News Media Carefully Exclude Mention of TracyvFAU

US corporate news media have provided inordinate coverage highlighting specific outtakes of the recent AlexJones deposition in Texas state court. It is perhaps notable how throughout its hullabaloo coverage of the Jones trial same news media have carefully excluded any mention of Professor James Tracy’s pending action against Florida Atlantic University, an arguably more significant free speech case now before the US Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

As some may recall, this appeal followed an eleven day trial in December 2017 before Obama-appointed US District Judge Robin Rosenberg, whose numerous pre and in-trial motions grossly favored the FAU defendants by stripping Tracy of his right to assert First Amendment claims and keeping vital evidence from the jury.

Despite wall-to-wall, front page trial coverage by the The Palm Beach Post and the South Florida Sun Sentinel, the event was almost completely blacked out by national news media–the same media that widely broadcast the case’s commencement in April 2016 and the circus-like antics of Jones’ deposition.* In fact, the Sun Sentinel has yet to even report to its readership the fact that the case has been appealed.

Tracy’s attorneys are still awaiting the court’ decision on the their request to present oral argument before a panel of three appellate judges hearing the case. FAU has argued against the court entertaining oral argument.

*In any self-respecting court proceeding, why is the Jones deposition being so selectively broadcast in the first place. It may well be to try the defendant in the court of public opinion, before his case can reach a jury.

Leave a Reply

43 thought on “Alex Jones Media Circus Continues”
  1. The deposition does seem very odd. Please continue asking questions. We are seeking “recent news” on Controversial Events & Seeking Verifiable Evidence: Where can we find reliable news on the latest issues in the legal cases against either whistle-blowers, or persons who ask questions? For example, seeking info on persons raising questions about 9/11 Event, the issues from alleged Las Vegas Shooting, the Parkland FL Event, or about Wolfgang Halbig, or the Sandy Hook event. In a bizarre way, there seems to be a major purge of information regarding these events, and even ongoing smear campaign efforts against those who ask questions. Are we as citizens allowed to ask questions? Below is just one example out of many.

  2. Alex Jones … I thought the videos of him as Bill Hicks were spot on, that Alex was just one of Bill’s personas. And he took the persona full time and Bill Hicks disappears. He’s playing a role in show business like the second Paul McCartney. It’s like the Remington Steele TV show, there’s no one at the agency named that, it’s just a cool handle. There is no one named Elton John, it’s a more than a stage name, it’s a brand name. That brand means piano driven rock music. When Alex started having those fancy mainstream news sets, I wondered if he was legit. The main knock on him being he can’t touch the Zionists… the best way to deal with your opposition is to become them. As I remember it, Alex barely touched Sandy Hook, the guy that really went after it was James Fetzer. So why wasn’t Fetzer gone after first and foremost? Because Alex has a much higher profile would be a my guess. Alex is a terrible interviewer, he always cuts his guests off to interject the manic raving lunatic venting. That’s his role, to pigeon hole the truth movement as loud mouthed raving lunatics. What’s the trial really all about? Establishing another sacred cow of News reporting… the mass shootings to go along with the Holocaust. The last thing you are allowed to do is ask “did it actually happen?” The visceral reaction I’ve gotten to “Sandy Hook is another scam to increase Gov’t power by demonizing gun ownership” is met with pre-violence mode of name calling and gaskets about to blow. Until you have actually experienced it, you have no clue how brain washed John Q. Public really is. Alex Jones is a conspiracy starter kit. 911 Truth was a gateway drug to even darker alleys of truth like the sick pedos in high places and child sacrifice. The Moon Landings being staged in such a lame and haphazard manner that to still subscribe to the fantasy is a sure sign of a shallow programed intellect. Once you slay all the sacred cows of conventional wisdom, the world opens up like a flower in spring. I remember when a friend suggested I check out the Flat Earth theory. I said I just can’t go there. Then months later, I thought why not? I was willing to dig into 911, question the Holocaust, call the moon landings as fake as a three dollar bill. I was able to look at all the mass shootings and think, hey… they want us to be afraid to go anywhere… a church, a school, movies, a concert, flying, trains… you name it. They want us to not just accept more security, but beg for it. I am assuming from now on that any mass shooting is staged or otherwise synthetic terror with a political agenda that plays like a broken record; until proven real and organic. I can see the Climate Change agenda as “none of the above”. They have made that issue black and white… you either go along with it being real or you are in the same camp as Holocaust deniers. Why isn’t there a third rail to drive down? That being the climate has been jacked and weaponized. Severe weather events can be summoned by the push of a button. The Climate Change alarmists can never touch this because it’s like Kryptonite to Superman. It renders them impotently flaccid. I looked at Flat Earth theory on a lark. Then I started thinking for myself… again! One of the really big ones for me is aviation and the sound barrier and civil engineers make zero allowance for Earth’s curve on 100 mile bridges across vast spans of ocean. That’s the clincher really. Even thousand mile railroads across pancake flat prairies don’t allow or account for Earth’s curve. If Civil Engineers don’t account for it, who would? You would think by now NASA could show us a continuous live video stream showing Earth rotating. No such thing exists and no one asks why? Those pictures of Earth they show from the Moon are proven to be photoshopped composites or artist renderings. None one asks why? Because they saw the Moon Landing on TV. How impossible it would be to land on a 1,000 mph spinning ball and why there isn’t a continuous sonic boom as everything on Earth would be traveling far in excess of the speed of sound. How impossible variable wind direction would be at 1,000 mph spin . In Continuum Mechanics, Earth’s spin could be described as the mother of all vorticity tensors! I never heard of them until the final exam. What’s the worst thing that can happen to you digging into Flat Earth theory? You could be labeled anti-science lunatic and grouped in with Holocaust and Climate Change Deniers. Fine.

    1. Dave Kraft, I actually started reading your epic but when you began the flat-earth shpiel, I realized you were a shill. Whaddayasay you just go away?

      Dr. Tracy, you know you are clearly getting a lot of attention, when such blatant shills start trolling your site…

      1. Dave Kraft’s comment is actually spot on! I’m glad he brought up flat earth… after all it is freedom of speech, is it not?
        I knew before he mentioned it, that it would be mentioned. Or I was hoping he would mention it! He brings up great points that can’t be thrown out due to one’s opinion that he is a shill…

      2. Not everyone who has accepted the flat earth paradigm is a shill. I can assure you I am not after having researched it for 4 years. Once one gets into it, it’s not quite as insane as it sounds. Most, if not all of us started out laughing at it.

        1. Willy,
          You know you’re my bud, but there’s no way you’re gonna win this argument. You’re going to have to refute Aristotle for starters. And then Eratosthenes and the whole circumference of the earth thing – it just goes on from there.

          I’m no STEM candidate, that’s for sure, but even I can see that science is a series of observations made over the ages that accretes into a body of knowledge. It proceeds from a schoolchild’s observation that earth’s shadow on the moon is curved.

          What benefit derives from keeping knowledge of the flat earth from people? I don’t understand the purpose of the deception.

    2. Hi Dave,

      Your comment is somewhat dated but I’ll catch up and give you a back-link in case you’re not paying close attention.

      This one got my attention because it appears to be an upgraded info-war tactic. It really sounds like a real human being wrote it. It’s actually a fairly good synopsis of a partial listing of the kind of truth that can garner caustic disdain from the brainwashed portion of John Q Public. At any rate, for the most part, there is no reason not to give a free speech pass; except for the flat earth endorsement. I’m going to recommend that you do not do your own thinking if that is the kind of conclusion you reach.

      I’m thinking that maybe the grief that attends revelations of important truth and constant rejection has wore you down, and you now, being a social being, suffer the excruciating terror of a lost social bond. This sort of wear can result in a strangulation on the will and the voice. It’s as if the full fight or flight reaction to palpable danger, elicited in conjunction with the public demand for ‘rational’ behavior, creates an untenable emotional state of panic level anxiety that paralyses the mind. Alarm bells are screaming in our ear but we are compelled to limit our social purpose to the comparatively inane. Compelled to act as if nothing is wrong when it’s known that huge lots of something is.

      Of course, the enemy that has weaponized the weather and acquires territory through literal incendiary attacks and attrition, has much more in it’s arsenal. Their advance depends on being beneath detection. Therefore much effort is used to associate the absurd with the plausible, thereby scrambling the narrative of exposure. Evidence of fakery; Musk, NASA and astronauts on strings are not evidence of a flat earth. Is it really necessary to account for earth curvature when building long bridges or does each vertical support erect according to gravitational plumb.

  3. Oh, the fear journalism professionals must be suffering to have to advertise their worth to the public.

    Just search the phrase “Journalism matters. NOW more than ever!” and you’ll find it echoed around everywhere.

    Michael Schudson of the Graduate School of Journalism of Columbia University is an expert and he believes it matters. He lays bare the strategy vital to journalism’s importance:

    “For the public to be swayed from positions they have already staked out, and for government officials to respond to charges that they behaved corruptly or unconstitutionally or simply rashly and unwisely, the information has to come from organizations that hold themselves to the highest standards of verification, fact-checking, and independent and original research, exactly what professional journalism aspires to do.”

    So, professional journalism aspires to keep Alex ‘mea culpa’ Jones in the news in order to control public opinion about Sandy Hook, and absents TracyVFAU from all sources to help powerful entities respond to corruption and a constitutional crisis.

    Thank you, Professor Schudson.

    1. The Columbia Review of Journalism is another authority willing to lay out the agenda to which TravyVFAU appears subject.

      “We monitor the press,” CRJ proclaims, and in a recent article its ambassador Emily Bell calls for newsrooms to quarantine extremist ideas through “strategic silence” and the news’ ability to “set agendas, omit extremist ideas and manage voices.

      Bell has considered Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon, where she imagines that surveillance limits the brazenness of the inmates. Not an historian of ideas, she compares the Panopticon favorably to our more dangerous situation now in which social media inmates are free to be brazen-as-they-wanna-be.

      Bell lectures that the “easy publicness” of social media is what encourages unwanted speech, and “empower(s) such speech to shock and radicalize” others more widely than ever before. “The algorithms weren’t enough to keep the virality at bay,” she bemoans.

      Discipline is needed! And CRJ is ready to inflict it. By policing newsrooms for ‘Strategic Silence’ surrounding certain sensitive stories, it hopes to quarantine dangerous ideas; that is, ideas dangerous to the status quo.

    2. CRJ’s Emily Bell quotes Danah Boyd of Data & Society and Media Manipulation Research Lead Joan Donovan as also “challeng(ing) newsrooms to practice ‘strategic silence’ to avoid amplifying extremist messaging” and to “actively take the high ground… in order to defy extremists’ platforms for spreading hate.”

      Though the ‘hate’ and ‘extremism’ is never defined, a clue is left by Bell when she explains “stochastic terrorism” in which a lone wolf, amid “a saturation of inflammatory rhetoric,” takes the bait.

      “The terrible events in Christchurch bear the hallmarks of stochastic terrorism,” Bell intones, “prompted by far-right influence and endless Islamophobic themes repeated by prominent politicians and elements of the media.”

      Ah, yes. The terrible faux events in Christchurch, prompted by inflammatory rhetoric, no doubt.

      In one sentence, Emily Bell reveals the ideology and agenda of the Columbia Review of Journalism and its slavish obeisance to self-selected authorities.

  4. Quote: Martin E. ComasContact ReporterOrlando Sentinel
    April 4, 2019 11:35 am
    “A Lake County man who gained notoriety for his dark fixation on whether the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary actually happened — or was the result of a nefarious conspiracy — has been thrust into the national spotlight as he is named in several defamation lawsuits filed by the victims’ families.
    According to a deposition and court records released last week from one of the lawsuits, right-wing radio host Alex Jones said he was fed conspiracy theories — including through more than 4,000 emails over several years — by Wolfgang Halbig of Sorrento that the killings in Newtown, Conn., may have been staged by the government as a way of bringing forth more gun-control laws.
    Halbig’s obsession about the massacre that left 20 first-graders and six adults dead has been the subject of stories in recent days by the New York Times, Washington Post and other publications. He also is mentioned in an NPR radio show last month about “the upside-down world where conspiracy theorists dwell.”

    Wolfgang Halbig is named in several lawsuits by parents of Sandy Hook shooting victims for his conspiracy theories about the mass shooting. (Wolfgang Halbig)
    “I can’t tell whether they died or they did not,” Halbig told the Orlando Sentinel this week. “But for six years I have made public records requests to prove whether this happened or not. And they have refused to give me those documents….I wanted, for once and for all, to know whether Sandy Hook happened.”
    Jones even invited Halbig, 72, several times to be a guest on his radio and online show Infowars to talk about the “supposed tragedy” Dec. 14, 2012.
    For Jones, Halbig was a source of fodder for his hard-edged program that spouts bizarre conspiracy theories across the Internet. For Halbig, Jones provided him with a national stage to talk about his preoccupation with Sandy Hook.”
    Top management for the Orlando Sentinel:
    • Nancy A. Meyer, Publisher and General Manager
    • Julie Anderson, Editor-in-Chief
    • Roger Simmons, Managing Editor
    • Hey Publisher and Manager Nancy A. Meyer: Instead of approving this unenlightening hit piece on Wolfgang Halbig and Alex Jones, why haven’t YOU sent some reporters and lawyers to Newtown, CT to seek public records of the alleged shooting there on December 14, 2012 as Mr. Halbig has done now for years and at great cost to him without success? Don’t you believe in free open access to public records? They could have simply placed all the records in a public room or library for all to see and read without having to go to the expense of hiring lawyers couldn’t they? Why haven’t you written an editorial suggesting exactly this proposal? What journalism school did you graduate from? Is this what they taught you to do, to obstruct truth and information? Is this what they taught you to do to write hit pieces on Professor James Tracy, Ph.D. who was one of the few professors at the cesspool FAU with the guts and intelligence to question this massive scam on America that day? The best thing which could happen to the piece of journalist garbage called the Orlando Sentinel would be for a rich billionaire to buy it and burn it down forever. The dupes who run it learned their lessons well from their idols Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels, the masters of propaganda and lying to the population. I challenge you so called experts in journalism: Nancy A. Meyer, Publisher and General Manager
    • Julie Anderson, Editor-in-Chief
    • Roger Simmons, Managing Editor
    • Prove, with evidence and facts, available to any citizen, that anyone died at Sandy Hook on December 14, 2012, not fake hot air lies from the lying media like you. All of you should have flunked out of the respective schools who certified you as professional liars.
    Winfield J. Abbe, Ph.D., Physics

    1. You had me till the obligatory Hitler reference.

      The controllers of official history are delighted when their imagery creeps unquestioned into every argument.

      1. Drives me crazy when they do this also.

        How can you not question the biggest fraud story out there when you are supposedly aware of the rest of the lies.

  5. I’ve been commenting for years on this site. I use my actual name, and I’m fearless. I don’t call people names I don’t agree with. Try using your actual full name Marie. Winfield and I do it every time we comment. Did you have anything to add to this conversation besides running me down?

      1. Hey Toni, would you believe that none other than Stephen Hawking was involved in a fraudulent experiment dubbed “Flat Earth Crushed”?. It aired on PBS, and the evidence of their fakery was censored multiple times. It is now back up with DMCA Copyright claims, and would be a worthwhile 15 minutes of your life. Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the Earth, but the Earth keeps refusing to cooperate.

        1. Finding anomalies in a television broadcast is not the same as debunking Eratosthenes, whose calculations are not addressed by the videomaker.

          Television, and all production, is concerned with verisimilitude only in so far as it communicates the intended message. Believe me, you would not want to eat the delicious looking food featured in infomercials, which has most likely been hit with hairspray or some noxious thing to make it look good to the camera.

          Of course the broadcast was a simulation, all production is. It couldn’t not be. It’s made up by producers. Look how the “Flat Earth CRUSHED” title falsely supposes that the average person is a flat-earther. Witness the astonishment of the ‘volunteers’ that the lake is not flat. “It looks flat!” they repeat. These are all choices made by the producers in pursuit of their message, as ‘false’ in their way as the helicopter disappearing. None of it has any bearing on the results of the experiment being performed in the program.

          They seem to have fooled you, too, into believing that Stephen Hawking was involved in the making of this production, and thus implicated in the larger hoax. In truth he gave nothing but his name to this. Surely you realize that is not his voice; he doesn’t have an American accent. All the producers had to do was borrow his voice modulator.

          Who knows why the footage appears as it does? We could go into the thousand ways and reasons in which any production veers from reality. It usually has to do with money. The video analysis of “Flat Earth CRUSHED” does nothing to debunk the calculations for earth’s circumference as presented in the program.

        2. Silly that you make assertions without checking. Hawking appears in his chair at the beginning of the episode, and short of standing up and gesticulating wildly, I don’t know how one would “prove” he’s not involved. YouTube is time limited @ 15:00 for many users, so editing is required.

          You are correct that Eratosthenes is not debunked by proving deceptive editing. Here is some actual unedited “impossible” footage. Understand that atmosphere makes long distance photography difficult to impossible under most conditions, but every once in a great while the truth happens, and the artificial horizon that swallows ships is nowhere to be found.

        3. I don’t have to have seen the host wrap to know how much Stephen Hawking was involved. He’s there to lend prestige to the production. Do you really believe this was his idea? You’re the one who is silly enough to believe every Hollywood trick, which is not surprising since you believe in flat earth theory.

          You are unsophisticated as to production, which makes it impossible to take at face value your assertion that some footage or other is unedited.

          I don’t find it interesting to chase every video that you post. For years now, flat earth minutia has done nothing to call into question, let alone overturn, the history of scientific thought. If you want to make this a real conversation, quit looking for clues of a conspiracy and start challenging the actual science.

        4. Hey Marko. Have you wondered as I have how in actuality Hawking spoke? We’ve all heard that horrible simulated voice. But how did Hawking get his words to be spoken by this contraption?

          One hint at the ridiculousness of it all is in cartoon depictions of Hawking. Both the Simpsons and Family Guy cartoons added a joystick that Hawking manipulates with his hand, presumably to convert his thoughts to text. But he uses no such joystick. According to some long ago PBS production I think it was, a camera is focused on one of his pupils. The slight movements of his eye focusing on each letter are captured and sentences are thus formed, albeit at a snails pace.

          They never did explain how he “clicked” to select each letter though. And no explanation is given to account for how rapidly he is able to respond to direct questions or to converse so fluidly at times.

          What is even more bizarre is how he can engage in this thought to text conversion process through eye movement when his eyes are rolled back in his head and seems by all other measures completely oblivious.

          I can only conclude that Hawking was the puppet of one or more agendas. Truly messed up. Way worse than being left in the garden sun unattended. His torment was shared by us all.

        5. Thanks for that explanation, Peter Klein. It makes even host wraps seem unconscionable, when you put it like that. He must have needed the money.

  6. I was just reading James Fetzer’s latest post… begging the guy going after Alex Jones to go after him. During discovery, the defense could get proof the father has any legal standing to sue anyone. Then they could show the kid’s passport was forged and so were his death certificate. Just now trying to find more, I stumbled across former NSA Technical Director Bill Binney’s latest interview. Mind blowing revelations about things I’ve never heard about like Marble Framework and Parallel Construction. Things that so undermine the bedrock of US founding principles, I have come to the startling revelation that the right to privacy guaranteed in the Constitution no longer exists. Things like a TV even when it’s turned off is ease dropping anything you say. Or the program that allows a car’s computer to be highjacked and the car can be remotely commanded to reach it’s top speed no matter what you do to stop it. This crowd might be interested in Bill’s information

    1. In this interview, Wm Binney talks about the Christchurch NZ cgi shooting as though it were real, and also the fake Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando (“that fellow who did the shooting down in Florida in one of the bars”), which is when I decided to tune out.

      1. On his second pass through the mosque, shooting stacked bodies that are not bleeding, he literally shoots the skullcap off of a young man w/o damaging his head. It was bizarre, I thought I was watching Benny Hill or the Little Rascals.

  7. There’s barely any participation after the original site was taken down. I guess it’s just me and Winfield. There’s plenty of new stories to explore. The New Zealand fake shooting for instance. All the boxes are checked. The general public is convinced it happened. The usual 2% who actually pay attention are calling it bogus… the shell casings disappear in mid air, the missing blood bath, no dust from walls shot to pieces and no smoke, the gun looks toy like. If you call attention to the low production values of the scam, people that haven’t even seen the video call you crazy. Then cue the calls for more gun confiscations. People would much rather talk about the college basketball championship, and I can’t blame them. Keep the bread and circus flowing and we can move on to the next social justice outrage.

    1. Dr. Abbe’s posts are always interesting and informational, whereas I don’t remember you ever expressing an original thought, Dave kraft (actual full name with the uncapitalized surname).

      1. I really enjoy reading Dave Kraft’s posts. You know, the FE topic came up on MHB a few years ago, and it received quite a smack down from the regulars. People were obnoxious and prideful, which was surprising given the nature of most people who come to this site. I woke up with Sandy Hook, and resolved to question everything, and not to think any idea was too crazy to consider. I jumped down the FE hole and found there was quite a bit of compelling evidence. We know that most things we are told in this world are lies conceived of in conspiracy, at the very least, if you’re unwilling to look deeply into it for yourself, show some respect.

        1. CE, you characterize ‘people’ by which you mean me, I guess, as obnoxious, prideful, incurious, and disrespectful.

          Yet you offer no insight into flat earth theory or anything else, which seems obnoxious, prideful, incurious and disrespectful.

    2. I miss the days when the blog was more active with comments and posts. I watched the NZ video and wanted to talk about it. There were so many weird things. People don’t like to converse about these types of events. No one seems to be in the slightest bit concerned or interested about the fact that you will face penalty for possessing or sharing the video in NZ. I think that’s pretty terrifying, and I’m sure that type of thing is on its way here soon.

  8. ….….

    Here is a most relevant conversation relating to
    American Journalism, the First Amendment, and Truth and Justice.

    It is live streaming now but it should restream in full very soon as the live stream is about to end.

    All of this through the issue possible extradition of Julian Assange to USA “justice” system.

    1. I watched for awhile after you posted this link at Jim Fetzer’s blog. Thanks.

      I don’t know whether to ask you this there or here at MHB, but I wonder what you make of American Everyman Scott Creighton’s long-running thesis that Assange is a CIA honeypot. Scott says that this morning is just another act of theatre, and that Assange doesn’t even live at the Embassy and is smuggled in and out as needed. The Embassy is bugged, not to spy on Assange as Wikileaks claims, but to spy on Assange’s visitors with Assange’s full compliance.

      Scott points out that this arrest was made today to put out a story that could displace the focus on Brexit, which could be true whether Assange is a honeypot or not.

      What do you think?

  9. Toni
    April 11, 2019 at 4:13 pm
    I watched for awhile after you posted this link at Jim Fetzer’s blog. Thanks.
    I don’t know whether to ask you this there or here at MHB, but I wonder what you make of American Everyman Scott Creighton’s long-running thesis that Assange is a CIA honeypot. Scott says that this morning is just another act of theatre, and that Assange doesn’t even live at the Embassy and is smuggled in and out as needed. The Embassy is bugged, not to spy on Assange as Wikileaks claims, but to spy on Assange’s visitors with Assange’s full compliance.
    Scott points out that this arrest was made today to put out a story that could displace the focus on Brexit, which could be true whether Assange is a honeypot or not.
    What do you think?

    Toni, I have a distrustful attitude of Scott Creighton from years ago on his website where he put forth his theory of what destroyed the WTC Towers on 9-11 – something about sophisticated electrical wiring on certain floors that effected the destruction sequence nonsense. I do not mind Left Wing commentary at all but often its commentary on false events is so so off.

    That link to that live show was from I guess what we would call “left wing” commentators but much of what was said was very true, but I would not describe any of them of being at all concerned about USA sovereignty and rule of law and constitution. They were all concerned about “human rights” for the world. They all pointed out how the US “empire” has committed horrible crimes and murdered hundreds of thousands of people for many years. They also focused on the corporations and the banks and their evil. That is true too.

    I find it interesting that Q has said many times that Assange is a good guy and Snowdon as an evil, black hat traitor. Also that many strong supporters of Trump on YouTube are saying the US just wants to get Assange safely on U S soil so Trump can take good care of him and set him free as a hero. Some say Assange has all the goods on the coup attempt against Trump and he will reveal that. Some say Assange has all the facts about the PizzaGate issue which he originally disclosed. That video did not point out that Assange has really not be with Wikileaks for many years and Wikileaks has worked against assange in many ways.

    My concern is that now that USA is being shown to be so empire and globalist oriented and as having started many unjust wars, and often for Israel, that we all just throw our sovereign nation to the wolves.

    I would be happy if somehow the USA became a second-rate country no longer wanting world domination and empire but still a sovereign country with a rule of law, a rule of law that is impossible without real respect for our borders. (Only reason I voted for DJT is that I thought he was the least likely candidate to persecute me and kill me.)
    No matter what happens, souls, not countries or world empires, being saved is all that matters.

    1. He’s a Leftist, but I don’t think Scott is disingenuous, and to be honest, Assange’s opinion of 9/11 is worse than Scott’s. As Scott rightly says 9/11 truth is the road to all truth. Assange puts out the chomskian notion that 9/11 is a distraction from more important issues, that it’s even a false concern, an opinion with which Caitlyn Johnson appears to agree when she calls for people to move past ‘conspiracy.’

      I agree with you about the Left, they seem to filter everything through their revulsion of ‘The Right.’ That’s what comes first. Rather than incorporating what they can agree with from a conservative view, like the constitution and national sovereignty (you would hope), they reject it all as ‘extremist.’ It must feel like resistance to them. It’s all about feelings, about emotion; just look at the fervent response to Assange’s arrest today.

      The Left still sees itself in opposition to the Right. It’s not like the Right has not defended and implemented liberal values for a few hundred years. After all, no one who thinks national sovereignty is an important value, also thinks slavery is good idea.

      Conservatives have incorporated values from the Left, but the Left cannot do the same with conservative values. They resist.

      The Leftists are impeding out collective growth.

  10. “He’s a Leftist, but I don’t think Scott is disingenuous, and to be honest, Assange’s opinion of 9/11 is worse than Scott’s. As Scott rightly says 9/11 truth is the road to all truth. Assange puts out the chomskian notion that 9/11 is a distraction from more important issues, that it’s even a false concern, an opinion with which Caitlyn Johnson appears to agree when she calls for people to move past ‘conspiracy.’ ”

    Do not remember Caitlyn Johnson in that video, unless maybe she was the host.

    July 26, 2010
    9/11 Blogger
    July 26, 2010
    In this interview, Belfast Telegraph reporter Matthew Bell asks Wikileaks founder Julian Assange about “conspiracy theories”. Assange subsequently explains his position.

    His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? “I believe in facts about conspiracies,” he says, choosing his words slowly. “Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It’s important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there’s enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news.”

    What about 9/11? “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.” What about the Bilderberg conference? “That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes.”

    Mr. Assange seems to have conveniently forgotten that 9/11 may be, in a very concrete sense, a ‘conspiracy for war’, leading directly to the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and the permanent “War on Terror”.


    Another idea this video promoted was that if we do not have journalistic freedom of speech, its all over. I guess, I, as a “conservative” because I am a Catholic Christian, do not see any way we can have a civilized society without reasonable limits based on natural law.

    1. Caitlyn Johnson was a contributor to the program.

      This is a link to Caitlyn sparring with Scott on twitter; she rejects that Assange is CIA and I think Scott makes the better argument:


      I’m probably the only person around here who thinks the Podesta/Pizzagate emails are a fantastical elaboration dreamed up by do-gooders obsessed with pedophilia. It was a happy day for intelligence services when that story took off and achieved virality. Talk about a time-suck. My point, though not original, is that Assange may be a limited hangout. The Pizzagate stories were affirmed by wikileaks.

      As to your last quote, Dachsie:
      “Another idea this video promoted was that if we do not have journalistic freedom of speech, its all over. I guess, I, as a “conservative” because I am a Catholic Christian, do not see any way we can have a civilized society without reasonable limits based on natural law.”

      Are you saying that reasonable limits based on natural law need to be placed on journalistic freedom of speech?

  11. “Are you saying that reasonable limits based on natural law need to be placed on journalistic freedom of speech?”

    More like…

    “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.”
    Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

    At least we are discussing Assange in a timely manner. We will be inundated with this topic over the next few days.

  12. Finally a flood of comments. I started to think everyone gave up on MHB as a forum for further inquiry into the strange and dark workings of our World. The 911attacks were a watershed moment when it became a gateway to recognizing other elaborate deceptions. The Weapons of Mass Destruction story was hammered relentlessly. You should see the video medley of people repeating it like a mantra. How many MHB people still believe it now? How many still believe the “19 runts with box cutters doing 911” story?… recruited, trained and controlled by an elusive cave dwelling Jihadist. By SAT phone. Because they hate our freedom? And CNN shows the artist rendering for the bunker like they know what it looks like.

    How many MHB people still believe all these mass shootings are real and genuine acts of violent extremist lunacy? I am reasonably certain Columbine was one of the few. Some people think even that one was synthetic in some way or the other. One of the untold parts of the story was the basement tapes the killers made. Only a couple folks got to see those. Attorney John Decamp was one. His view was there was an excellent case against the makers of Prozac. The killers would cold turkey the drugs, then double the dosage for a stronger high. A feeling of inviscibility would overcome them as they played violent video games for hours upon hours. The line between fantasy and reality was blurred to the point of non-existance. Here’s his interview
    DeCamp said the only good result of his litigation was the severe side effects warnings in drug commercials. Have you noticed the same warnings being given for drugs you might not associate with suicidal thoughts like allergy meds?

    Until proven otherwise like Columbine, I automatically figure mass shootings are staged, sponsored or orchestrated with a political agenda to engineer consent for disarmament. Because mass shootings coverage plays like a record dropping from the changer. Remember those? Cue up the battle cry for “reasonable” gun control. They can never say what they really want which is banning private gun ownership altogther. The steps have to be incremental

  13. I was on the Rock Legends Cruise five years ago and I almost tracked down James Tracy just for grins when I returned. I have been following his blog like 7 years plus. The insane traffic made me chicken out with limited time before my flight. I find it amusing being called a shill. I represent no one but myself . I never attack other commenters on these forums. I don’t run people down even when they do. I also don’t hide behind an alias. There’s a few of us.

    I hope you’ll have dug into the Stem School Shooting here in Colorado, your latest school shooting du jour. The news coverage is preposterous. So many “witnesses” found the “composure” to give interviews, but failed to convince me they witnessed a horror. They laughed in the face of tragedy. Seems to be the common thread linking all these shootings. I am guessing 99% of all people who hear about mass shootings automatically believe they are real. They will never spend an ounce of time digging to see if the story makes any sense. We are the 1% that dissect every word belched forth by the “on the scene” news reporting. The Stem School Shooting actors were just as bad as Dandy Hoax, Charlestown Church and others. To me the crux of the biscuit is not whether the shooting took place or did not. The people put on TV to talk about it are playing a role and pushing an agenda. Their acting is so horrible and the laughing, that’s mocking the awake population. The asleep will consider us insane for even mentioning it.

Leave a Reply