Posts Tagged ‘CNN’

President Obama’s administration’s constant reassurances to the American people starting last month is starting to look a lot like what I suspected they would be – a ploy.  A ploy for the Obama admnistration to show that it “has leadership qualities”.  But I was right when I said if there would be a terrorist attack before the November elections, just call me the prophet.  And this was pretty damn close…well, we still have until Tuesday.

“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” wrote Shapiro, adding, “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, October 29, 2010

UPDATE: As this contrived scare unravels, Obama has given a press conference reversing earlier announcements that there were no explosives in the packages found on the planes. Obama claimed that the packages “did apparently contain explosive material,” completely contradicting earlier reports which quoted authorities as saying that both the package found in the UK and the two found in the U.S. were all duds and contained no explosive material.

A few hours ago CNN reported, “Investigators examined two UPS planes that landed at Philadelphia International Airport and another at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, said Mike Mangeot, a UPS spokesman. Authorities later gave the “all-clear” at the airport in Newark, U.S. and U.K. officials said,” and yet now CNN is running with the headline, Suspicious packages ‘contain explosive material,’ Obama says. This stinks to high heaven. Obama is directly contradicting the announcements of his own federal security apparatus.

Obama also said that the events were a scare tactic designed to shake up Americans before the elections. On this point he’s correct, but all the evidence points to his White House being behind the scare. Obama was informed last night of the events as the packages were discovered and even after it was known that the UK package contained no explosive material, he issued a full security alert anyway.

As we predicted on four separate occasions would happen, the Obama White House has deliberately contrived a fake terror scare on the eve of the mid-term elections in an effort to subdue the rampaging political appetite for anti-big government candidates that threatens to sweep aside establishment incumbents next week.

Despite the fact that the so-called suspicious package discovered on a flight in the United Kingdom tested negative for any explosive material, President Obama, after being informed of the apparent “threat” yesterday, “directed U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the Department of Homeland Security” to launch a full-scale security alert, according to a White House press release, which in turn was helpfully elevated to levels of hysteria by the corporate media today.

The scaremongering was focused around two UPS planes that landed at Philadelphia International Airport and another at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, but just like the incident in the UK, both were soon given the “all clear,” reports CNN, and no bombs were found.

Despite the fact that no explosives at all were found on any of the planes, the establishment media is still feverishly running with the story that this was a “mail bomb” plot targeting the United States and that it was run out of Yemen, which coincidentally is also the US Military-Industrial Complex’s number one target for attack.

Quite how a “mail bomb plot” can succeed without any actual bombs is something the hysterical press has failed to properly explain. Like every other single major terror scare targeting the United States that we have covered, this smacks of an engineered political ploy.

As the video at the top of this article highlights, the terror scare also arrives just days after British Airways Chairman Martin Broughton attacked US authorities for the continuation of “completely redundant” airport security checks. It also comes amidst an increasing backlash against naked body scanners.

Just as former Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge admitted that fake terror alerts were issued by the Bush administration for political gain, Obama is taking a leaf out of the Neo-Con’s playbook – and his timing couldn’t be better – just four days before the mid-term elections on Super Tuesday.

Over the last few months, on four separate occasions, we warned that the Obama White House would pull a terror stunt on the eve of the election in an effort to corral an increasingly resentful and angry electorate into acquiescence. As we reported back in July, former Clinton advisor Robert Shapiro wrote that Obama was relying on an October surprise in the form of a terror scare to rescue his presidency.

“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” wrote Shapiro, adding, “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

 Last month we reported on how the Obama administration’s threat that a “small scale terror attack” was on the cards was just another political ploy to instill fear within Americans. In another subsequent article we again highlighted the probability of the government contriving a terror scare for political grist.

We repeated our warning about Obama seeking to exploit terror earlier this month in the aftermath of the supposed airport lobby bombing plot, which again turned out to be nothing but hot air.

We’d be loathe to forget that the media and the government have been totally discredited over and over again by their complicity in issuing phony terror alerts designed to manipulate elections and frighten the public into slavish obedience, accepting naked body scanners, an intensification of the police state and any other indignity in the name of the government protecting them from terrorists like Christmas Day bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was allowed to board the airliner he tried to attack by order of the US State Department.

Within hours of this new terror scare breaking every indication, most notably the fact that Obama was informed last night and decided to go ahead with a full security alert despite the UK package being a dud, screams out that this is a contrived political stunt designed to sway the many key undecided voters in anticipation of next week’s mid-terms.

Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth President of th...

Image via Wikipedia

In the following video clip Rick Sanchez is talking to Wayne Slater about Gov. Rick Perry of Texas and that he will win the Governor’s race.  Sanchez had to throw in the “call to secession” quote by Perry.  Which I believe was nothing more than a political stunt.

Anyway Sanchez calls “states rights” racist to minorities.  Evidently Sanchez does not understand the meaning to “secession”.  It was meant as a roadblock of too much federal power.  Granted Texas, if they should ever decide to secede, would lose about $500 billion over night.  But principles, I guess.

If states rights are “racist”, then what can be said of the federal government’s slow action to ensure the rights of colored people during the 1960s?  Or the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans during WWII?  Sixty-two percent of those imprisoned during that time were American citizens, by the way.  What can be said of the federal government’s genocide of Native Americans?

In the 1850s the federal government enacted the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793.  This was done on part of the federal government, and was not anti-slavery.  Abolitionists would call this a “Bloodhound Law”.  Anyone can read the history of Abraham Lincoln and find that he was not as anti-slavery as what people thought.

Secession is the right of the states and, in that, preserves the right of the people. Any such quotes to the contrary are just ill-informed.

Can the liberal mainstream media get any more biased than this?  Come on.  All these winers complaining people are saying nasty things about someone, please, give me a break.  Its the first amendment, people.

Is the mainstream media more credible?  Do they want us censored just like they are?  We are the most free media network out there.  Just because some blogger jumped to conclusion over a speech given by Sherly Sherrod and now all of us have to pay the price.

Since nasty things are being said about people all the time on the blogs, why didn’t they say something sooner.  Oh, I get it.  Becuase one of their own was attacked.

In a free market internet the common sense and free speech of others keeps dubious and sometimes malicious statements “fair and balanced”.

P.S.  Did I mention that outlets like CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News hate bloggers because they want to be the only source for news.

Keep the internet free!  Watch the clip here.

This is something that fuels the debate between what is “free” and what is “right”.  What the clip below of CNN’s report on the issue.

Who do you agree with? 

I am more inclined to agree with the motorcycilist and the ACLU.  Despite the fact that the man was speeding and becoming a wreckless endangerment, I don’t think he was wanting to film himself riding with the hopes of getting into a chase, with the chance of having his license revoked.

The state trooper should not have pulled his gun.  He should have flashed his badge, identified himself, and gone from there.  What regular John Doe citizen is going to have a good reaction when a Chevy Impala pulls up and a plain clothes man gets out with a gun?  Oh boy, a man with a gun!

The fact is, is that there are a lot more people to prosecute other than some stupid speeder who happens to have a camera on his helmet, and an over reacting cop gets out with gun drawn and waits at least five seconds to identify himself.  What person would have a good reaction to this?

Where is Constitutionally or morally right to confiscate a man’s computers all on the basis of him posting a video on You Tube?

Would taping things such as this merit you getting put in the slammer?  Or this?  Or watch how Sean Hannity’s buddy Oliver North is protected in refrence to REX-84.

I saw on CNN today where there is talk of sex offenders being held indefinitely even after trial, conviction, and even after they serve their time.  Now as a person who is anti-government, I cannot support this.  It seems that the guv’ment looks to hold anyone they want without trial at will.  Many are asking the question “if they do this with sex offenders, where will it end?”  Robbers?  Murderers?  How much of the population will they suspend constitutional rights?

We could argue on the basis of the safety of the people, but once the rights of others are suspended we are all at risk.

Lou Dobbs for Senate?

Posted: November 26, 2009 in News, Politics
Tags: , ,

‘Mr. Independent may have his eyes set on a Senate race for 2012.  Sources have it that Dobbs is set to contest Democratic seat holder Robert Menendez, the Senates only Hispanic. 

While the Presidency is in speculation the Senate is more like it says his spokesman.  Dobbs is best known as being a crusader against illegal immigration but there are those who doubt whether he could pass the Republican National Committee “purity test”.  Politico is reporting that strategists are delighted in a possible third party canidate.