Monday, February 28, 2011

Prison Planet Admits Using Charlie Sheen and the Entertainment Industry to Generate Publicity [and Revenue] for Alex Jones’ Websites


Oh, sure...they do not actually say the word “revenue” but that is exactly what more publicity means….more cash and more fame

by Larry Simons
February 28, 2011

My analysis of Prison Planet/Infowars latest Sheen story “Inside the Mind of Charlie Sheen

The following is the verbatim article written by Paul Watson and Alex Jones as it appears on Prison Planet and Infowars and my response/analysis in [purple]:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Following the controversy caused by Charlie Sheen’s wild and rampaging appearance on The Alex Jones Show, it’s necessary to understand why the actor is so angry, if only to set the record straight on a number of issues that have been misconstrued by the establishment media, as well as explaining why Infowars and Alex Jones are involving themselves with the machinations of the entertainment industry.”

[Why is it necessary to understand why Sheen is angry? Why even mention Sheen on Jones’ websites? Why even be connected and associated with a drug-addicted degenerate? Why does Alex Jones feel the need to give Sheen a platform to “set the record straight”? Jones, although profoundly obsessed with celebrities, is not a reporter for Entertainment Tonight or Extra. We already know why Jones is involved in the machinations of the entertainment industry…because he is obsessed with celebrities and is far more interested in promoting his websites, DVD’s and all his other merchandise than he is in informing the world about what is really going on]

“Firstly, Charlie Sheen is clean. Alex Jones spent considerable time with the actor recently and personally witnessed the fact Sheen is off the alcohol, is regularly exercising and is more focused than ever before.”

[Jones “personally witnessed it” Sheen is clean, huh? Wow, I’m convinced! Alex, please explain to your fans why Charlie Sheen sounded completely jacked up with cocaine during the interview? Wait, I take that back…please don’t explain, because I don’t care if he is clean or 1 minute from death. You shouldn’t care either Alex Jones]

“The impact of coming off a 6 month burnout and the endorphin rush that this causes undoubtedly contributed to Sheen’s over the top behavior during the interview, but this behavior came as a result of Sheen’s anger reaching boiling point.”

[So Sheen is excused for his behavior then, right? The message that Watson and Jones is sending with this statement is this: If you come off a 6-month burnout and have an endorphin rush, anything you do as a result is justified and you should not be held accountable. If you rob a bank, shoot someone or scream profanities at children or senior citizens, it’s A-OK, because it’s an endorphin rush and it’s not your fault]

“Sheen even went to the extent of providing Radar Online with a urine sample to prove he was clean – the sample came back negative and Sheen passed the drug test. Sheen also passed a blood test conducted by doctors on behalf of Entertainment Tonight.”

[Did anyone witness Sheen piss in the cup? Even if he did pass…so fucking what? Who cares if he’s clean now? Him “being clean now” excuses him from his psychotic behavior over the last 20 years? It excuses him from “accidentally” shooting Kelly Preston in the arm? It excuses the $53,000 he spent on Heidi Fleiss’ prostitutes? It excuses him from beating the shit out of Brittany Ashland and choking Capri Anderson? It excuses him for the domestic violence incident involving his third wife Brooke Mueller? The list goes on and on. It must require basketball-sized nuts for Alex Jones and Paul Watson to defend this prick!]

“Why is Sheen so angry? While Sheen was recuperating from his personal troubles, he had to keep his mouth shut as people who he thought were his friends ceaselessly attacked him with complete disregard for Sheen’s well-being.”

[The question should not be “Why is Sheen so angry?”, it should be, “Sheen has friends?”. It should be, “Who gives a 2-cent shit about Sheen’s well-being?”. It should be, “Why is Sheen still free to walk in society?”]

“Sheen was told by his studio not to complain about the cancellation of four Two and Half Men episodes, and the actor kept his word as he prepared to go back to work and film the final four episodes of the season. However, during this time he was subjected to several vicious personal attacks, not least of which by writer Chuck Lorre, who while Sheen was recovering, taunted him with vanity cards displayed at the end of Two and a Half Men episodes about how he should “outlive” Charlie Sheen, along with other vanity cards run on separate TV shows that insulted Sheen for being “dead inside”. Lorre proudly displays these insults on his own website."

[Sheen doesn’t deserve personal attacks? He is a menace to society and should not even be free to walk among normal, sane, productive citizens. I do blame Chuck Lorre and CBS for one thing: For caring more about ratings and money than having the integrity to fire crazy Charlie long, long ago!]

“The media has completely missed the fact that Lorre cast the first stone. While Sheen kept his mouth shut and was trying to get himself together, instead of getting support he was getting constantly attacked.”

[“Get himself together?” What is Jones’ and Watsons’ definition of this…”beating the fuck out of one or two women instead of five or six?” ‘Taking drugs four days a week instead of every day of the week?”]

“Before Sheen appeared on The Alex Jones Show, Alex talked to the actor in order to get an idea of what Sheen wanted to discuss on the program. As we highlighted in our promo article for Sheen’s appearance, we expected Sheen to address some of the “myriad of exaggerations, misinformation and outright falsehoods about his life that have been whipped up by the establishment media in recent weeks.””

[And, like I said, nobody knows why it’s Alex Jones’ job to do this. Jones’ disturbing obsession with celebrities will not let him realize that getting Sheen to “address some of the “myriad of exaggerations, misinformation and outright falsehoods about his life” is not his job. I also love how the link Jones and Watson provided for their promo was the Infowars link, for which they allowed 11 comments, but the Prison Planet link to the same story, they allowed ZERO comments, because they closed the comment thread on PP]

“Alex Jones was not prepared for what was to follow, as Sheen vented his anger in a number of different ways – some strange, some offensive, and some hilarious. This kicked off a global media firestorm that continues to rage as Sheen now prepares to appear on ABC’s “20/20″.

[None of it was hilarious. It was ALL disturbing and ridiculous. Jones loves every minute of the fact that it “kicked off a global media firestorm”, because maybe that equals cash, cash, cash!]

“Obviously, Sheen doesn’t really think Thomas Jefferson is a “pussy” and that he and Alex Jones are ninja warlocks or vatican assassins. The interview was partly serious, partly dark satire and partly dark poetry. Indeed, the interview has attracted so much attention that Sheen’s use of the word “winning,” as a jab against his detractors is fast catching on as some of kind of new viral “Chuck Norris facts” style cultural motif.”

[“Obviously” huh? And what statement during the interview or since the interview makes that “obvious”?? It is astonishing that Watson and Jones would say it’s “obvious” and then refuse to explain why it’s obvious. It’s crystal clear why Watson and Jones did not include the “obvious” reason; because it does not exist and because Sheen meant to say Jefferson was a “pussy”, and Watson and Jones have ZERO evidence that Sheen did not mean it]

“As is to be expected, the establishment media seized upon Sheen’s comments and instantly began smearing the actor. Sheen was ludicrously dubbed “anti-semitic” for using Lorre’s birth name. As Sheen points out in the ABC interview, “So you’re telling me, anytime someone calls me Carlos Estevez, I can claim they are anti-Latino?””

[Once again, Watson and Jones deny an accusation and fail to provide the evidence that Sheen was not being anti-Semitic. Why mention Chuck Lorre’s real name? Watson and Jones’ only defense is to make a stupid analogy of the Sheen question, “So you’re telling me, anytime someone calls me Carlos Estevez, I can claim they are anti-Latino?” My answer: YES, if they are saying it in the exact same context Sheen was saying Lorre’s real name in! YES!]

“While Sheen tries to get his life back on course he will continue to be attacked by the corporate media and his own colleagues for two primary reasons. Firstly, to have someone as outspoken as Sheen enjoying the platform of the biggest grossing television show in America is dangerous for the establishment.”

[Huh? Sheen is a part of that establishment! He admitted during his mock/fake interview with Barack Obama that he voted for Obama, but Jones and Watson will have us believe that Sheen is anti-establishment? Are they kidding? “Dangerous” for the establishment? I’m pissing my pants! The only thing dangerous is Charlie Sheen walking among sane American citizens]

“We saw this when Sheen came out for 9/11 truth.”

[And that just might be the single worst thing that has ever happened to the truth movement. Alex Jones befriending and defending a nutcase like Sheen gives the former reason a run for its money]

“Secondly, it appears likely that CBS and Warner Bros. Television are trying to force Sheen to quit so they don’t have to fire him and buy out his contract.”

[Again, money trumps everything in Hollywood. CBS should be an accessory to Sheen’s criminality, because it’s the 1.8 million an episode CBS pays him to live his life of insanity]

“For the sake of everyone who works on the show, we hope everybody can get together and work everything out. There has been enough vitriol from both sides and it’s time to sit down and come to an understanding.”

[Watson…Jones…why do you even care?]

“As to why we are talking about a Hollywood actor’s career troubles when massive revolts are spreading the globe as the planet verges on the precipice of chaos, the answer is simple. For a start, we never expected Charlie’s interview to turn into such a gargantuan spectacle to the point where it became the number one news story in America.”

[Watson and Jones state “the answer is simple”, then fail to give the reason they are involved!]

"However, neo-liberal Soros outlets like Media Matters and many others have attacked Infowars and Alex Jones for inserting himself into the Sheen controversy in order to generate attention and publicity for Jones’ websites. Far from being an underhanded tactic, we are proud of this fact and have openly stated that this was our goal after the Sheen story went supernova….winning!"

[Here Watson and Jones claim they are being “attacked” by Media Matters as if they are innocent. Then, in the very next sentence they ADMIT Media Matters is correct in accusing them of wanting the publicity! This explains why Jones and the staff at Prison Planet are attracted to nutballs like Sheen: They are equally as crazy as Sheen! They admit they are involved in the Sheen story to generate publicity, which equals more hits, which equals more subscriptions, which equals more cash.

Here’s the best part: Watson and Jones state, “we are proud of this fact and have openly stated that this was our goal [generating publicity] after the Sheen story went supernova” after they had previously stated, “While Sheen was recuperating from his personal troubles, he had to keep his mouth shut as people who he thought were his friends ceaselessly attacked him with complete disregard for Sheen’s well-being.”

Is it not showing a complete disregard for Sheen’s well-being to exploit this story and to use Sheen to gain publicity (which leads to revenue) for Alex Jones’ websites? Watson and Jones are complete fucking hypocrites!]

“By making such a sortie into the matrix, we are able to reach out to dumbed-down TV heads who would never have had their interest peaked otherwise. Indeed, we are already receiving numerous emails from Two and a Half Men viewers who are experiencing sudden revelations in political awakening, having been asleep for years."

[They would have to remain dumbed-down and “asleep” to not see past the blatant exploitation of Charlie Sheen by the likes of the two biggest hypocritical frauds on the planet, Alex Jones and Paul Watson. So, since it would be obvious that Watson and Jones would practically require their new “fans” to remain in their dumbed-down stupor (in order to be blind to Jones’ hypocrisy), that only means one thing: Jones and Watson want their new “awakened” fans for their own personal financial profit]

“We are harnessing the power of the global entertainment industry, which is so detrimental to our society and culture, and using the establishment’s tactics as a weapon against the establishment itself."

[My response to this is summed up perfectly by commenter “the sage” on this thread, when he says:

“And yet, in contradiction to this, Alex and PP have been constantly praising Sheen and his lifetime of Hollywood success as an achievement to honor Sheen and give him a platform on prison planet. I agree with the quote, but Sheen is part of that industry. It is total propaganda for prison planet to try to have it…both ways…concerning Sheen."]

“In saying that, Jones has been a close personal friend of Sheen for no less than six years and his primary concern was for Sheen’s well-being, which is why he spent considerable time with Sheen long before the controversy erupted."

[LOL. And these two fucktards just said they are using this story to generate publicity! How can they claim they are concerned for his well-being and then say they are exploiting the story for financial gain, and then go right back and say in the very next sentence that they care for his well-being again?]

“But don’t think for a minute that we’re going to waste such an opportunity to bring millions of new potential Infowarriors into the fold by disguising the antidote of truth inside a package of shiny, media friendly, celebrity gossip – we’d be fools not to.”

[And now they are back to saying the exploitation of Sheen is their clear intention after they just said that Jones’ “primary concern was for Sheen’s well-being”! Jesus! How are they any different from the ones they condemn for attacking Sheen?]

“This is an information war. We need to stop preaching to the choir and extend an olive branch to the millions of Americans who are locked inside the matrix with no knowledge of how to escape. By using the global juggernaut of the entertainment industry and people’s obsession with celebrities, itself a contrivance of the establishment, we can awake millions more would-be zombies from their slumber.”

[Again, my response is summed up better by “the sage”. He says:

“So you admittedly artificially and falsely propped up the image of Sheen to all the prison planet listeners in contradiction to what he really represents (just another element of the corrupt Hollywood influence) in order to wake up the zombies for which Sheen is partially responsible for entertaining and/or creating? So now Sheen deserves respect for prison planet being able to use his downward spiral for the benefit of humanity? This article is more disturbing than anything Sheen has ever ranted”]

I concur.

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Crackhead Charlie Sheen Calls Greatest President Ever, Thomas Jefferson, a “Pussy”; Alex Jones Laughs About It


Above picture is Alex Jones laughing when Charlie Sheen called one of our countries’ greatest leaders a “pussy”. No wonder Jones has no respect for his own fans [who he censors on a daily basis]; he disrespects our own founding fathers in order to gain approval of a womanizing, narcissistic, sex-addicted crack-head


by Larry Simons
February 26, 2011

During Thursday’s interview on The Alex Jones Show, free-speech hater Jones gave airtime to woman-beating crack-head Charlie Sheen, a move that had already been condemned by scores of Jones fans even before the interview took place. In between cocaine-induced rants, profanity-ridden tirades, calling Chuck Lorre [producer of his TV show] a “turd” and insisting that he was “clean” [from cocaine], Sheen went a step further and insulted one of the greatest Americans this country has ever seen: Thomas Jefferson.

During one of his narcissistic, drug-induced babblings, Sheen condemned Alcoholics Anonymous by saying this:

“This bootleg cult arrogantly referred to as AA, is…Alex, sports like a 5% success rate. My success rate is 100%. Do the math. Take for instance its founder, a desperate and, I don’t know, broken down plagiarist stayed high on acid until the day he died. I can’t seem to find that chapter in his silly book of lies. And then Alex, try to get your mind around this, as a fellow warrior deep in the trenches. Their entire manifesto is built upon complete and total surrender or the concept of complete and total surrender. They urge you to put down your sword and come join the winners. In 22 years, the only winners I could locate in their toothless war were either driving a convertible van or living like trolls under some abandoned bridge. Another one of their stupid mottoes Alex is uh, “don’t be special, be one of us”. Newsflash, I am special and I will never be one of you! There it is.”

In response, Jones said, “You sound like Thomas Jefferson”, in which Sheen said, “Well I’m not Thomas Jefferson. He was a pussy.”

Listen to the clip, it is said right around the 3:30 mark


First of all, I have no idea what Jones was even referring to when he stated that Sheen “sounded like Thomas Jefferson”. How?? Is Jones saying that Jefferson was constantly jacked up on so many drugs that he would talk continually without stopping for at least a half of a second to catch his breath? Or was Jones saying that Jefferson thought he was god’s gift to women and better than everyone else? Who knows?

Second of all, Sheen never volunteers to explain what made Jefferson a “pussy”. Jones never even asks him, nor does Jones rebuke Sheen. Instead, Jones follows that deplorable comment with the common reaction that all true patriots would have…he laughs about it.

For Jones to sit in his studio day in and day out and claim that he loves this country and admires our founding fathers, and then turn right around and let the biggest asshole in show business insult one of the greatest men that has ever lived while Jones just laughs it off is nothing short of despicable.

Sure, Sheen has every right to say what he feels. This is still America, where our founders granted Sheen the right to say those words. But, for Alex Jones to claim he is a patriot and then laugh off one of our greatest founders being insulted, makes Jones a certified and bona fide asshole.

I have been losing my respect for Alex Jones at a rapid pace now for the past year, and I finally decided this is the last straw. From this point on, I will be removing the links to Jones’ sites from the right side of my blog. I will no longer support a man [Jones] who befriends and schmoozes with some of the biggest dipshits and frauds [Kevin Trudeau, Pastor Steve Anderson, Mancow, David Icke, Lindsey Williams and Sheen] in America today.

As far as me posting anymore Prison Planet stories on my blog, all I can say is I cannot promise I will not post more, but I guarantee one thing: If I post more, they will surely be stories that are written mostly from a “reporting” nature and not laced with so much opinion. I was already at the point of disgust at Paul Watson and Jones that they sensationalize so many stories and riddle them with neocon-style fearmongering without offering any solutions. Readers of my blog have probably noticed, I was already posting less and less Prison Planet articles even before two days ago.

Fuck you Alex Jones. You’re a disgrace to this country for even talking to one of the most despicable human beings in the world [Sheen] let alone being his friend. Jones is losing his fan base at a rapid rate. All one has to do is read the comment boards on a daily basis to discover that [well, on the stories that Jones allows comments].

It is refreshing to know that I am not the only one who feels this way.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Prison Planet/Alex Jones Playing the Censorship Game Again Concerning Charlie Sheen


Alex Jones announces on his websites he is doing an interview with Charlie Sheen today on his radio show but after disgusted and appalled fans litter comment board with outrage at Jones and Sheen, Jones deletes comments and turns off comment thread to that particular story [well, it seems to be ALL Sheen stories now]

by Larry Simons
February 24, 2011

Once again, like in 2009, when Alex Jones deleted comments and closed comment boards to a story he posted about a Charlie Sheen-Barack Obama interview that never took place, the censorship game at Prison Planet has happened again. This time, it was the announcement of an interview Jones is doing with Sheen today at 2pm EST that had people flooding the comment boards in opposition to Charlie Sheen and his abusive behavior and continual drug addicted stupors that has been a frequent news story lately.

I went to Prison Planet early this morning and saw multiple comments under the posting titled, “Exclusive Interview: Charlie Sheen To Appear On The Alex Jones Show 2PM EST", that blasted Jones and Sheen, similar to the comments aimed toward fraud Lindsey Williams yesterday. I did not think to save any of them or capture screen shots because I really did not think Jones would pull this stunt again. I was wrong. I went back to the site at roughly 1:30 pm and discovered under the headline of the story that it says, “Comments off”. [see below]



Luckily, I found a cached page of the original post complete with comments that had been posted prior to Alex Jones’ censorship thugs pounced on the First Amendment [that Jones so adamantly supports]. Here is a portion of the cached page showing evidence that the story did have comments at one time [see bottom of screen shot].



Here are a few comments posted before Jones deleted them and closed the comment thread:

Captain Ron Reply:
February 24th, 2011 at 10:50 am
Well woooptidy f u c k i n g do!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So you put “sprinkles” on it by bringin out “lester the molester” to “edumbacate” all us cretins as to what really happend on 9/11????
Until something is done about it… WOOOPTIDY F U C K I N G DO!!!!!!


Philippe Reply:
February 24th, 2011 at 10:39 am
Isn’t this part of the nonsense that Alex talks about as a distraction to real issues? Charlie likes hookers and mountains of cocaine; really, I don’t care. I’m joyed he knows the truth of 9-11 and so many other issues, just what a shame he’s more of a liability than an asset. If he got his life cleaned up and off the government drugs and hooked on to learning and being an asset to the truth movement, then I could welcome him.

the sage Says:
February 24th, 2011 at 10:38 am
Agreed. My earlier comment expressing the same was immediately deleted from this thread.
You see Alex can speak often about the mindless citizens watching sports and involving themselves with Hollywood drivel and inanities, but once you point to the Holy Sheen with the same examining finger…well…we can’t have that ‘cuz prison planet doesn’t like it.
But it is exactly the same thing. This is why I know I can never fully place my trust in Alex or prisonplanet.corp. The lack of objectivity and censorship coupled with this type of blatant contradiction tells me volumes. Alex gets special treatment and say whatever he wants about useless actors, entertainment and activities when he demeans the public at large. But we can’t touch his favorites or golden boy without reprimand.

Watchman57 Says:
February 24th, 2011 at 10:48 am
Oh good grief! Bad enough having Williams rammed down our throat now the self proclaomed biggest customer of Heidi Fleiss, self admitted coke freak and Hollyweird bleep. If this creature is the best the truth movement can find to champion the truth we are dead.! No wonder people laugh at me when the #1 truth talk show host/Patriot pals it up with the likes of Williams, Sheen. O’donnell, Icke ect. ect. And to excuse all the documented crime and perverted lifestyle as lies and propaganda of the NWO is beyond way beyond reason. This is the last straw for me I kick the AJ habit today! Too bad so many will be destroyed or quit the fight because of this nonsense…….

DocApocalypto Says:
February 24th, 2011 at 10:53 am
I’ve been saying it for years, what we need is more womanizing crackheads for the freedom movement!

Alex, get over your man crush on Charlie and get real. The guy is a degenerate scumbag. If he wasn’t on your side politically, you would be the first one to point this out. Be honest. Be real. Be true.

These were just a few. I saw many more negative comments aimed at Jones and Sheen that were obviously posted after what the cached page shows. God knows how many angry comments were posted total before Jones’ henchmen made their move and removed all the comments and shut down commenting.

I was curious to know if anyone was angry about the censorship, so I clicked on the comment threads to the other stories to see if anyone was talking about it. The comment thread to the story, “SPLC Report Lumps In We Are Change With Neo-Nazis, KKK", had one comment from “the sage”. It read:

“Prison planet, in an effort to quell free speech and have the opinions of regular listeners with critical comments about the Charlie Sheen interview, sweepingly deletes then and then closes the comments section down.

This isn’t the first time this has happened concerning the opinion of listeners being critical of Sheen or his appearance on the show.

Too much truth is a better pill to swallow..even for those who claim to bring more truth to the public than anyone.

So much for Alex doing the show “for the people”.

You are only free if you agree with prisonplanet or it will be censored. But the same thing happens to callers as well, either talked over, put on hold or shut down.

You see, there is freedom and then there is freedom defined and controlled.”

Here is the screen shot of that comment



As you can see, this comment was posted at 11:19am [not my time zone because I was at the site at roughly 1:30pm]. Just about 30 minutes ago, I noticed that the above comment [by “the sage”] was deleted! [see below]


[Pic 2]

Notice the comment above the 11:19am comment was posted at 11:14am and also posted by “the sage”, and the comment below it posted at 11:28am by “worldtruthorg” but that 11:28am comment is a reply to “the sage”, so I’m assuming that when an original comment is deleted, then all reply comments go with it. The comment below “worldtruthorg” is posted by “JosieWales” at 11:20am. But, in the screen shot above [Pic 2] it goes from the “the sage” comment at 11:14am straight to the “JosieWales” comment at 11:20am. The 11:19am comment by “the sage” and all reply comments were completely scrapped by Jones and his anti-free speech thugs at “First Amendment-loving” Prison Planet.

I will keep my readers up to date if the outrage as a result of this appears on other comment threads [before they are scrapped too!]

UPDATE:

Prison Planet has posted a new story on Charlie Sheen titled, "Charlie Sheen Unleashes on TSA". Yep, you guessed it.....comment thread is turned OFF. Seems it's crystal clear: Alex Jones does not want anyone criticizing and condemning his Hollywood connection. It matters not to Jones that Sheen is the biggest douchebag in show business....as long as Jones gets to schmooze with him, that's all that matters.

Here is the screen shot showing yet another Sheen story disabled from allowing fans to post comments. I will not give a damn anymore the next time Alex Jones cries censorship and bitches that he is being denied his first amendment rights. He is the biggest hypocrite of them all.


[click to enlarge]

Thanks to Red Dirt Report for posting this story

It’s Practically Unanimous at Prison Planet: “Oil Insider” Lindsey Williams Is Full of Shit


Scores and scores of angry Alex Jones fans/listeners flood comment boards calling Williams a fraud and demanding that he never be a guest again 

by Larry Simons
February 24, 2011

It was just a matter of time that fans and listeners to Alex Jones’ radio show and members of Prison Planet TV became outraged at Lindsey Williams, the Baptist minister who claims he worked as a chaplain for the Alaskan Pipeline workers in the early 70’s and was invited to secret meetings of top oil execs.

The outrage seems to stem from the fact that Williams tends to pop up and make appearances on the Alex Jones Show every time there is a world crisis that affects the price of crude oil. The main gist of what is fueling the anger appears to be the fact that not only does Jones and his writers at Prison Planet and Infowars use words like “bombshell” to describe Williams’ revelations [when fans/listeners say “nothing Williams ever says is new”], but the fact that Jones continues to invite Willaims on his show when fans are calling him a massive fraud.

Jones and his staff posted the same story of Williams’ appearance on Jones’ radio show on Infowars and Prison Planet and the comment boards immediately exploded into a barrage of attacks against Williams [many aimed at Jones as well], calling him a fraud and “snake oil salesman”. The story entitled, “Lindsey Williams to Break Bombshell Info on Alex Jones Show” has outraged many into never listening to Williams again and even caused one to cancel their subscription to Jones’ site.

Many accused Williams of being nothing more than a pitchman for his books, CD’s and DVD’s. A common complaint from fans about Williams is that he takes way too long to reveal what the “big news” is that he "supposedly" learned from his “oil insider” friends. Many were outraged that Williams even waited until the next day to reveal the “shocking” news.

I have had my own doubts about Williams recently. Here is a man who claims he was invited into “secret” meetings with big elite oil people in the 70’s. Why, because he was a minister? Then, a few years ago, his website is mysteriously shut down, only for Williams to reveal later [to Jones] that he had to shut it down because of threats he was receiving for going public [of course, this is despite the fact that he had already gone public in 1980 with his book, “The Energy Non-Crisis” and has been vocal on Jones’ radio show many times since then] with “inside information” about what the “elites” are planning to do concerning oil.

Williams’ claim that he had received threats in the past begs the obvious question: Why does he keep risking his life every 3 or 4 months to bring us his startling revelations? Why wouldn’t he anonymously send Jones this information if it is so Earth-shattering [after all, that is what you would really do if you were whistleblowing secret information and wanted to remain alive]? I will tell you why. Because Williams cannot make a goddamned penny if he is giving up his information anonymously. It’s all about the almighty dollar.

Below is a just a short list of comments from the Prison Planet and Infowars postings of the story entitled “Lindsey Williams to Break Bombshell Info on Alex Jones Show” that was posted on Feb. 21 and 22 respectively.

Comments from the Prison Planet posting of the story
[Note: If you click on the screen name of the person commenting and it does not go to the comment within the comment thread, that means either the comment has been deleted or the comment thread itself was erased and closed]

Gordon Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:37 am
Lindsey Williams is nothing more than a bullshitter always trying to make himself some kind of gowd damn fortunte teller. Notice how this prick told the fuel story only AFTER this latest Lybia outbreak as if he had somehow called it. Bullshit…..Lindsey Williams is a complete joke and frankly discredits Alex and our movement.

Hegelian Says:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:56 am
Unfortunately, EVERY time L. Williams is on the broadcast I hear:
“Alex, I’m about to give you some information that is SO crucial, SO important, that it will affect the lives of every man, woman and child on this planet.”


OR


“Alex, I have never been so shaken to my core at about what I ‘m getting ready to tell you.”

OR

“Alex, PLease, PLEASE, PLEASE– if your listeners will just hear my warnings– and prepare– I’m getting ready to tell them something so amazing, so powerful…”
Come on Lindsey, OUT WITH IT ALREADY! I have heard about 5-10 interviews with him over the years– and its the SAME pumping up/sales pitch EVERY TIME. [Not surprising since Pastors are great salesman usually]


NoSo Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:37 am
There’s a clear script and formula, it’s not at all improvised. I think many are coming to the conclusion he’s just trying to sell his DVD’s. Skepticism is good, to be encouraged. The man will have to face the music if his statements prove to be false, as the oil rig disaster was. If anything was proven there, it was the man way over hypes things and uses the same kind of acting every time. He acts, it’s an act and not genuine because it’s repetitive and scripted. I’d have to say thus far I don’t give hardly any credibility to Mr. Williams in terms of anything other than predicting the price of oil maybe once.

Someone needs to document Lindsey Williams predictions and statements and put up a website on what he said that was false and never came to be. Their timeline may be a bit off, and that’s normal, but if they show a pattern of false predictions, they’re just trying to hype things up to sell their DVD or whatever. 

winston_smith Says:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:56 am
I know Jones ain’t the sharpest tool in the shed, but even my granny could recognize Williams for what his is…..a bullshitting opportunist. I’ll bet my last dollar that Jones gets a cut from the DVD sales.

Cybro Says:
February 22nd, 2011 at 11:11 am
It’s going to be total bullshit and I’m not even going to listen to this guy talk in circles reminding me over and over again that he once said the price of oil would go up. Wow, who would have ever guessed that would happen? This guy is just too embarrassing to listen to anymore. I will skip the two or three hours of blabber and let the comments on You Tube tell me he sold another load of snake oil to Alex. 

gary777 Says:
February 22nd, 2011 at 12:24 pm
is this the same Lindsey Williams that predicted $50 silver by February 1, 2011? hmm
yeah unfortunately i have a memory longer than 15 minutes..sorry Lindsey.. 


Ijustcancelled Says:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:25 pm
I have been a huge fan of Alex Jones for the past 8 years, but sadly today i just can’t stand listening to this kind of bullshit.

Lindsay Williams is Alex Jones in 5-8 years years from now, sadly today I just realized that Alex is just in it for the money and I have nothing against him making a living but this is too much.
It just seems like a waste of my time when it’s just so transparent that he and Lindsay are most likely cut from the same cloth.

Alex I’ll still listen to your program but I have decided to not be a member anymore because you seem to be full of shit and full of yourself lately. I did by alot of silver and gold and I am grateful but I think your head is getting bigger than your ass.


C5Kev Says:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:18 pm
I must agree with many of the comments posted today. If Lindsey had such incredible new news to share with all of us, just tell us (in 5 minutes or less please!) and knock off the sensationalism and the selling of his incredibly boring DVDs. I knew those would pop up in there at some point. 

Here are the comments from the Infowars posting:

The Bully says:
February 22, 2011 at 2:11 pm
So what was this massive revelation? I missed the show, someone fill me in. I’m sure whatever it was he managed to spread about 30 secs of information over 4 segments to keep the sponsors happy. 

c-leg says:
February 22, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Alex – if you and/or yours read these posts- get the message your customers are sending. Please do not waste your time with this guest again in the future. 

I understand that Infowars is a business and that you need to fill your air time and getting access to guests that actually have something to say isn’t easy, but dead air would be more informative than this guy.


I thought this comment was interesting. “Socrato” said:

February 22, 2011 at 3:51 pm
C-leg, I appreciate Lindsey as a guest. He is almost always right.
Well, if Williams is getting his information from oil insiders that are “in the know” who claim to be Williams’ friends, why isn’t Williams always right? Williams is not claiming to be making Nostradamus-style predictions; he is claiming he is getting the info from others, so why is he ever wrong?

Swordsman3000 says:
February 22, 2011 at 8:57 am
So….Did Williams actually ‘Say’ anything this time ?….I refuse to listen to him anymore, i gave him a chance (I should say..”I gave Alex a chance”) to stop all the BS’ing and get to some real facts that only some Super Elite would know….Sorry, but telling me what oil is going to do can be accurately predicted by a simple insider oil speculator, no ‘Secret Elitiest’ needed 

Winston Court says:
February 22, 2011 at 7:21 am
LET’S PETITION ALEX TO GET THIS DAMN NUT JOB OFF HIS SHOW!
Goodbye Lindsey … 


Winston Court also said:
Lindsey is my least favorite guest. He takes far too long and far too many words to give us a tip or two. Alex would be best just getting what he has to say and giving it to us in Alexs’ words.

Lindsey is only here to sell his book, something I would NEVER buy after hearing lindsey. I would imagine the book is 99% about what he is GOING TO TELL ME and 1% about anything he actually has to say …


Perhaps this might be one of the best comments I read:

h5mind says:
February 21, 2011 at 10:41 pm
Lindsey Williams sounds like many of the earnest-sounding folks who frequent the Above Top Secret web site. Every day, there’s at least one dude who “has a friend” involved in some top secret government facility, somehow stupid enough to risk his life, loss of pension, and incarceration to blab about some never-before revealed crap. Of course, the info is never able to be independently verified (natch), so the entire account becomes a conspiracy gabfest and lively debate between the true believers and infidels. Thus effectively painting any legitimate investigation into any controversial topic with the same broad stroke of lunacy.

Examples like Williams provide further evidence that Alex’s business is– first and foremost– info-tainment, not information. 


While it is true that Williams has been correct on several occasions, he has also been wrong on several occasions. Being right some of the time means nothing. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. It is the equivalent of reading horoscopes and thinking that just because you read "you will face a new life challenge soon" and get a brand new job a week later that the person writing the horoscopes somehow, miraculously could foresee future events in your life. They don't, of course. It is a statistical, inevitable fact that the aforementioned prediction will apply to hundreds, maybe thousands of people. It is like throwing a tennis ball into a crowd of people and when it hits someone, the person throwing the ball claims they aimed at that person and therefore has talent.

This is what Williams is doing. He makes a "prediction" that oil will rise or fall. When the "prediction" goes his way, naturally he claims he saw it coming. When he is dead wrong [ex: BP oil spill] he claims the dollar rose in value [or some other unexpected, uncontrollable event took place] or gives some other bullshit reason why his prediction will now be delayed. The main question needs to be asked: If he is getting passed-along information from others, why would he ever be wrong, even once?

It does make one wonder if Alex Jones receives a cut from Williams’ profits from books, CD’s and DVD’s. Maybe Jones makes an agreement with Williams before an interview is arranged that Jones gets a certain percentage of Williams' profits or he will not be allowed airtime. Who is buying this shit anyway?

It is a simple solution. Stop supporting a man who is full of complete bullshit. More importantly, stop supporting the people that advocate and support the bullshitter.

Thanks to Red Dirt Report for posting this story

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Fox News Caught In Shocking Dirty Tricks Stunt Against Ron Paul


News channel deceptively represented Paul’s 2011 CPAC straw poll victory with footage from 2010 event at which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed result

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
February 16, 2011

In a shocking act of mass public deception, Fox News attempted to skew Ron Paul’s 2011 CPAC straw poll win by representing it with footage from the previous year’s CPAC event, at which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed the result, another example of the continuing dirty tricks campaign being waged against Paul by the establishment media.



Congressman Paul replicated his 2010 victory over Mitt Romney by defeating the former Governor of Massachusetts for a second consecutive year at the annual CPAC conference.

However, before anchor Bill Hemmer introduced a segment concerning the story, Fox News played a clip of the 2010 announcement of the poll results, during which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed Ron Paul’s victory, passing off last year’s footage as representative of this year’s event.

Hemmer then proceeded to state, “In the end he was the winner, probably not the reaction he was hoping for,” describing the reaction as “mixed applause and boos,” before directly asking Ron Paul if he knew who was booing him.

“Who was in the audience booing you, did you get a name, did you get an ID on those people?” asked Hemmer.

In reality, there were hardly any boos after Ron Paul was announced as the 2011 CPAC winner, the result was met with a massively positive reaction, only Fox News deemed it necessary to hide that fact from their viewers. The video clip above shows the real footage from the 2011 event, proving that Fox News had attempted to deceive Americans into thinking that Paul’s victory was unpopular, by deliberately using the wrong footage.

A separate We Are Change Oklahoma clip of the 2011 straw poll victory confirms that Paul’s win was met overwhelmingly by a loud chorus of cheers and applause.



This is the second time in the space of a week that Fox News has deliberately used dirty tricks to try and ostracize Ron Paul by discrediting the legitimacy of his potential candidacy for president.
A Fox News poll released earlier this week which asked who would make the best president included many of the potential candidates that Ron Paul trounced in the CPAC straw poll, yet the Congressman’s name was not even included in the survey.

Exemplifying again how the establishment consistently tries to derail Paul’s momentum by ignoring his very existence, obscure names like John Thune and Jon Huntsman were included in the Fox poll and yet Paul was omitted entirely.

While Fox News continues to act as an accommodating platform for the pied pipers of the hijacked tea party movement, people like Tea Party Caucus leader Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin, real conservatives like Ron Paul and his son Senator Rand Paul are subject to dirty tricks and underhanded ploys.

Given the energetic power of his grass roots base, the establishment is scared to death of Ron Paul building any kind of momentum as the 2012 campaign race nears, which is why they have to resort to pulling stunts like this to hoax the American people into thinking that the message of liberty and freedom is unpopular, when in reality it is spreading like wildfire and would completely overrun the status quo if Ron Paul was allowed to communicate on a level playing field


COMMENTARY
by Larry Simons

My only problem with this article by Paul Watson is his use of the term "shocking" in the headline. FOX News up to dirty tricks? Why is this "shocking"? It would be shocking if FOX had played the 2011 footage from the beginning and not attempted to deceive.

Friday, February 11, 2011

Bonesman Dana Milbank Rewrites History [and Omits Some] Concerning Henry Clay; Ridicules Rand Paul For Stating Facts


Dana Milbank portrays Henry Clay as an advocate of freedom who hated slavery [despite the fact that he owned slaves] and vilifies Rand Paul for stating the facts about Clay

by Larry Simons
February 11, 2011

In a February 2 article in The Washington Post, liberal writer and Skull & Bones alum Dana Milbank vilifies Kentucky senator Rand Paul for simply stating facts about 19th century statesman Henry Clay during Paul’s opening speech on the Senate floor.

In the article titled, “Rand Paul, the great uncompromiser”, Milbank says:

“His [Paul’s] first address to his Senate colleagues came in the form of an extended denunciation of one of his home state's favorite sons and one of America's most accomplished statesmen: Henry Clay, the antebellum Whig senator and speaker of the House known as the "Great Compromiser," whose work in the decades before the Civil War preserved the union.”

How could Clay have “preserved the Union” when his entire political philosophy evolved around unconstitutional beliefs and mandates that actually led to the eventual secession of the South? Naturally, Milbank refuses to mention the fact that Clay’s protectionist advocacy and proposal of a bill in 1824 to raise tariffs and of the 1828 Tariff of Abominations angered Southern politicians who immediately opposed it. It angered Southern citizens so much that it nearly caused secession then. The government backed down and reduced the tariffs in 1833.

This compromise was known as one of the big three compromises of Clay’s political career. Ironically, it was a compromise that angered Clay to make and one in which Clay receives credit for settling when he was the one who instigated it in the first place. Oddly, Clay also receives credit for “peacemaking” as a result of the Missouri Compromise when he persuaded two dueling factions in Congress to accept the state of Maine into the Union in 1820 as a non-slave state when Missouri [as part of the newly acquired Louisiana Territory] wanted to enter the Union as a slave state.

This, of course, would restore the balance of congressional representation among the states. What Milbank fails to comprehend is that if Clay were the pro-freedom/anti-slavery guy Milbank claims he was, Clay would have been working night and day to end slavery. Compensated emancipation would have been a great place for him to start.

Clay became so angered that he was forced to compromise [in 1833], that he promised to defy the South one day and raise tariffs even higher. Clay was the author of the American system and wanted desperately to bring the British mercantilist system to America. Defenders of the Jeffersonian view of limited, decentralized, constitutional government constantly stopped him. Clay got his wish [posthumously] in the establishment of the Hamiltonian view of a centralized, protectionist American system [that ignored the Constitution] in the election of his clone, Abraham Lincoln, in 1860. Clay’s promise of “defying the South” came true after his 1852 death in the form of dishonest Abe.

The Compromise of 1850 was yet another issue of newly acquired land for the country that divided the North and South again over the slavery issue. Henry Clay stepped forward once again to propose a compromise and offer concessions for both sides. Once again, Clay was not motivated by a desire to end slavery, but to keep alive the slave trade in Washington D.C., allowing the New Mexico and Utah territories as well as Texas to decide for themselves if they wanted to allow slavery.

Clay also proposed [as part of the Compromise] the extremely pro-slavery Fugitive Slave Law [a revamped version of the old Fugitive Slave Law of 1793], in which law officials, federal marshals and ordinary citizens were required to capture or assist in capturing escaped slaves even in non-slave states. The accused slaves were not entitled to a jury trial, nor could they testify in their own behalf even if they weren’t even a slave! If the accused slave was really a freedman, they could not resist their return to slavery. Yeah, Clay sure was “devoted to the cause of liberty” all right!

Milbank then includes excerpts of Paul’s senatorial speech:

“Henry Clay's life is, at best, a mixed message," Paul informed the nearly empty chamber, as he stood at a desk once occupied by Clay himself. The objectivist objected to Clay as "morally wrong," a slave master who had "no room for the abolitionists" and who made decisions that "may have even ultimately invited the war that came." Paul said such demerits should be considered "before we eulogize Henry Clay.”

Then Milbank says this, “Sorry, senator, but Clay already was eulogized -- in 1852 -- and the history has already been written.”

Milbank’s link to Clay’s eulogy delivered by Abraham Lincoln on July 6, 1852 is a much-condensed portion of the eulogy. In fact, in the portion linked to by Milbank, the only sentences taken from the eulogy are Lincoln’s own [positive] words written for Clay, and since Lincoln practically worshipped Clay, naturally none of the excerpts included in that condensed version would put Clay in a negative spotlight.

No part of the complete eulogy that includes Clay’s own words or puts negativity on Clay appears in the condensed version posted by Milbank [and there are portions of the eulogy that, when spoken in 1852, would not have seemed controversial or negative, but now they most certainly do]. This is why Milbank makes sure his readers only see a bullshit condensed version. This is how strong and widespread the Lincoln cult is: that even liberal Democrats buy into the myth that Lincoln [and his idol Henry Clay] were champions of freedom and hated slavery.

In the complete eulogy given by Lincoln here, we see why Milbank purposely misled his readers to a shortened form of the eulogy. I wonder if it is because in the eulogy Lincoln mentioned that Clay was one of the earliest members [and founders] of the American Colonization Society [Clay was its president when he died in 1852] when he said:

“The American Colonization Society was organized in 1816. Mr. Clay, though not its projector, was one of its earliest members; and he died, as for the many preceding years he had been, its President. It was one of the most cherished objects of his direct care and consideration; and the association of his name with it has probably been its very greatest collateral support. He considered it no demerit in the society, that it tended to relieve slave-holders from the troublesome presence of the free negroes; but this was far from being its whole merit in his estimation. In the same speech from which I have quoted he says: "There is a moral fitness in the idea of returning to Africa her children, whose ancestors have been torn from her by the ruthless hand of fraud and violence. Transplanted in a foreign land, they will carry back to their native soil the rich fruits of religion, civilization, law and liberty.”

How they would do this after having been deprived of an education and of the fruits of religion, civilization, law and liberty in the United States was not explained”, writes historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo in “The Real Lincoln”.

Lincoln continues [in Clay’s eulogy]:

“May it not be one of the great designs of the Ruler of the universe, (whose ways are often inscrutable by short-sighted mortals,) thus to transform an original crime, into a signal blessing to that most unfortunate portion of the globe?" This suggestion of the possible ultimate redemption of the African race and African continent, was made twenty-five years ago. Every succeeding year has added strength to the hope of its realization. May it indeed be realized!”

Lincoln called being black in the United States “an original crime” then suggested that it would be an act of God to have blacks returned to “that most unfortunate portion of the globe [Africa]”

Lincoln continues:

“If as the friends of colonization hope, the present and coming generations of our countrymen shall by any means, succeed in freeing our land from the dangerous presence of slavery; and, at the same time, in restoring a captive people to their long-lost father-land, with bright prospects for the future; and this too, so gradually, that neither races nor individuals shall have suffered by the change, it will indeed be a glorious consummation. And if, to such a consummation, the efforts of Mr. Clay shall have contributed, it will be what he most ardently wished, and none of his labors will have been more valuable to his country and his kind.”

Here, Lincoln attempts to act as a savior by the two-fold act of 1. Abolishing slavery [by removing all blacks to Liberia, which was a portion of land in Africa purchased by the American Colonization Society in 1822 for the sole purpose of sending all blacks to Africa under the guise of “ending slavery”] and 2. Giving black people hopes of a brighter tomorrow by returning them to “their long-lost father-land”. Also noteworthy is the fact that Lincoln was President of the Illinois Colonization Society.

Gee, what swell guys Clay and Lincoln were. It was so thoughtful for them to think about the well being of the black man and strive to give them the “best futures possible” so they could have “freedom, education, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Hmmmm, wasn’t that the idea of the Declaration of Independence? So they could have all those things right here in the U.S.?

Does Milbank mention any of this? Of course not. He mentions historian Robert Remini’s quote:

“[The] Compromise of 1850 delayed the catastrophe of civil war for ten years, and those ten years were absolutely essential for preserving the American nation under the Constitution. Had secession occurred in 1850, the South unquestionably would have made good its independence, and the country might well have split permanently into two nations.”

Milbank fails to mention what would have been wrong with the South seceding from the Union, since most Northern newspapers wished the South “god-speed” in their act of secession and no one besides Lincoln saw it as an act of treason. This is why Lincoln shut down over 300 Northern newspapers during the war, to silence their opposition and to indoctrinate generations with the myth that secession is "treason".

Milbank then says:

“The attempt to turn Clay into a pro-slavery figure was a daring position for Paul, who spent an embarrassing part of his campaign debating with himself about whether the Civil Rights Act was such a hot idea.”

Not only have I already debunked the lie that Clay was an abolitionist [or even a closet one], but Milbank links to a May 2010 article by Greg Sargent who repeats the lie that Rand Paul said “yes” to Rachel Maddow when she asked him, “"Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don't serve black people?”, on her show on May 19, 2010. I debunked this last year.

Milbank continues:

“Clay, the first person to lie in state in the Capitol rotunda, wasn't available to defend himself. But in the 2010 biography, "Henry Clay: The Essential American," David and Jeanne Heidler point out that the Great Compromiser's list of admirers included the Great Emancipator himself. Lincoln “admired Clay more than he did any other man on the American political scene,” they wrote, and he “was convinced, like Clay, that only gradual emancipation would end slavery without destroying the union.”

Here, Milbank attempts to glorify the works and beliefs of Clay by telling his readers that Lincoln was a big admirer of Clay. Why he uses a quote from two authors to point out an obvious fact that anyone who does 10 seconds of research can find out [that Lincoln admired Clay] is a big mystery. The irony here is that while Milbank acts as if it is not an obvious fact that Lincoln admired Clay [by using a quote by authors], which of course it is; it is also just as obvious [to anyone who cares about facts and doesn’t buy that Lincoln is a great man just because his face is on the penny, the 5 dollar bill and Mount Rushmore] that Lincoln is no one to be admired.

Lincoln was a racist dictator whose quest for empire destroyed the America that the founding fathers created and envisioned forevermore. Many could argue that America ended in April of 1865. They would be right. Lincoln freed no slaves, waged war against his own citizens and murdered over 300,000 of them in order to establish his real agenda: Adopting Henry Clay’s “American System” to centralize government, obliterate states’ rights and destroy individual liberty so it could be replaced with allegiance to the Federal government.

For Milbank to give his stamp of approval to Henry Clay by saying that Lincoln admired him shows that his knowledge of American history comes exclusively from Lincoln cultists.

Milbank admits in his next paragraph that Clay owned slaves. He justifies this by mentioning George Washington owned slaves too. I would assume from this statement that Milbank believes that two wrongs make a right. Was Washington the President of an organization created for the sole purpose of removing all blacks from the country? Did Washington’s actions directly lead to near secessions and eventually lead to a full blown one after his death? Was Rand Paul talking about George Washington in his speech? [Oh by the way, Washington posthumously freed all his slaves. It was in his will to do so]

Milbank then says:

“Had Clay been any more of an outright abolitionist, he would have become a “marginal figure,” David Heidler told me. Paul may think Clay's failure to embrace emancipation “cost him the presidency,” but Heidler pointed out that “no abolitionist could have secured the nomination of a major party” back then.”

An “outright” abolitionist? Are you kidding? In Lincoln’s eulogy to Clay, Lincoln said this:

“He ever was on principle and in feeling, opposed to slavery. The very earliest, and one of the latest public efforts of his life, separated by a period of more than fifty years, were both made in favor of gradual emancipation of the slaves in Kentucky. He did not perceive, that on a question of human right, the negroes were to be excepted from the human race. And yet Mr. Clay was the owner of slaves. Cast into life where slavery was already widely spread and deeply seated, he did not perceive, as I think no wise man has perceived, how it could be at once eradicated, without producing a greater evil, even to the cause of human liberty itself.”

On principle and in feeling” he was “opposed to slavery”? But apparently not in practice. Lincoln said that Clay could not see how slavery could be eradicated “without producing a greater evil, even to the cause of human liberty”. Slavery is the complete opposite of human liberty, but Clay thought ending slavery [which gives birth to freedom] would be worse than slavery itself? Translation: Freedom for the black man is worse than him being enslaved.

Milbank contradicts himself by quoting David Heidler as saying, “no abolitionist could have secured the nomination of a major party [back then]”, when in the previous paragraph he said, “It was Clay's “corrupt bargain” that gave the presidency in 1824 to the anti-slavery John Quincy Adams.” Adams managed to become President while being very anti-slavery [which Milbank had just said]. In fact, Clay ran for President in the very same election [1824] and both men were of the same party. Does Milbank have a clue of what he writes about?

I think Milbank should stick to writing about what he knows best: Fairy tales? His days at Skull & Bones? Revisionist history? Regardless of which topic he picks, it will guarantee that he won’t have to spend any time on research.

Thursday, February 3, 2011

FRAUD ALERT!: My Posts Are Deleted Under a Thread to A Story About That Bloggers’ Posts Being Deleted!


I have been “Ostroyed” again. I have the proof

by Larry Simons
February 3, 2011

Normally, I would not give unimportant, insignificant shitbags any attention on my blog [so as to not link to them and give them hits], but I just couldn’t ignore this. A hypocritical coward that goes under The Last Blog Left [I say ‘coward’ because he is too chickenshit to give his actual name or photograph on his blog] has been attempting to refute my blog for a year or two now [and has failed miserably]. We debate just about anything, from 9-11 to Jared Loughner, and I continually school him, over and over again.

I have only mentioned him one other time on my blog. Not because I am trying to hide my battles with him, but because he is a nameless, faceless troll who deserves no mention whatsoever on my blog, most of all because he doesn’t matter.

I could not ignore this. It was just too good. Yesterday on his stupid blog he posted a story in which he bitched about his posts being deleted from a site he posted at called Rys2Sense [anti-neocons]. I literally laughed out loud because over the past year or two he has done nothing but bitch about his comments being deleted [while at the same time deleting my comments from time to time].

Just in the past few weeks he has deleted many of my comments where I continually school him with facts about the Jared Loughner shootings in Tucson on January 8. Every once in awhile I will spout off a cuss word in my posts, but since my posts are chock full of irrefutable facts that he cannot answer, he deletes them and claims the reason they are deleted is because of the profanity.

I went through this same bullshit with liberal blogger Andy Ostroy last year when he would delete my comments and claim they were packed with hate-filled vitriol [also claiming that I violated blogger.com’s rules for blogging] and that he would report me to blogger.com if I continued. Naturally, Ostroy would delete the comments so that blogger.com would be prevented from seeing the evidence of my “vitriol” he claimed I spewed.

I called this being “Ostroyed”.

Ostroyed: Having your comment deleted from a blog when the blogs owner claims you were “off topic”, “nasty” or you violated rules, when in reality, it was because the comment contained something the owner could not debunk or wanted to confront.

Yesterday on TLBL’s blog, I posted these two messages right after I laughed at his blatant hypocrisy of bitching about being deleted when he does it to me [and to others]. In my posts, I predicted that the posts would be deleted [even under a story in which he bitches about being deleted himself]. Here are the screen shots.



As you can see, the comments were posted under the story titled, “Deleted by Rys2Sense” and I left the comments at 7:23 PM and 7:24 PM on Feb 2. At 4:37 AM on February 3, my prediction came true. [Keep in mind, TLBL is from England so he is 5 hours ahead of USA time]. The bottom screen shot shows my earlier two posts deleted, so I added a new comment [notice it is the same story titled, “Deleted by Rys2Sense”].



TLBL loves to hide behind the notion that profanity offends him [and this is why he deletes posts] but as the below screen shot shows, three of TLBL’s labels on the right side of his blog contain profanity: “fuck you”, “Bastards”, and “Tory Fucking Bastards”, so it is obvious that profanity is not an issue with TLBL………FACTS are.



UPDATE:
My above comment posted at 4:37 AM was deleted. So I posted another. Too damned funny!



UPDATE: TLBL continues deleting my posts [AND posts from OTHERS, who are NOT violating the rules he claims I was...which I wasn't].

Here's the proof [click to enlarge]



One comment he deleted was from "anonymous". Anonymous said:

"So, Last-Name, You accuse others of deleting your posts and then actually justify exactly why you delete posts!!"

It was deleted. It broke no rules, was not hateful vitriol and contained no profanity. It didn't matter. TLBL was not, under any circumstances, going to confront a comment that he had no way of addressing. So, delete-a-roo it was!

I responded to anonymous' comment by saying:

"EXCELLENT point Anonymous!! EXCELLENT! I'm sure Rys2Sense has his reasons too! So, the REAL issue here is, is that TLNL is saying HIS reasons are BETTER than Rys2Sense's reasons!!!! God, I'm pissing my pants!"

Deleted.

Earlier I had posted this: [TLBL's comments in purple]

"Your comments are deleted because

1) they either said nothing"

Translation: Larry makes EXCELLENT points and I just can't refute them, so I will say there is absolutely no substance to his posts whatsoever or bitch about him cussing [when I cuss myself quite frequently]-----too funny.

"2) you make unsubstantiated accusations which are clearly libelous and possibly subject to litigation. I want nothing to do with it."

Please list the "unsubstantiated accusations"----AND if that's the case, why would that merit DELETION? If they are "unsubstantiated", couldn't you EASILY make me look like a fool and debunk them???

"Clearly libelous"??? Then why would you PROTECT me and DELETE them? That's what Ostroy does, claims I violate blogger.com's rules and then ERASES the evidence so that they couldn't see my "supposed" libelous comments! I'm laughing my head off!

Please list these "libelous" comments-----I'm all ears.

"Nothing you have said has any direct relevance here. This is my blog, not Socrates'."

Please see TRANSLATION above.

"Your beef is with Socrates, not me. I don't know anything about the accusations you make - in my own experience I have seen nothing of Socrates which fits with the character of your claims. None whatsoever. If Socrates uses a lot of user names, so what? I don't know anything about it, nor do I much care."


So why did you ERASE the comment made by the guy who made the claims and whose site the comment linked to that listed the smorgasbord of evidence that Socrates is a loon??

Why was his comment DELETED? So no one could click on to that guys site and read the evidence for themselves? You "not having seen nothing about Socrates' character of [not MY claims, the other guys] claims", means you are LAZY, since the link was on your screen to easily just click and find out, like I did.

So, you "dont care" if Socrates uses alot of user names? So, you dont care that he's a big fraud and loon? It's very interesting that you mentioned his many user names, because when I made my comment about it the other day I didnt mention anything about him having many user names, I just said "I clicked that link and read alot about Socrates and he's a loon"----I didnt mention the user names------but YOU just did! LOL. So, that means you must have clicked that link and saw what I saw!!! You just inadvertently let the cat out of the bag that you KNOW Socrates is a fraud---after just claiming "I don't know anything about the accusations you make - in my own experience I have seen nothing of Socrates which fits with the character of your claims. None whatsoever."!!!!!

Jesus, you are the biggest FRAUD on planet Earth buddy!!!!"

Deleted.

Here's the best part. TLBL claims I was "spamming" the thread, so I wrote this:

"How is it considered spamming when the comment is deleted? I thought spamming is when you flood the thread with the same comment over and over and it's NOT deleted?"

TLBL abandoned his rule of me not being allowed to post [for 5 seconds] because he was able to confront it without looking foolish.....so he thought. He responded:

"I guess it's just plain ole malice then, Larry."

I responded: [NOTE: When I attempted to post this, I was not logged into my blog and TLBL's blog did not allow my comment to appear. I figured out that he had changed his settings so only those who are logged into their google accounts can post now.....is this the world's biggest fraud or what?]

"Thought I wasn't allowed to post? If I'm not allowed, then don't respond to the posts. If I AM allowed, address the posts you've been DELETING. Why is it OK for YOU to delete but not Rys2Sense? Maybe he thinks it's malice too? Hmmm? Can we agree on that?

You changed the commenting option so now one has to be on their google account to post now! LOL. I own your blog."

Here is the screen shot of the above post



Naturally, because my above comment incriminated TLBL and couldn't be addressed without extreme embarrassment and fear that he would be exposed as the big fraud he is on his own blog, it was deleted. Here's the proof:



How much more proof does anyone need that TLBL is the biggest fraud that ever lived?

NOTE: He calls my comments "libelous" despite the fact that a libelous comment hinges upon a statement being FALSE. I proved everything I claimed he did and said in this post. Plus, can comments really be libelous if the one claiming libel against them has not disclosed his actual name and/or photo? TLBL is a nameless, faceless blog who writes under an alias. How can that be libelous even IF my comments were false [which they are not, as I have proven]