Was Saddam Hussein really the ruthless tyrant that American War Criminals claim he was?

Was Saddam Hussein really the ruthless tyrant that American War Criminals claim he was?

By Bert Cooper

So, some may say, Saddam Hussein hanging at the end of a rope was a loser - others may be foolish enough to wonder : "But were his policies really those of a tyrant?"

Because Mr. Hussein is now universally dismissed in the U.S. media (including alternative media) as having once been the very breath of Evil itself - "We all know that he surely did all those bad things everybody says he did, but he should not have been hanged that way," etc. But, when one asks, "What was the direct personal knowledge of his accusers?" "What was the direct knowledge of their sources ?" All of a sudden we find ourselves in the soup of what may eventually be called the largest and most successful psychological barrage possibly in the history of Zionist propaganda.

Compare the educational policy in Iraq under Mr. Hussein to that of the U.S. under its presidents in the same time period.

It is not unusual that in the U.S. a young university student might have to finance an almost perpetual "educational debt" (ranging from $10,000 to $1,000,000, for example, for an engineering degree from a state university, or a medical degree from an Ivy League school, respectively). Moreover, these so-called educations will have been predicated on the twisted ethics of their deans, and on the presumption of "profits by free trade," where a cheaper man is a better man, and on the inevitability of "globalization." In the U.S., students are actually taught creative ways to "spend their way out of debt."

Under leadership of Mr. Saddam Hussein, every student in Iraq finished his or her university education - completely debt free - male and female, in roughly equal proportions - Shia and Sunni in roughly in the same proportion as the national population.

Every student graduating debt free - is that the educational policy of a tyrant? Were Saddam such a tyrant, would he not have feared that the students of his nation might be told - go forward young men and women, use your education, predicated on honesty in labor and productivity through science, in the fields of agriculture, architecture, or engineering, or medicine or whatever, do good and be debt free?

Is that public educational policy of a tyrant? - or, is that a system of education which racists from Texas would perceive as a threat to the so-called "precious style of life" so dear to their children? What would happen to "the American democracy," of, by and for millionaire rogues, if the example of Mr. Hussein’s educational policy were to catch on, not only in the rest of southwest Asia, but even in America itself?

In the U.S., 40% of the population lack access to basic health care, and the poor are charged from 10% to 100% in fictitious interest when they have to use their credit cards for basic health care.

Under leadership of Mr. Hussein, every citizen in Iraq had access to basic health care, be they male or female, be they Shia or Sunni.

Is this the health care policy of a tyrant? Or, would the Iraqi health care system, under the so-called "tyranny" of Mr. Saddam Hussein, be perceived as a threat to the U.S. system, which is managed by profiteers and eugenicists.

Would not Mr. Hussein’s example of universally available basic health care be perceived as a threat to the Hollywood geniuses of the American lie, and their notions of "Hollywood democracy?" (Even some of us Americans have figured out that, although there is no shortage of Jewishness amongst the Jowdets and the Kurds, the rest are either Sunni or Shia. Under the so-called "tyranny" of Saddam Hussein, Iraq had joined three races, Arabic, Persian, Kurdish, and two religions, Shiâia and Sunni, under one official language, currency system, and government.)

In the U.S., the idea of a "democratic" Congress has devolved into the idea of a glorious Zionist infestation, where liars are given unregulated legislative powers, in league with the Hollywood pornographers and the millionaire homosexuals who appoint them to power.

By comparison, under the so-called "tyranny" of Mr. Saddam Hussein, predatory liars, paedophiles, child rapists, homosexuals and pornographers were put into prison - or even killed, as apparently many should be.

However, under the American theory of democracy, which in reality is a system of bank fraud under a Hollywood system of currency reserves, our politicians have become sellouts to predatory liars, paedophiles, child rapists, homosexuals and Hollywood pornographers, e.g. "Capitol Hill." Is it any wonder, that these politicians then appoint baby-killers as generals of their armies, and given them extravagant pensions with full benefits, including funeral by parade. (But, OH! say the generals, the ratio of one Iraqi child murdered per clueless American "volunteer" during the occupation, is only a collateral statistic - a kind of non-damage, a kind of no-visible-effect phenomenon, which therefore can never come back to weigh on the souls of the baby-killing foot soldier, because Iraqi children don’t have any souls yet, so evil was their tyrant, Saddam Hussein - so say the U.S. generals whose appointments were arranged by the self-same infestation who operate "Capitol Hill" as if it were their private sexual nightclub.

Compare the pay scale of the typical CEO in the U.S., whose pensions in retirement are often a thousand times the pay of the average worker, with that of his Iraqi counterpart. The CEO in the U.S. is compensated largely for his having shifted his productive capital, and hence means of taxation, from the U.S. to China. (China has evolved exactly as planned, into an infestation of free-trading nomads whose long-standing enemy has been the civilized Asian, including China, Persia, India, and Russia. It was created first by isolation of U.S. ally, Chiang Kai-shek, by grants of heavy military equipment, from Harry Truman, whose first act was to grant full recognition to Israel, to Ho Chi-Minh and Kim Il-Jung, which allowed Chairman Mao, who was chamber pot boy for an infestation of British-Zionist-Marxists into Chinese culture, to liquefy Chinese-Confucian culture, re-establish an economically huge British slave-labor plantation system, and consolidate it into an anti-American war machine, for the purpose of economically eradicating the principle of general welfare that was first stated in the United States Constitution.)

These American CEOs, who build castles in America while shifting their factories to, and paying taxes to, China, and whose salaries include, with approval of the so-called "Central Compensation Committee" reckless emissions of a new form of Wall St. currency known as stock options, which are now being freely printed without regard for reality or for any competent regulating authority, other than a Zionist-racist and eugenicist one, and whose Hobbesian style of life now goes way beyond the dangers of indolence which our Jefferson so worried about in regard of early American slavery and apartheid, and which is now being crystallized into a globalized domain of racism and eugenics - these so-called CEOs are anointed as "business leaders" in America. Compare that with the so-called tyranny of Mr. Saddam Hussein, where treasonous profiteers, were, without regard to religious protection, removed from society and put in prison, where they belong. Is that the policy of a tyrant? But, HEY!, say the American CEOs, we can shift our factories to China (which must really be understood as Zionist-operated China) - we can destroy American productive capacity, and thus our freedom to trade - because we want to! - These same CEOs will claim that racism and eugenics are simply the artefacts of unlimited freedom for Zionists, and for their Hollywood propaganda frauds, for "our" system of free trade, of globalization, and of "democracy" by bank fraud, will surely last forever and forever.

By comparison to the U.S., and its voluntary and unwarranted use of weapons of mass destruction against the unarmed and economically depressed peoples of Iraq, whose schools and day-care centers, and whose hospitals and clinics, had been destroyed by "smart-bombs" dropped by American pilots flying bravely at 40,000 feet, seven days a week, Sundays and holidays included, for ten years straight, Saddam Hussein, took the peaceful route, and got rid of all of his weapons of mass destruction.

I again suggest that it might not be beyond the veil of reason that Mr. Saddam Hussein will eventually be considered for appointment by the U.S. Congress, for the U.S. Medal of Honor, for his proven humanitarian genius. At a minimum, Mr. Hussein had the military foresight to rid his nation of WMDs, and strip his populations down to their spiritually most powerful and enduring state, their bare humanity. Whatever mistakes he may have made in his youth, in the end, he was smart enough to get rid of his stupid bombs and his weapons of mass destruction.

In a stroke of humanitarian genius, Mr. Hussein prevented his own militia groups from acquiring any form of WMD, knowing that if they fell into the hands of irregular Iraqi militias (who he doubtless foresaw would arise as "neighborhood" militias in the face of the overwhelming U.S. military forces), they would only bring harm to themselves and to their enemy, if they ever got control of them. So he got rid of them. Genius!

By upending his WMD programs, Mr. Saddam Hussein in effect, saved the lives of over 100,000 U.S. soldiers - who he doubtless saw were as innocent in their economic predicament as would be the Iraqi neighborhood militias in theirs. Was this military wisdom, which saved the lives of Iraqi citizens and U.S. soldiers, the act of a tyrant - the very breath of Evil itself, as all those Americans with their direct and personal knowledge profess with such surety?

Lastly, unlike the U.S., which since the presidency of Woodrow Wilson, has been borrowing its currency from a foreign power (the Hollywood Dollar being floated as it is in the stench of an equally absurd Hollywood System of Trade Inbalance - a fictional currency loaned back to its own originating population, with interest owed to a foreign power, e.g. with interest charged against its own original and sovereign population, through a deception known as the Open Market Committee of the Federal Reserve System, a Zionist apparition which is neither open, nor market, nor federal, nor reserve) - the currency of the people of Iraq, the Dinar, under protection of "the tyrant" Mr. Saddam Hussein, was not to be borrowed from a foreign power, specifically the Zionist power that charges interest against the U.S. population for its own internal use of its own sovereign currency. Under his leadership, the Dinar was emitted into circulation by the sovereignty of the Iraqi nation itself, and thus from the domestic population which created their own scientific and reality-based economy to correspond with their own currency. (The test of formation of a Palestinian State will be in the answers to the questions, From whom, e.g. from what foreign power, shall the Palestinian people borrow their own sovereign currency? and who shall control the custom houses of the Palestinian people?)

Is this the signature of a tyrant, who would protect his people from Zionist usurpation, of the individual sovereignty of each citizen and the human dignity of their future grandchildren?

Or, might not Mr. Hussein’s system of honesty in banking, and in the sovereign emission of Iraqi currency, be seen as a threat to the racists and pedophiles who now control the institutions of credit and the emission of new currency in the United States?

(For those who might not know, contrary to the universal bank frauds which lie at the heart of all of Marxist theorizing, be it Marxist left or Marxist right, the power to organize representative governments on principles of general welfare, and then to declare sovereignty and emit new currency in proportion to the growth of the physical economy of a population, is an act of internal and domestic human rights. (Marxist silence on this point of sovereignty over national institutions of credit, currency and customs, and his juxtaposition of the interests of financial capitalists against the interests of wandering mobs, where both were borrowing currency from apparitions like the Federal Reserve, are the key to understanding Marx as a fraudster.)

The power to organize into a sovereign government and emit a national currency is a basic human right, from God, inherent in everyone, who desires to participates in a scientific and reality based economy - that is the message of sovereignty and protectionism which U.S. Constitution of Hamilton represents, and that is the message for which the Zionists of the world have long filled their souls with the venom of jealousy and hatred.

Contrary to the predicates of Marx, which he plagiarized from Mandeville and Smith, the "means of production" does not emanate from offshore gambling houses - credit, when organized on principles of science, sovereignty and general welfare, as opposed to being emitted on principles of racism, eugenics and Hobbesian greed, can then be "matriculated" into forward economic motion, by proportionate circulation of new currency, from an internal banking house, and from that, scientific economic progress and lawful pursuit of happiness can be organized - without need to pay interest on use of fictitious "reserves" of Hollywood perverts.

Some in America will say, that they have direct and personal knowledge that Saddam Hussein dreamed of boiling his grandmothers in oil, and then cutting up their pickled flesh and serving it to his armies of hungry generals, his favorite Grandmother’s Caesar salad - at evening soirees softly illuminated by oil lamps glowing in his many open-air gardens, covered with shades made from the skins of his grandchildren - so evil was he, and so certain are the Americans, who claim universal and direct personal knowledge of their accusations.

Others will say, Saddam built castles for himself! His bathroom faucets were plated in gold and made in America! To which, one might ask, What was Saddam planning to do, take his American faucets with him? Were not "his" so-called castles dedicated to use as a government buildings? - the beauty of which, but for the rage of a few malcontents, was possibly appreciated by many Iraqi citizens. Private occupation - yes, but castle ownership - is that not more the Hollywood fantasy of American CEOs and British oligarchs. Was Saddam’s use of a government "castle" the action of a tyrant within his own culture?

Still others will say, but Saddam ordered, in a time of war some decades ago, an exemplary military response, the killing 148 persons who were planning to overthrow of his government.

Yes, perhaps he did respond, as a humanitarian leader should in time of war, when a band of assassins, arguably financed by a foreign power representing unregulated financial frauds of Wall Street pornographers and legislative frauds of Capitol Hill liars and pedophiles, were planning to create an economic chaos which would bring in an armed infestation of American baby-killers and pimps.

But the more important question might be, What American can lay claim to any standing by which he might accuse Mr. Hussein of brutality for this act, when, for example, a particular Governor of the State of Texas, oversaw the systematic and foreseeable murders of over 400 inmates in his prison system, each year he was in office, for the crime of Being Happy in Black Skin? And that is the murder rate in just one of the fifty state prison systems in the U.S., for a period of only one year.

What American has standing to accuse Mr. Hussein of brutality for making a public example, in time of war, of small band of assassins acting as if they were agents of a foreign power, when Americans are killing many times that number of their own population, for the crime of being Happy while Black?

Was Saddam Hussein a loser? - we shall see, for one day it shall be prophesied that, will come the day, the bravest men of the most powerful nation in the history of the world, will one day be reduced to trembling in their socks and quaking in their underpants, their Senators bedwetting themselves as they try to legislate reality from the dais of their lies, their wives shredding their own good Constitution for fear that their brave husbands might suffer another panic attack - panic brought on by an as yet unnamed form of psychological fear, that a bearded little Mickey Mouse from Yemen, who spends all his days and all his nights crawling about in caves, hiding, in mountainsides half way around the world, might poke his hairy little noggin out of a cave, and say Cocoo or something.

"Quick Honey, before he might say “cocoo”again, feed another page of the Constitution into the shredder “ cried the bravest of the brave in this hyper-powerful nation, "Osama bin Mickey Mouse might poke his nose out - Oh, dear! I feel another panic attack coming! quick! feed the shredder faster!!"

What might be the consequence, in this prophesy yet to come, should a nation of such brave men suddenly march themselves off into war, with supply lies extending half-way round the globe while CEOs are moving their factories to China, on the singular predicate that the pornographic anonymity of their media-lies is so invincible, the racist frauds of their financial-chimera so perpetual, the powers of their bombs so smart, that surely, God must, by comparison, be so stupid?

So, some may say, Saddam Hussein hanging at the end of a rope was a loser - others may be foolish enough to wonder : "But were his policies really those of a tyrant?"

The Controversy of Zion

Do you REALLY want the TRUTH?

Can you HANDLE it?

Only one way to find out...

Douglas Reed's "The Controversy of Zion" now on the internet!

Commencing in 1951, as Britain's foremost World War II correspondent, he spent more than three years writing "The Controversy of Zion" - all 300.000 words of it. He completed the epilogue in 1956. Although there is correspondence to show that the book was once discussed with his publisher, the manuscript was never submitted, but remained for 22 years gathering dust in his home in Durban, South Africa.

Would he have loved the internet! Now, half a century later, it exists, and must assist in the dissemination of his powerful truth. Several chapters show how much he would have loved this possibility. Just as much as the zionist censors of the internet hate this breach in their worldwide brainwashing and control of the media.

In Europe during the years immediately before and after World War II, the name of Douglas Reed was on everyone's lips. His books were being sold by the tens of thousands. He was known with intimate familiarity throughout the English-speaking world by a vast army of fans. And then he was banished. Was it this book? Take a look at these chapters and judge for yourself.....

The Controversy of Zion

Police spies chosen to lead war protest

Police spies chosen to lead war protest

Demian Bulwa, San Francisco Chronicle Friday, July 28, 2006

Two Oakland police officers working undercover at an anti-war protest in May 2003 got themselves elected to leadership positions in an effort to influence the demonstration, documents released Thursday show.

The department assigned the officers to join activists protesting the U.S. war in Iraq and the tactics that police had used at a demonstration a month earlier, a police official said last year in a sworn deposition.

At the first demonstration, police fired nonlethal bullets and bean bags at demonstrators who blocked the Port of Oakland's entrance in a protest against two shipping companies they said were helping the war effort. Dozens of activists and longshoremen on their way to work suffered injuries ranging from welts to broken bones and have won nearly $2 million in legal settlements from the city.

The extent of the officers' involvement in the subsequent march May 12, 2003, led by Direct Action to Stop the War and others, is unclear. But in a deposition related to a lawsuit filed by protesters, Deputy Police Chief Howard Jordan said activists had elected the undercover officers to "plan the route of the march and decide I guess where it would end up and some of the places that it would go."

It was revealed later that the California Anti-Terrorism Information Center, which was established by the state attorney general's office to help local police agencies fight terrorism, had posted an alert about the April protest. Oakland police had also monitored online postings by the longshoremen's union regarding its opposition to the war.

The documents showing that police subsequently tried to influence a demonstration were released Thursday by the American Civil Liberties Union, as part of a report criticizing government surveillance of political activists since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The ACLU said the documents came from the lawsuit over the police use of force.

Jordan, in his deposition in April 2005, said under questioning by plaintiffs' attorney Jim Chanin that undercover Officers Nobuko Biechler and Mark Turpin had been elected to be leaders in the May 12 demonstration an hour after meeting protesters that day.

Asked who had ordered the officers to infiltrate the group, Jordan said, "I don't know if there is one particular person, but I think together we probably all decided it would be a good idea to have some undercover officers there."

Several months after the rally, Jordan told a city police review board examining the April 2003 port clash that "our ability to gather intelligence on these groups and this type of operation needs to be improved," according to a transcript provided by the ACLU.

"I don't mean same-day intelligence," Jordan told the civilian review panel. "I'm talking about long-term intelligence gathering."

He noted that "two of our officers were elected leaders within an hour on May 12." The idea was "to gather the information and maybe even direct them to do something that we want them to do," Jordan said.

"I call that being totalitarian," said Jack Heyman, a longshoremen's union member who took part in the May 12 march. He said he was not certain whether he had any contact with the officers that day.

Jordan declined to comment when reached at his office Thursday. In his deposition, he said the Police Department no longer allows such undercover work.

City Attorney John Russo said he was not familiar with the police infiltration of the protest, but said the city had made "significant changes" in its approach toward demonstrations after the port incident. Police enacted a new crowd-control policy limiting the use of nonlethal force in 2004.

The ACLU said the Oakland case was one of several instances in which police agencies had spied on legitimate political activity since 2001.

Mark Schlosberg, who directs the ACLU's police policy work and wrote the report released Thursday, cited previously reported instances of spying on groups in Santa Cruz and Fresno in addition to the Oakland case. He called on state Attorney General Bill Lockyer and local police to ensure that law-abiding activist groups don't come under government investigation.

"It's very important that there be regulation up front to prevent these kinds of abuses from occurring," Schlosberg said at a news conference.

Schlosberg said the state needs an independent inspector looking into complaints and keeping an eye on intelligence gathering at such agencies as the California National Guard and the state Department of Homeland Security.

Tom Dresslar, a spokesman for Lockyer, said the attorney general had not yet read the ACLU report. But he said his boss "won't abide violations of civil liberties. There's no room in this state or anywhere in this country for monitoring the activity of groups merely because they have a political viewpoint."

Following the Oakland port protest and disclosures about the monitoring of activists, Lockyer issued guidelines in 2003 stating that police must suspect that a crime has been committed before collecting intelligence on activist groups.

But Schlosberg said the ACLU had surveyed 94 law enforcement agencies last year and found that just eight were aware of the guidelines. Only six had written policies restricting surveillance activities, he said.

Just to make the point clearer, here is Laura Knight-Jadczyk's latest:

Alex Jones and 911 Scholars: The Parable of the Good Shepherd

'They saw a Samaritan carrying a lamb and going to Judea. [Jesus] said to his disciples, "Why is he carrying the lamb around?" They said to him, "So that he may kill it and eat it." He said to them, "He will not eat it while it is alive, but only after it has been killed and has become a carcass." They said, "it cannot happen any other way." He said to them, "So also with you: seek a place of rest for yourselves, that you may not become a carcass and be eaten." Gospel of Thomas

Lately there's been a lot of "rah rah" activity among the "Reopen 911" folks; at the same time, there's been a whole lot of infighting and flaming. Gerard Holmgren and Rosalee Grable AKA Webfairy, are insisting that there were no planes at ALL involved in 911 - that it was all manufactured imagery via various technologies - and at the same time, they and a coterie of their fans (fan is short for fanatic) are going after Prof. Steven Jones because he is not giving them full credit for coming up with the idea that the World Trade Center Towers (and Building 7) were brought down by Controlled Demolition. (It never occurs to them that he might have thought of this himself after watching the films of the collapse and thus is not obliged to give them credit.) The reason I know about all this is because somehow, I got included on a list of 911 people a couple of weeks ago (it started with a debate being promoted by APFN, I believe and, like Topsy, just "grew and grew"), and at a certain point, I just could no longer keep silent at the nonsense that was flying back and forth, being passed off as logic and reason.

Trying to bring the light of measured discourse and calm reflection to this group was pretty much like waving a red flag at a bull. I was actually quite shocked. Individuals whose writings I had long considered to be quite good, if not superior, revealed themselves to be little more than ego driven wannabes. After a few days of exchanges, providing referenced material for discussion, and being flamed by such luminaries as Holmgren, Grable and (surprise!) Alex Constantine, I realized that it is really, really true: the 911 Movement is co-opted to the very core, and probably always has been.

In any event, most of the rancor seemed to be due to the above-mentioned fact that Professor Steven Jones of BYU - who isolated a patented thermite, Thermate, from samples of the WTC metals - is not acknowledging Homgren and Grable for being the first to think up and promote the idea that the WTC and Building 7 were brought down by Controlled Demolition. And now, Prof. Jones is going on television, getting fan mail, and basically revelling in his 15 minutes of fame (according to Holmgren and Grable) while, horror of horrors, Jones and the rest of the 911 Scholars - not to mention nearly everyone in the fact-based 911 research community - completely diss the idea that there were NO PLANES at all involved in 911. This is, as it happens, the new pet theory of Holmgren and Grable. And how, they seem to be asking, can Prof. Jones reference ONE of their ideas (without giving them credit) and not consider that the other idea is also just as viable?

So, Holmgren and Grable conclude that Professor Jones and the other 911 Scholars MUST be agents of the government. In fact, anybody who says there were any planes at all involved in 911 must be COINTELPRO. And definitely, anybody who suggests an Israeli involvement in 911 is COINTELPRO.

Meanwhile, Alex "Jarhead" Jones has moved up the media ladder and managed to get the whole show covered by C-Span after his big splash with the 911 Conference a month or so ago. This, of course, DOES raise a whole new set of questions. Why? As it happens, Jones is closely associated with Jeff Rense who has been revealed to be a pathological liar and associated with known COINTELPRO agents - and I mean known by personal experience.

So, go ahead and watch the Alex Jones "911 Scholars Symposium" and then come back and read the rest of my remarks (unless you have already seen it).

Back so soon?

Okay, let's continue. As you probably noticed, Alex is an irritating and bombastic guy... kind of like a cross between Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh with a heavy overlay of fundamentalist preacher. It's probably for those very reasons that he was able to pull together such a symposium and also why he has been graduated to a new network recently. People tend to do what he demands just so he'll shut up. The question is: is there something else about Alex Jones that compels C-Span to carry the show and even show it several times over a period of days?

Hmmm... what is UP with that?!

I'm not the only one wondering. Lisa Guliani of Wing TV wrote and asked me a pretty straightforward question

When do you ever see true enemies promote one another?

Alex Jones and others in the "alternative media", "patriot community and 9- 11 truth circles" supposedly consider the mainstream media such as C-Span, FOX News, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc.. as the ENEMY. Jones says this so often (at least in the past) that it is almost like a refrain.

American Free press newspaper even did a story awhile back using this as the headline: The Media is the Enemy.

Are these entities - Alex Jones and the Zionist controlled media - truly enemies? Or is this yet another trap that is being set?

Well, since she put it that way, yeah... it IS a puzzlement. My first thought was a particular part of the Protocols of the Pathocrats where it says:

PROTOCOL No. 12 Control of the Press

[...]

We shall deal with the press in the following way: what is the part played by the press to-day? It serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purpose or else it serves selfish ends of parties. It is often vapid, unjust, mendacious, and the majority of the public have not the slightest idea what ends the press really serves. We shall saddle and bridle it with a tight curb: we shall do the same also with all productions of the printing press, for where would be the sense of getting rid of the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? [...]

No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of our government infallibility. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification.

I BEG YOU TO NOTE THAT AMONG THOSE MAKING ATTACKS UPON US WILL ALSO BE ORGANS ESTABLISHED BY US, BUT THEY WILL ATTACK EXCLUSIVELY POINTS THAT WE HAVE PRE-DETERMINED TO ALTER.

NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.

If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the [normal human]communities to such an extent the they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the colored glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses.[...]

Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals. This will neutralize the injurious influence of the privately-owned press and will put us in possession of a tremendous influence upon the public mind .... If we give permits for ten journals, we shall ourselves found thirty, and so on in the same proportion. This, however, must in no wise be suspected by the public. For which reason all journals published by us will be of the most opposite, in appearance, tendencies and opinions, thereby creating confidence in us and bringing over to us quite unsuspicious opponents, who will thus fall into our trap and be rendered harmless.

In the front rank will stand organs of an official character. They will always stand guard over our interests, and therefore their influence will be comparatively insignificant.

In the second rank will be the semi-official organs, whose part it will be to attack the tepid and indifferent.

In the third rank we shall set up our own, to all appearance, opposition, which, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards.

All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions -- aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical - for so long, of course, as the constitution exists .... Like the Indian idol "Vishnu" they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one of the public opinions as required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will, in fact, follow the flag which we hang out for them.

In order to direct our newspaper militia in this sense we must take special and minute care in organizing this matter. Under the title of central department of the press we shall institute literary gatherings at which our agents will without attracting attention issue the orders and watchwords of the day. By discussing and controverting, but always superficially, without touching the essence of the matter, our organs will carry on a sham fight fusillade with the official newspapers solely for the purpose of giving occasion for us to express ourselves more fully than could well be done from the outset in official announcements, whenever, of course, that is to our advantage.

THESE ATTACKS UPON US WILL ALSO SERVE ANOTHER PURPOSE, NAMELY, THAT OUR SUBJECTS WILL BE CONVINCED TO THE EXISTENCE OF FULL FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND SO GIVE OUR AGENTS AN OCCASION TO AFFIRM THAT ALL ORGANS WHICH OPPOSE US ARE EMPTY BABBLERS, since they are incapable of finding any substantial objections to our orders.

Methods of organization like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or to tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it .... WE SHALL HAVE A SURE TRIUMPH OVER OUR OPPONENTS SINCE THEY WILL NOT HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSITION ORGANS OF THE PRESS IN WHICH THEY CAN GIVE FULL AND FINAL EXPRESSION TO THEIR VIEWS owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.

Trial shots like these, fired by us in the third rank of our press, in case of need, will be energetically refuted by us in our semi-official organs. [...]

As I have noted on several occasions, it was only AFTER the release of the QFG Pentagon Strike Flash Animation on August 23rd, 2004, that a veritable onslaught of news articles were published that sought to dismiss the "no plane at the Pentagon" theory. But never, EVER, in any of these debunking pieces was our website (quite popular by numerical standards, I should add) EVER mentioned.

As Joe wrote in his Flying Fish article:

We notice that very few items of so-called "conspiracy theory" have rattled the "Bushes" quite like our Pentagon Strike Flash did. The Pentagon Strike video came out on August 23rd 2004. Probably nobody really noticed it at that point, but it hit a chord of response in the hearts of millions of people around the world. They began to madly download and forward it to their friends and relatives. Latest stats on how many people have viewed it to date are 500 million!

Apparently it even landed in the email box of the Editor of the Washington Post, which is why Carol Morello sent us an email asking for an interview. Or so she said. My suspicion was that the Post was instructed to do "damage control", albeit oh, so gently!

Now, look at this mini-timeline:

August 23rd 2004: Pentagon Strike Video which propagates wildly for a month.

September 11, 2004: CatHerder post to Above Top Secret forum debunking the Pentagon Flash.

September 21st 2004: First contact by Carol Morello of the Washington Post

October 7th 2004: Washington Post article

It was an interesting feeling to know that if they hadn't seen the Pentagon Strike before, certainly George and Dick, Karl and the gang were watching it after the Washington Post wrote an article about it.

October 19th 2004: George Bush visits New Port Richey - a previously unscheduled "whistle-stop" on his campaign trail. NPR is very small, not likely to be a major target of any presidential candidate, but it just happens to be Laura Knight-Jadczyk's hometown. It was our initial reaction that Dubya's visit to Laura's little home town - certainly of no importance on the campaign trail - was deliberately done to send a message to her. Fact is, her daughter's ex-boyfriend wrote to tell her that he had been among those selected to shake the hand of George W. himself! Now, how's that for a coincidence?

As to exactly what Carol Morello of the Washington Post wrote to Laura, here is the pertinent passage which is actually quite revealing:

A couple of editors here saw the video/film, and I was asked to find out what I could about it. As you can imagine, we continue to have an intense interest on the attack on the Pentagon and the people who were affected.

I've just begun reporting, so it would be premature to tell you what "perspective" my story would have.

My initial impressions are that the questions and theories expressed in the video got a spurt of attention in early 2002, after the publication of a best selling book in France, then the furor died down for a while, and now they have re-emerged with the extraordinarily wide dissemination of this video on the Internet.

The 911 Commission report appears to have done little to dampen the controversy. I hoped to speak to you about how and why you posted it on your web site, what kind of response you've received and what you think about it. [?]

Notice that she attributes the resurgence of interest in the "Pentagate" problem to the Pentagon Strike video. Can we say "damage control"?

And if there is damage control, then that means there is damage.

Up to this point in time, the only acknowledgement the administration ever gave to such issues was to refer vaguely and dismissively to "conspiracy theories". Now, suddenly, it seems that dealing with the "conspiracy theories" in a direct manner was seen to be imperative. "9/11: Debunking the Myths" came out in Popular Mechanics Magazine in March of 2005, just five months after the Washington Post article. That's pretty fast work. [...]

So far, we have been generous to the people at Popular Mechanics. We have assumed that they are simply well-intentioned but misguided souls. However, it appears that there is a more sinister, and dare we say it, "conspiratorial" side to Popular Mechanics' "innocent" debunking of 9/11 conspiracy theories. You see, it turns out that one of the main contributors to the article is one Benjamin Chertoff, a cousin of the new Dept. of Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff.

American Free Press' Christopher Bollyn, who dug up the information, also claims that Ben Chertoff's mother was a Mossad agent. While there is, as of yet, no evidence of any working relationship between the two, it is certainly noteworthy that the cousin of the current Homeland Security Chief, (who, in his previous incarnation as head of the Justice Department's criminal division was instrumental in the release of obvious Israeli spies before and after 9/11), happens to be behind a high-profile attempt to debunk 9/11 conspiracy theories.

So if you happen to stop by the sorry article in question, don't be fooled or intimidated by the word "science" in big bold letters on the Popular Mechanics page. [...]

According to another 9/11 researcher:

"The editors of Scientific American followed in the footsteps of Popular Mechanics in exploiting a trusted brand in order to protect the perpetrators of the mass murder of 9/11/01. The column by Michael Shermer in the June, 2005 issue of Scientific American, titled Fahrenheit 2777, is an attempt to deceive the magazine's readers into dismissing the overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was an inside job without ever looking at that evidence. More specifically, Shermer attempts to inoculate readers against looking at the decidedly scientific refutation of the official story? [?]

Shermer's column exhibits many of the same propaganda techniques as the ambitious feature article in the March issue of Popular Mechanics by Benjamin Chertoff, for which Shermer professes admiration:

'The single best debunking of this conspiratorial codswallop is in the March issue of Popular Mechanics, which provides an exhaustive point-by-point analysis of the most prevalent claims.'

Comparing the two attack pieces is instructive. Both pieces mention a similar range of issues, with Shermer adding Jewish conspiracy rumors and UFOlogists to the mix...

This last is undoubtedly a direct reference to Signs of The Times, while avoiding giving a direct link to our website out of fear that the reader might be influenced.

Shermer uses an array of deceptive methods to persuade the reader that challenges to the official story of the 9/11 attack are worthy only of ridicule and should not be scrutinized. His primary technique is to use hoaxes and unscientific ideas to "bracket" the valid ideas that he seeks to shield the reader from.

That Shermer went to such great lengths to thoroughly misrepresent the painstaking, scientific, evidence-based work of many researchers is a testament to the success of the Pentagon Strike Video! It really stepped on a sore toe. And that tells us something important, the same thing Carol Morello of the Washington Post wrote:

"the questions and theories expressed in the video got a spurt of attention in early 2002, after the publication of a best selling book in France, then the furor died down for a while, and now they have re-emerged with the extraordinarily wide dissemination of this video on the Internet."

We notice that never, in any of the two major "debunking" articles that followed fast on the heels of the Pentagon Strike video, was the video ever even mentioned by name, nor was our website mentioned. Other books, other researchers, other web sites were mentioned, but the deliberate avoidance of Signs of The Times - the origin of the Pentagon Strike, was conspicuous. We notice the same trend in the Above Top Secret forum.

Again we point out: debunkers are sent in only when damage control is needed. And damage control is only needed when it is thought that there might be damage. That means that the Pentagon Strike is understood clearly, in the minds of the perpetrators, to be the weak link in their chain of lies.

Now, in a certain sense, I understand why many of the alternative news sites that carried the Pentagon Strike did not link back to its source of origin; after all, we do get into some - shall we say - unusual things. But it was surprising that the mainstream media debunkers did not ONCE mention SOTT... because they could so easily have utilized our more "esoteric research" to ridicule us.

But they didn't. And that is very revealing when you consider the Alex Jones Dog and Pony Show and what it propagates.

So, back to the 911 Scholars Symposium. I was watching and listening to the four guys... Steve Jones, Bowman, Tarpley, and Fetzer, and each of them were good in different ways. Fetzer was impassioned from his depths, I think, and Tarpley had a lot of info at his "neuron tips," and Prof. Jones was just bemused and really kind of out of his natural environment and it showed. He acted like a kid who has discovered a new toy and doesn't realize it is a loaded gun with the safety off. Bowman was politicking - maybe he's sincere, I don't know.

Anyway, combined, they did produce a strong impression that might sway a lot of people to their view which includes arresting Bush and the whole gang for treason. Bowman even says that if he is elected to congress, he'll make it an issue "on the hill."

So, the question is, of course, why are they being allowed to have even a toe in the door?

That was my first question and as I was listening to all of them pat themselves on the back that they were NOW getting a lot of attention, that people were opening up and seeing the truth, and it was just a matter of time before the whole thing blows wide open, I could only think: You don't know what you are dealing with. Facing down psychopaths isn't going to be that easy.

For example, they are all talking big about arresting the Neocon gang en masse and "taking back the government."

Okay, try to imagine the steps by which this might be done.

Go ahead... think!

The first thing is: who is going to do it?

Alex Jones? Webster Tarpley? A group of 911 researchers?

Do you think that, if they had the remotest chance of doing such a thing that they would be allowed to leave their houses on the day they plan to execute said warrant in anything other than a bodybag?

I mean, get real!

Oh, they'll have "back-up" you say.

Who, pray tell, is going to back the fearless 911 gang with plans to arrest the President and most of Congress? A gang of NRA aficionados armed to the teeth? What do you think will happen?

Come on now, think! Think ARMY vs. rabble with hunting rifles and maybe an odd AK 47 here and there.

And even if you did manage to actually take the perps into custody, who is going to try the case and before what judge that hasn't been bought and paid for by the Neocons?

Picture the scenario: a group of U.S. citizens band together and start REALLY pushing to go after Bush and Cheney...

Can you give me a script here? I'm having a hard time getting beyond the idea that all of them would be immediately arrested as "enemy combatants".

So now it is time to have a peek at some of the reality - the context in which this Alex Jones Dog and Pony show is being set up.

First:

Shield sought for US personnel from 1996 war crimes act

Charges feared in detainee cases

By R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post | July 28, 2006

WASHINGTON -- An obscure law approved by a Republican-controlled Congress a decade ago has made the Bush administration nervous that officials and troops involved in handling detainee matters might be accused of committing war crimes and prosecuted in US courts.

Senior officials have responded by drafting legislation that would grant US personnel involved in the terrorism fight new protections against prosecution for past violations of the War Crimes Act of 1996. That law criminalizes violations of the Geneva Conventions governing conduct in war and threatens the death penalty if US-held detainees die in custody from abusive treatment.

In light of a recent Supreme Court ruling that said international conventions apply to the treatment of such detainees, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has spoken privately with Republican lawmakers about the need for such protections, according to someone who heard his remarks last week.

Gonzales told the lawmakers that a shield was needed for actions taken by US

personnel under a 2002 presidential order, which the Supreme Court declared illegal, and under Justice Department legal opinions that have been withdrawn under fire, the source said. A spokeswoman for Gonzales, Tasia Scolinos, declined to comment on Gonzales's remarks.

Language in the administration's draft, which was prepared by officials in the Justice and Defense departments, seeks to protect US personnel by ruling out detainee lawsuits to enforce Geneva protections and by making US enforcement of the War Crimes Act subject to US -- not foreign -- understandings of what the Conventions require.

The aim, Justice Department lawyers say, is also to take advantage of US legal precedents that limit sanctions to conduct that ''shocks the conscience." This phrase allows the courts to consider the context in which abusive treatment occurs, such as an urgent need for information, the lawyers say -- even though the Geneva prohibitions are absolute.

Now, read this next one - this ought to shiver your timbers:

Bush Submits New Terror Detainee Bill

By Anne Plummer Flaherty The Associated Press Friday 28 July 2006

Washington - U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the Pentagon's tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court.

Administration officials, who declined to comment on the draft, said the proposal was still under discussion and no final decisions had been made.

Senior officials are expected to discuss a final proposal before the Senate Armed Services Committee next Wednesday.

According to the draft, the military would be allowed to detain all "enemy combatants" until hostilities cease. The bill defines enemy combatants as anyone "engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners who has committed an act that violates the law of war and this statute."

Legal experts said Friday that such language is dangerously broad and could authorize the military to detain indefinitely U.S. citizens who had only tenuous ties to terror networks like al Qaeda.

"That's the big question ... the definition of who can be detained," said Martin Lederman, a law professor at Georgetown University who posted a copy of the bill to a Web blog.

Scott L. Silliman, a retired Air Force Judge Advocate, said the broad definition of enemy combatants is alarming because a U.S. citizen loosely suspected of terror ties would lose access to a civilian court - and all the rights that come with it. Administration officials have said they want to establish a secret court to try enemy combatants that factor in realities of the battlefield and would protect classified information.

The administration's proposal, as considered at one point during discussions, would toss out several legal rights common in civilian and military courts, including barring hearsay evidence, guaranteeing "speedy trials" and granting a defendant access to evidence. The proposal also would allow defendants to be barred from their own trial and likely allow the submission of coerced testimony.

Senior Republican lawmakers have said they were briefed on the general discussions and have some concerns but are awaiting a final proposal before commenting on specifics.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England are expected to discuss the proposal in an open hearing next Wednesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Military lawyers also are scheduled to testify Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislation is the administration's response to a June 29 Supreme Court decision, which concluded the Pentagon could not prosecute military detainees using secret tribunals established soon after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The court ruled the tribunals were not authorized by law and violated treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions, which established many international laws for warfare.

The landmark court decision countered long-held assertions by the Bush administration that the president did not need permission from Congress to prosecute "enemy combatants" captured in the war on terror and that al Qaeda members were not subject to Geneva Convention protections because of their unconventional status.

"In a time of ongoing armed conflict, it is neither practicable nor appropriate for enemy combatants like al Qaeda terrorists to be tried like American citizens in federal courts or courts-martial," the proposal states.

The draft proposal contends that an existing law - passed by the Senate last year after exhaustive negotiations between the White House and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. - that bans cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment should "fully satisfy" the nation's obligations under the Geneva Conventions.

Sen. John W. Warner, R-Va., chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said Friday he expects to take up the detainee legislation in September.

Now, we already know that the Neocon/Zionist consortium has control of Congress. No matter how many questions or doubts they say they have about this bill, they will roll over and pass this legislation. In fact, any discussion at all is just for show. We know that already because we have seen it happen again and again.

Now, consider what Paul Craig Roberts wrote about Bush's illegal spying...

Bush's acts of illegal domestic spying are gratuitous because there are no valid reasons for Bush to illegally spy. The Foreign Intelligence Services Act gives Bush all the power he needs to spy on terrorist suspects. All the administration is required to do is to apply to a secret FISA court for warrants. The Act permits the administration to spy first and then apply for a warrant, should time be of the essence. The problem is that Bush has totally ignored the law and the court.

Why would President Bush ignore the law and the FISA court? It is certainly not because the court in its three decades of existence was uncooperative. According to attorney Martin Garbus (New York Observer, 12-28-05), the secret court has issued more warrants than all federal district judges combined, only once denying a warrant.

Why, then, has the administration created another scandal for itself on top of the WMD, torture, hurricane, and illegal detention scandals?

There are two possible reasons.

One reason is that the Bush administration is being used to concentrate power in the executive. The old conservative movement, which honors the separation of powers, has been swept away. Its place has been taken by a neoconservative movement that worships executive power.

The other reason is that ** the Bush administration could not go to the FISA secret court for warrants because it was not spying for legitimate reasons and, therefore, had to keep the court in the dark about its activities. **

What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election?

Could we attribute the feebleness of the Democrats as an opposition party to information obtained through illegal spying that would subject them to blackmail?

When Roberts suggests

"What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election? "

... he doesn't really go the full distance.

What if the illegal spying is to gain complete control of government and judiciary? Everybody has dirty laundry, and if you have that information, you can control about anything. The only people you can't control are those who are "clean" and we can guess from the way things are going in the U.S. and UK, just about everybody is "dirty."

Americans turned out in record numbers to vote in the last election. They NEVER do that unless they are unhappy with the status quo. The exit polls and evidence of vote tampering suggests strongly that Bush did not win the election... (which is not to say that Kerry was any better choice!)

So, not only do they have control of congress and the judiciary, they also control the votes... As Stalin said, it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes. And with control of congress and the judiciary AND the support of the Israeli owned media, there is NO possibility of them being made accountable for ANY of their crimes.

So, considering the cards that the Neocons are holding in terms of illegal spying, I think we need to be realistic and understand that even the next election is not going to change anything.

Oh, they may make a show of running Jeb Bush for president, or even some dark horse we don't know about. But with the controls this cabal has already, there is ZERO possibility of fundamental change in course.

And that means that all those folks getting up and speaking out about 911 may very well be the first to be rounded up as enemy combatants under Bush's new law once it is passed.

In the third rank we shall set up our own, to all appearance, opposition, which, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards...

When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will, in fact, follow the flag which we hang out for them. ...

The first rule of warfare is: KNOW your enemy and the whole 911 crowd is so focused on their theories, blinded by their egos, and unaware of the larger context in which 911 must be placed that they are little more than sheep being led to the slaughter by the Pied Pipers of the "Third Rank Alternative Press" and 911 Truth organizations - people like Alex Jones, Jeff Rense, Gerard Holmgren, Rosalee Grable, Alex Constantine, and their associates and fans.

'They saw a Samaritan carrying a lamb and going to Judea. [Jesus] said to his disciples, "Why is he carrying the lamb around?" They said to him, "So that he may kill it and eat it." He said to them, "He will not eat it while it is alive, but only after it has been killed and has become a carcass." They said, "it cannot happen any other way." He said to them, "So also with you: seek a place of rest for yourselves, that you may not become a carcass and be eaten." Gospel of Thomas

Some days I feel like Cassandra...

Alex Jones and the Jarhead Chronicles

Alex Jones: Another Paranoid, Uneducated, Unemployeed White Male with an Inferiority Complex. Oh Joy!

By Shelly Tumbleson

Introduction 

Alex Jones is the name of a guy who for lack of a better description, is a personality at ACTV (now known as ACAC). He spends each and every possible moment on TV going on about this New World Order, about his super-patriotism and about how everyone except the most devoutly hyper paranoid right wing lemmings is trying to persecute him. he generally does this by equivocating anyone not conforming to HIS views as goosestepping nazis.

   The first part of this page is devoted to revealing some things about Mr. Jones that he will vehemently attempt to deny. In the civilized world, we call these things, "facts".

The second part of my comments will be wholly and totally biased. Jones is a bully. Part of being a bully is being a coward at heart. I will spend my time proving that not so deep down that Alex Jones is an attention craving,delusional, disgruntled uneducated white male who ultimately believes in nothing.

My introduction to Alex Jones came from surfing through channels 10, 11 and 16. For those of you who are not subscribers to Austin Cablevision, these are the Austin Community Access Centers channels. Anyone who cares to take the time to become a producer of a live or dead (eg: recorded), show can do so by taking the classes and reserving a series time. I did such a thing many years ago and encourage as many people as i can to do the same.

Or you can be like Alex Jones. He simply asks various producers if he can show some tapes and/ or be a talking head for their shows. This is good for the producers because many producers have an idea of what their show should be like, but aren't really cut out for being on television. It is possible that Jones is now a producer; i do not know.

So there I was one night, flipping through the channels and there's this guy on TV who is taking calls (this was a live show). I honestly thought the guy was funny, not because of his sense of humor, but because a caller might say, "Hey Alex, there are too many damned Asians at UT". (sadly enough, there are enough lazy white boys at the University of Texas who are too chickenshit to compete against Asians in the race for a good grade in the academic arena. They would much rather piss and -bee yatch- and moan about it instead of studying). So this guy, Alex, would then start up with something like, "You are so right. These Communists are trying to subvert this country by coming here, squeezing students out of universities and distributing their propaganda."

Note that this is not an actual quote, but rather is indicative of the type of rhetoric that Alex Jones gives.

But later, he became much more incoherent. He started putting organizations and names to the forces that were persecuting him, though he never had any proof. One such story came from an event that he fabricated that will be explained in a bit.

So as far as i was concerned, this guy went the wayside of all other crackpot conspiracy theory nuts and religious zealots. And he faded into the background noise until he became a mere buzz of incoherentness.

Then... then he had to introduce himself to me.

One night, before it was time to make the set of my show, Alex starts hoopin and hollerin about some ratings he received as a result of this little hour or so of ranting he was able to do on KLBJ am. Apparently no one bothered to tell him what sort of people tend to listen to am radio, let alone what kind of people listen to am radio at night. Well, ratings are ratings and he was happy and proud that he had done so darn well. Okay, he's entitled to that. If you need ratings to have some sense of approval, and you need that approval to justify your esteem, then go for it.

So as he's about to leave the building, he sees me working on a computer. He SCREAMS at me, "HI! I'M ALEX JONES!" Now, being a Texan of a much higher caliber than the likes of Clayton Williams (who steadfastly refused to shake the offered hand of Ann Richards when she offered it to him before a debate for the governorship of Texas), i went to shake the hand.

Handshakes are important. You can tell a lot about a persons handshake, the way they use their eyes when they speak and on a more intimate level, the way someone uses their hands. Well, no sooner than had my hand joined with his when he withdrew it. "My name is She..." "I KNOW WHO YOU ARE. I'VE SEEN YOUR SHOW!" I honestly don't remember anymore than that. He stormed out of the door before any conversation could happen. Once again, he faded into the background; a noise much less significant than any gnat.

Like i said, "Handshakes are important".

Some weeks later i put a tagline on my show. It was custom to create and put some text on the screen (i worked with a static shot) that changed from week to week. This one week, i had gotten sick and tired of the irrelevant diatribes of the radical paranoid white trash hicks that now permeate the live shows of ACAC. So on my screen was the following tagline:

The access show without a delusional conspiracy theory.

So the show ended. Some people got a chuckle out of my tagline, but no one really remembered it. Heck, we never even once talked about the paranoid angry white male shows except to have an ocassional chuckle at their expense.

And again... weeks later after i'd all but forgotten about this tagline, Alex approaches a young man named Sean who was at the studio to take my show over (something i enjoyed doing; being in front of the camera all of the time can become very boring). Sean was about 14 years old. Jones gets into his face when i'm in the restroom. I walked out to see Jones grilling Sean. "DID YOU CONSPIRE TO BUY THAT SHIRT OR DID YOUR MOTHER BUY IT FOR YOU?!?" (verbatim) Sean had become an unwitting victim of the one i would come to call, "Jarhead Jones".

Sean, to his credit, shrugged him off by saying, "My mother bought it for me." Jarhead was momentarily stumped. "DID SOMEONE CONSPIRE TO MAKE HER BUY IT?!?" (again, verbatim), he cleverly responded . So there he was, this towering mass of anti-intellectualism steadfastly pointed at a 14 year old. And that was when he and i had words. I won't even bother to describe his attempt at rationale discussion. But to be fair, it was pretty sad of me to think that he'd listen to anything i said to him.

For a sample of this person's incoherent ramblings and social retardation, listen to the first 3 or so minutes of this Real Audio clip of him (note: this link appears to be dead. If i can find it again, i will change it). More specifically, listen to the first caller trying to give Jarhead Jones some support. If you feel the need, please listen to more. If you decide that this is the kind of reactionist, white trash plebian rhetoric that appeals to you, more power to you.

But that wasn't what really pissed me off about Jarhead. Sure, it takes an utter and complete coward to antagonize a 14 year old but what really set me off was this...

So one night, i'm flipping through the channels. I see a segment of a 60 Minutes show on one of the access channels. Here's the setup: a SWAT team working with University Police somewhere in Florida, I believe. there was a voiceover of this particular clip. The voices of the original interviewees were replaced with Jarhead Jones saying things like, "...AND SO WE'RE DOING ALL OF THIS TO FUND THE POLICE STATE AS MANDATED BY THE UNITED NATIONS TO HELP IMPLEMENT THE NEW WORLD ORDER!" (note: this quote is of my own creation. Alex Jones is incapable of stringing together such a coherent thought... ask anyone who's listened to him)

This bothered me. It really bothered me. I have been a producer at ACTV for most of this decade and a fan of it for longer. Most of that time, i've been witness to ACTV being under attack by the right wing... People like Jones who love to cry, "I've got rights!", but when questioned or they cross a line, then all of a sudden they're helpless persecuted victims.

The concept of, "If you don't like what you see, exercise your right to change the channel!" has eluded these people. There's something about free speech being used by someone who is not subservient to the Radical Right that really pisses these people off. But i'm getting ahead of myself.

It may not be readily clear why this pissed me off, but that should be explained at length shortly.

I posted the following letter at the ACTV studio. The letter was torn down by Alex Jones within the hour.

        An Open Letter to ACAC Producers

         Dear Friends,

        Some weeks ago, I watched part of a program on either channel 10 or 16. Someone had recorded a segment of a 60 minutes episode about a SWAT team that was part of a University campus in Florida (I believe it was Florida). This segment had been altered by a narrator speaking over the voices of those who were being interviewed. Whatever their original opinions and comments were, were lost to the voice of the narrator.

        What bothered me about this show was not so much the fact that someone had shown someone else's work; in this case 60 Minutes. However, it is not unreasonable to think that CBS might find a legal reason to sue ACAC and the producers of the show that showed their for plagiarism and slander. This alteration was not satirical nor humorous and thus would not receive protection as such. Perhaps "Fair Use" would fall into this category, but given the fact that CBS' work had been altered by the narrator, I cannot help but to feel that the producer of the show put the institution of ACAC and thus, the community of other producers at serious risk of a lawsuit. For those of you who were part of ACTV/ ACAC a couple of years ago should remember the chilling effects that a lawsuit (the Infosex debacle), can have upon this establishment.

        What I found so disturbing about this program was the fact that the person "narrating" this story appeared to be interested only in convoluting and distorting the journalism of 60 Minutes to fit his own theories. For those of you who did not see this show, the narrator spoke over the voices of those in the story, filling their dialog with his own ideas which were incoherent at best.

        On a personal level, none of this disturbed me nearly as much as the fact that the narrator saw the 60 Minutes segment and those who were part of the story, as mere objects to be treated as puppets. He filled their mouths with words that weren't theirs, making human beings into inanimate objects that existed only for the sake of having them serve his own incoherent delusions.

        By writing this letter, I hope to raise awareness that there are some among us (Producers), who are jeopardizing the foundation that we all work so hard to maintain. That is, the personification of Free Speech, the ability to bring contemporary issues to the community of Austin (especially live television), the coverage of local artists/ musicians and the opportunity to create content for visual media. As a collective of Producers, we have worked far too hard to let anyone jeopardize the freedom that we (still) enjoy.

         Thank you for your time,

        Shelly Tumbleson

        Producer #1830 from 1992 to present.

When I wrote this letter, my goal was not to do any name calling. It was to raise awareness that there are factions of producers down here (at ACAC) who see Free Speech as an excuse to say anything they wish to, regardless of it's factual basis and regardless of the legal implications. By not pointing finger and naming names, I allowed those responseible for this "piece" to save face. The narrator was Jarhead, though to this day, I do not know who the producer was, nor the name of the show.

I posted my letter on the producers board here at the studio. This board is a place for us to communicate to one another; whether it be a call for talent or an announcement or a statement; this board is a sanctuary for us to post our thoughts. However, in true paranoid fascist behavior, Jarhead removes my posts as soon as he can; provided that I'm out of sight. In true paranoid fascist behavior, free speech is good and well as long as no one stands up to challenge his delusions. Then again, he berates me (behind my back, of course), as untalented because i've only done 6 years of live television instead of of being a shock jock on the local white trash ranting radio station [which, as of the summer of 2000, went out of business].

Because of this behavior, I decided to spend some time on my last show talking about the mental deficiency and cowardice of these people. Such as, has anyone ever wondered why only uneducated to semi-educated white males call these shows? Perhaps they're not capable fo taking charge of their lives and thus need to blame someone else for their failures? They have a victims mentality. That is, everything that happens to them is the fault of someone else. It reveals their level of immaturity. I have heard this tripe before. Historically they have used words like, "degenerate", "subversive" and "immoral". They call themselves patriots, freedom fighters, avatars and all too often, they proclaim their actions, regardless of the cost or outcome, as the will of God.

But there's more, so much more...

A fellow producer related the following story to me. The names have been changed, except for a couple. The following is an excerpt of that letter. Bracketed "[ ]" areas are my own clarifications.

His incessant pestering of me was completely centered around "what an asshole you [ in reference to me ] are." At least 4 times during this mono-syllabic diatribe, he asked me not to tell you that he said this. OK Jarfuck.

He challenged a man to "step outside"... the man (Steve) took him up on it, and whipped him like the little -bee yatch- that he is. Not being able to accept defeat... he claimed that 4 men with knives attacked him to stifle his free speech. OK... maybe many of us have been that humiliated in our lifetimes... But THEN he got Daddy to call in a favor, and he actually got the FBI to go to Fringeware to find Clayton's address. (Clayton is the first guy that he first tried to lure outside) He did this by concocting a story of him being one of the leaders of a "terrorist" organization called Anathema, which is affiliated with Fringeware."

As the months went on, my source was harassed by [Alex Jones], who tried to coerce him into believing that he had indeed been attacked by these guys with knives. Finally he [the source], explained that he knew the real story of what happened and that if Jarhead didn't shut up about the incident, he would call every radio and television show in town and explain what really occurred.

After this letter, I received a more detailed account of what happened:

"This is a long story, but the details make it so much more enjoyable! I'll be as brief as possible. This guy Clayton, a.k.a. SpaceHitler, had been pranking everybody at access for 7 years. (the "die-die-die guy"), including you. His favorite target was Jarhead. One Monday night Jeff Davis had his "Patriot Fun Show" Jeff dressed as Elvis, Jarhead dressed as a Booger Elf. Jeff's daughter/call screener, Crystal loved his pranks... and put one through on this night. After Jarhead was freaking out at the call, Clayton (henceforth referred to as C) called back. Crystal invited him to the show, saying that if Jarhead started anything... there were people there to stop it. C called me for a ride. As hard as it was, I declined. No way was I gonna put C and Jarhead together in one building. He found another ride, and brought along a crazy skater friend of his. (C is legally blind, so he doesn't drive)

Upon arriving, C and co.(a total of 3 guys)were talking to whoever was at the desk, and Sir Jarhead the Booger Elf, a.k.a. Jarhead, recognized his voice... and began to berate him as best his little mind could manage. C is actually very smart, and was calmly pointing out Jarhead's swelling example of fascism.

Jarhead became louder, and louder begging C to step outside. That is when Steve, said, and I quote. "I can't believe you're acting like this because he called you a Jarhead." He spun around and focused his fury on Mystery S. When he said "step outside, and I'll whip you like my -bee yatch-." Mystery S said OK, let's go... and led the way. Jarhead hesitated, then followed. As did Charlie (of The Show with No Name) and Kanya (no name co-host, & play toy) with C, and the driver.

Jarheads next brave move was to announce that he had a gun, and began foraging around in his truck. Steve said, oh, now your gonna shoot me you pussy. Jarhead came from the truck with his hand in his pocket, and slowly advanced towards Steve. Steve retreated 2 or 3 steps, then said, "Then shoot me" and promptly nailed Jarhead with a right hook. They both just stood there for what seemed like a long time, then Steve let many more fly.

Jarhead tried to throw one... that's right, one punch which grazed Steve's nose... like flicking at a booger. At this point Iggy came out of the studio. Jarhead saw him, and screamed for him to go get Bob. Iggy ran in to do his masters bidding. Steve hit him a few more times. By now Charlie had convinced C and his friend to get out of there. They got in the car, and split. (with Steve) Bob came running out, to see Jarhead bleeding profusely, and shouting "they jumped me with knives!" Charlie disputed this, so Jarhead spit blood on him...So Charlie, bless him, punched him right in that mason jar of a head. When the cops came, Jarhead was ranting and changing his story with each breath... began to talk of his importance... and his families wealth... and his relatives in the FBI!!!

Nearly getting himself arrested. Herman saw the security tape of the incident, and related it, blow by blow, to (name deleted) and I the next night. The next day the Idiot Cause Jumpers Brigade took over the airwaves. Greg Ericson...Jeff Davis etc. Most notably, Terry Liberty Parker. He called every show claiming Jarhead had been attacked in the parking lot by 4 guys with knives... held his own, breaking the biggest guy's nose. (Jarhead's version, of course.) And crying out about what a "Chilling Effect" this will have on free speech in Austin. Several of us called around to these same shows, telling the real story. We were cut off almost immediately on most shows. Terry began to call this a blame the victim campaign... and likened it to blaming a rape victim for the assault due to the length of her skirt.

About a week after this began, I called Terry Liberty Parker at his home and let him have it. He would not hear anything I had to say. So I told him that if it took me the rest of my days, I would rub his nose in the "chilling effect" I (we) did. At one point TLP stopped hosting his 30 min Libertarian insert before Smash the State, thinking it would stop. It never has.

Jarhead tells a whopper when he recounts this story... It seems to grow exponentially each time I hear it. What a pussy. He created Social security fraud, child pornography, and terrorism charges so he could bring in the Feds. The guys at Fringeware told the Feds, -flick- you... bring a warrant. To the bureaus credit, they let it drop.

To this day, these delusional buffoons still reference this "event" as proof that what they do is gravely dangerous. I have 6+ hours of footage of all of the flap on access that I have titled Jar Wars. So you see... lots of people do know the truth. That is why Jarhead freaks out so bad when somebody throws it in his face. The scary thing is that I believe Jarhead truly thinks his version IS the truth!

For many weeks we lampooned these idiots on Night Talk. Clayton would call in as Jarhead, recounting how Ninjas with light sabers descended upon him to stamp out his free speech. You gotta hear some of these calls."

I also found out that Jarhead left the studio with a lot of his blood decorating the lobby. He didn't even have the courtesy to clean his own mess up.

Are you suprised at any of this? Neither is anyone else.

Before i go any further with letting Alex Jones make even more of an -arse- of himself than he has already, i wanted to present a couple of items for your consideration.

The DSM-IV, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, is the benchmark for helping mental health experts determine the nature of a persons sickness. This book is readily availible at any decent bookstore.

I found this passage last year and i thought it had Alex Jones written all over it. It describes the features of a manic episode. Now i'm not an expert at diagnosing these sorts of things but you may be (or you may just think you are). Read the following excerpts and decide for yourself if they resemble our favourite dunderpate or not.   

Inflated self esteem is typically present, ranging from uncritical self-confidence to marked grandiosity, and may reach delusional proportions (Criterion B1). Individuals may give advice on matters about which they have no special knowledge (e.g., how to run the United Nations). Despite lack of any particular experience or talent, the individual may embark on writing a novel or composing a symphony or seek publicity for some impractical invention. Grandiose delusions are common (e.g., having a special relationship to God or to some public figure from the political,religious, or entertainment world).

    Manic speech is typically pressured, loud, rapid and difficult to interrupt (Criterion B3). Individuals may talk nonstop, sometimes for hours on end and without regard for others wishes to communicate. Speech is sometimes characterized by joking, punning and amusing irrelevancies. The individual may become theatrical, with dramatic mannerisms and singing. Sounds rather than meaningful conceptual relations may govern word choice (i.e. clanging). If the persons mood is more irritable than expansive, speech may be marked by complaints, hostile comments or angry tirades

Now, i'm not saying that Jones *IS* a manic depressive or that he is constantly having manic depressive episodes, but i do think that there are grounds for suspecting him of being afflicted with manic depression and/or other psychosis. But there's much more, both before and after the above quoted paragraphs. For a fair estimation of how accurate a Manic Episode is to the behaviour of Alex Jones, please read up and make your own decision.

Judging from his behavior, i suspect Jones of being afflicted with one or a variety of mental ailments, but a cocaine habit might induce the same type of behavior.

Should people take pity on Alex Jones? That's a tough one. Whatever afflictions he has, he appears to do nothing to try to overcome them. So while i have a tough time finding any pity for him, I think it's appropriate for people to find him pitiful.

It's almost 2000.

Where are the bombs and martial law and all that Armegeddon stuff that these assholes promised ?

It's November of 1999.

The doomsday cults, New World Order Conspiracy Theorists, knee jerk uber-conservative hate groups and other fundamentalist terrorist organizations have long since gone underground. But Alex Jones remains.

I moved back to Austin about half a year ago for reasons i do not care to discuss. And though nothing would bring me more pleasure than to tear down his theories with nothing more than logic, observation, rationale and reason (the antithesis of all that he is), the reality is that i simply do not care enough. He is incapable of reason, he cannot engage in dialog and anyone who challenges his "wisdom" is a subersive, working for the Illuminati, New World Order (whatever the group du jour is). This behavior is well documented in American History, by the way. It was called "Mc Carthyism".

So as you probably know by looking around this site, i'm going back on the air with my new show, Box of Bugs. I might take potshots at the paranoid lunatic fringe, but why bother? i mean, their followers have "Gawd on their side.", so what's the chances of my persuading them to look at their conspiracy or their cult leader "jarhead jones" with unveiled eyes? i might as well go toss rocks at the moon.

By the way, has it ever occured to anyone to sample the kind of people attracted to Jarhead Jones and his bunch? I've yet to find anyone other than semi educated white males with middle of the road kind of jobs following him. Coincidence? Maybe. But i think it merits remembering what other kind of groups in this country have attracted homogenous anglo/norman/saxon groups of men.

As a side note, i thought i would add something to the story of my first meeting of Jarhead. I thought he was in his mid 40's. he looks tired, worn, stretched. The saying of "ridden hard and put away wet" comes to mind. Up close, he looks like someone who's done a few too many yards of cocaine in his life (which would nicely explain the behavior, btw). Then someone told me he's in his 20's. Draw your own conclusions.

Check back here now and then. If i see something too precious to pass up, i'll be more than glad to post it.

arigatoo goziamasu!

shelly.

N O T I C E !

I have finally gotten around to the 2nd part of my comments on Jones and the whole "Lunatic Fringe" of uneducated, angry white males that comprise so much of the ACAC culture these days. Be sure to read on here.

Alex Jones, Part Two:

The Jarheadian Escapades Continue.

Many years ago i saw Alex Jones on Tee Vee for the first time. At first i thought he was just a big lug who liked to rant and scream for the sake of laughs. Like a daytime drama that takes itself too seriously, he was melodramatic, over the top and he was so full of himself that it was funny.

Then he started imagining organizations, using only heresy and his own conjecture as proof. He started adopting a Mc Carthyist attitude towards anyone who questioned him, he started using Austin Access as his favorite venue for propagating his own mythologies, conjectures and half baked theories for the sake of promoting his website, infowars.

Oh... did i mention that he sells videotapes on his site? They're pretty funny actually, even though he does manage to describe some serious issues in the process.

For those of you who don't know, Jones is an ultra right wing Uber-Patriot who preys upon the feeble minded by instilling half truths, lies and paranoia into them. He then tells them that if they don't believe in HIS and ONLY his way, then they are leftist puppets being used by the United Nations, Secularists, Liberals, the "Elite Bankers" (be careful not to say "Jewish" there!), the "Hollywood Elite" (whatever that's supposed to mean), even Satanists (uh, free clue: there is no such thing as "Satan" except for number 18, Miroslav Satan, who plays for the Buffalo Sabres), and anyone else who's not a fantical right wing conspiracy nut. To get his maximum bandwidth, Jones has befriended many people who have become producers, most of whom allow him to show videotapes of him on their time. It is commonly believed that Jones takes it upon himself to monitor us "Leftist" producers and press charges on them for the most minor and trivial infraction. See the The Show With No Name debacle.

Hopefully you've already read the first part of the Jarheadian Escapades. If not, take the time to do so. You won't be disappointed (unless you hate to read).

Jones is a tireless self promoting popular personality here in Austin. But just because he's popular, that's not to say that he has any endearing qualities such as likeability, intelligence or leadership ability. Popularity just means you're known. Heck, David Duke is popular, Lyndon la Rouche is popular, that child loving pop star, Michael Jackson, is popular. Even the suspected cross dressing J. Edgar Hoover was popular. So yes, even i have to concede that Jones is popular.

His tactics remind me of the Mc Carthyist witch hunts of the 50's, or of the Red Guard in China during their revolution or more presently, of the Taliban of Afghanistan. And as he's gotten older, he's become more outrageous, incomprehensible, fantical and frankly, i think he's become dangerous. No... i do not believe he has the courage nor ability to plan an attack like someone like Eric Robert Rudolph, but i believe he is capable of influencing a feeble minded individual into doing so.

But all of this aside, the reason i'm writing this is to let everyone know what's happened as of late.

Some months ago, the Austin Chronicle ran an in depth article on the affairs of Austin Community Television . The opening editorial was in regard to Alex Jones. Of the many outstanding points that were made, Jones is a "tarbaby". No, that's not a racist comment for those of you who think like that. A "Tarbaby" is a journalistic and political term used to describe a scenario where the subject at hand is more likely to stick with you regardless of what you do to shake it. Typical tarbaby topics are generally abortion, gun control, etc... .          

July 14, 2000: The time has come to talk of Alex Jones. When the Chronicle editorial staff first considered how to cover the ongoing controversy at Austin Community Access Center (ACAC) regarding Jones, there was almost a consensus not to do it. The feeling was that regardless of what we said about Jones it would empower him, helping to further define him as a spokesperson in our community. There was also the tar baby concern -- once you got into it with Jones, you could never get out. The feeling was that despite his beliefs, his overriding goal was self-promotion. It was solely to his advantage to extend any interaction. The staff did not want to participate in any support, promotion, or ongoing dialogue with Jones, but the ACAC story is important to our community.

            Jones is an articulate, sometimes hypnotic, often just annoying conspiracy theorist -- black helicopters over our cities, Clinton's storm troopers rampaging through our streets, the Y2K computer crash used as an excuse for martial law (oh wait, that didn't happen, but the rest will). Through his ACAC show Info Wars, his canceled KJFK radio show, and such stunts as building a chapel at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Jones has gained notoriety. Unlike a journalist or historian, a conspiracy theorist starts out with an assumption, garners all information that supports their theory, and ignores or discredits information that disagrees with it. Jones seems driven more by getting media attention than any ideology. There are conspiracies everywhere and the forces of evil are sweeping our country: Smart Growth, free trade, light rail, Social Security, world government. Nefarious, usually unnamed, international conspiracies are busy controlling our lives. Jones does not offer specific political solutions (Jones' only solution actually is to encourage an ever-increasing paranoia about everything).

            I used to listen to Jones on the radio but eventually stopped because any participation -- even just listening -- supported the show. Jones loves to rant. Jones is the hero of most of his rants. There has never been anything he supported except freedom and the Constitution. I can imagine him roaring, "That is exactly the point!" -- except Jones uses them as straw men, props against which to place all the conspiracies invading our daily life. Still, I was sorry when KJFK took him off the air. I really think the society is richer for having many different voices. I thought it was a cowardly decision.

            Unfortunately, a number of ACAC producers think that Jones' respect and support for freedom of speech ends with those voices with which he personally agrees. The most recent controversy concerns Charlie Sotelo's The Show With No Name, which has been suspended by ACAC. At least partially at issue is Jones' role in The Show being taken off the air. Jones denies he had anything to do with it, and ACAC Board President John Villareal backs him up. There is also the concern, however, about how active Jones has been in monitoring other shows, especially those he doesn't like. Read Lee Nichols' piece on Jones and ACAC ("Mad TV," p. 34) and Marc Savlov's piece on Charlie Sotelo ("Access Denied," p. 36) and decide for yourself. On behalf of the staff, I ask that this not become a catalyst for becoming part of Jones' audience.

            Charlie Sotelo works for us at SXSW (us being managing director Roland Swenson, Nick Barbaro, and myself). Specifically Sotelo works on the film conference and festival. On Austin cable access, he has hosted The Show With No Name. Currently he is facing a 90-day suspension for showing a Nike commercial directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, The Game). Complaints were filed against Sotelo because access shows can't show commercials. Even though this Nike commercial was old and for a product no longer manufactured and clearly shown as an early work of an interesting director, it was decided that The Show violated this rule and should be suspended.

            Sotelo hosted this show long before he came to SXSW. In fact, one of the reasons he came to our attention is because he hosts the show. I've never seen it. At home we don't have cable. This is from no high moral anti-TV stance but because I'm a hopeless addict. Give me a remote control, and I'll go all night, never watching more than a minute of anything. So I haven't seen the show. Most everyone I know raves about it.

            Obscure beginning works by now-established talents are treasures to the film enthusiast. Sotelo has given me many tapes, and I get a special thrill from bits like Andy Kaufman's appearance as a contestant on The Dating Game for reasons that have nothing to do with The Dating Game.

            One can respect the ACAC board on this. It seems absurd to acknowledge this as a commercial rather than a rare work in a director's filmography, but if they make an exception this time, what happens when some group shoots some "arty commercial" for a local event and wants to run it on access because of their enthusiasm for it? The Sotelo exception could wreak havoc. Still, the shoes are not even on the market any more, and shouldn't ACAC be a place to showcase obscure but interesting works?

            The board is trying to reach some compromise with Sotelo on The Show and establish greater clarity regarding their policies. We'll see what happens. But what is shocking is that Alex Jones, the anti-authoritarian guerrilla freedom fighter, a champion of liberty, isn't leading the charge to reinstate Sotelo. What is more shocking is the notion that he freely admits to filing complaints against other broadcasters over the years. Vigilance and freedom, he reminds us on his shows, are the main defenses of liberty, but he doesn't seem to respect his own opinion, or anyone else's.

(Borrowed from The Austin Chronicle ) http://www.auschron.com/

For the most part, i have nothing to add to this. I felt that it was a well placed, thoughtful and accurate essay that should be heeded by all who are intelligent enough to listen... and ponder. In terms of ACAC policy, i do disagree that we, as producers, should be unable to give critical review for works of people, even if those people produced commercials, but that's an esoteric discussion not meant for these pages.

That was just the editorial. Then came the article...

In the 14 July 2000 issue of the Austin Chronicle, Austin Access (ACAC) was covered at great length. Not just Jones and his brigand of rag tag conspiracy nuts with guns and more biblical scripture than you can shake a stick at, but Austin Access as the dysfunctional community that is usually is.

But not all is wrong at ACAC. As is the case in most instances, a handful of radicals manage to steal the recognition and merits from others by tainting the entire organization. I have to give special recognition to The Reel Deal for not just an outstanding show, not just for being a shining example of diversity and tolerance, not just for being good enough to go pro (at least two of their crew do movie reviews for a local affiliate), but for showing that a group of people with a common goal can produce a really outstanding show and raise the bar of excellence for others to emulate.

The article can be found here. It is kind of long, but worth the time to read. Here is an excerpt regarding what has become known as "The Parking Lot Incident", which is covered at length in the first part of my comments on Jones.           

In addition to creating tension between Sotelo and Jones, Thumbleson's Web site alleges the fight exacerbated a feud between Jones and "Steve's" friend, Clayton Counts. Counts is notorious, for lack of a better word, for making prank calls to ACAC call-in shows, especially Jones' show. Counts, who still maintains an Internet account on the server of the now-defunct bookstore Fringeware, said he suspects that Jones then called in the FBI and made bogus claims that Counts was a terrorist and possessed child pornography and got the bureau to raid Fringeware to get Counts' address. According to the Web page, the bureau later dropped the investigation.

Just so it's clear, my last name is not "Thumbleson", though the story is in reference to my website. In reference to my conjecture that the Jones camp is obsessed with what other producers say and do ( for the sake of finding a reason to "bust" others for any infraction). The article goes on to say:           

The anti-Jones camp claims that if a fellow producer crosses Jones, he will watch their program obsessively until he finds a violation and turn that person in. Seeming to support that contention, Jones' producer Mike Hanson turned over dozens of hours of videotape of Side's show to the Chronicle, and said he had more.

Now, these are just two minor excerpts that i'm using to draw a point. I really cannot urge you enough to take the time to read the entire article and draw your own conclusions. Unlike Jones, i cannot... will not say that i am somehow divine enough to know the categorical and unquestionable truth in things. I offer my thoughts, some resources and expect you, as adults, to decide for yourself.

In closing this section of my thoughts, i offer the following comment on all radicals, be they left or right.

It has been my experience that anyone who is so polar, so fanatical that they believe they are divine recipients of knowledge and truth, are also the first to proclaim that they are victims. The best example i can give of this in recent times is how anytime someone wants to maintain the separation of church and state, or insists that secular, scientific, plausible theories be taught in the classroom (as opposed to mythical parables that were designed for humanity when it was in its infancy), it is the extremist religious types who take it as an affront to their beliefs and consider sharing such thoughts (and subsequently dismissing the mythologies of their religion), who cry and bemoan at how they have become victims and are being oppressed. Without getting too sidetracked, it reminds me of a spokesman for the Catholic League who said Catholics were being opressed by Kevin Smith's Dogma.

Yea, right.

In that spirit, Jones makes the following comment in the article:           

"I am the abused one here," Jones responds. "I am not part of any rivalry. I'm just attempting to do my show. I just want to be left alone."

Let me be very clear... Jones is as much as a victim as someone who wears a KKK outfit, stands in a ghetto and screams racial slurs. This comment (above) is wrong on three accounts.

One: he is not simply interested in doing his show. He is interested in promoting his website and encouraging people to buy his "crockumentaries".

Two: he does NOT want to be left alone. He craves any and all attention and will use any attention to draw more people to his website (again, see: "Buy my Crockumentary!").

Three: Jones' saying that he's not part of any rivalry is just plain laughable, silly and frankly... it's disturbing. Ask Christian Side (read the article for about Jones' lawsuit against Christian Side). Fanatics need to think they are being persecuted and opressed to reinforce their belief that their self righteousness is ordained by God Himself. (See also: Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, Fred Phelps, Donald Wildimon, etc...) .

As a side note, i can't help but to notice it's only been as of recent times that somehow the act of discovery and invention has become parallel to "satanism". Indeed, some of the most brilliant scientific minds, including but certainly not limited to the German engineers who built the American space program and Albert Einstein himself were scientists who saw their secular careers as extensions of their faith. But this too, is a discussion for another time.

Please, take the time to read the article and Louis Black's Page Two editorial. When you're done with all of this (whew!), come back and check out the fallout.

The Austin Chronicle Article:

Alex Jones: Conspiracy Victim or Evil Mastermind?
Media Clips
BY LEE NICHOLS    

   
July 14, 2000:

Alex Jones is no stranger to conspiracy theories. As watchers of his access television shows and listeners to radio shows are well aware, he is devoted to exposing the many conspiracies he believes are threatening our freedom. But to listen to some of Jones' critics, there is a new conspiracy afoot -- and Alex Jones is behind it.

Jones' rants -- formerly heard on KJFK radio and still aired on the Austin Community Access Center's (ACAC, formerly ACTV) television stations, the Internet (www.infowars.com), and his syndicated radio programs -- have become a regular fixture in our town's cultural landscape. Jones rails against what he sees as government and corporate threats to our individual liberties, with predictions that the jackboots will be kicking in our doors and hauling us into internment camps any day now -- in fact, he alleges that this is already going on. He points to the deaths of the 80 Branch Davidians in Waco in 1993 as an example of federal police run amok. Jones recently led the effort to build a chapel on the grounds at Mount Carmel.

But a group of current and former ACAC programmers contend that their freedom -- specifically, their right to free speech and to disagree with Jones -- is what is really being threatened, thanks to what they call Jones' heavy-handed tactics. The programmers' allegations -- which they have made very public by both broadcasting them on ACAC shows and posting them on Web pages -- are that Jones has used both ACAC policy and legal maneuvers to intimidate them or get them thrown off the air.

Jones and his supporters counter that Jones is the real victim. They claim that his critics are harassing, threatening, and even physically assaulting him. These allegations go back pretty far -- more than four years -- but recently resurfaced when ACAC programmer Charlie Sotelo received a 90-day suspension from station airwaves when his The Show With No Name was found to be in violation of station policies regarding commercialism. (Sotelo is an employee of the SXSW Film Festival & Conference, which is partially owned by Austin Chronicle publisher Nick Barbaro and editor Louis Black.)

Jones and Sotelo both admit to a great dislike for one another, and at least one fan of the show says that Jones admitted to filing the complaint which led to Sotelo's suspension. But both Jones and ACAC executive director John Villareal deny that charge. Asked what role Jones had in Sotelo's suspension, Villareal replies, "None whatsoever. The guy [Jones] gets too much credit. There were two phone calls [filing complaints], and neither of them were from Alex."

Villareal won't disclose who the two callers were, saying that ACAC policy allows complainants to be anonymous. At press time, The Austin Chronicle was trying to obtain the names under the Texas Open Records Act, but the city maintains that ACAC is an outside contractor hired to run access television on the city's behalf, and thus is not subject to Open Records laws.

Villareal's statement appears to be at odds with a conversation that Jones had with Casey Monahan, a fan of The Show With No Name, at Eastside Tex-Mex restaurant El Azteca. As Monahan, the director of the Texas Music Office, tells it: "I saw [Jones] at El Azteca, I asked him what the deal was with it, and he told me he filed a complaint, and that somebody else did too."

Jones believes that Monahan may have misunderstood him. "I did file a complaint on him for busting into my studio," Jones says, referring to an incident in May when Sotelo accused Jones of doing studio recording that was so loud that the noise was bleeding over into Sotelo's live broadcast of The Show With No Name (which Jones denies). "The guy [Monahan] stopped me ... and asked me, 'What happened to Charlie Sotelo?' And I said 'The guy's crazy, he busted into my studio, and I filed a complaint on him.'" But Jones says that complaint, which he says he later withdrew, was unrelated to the one that got Sotelo suspended.

The Parking Lot Incident

The bad blood between Sotelo and Jones goes back about four years, to a fight that occurred in the ACAC parking lot. Jones' detractors cite the incident as an example of his inability to tell the truth.

There are two different versions of the incident -- Jones claims that a group of four thugs, one wielding a knife, accosted him outside the studios and physically attacked him because of his beliefs. Sotelo and others tell another story, saying that Jones challenged a man who was ridiculing him, whom witnesses will only identify as "Steve" or "Mystery S." They claim that Steve accepted Jones' invitation to fight, and then thrashed Jones handily. The account, as related by ACAC producer Max Kane, can be read on a Web page maintained by another producer, Shelly Thumbleson (www.synaesthetic.com/jarhead.html).

According to Sotelo and the Web page account, after "Steve" left, Jones told police he had been attacked with a knife. Sotelo refuted this, and says that Jones then spit blood on him in retaliation, for which Sotelo allegedly punched Jones.

Jones describes it differently: "The police showed up. They started listening to these people's propaganda. The other people fled. They went and watched the [security] tape, and then they went and wrote the report and then the investigation was pursued on the attackers." Jones said the investigation was never resolved.

Both sides claim that security videos at ACAC support their version of the fight, but ACAC said the tape is no longer available.

In addition to creating tension between Sotelo and Jones, Thumbleson's Web site alleges the fight exacerbated a feud between Jones and "Steve's" friend, Clayton Counts. Counts is notorious, for lack of a better word, for making prank calls to ACAC call-in shows, especially Jones' show. Counts, who still maintains an Internet account on the server of the now-defunct bookstore Fringeware, said he suspects that Jones then called in the FBI and made bogus claims that Counts was a terrorist and possessed child pornography and got the bureau to raid Fringeware to get Counts' address. According to the Web page, the bureau later dropped the investigation.

As in the Sotelo case, Jones' accusers have failed to produce any hard evidence of his connection to the raid. The most solid link is Jones' claim, made on one of his ACAC shows, that "I've got the FBI and the Austin Police Department" investigating the fight. And again, Jones again denies any connection to the raid, pointing out that Fringeware was an advertiser on his KJFK radio show.

Also on the Web site, Thumbleson recounts an incident from early in Jones' tenure at ACAC, when a Jones show featured a clip from 60 Minutes, but with a voiceover replacing the show's original dialogue. Thumbleson says he posted a letter at the studio scolding Jones and warning his fellow producers that such a stunt might expose ACAC to legal liabilities. According to Thumbleson's site, "The letter was torn down by Alex Jones within the hour" -- a claim Jones dismisses as "pure propaganda."

Another who feels he took abuse from Jones is Christian Side Hanke, who broadcasts under the name Christian Side, and has belittled Jones' opinions on his show The Response. In retaliation, Hanke says, Jones has targeted him with legal maneuvers. One concerned what Hanke says was a false police report for stalking. Jones also explored the possibility of a wrongful termination lawsuit when he was canned by KJFK, and had Hanke deposed to see if he might have contributed to the firing.

Hanke says the "stalking" occurred when he went to a protest Jones attended for the purpose of contesting Jones' rhetoric. "After the first protest I attended, I received a call" from a police detective, Hanke says. "The detective was laughing about it."

Hanke says Jones came close to filing a lawsuit against him after he read, on-air, an e-mail which he says originated as an Internet newsgroup posting from an insider at KJFK and which was subsequently forwarded to him. The e-mail says Jones "was fired because he is an immature little punk who cries until he gets his way."

During the deposition, Jones' lawyer Steve Gibbens tried to link Hanke to the firing, asking him repeatedly if he had any sort of communication with staffers at KJFK, and questioning him about a statement he had allegedly made that "It's my mission to get [Jones] off the air." Hanke replied that any such statement would have been merely an attempt to challenge the truth of Jones' on-air claims, and not a specific plot to get him fired.

"The guy is kind of weird," Hanke says. "The fact is that everyone has to be a scapegoat for something. This guy's sitting here saying on the air that I've hung a cat on his door or something. Whenever he was trying to sue me, I've always sort of let things go. But I have a tape of all the times he said 'this guy's a stalker' ... calling me a stalker in public. And I was like, okay, I'm going to take all these tapes and sue him for defamation right back. ... [It's] nothing more than a pure, unadulterated false charge, and it escalated."

Jones says Hanke has it backward: He claims he is Hanke's victim, and that Hanke has threatened him via television and phone messages. "We filed an exploratory motion in court to let him know we were serious," Jones says. But Jones' suit never happened; Hanke says Jones simply couldn't afford to pursue it any further and begged to be left alone, but Gibbens claims that the suit remains "in a holding pattern."

The anti-Jones camp claims that if a fellow producer crosses Jones, he will watch their program obsessively until he finds a violation and turn that person in. Seeming to support that contention, Jones' producer Mike Hanson turned over dozens of hours of videotape of Side's show to the Chronicle, and said he had more.

On the other hand, Jones' detractors could be accused of obsessively watching Jones as well -- Side and Kane gave me their own tapes, and another producer named Beau Henry, who once considered himself a Jones ally, actually produced a "documentary" detailing Jones' activities.

The documentary focuses on a 1997 conflict between Jones and producer Chris Ramirez in which Ramirez aggressively challenged Jones at the ACAC offices regarding the veracity of claims Jones made on his show. Shortly after the argument, complaints were filed against Ramirez for alleged commercialism on his show; Ramirez was subsequently banned from telecasting on ACAC twice, the second time permanently. The documentary suggests there was a link between the argument and the suspension. The Chronicle was unable to contact Ramirez for comment.

"There was a purge of everybody [at ACAC], that had nothing to do with me," says Jones. "The complaint was filed by somebody about him ... He was suspended for talking about Taco Bell prices. I just love these people -- they get on, they break the rules, I don't complain on them, and they accuse me of it.

"And then the guy did some things on the air that were so horrible about me you couldn't imagine, and we started monitoring. He was saying that if I was out in the crowd to shoot me or throw gasoline on me at a rally. Boom, he got suspended for that. Yes, being here six years, I have filed two or three complaints."

Kane, who formerly directed Ramirez's show, says that Jones and other ideologically similar programmers, such as Terry "Liberty" Parker and Jeff Davis, "are more or less a plague on free speech. ... If you watch any show, you can find technical violations."

"I am the abused one here," Jones responds. "I am not part of any rivalry. I'm just attempting to do my show. I just want to be left alone." end story

Editorial From the Austin Chronicle

Page Two
BY LOUIS BLACK    

   
July 14, 2000: The time has come to talk of Alex Jones. When the Chronicle editorial staff first considered how to cover the ongoing controversy at Austin Community Access Center (ACAC) regarding Jones, there was almost a consensus not to do it. The feeling was that regardless of what we said about Jones it would empower him, helping to further define him as a spokesperson in our community. There was also the tar baby concern -- once you got into it with Jones, you could never get out. The feeling was that despite his beliefs, his overriding goal was self-promotion. It was solely to his advantage to extend any interaction. The staff did not want to participate in any support, promotion, or ongoing dialogue with Jones, but the ACAC story is important to our community.

Jones is an articulate, sometimes hypnotic, often just annoying conspiracy theorist -- black helicopters over our cities, Clinton's storm troopers rampaging through our streets, the Y2K computer crash used as an excuse for martial law (oh wait, that didn't happen, but the rest will). Through his ACAC show Info Wars, his canceled KJFK radio show, and such stunts as building a chapel at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Jones has gained notoriety. Unlike a journalist or historian, a conspiracy theorist starts out with an assumption, garners all information that supports their theory, and ignores or discredits information that disagrees with it. Jones seems driven more by getting media attention than any ideology. There are conspiracies everywhere and the forces of evil are sweeping our country: Smart Growth, free trade, light rail, Social Security, world government. Nefarious, usually unnamed, international conspiracies are busy controlling our lives. Jones does not offer specific political solutions (Jones' only solution actually is to encourage an ever-increasing paranoia about everything).

I used to listen to Jones on the radio but eventually stopped because any participation -- even just listening -- supported the show. Jones loves to rant. Jones is the hero of most of his rants. There has never been anything he supported except freedom and the Constitution. I can imagine him roaring, "That is exactly the point!" -- except Jones uses them as straw men, props against which to place all the conspiracies invading our daily life. Still, I was sorry when KJFK took him off the air. I really think the society is richer for having many different voices. I thought it was a cowardly decision.

Unfortunately, a number of ACAC producers think that Jones' respect and support for freedom of speech ends with those voices with which he personally agrees. The most recent controversy concerns Charlie Sotelo's The Show With No Name, which has been suspended by ACAC. At least partially at issue is Jones' role in The Show being taken off the air. Jones denies he had anything to do with it, and ACAC Board President John Villareal backs him up. There is also the concern, however, about how active Jones has been in monitoring other shows, especially those he doesn't like. Read Lee Nichols' piece on Jones and ACAC ("Mad TV," p. 34) and Marc Savlov's piece on Charlie Sotelo ("Access Denied," p. 36) and decide for yourself. On behalf of the staff, I ask that this not become a catalyst for becoming part of Jones' audience.

Charlie Sotelo works for us at SXSW (us being managing director Roland Swenson, Nick Barbaro, and myself). Specifically Sotelo works on the film conference and festival. On Austin cable access, he has hosted The Show With No Name. Currently he is facing a 90-day suspension for showing a Nike commercial directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, The Game). Complaints were filed against Sotelo because access shows can't show commercials. Even though this Nike commercial was old and for a product no longer manufactured and clearly shown as an early work of an interesting director, it was decided that The Show violated this rule and should be suspended.

Sotelo hosted this show long before he came to SXSW. In fact, one of the reasons he came to our attention is because he hosts the show. I've never seen it. At home we don't have cable. This is from no high moral anti-TV stance but because I'm a hopeless addict. Give me a remote control, and I'll go all night, never watching more than a minute of anything. So I haven't seen the show. Most everyone I know raves about it.

Obscure beginning works by now-established talents are treasures to the film enthusiast. Sotelo has given me many tapes, and I get a special thrill from bits like Andy Kaufman's appearance as a contestant on The Dating Game for reasons that have nothing to do with The Dating Game.

One can respect the ACAC board on this. It seems absurd to acknowledge this as a commercial rather than a rare work in a director's filmography, but if they make an exception this time, what happens when some group shoots some "arty commercial" for a local event and wants to run it on access because of their enthusiasm for it? The Sotelo exception could wreak havoc. Still, the shoes are not even on the market any more, and shouldn't ACAC be a place to showcase obscure but interesting works?

The board is trying to reach some compromise with Sotelo on The Show and establish greater clarity regarding their policies. We'll see what happens. But what is shocking is that Alex Jones, the anti-authoritarian guerrilla freedom fighter, a champion of liberty, isn't leading the charge to reinstate Sotelo. What is more shocking is the notion that he freely admits to filing complaints against other broadcasters over the years. Vigilance and freedom, he reminds us on his shows, are the main defenses of liberty, but he doesn't seem to respect his own opinion, or anyone else's. end story

 

So, the Chronicle ran the articles and as expected, the feedback the next week was pretty much 50/50. But for me there was a nagging problem. See... once upon a time, i watched an interview that Charlie Rose gave to Christine Amonpour. When he asked her about the journalists obligation to maintain neutrality in the events going on in Yugoslavia, her answer was profound. She said that there arises certain situations where neutrality towards the activities of a person or a group is basically the same as endorsing that behavior.

In that regard, i wrote the following response to the Chronicle:

            Radical Misinformation

            To the Editor,

            I was very impressed with your coverage of Alex Jones ["Media Clips," July 14]. It was extremely unbiased and I suspect it might have taken a considerable amount of restraint to write this article. But in hindsight I have to wonder: Is being unbiased when covering Alex Jones tantamount to endorsing him? Simply put, he is a source of misinformation that many people listen to and believe without question. In the early 90s we called them Dittoheads . Whether it be Jones' claims that the Marines have some town in North Carolina under Martial Law (no proof has been given of course), whether it be Jones decrying "We are at war here, folks! Your government has declared war on you!" or be it Jones inability to correctly recall how and why he got into (and lost) a fight in the ACAC parking lot, the reality is that Alex Jones is incapable of distinguishing facts from fantasy (if he indeed was jumped by four men, one with a knife, how is it that he walked away alive and uncut?). It is my belief that in being unbiased toward Jones, it is way of giving him tacit credibility.

            Nonetheless, I commend the Chronicle on an outstanding editorial (Mr. Black's "Page 2" comments) and especially Mr. Nichols' journalism. But ultimately Alex Jones is to patriotism what Matt Drudge is to journalism and what hot dogs are to meat. He is a lightening rod for radicals and he must be questioned and discredited for each one of his unfounded claims.

            Shelly (last name withheld)

            ACTV/ACAC producer since 1992             

If you'd rather see the letter in it's original context, including other letters that both support and rally against Jones, feel free to have a look. To his credit, i will admit that Jones HAS figured out some things. Namely that a market based conciousness is a path to ruin. What he HASN'T figured out is: journalism, accountability, credibility, social skills, production values, and in my opinion, he still doesn't grasp the finer points of integrity nor honor (or the rougher points for that matter). He also knows that when a people do not excersise their right to free speech, that governments will take those rights away. He's also got a clue that corporations will sacrifice individual rights both here and abroad for the sake of quarterly profits. So, kudos to him for those things.

The main point of my letter to the Chronicle is pretty much the same point as the first part of my comments on him. That is, he is incapable of distinguishing facts from fantasy. The reality is that he did get into a fight that he started. He did get his -arse- whipped like a schoolyard -bee yatch-. He did get punched in the nose by Charlie Sotelo because he (Jones) wanted Sotelo to lie for him and when he (Sotelo) would not, Jones spit on him. If anyone doubts me, call his show and ask about "The Parking Lot Incident". Then watch his reaction. If nothing else, you'll find it a source of great amusement.

Oh... I'd like to add something here. It seems that Jones has recently found that people have been reading the story about "The Parking Lot Incident". He's asked an associate of mine to tell me to tell me to remove it, or so i've heard. I guess if what i wrote wasn't factual, he would have filed suit by now; a common tactic of his. Speaking of removing things, there's a board at ACAC where any articles or letters that are published by the Chronicle or Austin American Statesman. The letters supporting Jones are still there as is the article regarding him and the editorial as well. There are a few pieces of mail that are posted from people who wrote in to rally to his defense as well. My letter, the one above, was there for a few days. It is gone now. I have taken the time to print up a few nice copies of it, and i repost it every week. Needless to say, it is taken down every week as well. I do not know who is doing it, but i know they are a very petty minded, insecure coward.

So if you happen to be one of the lemmings who follow Jones around without an iota of integrity (which is what it would take to follow someone like that), then how can you justify putting any faith or stock in someone who CANNOT distinguish fantasy from reality? Oh... nevermind. If you follow Jones, chances are that you can't either.

Jeff Rense Retains Lawyer; Uses Coercion and Intimidation

By Lisa Guliani of Wing TV

After the publication of an article that I wrote for WING TV entitled Jeff Rense: A Reinvention of What?, we now have official confirmation that Jeff Rense has retained the services of a lawyer who is resorting to coercion and intimidation tactics in trying to pressure Patricia Smullin (owner of KOBI-TV in Oregon) into reversing herself by signing a pre-scripted statement in order to avoid a potential “defamation lawsuit.”

In fact, this is what Attorney-at-Law Eugene V. Anderson wrote in a letter dated May 31, 2006 in which he wants Ms. Smullin to actually sign a statement that he himself wrote and SCRIPTED for her in advance. The next three paragraphs are what Jeff Rense's legal gun "suggests" that Ms. Smullin write and sign:

“You had virtually no day to day contact with Mr. Rense during his tenure at KOBI-TV where he worked under the then news director, Alan Goldberg, as an anchor/director, from May 1983 to June 1984. While at KOBI Mr. Rense worked extremely hard, producing, writing, and anchoring both the 6-7 and the 11 pm newscasts, Monday through Friday. Mr. Rense was a superb anchor/producer and he earned KOBI an Arbitron rating for his newscasts of a 53 point share, which is unprecedented in our station's history.

I categorically deny the quotations attributed to me in the Wingtv.net article titled “Jeff Rense: A Reinvention of What?” by Lisa Guliani. I deny stating that Jeff Rense is a ‘compulsive liar’. I deny stating that Jeff Rense is ‘not known for his honesty.’

I deeply regret the totally untrue statements attributed to me in the Wingtv.net article, and I hereby issue a heartfelt, formal and public apology to Mr. Rense. I personally have a great deal of professional respect for Jeff Rense.”

To read Attorney Anderson’s entire letter, click here: Jeff Rense Lawyer (page one) Jeff Rense Lawyer (page two)

Now remember, Ms. Smullin didn’t write a single word above; Jeff Rense’s lawyer did! And, of course, if Ms. Smullin ever signs this SCRIPTED statement (that she didn’t even write), then Jeff Rense (by dangling the threat of a defamation lawsuit in her face) would publish it on his website and pull a bait-and-switch in a transparent attempt to discredit my article. But as can be seen from the SCRIPT, his underhanded tactic has now been exposed.

Jeff Rense: COINTELPRO Asset

By Lisa Guliani of WING TV

Patsy Smullin has run KOBI-TV for the last 30 years, and her father founded it. If anybody would have known Jeff Rense and the supposed 5,000 newscasts he claims to have made, it would be Patsy.

As it happens, Patsy Smullin does remember Jeff Rense, and in two different telephone conversations I had with her over the past few days, she confirmed that he did have a position at her television station for a brief time as a reporter and news anchor. Smullin stressed that Jeff Rense, or “a guy calling himself Jeff Rense” (her words), was employed at KOBI (an NBC affiliate) from June 1983 to May 1984, and she is not aware of him working at any other station in the state of Oregon either prior to his employment at KOBI-TV or afterward. [I would think if he'd worked at other stations previous to his KOBI position, these would be listed on his job application or resume when given to KOBI-TV.]

Patsy had more to say. She revealed that in her experience as Jeff Rense’s employer (and this is a direct quote), “He was not known for his honesty.”

Think about it. Patsy Smullin was Rense’s employer some twenty-odd years ago. After all this tiime, the characteristic that has remained clearly in her memory is that “he was not known for his honesty”. What does that say to you? According to Ms. Smullin, at that time Jeff was also involved in several court battles with other people. One wonders if it has anything to do with him not being known for his honesty?

When asked if she could elaborate on the comment she'd made regarding Rense not being known for his honesty, her response was: "Sure. He was a compulsive liar." Also, when questioned as to the claim that Jeff anchored and produced “5000 newscasts,” Patsy Smullin laughed heartily and stated, “This is absolutely false. He never did that here.” Okay, if not at KOBI-TV, then where? Perhaps Jeff Rense will reveal this to us all at some point so we can check it out.

But on his own website, Jeff Rense claims to have been an award winning news director and TV news anchor for 10-12 years (accounts vary). If not at KOBI, then where?

An American Treasure

"…an award-winning television News Director and News Anchor for over ten years, Jeff continually pushed for higher standards of journalism and responsible, intelligent reporting and inquiry. Regrettably, those goals were often at odds with the irrevocable TV news obsession for tabloid exploitation of the trivial, the tragic and the sensational. The situation became so dubious and distasteful that one day he walked away from his highly-successful news anchor/news director career (as high as a 53 Share of the audience - Nielsen) and moved to radio, recognizing it as the last viable approach to bringing reality to the American public...and now with the internet, to the world."

Interesting that Rense declares himself to have worked as a news director and TV news anchor. An online search to verify this claim will return only Jeff’s words – repeated endlessly ad nauseum - as to the truthfulness of this assertion. There is literally no data to substantiate this claim anywhere on the Internet. The claim exists only on the Rense website and a few other websites that have copied and pasted the Rense claims onto their own pages.

Here’s another variation on the same theme: Jeff Rense Hosts Sightings

"During 12 years as an award-winning broadcast journalist, Jeff anchored and produced more than 5,000 television newscasts. This devoted single dad is also author of the book AIDS Exposed and passionately investigates ways to prevent diseases and extend life. His brother is Rip Rense, longtime reporter for the Los Angeles Times. Jeff first did radio while an education major at the University of California Santa Barbara, and in 1994 he returned to this first love with the talk radio show "End of the Line." In 1997, by agreement with Henry ("the Fonz") Winkler and Paramount Pictures, this show transformed into the ratings star "Sightings."

Based on the following article he was a former news anchor at KOBI-TV. However, if one searches KOBI, there is no information on the former popular TV news anchor/news director Jeff Rense to be found.

The Truth Is Up There

"Presiding over this conspiratorial miasma is talk-radio host Jeff Rense, whose weeknight show, Sightings, is broadcast from a studio somewhere in Southern Oregon. (Citing threats to his life, Rense asked WW not to print his exact location.) Five nights a week, millions of Americans (including an estimated 21,000 Portlanders) in 120 cities tune in to Rense to catch up on the latest news on alien abduction, Bigfoot, paranormal phenomena--and chemtrails. A former news anchor at KOBI-TV in Medford, Rense began to hear reports of chemtrails in 1999."

The above page also says:

"...By the late 1980s, Rense had worked for a handful of network affiliates in the West. He said his ratings were high, and he got 'lucrative offers' from several Oregon stations. But he had also become disillusioned with TV news and decided to quit the business...." "...After walking away from his TV career path, Rense returned to Santa Barbara and opened three pet stores..."

"...By the early 1990s, he had sold his All About Pets outlets and in 1994 approached KTMS with his idea for a talk-radio show, or at least his version of one..."

A Professional Broadcast Journalist

"As an award-winning broadcast journalist, Mr. Rense has anchored and produced well over 5,000 live 30-and 60-minute television newscasts… He began his End of the Line radio show which is now in its fourth highly successful year. Recently, the End of the Line was acquired by the Premiere Radio Networks, one of the top two radio syndicators in the U.S., and renamed Sightings On The Radio through an agreement with Paramount."

"As a journalist and private citizen, he became aware of the misinformation and propaganda surrounding the worldwide AIDS epidemic. Devoting three years of his life to researching, collecting, and compiling information, Mr. Rense authored the underground best-seller, AIDS Exposed, published in 1996. This 420-page book has been acclaimed as 'overwhelming,' 'invaluable' and 'the supreme public service' by broadcasters, medical professionals, and educators alike. Appearing on scores of radio and TV talk shows as an author, Mr. Rense has also been invited to lecture at such institutions as the University of California and USC. He has also written numerous articles, papers, and reports on a wide range of subjects and acts as a consultant on many different issues."

Rense's radio show "End of the Line" was renamed "Sightings on the Radio" with Paramount's backing.

An extensive online search for articles, journalistic reports and papers from Rense’s purported pre-Rense.com prior journalism career yields nothing.

How can this possibly be if he has written ‘numerous articles, papers and reports’? His book, AIDS Exposed, does not appear to be available anymore, with the exception of potential availability of a random used copy, if you’re lucky.

A search on the publisher of this book, Bioalert Press, coughs up nothing as far as any listing for a company website. The top link on Google search for Bioalert Press says: Bookstore-- Balaam's Ass Suggests you Read These Good Books-- Health AIDS Exposed-- Jeffrey Rense-- BioAlert Press-- Order from Jeffrey Rense, Box 764, Goleta, CA 93116. www.balaams-ass.com/bookstor/health.htm -

The above Google link would not come up for me in multiple attempts on different days. Regarding the Balaam’s Ass link, one has to order the book directly from Jeff Rense. Is Bioalert Press really just Rense? Has anyone out there ever heard of BioAlert Press?

I find it very ironic that Rense claims to have become so disillusioned with the nature of the mainstream news broadcast business and its inclination to report tabloid style and sensationalistic material, when all anyone has to do is peruse the Rense.com website for 10 minutes to realize that this well-funded site – funded by the same mainstream businesses that Rense claims to detest – is full of nothing but a never-ending series of sensationalistic, tabloid-type, speculative, unsubstantiated or fabricated “news” articles. I have to ask: Is it only wrong, disillusioning and distasteful when “other” people do it, Jeff? Or are you doing it for them?

Furthermore, online searches for any evidence of Jeff Rense’s longstanding claims regarding his extremely elusive broadcast journalism career path result in even more dead ends. There is an article on the Rense website entitled “The Most Dangerous Man in Talk Radio”, authored by an alleged LA writer named Kennedy Grey.

In this article, Kennedy Grey tells us, “When Jeff Rense walked away from a #1 rated Oregon TV news anchor position, people suspected job burnout. But Rense wasn't burned out on his job - his dissatisfaction was with the entire news media mainstream itself. Grey also states that Jeff spent “Twelve years as on on-air news anchor and News Director "up and down the west coast". Grey further says, “Rense set out to re-invent himself into a liberator of truth from the confines of a corrupt and bloated news broadcast industry.” He directly quotes Jeff Rense, who states that “Radio is theatre of the mind - a classroom of the mind."

Very interesting comments, aren’t they? The news anchor/news director statement is impossible to verify via the Internet, and thus far Jeff Rense is not forthcoming with information in spite of email sent to him containing a link to our website inquiry dated Friday, May 26, 2006 entitled Who is "Jeff Rense"?.

Does anyone have a copy of any of these 5,000 Jeff Rense newscasts? We’d sure like to see one. Thus far, we have not been able to locate anyone other than one person who remembers seeing Jeff Rense anchoring a TV newscast.

Only one TV news station’s call letters has been identified thus far. KOBI-TV 5 out of Medford, Oregon, which is an NBC affiliate. Pretty slim pickings. Nevertheless, I made a few phone calls to Medford, Oregon. One would think that as popular as Jeff Rense supposedly was, surely someone would remember him from the 1980s – particularly if he had produced and anchored 5000 newscasts up and down the West Coast. I contacted the Mail Tribune and spoke with an employee in the newsroom there. She had never heard of Oregon’s (former) #1 top rated news anchor, Jeff Rense. I’m awaiting a call back from Bob Hunter, editor of the Mail Tribune newspaper, to see if he has any recollections on this matter.

“5000 newscasts” is a lot of face-time, wouldn’t you agree?

Three calls to Rense’s former place of employment, KOBI-TV, speaking to four people who worked there didn’t help Rense very much. The first three individuals I spoke to had never heard of Jeff Rense and have no idea who he is. The fourth person was the owner of KOBI-TV, Patsy Smullin.

Jeff claims to have left KOBI due to his disillusionment with the mainstream news business and the tendency of TV news to sensationalize and dip into tabloid reporting, as stated above. I read Jeff’s published claims about this to Patsy Smullin. She responded, “That’s not the reason he gave to us at all. He said he was leaving to join his wife in their pet store.” (I am currently checking out the pet store information.)

Overall, Patsy Smullin did not give the impression that Jeff Rense had been a good employee while at KOBI-TV. In fact, her remarks lead one to believe that he was dishonest and untrustworthy. It was all I could do to restrain myself from asking if he conducted newscasts while wearing a wig.

The question we are entitled to ask is: why would Jeff Rense make so many claims about himself, and why would he twist the truth and make public assertions that are simply not true? Isn’t the “reinvented Jeff Rense” supposed to be all about truth and realism as opposed to sensationalistic, tabloid-style garbage? If one looks through his massive website, is it conceivable that a person might have some difficulty trying to discern the difference between Rense shinola and honest-to-god truth? Where does one end and the other begin? Furthermore, is Jeff Rense the person we really want to ask? Maybe that’s a little like asking the Bush Gang to investigate 911? (Oh, right! That’s already been done. Vanity Fair called it a “whitewash.”)

“Jeff Rense” is a familiar name to countless political/conspiracy talk radio listeners and web surfers. In these circles, virtually everyone has heard of Rense.com. What very few people realize, or have even stopped to think about, is that very little is known about Jeff Rense himself. The available online biographical information is vague and deals in generalities, and has been copied and pasted from one web page to another over the years. The Rense legend has been dished out for public consumption in small, measured doses over time in word-bytes, with hardly anyone daring to openly question its veracity. Rense fans embrace, and often even vehemently defend the legend; those who don’t end up being ridiculed and attacked. That’s a curious feature of Rense’s position as a “Don of Conspiracy Theory.”

Jeff Rense is an interesting guy, wouldn’t you say? He’s almost a “legend,” and is even listed on a government site as the number one purveyor of “misinformation.” That’s quite an accomplishment in a world where “conspiracy theories” are mostly ignored and/or ridiculed. You could even say that it’s very good PR to get on such a list.

My curiosity about Jeff Rense began to grow when I realized that he has maintained a large Internet presence for over a decade, and despite this, there is virtually no information on him other than that which one finds on his website. How has Jeff Rense managed to keep information about himself off the world wide web all these years? That’s an interesting question.

We live in a time that discourages curiosity about the ‘wrong” topics – that’s a hallmark of the Fascist Bushistas - and it seems that questioning Rense is definitely “off limits”. We have to wonder why that is? Asking questions about the ‘wrong” people is treated almost as sacrilege. We love to hold our heroes and gurus high, don’t we? But we have learned the hard way that questions are only discouraged by those who have something to hide.

What could such a nice guy, such a great “patriot” as Jeff Rense possibly have to hide?

After spending some time combing through his claims and trying to find verification, I began to realize that “Jeff Rense” is little more than a reinvention. He has made some very interesting claims over the years, particularly with respect to his former stints in broadcasting and journalism; claims that served as building blocks in the creation of a legend, a legend constructed from the twisting of truth.

Well, let’s look at “Jeff Rense” shall we?

Claim #1: On the Rense.com homepage, we see the following:

“7-time Peabody Award Nominee” Rense Peabody Talkers claim

Peabody Awards

Truth: The Rense.com website claims 7 Peabody Award nominations. The Peabody Awards do not have nominees. Anyone can fill out an entry, and then later the winners are announced. The following is an email from the Peabody Awards Foundation:

"The Peabody Awards program receives between 1,000 and 1,200 entries each year. We have a 15 member judging panel that meets several times during the judging season, as well as listening to/watching entries alone in their homes. They discuss all entries as a group, usually awarding between 30 and 35 Peabodys each year. There are no set number of awards given, and the board does not choose winners according to categories. We do not have a list of finalists or "nominees" as other awards programs have. Basically we have entrants and winners.

Danna L. Williams Senior Administrative Assistant, emailed Feb. 6th 2006 "

In other words, you could nominate me, I could nominate you, and we could all nominate Bozo the Clown. The Peabody panel will most likely be interested in these suggestions, but ultimately it is THEY who choose the winners – not the public. There are no official lists of “nominees”. Rense’s website claim to be a “7 Time Peabody Award Nominee” is not only misleading, it means essentially nothing. It is presented to create a false impression of Rense’s achievements, basically it’s deceptive bullshit.

Talkers Magazine

Claim # 2: The Rense website states: “Talkers magazine top 100 Host” Talkers Magazine ‘Heavy Hundred’ Truth: Please note that Jeff Rense isn't listed in the top 100, and he isn't even listed in the additional 250 names cited in the rest of Talkers Top Radio Show Host picks for 2006. Rense failed to make the cut for 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, etc. Rense was on the list once about 6 or 7 years ago, according to a response to my inquiry from Talkers. In fact, they find it pretty interesting that Jeff Rense is continuing to present this claim on his website, creating the appearance of his inclusion on this popular list, when in fact he is currently not listed. Talkers characterized this misleading representation in one word: “deceptive”, saying they will be keeping an eye on Rense and any Talkers-related claims from here on. Take a look at the list linked above. Call Talkers Magazine and ask them yourself if he is indeed on the Heavy Hundred list.

Claim #3: Rense’s Myspace web page at:

Rense My Space Profile lists his location as Ashland, Oregon – yet his Rense.com fan page says he is in California. Which is it? Oregon or California? Does Rense have two residences? If so, how does one afford two residences on an Internet radio income?

Of course, the answer could be that one is his residence and the other is his business address, but again I ask: if he is just doing his thing because he is a “true patriot,” knowing how hard it is for other true patriots to make ends meet, we have to ask who is paying for his office? What money is backing him? His MySpace page states an income of $100,000-$150,000 per year. That’s a pretty good chunk of change for a guy who claims to be in the business out of the goodness of his heart and his interest in truth.

Claim #4: Jeff Rense From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Former television news anchorman Jeff Rense, who lives in Santa Barbara, California, is a popular conspiracy theorist and is the host of the Jeff Rense program which is broadcast on terrestrial radio and on the Internet. He originally became famous in the 90's with the program "Sightings". His radio program and website (See below) cover such subjects as UFO reports, paranormal phenomena, conspiracy theories, reports of new diseases and a plethora of other material rarely covered by the mainstream media. Jeff Rense leans towards a populist approach regarding politics and media. Rense does not subscribe to any conventional political standpoint and many of his views are simultaneously left and right leaning. Rense has one brother: writer, Rip Rense. His step mother, New York socialite and editor-in-chief of Architectural Digest Magazine, is Paige Rense. His father, now deceased, was sports journalist, Arthur F. Rense (1917-1990). Jeff Rense is also a vegan."

Here we learn that Rense’s views are simultaneously both left-leaning and right-leaning. Sounds like an impossible contortion to me. It is also established from more than one source that Jeff’s father, Arthur Rense, formerly a sportswriter and sometime poet, also landed a job at Douglas Aircraft doing PR. How does a poet and sports writer qualify for work as a public relations director at Douglas Aircraft, one of the biggies of the Military Industrial Complex? Here is the NY Times obituary for Arthur Rense:

Arthur F. Rense, Public Relations Executive, 74 Published: January 5, 1991 “Arthur F. Rense, a retired public relations executive, died on Dec. 28 at his home in Las Vegas, Nev. He was 74 years old. He died of leukemia, said his wife, Paige Rense, editor in chief of Architectural Digest. Mr. Rense had been director of public relations for the Summa Corporation, owned by Howard R. Hughes, until he retired in 1985. He had been public relations director for the missiles and space systems division of Douglas Aircraft Company and director of public relations at Harvey Mudd College in Claremont, Calif. Besides his wife, Mr. Rense is survived by three sons from a former marriage, Kirk of Irvine, Calif., Jeff of Santa Barbara , Calif., and Rip of Sherman Oaks, Calif.; four brothers, Randy, Andy and Frank, all of Cleveland, and William of Denver; and two grandchildren.”

Regarding Summa Corporation: The Washington Post for April 1, 1975, carried this information:

Summa Corp. is the financial umbrella under which most of (Howard)Hughes' worth is contained. . . .Most recently, another Summa "asset" hit the news: the $350 million Hughes Glomar Explorer vessel that Hughes built at the behest (and the expense of) the Central Intelligence Agency . . . Mormons, Hughes, & CIA

Summa Corporation has been tied to CIA contracts on more than one occasion, to say the least. Douglas Aircraft Company is also well-known for its numerous government contracts, not to mention the starring role it is now playing in Bush’s Endless War. So again I ask: how did “poet and sports writer” Arthur Rense end up as public relations director for Douglas Aircraft and Summa Corp? In bed with the Feds? More importantly, what kind of connections does his son Jeff have with these same gangs? After all, his views are “both left and right” which suggests that he could have “left” views to vacuum in his audience all the while subtly converting them to “right” views.

Douglas Aircraft also has ties with RAND Corporation: RAND (Encyclopedia)

The RAND Corporation is an American think tank.

"A think tank is a group of individuals dedicated to high-level synergistic research on a variety of subjects, usually in military laboratories, corporations,... first formed to offer research and analysis to the U.S. military. The organization has since expanded to working with other government and commercial organizations Project RAND was set up in 1945 by the USAAF, under contract to the Douglas Aircraft Company. An interesting aside, Condoleezza Rice is a former RAND CorporationTrustee 1991-1997 and current Secretary of State for the United States, a war whore if ever there was one."

Okay, I think everybody knows that Summa, Douglas Aircraft, and RAND are all major players with DOD, military and intelligence agencies in the fascist government that Jeff Rense claims to oppose. Yet we find that his father, Arthur Rense, poet, sports writer, was “somehow” a public relations director for both Douglas Aircraft and Summa Corporation? I would very much like to hear Jeff Rense publicly discuss this curious fact one of these fine days and explain how he could live much of his life with alphabet soup guys swarming around and avoid being sucked into the game. Funny how this topic never seems to come up, isn’t it? Perhaps he just keeps forgetting to mention it.

Now I want to come back to the fact that Jeff Rense has been “honored” by being listed on an official government website as a major purveyor of “disinformation.” Among the conspiracy minded crowd, that is a high kudo indeed. But is it evidence that Jeff truly is a news source standing in opposition to the Bush Reich and their Endless Wars of Lies and Agression? Maybe not. As Robin Ramsay, Editor of Lobster Magazine, wrote in the February issue of Fortean Times:

Recently, the US State Department has begun trying to rebut some of the current conspiracy theories about America. Their first targets were a couple of websites - www.rense.com and Conspiracy Planet - and the late Joe Vialls, an Australian. What a boost for the named sites! Attacked by the State Department![...] [Y]ou don't have to be a PR genius to see that what you simply mustn't do is launch official attacks: all they do is amplify and legitimise the theories by announcing that they are deemed to be worth attacking. [Fortean Times 206, February 2006, p. 19]

What a coup for Rense and Alex Jones! To be officially declared the primo disinfo sites!

Now, if you know anything about COINTELPRO, you expect that the real COINTELPRO operations will be attacked "officially" in order to legitimize them exactly as Robin Ramsay has described. That also means that those who are honest and sincere seekers of truth and who do their homework and expose the lies of the Bush Reich will most certainly NOT be martyred by the official government. It's way too dangerous and gives them legitimacy. Rather, they will be defamed by the “officially designated disinformation agents” – and dare we say it? – agents of COINTELPRO - such as Jeff Rense, Alex Jones and similar disinformation agents that have received the Bush Reich seal of approval. In fact, it seems that this is a well-orchestrated plan that is described in detail in that much maligned document, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” A really good way to keep your eye on the ball is to consider Protocol 12...

Now, it is important when reading the Protocols to not assign it's origin to any national, ethnic, or religious group. Rather, consider it to be a statement of any group that seeks to control and dominate and use the public for their own gain Then you will truly begin to understand who is who. (Excerpts of Protocol 12: Control of the Press are located at the end of this article):

Recently, Jeff Rense accused WING TV of engaging in deception, trickery, subterfuge, lying, slandering and libel, just to name a few of the charges. He has publicly called Victor Thorn and myself “dirtball scum” and together with Alex Jones and their groupies, charged us with being “cointelpro assets, government agents and un-American operatives." True to form and apparently attached to Rense at the hip and the lip, (and linked on the official government site, I should add), Alex Jones reinforces, endorses, and repeats Rense’s vomitus, only louder. What’s amusing about this is that Rense, Jones, nor any of their groupie parrots have yet to substantiate any of these bogus charges made against us.

Let me get this straight: nobody has to qualify with data anything they say, including (and particularly) veteran journalist Jeff Rense? Alex Jones has yet to qualify any of his ridiculous comments about us either, and he refuses to hold himself accountable for his own words.

Ask yourself: Why? Is it conceivable to anyone out there that they cannot PROVE the things they say about WING TV? Moreover, this begs the question, can they prove any and all of the other “gospel-truth” claims they’ve made over the years? That is another very good question.

You see, we are supposed to just believe what they say simply because they say it. Forget about facts, data or substantiation. Forget about showing evidence of their assertions; forget about journalistic ethics; just nod your head and agree. Don’t ask questions. Gobble up the lies and twisted half-truths and get your fill of the fix du jour. After all, in the words of Jeff Rense, it is all a “theater of the mind”.

What we observe is that both Rense and Jones pander to a “least common denominator” audience demographic, the people out there who don’t bother to check things out for themselves and will just repeat what they hear and read over and over, like good little automatons. This is the ideal Rense-Jones target audience, one which will worship blindly, surrender critical thinking skills, believe without questioning or disagreement, and of course, shell out the bucks.

Incidentally, I did a search on Kennedy Grey, the LA writer who penned the article about Rense entitled “The Most Dangerous Man in Talk Radio”. He (she) is supposedly the founder of a group called RAS, an acronym for ‘Rock Against Suicide’. Unfortunately, a Google search for Kennedy Grey did not yield a website for the RAS group anywhere, but there is an interview with Kennedy Grey on this website: The Internet Nirvana Fan club.

Nirvana Fan Club. Oh boy, how impressive. A Curt Cobain suicide website.

I was not able to find any links online to Grey’s organization, RAS, or to Kennedy Grey, other than the single article he wrote which is published on Rense.com. I would like to find Kennedy Grey and ask whether he/she even bothered to check out any of the claims Rense made to him in the interview. I’d like to learn if Kennedy Grey is a real person, for that matter, or just a construct of Rense. Whatever the case may be, it doesn’t look like Grey checked out any of the statements Rense made in that interview. If some fact-checking had been done, Grey’s article would probably be written a bit differently. At the very least, it should have been.

Rense and Alex Jones enjoy howling that “Honest-to-God patriots" NEVER attack other patriots. That sounds a lot like:

"For any attempt to attack us, if such still be possible, we shall inflict fines without mercy…. No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of our government infallibility. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification." [Protocols]

The fact is, those who do the research know that the Founding Fathers engaged in a great deal of spirited, heated, sincere dispute with one another. Some of them hated one another with a passion, yet in spite of this animosity, worked together for the common good of all; as the cause was greater than themselves, and they all knew this to be true. So where do Rense and Jones come off bellowing such obnoxious bullshit, especially when we consider the fact that merely branding oneself a “patriot” does not necessarily make it so. I could call myself “Madonna”, but that doesn’t mean I AM Madonna.

Appearances can be very deceiving, especially when some so-called “patriots” choose to hide behind microphones in undisclosed locations, behind wigs and a couple of re-touched, photo-shopped cartoon pictures of themselves, and when all they choose to disclose is a limited amount of extremely vague babble about their alleged past accomplishments, achievements, or experience designed solely to “create a legend”.

And then, when we discover, with a minimum of investigation, that their claims do not hold up, that it is all completely manipulated, twisted, exaggerated, amplified and contorted facts designed to present a false front, we are entitled to question everything else. Why do people tell lies, whether overtly or by omission? Some do it because of mental issues, some do it for profit, and some do it just because they can.

Bottom line: Jeff Rense has falsely accused WING TV of trading in lies, deception, duplicity, innuendo, disinformation and trickery. Jeff Rense better start looking in the mirror, because I see a so-called “patriot” that needs to come clean about a few things, someone who is “not known for his honesty”.

Definitions of deception on the Web:

• misrepresentation: a misleading falsehood • the act of deceiving • magic trick: an illusory feat; considered magical by naive observers • Deception is providing intentionally misleading information to others. • To practice deceit. • To give a false impression: appearances can deceive. • To cause to believe what is not true; mislead. • to cause to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid intransitive verb : to practice deceit • be false to; be dishonest with - 2: cause someone to believe an untruth

Stay tuned, because this investigation is not over. More to follow soon.

"The big print giveth and the small print taketh away." ~ Tom Waitts ~

Protocol 12: Control of the Press

1. The word "freedom," which can be interpreted in various ways, is defined by us as follows –

2. Freedom is the right to do what which the law allows. This interpretation of the word will at the proper time be of service to us, because all freedom will thus be in our hands, since the laws will abolish or create only that which is desirable for us according to the aforesaid program.

3. We shall deal with the press in the following way: what is the part played by the press to-day? It serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purpose or else it serves selfish ends of parties. It is often vapid, unjust, mendacious, and the majority of the public have not the slightest idea what ends the press really serves. We shall saddle and bridle it with a tight curb: we shall do the same also with all productions of the printing press, for where would be the sense of getting rid of the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? …

For any attempt to attack us, if such still be possible, we shall inflict fines without mercy…. No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of our government infallibility. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification.

I BEG YOU TO NOTE THAT AMONG THOSE MAKING ATTACKS UPON US WILL ALSO BE ORGANS ESTABLISHED BY US, BUT THEY WILL ATTACK EXCLUSIVELY POINTS THAT WE HAVE PRE-DETERMINED TO ALTER. WE CONTROL THE PRESS

4. NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.

5. If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the GOY communities to such an extent that they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the colored glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses; if already now there is not a single State where there exist for us any barriers to admittance into what GOY stupidity calls State secrets: what will our positions be then, when we shall be acknowledged supreme lords of the world in the person of our king of all the world ....

6. Let us turn again to the FUTURE OF THE PRINTING PRESS. Every one desirous of being a publisher, librarian, or printer, will be obliged to provide himself with the diploma instituted therefore, which, in case of any fault, will be immediately impounded. With such measures THE INSTRUMENT OF THOUGHT WILL BECOME AN EDUCATIVE MEANS ON THE HANDS OF OUR GOVERNMENT, WHICH WILL NO LONGER ALLOW THE MASS OF THE NATION TO BE LED ASTRAY IN BY-WAYS AND FANTASIES ABOUT THE BLESSINGS OF PROGRESS. Is there any one of us who does not know that these phantom blessings are the direct roads to foolish imaginings which give birth to anarchical relations of men among themselves and towards authority, because progress, or rather the idea of progress, has introduced the conception of every kind of emancipation, but has failed to establish its limits .... All the so-called liberals are anarchists, if not in fact, at any rate in thought. Every one of them in hunting after phantoms of freedom, and falling exclusively into license, that is, into the anarchy of protest for the sake of protest.... FREE PRESS DESTROYED

7. We turn to the periodical press. … if there should be any found who are desirous of writing against us, they will not find any person eager to print their productions. Before accepting any production for publication in print, the publisher or printer will have to apply to the authorities for permission to do so. Thus we shall know beforehand of all tricks preparing against us and shall nullify them by getting ahead with explanations on the subject treated of.

8. Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals. This will neutralize the injurious influence of the privately-owned press and will put us in possession of a tremendous influence upon the public mind .... If we give permits for ten journals, we shall ourselves found thirty, and so on in the same proportion. This, however, must in no wise be suspected by the public. For which reason all journals published by us will be of the most opposite, in appearance, tendencies and opinions, thereby creating confidence in us and bringing over to us quite unsuspicious opponents, who will thus fall into our trap and be rendered harmless.

9. In the front rank will stand organs of an official character. They will always stand guard over our interests, and therefore their influence will be comparatively insignificant. 10. In the second rank will be the semi-official organs, whose part it will be to attack the tepid and indifferent.

11. In the third rank we shall set up our own, to all appearance, opposition, which, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards.

12. All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions -- aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical - for so long, of course, as the constitution exists .... Like the Indian idol "Vishnu" they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one of the public opinions as required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will, in fact, follow the flag which we hang out for them.

13. In order to direct our newspaper militia in this sense we must take special and minute care in organizing this matter. Under the title of central department of the press we shall institute literary gatherings at which our agents will without attracting attention issue the orders and watchwords of the day. By discussing and controverting, but always superficially, without touching the essence of the matter, our organs will carry on a sham fight fusillade with the official newspapers solely for the purpose of giving occasion for us to express ourselves more fully than could well be done from the outset in official announcements, whenever, of course, that is to our advantage.

14. THESE ATTACKS UPON US WILL ALSO SERVE ANOTHER PURPOSE, NAMELY, THAT OUR SUBJECTS WILL BE CONVINCED TO THE EXISTENCE OF FULL FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND SO GIVE OUR AGENTS AN OCCASION TO AFFIRM THAT ALL ORGANS WHICH OPPOSE US ARE EMPTY BABBLERS, since they are incapable of finding any substantial objections to our orders. ONLY LIES PRINTED

15. Methods of organization like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or to tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it .... WE SHALL HAVE A SURE TRIUMPH OVER OUR OPPONENTS SINCE THEY WILL NOT HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSITION ORGANS OF THE PRESS IN WHICH THEY CAN GIVE FULL AND FINAL EXPRESSION TO THEIR VIEWS owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.

16. Trial shots like these, fired by us in the third rank of our press, in case of need, will be energetically refuted by us in our semi-official organs.

17. Even nowadays, already, to take only the French press, there are forms which reveal masonic solidarity in acting on the watchword: all organs of the press are bound together by professional secrecy; like the augurs of old, not one of their numbers will give away the secret of his sources of information unless it be resolved to make announcement of them. Not one journalist will venture to betray this secret, for not one of them is ever admitted to practice literature unless his whole past has some disgraceful sore or other .... These sores would be immediately revealed. So long as they remain the secret of a few the prestige of the journalist attacks the majority of the country - the mob follow after him with enthusiasm.

18. Our calculations are especially extended to the provinces. It is indispensable for us to inflame there those hopes and impulses with which we could at any moment fall upon the capital, and we shall represent to the capitals that these expressions are the independent hopes and impulses of the provinces. Naturally, the source of them will be always one and the same - ours. WHAT WE NEED IS THAT, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS WE ARE IN THE PLENITUDE POWER, THE CAPITALS SHOULD FIND THEMSELVES STIFLED BY THE PROVINCIAL OPINION OF THE NATIONS, I.E., OF A MAJORITY ARRANGED BY OUR AGENTUR. What we need is that at the psychological moment the capitals should not be in a position to discuss an accomplished fact for the simple reason, if for no other, that it has been accepted by the public opinion of a majority in the provinces.

19. WHEN WE ARE IN THE PERIOD OF THE NEW REGIME TRANSITIONAL TO THAT OF OUR ASSUMPTION OF FULL SOVEREIGNTY WE MUST NOT ADMIT ANY REVELATION BY THE PRESS OF ANY FORM OF PUBLIC DISHONESTY; IT IS NECESSARY THAT THE NEW REGIME SHOULD BE THOUGHT TO HAVE SO PERFECTLY CONTENDED EVERYBODY THAT EVEN CRIMINALITY HAS DISAPPEARED ... Cases of the manifestation of criminality should remain known only to their victims and to chance witnesses - no more.

I think that all of the above may sound very familiar to all of you reading this. The only difference is that now we work with the Internet and not printed materials. But the principles are the same.

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Destruction of the 911 Truth Movement

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Destruction of the 911 Truth Movement

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret.com, Project Serpo Psy-ops, and the Pentagon's Flying Fish

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret.com, Project Serpo Psy-ops, and the Pentagon's Flying Fish

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret.com EXPOSED!!!

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret.com EXPOSED!!!

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Four And A Half Years...

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Four And A Half Years...

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Real Enemy and What YOU Can Do

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Real Enemy and What YOU Can Do

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Bridge Over Troubled Waters

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Bridge Over Troubled Waters

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret: Ethics and Google Bombs

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret: Ethics and Google Bombs

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Magus and The Swamps of Eugnosia

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Magus and The Swamps of Eugnosia

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Cult of the Plausible Lie

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Cult of the Plausible Lie

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Spider and The Fly: SkepticOverlord and COINTELPRO

Laura Knight Jadczyk: The Spider and The Fly: SkepticOverlord and COINTELPRO

Laura Knight Jadczyk: More Inside Scoops on Abovetopsecret.com!

Laura Knight Jadczyk: More Inside Scoops on Abovetopsecret.com!

Laura Knight Jadczyk: AboveTopSecret.com COINTELPRO Update 2

Laura Knight Jadczyk: AboveTopSecret.com COINTELPRO Update 2

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret.com COINTELPRO Update

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Abovetopsecret.com COINTELPRO Update

Laura Knight Jadczyk: COINTELPRO Updates: Above Top Secret Forum

Laura Knight Jadczyk: COINTELPRO Updates: Above Top Secret Forum

Laura Knight Jadczyk: How to Spot COINTELPRO Agents

Laura Knight Jadczyk: How to Spot COINTELPRO Agents

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Is the Above Top Secret Forum COINTELPRO?

Laura Knight Jadczyk: Is the Above Top Secret Forum COINTELPRO?

Godlikeproductions is Psy-Ops

This report was apparently written in 2004. Godlikeproductions has since "changed hands." That is, the owners/operators apparently responded to the publication of this information by "going undercover." Some of the links may have been scrubbed. But, at the time we obtained this, all of the links were valid and all of the information is accurate.

Remember the "Aussie Bloke hoax" that was running wild in the Spring of 2004? It all began on godlikeproductions. And so, we decided to take a closer look.

The first thing we found was that the Whois information regarding godlikeproductions.com is as follows:

Registrant: Belisha, Elaine (GODLIKEPRODUCTIONS-DOM) Godlike Productions P.O. Box 725 West Point, GA 31833 US

The domain was registered on July 25, 2000.

Nothing is terribly interesting about that, now is there? But we continued to search. We find Elaine on a google search, FILER'S FILES, cached, since the page is no longer available:

NORCROSS: Elaine Belisha reports her 14 year old daughter, Marilyn Chen, saw a translucent, boomerang-shaped aircraft on Sunday, Sept. 13, 1998 at 8:00 PM. "I asked her to draw a picture, thinking it might be a stealth bomber, but it has a much larger wingspan relative to the size than a stealth." The UFO appeared and disappeared almost magically even though it was at close range at dusk. Thanks to E. Belisha, 2019 Lia Hills Drive Norcross, GA.

We then find Elaine HERE::

RE: segmentation

Posted By Elaine Belisha On Thursday, April 04, 2002 at 9:48 PM

CRM is not a subset of e-commerce, but of business. One of the most valuable questions I was ever asked was, "How does this help me run my business?" CRM is segmented and complex due to proprietary legacy data, for one. Whether the software includes micro-managing your sales force or data mining for marketing targets, it's all about streamlining profits.

Elaine Belisha

We find Elaine HERE:

RE: help please....crystal reports and asp Posted By Elaine Belisha On Saturday, March 02, 2002 at 1:42 PM Crystal Reports are tricky to load. I made mine in visual interdev and they work. I have the source code at the office though. I don't have it on my home computer (or interdev). It involves creating two active-x server objects: 1) a report object that points to the report, and 2) a viewer object that points to the report object. I'll post the code monday, if you can wait that long. E. Belisha

and HERE:

RE: APACHE & ASP configure ? Posted By Elaine Belisha On Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 9:13 AM Chilisoft is what I use on my Apache. http://www.chilisoft.com/ I didn't do the install but it works well. E. Belisha

There are other computer tech discussion entries under Elaine's name, all of which suggest that Elaine is a very computer savvy lady.

Then, we find Elaine on Kent Steadman's CyberSpaceOrbit and on RumorMills in a very unflattering light:

GODLIKE ATTACKS ME, RMN AND THE OLD MARINE WIFE Posted By: Rayelan Date: Sunday, 18 April 2004, 5:05 p.m. [...] I wonder how many people have actually met Oswald LeWinter??? He's the poster on Godlike who started all of this... of course he doens't even use his real name... he hides behind 100s of aliases... it must be real fun for him to do this. I wonder how many people realize they have fallen for disinformation coming from an old CIA/Mossad opertive... one of the best... so you shouldn't kick yourself too hard if you swallowed his crap line hook line and sinker! but again... let's look at the person they assigned to "take down" Rayelan and Rumor Mill News... the sent the best! Having been married to the #3 man in the CIA... I still have a few strings I can pull to get information. I called one of these "strings" to inquire about whose payroll Oswald is on. I was told that he is hated by today's CIA and if he ever comes back to this country he will end up in prison or worse. I was told that he is on the Mossad payroll. ON THE MOSSAD PAYROLL!! WOW!!!! THAT IN ITSELF IS AN EYE-OPENER -- Think about it... THE MOSSAD IS TRYING TO SHUT DOWN RMN. Why??? Are we getting too close to their involvement in 9.11 - OKC -- Waco -- and their blackmail of George W. Bush... with the threat of biological or nuclear attack on a US city! (article being written on this)

Even if the above impassioned rant is a bit incoherent, the reference to MOSSAD will become more interesting as we go along.

All in all, the pickings on Elaine Belisha were pretty slim! I was beginning to think that the woman didn't even exist before the UFO report on September 13, 1998. However, we are resourceful if nothing else. We found Elaine here: Guestbook of Michelle Guerin where she filled in the form with the following information:

Email:Elaine Belisha Web Page:www.hifiexchange.com How I found your page: mail Comments about the web site: Great page, Michelle! LOVE it

What can we deduce from this tiny bit of information?

Well, first of all we note that Elaine must be a friend of Michelle Guerin because she says she was informed about the creation of the page, probably by Michelle herself. Her personal comment also seems to confirm this.

But what is even more interesting is that Elaine gives a website address: hifiexchange.com

A whois search on hifiexchange.com gives the following result:

Registrant: Keyword Traffic PMB # 483 1733 H Street, Suite 330 Blaine, WA 98230-5106 US 800 633 8435x05

The domain was registered on July 31, 2003.

When we try to go to hifiexchange.com, we are redirected to a sort of "auction" page which tells us that we arrived at that page because "You searched the web for Home Theater Speakers."

Well, we didn't exactly do that. So we decided to search google for "home theater speakers." For at least the first four pages of search returns, there was no appearance of "hifiexchange.com."

BUT, we notice a little image in the upper corner of a funny little blue guy and the word "TopDotz" (tm) We search for whois on topdotz and find:

Registrant: Keyword Traffic PMB # 483 1733 H Street, Suite 330 Blaine, WA 98230-5106 US 800 633 8435x05 Domain Name: TOPDOTZ.COM

The domain was registered on September 22, 2000.

I want to mention, at this point, that there are no names of real people on the "Keyword Traffic" domain registrations. Nevertheless, we visit topdotz.com and discover that it is a search engine displaying a logo that says: DotzUp! Well, by now, we can't resist and we go and search whois for dotzup.

Domain Name: DOTZUP.COM Administrative Contact: Master, Web dotz@icehouse.net 4235 S. Cheney-Spokane Rd STE 10 Spokane, WA 99224-9661 US 1 509 443 1948

The domain was registered on August 11, 2000 Again, there are no names.

So, we want to know if there is any connection between the new owners of hifiexchange.com and Elaine Belisha and we proceed. Leaving DotzUp, we go back and continue searching for "hifiexchange.com" we find a curious website that says: Here is the INFOPAK.... NOTE: The compilation of this infopak is due in large part to the efforts of many others, far too many to mention here, with the exception of Wizdomme, SteelBtrfl, and DsSiteMstr to whom is owed many thanks for their efforts on behalf of the BDSM community. A request can be sent to SteelBtrfl to be placed on her mailing list. Here the reader will find the milieu in which Elaine Belisha seems to live and thrive. The website has such entertaining sections as:

SUPPORT GROUPS FOR: Submissives [...] Dominants [...] Switches

and

A LustSlave's Page Sublime: Slavery, Sluts, Submission

and

Leather on Q Boston Dungeon Society Bound For Pleasure BBS Tantric Sexuality:

and

The Gorean Pleasure Slave Silk & Steel SLAVEPENS

About half way down, we find Elaine Belisha's personal website - hifiexchange.com - listed as "INDIVIDUAL WEBSITES" of those who are associated with this group of extremely strange individuals.

Okaaaaaaayyyy.... This is getting interesting.

Well, we wondered if Elaine's old website - now owned by Network Traffic - was in the web archive. Sure enough! The old hifiexchange.com! On this interesting page we read the following:

Welcome! My job titles include MOM, Goddess, alien abductee and Webmaster. Unfortunately, I don't get paid for doing any of these things. I have an admirable collection of unpublished science fiction novels, with rejection slips included. I am fond of bad puns and dirty jokes. I love receiving e-mail on any subject, especially alien abduction experiences (and skeptics & debunkers are welcome, too). I am especially interested in the Philadelphia Experiment and the Montauk Project.

The next items are about her children one of whom we already met in the UFO sighting report:

This is my oldest daughter, Marilyn. She's primarily interested in the internet, and spends hours on it daily. She loves role playing games and something called Magic, The Gathering. She's fourteen years old. At school she is in the gifted program but she always gets confused about "push" or "pull" signs when opening doors. Visit marilyn's Web page....oooooo scary....Marilyn's Darkness For some cool poetry by Allen, Marilyn's bud, Visit Allen's Page of Various Useless Stuff

It seems that the above was written about the time of the UFO sighting if her daughter was 14 at the time of writing. Elaine has another daughter about whom she writes:

This is my youngest daughter, Sara. She is fond of dominating cats into submission. She loves them and pets them and squeezes them to death. Her goldfish committed suicide by leaping out of the aquarium into a cup of coffee. She's really not sadistic, just er... eccentric.

Charming family, eh? Elaine's a veritable June Cleaver, now isn't she? B & D being passed on to the children... Well, it gets better. We find oldest daughter Marilyn keeps an online journal with such beguilingly innocent entries as:

You seek Magick! First of All I LOVE alien SEX FIEND!

and

I havnt been fucked like that since grade school.

If you check her model portfolio, you will find cute bondage photos. Wonder where she learned all that? If you check her links page, you will find that she links to mama's site: godlikeproductions, among others listed as "friends." Then, if you search google groups for "ebelisha" you will find a few posts on the newsgroups from daughter Marilyn:

From: ~Marilyn (ebelisha@mindspring.com) Subject: Re: New Satanic Site!!!! Newsgroups: alt.satanism, alt.individualism, talk.religion.misc, alt.atheist, alt.magick Date: 1997/08/13 "!" Check out ~Marilyn's Darkness~ http://angelfire.com/ga/Marillyn/index.html Tis a great page! Meet satan, and Dark poetry! Also,theres a poem of the week contest. ~Marilyn

Obviously, Marilyn was only 13 years old when she was posting the above on the 13th day of August - which fact obviously entertained her as we can see by virtue of the exclamation point put next to the date.

One can also find "ebelisha" at the godlikeproductions FAQ which says:

Moderators help keep Godlike Productions ufpdated with the most current news. If you have a question about being a moderator, you should direct it to ebelisha@godlikeproductions.com.

Getting back to hifiexchange.com - the one listed by Elaine Belisha as her home page - we finally find it HERE in the web archive. The address is given as: 5926 BUFORD HIGHWAY, ATLANTA, GEORGIA

Okay. What to do next? Well, check the Georgia corporation listings.

Under the business name: HIFI Exchange we find:

HIFI EXCHANGE, INC. A DOMESTIC PROFIT COMPANY ADDRESS: 5926 BUFORD HWY NORCROSS , GA 300712405 CEO: HAIM BELISHA CFO: HAIM BELISHA SEC: HAIM BELISHA REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: JEFFREY ALAN BASHUK 990 HAMMOND DR. STE. 990 ATLANTA , GA 30328 Date of last annual registration 03/10/1999 Dissolution 11/09/2002

So, it looks like the Belisha's sold their business and their domain name to the Network Traffic folks. Remember that Keyword Traffic only registered the domain name on July 31, 2003. No big deal, right? Well, perhaps, or perhaps not. As it happend, Haim Belisha popped up on a second run at the Georgia Corporation site:

AUDIO CREATIONS, INC. A DOMESTIC PROFIT COMPANY ADDRESS: #176, 9700 MEDLOCK BRIDG RD DULTUH , GA 30097 CEO: HAIM BELISHA CFO: SEC: REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: JEFFREY BASHUK #990, 990 HAMMOND DRIVE ATLANTA , GA 30328 Date of last annual registration 05/09/2001 05/18/2002

Note here: We find Jeffrey Bashuk or Jeffrey Alan Bashuk as registered agent for over 50 different corporations on the Georgia Secretary of State site ranging from THE DECATUR CHURCH OF RELIGIOUS SCIENCE, INC. to NORTHLAKE ALLIANCE OF GAYS/LESBIANS & STRAIGHTS, INC. The obvious reason for this is that Mr. Bashuk must be in the business of acting as a Registered Agent. This, however, may be more interesting than we initially suppose.

Moving along: another interesting item that popped up was that when doing the domain search on hifiexchange.com another similar domain popped up: HOMEHIFIEXCHANGE.COM So naturally, we decided to just take a peek. It was a bit of a surprise to discover that this company was also domiciled in ATLANTA, GA! Well, who'da thunk it? What a coincidence! Here is the whois data:

Organization:, ExchangeBlvd.com, LLC, Brad Lloyd, 6205 Barfield Rd., Suite 125, Atlanta, GA 30328, Date of last annual registration August 18, 1999 Is there anything interesting about this "ExchangeBlvd.com, LLC?" Doing a Georgia corporation search on the company, we find: EXCHANGEBLVD.COM, LLC A GEORGIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 CEO: CFO: SEC: REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: LARRY TEDESCO 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 Date of last annual registration 11/03/1999

There are no officers listed, but we do note the registered agent: Larry Tedesco. We note that the contact listed on the domain registration is a Brad Lloyd. So, while we are on the Georgia Corporation website, we do a search for Brad Lloyd, finding:

THE CAMERA EXCHANGE, LLC A GEORGIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 861 HOLCOMB BRIDGE RD STE 101 ROSWELL , GA 300761900 CEO: CFO: SEC: REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: BRAD LLOYD 861 HOLCOMB BRIDGE RD.,STE.101 ROSWELL , GA 30076 Date of last annual registration 03/08/1999 and dissolved on 11/09/2002

and

INSTRUMENT EXCHANGE, LLC A GEORGIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 861 HOLCOMB BRIDGE RD STE 101 ROSWELL , GA 300761900 CEO: CFO: SEC: REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: BRAD LLOYD 861 HOLCOMB BRIDGE RD.,STE.101 ROSWELL , GA 30076 Date of last annual registration 03/08/1999 and dissolved or revoked on 11/09/2002

Again we notice that there are no officers listed.

Okay. What next? A corporation search on Larry Tedesco which brings up:

INSTRUMENTEXCHANGE.COM, INC. A DOMESTIC PROFIT COMPANY ADDRESS: 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 CEO: LARRY TEDESCO CFO: LARRY TEDESCO SEC: STEVE SCHECHTER REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: LARRY TEDESCO 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 Date of last annual registration 03/10/2004 and still active as of 06/14/2003

and

PHOTOGRAPHYEXCHANGE.COM, INC. A DOMESTIC PROFIT COMPANY ADDRESS: 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 CEO: LARRY TEDESCO CFO: LARRY TEDESCO SEC: STEVE SCHECHTER REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: LARRY TEDESCO 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 Date of last annual registration 06/14/2003 , still active as of 03/10/2004

and

GOLFCLUBEXCHANGE.COM, INC. A DOMESTIC PROFIT COMPANY ADDRESS: 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 DULUTH , GA 30097 CEO: LARRY TEDESCO CFO: LARRY TEDESCO SEC: STEVE SCHECHTER REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: LARRY TEDESCO 6470 EAST JOHNS CROSSING ST390 ATLANTA , GA 30328 Date of last annual registration 06/14/2003 and still active as of 03/10/2004

and

TEDESCO, INC. A DOMESTIC PROFIT COMPANY ADDRESS: 1034 BROOKWOOD DR AUGUSTA , GA 309092304 CEO: LARRY TEDESCO CFO: SEC: DAVID L SPENCER REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: LARRY TEDESCO 1034 BROOK WOOD DRIVE AUGUSTA , GA 30909 Date of last annual registration 03/06/1997 Dissolved or revoked: 07/05/1999

and

GEORGIA GOLF ENTERPRISES, LLC A GEORGIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 2105 WOOD FALLS DR. CUMMING , GA 30041 CEO: CFO: SEC: REGISTERED AGENT & OFFICE: LARRY TEDESCO 2105 WOOD FALLS DR. CUMMING , GA 30041 Date of last annual registration 01/21/2004

Mr. Tedesco is almost as busy as Jeffrey Bashuk.

The next item that popped up was an article about Larry Tedesco in the Atlanta Business Chronicle:

EXCLUSIVE REPORTS From the April 26, 2002 print edition Auction site bidding on expansion

by Mary Jane Credeur Staff Writer

The organizers behind ExchangeBlvd.com Inc., which operates an online golf club auction site, are hoping to duplicate their specialty auction concept for musical instruments and photography equipment.

Atlanta-based ExchangeBlvd.com recently raised another $1.5 million round from previous investors to cover the cost of launching InstrumentExchange.com and, later this year, PhotographyExchange.com.

"We want to be a specialty shop for equipment that you can't find in just any old run-of-the-mill store," said CEO Larry Tedesco.

The 6-year-old company has brought in roughly $4 million in investments over its lifetime, much of which came from Arkansas investment bank Stephens Inc., which is owned by the family of PGA legend and former Augusta National Chairman Jack Stephens.

With sales last year topping $9 million, Tedesco believes it's time to expand the profitable auction site to include other high-end goods. ExchangeBlvd.com expects to pull in revenues of $2.5 million on projected sales of $15 million this year, Tedesco said. [...]

Since the site went live six years ago with only a few dozen users, the company has attracted 200,000 regular users and has gained the backing of the PGA of America and Golf Magazine. The company also began publishing a "blue book" reference guide of used golf club values based on the nearly 100,000 golf equipment transactions it handles each year.

We finally find Larry together with Brad on a yahoo biz site:

Exchange Blvd, Inc Company Profile Exchange Blvd provides item-specific online auction marketplaces. Sites include GolfClubExchange.com and InstrumentExchange.com (musical instruments).

Coming back to Haim Belisha, undoubtedly the husband of Elaine Belisha, another curious item popped up:

Leslie Hore-Belisha was born in Devonport in 1893. Educated at Clifton College and Oxford University he served as a major in the British Army during the First World War.

Hore-Belisha, a member of the Liberal Party, worked as a journalist and lawyer before entering the House of Commons for Devonport in 1923. [...]

In 1937 Neville Chamberlain appointed Hore-Belisha as Secretary of State for War. This was a controversial decision as the former holder of the post, Alfred Duff Cooper, was popular with the British armed forces. [...]

Hore-Belisha upset the Army Council by replacing three senior members with younger and more flexible men. He also upset Neville Chamberlain by suggesting the introduction of military conscription during his negotiations with Adolf Hitler in 1938. His attempts to persuade Chamberlain to rapidly increase spending on the armed forces was also unsuccessful.

In the House of Commons the Conservative Party MP Archibald Ramsay was the main critic of having Jews in the government. In 1938 he began a campaign to have Hore-Belisha sacked as Secretary of War. In one speech on 27th April he warned that Hore-Belisha "will lead us to war with our blood-brothers of the Nordic race in order to make way for a Bolshevised Europe." [...]

Neville Chamberlain eventually decided to remove Hore-Belisha as Secretary of State for War and appoint him as Minister of Information. Lord Halifax objected, claiming that it was "inappropriate to have a Jew in charge of publicity." In January 1940 Hore-Belisha was sacked as Secretary of State for War.

In 1945 Winston Churchill appointed Hore-Belisha as Minister of National Insurance. However, he lost office when the Labour Party won the 1945 General Election. Leslie Hore-Belisha, who lost his seat in the election, died in 1957.

One wonders, of course, if the above Leslie Hore-Belisha was related in any way to Haim Belisha?

In any event, getting back to Elaine's friend, Michelle Guerin we find that on her website, she has posted a story about her life as a "Montaukee." We also find an article written by Michelle on the subject of Alien/Human Hybrids.

We also find that Elaine has written a comment to an article posted on Kent Steadman's site.

6/19/2002 6:00 PM Re: SLEUTH ALERT: Worldwide Periodical Time Shift? So all we have to go on are a number of mechanical watches (which DO and SHOULD lose time, because no watch is perfect). How did you know these watches measured time accurately before this magical date? A decent way you can measure the rate of watches losing time is to record the difference of your standard time reference (STR to save me typing) to your time. If the difference between your watches over a few days, and the STR increases then either there is something going on with time or your watch is deteriorating. If the difference between these watches and the STR is relatively constant over time, everything should be normal. And the sun moving? You should consider errors made in your measuring and the dodginess of the astro-software you use -- and don´t forget the fact that the sun naturally changes its path across the sky across seasons. HTH. Elaine Belisha

and here, in response to an article about Fulcanelli:

6/2/127 1:30 AM Re: Fucanelli´s Doom: Judgement Day: The Trial by Fire on 9/22/2002 It is amusing how the "white" man valued the beliefs of my people so little until now, when they realize thier f#@$ed,they run to us for the answer.The fact is,these "people" are an infection,a disease, perhaps like a cancer, eating away at the natural order of things.Be careful what you think, if you believe it,it will happen, withen your own frame of reference.That is to say, you are creating your own reality and your reality sucks.Stop Elaine Belisha

We notice that both ladies like Kent Steadman and both ladies are into Montauk and alien abductions. So, we have a look at Kent Steadman just for the heck of it:

Registrant: Kent Steadman (CYBERSPACEORBIT2-DOM) 425 South 156th Street, #119A Seattle, WA 98148 US Domain Name: CYBERSPACEORBIT.COM Record created on 01-Sep-1999.

This jogs our memory and we recall that Network Traffic which now owns hifiexchange.com is also in Washington state. Probably a coincidence.

But then there is that strange coincidence where homehifiexchange.com suddenly came to be in Atlanta, where the OLD hifiexchange used to be... while the old hifiexchange went off to Washington State and we see some strange little threads hanging out here and there just waiting to be pulled.

So, I went back to Network Traffic which has the nifty little trademarked icon... and searched the US Trademark site. Nothing. No corporation filings in Washington State either.

Whoever they are, these folks are invisible.

Remember Larry Tedesco and homehifiexchange.com about which company we are told:

The 6-year-old company has brought in roughly $4 million in investments over its lifetime, much of which came from Arkansas investment bank Stephens Inc., which is owned by the family of PGA legend and former Augusta National Chairman Jack Stephens. With sales last year topping $9 million, Tedesco believes it's time to expand the profitable auction site to include other high-end goods. ExchangeBlvd.com expects to pull in revenues of $2.5 million on projected sales of $15 million this year, Tedesco said. [...] Since the site went live six years ago with only a few dozen users, the company has attracted 200,000 regular users and has gained the backing of the PGA of America and Golf Magazine. The company also began publishing a "blue book" reference guide of used golf club values based on the nearly 100,000 golf equipment transactions it handles each year.

Now remember that when we searched the domain registration of hifiexchange, we found that the domain was registered by Keyword Traffic on July 31, 2003. So if it was a 6 year old company in 2002, then that means that Haim Belisha is either closely involved, or acted as a front since he and Elaine Belisha owned hifiexchange prior to that time.

Just to get a handle on who these people are, go HERE and read carefully. Among other things you will find:

1979 Mochtar Riady and Stephens Inc set up Stephens Finance Ltd. In Hong Kong. Lance is indicted on charges of violating federal banking laws. Clifford's partner, Robert Altman, represents Lance who eventually achieves a hung jury. During this same period, Stephens is, according to Peter Truell and Larry Gurwin in "False Profits," playing "a crucial role in BCCI's penetration of the US market."

1984 Mochtar Riady buys a stake in the Worthen holding company whose assets include the Stephens-controlled Worthen Bank. Price: $16 million. Other Worthen co-owners will eventually include BCCI investor Abdullah Taha Bakhish. Deal handled by C. Joseph Giroir II. Giroir is the Rose law firm chair who hired Hillary Clinton. Giroir will continue to be a deal-maker for the Riadys.

1985 Arkansas state pension funds -- deposited in Worthen by Governor Bill Clinton -- suddenly lose 15% of their value because of the failure of high risk, short-term investments and the brokerage firm that bought them. The $52 million loss is covered by a Worthen check written by Jack Stephens in the middle of the night, an insurance policy, and the subsequent purchase over the next few months of 40% of the bank by Mochtar Riady. Clinton and Worthen escape a major scandal. Mochtar's son James comes back to Arkansas to manage Worthen as president. Worthen is investigated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for improper loans to companies owned by the Riadys and Stephenses.

1986 George W. Bush and partners receive more than $2 million of Harken Energy stock in exchange for a failing oil well operation, which has lost $400,000 in the prior six months. After Bush joins Harken, the largest stock position and a seat on its board is acquired by Harvard Management Company. The Harken board gives Bush $600,000 worth of the company's publicly traded stock, plus a seat on the board plus a consultancy that pays him up to $120,000 a year. When Harken runs short of cash it hooks up with Jackson Stephens, who arranges a $25 million stock purchase by Union Bank of Switzerland. Sheik Abdullah Bakhsh, who joins the board as a part of the deal, is connected to BCCI.

1988 Stephens' wife Mary Ann runs George Bush's campaign in Arkansas. He is a member of Team 100 -- individuals who have given $100,000 to the Republican party.

A few days before the supposedly surprise arrest of five BCCI officials, some of the world's most powerful drug dealers quietly withdraw millions of dollars from the bank. Some government investigators believe the dealers were tipped off by sources within the Reagan administration. [...]

1991 Stephens Inc gives $100,000 to a Bush dinner committee. With Stephens, Mochtar Riady buys BCCI's former Hong Kong subsidiary from its liquidators. A former top aide to White House Chief of Staff John Sununu goes to work for a prominent figure in the BCCI scandal less than a month after leaving the Bush administration. Edward Rogers Jr. signs a $600,000 contract to give legal advice to Sheik Kamal Adham, an ex-Saudi intelligence officer who is being investigated for his role in BCCI's takeover of First American Bankshares.

The Miami acting US Attorney is reportedly rebuffed by the Justice Department in his efforts to indict BCCI and some of its principal officers on tax fraud charges. Justice Department later denies this occurred. [...]

We wonder again, just who owns hifiexchange.com NOW? And geez, Elaine Belisha, founder of Godlikeproductions.com sure hangs out with interesting people, eh?

But let's go back to that funny remark Elaine Belisha made on Kent Steadman's site:

"It is amusing how the "white" man valued the beliefs of my people so little until now, when they realize thier f#@$ed,they run to us for the answer."

This connects us back to Will Scott Anderson of the Aussie Bloke Hoax:

Scott Anderson is the current spokesperson for a false group operating out of Deltona Florida using the name of Indian Creek Band of Chickamauga Cherokee. Anderson has in fact been known for the solicitation of donations from the public on behalf of a Convicted Sex Criminal who is a Registered Sex Offender in the State of Missouri, along with several other incidents of exploitation affecting American Indian People.

With all the sex-capades going on in the background of Elaine Belisha's life, put together with her remark that seems to indicate that she is claiming to be Native American, we can't help but make a connection here, however tenuous.

If all of this doesn't look like covert ops run by the Bush-MOSSAD Administration in cahoots with their Saudi pals, I don't know what does.

In short: Godlikeproductions is Psy-Ops.