Resistnwo.com News 25
HOME
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 9, 2011
Get ready for the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords to be used in a serious way against the Tea Party movement. MSNBC, CNN and the rest of the Mockingbird media are now attempting to portray millions of Americans as violence prone anti-government radicals.
Fox News attributes the shooting to anti-government sentiment.
In the hours following the shooting liberal bloggers blamed Sarah Palin’s mid-term election rhetoric for the Gifford shooting. Palin’s campaign organization, SarahPac, posted an ad targeting Democrat Giffords for defeat during the election. The liberal blogosphere is directly accusing Palin of stoking hatred against the Arizona Congresswoman that led to the shooting in a Tucson parking lot.
Daily Kos and FireDogLake have taken up the charge and are blaming Palin directly. Sarah Palin is not an anti-government radical – she is part of the establishment Republican party and to accuse her of calling for the assassination of Gifford is ludicrous.
The word “target” is a well established part of the Democrat-Republican political lexicon.
In a Tweet, suspected CIA operative Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos wrote sarcastically: “Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin.”
Arizona Democrat Rep. Raul Grijalva denounced what he describes as a political environment poisoned by “anger, hatred, and division.” Grijalva blamed the Tea Party movement: “[When] you stoke these flames, and you go to public meetings and you scream at the elected officials, you threaten them – you make us expendable you make us part of the cannon fodder. For a while, you’ve been feeding this hatred, this division… you feed it, you encourage it…. Something’s going to happen. People are feeding this monster…. Some of the extreme right wing has made demonization of elected officials their priority.”
In other words when citizens victimized by a predatory and arrogant government angrily confront their so-called representatives, it is tantamount of calling for violence and assassination.
“I think that Sarah has finally yelled fire in a crowded theatre,” a post on the Firedoglake blog avers. “If they can show that this dipstick was in any way influenced by Palin’s dog-whistle advocacy of violence, they need to drag her ass in for an arraignment.”
“I know Sarah and the GOP spamming their mentally ill constituency that it is, ‘OK to kill people if they don’t share your beliefs’ doesn’t help the situation but it is really too early to say what the attacker’s motives were,” said another.
“This tragedy rests sorely on your doorstep Ms. Palin,” blogger Bartholomew Hayes wrote. “Your irresponsible rhetoric has brought senseless violence against the American people.”
All of this posturing is absurd. Sarah Palin is obviously a creation of the establishment. She was appointed the unofficial leader of the Tea Party movement after a large part of it was craftily transformed by operatives into a harmless cheerleading section for the Republican party. Palin’s handlers made sure she publicly kissed the ring of top level Rockefeller minion and notorious unapprehended war criminal Henry Kissinger.
“A lot of people have bets on how long it will take before they blame this on the tea party and that’s absolutely ridiculous,” Debbie Dooley, a national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, told Congress.org.
The Tea Party movement originally established by Libertarians and Ron Paul and subsequently co-opted and brought trance-like into the Republican party Borg hive is not a threat to the establishment.
The real Tea Party not co-opted by Republicans is the obvious target of what yet may turn out to be another staged event. Sarah Palin is the television reality show queen and propped up figurehead of an orchestrated movement funded in part by the CIA operative Richard Mellon Scaife.
The CIA has perfected the art of undermining and destroying indigneous political movements in opposition to the ruling elite and their power structures and institutions. The FBI’s covert and illegal COINTELPRO operation took down countless political movements, most notably the anti-war and civil rights movements of the 1960s. Fred Hampton and other Black Panthers were assassinated as part of the FBI’s reign of terror.
“Regardless of why the shooting took place, there will be a lot of talk about violence in America in coming days,” warns corporate behemoth Time Magazine.
In addition to further demonizing the Tea Party and other constitutionalist and patriotic movements, the brutal murder of innocents and the serious wounding of a Democrat Congress critter will be used to ramp up the statist argument that Congress needs to pass gun control legislation. The visage of Timothy McVeigh and homegrown terrorism will also get a new lease on life.
“Others on the left have taken it upon themselves to politicize this event by trying to paint it as an argument for stronger gun control laws,” warns Solomon Kleinsmith. “This coming even as we know next to nothing about this Jared Lee Loughner character, where he got his weapon, or if there was any history of violent legal problems.”
For the elite, the problem is not violence. It is the existence of and threat posed by a viable and growing constitutionalist movement that demands the Federal Reserve be closed down and the banksters responsible for the unfolding global economic crisis be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity.
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 9, 2011
The FBI and local law enforcement in Pima County, Arizona, are looking for a
second man wanted in connection with the shooting of Rep. Giffords and the
murder of a federal judge and five others.
The man is described as a Caucasian male, approximately 40-50 years old with
dark hair, who was last seen wearing blue jeans and a dark blue jacket. Fox News
reported early Sunday that the man may have given the accused assassin, Jared
Lee Loughner, a ride to the supermarket. Is it possible he acted as Loughner’s
handler in a larger assassination plot?
Early in the Oklahoma City bombing case, the FBI sought a second man, described
as John Doe 2. Police sketches of the man were released to the media.
By the time the government was ready to prosecute Timothy McVeigh, however,
John Doe 2 slipped into the background. Justice Department officials told the
corporate media that the three witnesses at a truck rental business might have
been confused when they were originally interviewed and said a second man accompanied McVeigh. “And finding out otherwise was impossible for most reporters, because the witnesses in Kansas were under intense pressure by the FBI not to talk to the press,” J. D. Cash wrote for the McCurtain Daily Gazette in 2004.
“Regardless of the fact the witnesses at the truck rental were holding firm, by the time the much-anticipated murder and conspiracy trials for McVeigh and Nichols began in Denver in 1997, the government was working overtime trying to dismiss evidence that there had ever been a John Doe 2, or any other suspects that might muddy their cases against McVeigh and Nichols,” Cash writes.
The FBI later admitted it had withheld evidence about informants who claimed Timothy McVeigh had additional accomplices. “Filings in the case also revealed the existence of at least four informants who were part of the Oklahoma City bombing investigation, including the one working undercover and another under an explicit confidentiality agreement,” J. M. Berger wrote for Intelwire in 2006.
Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, the Christmas non-bombing patsy who attempted to light his underwear on fire, was delivered to the airport and placed on the plane by a “sharp dressed man” who had pull with airport authorities. Kurt Haskell, a passenger on the flight, told Alex Jones last year that the man was detained and handcuffed following Mutallab’s stunt. Since the event, however, the corporate media has ignored the participation of this Indian man, who was apparently Mutallab’s handler and managed to get the dim-witted Nigerian on the flight despite the fact he did not have a passport. He was also suspiciously removed from a terror watch list prior to the flight.
It is very early in the Giffords shooting case. The FBI and Arizona law enforcement say they are looking for a second man connected to the murders, but this may fade into the background as the government prepares to prosecute Loughner.
The official story that will become gospel for the corporate media is in the process of formulation. A second man may not be part of that narrative.
Bruce Drake
Contributing Editor
Author Bio »
Contact Author »
Subscribe :
The gunman accused of shooting Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Gifford
and 19 others was trying to reload his semi-automatic weapon,
but the efforts of bystanders and a new magazine that failed
prevented what Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said coul
d have been "a huge greater catastrophe."
Speaking at a Sunday press conference in Tucson, Dupnik
said that suspect Jared Lee Loughner was attempting to change
magazines after his initial volley of shots when "a woman went
up and grabbed the magazine and tore it away from him while he
was trying to put another magazine in."
Loughner then succeeded in loading another magazine but that
"fortunately the spring and the magazine failed" and two other
civilians were able to get the weapon away from him and subdue
him until police came, according to Dupnik.
Gabrielle GiffordsDupnik said each magazine contained 31 bullets
and had Loughner been able to reload and fire again "there would have bee been a huge greater catastrophe."
The woman who tried to get the magazine away from Loughner was herself wounded during the shootings.
Dupnik did not immediately have the names of the bystanders who tried to stop Loughner.
Loughner was armed with a 9 millimeter Glock semi-automatic which FBI Director Robert Mueller said he had obtained last November. Mueller did not say where Loughner got the gun. CNN reported it was purchased at a store in Tucson.
Dupnik also disclosed that the second "person of interest" that authorities said they were seeking as a possible accomplice may not have been involved in Saturday's shootings.
While Dupnik said authorities still need to locate the man, whose photo was distributed by law enforcement officials, "we are more satisfied in our minds that this person may not have been involved in this incident at all."
Dupnik, who has received wide attention for his remarks Saturday attacking the amount of "vitriol" in political rhetoric that he said may contribute to violence, repeated that view with obvious emotion on Sunday and also lashed out at laws that let "everybody" carry guns.
"I think that when the rhetoric about hated, about mistrust of government, about paranoia about how government operates and to try to inflame the public on a daily basis, 24 amours a day, seven days a week, has impact on people especially who are unbalanced personalities to begin with."
Asked how he felt about Arizona's gun laws, Dupnik said of the state, "I think we're the Tombstone of the United States of America."
"I have never been a proponent of letting everybody in this state carry weapons under any circumstances that they want and that's almost where we are," he said. "The legislature at this time is proposing that students and teachers be allowed to have weapons in schools and in college ... that's the ridiculous state to where we have become."
The 74-year-old Dupnik is a Democrat who, according to the Washington Post, "is known for his colorful and often bluntly partisan commentary." He has called Arizona's new law cracking down on illegal immigration "racist" and "stupid" and has refused to enforce it. He has also described the tea party as "bigots."
Dupnik's Saturday remarks drew a rebuke from Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, a Republican, who said on CBS' Face the Nation, "I didn't really think that that had any part in a law enforcement briefing last night. It was speculation. And I don't think we should rush to speculate. I thought that the report that we just saw from Tucson seems to have it about right. We really don't know what motivated this young person except to know he was very mentally unstable"
Liberals and conservatives claim the alleged killer's reading reveals his true ideology. They're both wrong
By Laura Miller
No sooner had the media discovered the YouTube profile page for
Jared Lee Loughner -- charged with killing six people, including
federal Judge John M. Roll and a 9-year-old girl, and wounding 13
others, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., in a shooting in
Tucson Saturday -- than speculation began about the favorite books
Loughner listed there. Conservatives pointed to Loughner's
citation of "The Communist Manifesto" as proof that he was a leftist
maniac and liberals interpreted his enthusiasm for Ayn Rand's "We,
the Living" as evidence that he was a right-winger.
Other books on Loughner's list (the profile was created on Dec. 20)
include the children's classics "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland,"
"Peter Pan" and "The Phantom Tollbooth." He also claimed to have
admired Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf." But the idea that this list will tell
us much about Loughner and any political motives he had for
shooting those 19 people is sorely misguided. Anyone who takes the
time to watch the 22-year-old college student's videos ought to be
able to see that clearly enough.
As the New York Times remarked on Sunday, the garbled, rambling and generally incomprehensible statements included in the videos (which consist of text only) are "consistent with the delusions produced by a psychotic illness like schizophrenia, which develops most often in the teens or 20s." Loughner's book list is also consistent with a bright, curious, rebellious teenager whose life has been arrested and derailed by just such an illness. In fact, the only surprising thing about that list is that it doesn't include "The Catcher in the Rye," a novel important to two other mentally ill shooters: Mark David Chapman (who killed John Lennon) and John Hinckley, who tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan.
The sole ideological thread running through Loughner's list is an inchoate anti-authoritarianism. It's likely that what attracted him to "Mein Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto" was less the political thinking in either book than their aura of the forbidden, the sensation that he was defying the adults around him by daring to read either one. The rest of his favorites -- "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," "Brave New World," "Animal Farm" and "Fahrenheit 451" -- depict deceitful and oppressive regimes committed to squelching individual initiative and thought.
It's not hard to understand why Loughner might be drawn to such narratives. A young man whose slide into paranoid schizophrenia has been noticed and addressed (Loughner was suspended from Pima Community College and administrators insisted that he get a mental health evaluation before he would be allowed to return) probably would favor literature in which maverick truth-tellers are labeled as insane or criminal by self-serving authority figures.
By including Plato's "Republic" and "Meno" on his list of favorites, Loughner could imply, as many paranoids do, that by virtue of his superior intellect he was privy to hidden knowledge of how the world really works. Casting the delusional notions in his videos in the form of logical syllogisms ("If A.D.E. is endless in year, then the years in A.D.E don't cease. A.D.E is endless in year. Therefore the years in A.D.E. don't cease.") was surely also meant to insist that they were the product of rational thought, not insanity.
But Loughner is almost certainly insane and, like the countless other mentally disturbed people who send similar ravings to media outlets around the world, his ideas would have been ignored as incoherent and irrelevant if he hadn't fired a gun into a crowd of people Saturday. The fact that he did fire that gun, however, doesn't make his delusions suddenly meaningful. It doesn't make his list of favorite books significant. Crazy people who make headlines and change history are still crazy.
By studying Loughner's book list for clues to the political leanings that somehow "drove" him to commit murder, commentators are behaving a lot like crazy people themselves. Paranoids are prone to scouring newspaper articles and the monologues of late-night comedians for imaginary coded messages that confirm their "secret knowledge" about the world. But those coded messages aren't there -- it's just random stuff with no special significance. The truth about mental illness is that it strikes without regard to political affiliation or ideological orientation, and it turns beautiful minds into nonsense factories. We can debate a social order that allows its victims access to firearms and talk about finding better ways to intervene before the minority of mentally disturbed individuals with violent impulses are able to act on those impulses. But trying to find the cause for this disease in politics, ideas or books is just plain nuts.
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 13, 2011
On Wednesday night in Tucson, Arizona, Obama and the Democrats disrespected the dead and turned a memorial into a cheap and tawdry political rally for the re-election campaign of Barry Obama.
A few of the usual pundits and observers noticed the obvious attempt to gain political mileage out of the dead and wounded by the Obama machine.
“Never before in the annals of national moments of mourning have the words spoken been so wildly mismatched by the spirit in which they were received,” writes John Podhoretz. “There was something about the choice of place, a college arena with the appropriate name of the McKale Memorial Center, that made the event turn literally sophomoric.”
The Washington Post said it is not “offering a judgment on whether or not it was an appropriate tone for a memorial service, but rather that it made for at-times incongruous sounds and images on television.”
The New York Times skirted the truth when Michael Shear wrote: “Mr. Obama’s speech, delivered amid sorrow, offered a fresh glimpse of the candidate who used hope as the tool to inspire his [supporters].”
“This was more like an Arsenio Hall show than a memorial service,” Doug Lucas, writing for American Thinker, complains today. “Catcalls, standing ovations, whistling and the whoop, whoop, whoop of the crowd dominated the night. What should have been a somber occasion for reflection turned into another Obama pep rally. It was as if these students had their guy up on stage and by God they weren’t about to let a national tragedy get in the way of them having a good time and cheering on their messiah.”
From the moment a politically correct Indian invoked ancestral spirits it was obvious the event was designed to be a political rally for Obama.
The creepy zombie-like Obama supporters we endured during the election returned in force and completely overshadowed any solemnity intended for the dead.
Another indication Democrats planned to exploit the dead came when operatives placed “Together We Thrive: Tucson & America” t-shirts on seats in the lower sections of the arena prior to the arrival of participants.
On January 10, the University of Arizona announced that Team Obama had accepted an invitation to visit Tucson in response to the shooting on Saturday. “President Obama will speak at a memorial event at 6 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 12 to support and remember victims of the mass shooting in Tucson, and to lift the spirits of those who have been personally affected by this tragedy,” UANews reported.
It takes time to design and manufacture thousands of t-shirts, a fact that leads one to conclude that Obama’s handlers had planned to exploit the tragedy soon after it occurred last weekend.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama chief of staff, once averred “never let a good crisis go to waste.” Soon after the shooting, however, Emanuel was quick to declare his political maxim “is not not intended for this moment, it doesn’t apply to this moment.”
The reaction of the Barry Obama faithful last night indicates otherwise. The corporate media is now predictably praiseful of the scriptwriter eloquence of Obama’s teleprompter speech. But with a few notable exceptions they have ignored the obvious fact that Barry Obama operatives decided before the smoke cleared in Tucson to exploit the memorial for political gain.
It is not an exaggeration to say that Obama has kicked off his re-election campaign on the bodies of Jared Lee Loughner’s victims, including the body of a nine year old child.
Even with the stench and pallor of the dead, politics never seem to change in the district of criminals.
Alex Jones & Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
January 14, 2011
A significant milestone in the fight against fluoride emerged quietly and without major notice from the mainstream news last week. After decades of ignoring the research about the dangers and hailing water fluoridation as one of the 10 greatest health achievements of the 20th Century (CDC), the government is calling for a reduction in the amount of fluoride it adds to public water supplies, citing its negative effect on teeth (dental fluorosis). For the first time since 1962, the standard for fluoride will be lowered from 1.2 to 0.7 milligrams per liter.
Because fluoride from water builds up over time in the human body, this reduction will not eliminate the dangers of fluoride– which include risk of bone cancer, bone fractures, thyroid disorder, brain inflammation, lowered IQ and mental functions, sterility or reduced fertility and more. However, it is a good sign that the powers-that-be are losing ground on the fluoride debate. Further, the reduction of fluoridation is proof that the warnings from activists, critics and health professionals have been heard after all.
As Alex Jones points out in the video, many of those health professionals who have been blowing the whistle on fluoridation for decades are employees or union contractors of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other governmental regulation agencies. Their objections, based on alarming scientific studies such as the one linking fluoridation with a seven-fold increase in bone cancer for boys, have heretofore been almost wholly ignored, until now. One reason for this government admission, by the way, likely has to do with limiting liability for those harmful effects, or even establishing immunity for districts who adhere to lowering the fluoride standard against future claims to harm.
At the same time, hundreds of other chemicals including many toxic ingredients like lead, arsenic, radium and uranium are also found in public drinking water. Many of these dangerous toxins are put into the water as part of the fluoride-cocktail administered in the many municipalities across the United States and other Western countries, or are leached into the supply via the acidic levels of fluoride. The compound is often not simply sodium fluoride, but a mix of toxic waste byproduct [see chart for hydrofluosilicic acid] created in the process of scrubbing phosphate fertilizer plants and in other high industry applications, such as aluminum.
Furthermore, while fluoride is scheduled for reduction in public water supplies, it is still very common and often dangerously concentrated in many food products at levels of many more parts per million than water and in pesticides used for food production, and in the soils where those pesticides are used.
Though these other fluoride dangers are significant enough that we need to continue educating and informing our fellow friends, neighbors and families, those who have long spoken out about this issue can cherish one victory on the road to taking back our nation, our lives and our health. Now, with this important government admission, we must push for complete removal of added fluoride from public water in our areas.
Further, as advisors to government bodies around the world attempt to argue for forced mass-medication by adding substances like lithium to public water, we must argue against ‘forced consent’ and demand one of our most integral human rights– that no government of man can make a law to force medicate us against our will. We have a human right to say no, especially when we know better.
Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
January 16, 2011
(NaturalNews) The Institute for Safe Medication Practices
(ISMP) recently published a study in the journal PLoS One
highlighting the worst prescription drug offenders that
cause patients to become violent. Among the top-ten most
dangerous are the antidepressants Pristiq (desvenlafaxine),
Paxil (paroxetine) and Prozac (fluoxetine).
Concerns about the extreme negative side effects of many
popular antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs have been
on the rise, as these drugs not only cause severe health
problems to users, but also pose a significant threat to society.
The ISMP report indicates that, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System, many popular drugs are linked even to homicides.
Most of the drugs in the top ten most dangerous are antidepressants, but also included are an insomnia medication, an attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) drug, a malaria drug and an anti-smoking medication.
As reported in Time, the top ten list is as follows:
10. Desvenlafaxine (Pristiq) – An antidepressant that affects serotonin and noradrenaline. The drug is 7.9 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
9. Venlafaxine (Effexor) – An antidepressant that treats anxiety disorders. The drug is 8.3 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
8. Fluvoxamine (Luvox) – A selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) drug that is 8.4 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
7. Triazolam (Halcion) – A benzodiazepine drug for insomnia that is 8.7 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
6. Atomoxetine (Strattera) – An ADHD drug that is 9 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
5. Mefoquine (Lariam) – A malaria drug that is 9.5 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
4. Amphetamines – This general class of ADHD drug is 9.6 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
3. Paroxetine (Paxil) – An SSRI antidepressant drug that is 10.3 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs. It is also linked to severe withdrawal symptoms and birth defects.
2. Fluoxetine (Prozac) – A popular SSRI antidepressant drug that is 10.9 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
1. Varenicline (Chantix) – An anti-smoking drug that is a shocking 18 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.
