Canada Free Press: Nuke attack in US?

[Hugo Chavez]

Check it out, here is after the destruction, the image that is in the old testament on the messiah, the swords to plowshares.  It is also in line with the messonic messiah/new order of the ages/from many one... This is it baby, the master plan... They put this stuff everywhere for people to see. The blond boy is the one in common from other murals and who wears the Mcgregor motto.



And no, I don't have a fascist attack in line for anyone who doesn't agree with me like Ozmo says

[Soul Crusher]

Sorry guy, but I don't get what this means.  Are you saying I'm accusing others of being liberals?

As far as your other responses to my posts go, I just don't see how you can tell whether I'm a conservative or liberal leaning. I also find it condescending, since you don't know me, to say that I'm uninformed.  What I said was that the sources reporting on this are heavily editorialized and biased toward the right.  Paul Williams has been going on about the imminent attack for two years now, so I doubt if he and the rest of the world understand the same meaning for the word imminent. I do understand that terrorist cells have the patience of the east and plan their attacks many years in advance.  I just don't believe 6 hack right wing news sources, one of which employs students, would have the inside breaking news on this.

So who in your opinion in a "hack left wing news source"

[Deedee]

So who in your opinion in a "hack left wing news source"

The one that instantly comes to mind at the moment is the Montreal Gazette. I really try to stay away from reading both conservative as well as liberal hack news blogs/orgs and prefer to get my news from a variety of sources like the BBC, a few French and German papers as well as Boston Globe and LA Times. For Canadian news it's the Globe and Mail. The only "liberal" on-line news sources I read are Truthout and Media Matters for America. Mostly what goes on in the world is very troubling and sickening to me, so I sometimes try to avoid as much of the depressing news as possible and I often go long periods of time where I only read Artsjournal.com and London Review of Books.

Does that answer the question? 

[240 is Back]

This is what your disclaimer looked like:

This is just an article from a Canadian publication.  I'm sure it's wrong, and all that.  But in the non-mainstream media, it's been coming out over the last few days.  Could be nothing, could just be a scare tactic.  But it'd be irresponsible not to pass it on

I think it was irresponsible to not mention that the source of the information was heavily biased.

yeah, but the moment I label any publication as highly left or highly right, suddenly that is what the argument becomes.  People will automatically accept or dismiss the articles based upon whatever 3 word description they hear accompanying it.

I posted the WTC1993 voice recordings of the bomber speaking with FBI head about the bomb construction - yet people dismiss it because it is on a site they deem liberal.  I could show them someone from our country standing on one of those little TNT boxes you'd see in cartoons with the plunger detonator, and if it came from anywhere left of FOX, they wouldn't even look at it.

Do you agree that many here will ignore or dismiss evidence or articles not based upon their content, but upon the newspaper/site in which they arrive?

[Hedgehog]

yeah, but the moment I label any publication as highly left or highly right, suddenly that is what the argument becomes.  People will automatically accept or dismiss the articles based upon whatever 3 word description they hear accompanying it.

I posted the WTC1993 voice recordings of the bomber speaking with FBI head about the bomb construction - yet people dismiss it because it is on a site they deem liberal.  I could show them someone from our country standing on one of those little TNT boxes you'd see in cartoons with the plunger detonator, and if it came from anywhere left of FOX, they wouldn't even look at it.

Do you agree that many here will ignore or dismiss evidence or articles not based upon their content, but upon the newspaper/site in which they arrive?

Good point, very good point.

But then, IMO, you really should be a bit more selective when posting articles.

It's not a biggie...

I dunno, I guess I just felt that it would lend to the credibility if the source is shady, then mention it.

Fictious example: If I post an article about how all black people are really low intelligent, it would be fair play to mention that the site that I got the article from, aryansaretehshyte.com, are known for their connections with the KKK or whatever.

At least when posting from unfamiliar extreme sources IMO. No need to post a disclaimer for shit like Limbaugh, Franken, FOX or the mainstream media.

JMO.

I just reacted because I got the impression that the source was a 'regular' alternative news source. Smaller news station.

As I stated, no big deal.

YIP
Zack

[Deedee]

What's your opinion on Sawatsky?

YIP
Zack

I respect what he's contributed to journalism in Canada, and his sense of ethics.  Now he's also like the direct mail guru of "interviewing" who basically wrote the formula for the way it's done today. You have to admire that too. Someone who met him said that while he didn't really seem to volunteer much in the way of presence, he does have incisive eyes and seems to intuitively know how to read people. Doesn't he now work for some US news network, teaching anchor people how to conduct interviews?

[240 is Back]

many people here would consider Alex Jones to be an extreme, left wing source.  They'd dismiss prisonplanet.com or Infowars.com as conspiracy crap.

Problem is, on July 25, 2001, Alex jones predicted 9/11. 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1222445722544874066&q=alex+jones+july+25%2C+2001&hl=en

Alex Jones said:
 - Here are the news stories which precipatate terror attacks
 - We know the Joint Chiefs want to blow up airliners
 - We know you will use these attacks to restrict American rights
 - Bin Laden, a known CIA asset, will be blamed.
 - "If you LET some terrorist group do it, like the WTC"

He put up the White House's phone number.  He begged his listeners to call the Wh and their congressmen, and ask them to investigate the recent media reports which show the govt is prepping for a self-attack.

Some 16 days later, we were attacked on 9/11.

Some believe that if 100 miillion people had heard this message, instead of 10,000 - then 911 wouldn't have happened.

[Hugo Chavez]

many people here would consider Alex Jones to be an extreme, left wing source. 

And nothing could be futher from that truth... If anything he's much more conservative than liberal.  Pro-gun, Patriot, Pro-American Sovereignty, Pro Freedom... Doesn't strike me as the type who likes big government.  Alex seems much more like the type who follows the best government is the one that governs the least type.  If he gets pegged as a left wing source he's wrongly pegged bigtime.  He's a guy who truly sees the divide and rule and the purpose of communism, this ism and that ism behind divide and rule.  I love Alex man

[24KT]

many people here would consider Alex Jones to be an extreme, left wing source.  They'd dismiss prisonplanet.com or Infowars.com as conspiracy crap.

Problem is, on July 25, 2001, Alex jones predicted 9/11. 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1222445722544874066&q=alex+jones+july+25%2C+2001&hl=en

Alex Jones said:
 - Here are the news stories which precipatate terror attacks
 - We know the Joint Chiefs want to blow up airliners
 - We know you will use these attacks to restrict American rights
 - Bin Laden, a known CIA asset, will be blamed.
 - "If you LET some terrorist group do it, like the WTC"

He put up the White House's phone number.  He begged his listeners to call the Wh and their congressmen, and ask them to investigate the recent media reports which show the govt is prepping for a self-attack.

Some 16 days later, we were attacked on 9/11.

Some believe that if 100 miillion people had heard this message, instead of 10,000 - then 911 wouldn't have happened.

I've always though Alex Jones was a right-wing Republican.   

[24KT]

And nothing could be futher from that truth... If anything he's much more conservative than liberal.  Pro-gun, Patriot, Pro-American Sovereignty, Pro Freedom... Doesn't strike me as the type who likes big government.  Alex seems much more like the type who follows the best government is the one that governs the least type.  If he gets pegged as a left wing source he's wrongly pegged bigtime.  He's a guy who truly sees the divide and rule and the purpose of communism, this ism and that ism behind divide and rule.  I love Alex man

Ya, Alex Jones is a TOTAL republican! Why some people can't seem to understand that Republicans are capable of hating what's going on in their country under this current regime is beyond me. It was the alienation of the mainstream Republicans that even allowed Clinton to get elected in the first place, then re-elected.

[Soul Crusher]

Ya, Alex Jones is a TOTAL republican! Why some people can't seem to understand that Republicans are capable of hating what's going on in their country under this current regime is beyond me. It was the alienation of the mainstream Republicans that even allowed Clinton to get elected in the first place, then re-elected.

I am a republican and disgusted what is going on in this country.  HOWEVER, my disgust with the left is far greater than with GWB, who himself deserves a ton of criticism.

1.  Spending (A Bridge to nowhere)
2.  Illegal Immigration (Sellout of American Workers)
3.  Campaign Finance Reform (Abridges Free Speech)
4.  Dubai Ports Deal ($$$$$$$$$$$$)
5.  Prescription Drug Bill (More Socialism)
6.  Farm Bill (Pork Pork Pork)


I have no problem with the WOT and in fact think he has not gone far enough against our enemies after 9/11. 

[240 is Back]

I am a republican and disgusted what is going on in this country.  HOWEVER, my disgust with the left is far greater than with GWB, who himself deserves a ton of criticism.

1.  Spending (A Bridge to nowhere)
2.  Illegal Immigration (Sellout of American Workers)
3.  Campaign Finance Reform (Abridges Free Speech)
4.  Dubai Ports Deal ($$$$$$$$$$$$)
5.  Prescription Drug Bill (More Socialism)
6.  Farm Bill (Pork Pork Pork)


I have no problem with the WOT and in fact think he has not gone far enough against our enemies after 9/11. 

Fair enough.

Now if evidence came to the world stage which conclusively showed Bush let 9/11 happen, would he move up your list of dislike? 

[Soul Crusher]

Fair enough.

Now if evidence came to the world stage which conclusively showed Bush let 9/11 happen, would he move up your list of dislike? 

I have not seen any credible evidence so far, even from you.

[24KT]

I have not seen any credible evidence so far, even from you.

Conveniently avoiding the question i see... 

[Hedgehog]

I am a republican and disgusted what is going on in this country.  HOWEVER, my disgust with the left is far greater than with GWB, who himself deserves a ton of criticism.

1.  Spending (A Bridge to nowhere)
2.  Illegal Immigration (Sellout of American Workers)
3.  Campaign Finance Reform (Abridges Free Speech)
4.  Dubai Ports Deal ($$$$$$$$$$$$)
5.  Prescription Drug Bill (More Socialism)
6.  Farm Bill (Pork Pork Pork)


I have no problem with the WOT and in fact think he has not gone far enough against our enemies after 9/11. 

In a capitalistic society, you don't protect the borders at all.

The theory is, that by protecting your (American) workers and industry, you allow them to survive without development. Which is largely why the US car industry isn't able to compete with the foreign companies. They never had to compete on equal terms.

This will lead to disaster in the end.


Perhaps this explains why Bush isn't protecting the US workers. He, or rather his business advisors (I doubt he has the intelligence), is looking out for the US economy as a whole.

Will it lead to prosperity? Sure.

USA just needs to get as many people as possible into college. Why not make college tuition for select courses free? I'm thinking engineering, math, physics, computer science and shit.

Stuff that USA will only profit from.

YIP
Zack