The Controlled Left

Balbus you are totally taking what I said out of context. Rat once said, referring to rense.com, that Jeff Rense posts articles of all kind, even ones he may not agree with, because he realises that his fanbase, or as rat realizes, a good amount of posters on these forums, may be interested in the article itself. If I posted an article from Fox News saying that 80% of Iraqis believe the US should be in their country, I definitly wouldn't agree with the article, but I would post it just to see what everyone else thought.

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

So, in other words, Jeff Rense Caters to the consumer?

These conspiracy web sites can't be trusted for the same reason that mainstream news can't - the reason I just stated. How can you trust any news from a news source that dispenses obviously false news? Sure, it's POSSIBLE that some real news might be put in among the fake, but how can you tell the difference? How do you know which to believe and which to ignore?

I've got nothing against rat. His views are pretty similar to my own really; we both believe the government isn't what is projects itself to be, that the hierarchy of power is arranged differently from how the top of that power ladder would like you to believe. The difference is our preception of the depth of this deception. I think America's richest, the CEOs and business leaders, are quickly growing their powerfull tentacles and wrapping them around the government, that this particular injustice really got it's start relatively recently. Rat thinks that a group of rich banker families control everything. THATS almost the same thing. The difference is Rat's elite have supposedly dictated EVERYTHING since even before native Americans were told to get the hell out of the white man's new world. I think it's too convenient of a theory; its a system that would be opposed by each and every person who hears about it (except those in control). It's full of holes. I argue with rat about his theories because
1. I enjoy these arguments, and heated discussion, etc.
2. I feel rat's anger and energy are guided at a nonexistant entity. Assuming this is true, he is doing absolutely nothing for anybody by posting all these conspiracy theories, except perhaps convincing more people to throw their anger at that same nonexistant "elite". I would much prefer that any person who has a problem with authority (and rightly so) actually help by, if nothing else, convincing people of the TRUTH. And, that is technically what rat is trying to do. He's got good intentions, but I don't think they're getting anything done.

And he definitely does not post these theories to watch people discuss them, because when anyone suggests that they're false he gets angry and calls them ignorant and blind.

 

I'll give you Eight realy good reasons why your conspiracy theories are pure bullshit:

1. Senator Ted Kennedy: Brother to President John F. Kennedy, brother to Atty Gen., later Senator Robert Kennedy, both assinated. Son of Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy who is the Daughter of Honey Fitz, long time Mass. Politician. A family dedicated to service to the ordinary citizen for 3 generations. Cannot imagine Ted Kennedy selling out.

2. Dan Rather: Lifelong Newsman, fierce and pugnaitous Anxious to root out corruption and malfeasance takes it to the limits. Same goes for Walter Cronkite and David Brinkley. can not imagine this group selling out.

3. Robert Morganthau: District Attorney, Southern Dist NY. His father served with President Rosevelt as a New Dealer. Lifetime fighting corruption, money laundering. Family history of service to the nation. Incorruptable. Will not prosecute the death penalty.

4. Harold Ikes: Insider, Democratic Party, worked inside President Clinton's White House. His father worked for President Rosevelt as a New Dealer. Family history of service to ordinary citizens. Partisan guy, a true democrat. Never a sell-out.

5. Pres. George Bush: His father was President, His grandfather was a Senator from Connecticut. 3 generations of service to the nation. Texas tough guy image. Seems inconcievable to sacrifice the family history to join a conspiracy.

6. V.P. Dick Cheney: He earned over 30 million dollars the year before running for office. Does this guy really need this office and all the B.S. that goes with it?
He must be into service to his country. Most folk would keep working earning big bucks.

7. Alan Greenspan: Chairman, Federal Reserve Board of Govenors. Straightest guy in Washington D.C. Earns approx $130,000 in his position. Could leave and earn millions on Wall Street, but sticks around to serve his country. Has guided monetary policy for approx 20 years with a good record fighting inflation and protecting granny's passbook account.

8. Howard Stern: King of all media: Honestly, can anyone imagine this guy keeping his mouth shut for 10 min about anything ? If there was a conspiracy, he would spill the beans in 3 minutes. Honorable mention to Don Imus.

 

"5. Pres. George Bush: His father was President, His grandfather was a Senator from Connecticut. 3 generations of service to the nation. Texas tough guy image. Seems inconcievable to sacrifice the family history to join a conspiracy."

I don't think bush "joined a conspiracy" so much as is too stupid to make any presidential decision, and so depends on other people to entirely run the presidency for him, which is exactly what those dictating every single action he takes want in a president. I think he's really only in it for glory and family honor and all that crap.

"6. V.P. Dick Cheney: He earned over 30 million dollars the year before running for office. Does this guy really need this office and all the B.S. that goes with it? He must be into service to his country. Most folk would keep working earning big bucks. "

Ugh, this shitbag doesn't belong on the same list as some of these other people. I don't think anyone cares less about the environment, and the man still gets anusloads of money. Ironically, he's got quite the investment in oil.

"Mr Cheney ran Dallas-based Halliburton for five years before quitting to run for office in 2000. He banked $36m when he left and continues to receive deferred income from the company. "

Hum-diddily. And, what do you know, Cheney's been accused of using his vice-presidential (and actually nearly presidential considering how close he is to his puppet president) influence to give haliburton big, meaty contracts without having to bid on anything. Cheney and his whitehouse crew do everything they can to block investigation into the issue. Bush and Cheney were definitely the wrong people to include on this list.

Not that I'm trying to support Rat's conspiracy theories, but your descriptions of those two particular men was somewhat disconcerting.

"8. Howard Stern: King of all media: Honestly, can anyone imagine this guy keeping his mouth shut for 10 min about anything ? If there was a conspiracy, he would spill the beans in 3 minutes. Honorable mention to Don Imus."

I think howard stearn's show is pretty vacant, nothing but mindless trash, but I suppose any proponent of free speech is a friend of mine.

 

Post #43 proves to me how easy it is for these elites to fool gullible people. I couldn't get past the first sentence about that DRUNK, Ted Kennedy, without laughing.

The thing about Alan Greenspan "serving his country" is even more ridiculous yet.

Yeah, Alan Greenspan is my hero. He's a real humanitarian.

Then again, I am sure post #43 is a joke and not to be taken seriously. It has to be a joke.

 

Least we forget -

As to the Newtopia article, I have to say so what, I mean it is very hard to pin down what they are saying and when you do it doesn’t amount to much? For one thing the Left Gatekeeper website attacks many people from the left and right unless it also believes Bush and Condi Rice are left wingers? It is in fact very hard to see what the website does stand for?

As to Charles Shaw’s ‘proof’ of some sinister conspiracy to quote -

"To offer a clear portrait of how "regulated resistance" works within the "Left" or "progressive" media, consider their steadfast refusal to report on or organize around two of the most important incidents in modern American history as pertains to our present situation—possible US government involvement in 9/11, and the relationship between the Bush family and the Nazi regime in Germany."

Well for one thing I’ve read many articles in "Left" or "progressive" media about these things, I think I’ve even heard them raised on both the BBC TV and radio plus the TV’s Channel 4 all parts of the UK’s mainstream media.

I believe it hasn’t just turned up in the Guardian paper but several other mainstream newspapers and journals. I’ve also had discussions on both subjects with members of several political parties and Stop The War Coalition members. And on Hipforums there have been many threads on the subjects.

So this ‘proof’ of so called ‘regulated resistance’ is not exactly conclusive is it, I mean when you look at it isn’t ‘proof’ at all.

Then you have to consider that US government involvement in 9/11 it is even in Shaws word only ‘possible’ and to many is suspect or discredited. I also have to point out that since the first book of Shaw’s new venture Drench Kiss Media will be a book called 9/11 Whistleblowers: The Authoritative Guide to the Case against the Official Story of 9/11, he might have another motive for wanting to say others are not covering it. (but that is only supposition)

Then you take the Bush-Nazis connection Shaw says

"This story should have resurfaced every time one of the Bush men ran for or was appointed to public office"

Well it is a good story but can you really say that the sins of the grandfather could be used to continually smear the grandson 50 years later, oh I think people should be reminded of the skeleton in the cupboard but it could be overused.

**

Rat if this was meant to be some great revelatory piece to convince people once and for all that your theory of a generations spanning conspiracy controlling the world is correct and anyone thinking otherwise is wrong, it is an incredibly damp squib and very anti-climatic.

 

And rightly so.

I miss the days when all you posted about was alcohol and music...

 

You assume that Ted would be the only Kennedy to be in on a conspiracy.

Dedicated to Service or to Power?

Did you get this straight from their autobios?

Everyone sells out, especially when your whole career is putting a happy face on unhappy things.

No one is incorruptable.

You sure are stuck on family histories arent ya?

You assume a democrat is less likely to sell out than a republican?
Why?
(btw: Clinton and Roosevelt were not saints in the least.)

Sacrifice the family history?
Have you researched the family history?
Google: Bush family history, Senate, Nazi symathizer

Power is always more enticing than money...
(btw, he still makes millions...)

I'm choking on too much b.s. to respond right now, will address at later date...

Agreed.

If there is a conspiracy, he doenst know about it.
Imus can kiss my ass.

 

(bumped)

 

Balbus, why are you such a dick, you pick on rat all the time and now you are blatantly bumping his old threads back to the top so you can pick on him more?

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

Hi Dan

It was Rat that seemed to be asking for our old threads to be reactivated, he claims he has “already answered your moronic questions and responded to your repeated accusations”
When I mentioned this thread.

As anyone that reads it can see he hasn’t.

 

I work in the media and there's no conspiracy. Sorry, squid.

 

Howard stern supports and publicizes the 9-11 truth movement..

Keep in mind the 9-11 truth movement and alex jones are two seperate things

Givin the articles ive found I find no reason not to doubt the 9-11 story.
Conspiracies do happen, and have happened many times in american history with american politicians.

 

Rat:


Hahaha, let's all have a good laugh about a DRUNKEN Ted Kennedy.... But I'm willing to bet 50 bucks you've had a few drinks in your lifetime, and gasp!, driven your car afterwards!

 

technically, the democrats and republicans do get funded by the same people. it even says it in books by liberal authors.