Posts Tagged ‘cnn’

Sum it up

November 17, 2013

Obamacare’s worst case scenarios, considered:

Or was it meant to fail?




Soviet Bogeyman, Murray N. Rothbard, and Getting Real

June 7, 2013
English: Murray Rothbard in the 90's

English: Murray Rothbard in the 90’s (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The late Murray N. Rothbard is a name well-known among most libertarians I suppose, and his article “The Soviet Bogeyman” from 1973 is re-posted at, at:

It is Rothbard’s reaction to a Libertarian Party presidential candidate of those years, Dr. Hospers, and the latter’s advocacy of national arming to counter Soviet aggression. Rothbard refers to an apparently false claim repeated by Hospers in his own defense that there were Soviet “orders to advance” into Western Europe at the end of the war (presumably World War Two).

I disagree with Rothbard’s gullibility, while more or less agreeing with the approach he takes to potential aggressive threats from the Soviet Union, in his last paragraph, as excerpted below. Meaning I agree with the Rothbard approach to defense, while noting that he is wrong in denying any “Russian Threat”.

To proceed to Dr. Hospers’ final point: what of those Americans who are not persuaded by our evidence, and who persist in fearing the Russian Threat? He accuses us anarcho-capitalists who wish to dismantle the American State of “risking not only my life, but yours, by disarming.” But the point is that, in an anarchist society, those who fear a foreign threat and wish to arm themselves defensively, are free to go ahead and do so. Dr. Hospers happily concedes that private police forces would be more efficient than the police force of government monopoly; so why not private defense forces or “armies” as well? Contrary to Dr. Hospers, anarchists do not propose to force those who wish to arm defensively to disarm: instead on the contrary it is he and other advocates of archy who are now forcing us to arm against a foreign threat that many of us believe does not exist. It is no more moral to tax someone to pay for one’s own defense, whether real or imagined, than it is to draft him for the same purpose. And, besides, if the FBI is really protecting us against the sabotage of Grand Central Station, then why couldn’t the owners of that station do a far better job?

In my opinion, there is no small measure of naiveté in Rothbard’s arguments that the Soviets were only ever interested in “peaceful coexistence”, and, so he says, they were satisfying with merely waiting for the spontaneous revolutions to occur in other nations.

From what I have read of his writings, and the immense respect accorded him by other libertarian voices that have shown reliable insights, and from what I have learned from those writings, Rothbard is a source of great understanding of issues libertarian and anarcho-capitalist.

But he is not an oracle of God, to say the least, and on the issue of parental obligations toward children I could not disagree more, and there will be more on that topic in this blog forthcoming.

But on some of the things he says about the “Soviet threat” and “Communist threat”, there is a disconnect from the real world. It is an understandable reaction to the warfare state and military-industrial complex and the anti-Communist hysteria whipped up to justify major hikes in state confiscation schemes and income tax theft. Certainly, living in America, it is easier to see the sins committed against us by our own government than by foreign governments, including the abuse perpetrated with anti-communist justifications.

The fact is, though, that the so-called “Soviet threat” was not a phantom, nor is the Saul Alinsky/Noam Chomsky/Oliver Stone school of misinformation and subversion. Fraud, flattery, envy, and rigged elections in support of newly repackaged Soviet-style “democracies” were never phantoms.

The kind of corruption very much visible to Rothbard in the Western states, this corruption being borne of human nature itself, was very much present in the minds of the advocates of “peaceful coexistence”. At the same time, Russian defectors were pointing out at the time Rothbard penned this piece, Soviet military academies were teaching new officers that nuclear confrontation with the West was inevitable and that the first strike would determine the winner.

In more recent modified plans, though, in my opinion, this seems to have been a last resort option. Their plan is aided and abetted inside the United States by intellectuals who demand more welfare state power, more confiscatory power, more state theft, more inflation, more power for the Federal Reserve. While blasting the use of unconstitutional and illegal tactics when they are used against their fellow socialist/dictatorship advocates, they snort “paranoia” when anarcho-capitalists decry their use against “rightists”, or the economic abuse of citizens.

During the times of the book of Judges of the Bible, there was no permanent police force, there was no king, there was no standing army, there was no government at all. But on occasion the nations roundabout would oppress them.

In the famous history of Gideon, in fact, it was one such time, and the Philistine masters had banned all making of weapons, and only “approved” blacksmiths were allowed to even forge metals into plows. Gideon was “called” while plowing and formed a band that manufactured a bunch of “illegal weapons” and used them in a very asymmetric battle to throw off the invaders.

There is another issue at play here in Rothbard’s essay and even in its resurrection for posting at that affects most American libertarians, especially as a reaction to warmongering neoconservatives.

That is, they seem to share a kind of ignorance that has been imposed upon Americans about the world outside of the United States. Libertarian principles do not belong to one group of people any more than the truth about any other thing. Advocacy of freedom and liberty are universal. Natural rights are universal.

American libertarians are very much aware, and vociferously oppose the grossly unfair idea of redistribution in the U.S., and they are very much aware of the machinations of intellectual and political operators that want to justify the growing state economic control and central planning dictates.

But in other lands, they seem to me to be woefully ignorant of the struggles of people in other lands against violations of their freedom and their rights.

The recent glorification by even some libertarians of Hugo Chavez based on his (apparent) anti-Americanism is a case in point. But on principle, as some gullible hearts believe, he did NOT do anything good for the poor, any more than Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” war on poverty. There are precious few journalists or news agencies left in the world that report the truth faithfully, and the AP might as well declare itself openly as a Leftist Propaganda Front.

In fact, Chavez’ anti-American rhetoric rings hypocritical. He re-created the ruling class of bourgeoisie with billionaire supporters and newly billionaire buddies, and his own heirs now own a fortune that rivals those of the most brutal dictators of Asian and African fame.

The attack on AP, in fact, by the U.S. Department of Justice, looks like a multi-pronged illusionist trick. The AP participated in the attack by the entire international press against Honduras’ restoration of constitutionality in 2009, for example, and to those of us intimately aware of what was really happening in Honduras (my wife is Honduran), we saw it as obvious that it was deliberately deceitful reporting.

CNN’s reports in particular, in Spanish, were very, very bad, so much so that when about a million Hondurans spilled into their plazas and main roads to support the constitutional succession to Roberto Micheletti, a large group gathered outside CNN offices to protest their lying coverage.

In Miami, a lot of Hondurans gathered outside the Honduran consulate. Some of the Honduran-Americans I spoke with said they had voted for Obama and they would “never make that mistake again”.

Back to Lenin’s “peaceful coexistence” policy that Rothbard refers to, the sneaky, NWO propagandist Professor Carroll Quigley, quoted by the Birchers, is not the only source to find Communist designs for “attacks” (Lenin’s word) on capitalist countries. There is plenty of Communist literature, and references from Communist Party defectors, from Communist Party victims, in huge abundance:


AUTHOR: Vladimir Ilich Lenin (1870–1924)
QUOTATION: They [capitalists] will furnish credits which will serve us for the support of the Communist Party in their countries and, by supplying us materials and technical equipment which we lack, will restore our military industry necessary for our future attacks against our suppliers. To put it in other words, they will work on the preparation of their own suicide.
ATTRIBUTION: VLADIMIR ILICH (ULYANOV) LENIN, as reported by I. U. Annenkov in an article entitled, “Remembrances of Lenin,” Novyi Zhurnal/New Review, September 1961, p. 147.Annenkov recounts (pp. 144–47) a visit to the Moscow Institute of V. I. Lenin shortly after Lenin’s death, where he examined a number of Lenin manuscripts consisting principally of short and fragmentary notes, some of which were so interesting that he copied them. This Russian-language journal is published in New York City.

The popular and widely-quoted paraphrase, The capitalists are so hungry for profits that they will sell us the rope to hang them with, has often been considered spurious because it had not been found in Lenin’s published works.

SUBJECTS: Communism


It’s not like history has nothing to say here. It is indisputable that Stalin participated whole-heartedly, with the complete support of the entire Soviet apparatchiks, in dividing up Europe among the Allies. It is indisputable that Stalin’s Soviet Union poured arms, logistical support and funds into Mao’s guerrilla warfare. It is indisputable that the Soviet Union’s KGB and the more secretive GRU supplemented the open guerrilla wars they were famous for. And libertarian-minded lovers of freedom embrace historical selective amnesia to their own hurt. Not only that, it is a denial of the testimony of many fellow libertarians with better knowledge than the rest of us on the subject.

Just ask yourselves, people, what is wrong with somebody who can say government power corrupts in a land like the United States but not in a dictatorship or Islamic mini-caliphate? Why just pick on so-called “rightist” dictatorships?

Why say the Supreme Court robbed the 2000 election from Al Gore, for whom you have no political love, obviously, but totally ignore the complicity of the Florida Supreme Court in trying to support the rigging of the results attempted by minor elections officials? I do NOT think the Constitution is perfect, maybe a looser version like the previous Continental Congress structures would have been better. But if you talk about the rule of law with the same mouth, remember that the Constitution says the STATES set the rules for selecting the electors and Florida followed their own rules and the Florida Supreme Court told the state to change the rules. The Supreme Court would have done well to stop the obviously suspicious counting that resulted in an Senator Franklin. Motto: “Count the votes till I win! Then stop counting!”

Daniel 11’s “vile person” comes to power on the heels of a “raiser of taxes”,  “in whose estate” shall come one who shall “come in peaceably, obtain the kingdom by flatteries”, “work deceitfully”, “enter upon the fattest places of the province”, and “shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches”.

And mayhem ensues..

The Crusades, Terrorism and the Middle East

April 28, 2013

The Crusades were an effort to take BACK by force that which had been taken by FORCE by Islamic conquest.
Wars are brutal and what’s missed in that is (1) the Crusades were opposed by many Christians of the day, including (2) St. Francis of Assisi, who brokered a peace between the two sides on one occasion.

The Inquisition was run by a *political* hierarchy that used the name of Christ for cover, just as today in the West the most vile of corrupt rulers use “democracy” as a cover, and a tyrannical Hugo Chavez used “majority vote” –and even God– as a cover (never mind the fraud).

How can anybody call the Inquisition period a “Christian” thing when a central issue was to BAN THE BIBLE AND BURN ITS ADVOCATES as witches? An identity thief can call himself anything. Kris Kringle or Santa Clause by any other lying name, no matter how much you paint lipstick on that pig.

Recently one Anders Behring Breivik shot 77 peaceful –and unarmed– campers dead in Norway (the first one was the only one armed security man) had advocated “Christian” culture on his web site. As soon as they saw the word “Christian”, CNN ran a feed at the bottom of the screen for hours on end, days, that said “Christian fundamentalist” — a criminally negligent and slanderous accusation against a great number of peaceful Christian fundamentalists. Because on the same web site where they got the word “Christian”, the shooter said that he did NOT believe the Bible and he did NOT believe in Jesus. CNN shows itself again to be “fundamentally” bigoted against the name of Jesus Christ.

It is also a sign of truncated thinking and anti-Christ bigotry to equate Christian and Islamic holy books or actions. Even militant Islamists –as they are painted in the Western media image of them–are no doubt offended at this irrational equivalency-by-monotonous-repetition equivalency meme. Atheists who do not have the need to invent such contortions, are appalled by this too. The worst horrors of history were done by officially and enforced atheist regimes that banned all religious faiths from any public expression.

In one of them, both the central figure (Christ) laid down his life to the death for unbelievers at the beginning, and millions of his followers have done the same since. In the other, the founding figure laid down the lives of unbelievers at the beginning, and 100s of thousands, maybe millions, of his followers have done the same thing since.

Most Muslims want to live in peace, and support their families. I have cultivated close friendship with Muslim co-workers, and we have talked about the principles of our faiths without even raising our voices. Many Muslims risk beheading for accepting Jesus Christ as risen Savior and many Christians risk beheading in many parts of the world for being Christians.

“Terrorism” is a very broad category of tactics used by small groups to leverage such tactics where the proponent is otherwise weak in power.We see the “blowback principle” take effect when the people targeted by such actions become enraged.

The unconstitutional undeclared “war against terrorism” was a Newspeak tactic to propel the U.S.A. and the world into a permanent state of war. All the easier to take away the “freedoms” that “they” supposedly hate us for. It all too easily expands into asking the subjects of the rulers to tell authorities about anybody who “hates the government”. We have seen this movie before.

Michael Scherer said it well, something like, They’re not over here because we’re free to enjoy a few beers at night, they don’t like us bombing and invading them. Nobody can accuse Mr. Scherer of gullibility. He was the head of the team that sought Osama bin Laden all those years and set it up for the next team to find him. I doubt he is portrayed in the Hollywood movie about the search.

He has explained many times in media interviews the established principle of “blowback”, a term often used within the CIA for such a phenomenon, where your actions have reactions. This is *NOT* a “blaming America” thing.

Who decided to bomb and invade over there? Was there ever any debate in Congress, as constitutionally required in the U.S., about a declaration of war? Was it “America”, or was it America’s rulers?

Was there ever a debate in Congress over whether to declare war on Libya? Or did America’s *rulers” decide to send in military force (Special Forces) on the ground while denying it? When the “rebels” began losing, who decided to bomb the crap out of Libyan government forces?

There were lots of talking heads that declared Gaddafi was murdering civilians. But the best evidence of massacre of civilians are the pictures of the town that is no more, obliterated, its inhabitants wiped out and “cleansed”, that the entire town of Tawarga.

It’s not that the murderers who perpetrated this racist atrocity hid anything. They bragged about it, they bragged that they were not going to let it rebuild, they bragged about wiping out the 10,000 black-skinned Africans who built it up. Towarga burning:


Frightened Towarga refugee:

The Obamas living it up: “Let them eat food stamps!” (They are ruling class)

March 21, 2013

Just because some CNN reporter thought she would get mileage by confronting Michelle Bachman over her criticisms of Obama‘s lavish spending in the White House (while the nation burns), O’Reilly turned around and criticized Bachman and everybody else who criticize Obama over “crazy stuff”.

I got tired of O’Reilly a very long time ago. He quit bringing on real conservatives awhile back, I don’t remember him bringing on a strong Christian spokesman, and he is pushing the envelope in looking for way to criticize the best of Congress and the hinterland. He’s looking like a closet nanny-stater claiming to be against the nanny state.

But look, maybe even some of the people criticizing the way Obama not only governs like a king, but lives like one on our dime, maybe they don’t get the significance of it either. And they could use some better writers, though I’m not applying. Didn’t anybody think about it? Michelle, or Obama, pick one: “Let them eat food stamps!”

How about, “He got us out of Iraq. One down, 149 to go!”

How about, “He says he refuses to torture prisoners. Killing them dead where they sit is okay”.

See, the real lesson from the Obamas living like millionaires at the expense of the rest of us Americans is, that it shows that they are NOT “one of us”!

6th Circuit: Diversity trumps religious freedom

January 5, 2013

Free speech gets no respect from the little tyrants of the subverted Establishment Government-Academia Complex:

This is my own blowback for the warping I got in college from my so-called “leftist” professors and the books they assigned. Back then the narrative was that everybody else was narrow-minded, they should all have “open minds” to new things.

So I did that, I kept an open mind, so I let their ideas in. But alas for them, and fortunately for me, I kept an open mind, and wanted to learn the truth, even if it was a narrow truth! Hello!

But the realization hit me that the mouths that preach at the serfs that they should “keep an open mind”, the biggest mouths, what they are doing is to tell the masses to open their minds so these hustlers can pour their own commands into them.

On a parenthetical note, for some “strange reason”, this reminds me of the guy at the Aurora cinema shooting, who got a phone call and as soon as he got that phone call he headed toward the exit.

HEY MEDIA! FOX INCLUDED! Why is NOBODY asking WHO was on the other end of that phone call?

And why have you dropped the ball on following up with the witness reports that said there was a grenade thrown from a different direction, and others that said “shooters” repeatedly? Hello?

I remember the first days after Oklahoma City. During the first few hours, coverage on CNN and the other networks included interviews with people who were in the area, as always, and ALL of them were saying there were two, and some said three seperate blasts, NOT just one. The next day, the story was that there had always only been one blast. Hello?

That’s why I always say, when there is some great news like Oklahoma City, or Waco, or the recent shootings, hit your news sources immediately, the earlier the better, before the top-down control switches get set. That way you can compare before and after. You should also look for little bits of information that comes out in following days, as well. Look for opinion pieces that carry little nuggets of factoids that don’t appear anywhere else.

You can then use those sources your “normal” neighbor trusts to share a peek at the real world to them.

Like sending the fire engines home at Waco on the very day they were going to attack the building, the NBC finally showing footage of tanks shooting fire into the building that they waited a whole year to air. Like the half-dozen residents and workers in the vicinity of the federal building in Oklahoma City that said on air that there were two and three blasts that disappeared from coverage later on even faster than John Doe #2 and #3. To get control of the second and third John Doe’s they had to trot out a press conference in the capital so THE boss could tell the media –and not incidentally, their own down-line in the chain of command– to back off the second and third bombers and go back to the lone wolf story.

Consider TWA 800. CNN and other broadcasters showed interviews in the first hours of the story with witnesses who saw streaks of light moving toward the flight and ending with the explosion of the plane. One of these was a guy who was fishing off the shore, former military, who identified it as an obvious missile. That was on your “trusted” news sources.

Consider the multiple times that mass shooters like the one in Newtown were stopped by private citizens who used their own firearms to stop them.

Anyway, heads up, keep alert, watch for the signs of the times.

Matthew 16:1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.

2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.

3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?


Citizens United decision helps the little guy have a voice

October 28, 2012
Citizens United

Citizens United (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Citizens United was where the little guy got a bit of a voice. I’ve listed four or five reasons below.

In the real world, incumbents re reelected something like 90 percent of the time to Congress, and the majority of times to the presidency. The reason?

The incumbent has a built-in billionaire advantage that comes automagically from (1) using the taxed and borrowed money, collected by taxation extorted from people of opposite sides of their positions and supporters all, for “official” communications, interviews, press releases, and (2) the payback from being a good “patron” for his sponsors’ causes, and (3) name recognition.

In today’s world, item (3) has a dollar value in the millions.

As relates to Citizens United, it is absolutely true that corporations are NOT people.

BUT free speech ensues from natural INDIVIDUAL rights, and one’s contributions to the efforts of an initiative to publicize the views shared by the contributors, provides the individual a way to compete for attention with the big money. Ironic that the excuse they use to protect special interests is that they want to stop the influence of special interests.

Now there are some people that want to throw a mud cover on that, to obscure the fact that people contributing to a corporate initiative with the purpose of supporting their own personal ideas, is a right that ensues from the free speech rights of the INDIVIDUAL doing that contribution. The corporation inherits the rights of the individual owners of that corporation, who have agreed to the terms thereof, and it is the collective voice of those individuals that bestows the right to express opinions.

It is preposterous to argue otherwise. If you do, for consistency you have to ban the corporate free speech of all the newspapers, broadcast studios, and Internet sites that belong to corporations! That means you have to muzzle NBC, CBS, MSNBC, FOX, huffingtonpost, and God forbid, oh my, NPR!

That is a major, blatant, self-contradiction in laws that restrict corporate speech, obvious when uttered explicitly. The corporate news industry is always “exempt” one group of corporations. This group gives voice to Sony, General Electric, and other such giants. Sometimes I suspect “it goes without saying”.

Another self-contradiction is that the subtler forms of support for a candidate are left untouched by these hypocritical initiatives. Hypocritical because exempted or regular newscasts, news stories, and so on.

Hypocritical also when you consider that a recent survey (1990s I believe) showed that as many as 97 percent of the editors in a recent survey were registered to vote with Democratic Party affiliation, and about 80 percent of the journalists. That may have gone down one or two percent since Fox seems like at least to have about an even mix between the two parties.

Those numbers probably help explain why it’s the Democratic Party that pushes for shutting the mouths of others. Us poor people and middle class cannot pay for a full-page ad to explain our views or influence opinions.

But then there are gobs of independents, and a big part of those independents are people like me who hold to ideas vehemently and brutally opposed by the two-party cartel that holds power right now.

The special-interest group with generally the most influence anyway is the collection of companies that own broadcast and cable networks and print newspapers, and don’t forget corporations with massive Internet presence. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, HN. And remember that NPR is no obscure news source, as shown by the fact that one of its own moderated the first presidential debate of the 2012 campaign.

And remember that those news sources subsist from advertising almost exclusively. NPR has subscribers, and many of the Citizen United contributors may have heard about it from alternate media. Little-guy media.

NPR is a corporate entity, yes it is, and the fact that much of its funding comes from the current incumbent that has the elected office, along with the strings that come along with it. It also outlasts each Congress and presidency with their change in personnel. The effect is that their perspective influences them to favor the idea that government is a benevolent animal, simply because they view themselves as benevolent.

In other words, NPR’s government funding goes hand in hand with the philosophy that government should influence favorably the public’s view of government.

See here a diagram showing much of the interconnections between media corporations and their “cousins” in other industries:

Network diagram showing interlocks between var...


Obama speech to soldiers met with silence | The Daily Caller

September 15, 2012

Obama making speeches to the soldiers, trying to drum up support and let supporters pretend he is supporting them, but they aren’t stupid, and they know he’s trying to suppress their vote.

That’s where real vote suppression is happening.

Pro-Big-Government Media Lying About Delegate Numbers

May 20, 2012

You also keep missing the point.

CNN was caught lying with its pants down about the delegate numbers.

It looks like the official Government-Corporate-Media complex just doesn’t know what to do with this story. No wonder the plutocrats have had to step in and save some of the Conformist Media in what appear to be acts of charity without good prospects for payback, one millionaire buying Time Magazine for one dollar, and Buffet’s companies snatching up 66 newspapers for fire sale prices. The Omaha tycoon a few years ago said newspapers were going to disappear soon. What’s up with that?

Maybe he figures he’ll get favorable consideration for his companies’ tax debt, and for permits and keep the IRS off my back please…..

It’s not just CNN. It looks like a blacklist on the story after story about what is going on in Republican Party conventions across the country at the local, county, and state levels.

“…Paul backers won 12 of 13 Republican National Convention delegate slots filled in balloting Saturday, May 19, at Rivers Edge Civic Center.

They might have taken all 13 seats if a Paul state delegate had not graciously conceded the final slot to Rep. Michele Bachmann….” Sounds like it means they could have kept her out of the delegate slate but conceded it to her.

So now 32 of Minnesota‘s 40 national delegates in August are committed to Paul.

RP has clinched at least the five states needed to place his name in the running at first ballot (the way I understand it at least), and his delegates have already won delegate majorities in eleven states – eleven.

The Doublespeak Media is LYING when they say the Ron Paul campaign has given up, conceded, or quit campaigning. The official campaign has NOT given up, they have said the strategy is shifting to accumulating delegates where it counts and skipping primary beauty contests where the more massive banking money favors Romney. That money is also supporting Obama, but later for that.

It is evident that the campaign is managing expectations among Ron Paul supporters, while at the same time possibly making a show of being gracious to Romney.

But the truth is, the Ron Paul campaign has no more idea than Romney about how close the delegate count may favor Ron Paul when it comes to counting numbers at the national convention. They have no idea what the effect of all this is.

Plus:  neither the Romney campaign nor the Ron Paul campaign, neither Gingrich nor Santorum nor Bachmann, none of them knows for sure what the delegates for the “dropouts” will do, despite the “endorsements”.

The bottom line is, “it’s not over till the fat lady sings”, much more so than before.

I’m old enough to remember the floor fights at some of the party conventions in the 1950s and 1960s, and they were covered live by the three major national networks open gavel to final adjournment, and I remember being intrigued as a young boy and teenager watching them, including speeches on the floor for one candidate or another, then the announcements of the votes, the conclusion that no one had won, and then finally the cheering when one of them got the “magic number”.

Nothing wrong with that. But apparently somebody didn’t like it and they started making the whole thing a horse race in the time of primaries, and making sure the conventions would simply be the infomercial of the anointing of the selected one. Like in the words of the now disillusioned Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama “was selected before he was elected”.

See the REAL delegate map by state:

GROWING EVER BIGGER! Ron Paul’s campaign making mincemeat out of media!

April 13, 2012

Witness the Power of an Idea: Ron Paul Massive Rallies 2012 – YouTube:

While Fox News was asking “Where’s Ron Paul”, as if they didn’t know, he was speaking to a crowd of 6,200 at UCLA, and after that spoke to a similarly sized crowd at Berkeley campus!

Watch that video and contrast it with what you’ve been seeing on broadcast outlets, or in your papers (if you still read those).

It seems like a few weeks ago, despite the reality they were seeing at Ron Paul rallies, and the fact that this phenomenon, this blowback against the empire, this grassroots movement, is making news, the news story of the century, somehow the order went out to slam down a complete blacklist curtain on his campaign.

The blackout is so blatant and so shameless it is difficult to wrap your head around if you haven’t been watching the trends over decades, if you have even the smallest bit of trust in the “establishment media”.

Forget Joe McCarthy, somebody (or somebodies) is doing better than him. He got blowback from the media.

So if you thought you were getting fair and balanced from Fox News or from CNN, do another double take on that video. Remember, the ownership of all those broadcast and cable news networks are owned by the same biggest corporations that rely on Wall Street for their financing and advertising dollars, and it’s starting to look like their marching orders, too…


Active military soldier speaks for others: More active military support Ron Paul than the rest of them combined

April 2, 2012

*MUST SEE*! Cpl J. Thorsen after speaking out for Ron Paul Despite US Army censorship: