Remember: All Crazy Gunmen are Left-WIng

Jones & Co. appear to be accepting the media's unfolding Florida nightclub shooting narrative at face value, and you might be wondering why that is. Aren't most, if not all, mass shootings just government-staged events designed to terk our gurns? Doesn't the global elite use a blend of sophisticated mind control and blackmail to trick totally innocent gunmen into being their patsies? Isn't everything false flag?

Well, no.

Because if a gunman is left-wing, he's just a crazy gunman and no false flag occurred. It is a rule of thumb in Jonestown. Alleged nightclub shooter Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat. Therefore, this was a straightforward mass shooting that just happens to be the largest in U.S. history.

Predictive Programmer Fêted by Alex Jones?

Mike Judge gave an interview to Alex Jones a couple of months ago, but I just remembered that Jones once accused Judge (in cahoots with Vice magazine) of using Beavis and Butthead in predictive programming.  He railed against an illustration in a 1994 issue of Vice, featuring Beavis and Butthead as Al Qaeda terrorists circling the Twin Towers in little planes, as just another example of THEM priming us for our own destruction. The problem was, that issue of Vice was actually a parody of a 1994 magazine to commemorate the magazine's 15th anniversary; the entire thing was written, illustrated, and printed in 2009. Vice explained this before Jones went on the air with his "Beavis and Butthead predicted 9/11" rant, so a 30-second 'Net search would have saved him some embarrassment. 

Was Judge aware of this? It wasn't brought up during the interview.

There are really only two possibilities here:
1. Jones realized he was mistaken about the Vice thing, but (as usual) decided not to issue a retraction.
2. Jones still thinks Judge is part of the Satanic cadre that uses entertainment to program the sheeple, but had him on his show anyway because he would be a big draw.

Can Alex Jones Spot a Patsy?

These days, it is remarkably difficult to frame someone for a criminal act and get away with it for any appreciable length of time. Sooner or later, an astute journalist or filmmaker or lovelorn correspondent is going to realize that the wrong person is in prison, and they're going to attempt to do something about it. Thanks to the efforts of groups like the Innocence Project, false convictions in the U.S. are being overturned at record pace. In Canada, vigilant media outlets like the fifth estate have turned the falsely convicted into household names, raising awareness of shoddy investigative techniques and bogus expert testimony. In fact, even if a convict is guilty as all hell, a William F. Buckley might step in and persuade the public - and, more importantly, the parole board - that They Got the Wrong Guy. Patsies are certainly not a thing of the past, but it is now harder than ever to sustain a fraudulent case against a suspect.

How ironic, then, that Alex Jones and company have convinced a huge number of us that we live in the Age of the Patsy. Crazy gunmen are actually mind-controlled assassins, racist lunatic bombers are just drugged-up scapegoats, and homicidal hijackers don't even exist.
I've noticed a very interesting thing about Jones and patsies, though. I've mentioned it several times already (notably here), and recent events have reinforced my suspicions in a powerful way.
Here's the deal: If a suspect is thought to be right-wing, like the Boston bomb suspects, Jones will almost immediately denounce the entire case as a false flag operation engineered by one or more government entities (or, in non-U.S. cases like Norway, "globalists" - a handy umbrella term for anyone who does anything Jones doesn't like). But if the suspect appears to have left-leaning tendencies, like ricin-mailing suspect Paul Curtis, Jones and Infowars will float the official story with few questions asked. This was the case with James Lee, who burst into the offices of the Discovery Channel in 2010 and threatened to kill staff members for the corporation's alleged failure to adequately address climate change and environmental pollution. It was also the case with Arizona gunman Jared Loughner, whom Jones denounced as an "abortion-loving atheist" and Infowars declared as fitting into the "classic satanic/vampire cult wannabe mould" (whatever that is). Jones suggested these men could be under the influence of mind control and psychotropic drugs, but didn't refer to them as patsies or try to convince us they were the victims of government blackmail.

On that note, let's take a closer look at how Jones handled the recent ricin mailings and the Boston bombings.

Boston: Barely half an hour after the first reports of bomb blasts, Jones tweets his suspicion that this was a false flag event. Later, Infowars articles tie events in Boston to foiled terrorist plots in which the FBI was involved, and Jones declares the FBI his #1 suspect. Jones predicts that pro-gun advocates like Oath Keepers will be framed for the attack.
Ricin: Responding to reports that letters thought to contain ricin were intercepted en route to President Obama, a Mississippi judge, and Senator Roger Wicker, a Prison Planet article argues that Wicker, as a Republican supporter of Second Amendment rights, was not the victim of right-wing gun nuts (as some media commentators speculated). The article suggests They will attempt to link the ricin letters to Boston.

Boston: In numerous articles, Infowars casts doubt on what the media has to say about the "patsy" suspects. At one point, they even question whether Tamerlan Tsarnaev actually died or not, pointing to grainy unsourced footage of a naked man being detained by police.

Ricin: On the day of Curtis' arrest, Infowars publishes a single article about the ricin mailing, titled "Ricin Arrest: Suspect Appears to Be a Mentally Unstable Democrat". The article does not contradict or question mainstream media reports, and plays up a vaguely anti-gun comment that Curtis once left on HuffPo. There is no longer any suggestion that the ricin mailings could be part of a false flag operation.

Boston: Infowars publishes photos of two "suspects". Though these two men are not doing anything particularly suspicious in the photos, Jones insists they are either military contractors employed by Craft International or Navy SEALs, and that they are much stronger suspects than the Tsarnaev brothers. Jones continues to bang the drum about these two men despite the fact that he is fully aware of the dangers of fingering innocent people.
Ricin: Not a single alternative suspect is presented.

Boston: Jones theorizes the bombings were just an excuse to give the TSA increased powers and enable gun control.

Ricin: After the arrest of Curtis, no alternative theories are presented.

Boston: Jones gradually adds the CIA and other entities to his list of suspects. He continues to refer to the Tsarnaevs as patsies, but admits they might have been involved in some capacity.
Ricin: Still no alternative suspects. Infowars reposts an extremely brief story about Curtis' release without additional comment.

Paul "Kevin" Curtis looked like a pretty good suspect. An Elvis impersonator with a penchant for conspiracy theories, he supposedly used his own initials and a favourite quote in the ricin letters. Even his friends complained about his erratic and obnoxious behaviour. For the past 12 years, he has been zealously trying to expose an alleged organ-harvesting operation, claiming he was wrongfully fired from a custodial job at North Mississippi Medical Center after he found a severed head and other body parts in a morgue refrigerator. The guy is clearly a few croutons short of a salad, and Alex Jones has no love for the mentally ill.
But Curtis was not the guy. He was a patsy. Someone carefully culled information from his many Facebook posts and other online ramblings in order to incriminate him. Because Curtis had previously sent letters about organ harvesting to Sen. Wicker and several other politicians, the lookalike ricin letters quickly made him the prime suspect. There is one suspected culprit in this frame-up job, but to date there have been no other arrests in the case.
How is it that Alex Jones, with his amazing predictive powers and psychic ability, completely missed this? And just why was the Infowars crew so quick to accept mainstream media reports about Curtis, while simultaneously challenging each and every media report about Boston?
I won't answer that. As they say in the conspiracy world, I'm only asking questions.

Boston: Solved

Half an hour after today's bomb explosions in Boston, Jones or someone in his camp was tweeting "this thing stinks to high heaven #falseflag". This is quite remarkable, given that it took him at least three hours to figure out that he "predicted" the James Stack airplane attack in Austin in February 2010, and at least 24 hours to figure out that he had "predicted" the Norway massacre.
By the time I tuned in to his show at around 2:30, he was wailing that the media might try to pin this on him (for demanding a new 1776 on Piers Morgan's show), and/or blame Oath Keepers. He thinks They will tie the bombing in to gun owners.
He says Salon is already "blaming" him, but that's not true. They're doing the same thing I'm doing at this very moment; documenting the creation of his latest false flag/frameup theory.
Have Oath Keepers been blamed for anything? Ever?

Now they're chitchatting about a banned Little Red Riding Hood book, and barely seem interested in reports of a suspect being in custody.

Jones points to CNN mentioning "right-wing extremists" as the start of the frameup. He failed to mention that this was editorial commentary by Peter Bergen, and that Bergen mentioned other suspects first. He said, "One of the things that I'd be looking at, once the device, if it is a device, is found, what kind of explosives were used. If it, for instance, if it was hydrogen peroxide, sort of a signature of Al Qaeda. If it was more conventional explosives, which are much harder to get hold of now, it might be some other kind of right wing extremists...
We've also seen other extremist groups, right wing groups, attacking, for instance, trying to attack the Martin Luther King parade."

Charlie Sheen looks good by comparison

 angry, wrong, paranoid and sexist = winning

I'm sure everyone has seen Jones' rant on Piers Morgan Tonight, and there's little I can say about it that hasn't been said already. He made a serious tactical error by bringing his SSRI nonsense into the "debate" - what the hell do antidepressants have to do with the 2nd Amendment, anyway? - but that's neither here nor there. Jones is not known for his ability to stick to a topic, engage in debate, or be coherent.
But it gets so much worse than that. After the broadcast, Jones was triumphant. He believed his appearance was an out-of-the-park success, even though he came across to most viewers as an escaped mental patient. He boasted that he made a CNN producer cry.
Then things got weird. Now, Jones is insisting that his CNN rant was such a threat to the establishment that he could be wiped out at any time by the NYPD or the Mafia. Are you serious? You've just discredited yourself (and embarrassed the pro-gun lobby) on national television, and you think that was not only successful, but so successful that someone will have to assassinate you? I'm sorry, this is just too crazy for words. Jones has lost it. He is the last person you want defending your Constitutional rights in public.

Speaking of SSRIs, Jones has been misrepresenting recent research. As I covered a long time ago, a single group of researchers found that SSRIs might decrease photosensitivity in shrimp, causing them to stray into areas where they can be easily seen and devoured by predators. On yesterday's broadcast, however, Jones declared that the shrimp are making themselves vulnerable because their inhibitions are lowered (do shrimp even have inhibitions?!). Then he stated that women - not men, only women - on SSRIs also have lowered inhibitions, and will "drop their skirts" at the slightest suggestion. In actuality, decreased sex drive is a common side effect of both depression and antidepressant use.

The "Truth" About Osama's "Death"

Straight up, I admit my prediction of Jones' response to bin Laden's reported death was wrong. I thought he would try to convince his listeners that They had to pretend to kill bin Laden at this point in time because Jones had done his job too well; as founder and leader of the 9/11 Truth movement (he's neither, but that's another post), he had convinced the world that 9/11 was an inside job committed by neocons and other New World Order baddies. Thanks to Jones' runaway success, the heat was coming down on Them. They had to put an end to their decade-long charade.

To his credit, though, Jones didn't take the credit. Instead, he hammered at the "fact" that bin Laden died in 2002. He also trotted out former ISI chief General Hamid Gul, the guy who went on CNN in December 2008 to declare that 9/11 was perpetrated by "neocons and Zionists". In my opinion, given Pakistan's shadowy links to 9/11 and international terrorism in general, this is kind of like asking the bank robber for a description of the getaway car. Again, though, that's another post.

Keep in mind that I have some doubts about the story of bin Laden's demise. Like bin Laden's entire life, it is shrouded in mystery and contradictions. Why take his body only to dump it in the Indian ocean? Was it really worth the risk of extracting his corpse, simply to avoid the construction of a shrine? What the hell took so long, anyway? Granted, at least one of bin Laden's children claims to have witnessed his death, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. Only time will tell if this story is accurate.
However, I'm going to show you that Jones' 2002 death claim isn't any more valid than the current government claim. In fact, it's even flimsier. Let's look at Jones' primary sources:

Steve Pieczenik. On his May 2 and May 3 broadcasts, Jones repeatedly referred to Pieczenik as "the number two man next to Kissinger" (Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, which was a more elastic title than you might think). I certainly wouldn't brag about that, but never mind. What Jones did not dwell upon is that Pieczenik has collaborated with Tom Clancy. You may recall that Jones has accused Clancy of participating in the New World Order conspiracy, using "predictive programming" in his novels and videogames (see here and here, for example). Dr. Pieczenik was also granted a Council on Foreign Relations fellowship.
I'm surprised that Jones considers him a reliable source. I certainly don't, but not for the reasons stated above. I think the guy uses Wikipedia and his website to exaggerate his achievements, possibly to promote his "nutritional medicine" practice and line of related products.
But let's be generous. Many résumé -padders and shameless self-promoters have given the world valuable inside information. It would be neither fair nor prudent to dismiss Pieczenik's bin Laden revelation just because he has a touch of Walter Mitty syndrome. Let's look at the meat of the matter: What evidence does Dr. P. bring to the table?
None.
Here is what he told Jones in 2002: "I think that Musharraf, the President of Pakistan, spilled the beans by accident three months agao when he said that bin Laden was dead because his kidney dialysis machines were destroyed in East Afghanistan. Well, he was one of the few that knew he had a kidney problem. That wasn't well known before. Everybody thought he had a heart disease. "

That's it. That's all he had to say. Pieczenik was just repeating what Musharraf had said in a CNN interview in January 2002. Musharraf didn't say bin Laden was dead. He said, "I think now, frankly, he is dead for the reason he is a ... kidney patient. I would give the first priority that he is dead and the second priority that he is alive somewhere in Afghanistan."
Musharraf now believes bin Laden was killed on May 1, 2011 (and is desperately trying to convince the world that Pakistan knew nothing about bin Laden's presence in his country). So Pieczenik's sole piece of "evidence" - Musharraf's 2002 opinion that bin Laden could be dead - is null and void. Pieczenik was making a guess based on someone else's guess. And for the record, Pieczenik didn't say anything about bin Laden's body being preserved so officials could "roll it out later". Jones added that bit.

Sometime between April 2002 and this Tuesday, Pieczenik's story changed dramatically. Now he claims that back in '02, he knew from the "intelligence roster" that bin Laden had Marfan Syndrome and had been treated by CIA doctors. He died in late 2001.
This is certainly a lot more specific than Pieczenik's 2002 pronouncement, but Pieczenik still doesn't provide any evidence. It has long been speculated that bin Laden suffered Marfan Syndrome (see here and here), so that's not exactly inside information.
Pieczenik does not claim to have seen bin Laden's corpse, he does not provide any details about the circumstances of his alleged death, and he doesn't or will not give the specifics of bin Laden's alleged treatment by CIA physicians. His story rings every bit as hollow as the CNN reports.

Walter Cronkite. The late Walter Cronkite never stated that bin Laden was dead. Just the opposite, actually. Like Heinz and Albright, he made a cheeky remark about bin Laden being used to boost Bush's approval ratings in the run-up to the 2004 elections. Specifically, he commented on Larry King Live about the bin Laden tape released on October 29, 2004: "I have a feeling that it could tilt the election a bit. In fact, I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, that he probably set up bin Laden to this thing." Cronkite believed it was bin Laden on that tape, alive and well. In fact, he conceded the tape could be a "double-edged sword" for Bush, because it presented the threat of further attacks along with evidence that his administration still hadn't bagged their number one enemy.

Prison Planet reported on this at the time, so I don't understand how Jones could so wildly re-interpret Cronkite's words.

Two unnamed "White House sources". Information that comes from anonymous sources is essentially worthless unless it leads to documentable sources. That's not the case here. No one has offered up verifiable evidence that bin Laden is dead.

Madeleine Albright. On December 17, 2003, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was about to be interviewed on the Fox News show Special Report With Brit Hume when she turned to Fox News analyst Morton Kondracke and wondered aloud if the Bush administration could already have a living Osama bin Laden in captivity, and was just waiting for the most politically expedient moment to announce his capture. She said nothing about bin Laden being dead. She did not say he was "on ice", as Jones repeatedly stated. Kondracke promptly relayed her comments to the world, and the story was picked up by many news outlets, notably the Washington Times.
If she had accidentally spilled the beans, Albright could have denied the conversation even took place. Instead, she confirmed her comments, but hastily assured the public that her speculation was made in jest. Clearly it was, because Bush did not spring bin Laden's capture as an October Surprise before the '04 elections.
Just like Musharraf, Albright has publicly accepted the report of bin Laden's death.

Theresa Heinz Kerry. I've spent all freaking day trying to find any instance of Teresa Heinz saying bin Laden was dead. Can't. It seems, however, that just like Madeleine Albright she made a catty remark about Bush capturing bin Laden just in time for the 2004 elections. At a fundraiser held in Pheonix, Arizona on September 22, 2004, she said, "I wouldn't be surprised if he [bin Laden] appeared in the next month."
As we've seen, these October Surprise remarks came to naught. Bin Laden did not appear in time for the 2004 elections - yet Bush nabbed a second term, anyway.

Conclusion: For some reason, Jones chose the weakest links to build his Osama-was-already-dead chain. He would have been better off trumpeting the bizarre statement made to David Frost in 2007 by Benazir Bhutto, the assassinated former prime minister of Pakistan. She told Frost on November 2, 2007, that bin Laden had been killed by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, one of the men accused of murdering journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002. She offered no details, and Frost didn't ask her to elaborate.
That was probably a wise choice. Nine days later, while under house arrest in Pakistan, Bhutto gave an interview to NPR in which she commented that her guards should be out searching for Osama bin Laden rather than confining her to her house.

On his May 2 broadcast, Jones repeatedly said They announced bin Laden's death at least ten times after September 11. This is a misleading statement. There were many rumours and unsubstantiated reports that bin Laden had been killed or captured at various times and in different places, but the only official government announcement of his death was made on May 1, 2011.

For a more reasoned take on bin Laden's reported death, check out the article Five Surprising Truths About the Killing of Osama Bin Laden by Joseph Fitsanakis at Intelnews.org.

"Paranoia Porn"

Thoughts on the Nightline piece on Jones and the accompanying ABC News article "Angry in America"

I did not like the overall tone of the reporting. If Alex Jones is inadvertently inciting violent actions by unbalanced listeners (and there's not much evidence of that; just an incident in Bohemian Grove that I'll describe later in this post), then Nightline had better go after the other conservative broadcasters who spew anger and paranoia, men with much bigger audiences than Jones - Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck. Any one of them could accidentally influence unstable fans to do crazy things to "save the country" or "get the bad guys".
Nor do I think that "paranoia porn" (while funny) is an appropriate label for the hardcore fearmongering and misinfo that these broadcasters represent. We can't forget that while the things Jones & Company say are amusing to some, it's all deadly serious to others.

But ABC did have some key, valid points: Jones is angry, and Jones is paranoid, and Jones twists the news out of all recognition to make it sound like part of a New World Order takeover agenda. Reporter Dan Harris heard Jones declaring that a CNN article endorses a one-child policy for America (it's Jones' contention that a global one-child policy will be instituted), but when Harris read the article he found a humorous piece that mentioned one-child policy in a sarcastic manner. This is something Jones does again and again: He finds sinister NWO propaganda in Squidbillies, articles with ironic titles, movies that he likes, and movies that he doesn't like (although, if he watched them carefully, he would see that some of them are actually consistent with his own beliefs).

In my opinion, the greatest "danger" posed by Jones is not violence by unhinged listeners, but the ignorance, fear, paranoia, and hatred that is instilled in many of his fans by the distorted information he and his guests provide. Do we really want a large group of people believing that:

• schizophrenics are demons?
• hate crimes are actually just events staged by Jewish interest groups?
• you should never go to the doctor?
• all food and water contamination is part of the plan to kill 90% of us?
• psychiatric meds are bad and you should never take them?
  
• if your country makes some guns illegal, it's morally acceptable to keep your guns and ambush police officers?

Do we want people fearing post offices, draconian plots that never happen, more draconian plots that never happen, and "imminent" gun confiscation?
At least one of Jones' fans went into hiding with his family last year to avoid corpse-eating robots, flu vaccines, and "imminent" martial law.
In 2002, believing that "child molesters and human sacrificers" were vacationing at Bohemian Grove, Richard McCaslin snuck onto the property armed with a handgun, a rifle, a sword, a knife, and a crossbow. He was apprehended before anyone was harmed.

But the bottom line is that Alex Jones isn't responsible for his listeners' actions. He has every right to spew misinformation and paranoia over the airwaves - a Constitutional right. And it's not the mainstream media's job to make people paranoid about his paranoia, as Nightline tried to do. It's up to the listeners themselves to check Jones' facts and think for themselves.

Brain-Eating B.S.

They're coming to get you, Barbara...

By Infowars standards, vaccines that will "lobotomize" the population are old news; Jones & Co. have already returned to calling Obama "Barry Soetoro" and freaking about the tapwater. But we'll go over the issue, anyway, because I'm sure Jones will return to it at some point, throwing references to "lobotomy vaccines" and "lithium in the water" into his broadcasts as though they're well-established facts of life.

The "lobotomy vaccines", as you've probably guessed, don't actually exist. Jones is referring to the research of Robert Sapolsky, a Stanford professor who has been studying the effects of chronic stress on animals and humans for the past three decades. In 2003, he announced that he is conducting research to develop a "vaccine-like" form of genetic therapy that will, if effective, buffer people from the adverse health effects of stress. The idea is to deliver to the cortex genes that produce neuroprotective proteins, counteracting the stress response.

Sapolsky says he's doing this research because relaxation techniques, talk therapy, and drugs (which only mask the effects of stress, rather than relieving them) are not solving the problem. He admits that his treatment is still years away from the clinical-trial phase, but feels it's crucial for science to tackle stress head-on. After observing the behavior of wild baboons in Kenya, Sapolsky came to suspect that tolerating a rigid social hierarchy can greatly increase stress and its assorted ills, particularly if submission is drummed into us from a young age. (I'm sure Alex Jones would agree with that.)

Sapolsky's work was recently profiled in a Wired magazine online article by Jonah Leher. It was this article (or a recap in London's Daily Mail) that spurred Jones to raise the alarm about "brain-eating vaccines". Jones ignored the bulk of the Wired article, which dealt with the well-documented effects of chronic stress and the possible evils of subordination, and went straight for the "vaccinelike treatment". And rather than weighing the pros and cons of such a hypothetical treatment, he summarily decided it was just another New World Order attempt to make us stupid, submissive, and apathetic. He automatically assigned the worst possible motives to Sapolsky and his assistants: Scientific tyranny. Never mind that Sapolsky's dream of a stress treatment may never materialize. Never mind that it will not, in all likelihood, ever become mandatory even if it does reach the market someday.
I encourage you to look into Sapolsky's work for yourself before deciding it's part of some NWO zombification plan. I don't fully understand all the science behind it, but I do realize that stress treatment is not intended to render people passive, stupid, or emotionless. Nor will it nullify the fight-or-flight response. It will not disable or destroy any part of the brain, as lobotomies did.

Jonah Leher responded to the panic with an editorial, pointing out that the Daily Mail condensed, paraphrased, and sexed-up the details of the Wired article. This triggered "right-wing paranoia", and soon other media outlets were portraying Sapolsky as a mad scientist attempting to create a zombie army. Leher concludes his commentary in a nasty way, declaring, "Alex Jones is a liar".

Jones isn't lying. He's just not fully informed about the research, he's jumping to the worst conclusions without talking to any of the principal players like Sapolsky, and he's villifying a potentionally beneficial treatment that hasn't even been tested on humans yet (and won't be for years, according to Sapolsky himself).
Jones has challenged Leher to be interviewed on his show, to prove that Jones' "documented" assertions about Sapolsky's research and other NWO mind-control plots are wrong. If Leher accepts this challenge and is allowed to speak freely on the program, I think Jones' wildly hyperbolic statements about "brain-eating vaccines" will be shown to be the alarmist factoids that they are.

Something in the Water (Does Not Compute)

In an August 4th Infowars article, Paul Joseph Watson states that "major mental health professionals are already pushing for lithium to be introduced into water supplies as a means of mass medicating against 'mood disorders'". Scary sh**, right? Yes, it is - until you realize that the only "major mental health professionals" even suggesting lithium in the water amount to exactly four Japanese researchers and one flake in Vancouver. And the Japanese guys made their suggestion in the pages of a periodical that isn't even remotely peer-reviewed, Medical Hypotheses. As one blogger put it, this is where scientists go when they are drunk or bored. It is not a medical journal by any stretch of the imagination.
In their Medical Hypotheses article, the Japanese researchers cited their own study, supposedly showing minor correlations between natural lithium levels in water supplies and suicide rates, which could be interpreted to indicate that more lithium equals fewer suicides. These results were published in The British Journal of Psychiatry last year, but the authors didn't suggest adding lithium to drinking water at that time. For that, they had to turn to a non-scientific journal. The only other similar study was conducted in Texas in the early '70s.
The Japanese study was also cited by the Vancouver professor who believes it merits further research, and that this "further research" (which no one seems to be conducting) could merit experimental dosing of water supplies.
Aside from these five dudes (who are insane, IMO), no one else in the scientific community is seriously advocating the use of lithium in the water. No one. In fact, pretty much everyone except these five guys is in perfect agreement that adding potent psychoactive substances to drinking water is a very bad idea. For Watson and Jones to suggest otherwise is irresponsibly alarmist. This is just one more example of the media taking the results of a single study and running wild with them, hyping the news until it's so out of proportion it's barely recognizable as science anymore. Jones should be media-savvy enough to realize this.

Watson's article is absolutely bursting with misinformation like "lithium in the water". Examples:

- "The U.S. government has been forced to admit that childhood vaccines preserved with thimerosol have contributed to the explosion in autism cases in the United States." This is in reference to the 2008 Poling decision, handed down by the federal "vaccine court". The government paid damages to the parents of 9-year-old Hannah Poling, who claimed their daughter suffered neurological damage from a series of routine childhood inoculations. People who still believe - despite a complete absence of evidence - that mercury in the vaccine preservative thimerosol causes autism in children celebrated the Poling decision, and frequently point to it as definitive proof that autism is linked to vaccines. The problem with this conclusion is that Hannah Poling isn't autistic. She suffered neurological damage due to a brain disease (encephalopathy) brought about by a mitochondrial disorder. To date, there has been no research into a possible link between mitochondrial disorders and vaccines. This is why the vaccine court conceded the case without an evidentiary hearing. The Polings couldn't provide any evidence that vaccination caused their daughter's impairment, and the court couldn't provide any evidence that it didn't. In short, the government couldn't "admit" anything.
Furthermore, Watson's mention of thimerosol is completely out of line, because the Polings believed their daughter was injured not by the preservative in the vaccines, but by immunological overload from having too many vaccinations at once. (Never mind that the viral load in the smallpox vaccine alone was greater than all the current childhood vaccines put together, and that this didn't result in an autism explosion in the 1950s!)

- John Holdren (Obama's science czar) is still promoting the use of sterilants in drinking water to curb the population. Watson points to a 2006 article written by Holdren as evidence of this, but all the article shows us is that Holdren is still concerned (as are many people) about runaway population growth. Nowhere in the article does he advocate involuntary sterilization. Being concerned about overpopulation does not mean you are into eugenics, mass murder, or any of the other things Jones warns us the "elites" are into, even if you did express a few absurd ideas in the '70s. My own mother advocates zero population growth, but is not a eugenicist by any means. She and Holdren are from a generation that is highly concerned about the world's future.

Watson then quotes some of the comments that Infowars readers have made on the article itself, including a registered nurse who claims he/she is abandoning his/her profession because he/she disapproves of vaccination and water fluoridation. This person repeats the often-cited but never-verified assertion that the Nazis used fluoridated water to "make the Jews more docile". Watson also brought this up in his first Infowars article on "brain-eating vaccines".
I have been trying to trace this factoid to its source for over a year, and it leads only to dead ends. The most authorative source of the Nazi fluoride story was an anti-fluoridation crusader of the 1950s named Charles Perkins, who also declared (without providing any evidence at all) that water fluoridation was a Communist plot brought to the U.S. by Soviet brainwashers. Perkins did not give any source for his statement that the Nazis used water fluoridation in the concentration camps, and at any rate fluoride does not render people docile. (If it did, wouldn't crime rates have dramatically decreased since the introduction of fluoride to municipal water supplies?)

As error-riddled and alarmist as Watson's articles on the issue are, Jones' video on the "brain-eating vaccines" and "lithium in the water" is even less factual and even more fear-based. Jones states that articles in Time magazine, the New York Times, and "all the major medical journals" are promoting the idea of putting lithium in our water. This is not the case. Those periodicals were reporting the results of the Japanese study, not promoting adding drugs to the water. In fact, The New York Times and BBC articles both quoted Sophie Corlett, director of the British mental-health charity Mind, who warns against adding drugs to the water.

"Admitting"

admit: 5. to allow or concede as valid 6. to acknowledge; confess
(Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language)

Jones loves to say that NWO conspirators have openly "admitted" to terrible things (scientists have "admitted" that chemtrails block out the sun, for instance).

Here's one that Jones has been particularly fond of lately: The U.S. military admits to growing opium poppies in Afghanistan! To mainstream news sources, no less! That's some pretty big news. The public should be hopping mad about that, but I guess we're all too busy watching Idol and kissing fascist butt to pay any attention, right?

Er, maybe not. Maybe the stories that Jones cites don't actually say a damn thing about American soldiers growing poppies.

Okay, screw the "maybe". The articles really don't say a damn thing about U.S. soldiers cultivating opium, and there's no evidence that they're doing so. Check it out:

- Jones claims that Reuters reported on the "admission". Reuters actually reported "Efforts to curb Afghan opium crop fail this year".
- The AP has turned out stories about the increased rates of opium use and addiction in Afghanistan, but has not (as Jones says) put out any "admissions" that the U.S. military is growing poppies or producing opium.
- Fox News supposedly blew the whistle, too. On his Sunday broadcast Jones declared, "Fox News interviewed a Marine Corps colonel who admitted, 'Yes, we grow the opium over there. We have to, or the Taliban will get the market.'" Jones is apparently referring to Geraldo's interview with Lt. Col. Brian Christmas, which revealed only that the Army is providing security for all cash crops in occupied parts of Afghanistan, and is currently tolerating the cultivation of poppies rather than destroying them, to avoid further pissing off Afghan citizens. Lt. Col. Christmas said nothing about the military growing opium. On the contrary, he said the army is buying up the harvested poppies just to get them off the market, and hopes that with encouragement the farmers will choose to raise food crops instead.
Now the ethical nature of all this is highly questionable, and you'd be right to question the army's real motives here. But did Lt. Col. Christmas (or any other colonel) say, "We're growing the poppies to push the Taliban out of the market?". No. The Taliban wasn't even mentioned. The attitude expressed was that poppy-growing is a cultural practice that just isn't worth fighting tooth-and-nail (duh).

Once again, Jones' idea of "admitting" and mine are quite different.

Upcoming MSNBC doc

This might be interesting. I wouldn't call Jones right-wing, exactly, but it's better than saying "rise of the conspiranoids" or "rise of the rednecks" or something like that.

The Blame Game II: James Von Brunn

Jones Blames Jews for the Holocaust Museum Attack

Warning: Some strong language. Please avert your eyes if you're sensitive.
Please see the post after this one for an important clarification.

UPDATE: Bingo. Jones does, indeed, blame someone other than James Von Brunn for the Holocaust Museum shooting. He blames the government (as I predicted) and the ADL (as I should have predicted).
When a D.C. caller described an office evacuation that took place simultaneously, implying there was foreknowledge of the attack, Jones immediately pronounced it a "Valkyrie takeover drill". Then he pointed out that hundreds of articles about Holocaust denial have appeared in the press in the last two weeks. Earlier in the program, he said most Nazis like Von Brunn are actually agents of the ADL. Then he said something incoherent: "I wonder if they've got another old guy they had in custody 5 years ago, tried him with a gun. They told him, 'Look, we won't kill your family...just go in and shoot somebody.' The old man waddles in to do it, and the ADL and Simon Weisenthals all have a good time."
I have no idea what incident he's referring to here. Let me know if you figure it out.
The bottom line is, Jews arrange for these tragedies to occur and then celebrate them because it brings them one step closer to .... something or other.
It's at times like this that I almost despise Alex Jones. He spent 80% of his broadcast ripping into "the fairy" Glenn Beck for linking Von Brunn to 9/11 Truthers, without any evidence. Then he accuses the ADL of staging racist terrorist attacks, without any evidence.

Jason Bermas, Jones' clone, parroted his complaint about the Holocaust denial articles by saying one of the most duuuuuuh things I've ever heard from him: "Obama went to Dachau this week, too! The Holocaust is big!"

Yes, Jason. The Holocaust is big. The murder of six million innocent civilians tends to stick in public consciousness, for some crazy reason. I realize it's not as important to you as freaking tapwater or the MIAC report, but for many of us the Holocaust was, is, and will forever be "big".

Perhaps even more sickening and alarming than Jones blaming Jews for the attack without presenting ONE shred of evidence: Not one caller even mentioned it. They prattled on about the Swine Flu pandemic, Glenn Beck, and other meaningless shit instead of saying, "Hey, man, what up with blaming Jews for this? Where's the proof?" Also, this was Jones' moneybomb day, and he easily met his goal for donations.

I am sickened by these people right now. I almost wish there was a New World Order, so these soulless and insane and self-centered idiots would end up in FEMA camps, far from telephones and radios.

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

I was going to devote this post to yesterday's broadcast, 'cause it was a doozy. But the Holocaust Museum shooting deserves our attention at the moment.

Thus far, the media has blamed the following groups for James Von Brunn's actions:

9/11 Truthers: Glenn Beck declared he has been been warning his fans about Truthers "for a very long time", and said "early reports" indicate Von Brunn was a "hero" of the Truth movement.
I live with a Truther, many of my friends are Truthers, and I keep a close eye and ear on events in the Truther world. I've never heard of this dude. Neither has the Significant Other, whose Truth heroes are Stephen E. Jones, the Jersey Girls, and Richard Gage. Yes, there are racists and anti-Semites in the Truth movement, but not everyone in the movement is racist and/or anti-Semitic. Perhaps the biggest sin of Truthers is not racism, but turning a blind eye to racism in the movement, rather than openly denouncing it as soon as it comes to light.
This is a case of the crackpot calling the kettle black, because as I've noted several times, Beck has ranted about many a conspiracy theory on his Fox News show. In fact, he went out of his way to point out that while it's okay to "protest the Federal Reserve", it's just crazy to be a Truther.

I guess Beck didn't pick up on another early report about Von Brunn: On December 7, 1981, he walked into the Federal Reserve's D.C. headquarters with a sawed-off shotgun and a hunting knife, planning to take hostages. He served 6 years in prison for this.

Liberals: Thus far, the only "journalist" to link Von Brunn to 9/11 Truth is this woman, but even she doesn't blame Truthers for his crime. She blames liberals. Srsly.

Evolutionists: An essay thrown up at Beliefnet seconds after the shooting occurred blames racism on the theory of evolution and those who subscribe to it. 'Cause we all know there are no Christian racists. Don't be fooled by the fact that nearly all the major racist organizations in the U.S. have been Christian.

Birth certificiate doubters: The Huffington Post and Olbermann immediately picked up on the fact that Von Brunn questioned the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate. And this would relate to shooting up the Holocaust Museum how, exactly? I mean, the person who flogged that conspiracy theory the hardest is Jewish.

I predict that Jones will blame the government. He'll say Von Brunn was set up by the Powers That Be to justify Homeland Security's *persecution* of right-wing extremists.

We can't really blame any racist organizations, because Von Brunn wasn't active in any. He might have joined the People Who Hate People Party, if it had ever held a single meeting.

We can't really blame stupidity; Von Brunn belonged to MENSA. I guess we could blame smart people, but I only know of one other murderer who belonged to MENSA. And let's face it, the average white supremacist isn't top-heavy with brains.

We could blame old people. After all, America's oldest school shooter was 70 years old. There could be many more bloodthirsty seniors out there...
Thank God for the Lawrence Welk reruns that keep them off the streets.

We could blame guns. However, I can't recall the last time a gun hopped into a museum by itself and started shooting at guards. Guns tend to prefer quiet, dark places.

So who or what can we blame?

Let's take a cue from Von Brunn's ex-wife. She didn't offer up any scapegoats. She made it clear that Von Brunn was an alcoholic racist obsessed with what he saw as the disintegration of America.

In other words, Von Brunn was just an angry racist fuck.

Let's leave it at that, shall we?

Alex Jones channel removed from YouTube for NO GOOD REASON!

Update: Jones is still talking about this to the exclusion of all else (aside from those poisonous tools of the Illuminati scumlords, vaccines).
He recently took a vacation and is trying to introduce some nutrition, exercise, and sanity into his life. We'll see how that goes.

The Alex Jones channel (a semi-official channel maintained by a fan) has been removed from YouTube. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette complained that Jones displayed one of the paper's articles about the Pennsylvania mass shooting during one of his broadcasts. Paul Watson and Kurt Nimmo of Infowars think this is a flimsy excuse; the reason YouTube really deleted the channel was to suppress Jones' coverage of the Swine Flu, they write. Because we all know how accurate, rational, and consistent Jones and his guests have been on that subject:

- The flu is just an excuse to force us all to be inoculated with a vaccine designed to kill us. The disease itself is basically harmless and is being blown out of proportion.
- Health officials and the media are covering up the number of deaths from the flu.

- The flu is actually a Satanic ritual sacrifice, timed to coincide with the occult holiday Cinco de Mayo and the Satanic holy day Beltane on May 1st. (see note at the bottom of this post) The elite have done a lot of nasty things on May 5, even though the Wikipedia list of notable events doesn't seem to include any of them. But that's probably because Wikipedia is controlled by the CIA, just as YouTube and Google are.

- You should buy a state-of-the-art filter mask from Dr. Deagle, to protect yourself.
- If you actually wear a mask, that means you've been suckered by the elites' alarmist propaganda.

Certainly, the channel couldn't have been deleted because Jones is spreading dangerous anti-vaccine misinformation, or because he makes slanderous and insupportable accusations against public figures, or because he insists that men only go on violent rampages because their second-ammendment rights are in jeopardy (or they're on psych meds, or they're mind-controlled assassins), or because he referred to people with schizophrenia as demons, or because he said the Columbia disaster was stage-managed as a "tribal bonding" rite for Israelis, or because he's scaring the hell out of gullible listeners who think they're going to be shot by hospital administrators if they don't agree to have their kids injected with lethal vaccines at birth, or because he brags about trespassing on private property...

I'll stop there, because I'm sure these couldn't have been valid reasons to yank his channel. I mean, Alex Jones is doing so much good for all of us! Sure, someday we may have to watch our children being placed in iron lungs because freaking polio has made a comeback, but that's a small price to pay for THE TRUTH.





* Note: Cinco de Mayo commemorates the 1862 Mexican victory against the French in the Battle of Puebla. Celebrants do extremely sinister, occulty-type things like drink beer, dance, and play air guitar. Clearly, we should keep some exorcists on stand-by for this stuff.

Satanists don't usually celebrate Beltane. Beltane is observed by many Wiccans and neo-Pagans, but we all know that every non-Christian in the world worships the Devil, right? Therefore they must be Satanists. If you disagree with this line of reasoning, it means you know nothing about Satanism or Wicca (even if you are a Satanist or a Wiccan), and you are going to hell.

Jones in the headlines. Not in a good way.

Alex Jones defended the deranged, cop-killing rampage of Rod "Crocodile Dundee" Ansell as a very natural, understandable reaction to Australian gun legislation.

But he's not defending the deranged, cop-killing rampage of 23-year-old Richard Poplawski in Pennsylvania.

That's an fascinating double standard Jones has. Cop-killing rampages are okay when they happen to Australians, because the Aussie cops had it coming for "taking away his guns" (even though they didn't take away all of Ansell's guns, obviously). But cop-killing rampages in the U.S. are not okay because...because...wait...I know there must a good reason here somewhere...

Oh, right. Because Alex Jones is being implicated as a cause of this rampage by Media Matters, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Little Green Footballs, and others, alongside Glenn Beck and other conservative commentators who are sounding alarms about imminent gun confiscation.

My feeling on this is that no one but Poplawski is responsible for Poplawski's actions. I'm a strong believer in personal responsiblity, as Jones only claims to be.

Whoops, spoke too soon: Towards the end of yesterday's broadcast, Jones blamed Obama for the rampage, because of his draconian gun-control measures. Also, the Marines must do something to make "nutballs" like Poplawski go crazy.

Alex Jones' Slightly Calmer Twin

A little bit more evidence that Glenn Beck is either having a nervous breakdown, or carefully patterning himself after Alex Jones (hey, maybe both):

- Griped about the MIAC report, particularly the part about Bob Barr and Ron Paul bumper stickers. As if he has one. If you're going to be a redneck, Beck, you'll have to stop wearing a tie and go back to drinking. (Penn complained about the report, too, but at least he supports Libertarians.)
To give credit where's it due, Beck did note that ecoterrorism is actually more of a threat than militias these days. Good point.
- Said he doesn't mind being compared to the guy who goes nuts in Network. In fact, he wants us all to be mad as hell! What are we supposed to do once we get mad? He hasn't quite worked that out yet. We should just be disgruntled and generally unhappy, about everything. This sounds strange coming from a commentator who hasn't supported any third-party or independent candidates, has no real solutions for anything, and talks about himself more than anything else.
- Interviewed Ron Paul and wasn't a dick about it.

Beck is getting so weird that his comment about the 9/11 Truth movement producing the "next Tim McVeigh" has boomeranged on him. Incidentally, in the clip Olbermann brings up an incident that shows why the MIAC report maybe isn't so out of line, after all. He also brings up Father Coughlin, the man I consider the intellectual forefather of Alex Jones.

Is Glenn Beck becoming the Dark Side of Alex Jones?

Alex Jones just annoys me with his half-digested info, paranoia, and general lack of discernment. But Glenn Beck is starting to scare me.

For one thing, Beck has a much larger audience and much broader appeal than Jones. My grandparents adore him, but they've never heard of Alex Jones.

For another thing, since making the move to Fox News, Beck has been talking about a lot of things that are, frankly, bats*** insane. A few could be straight out of Alex Jones's mouth: FEMA camps, American Communism, etc. Beck and Jones even hosted Chuck Norris on their radio shows in the same week, since he's promoting his book Black Belt Patriotism.

But incredibly, it's Beck who's taking things too far and showing signs of instability these days. He brought up the idea of an American anti-government militia to Norris. Then there's this:





Let's explore this.

Up until the beginning of this month, Michael McLendan was a 26-year-old sausage factory employee in Kinston, Alabama. He lived with his mom, Lisa McLendon, 52, who had been laid off from the Pilgrim's Pride plant where she worked. Then, for reasons that aren't entirely clear, Michael suddenly quit his job at Kelley Foods after two years of employment.

On March 10th, Michael slaughtered his mother and her four dogs without warning. He then drove 12 miles to the home of his 74-year-old grandma and proceeded to mow down everybody in her mobile home, save for one 4-month baby girl who was forced to watch her mom and baby sister die while she lay helpless, loaded with shrapnel. The people he killed:

Virginia White, his grandmother
Alfred White, 55, his uncle
Tracy Wise, 34, his cousin
Dean Wise, 15, his nephew (Tracy's son)
Andrea Myers, a visitor
Corinne Myers, Andrea's 18-month-old daughter

He tried to kill baby Ella Myers, but she survived.

You'd think killing 8 people in less than an hour would be sufficient to vent his rage, but McLaren didn't stop. He got back into his vehicle and started killing people randomly, taking aim at pedestrians, motorists, and shoppers:

James Starling, 24, a father of two
Sonya Smith, 43
Bruce Malloy, 51

Still not quite content, McLendon wounded the police officer who rammed his car to keep him from blowing through a roadblock. Then he crashed his vehicle into Reliable Metals, a former workplace, and took the life of his final victim: Himself.

Did McLendon just snap one day? Not exactly. It was soon discovered he kept a list of murder victims, including former co-workers. A letter he had written mentioned a legal dispute with members of his family. Investigators think this might have concerned a family Bible.

He was "a self-proclaimed survivalist who ordered videos instructing how to commit violence." He "talked in recent days of being depressed about his failure to become a Marine or a police officer", having dropped out of police academy after a two-week stint in 2003. He was discharged from the Marine Corps in 1999 because he had enlisted fraudulently. (1)

Investigators admit they don't know what set McLendon off. (1)

Now, Mr. Beck, what does any of this have to do with political correctness or political disenfranchisement? How was McLendon "pushed to the wall"?

When O'Reilly has to step in to be the voice of reason, you're in serious trouble. Please get some help, Mr. Beck.

Don't think for a moment that Beck's recent craziness lets Jones off the hook, though. His comments on the unprovoked, violent spree of "the real Crocodile Dundee" were every bit as insane as Beck's comments on Michael McLendon.



Sources:

1. "Trigger for Ala. gunman's rampage still isn't clear". Associated Press. Philadelphia Inquirer, Mar. 14/09
2. "Alabama gunman Michael McLendon kept 'revenge list'" by James Bone. The Times Online, Mar. 12/09.
3. "Killer's march took 200 bullets, 1 hour, 11 lives" by Jay Reeves. Associated Press. Examiner.com, Mar 12/09
4. Wikipedia entry for 2009 Alabama spree killing. Retrieved Mar. 17/09.

Bend It Like Beck

In this clip from Fox News' Fox and Friends, Glenn Beck talks unskeptically about FEMA camps and hints that Obama's administration will be using socialism as a stepping-stone to Communism; pretty much the same stuff, expressed in the same manner, that Jones rants about each day. The opening credits of Beck's Fox show even eerily resemble the intros to Jones's documentaries, featuring scenes of oppression and tyranny. But when Beck talks about these things, Jones said yesterday, it's just a New World Order desensitizing scheme. (Frankly, I suspect he's a little miffed with Beck for stealing some of his thunder.)

Sheesh. Even when folks agree with Jones, he can't agree with them.

The upside of this is that finally, Mr. Jones and I can agree on something: Glenn Beck is a tool.

But do I think Beck, Pat Robertson, et. al. will do a New World Ordered turnaround and start championing U.S. socialism after Obama's evil plan for European-style socialism (and, paradoxically, concentration camp detainment of dissidents) becomes too obvious to hide any longer?

I'll let you know my answer when I've stopped laughing.

Meanwhile, here's a foolproof 3-step plan to avoid detainment in a FEMA camp:

1. If you don't already live in a disaster-prone part of the U.S., move to one immediately.
2.Wait for the inevitable (earthquake, tornado, volcanic eruption, etc.).
3.In the wake of the disaster, stand on the rooftop of your home and bellow for help as loudly as you can for days on end. It wouldn't hurt to have an elderly relative in a wheelchair or some squalling babies with you.

Congratulations. You're safe.