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.

Who is Jim Garrow?

A fellow by the name of Jim Garrow has recently become the darling of the U.S. alt media, appearing on Alex Jones, Glenn Beck, Erik Rush, and many other shows. He claims to have been an alphabet agency operative (more on that below), and frequently cites inside sources at the highest levels of American intelligence. They're all anonymous sources, of course, but they're such loyal patriots that they're allowing Garrow to release information you won't get anywhere else on this planet. Here are just a few of the astonishing things Garrow has revealed to the public in just the past four months: 

• Obama ordered the assassination of Andrew Breitbart.
• Obama ordered the assassination of Tom Clancy.
• A military coup is imminent in the U.S. A cabal of military leaders is going to rise up against tyranny and unseat Obama.
• Obama was planning to use an EMP pulse weapon against his own country, but was foiled by a small group of military leaders. Now, in retaliation, Obama is assassinating those men. 
• Several of Garrow's CIA colleagues have been murdered because they got in Obama's way, and Garrow himself narrowly escaped an apparent assassination attempt in January.

Are we noticing a theme, here?
If Jim Garrow said, "I know what my next door neighbour gets up to when no one's looking," I would be inclined to believe what he had to say without too many questions. But when someone steps forward and announces that he knows what Earth's most prominent head of state is doing when no one's looking, I have to ask questions. Such as: "Who exactly are you, dude?" 

The answer to that one is complicated. Garrow identifies himself as a doctor, a CIA agent, a businessman, and the founder/executive director of a nonprofit that has saved more than 50,000 Chinese baby girls from infanticide. 

The next obvious question would be, "Does Garrow really do all this stuff?" Let's break it down:

Doctor

Garrow claims to have been awarded an honorary doctorate from the North Carolina College of Theology, a non-accredited school that has been called a diploma mill. The "college" offers something it calls "LIFE-EARNED DEGREES" to people who have worked in ministry. To earn one, you need only a high school diploma or a GED, some ministerial experience, and several thousand dollars.

CIA Man

Of course, I can't say with absolute certainty whether Garrow did or did not work for the CIA. And if he didn't, he's banking on that lacuna in our knowledge. Garrow himself will neither confirm nor deny that he was employed by the CIA; he simply says he worked for one of the alphabet agencies from the age of 18 up to October of last year (when he was outed by Obama and Valerie Jarrett).

Businessman

Garrow will not discuss his business interests in China in any detail, but he has said that his Pink Pagoda operation has over 300 private language schools there, making it the largest chain of English schools in that country. The trouble is, I can't find out how to enroll in these elite private schools he mentions. The only thing I can find on the Bethune Institute website is enrollment information for a 5-day course for people who want to teach English abroad.
In Canada, Garrow has worked as an educator and administrator at numerous public schools in small Ontario communities. He has a colourful history of fines.

Baby-Saver

It is this item in Garrow's wacky resume that troubles me most. I couldn't find his "Christian charitable organization", the Bethune Institute, listed on any of the three major charity watchdog websites. Nor could I find Pink Pagoda, the "branch" of the Bethune Institute that somehow involves rescuing babies from potentially homicidal caregivers. There's a commercial website for Pink Pagoda Girls, Pink Pagoda's awareness-raising effort, but no nonprofit sites for either charity. That was kinda strange.
Then I noticed a teeny-tiny disclaimer on the bottom of a PPG web page stating - as required by law - that Pink Pagoda Girls is not a nonprofit. Nowhere on the website is the affiliation between Pink Pagoda and Pink Pagoda Girls defined. It is implied that the website was created to draw attention to the actual charity, Pink Pagoda, yet there's no contact information for Pink Pagoda itself. Are PP and PPG the same thing, then? The Bethune Institute website describes PP as its "charitable arm."

And it gets stranger. Most microcharities have tightly focused, rather modest goals. They know they can't save the universe with limited resources, and if they're honest, they operate accordingly. But the Pink Pagoda Girls website declares that Pink Pagoda is trying to raise a billion dollars to "rescue" one million girls over the next ten years. To give you an idea of how batpoop freaking insane that is, United Way - America's largest charity - brings in under $100 million a year.

So just what does PP intend to do with all this money, should they actually raise it? The website does not make this clear. From what I gather, PP facilitates adoptions of unwanted female babies. Funds are raised through a sponsorship program, much like the ones run by World Vision and Feed the Children.
I wondered, how are the adoptions arranged? Does PP work with licensed adoption agents? Where are the babies housed before being placed with adoptive parents, and who takes care of them? How, exactly, are donations and sponsorship funds spent?
You won't find answers to any of those questions on the site. In the section about Garrow's book, however, you will discover that Garrow was a "reluctant participant in an off-the-books adoption program." According to the author of the website Research-China, which helps adoptive parents find information about their children, Garrow's employees operate by going into rural areas and offering families money in exchange for any unwanted babies they happen to have lying around. This isn't legal in China, so Garrow bribes government officials to keep PP running. He also claims to have the support and protection of China's president.
There are other big red warning flags all over the website:

1. An unhelpful map of U.S. sponsorships shows some states as light pink, others as dark pink. There's no legend on this map. What the heck does it represent? States in which sponsors live? If so, which shade of pink represents sponsor states? 
2. Garrow claims to have spent "millions of dollars of his own money" to relocate babies from murderous households to non-murderous ones. I can assure you that no one in Guelph has millions of dollars. It is a university town, but it's also an agricultural community. 
3. The "Girls Saving Girls Gun Giveaway"
4. The only staffers listed on the Who's Who page are Garrow and Erik Rush (VP of Pink Pagoda Girls).
5. PP's parent organization, the Bethune Institute, is described as both a charity foundation and a chain of language schools. It seems to be the latter.

I am not the only person who has noticed these red flags. The author of the website Research-China was skeptical about the numbers Garrow was throwing around four years ago. According to him, 34,000 babies would be roughly half the number of all children adopted internationally from China since 2000. How could it be possible for one man to be involved in so many adoptions? 

Okay, so Garrow runs a charity that isn't really a charity. And he's involved in a baby-buying operation that could be called human trafficking. That doesn't mean he's not totally on the level about all the incredible inside information he dishes out, right? Let's look at the evidence he's presented for some of his stories:

Nothing. Literally nothing.

Here's how it works: Jim Garrow gets on the air with a host who isn't likely to challenge him on anything. He says something like, "Obama and Valerie Jarrett outed me as a government agent." He does not give a source for this information, but he may slyly hint that he's getting all his intel from one of the three high-level military men that Obama forced out of office for refusing to deploy the EMP weapon (two general and one admiral), or from some other high-level source that he couldn't possibly name. He has also said that his Chinese private schools are attended by the children of some of the country's most elite families, so he gets inside info from them, too.

Garrow's quote goes viral in conspiranoid circles, no one questions Garrow any further because he's a patriot who would never divulge state secrets, and that's that.

Survival Food Scam

A must-read. If you're a Jones listener or Infowars reader, you've heard/seen these ads, and you may have read the Infowars article about FEMA stockpiling meals from this supplier:

"The Inside Story of the Charlatan Who Duped the Nation's Top Conservatives" by Zack Beauchamp (ThinkProgress)

2013: Not Quite the Year of Alex Jones

Matt Drudge hoped that 2013 would be "the year of Alex Jones". If he was hoping for people to become more paranoid and less informed, then he got his wish. If he was hoping that Alex Jones would enlighten the planet in 2013, he's probably a little disappointed right now. Let's break down what Jones accomplished this year:

1. Jones appears on Piers Morgan Tonight. Morgan has featured some well-spoken, highly informed gun advocates on to his show to debate him on gun control. Jones was not one of these people. Somehow, he turned what should have been an impassioned defense of the Second Amendment into a rant against Communists, the British, and "suicide mass murder pills" (psychiatric meds), seeding his rant with so much misinformation that it started to look like he was launching a false flag attack on his own credibility. Just one example: He stated that suicide is the number one cause of death in the United States. False. Heart disease has long been, and remains, the leading cause of death for Americans. Suicide is somewhere around number ten.
Jones was invited on the show because he had launched a petition to have Morgan deported back to the UK. How did that work out? Well, Morgan is still happily ensconced in dual residences: One in England, one in New York. As Jones certainly knows, having an opinion on television (even if it concerns Constitutional rights) is not grounds for deportation.

2. Jones "solves" Sandy Hook and Boston. According to Jones and his staff at Infowars, both of these events were staged by...somebody or other...to usher in gun control and draconian...stuff. Or something. The evidence in the Boston bombing amounts to some photos of random dudes. In the case of the Newtown shooting, Jones has not produced a single alternate suspect.
The Boston and Sandy Hook "truth" movements are thriving, but they aren't producing any solid information, as I've documented on this blog and at Swallowing the Camel.

3. Jones predicts WWIII. Again.

4. Mike Adams makes 20 dark predictions and announces a revolution in food technology. Mike "Health Ranger" Adams hosts the show when Jones is away, and his website Natural News receives copious Infowars coverage. We'll look at his 20 predictions and his epic announcement in another post. Prepare to be underwhelmed.

That's really about it.

WWIII! For realsies this time!!

I've written before about Jones' interesting habit of predicting the outbreak of WWIII about once a year. This year, the alleged transfer of nuclear warheads from an Air Force base in Texas (Dyess AFB) to one in Florida (DERMO) is the tip-off that WWIII is about to erupt, Jones claimed in early September. Jones and Anthony Gucciardi wrote, "There’s a reason that Russia has begun amassing 160,000 troops and heavy military equipment following an Israeli strike on Russian missiles in Syria. There’s a reason that the troops were called along with naval ships and bombers to attain ‘immediate combat readiness’ along the border. We reported on this months ago while the media was too busy focusing on the Trayvon Martin case to talk about the ignition of World War 3." The entire story is based on the say-so of a single anonymous military source. 
Today, Infowars is crowing over the firing of Major General Michael Carey, the person in charge of intercontinental ballistic missiles at three U.S. bases (note that Dyess is not one of them). Carey was allegedly engaging in illegal gambling in his off-hours, but of course Jones doesn't accept that explanation. Jones is certain that Carey was canned for the paperless transfer of warheads. On his Facebook page, Jones (or someone representing him) posted the following status update yesterday morning: "The General in charge of America's long range nukes has been fired a month after Infowars exposed the top secret transfer of nuclear weapons by Dyess Air Force base." 

Let's assume, for a moment, that Jones' unknown military "insider" is legit and truthful. Let's say that Dyess really was shipping all its ICBMs to Florida for some reason, without the proper authorization and documentation. I have absolutely no reason to trust this information, but let's just say it's solid.
Does this mean WWIII has to start soon?
Of course not. Even if a nuclear strike against Syria takes place soon (and there is absolutely no reason to believe this will be the case), subsequent events are not a foregone conclusion. 
Take a look at Jones' other WWIII predictions. Ask yourself how plausible they were. Keep in mind that he was just as adamant about those predictions as he is about his most recent, Syria-based one. 

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.