran has provided ample ammunition for those seeking to justify the broad demonization contained within the DHS report.

To the surprise of some left wing bloggers, but not to anyone who understands the bait and switch tactics routinely utilized by Fox News, host Shepard Smith was one of the first commentators to make the connection between the shooting and the DHS report.

"This is a former military guy, and he’s gone extremist," Smith said firmly, shaking his head.

"They were warning us for a reason. They see signs that this sort of thing is bubbling up."

"There was something to it," concluded Smith. "It was not obscene … and it appears now that
they were right."

Other undignified bloggers have also seized on the shooting in a childish attempt to justify their pathetically entrenched political viewpoints.

"I hope that everyone who mau-maued the Department of Homeland Security for expressing concern about this kind of thing feels appropriately ashamed of themselves," Matthew Yglesias of Think Progress wrote.

"The Republican hysteria over the DHS report — which was, by the way, initiated by a Bush administration official — was always based more on a partisan scheme than reality, but the incessant complaints look especially misguided today," writes Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen.

Brian Beutler of Talking Points Memo published a list of reasons why the DHS report was correct.

The fact remains that it is patently stupid and completely irresponsible to suggest that all veterans, supporters of the second amendment, Americans with economic concerns and those concerned with the loss of U.S. sovereignty are extremist racist killers. And that is what the leaked DHS report insinuated.

The very moment the report hit the mainstream, those on the right, such as Glenn Beck and Michael Weiner Savage, derided it as some kind of massive left wing Marxist Obama administration plot.

Of course, they uniformly failed to point out that the document was created by the Bush administration and that an earlier report produced by the Strategic Analysis Group, Homeland Environment and Threat Analysis Division of the DHS concentrated on "left wing extremism" ( Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade), again demonstrating the federal government does not hold an ideological bias when it comes demonizing groups and individuals that are opposed to it.

Now, in the wake of another shooting incident, those on the left have wasted no time in using the incident to hit back at the equally misguided fools on the right.

In reality these weak minded hacks have simply allowed themselves to be goaded into defending and agreeing with the ludicrous DHS security assessment.

This flurry of inane activity highlights how useful a tool the false left/right political paradigm is. The left and the right are so obsessed with bickering and winning pointless moral victories over each other that the absolute destruction of everything America stands for becomes a secondary concern.

Highlighting how completely isolated from reality they are, those attempting to exploit this awful tragedy to score political points, whether it be from the right or the left, is so far beyond contemptible, it defies belief.

Meanwhile, the corporate and financial elite are happy to play both sides off against each other while they carry on, almost completely undeterred, with their freedom destroying Social Darwinist agenda.

Glenn Beck’s Outrageous Lie: Racist Von Brunn is "Hero of 9/11 Truthers"

Kurt Nimmo
June 10, 2009

There should be absolutely no doubt Glenn Beck is a government disinfo operative tasked with taking down the 9/11 truth and patriot movements. In fact, Fox News — as a primary fount of Operation Mockingbird — is tasked with attacking not only the 9/11 truth movement but the pro-liberty and Constitution movements as well.

"Our country is now vulnerable," the operative Beck declares. "Those people who would like to destroy us — our enemies like Al Qaeda. They’d like to destroy us, and they will work with anyone. There are also people like white supremacists or 9/11 truthers that would also like to destroy the country. They’ll work with anybody they can."

In other words, the 9/11 truth movement, according to Beck, will work with al-Qaeda. If you read between the lines, Beck is calling for the government to dish out the same kind of violent response to the truth movement the CIA-created al-Qaeda received in Afghanistan or at Camp Gitmo. Beck is calling for murder and torture of people who disagree with the government.

Fox News did a smash up job subverting the tea parties and reducing the movement to a carnival sideshow while CNN and especially MSNBC went into overtime to portray the "tea baggers" as irrelevant and absurd.

On October 22, 2007, Beck — then a host on Prime Time News — viciously attacked the 9/11 truth movement, describing the whole movement as "insane" and branding 9/11 activists as "dangerous anarchists."

"These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation’s foundation, tear us apart and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us" said Beck. He later said the 9/11 truth movement is "the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from," insinuating the movement is intent on violence.

In November of 2007, Beck the operative teamed up with the scurrilous ex-Marxist and neocon David Horowitz to denounce Ron Paul’s supporters as terrorists. "Beck opened up his show segment by inferring that the U.S. military should be used to silence domestic dissent against the war, claiming that those he would later identify as Ron Paul supporters, libertarians and the anti-war left and link with terrorists, were a ‘physical threat,’" wrote Paul Joseph Watson for Prison Planet.

"When you enlist in the U.S. military, you have take an oath that says you’re gonna support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies - foreign and domestic - we talk a lot on this program about the foreign threats - maybe we should spend some time tonight on the domestic one….the physical threat may be developing domestically as well," said Beck.

Last week the corporate media reported that U.S. counterterrorism officials "authenticated" a video by a supposed al-Qaeda recruiter who claimed he has the ability to smuggle a biological weapon into the United States via tunnels under the Mexico border. In the video, Abdullah al-Nafisi also suggests that al-Qaeda might want to collaborate with "members of native U.S. white supremacist militias who hate the federal government," according to the Washington Post. The video was posted on the web by MEMRI, a documented Mossad front and Israeli propaganda outfit run by intelligence operatives and neocons.