The Obama Deception

[Schwa.]

Very interesting video. Anyone see this? I found it a bit sensational at times but pretty interesting.

The makers of the video urge the viewer to research their video for themselves.

Lots of good info in there. Be it false of not, still gets ya thinkin.

[SaggyBalls]

False or not?

Sensational or not, Alex Jones' movies are a lot more important to watch than almost anything on the news.

Vote for what you believe in any way you can.

I don't agree with every sentiment in the movie but it is important to recognize the changes that have occurred and are being pushed through by elected and appointed officials.

[hamilton]

Why I Don't Buy Into Your Conspiracy Theories

[SaggyBalls]

[color:green]"The most harmful effect of conspiracy theories -- which, in my experience are often built on some small kernel of verifiable truth -- is that it pre-empts serious analysis and investigation of the really important issues by marginalizing those performing the analysis and making the questions themselves appear to be based on crazy, fringe propositions. They serve to distract from the real dynamics that more often than not underlie the plots cooked up by overheated imaginations. "

There are a few points in the movie that I feel take away from its credibility...making the issue of sunspot cycles vs. fossil fuels in climate change for example would take steam out of the environmental movement while it's obvious that we're poisoning our planet with greenhouse gases, carcinogens, and countless poisins...

[color:green]"But asking those questions puts one at risk of being lumped in with a fringe movement, and the result is that we're less likely to get at the truth about what happened that day because of the 9/11 Truth movement, not despite its tireless efforts (a conspiracy theory as good as any other is that the whole 9/11 "Truth" movement is a government operation designed to prevent serious questioning of what led up to the events of that infamous day)."

these questions are important and to be fair, it shouldn't really matter to someone that really cares if someone lables them as 'fringe'

[color:green]"There are also pseudoscientific claims about 9/11 that don't hold water. Just one example among many: 9/11 "truthers" often say that the World Trade Center towers couldn't possibly have collapsed as a result of the impact of those jets because the estimated temperatures of the fires that followed weren't hot enough to melt the steel framework of the building...

...As a critical thinker who isn't an expert in the fine points of metallurgy, it would be deeply irresponsible to take them as evidence of anything more than what Hoftstadter called "the paranoid style in American politics."

"Another example is the North American Union -- which I wrote about here. If you're not familiar with the theory -- it's especially popular in far-right circles -- it holds that there is a "globalist plot" to combine the U.S., Canada and Mexico into one transnational super state and replace our own government with a regional power that presides over all of the citizens of the new union.

It is, simply, hokum: a "plan" endorsed in an academic white paper (and later a book) and nothing more. But there is a very real, and very dangerous (from progressives' perspective), push toward much closer economic integration in North America, as well as a move toward a "security partnership" among the U.S., Canada and Mexico with equally disturbing ramifications."

The SPP? Citizens of the countries in question never hear about on the mass media they depend on for their 'news'...

So what DO you 'buy into', hamilton?

I believe it is very important to look at these theories and ideas and then lay them over the Mass Media's explanation of the world's current events.

I buy into the importance of the power of citizens and local community. the 'New World Order' theory ceases to be a theory when guys like Henry Kissinger and Barack Obama openly talk about it, use "Security and Prosperity' as normal verbiage, as well as the many other things explicitly stated, just as any good salesman or jedi knight would.

For decades individuals' rights have been removed from citizens without notice from news media.

[color:green]From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilateral_Agreement_on_Investment

The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) was negotiated between members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) between 1995 and 1998. Its purpose was to develop multilateral rules that would ensure international investment was governed in a more systematic and uniform way between states. When the first draft was leaked to the public in 1997, it drew widespread criticism from civil society groups and developing countries, particularly over the possibility that the agreement would make it difficult to regulate foreign investors. After an intense global campaign was waged against the MAI by the treaty's critics, the host nation France announced in October 1998 that it would not support the agreement, effectively killing it due to the OECD's consensus procedures.

This information had to be LEAKED to have any kind of impact, and even then there was almost no coverage on the news.

NAFTA has stripped Canada of rights on resources (water) and has led to the privatization of our resources.

There are a lot of 'conspiracy theories' that link back to the WTO and the World bank and many of these 'theories' are more of a reality than fiction.

FEMA camps and prisons being built are no fiction.

the North American Super Highway being started in Texas is no fiction.

The narratives affixed to and that draw together the many facts that seem supressed when viewed en masse are what makes up the 'theory' side of conspiracy.

Why reply to 'has anyone seen this movie' with 'why I don't buy into your conspiracy theories'?

Seems awfully smug.

...not to offend you, hamilton, but that's a relatively self-satisfied response and doesn't really push along specific discussion about any of the content of the movie - and if you haven't seen the movie but are aware of the specific issues that Alex Jones advocates examination of, then that kind of response is entirely self-satisfied.

I think that all too often, these issues are posed to the public together because that's the easiest way for their implications to sink in and be most understood. Unfortunately, many people are socialized to care about not being the wierdo with the tinfoil hat, and in that polarize themselves in the opposite direction.

One important thing to understand is that 'this horrible thing is happening' and 'this horrible thing is happening to us' are very different...

...but on the flip side, 'this horrible thing' is still happening and will continue to while we're distracted with everything else that we're told is more important.

Whether or not it's a 'conspiracy' has nothing to do with these opportunitstic changes occuring.

The fact that matters to people more than the issues themselves on both sides of the fence is far more damaging to us in the long run than any implications that the Theorism would ever cause.

[M.O.B.E]

http://educate-yourself.org/lte/bobrosejitters23may09.shtml

[M.O.B.E]

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/obamadeceptionin12parts12mar09.shtml

[SaggyBalls]

Noam Chomsky, Gatekeeper for the Left?

December 28, 2007

Subject: NOAM CHOMSKY

From: adowds@yahoo.cz

Date: Fri, December 28, 2007

To: Editor

Why does Chomsky have to be a gatekeeper just because he doesn't believe in your conspiracy theories. Can he not simply be another person, probably like most members of your family for instance, that lives outside the realm of fantasy. I, your family and Mr Chomsky don't believe in the illuminati, the flying spaghetti monster or Santa Claus. Your reasoning is that we all must belong to a secret society for our denunciation.

What exactly are you doing with your time to stop the illuminati that could possibly be of any value? Be honest your fixation with them is nothing more than a boring hobby.

[SaggyBalls]

"Even if (911 conspiracy theories) were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares? It doesn't have any significance. It's a little bit like the huge energy that's put out on trying to figure out who killed John F. Kennedy. Who knows? And who cares? Plenty of people get killed all the time, why does it matter that one of them happened to be John F. Kennedy? If there was some reason to believe that there was a high level conspiracy, it might be interesting. But the evidence against that is just overwhelming. And after that, if it happened to be a jealous husband, or the mafia, or someone else, what difference does it make? It's just taking energy away from serious issues onto ones that don't matter."

N. Chomsky

"It's the same with the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, all these other things the people are racing around searching for conspiracy theories about-they're "nothing" organizations. Of course they're there, obviously rich people get together and talk to each other, and play golf with one another, and plan together-that's not a big surprise. But these conspiracy theories people are putting their energies into have virtually nothing to do with the way the institutions actually function".

N. Chomsky

Chomsky has never discussed the effects of sodium fluoride, nor the lead and arsenic used in water as silent weapons of pacification.

As a scientist, he is apparently uninterested in sodium fluoride's proven link to cancer, leukemia, osteoporosis, Alzheimer disease, and brain damage.

So should we be surprised that he never writes about the deadly poison aspartame found in thousands of products?

Or genetically modified foods and growth hormones which destroy immune systems while causing blood disorders and swelling of the organs?

Chomsky, the self-proclaimed radical, also advocates such depopulation methods. In Chomsky’s book "Understanding Power," a collection of his talks with activists, a crowd member asks about population control, to which Chomsky responds:

" If we continue to produce energy by combustion, the human race isn’t going to survive much longer...Yeah, population control is another issue where it doesn’t matter if you do it, everybody has to do it. It’s like traffic: I mean you can’t make driving a car survivable by driving well yourself; there has to be kind of a social contract involved, otherwise it won’t work". (61)

Chomsky is one of the many re-direct agents who use the real environmental pollution problems to push for a fascist takeover by a world government. Much like the ideas discussed in the Report From Iron Mountain, he uses the threat of global warming to justify totalitarian control:

"Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something. Well, given the state of the popular movements we have today, we’d probably have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I’d even agree to it, because there’s just no other alternatives right now." (Understanding Power, 388)

Here is Noam Chomsky, openly advocating a fascist takeover because the ends justify the means. This is classic problem-reaction-solution programming, as he points to the real threat of pollution and then offers the solution of tyranny

-Daniel L. Abrahamson

[Booche]

That's the most McCarthyismistic post I have seen on this board yet.

[color:purple]Congratulations free thinker.

[phishtaper]

ah, my old favourite example of incorrect pseudo-science. for the record, aspartame is not poison. this has never been shown. in fact, it's safety in humans has been demonstrated over the years in many legitimate controlled trials.

one has to critically question all points when someone continues to espouse such nonsense on this point.

[Thorgnor]

Especially when people denounce a Linguist (as a Scientist?) because he won't make claims about chemistry, biology or biochemistry.

Everyone is out to get you... curl up and die.

[hamilton]

My favorite conspiracy theory is the one that says the world is being run by a handful of ultra-rich capitalists, and that our elected governments are mere puppets. I sure hope it’s true. Otherwise my survival depends on hordes of clueless goobers electing competent leaders. That's about as likely as a dog pissing the Mona Lisa into a snow bank.

The only way I can get to sleep at night is by imagining a secret cabal of highly competent puppetmasters who are handling the important decisions while our elected politicians debate flag burning and the definition of marriage.

It's the only explanation for how the governments of the world could be staffed with morons and yet everything still runs okay, sort of. Granted, things aren't perfect, but when you hear our leaders talk, you have to wonder why our energy policy doesn't involve burning asbestos on playgrounds. There must be some competent people pulling the strings behind the curtain, adjusting the money supply, twiddling with interest rates, choosing the winners for American Idol, and that sort of thing.

Ha-ha-ha!

[Kanada Kev]

Cheese conspiracy:

[ollie]

Why I Don't Buy Into Your Conspiracy Theories

Thank you for posting that.

[SaggyBalls]

Hey - had to reel people into this somehow.

I really do like how diet cola is sweet but not sticky, but artifically sweetened anything isn't real food - quite a bit like 'Low Fat' or 'Fat Free' foods are filled with additives that are more harmful to the human body than the fat they replace.

As far as the Aspartame 'debate', it's not a natural substance and although methanol and formaldehyde are trace byproducts of natural metabolism, the levels of Formaldehyde in the average American's diet because of chewing gum, diet soda, and other artifically sweetened products is the other side of the story that is so easily smoothed over by the 'you would have to drink over fifteen hundred cans of soda to reach toxicity' line.

Above 86 degrees farenheit, liquid aspartame turns into Formaldehyde...so in actuality, many products don't contain Aspartame by the time they reach our stomachs. This is not myth it is chemical fact.

Consistent low level ingestion of / exposure to toxins of any kind is not healthy.

"safe" and "healthy" are very different.

"Not wholly Unsafe" is closer to the mark that the FDA uses.

Many People avoid eating MSG and Organic farming is causing an economic revolution yet the debate about Aspartame continues as if it is important to the survival of humanity.

Monsanto has profited a lot from this wholly unnecessary product. Yes, Monsanto. "But tests show it's not toxic" is easily trumped by "this product has no positive value in a healthy diet" and even with claims that aspartame is metabolized into molecular chains that are the precursor for the Amino Acid 'Tyrosine' there's never been any claim that aspartame increases levels of Tyrosine and if there were it would be touted as one of the most important food additives known to man because of it.

Whether one believes the 'toxicity' reports to be true, a diet of real food is undeniably healthier than one of man made chemicals.

The unfortunate side of the discussion is that most websites that are dedicated to criticizing the use/sale of Aspartame are often linked to detox and natural sweetener products. Though these websites have to somehow pay for themselves, to some an alternative low-caloric or non-caloric sweetener option may be seen as a service. To others it may seem like a conflict of interest. I have found a rather impartial resource in that regard.

"It was Ralph Walton, M.D. doing research for 60 Minutes who showed the importance of “independent†scientific peer reviewed research in his report titled: “Survey of Aspartame Studies: Correlation of Outcome and Funding Sources: http://www.dorway.com/peerrev.html 92% of independent research showed the problems aspartame causes and if you eliminate 6 studies the FDA had something to do with when they became influenced by aspartame manufactures and one pro-aspartame summary, 100% of ALL independent studies show the problems."

"Never has the public been warned that it triggers birth defects, a catastrophe the eminent Dr. Louis Elsas warned Congress about. In fact the average consumer of aspartame is not aware that the European Food Safety Authority says that an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of aspartame is 40 milligrams/kilogram of body weight about the amount in a six pack of diet soda for a 10 year old boy. Nor do they know how to tell if that amount is being exceeded by intake of the more than 5000 food and drug products currently sweetened with aspartame"

Recent studies show...

Now...we're not talking about thousands of independent studies...but consistently, independent research shows that Aspartame is Toxic.

Is toxic. Is.

Unfortunately, nearly all of the research on Aspartame has been linked to the FDA - which through clear example set with Bovine Growth Hormone many years ago shows again the FDA's partiality to Monsanto.

Are they out to get us? Who cares?

Is there useful information here? Absolutely.

Aspartame, Soy, Fluoride, Pasteurized Milk, Margarine & other toxic fats, cheap meat, nitrites, sulphites, high fructose corn syrup & other processed sugars...

...Then of course are beauty/hygiene products - bearing in mind that the body can absorb many chemicals more readily through the skin than through the gastrointestinal tract - As much as I miss the city, I'm so happy to not be on city water, as Fluoridated, Chlorinated water is not healthy to bathe/shower in...

...Not that they're necessarily parts of a plot against us but they are certainly prevalent and are poisons that many of us are in direct contact with on a daily basis, myself included.

I like cream in my coffee, ice cream, milk on my cereal, cottage (and other) cheese(s), soya sauce, and reconstituted juices.

I like Demarara (and other cane) sugar(s), Bisquick, packaged fried foods, and I'm not picky about my produce.

I use toothpaste when I'm not cleaning my teeth with baking soda which goes in cycles.

I eat many foods made from/with white flour.

Do these things support a healthier life? no.

I know enough to hold off eating these all the time and hope to remove myself from my poison-rich lifestyle as time goes on.

To what - if not the many factors in our food, water, and air quality - can we attribute increasing cases of cancer, respiratory illness, neurological disorders, autoimmune disorders, and a range of illnessess and wellness concerns that plague industrialized countries?

Aside from apathy/disbelief, of course.

The petroleum and petrochemical industries play a huge part in poisoning our world - what I listed as poison touches the majority of North Americans.

Factor in off gassing from our sofa, desk chair, carpet, laminate flooring, paint, plastic headphones, polyester shirt, draperies, refrigerator lining, plywood furniture, among others - and aspartame seems pretty weak.

This deadly cocktail of chemicals is so vast and varied that we may never know the extend of the physiological repercussions of our greed and haste.

To rule these factors out for consideration or concern is both unwise and reckless.

sugar-free Chewing gum? Diet soda? Coated ibuprofen? Quick, mindless decisions of convenience. These things are not truly important. Sugary soft drinks and chewing gum aren't that much less unhealthy for us - but work in different ways on our bodies.

Sometimes all this 'bad news' is overwhelming and we are numb to the warnings. At the end of the day we're still alive and dealing with all of the weight in our lives. Looking at it all as 'things to avoid' is a lot different than finding ways to support your and our well being.

Be good to yourself. The choices you make will not only benefit you, but are bound to help other people. This isn't about 'sticking it to the man' or being terrified. It's about putting value on your life and the energy that you get from it and give back to it.

We should have the right to choose what we put into our bodies. Mandated warning labels are the easiest and fairest compromise.

Edited May 26, 2009 by Guest
fack this is long.

[Schwa.]

I love how very critical and angré this makes Booche.

If you really felt as strongly about this issue as you seem to, why not give evidence to counter any and all points made in the video. With your vast knowledge on the subject you MUST have the explanation as to why public servants are meeting behind closed doors and not sharing any of the information discussed at said meeting. It is against US law to do this. Rather, you put out short, ignorant jabs about how stupid anyone must be to believe any of this.

Disclaimer: not once have i said i denounce or support said issue. Not. Once. Just amazed at the short sitedness of the retorts.

No doubt this post will be met with some sort of jab about how dumb i am. meh.

edit: hamilton did post something of use.

Edited May 26, 2009 by Guest
Bilderberg is taking over the Universe!!!

[ollie]

With your vast knowledge on the subject you MUST have the explanation as to why public servants are meeting behind closed doors and not sharing any of the information discussed at said meeting.

This happens in government everyday. I don't get it.

[Schwa.]

Does that make it OK, Ollie?

I'll have to be more specific. I'm specifically referring to the Bilderberg gathering. Entire hotels are emptied, any and all media personnel are banned from the premises with a security perimeter surrounding the property. Many many world leaders are in these meetings be it financial leaders or Presidents and Prime Ministers. I'm not talking about Joe the MP trying to work a backdoor deal to get a road paved in his neighbourhood man. I'd like to think you knew that.

Now you can tell me they aren't conspiring in there and no problem, that's not what i keep trying to convey. Are you not curious what it is they're doing in there? Just a little? Playin' canasta? Fuck no. These people work for the people and I can understand why herds of Alex Jones' are so angry because of this. The secrecy aides in their cause.

Note: i have still not taken a side. i'm more or less looking for an intelligent conversation here, not an argument.

[M.O.B.E]

"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for

people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."

-- Noam Chomsky

[Booche]

Where do you see me angry above Schwa......where.....

If you were paying attention, you would have noticed I was commenting on Yours Truly`s post.

Hamilton`s link is precisely the kind of points I was inarticulatingly getting at the other day in the other thread, as were others.

I'm specifically referring to the Bilderberg gathering.

It's against the law for these individuals to get together? And because their think-tank meetings arent made public it is automatically against the law?

There begins the definition of Hamilton's post!

Frank McKenna has been there and not as a public servant. Does that mean we are obligated to hear about his tete-a-tetes with Bill Clinton?

[Schwa.]

Just looking for a place to use the angré card buddy. Most of what i said was generated from the posts in the Sanctuary, apologies.

To answer your question, yes. Only the public servants though. Since they are getting paid by the US taxpayer, the US taxpayer has the absolute right to know what they're doing. Doesn't mean it ever happens, but yes, against US law.

Again, you're asking me these questions as though i've chosen to believe that there is a conspiracy. I'm not here to prove or disprove anything, just to talk about it. I've stated this point several times now.

[ollie]

Well, to what degree does the taxpayer have a right to know what a public servant is doing?

I start with the premise that some degree of discretion is required to govern a society. I think that when sometimes the degree of discretion is higher than I'd like that it's a necessary evil for the sake of national security.

[Booche]

I accept and would also like to offer my apologies Schwa, with regards to the prior thread. It is very hard for me not to read into some kind of agenda (I'll do my best not to from here on out) on your part especially when you bring up the Bilderberg gatherings.

They bring out the fury of conspiracy theorists. Just because one doesnt hear about a meeting between individuals it is automatically deemed there was a negative connotation? I am not saying there is or isnt but consider me an individual who would prefer the leaders of their respective fields (science, mathematics, politics, whatever) get together from time to time to discuss matters they see fit.

And I completely agree with Ollie. There has to be some kind of starting point.

I love a good question but I like a valid one even more.

[Schwa.]

I see where you're going with the discretion issue....a person is smart but people are stupid. I agree that many of the NA public just need to be told what to do...but why does the sake of North American (National) security involve the head of Walmart, IBM, Xerox, Royal Dutch Shell, Nokia and Daimler? that's the sketchy part.

Another sketchy thing is that they've kept this secrecy policy for such a long time now. why? they keep minutes at these conferences but don't write down names. just weird.

[ollie]

I see where you're going with the discretion issue....a person is smart but people are stupid.

Certainly that's part of it but on an even more obvious level, discretion protects the state from its enemies. Be they homegrown dissidents or foreign interlopers, a completely open government bereft of any level of secrecy severely inhibits its ability to sustain itself.

Why are Walmart and the like at the table? They probably bought their seats. I don't like it much either but I also don't know that my fear isn't irrational. I accept it on the level that we live in a capitalist society and business has a big part in driving the economy.

Ultimately I think that life goes on despite the backroom machinations of the upper crust.