Blogs - Conspiracies
Users that have been posting for a while can create their own articles on the fly by using
our built-in blogging service. Below are the most recent entries.
Date: May 03, 2013 at 17:13
Ever heard of Albert Turi? Whether you have or not, he's a celebrity. He was formerly chief of the New York City Fire Department Bureau of Training. Here's what he looks like:
Turi is most famous in the 9/11 conspiracist underground. On September 11, 2001, he evidently made a comment to NBC reporter Pat Dawson that has made him virtually Exhibit A in the conspiracists' claims that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Dawson's report goes something like this:
"....The Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York told me
that...er...shortly after 9 o'clock here had roughly 200 men in the
building trying to effect rescues of some of those civilians who were in
there...er... and that basically he received word of the possibility of
a secondary device, another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out
as quickly as he could but he said that there was another explosion
which took place and then an hour after the first hit here, the first
crash that took place, he said there was another explosion which took
place in one of the towers here."
This quote by a single NBC reporter is so ubiquitous and so central to the conspiracists' claims that, if you do a Google search for "Turi, Dawson, 9/11" you'll bring up hundreds of hits--almost all of them conspiracist web sites. The usual chicanery that passes for analysis of the issue holds that Turi's alleged statement, plus the real and genuine reports of numerous WTC survivors who reported hearing "explosions" in the towers after the plane strikes and before the tower collapses, is a convincing case of "controlled demolition." Alex Jones uses these claims as a central tenet of his film 9/11 Martial Law: Rise of the Police State, and his web site, www.prisonplanet.com, which is a home base for many net-based conspiracists. Time and time again I've had conspiracists direct me to these quotes and videos and then claim victory, that it is conclusive proof of a 9/11 conspiracy.
This belief is, to say the least, misplaced. In fact, the Turi quote and "bombs in the towers" testimony is nothing more than smoke and mirrors--here's why.
1. What did Albert Turi actually say?
If you pick apart what the conspiracists are actually relying on--and what little we know about what Albert Turi actually said--it's evident that the Turi quote is a very slender hook upon which to hang a massive conspiracy theory. First of all, Turi's statement comes to us through Dawson's report. Try this: do a Google search for "Albert Turi," as a phrase. Today I brought up 632 hits. Now try "'Albert Turi' -Dawson" (go to the Advanced Search page and look for "Albert Turi" but exclude pages containing the word "Dawson"). I got 156 hits. This off-the-cuffand unscientific analysis shows that 76% of the time his name is mentioned on Google-searchable engines, Turi's name appears in conjunction with Dawson's. Even most of the 24% of the remaining hits that I sampled randomly make reference to Turi in conjunction with being quoted--but never a direct quote. This demonstrates that, overwhelmingly, Turi's "testimony" comes from a single statement, made to a single reporter (Dawson), who did not even quote him directly.
The conspiracists are thus relying not on what Turi said--or even what they think Turi said--but what they think Pat Dawson thought Turi said, on one occasion, on one channel, once.
I've spent quite a long time over the past few days researching this matter, trying to find some account of Turi's exact and direct words. I was able to locate a badly-transcribed (probably OCA scanned) transcript of an interview of Mr. Turi with Tom McCourt, NYC Fire Department, on October 23, 2001.  This appears to be the only public statement in which Mr. Turi speaks for himself--i.e., not being quoted by Pat Dawson. Here is what that transcript reveals that he said about the matter of "explosions" (emphasis added):
"Then Steve Mosiello, Chief Ganci's executive assistant, came over to the command post and he said we're getting reports from OEM that the buildings are not structurally sound, and of course that got our attention really quick, and Pete said, well, who are we getting these reports from? And then Steve brought an EMT person over to the command post who was I think sent as a runner to tell us this and Chief Ganci questioned him, where are we getting these reports? And his answer was something, you know, we're not sure, OEM is just reporting this...
"The next thing I heard was Pete say what the f*ck is this? And as my eyes traveled up the building, and I was looking at the south tower, somewhere about halfway up, my initial reaction was there was a secondary explosion, and the entire floor area, a ring right around the building blew out. I later realized that the building had started to collapse already and this was the air being compressed and that is the floor that let go. And as my eyes traveled further up the building, I realized that this building was collapsing and I turned around and most everybody was ahead of me running for the garage, and I remember thinking I looked at this thing a little bit too long and I might not make this garage. But I did."
There you have it--Turi in his own words. "My initial reaction." And the crucial qualifier: "I later realized that the building had started to collapse already." This is the great hook upon which hangs the conspiracists' claims of controlled demolition. If you read the full interview, you'll see that nowhere does Albert Turi ever make the allegation that there were bombs in the World Trade Center. Nor is his story inconsistent with what he appears to have told Pat Dawson. If he was reporting his initial reaction to Dawson, that would fit squarely with his interview on October 23, 2001. Ignoring the obvious question--why do the conspiracists trust an NBC reporter, Pat Dawson, to quote Turi accurately--it becomes even more bizarre when you realize that Turi was not even talking about controlled demolition, nor does he seem to have had that feeling on the morning of 9/11.
Adding insult to injury, the conspiracist website www.911review.com twists and mangles this exact quote from this exact same interview.  To hear 911review.com tell it, Turi said this:
"And as my eyes traveled up the building, and I was looking at the south tower, somewhere about halfway up, my initial reaction was there was a secondary explosion, and the entire floor area, a ring right around the building blew out."
But you can see from my own more expansive quote from the interview (click here to read it again if you need to), Turi did not say that--the crucial words "I realized that the building had started to collapse already" have been carefully excised. Why is 911review.com playing spurious games with quotes? Could it be because Turi's "testimony" is at the very center of the controlled demolition claim, and to reveal that he doesn't seem to support that view would be to strike at one of the very sacred cows of the 9/11 conspiracist movement?
2. Why hasn't Turi spoken up more forcefully?
As you can see from my own investigation of Turi's presence on the web, Mr. Turi himself has evidently not exerted himself to any great degree to clarify or reinforce his comment to Mr. Dawson on the morning of 9/11/01. I had to search pretty hard to find the full McCourt-Turi interview, and recognizing it among the chaff of the oft-repeated Dawson story was a tedious task. Why hasn't Mr. Turi spoken up--either to clarify that he did mean to suggest there were bombs in the WTC towers, or that he did not mean that at all?
The conspiracists will likely attribute Mr. Turi's reluctance to come forward to sinister motives: Alex Jones, in fact, in 9/11 Martial Law makes the claim (which he does not substantiate) that firefighters' comments about "controlled demolition" have been suppressed by some shadowy arm of officialdom. This, however, is speculation, not fact. If Turi did believe in the "controlled demolition" theory, and the powers-that-be wanted to suppress him, why then was he allowed to be interviewed by Mr. McCourt, and why was the transcript of that interview published by the New York Times? There is not a shred of evidence that Mr. Turi has been threatened or otherwise silenced--in the absence of any such hard evidence, a claim of "official suppression" only makes sense if you already believe there is a conspiracy. Since belief in the conspiracy departs largely from the Turi misquote in the first place, this strikes me as an example of circular reasoning.
From what limited information I was able to gather about him on the web, Mr. Turi is now retired from public service. I have no doubt that he has probably received hundreds of letters from conspiracy researchers asking him to elaborate on his statements to Mr. Dawson. If he's one of their golden boys, surely somebody has tried to get him to go on record to support their case. It seems fair to guess that if Mr. Turi had ever granted an interview or public statement to a researcher on this matter, and his response supported the notion that his comment to Mr. Dawson meant that he was talking specifically about controlled demolition, you would find that statement commanding prominent attention on sites like www.prisonplanet.com. I wish to ask the conspiracists, then, if it is at least possible that maybe he has declined to answer any such queries because he doesn't want to bother feeding speculation, and that he said everything he had to say to Mr. McCourt in October 2001? To the extent we can or should read anything into Mr. Turi's low profile, is this not at least as fair a guess as the "suppression" claim?
3. What about all that other "explosion" testimony?
The conspiracists' love "explosion" stories, and the fervor with which they've repeated and misattributed Turi's alleged quote to Pat Dawson seems to bear this out. I would not be surprised if a criticism of this blog turns out to be, "Well, what about all those other witnesses who claim to have heard 'explosions' prior to the towers' collapse?" I am, in fact, preparing a separate blog on that very subject, but in a nutshell the argument is this: how do you know that these witness reports are inconsistent with the "official story"?
Let's assume Mr. Turi did hear what he thought was an explosion in the South Tower before its collapse, and that he intended to convey that message to Mr. Dawson. Under the circumstances that were then occurring in the burning and almost-ready-to-collapse South Tower, is it logical to maintain that the only possible source of any sound that could be described as an "explosion" is, in fact, a demolition charge? This is the fatal error, isn't it? The conspiracists wish us to believe that there is no possibility that a 1000+ ft burning skyscraper, which has been struck by a jetliner and has been raked by fire and damage up and down its height (particularly through the elevator shafts), is an environment in which either (a) explosions cannot actually occur from some cause other than demolition charges, and (b) that no other sounds can occur which witnesses can reliably describe as "explosions." In fact, the "explosion" testimony is incredibly consistent--witnesses say over and over again "I heard an explosion" or "it sounded like an explosion" or "it sounded like a bomb went off." Indeed, if you heard a big bang in a tall building, how else would you describe what it sounded like?
If the towers were standing still--if they had not been struck by airplanes, if they were structurally stable and there were no fires or other structural traumas to the buildings--it would be eminently logical to assume than an explosion-like sound may come from a bomb or some other explosive device. But the towers were not standing still. They had been struck by planes. They were on fire. Debris was collapsing from the top, both internally and externally. Their structural integrity was in serious question--as Turi's full October interview shows was very apparent. The conspiracists insist that, even under these extreme conditions, an explosion (or any sound that witnesses can interpret as an explosion) would not have occurred--but they do not explain why, because they can't. When you make the error of assuming that, for purposes of determining the likely cause of an explosion, a burning structurally-unsound skyscraper is the same as a building to which there has been no such trauma, it's easy to conclude that the "explosion" testimony can point to nothing but controlled demolition. This is the mistake every believer in the controlled demolition theory has made--and the mistake that few of them realize they've made. This will be covered in more depth in a future blog.
Albert Turi is not the spokesman for a conspiracy; while we may never know, it seems likely that he does not believe there was a conspiracy to blow up the World Trade Centers. Yet it's likely he will remain prominent in 9/11 conspiracy lore for years to come. As usual I expect to make no converts with this blog, and I may likely make even more enemies. But it seems to me that somebody should be standing up to protest how grotesequely this man's words have been twisted to serve as support for a bizarre adventure into the netherwords of illogic and paranoia.
Mr. Turi, my hats off to you, and thank you for your service to New York and the nation.
Date: Apr 02, 2013 at 09:53
BY AUTISTIC SKEPTIC
I am Clock, I am not the author of this article, I am simply reposting it as the authors blog went down.
Repeat, I am not Autistic Skeptic
By: Autistic Project
2013 Corrections By: Clock
Here are some famous comments from deluded youtubers.
1."My friend I watched the Bin Laden 'confession' video. You don't even get to hear his original speech in Arabic. What you get is a translator 'translating' him. Its like putting a voice to a dummy, Osama could have been talking about ANYTHING at that time and they dubbed the translator's voice over since you can't hear the original Arabic that confession is worthless. BBC admits that CIA created Al Queda in their documentary here -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QGhY6oY3O0911
= inside job"
How does a YouTube video prove anything??? Not that it's important.
[Clock Comment: I debunked this here (http://metabunk.org/threads/1042-Osama-bin-Laden-photo-and-video-comparison)
2."After 9/11 , the whole world went on paranoid alert . Therefore , anyone who pops their head up , is liable to get it shot off ! People in power , all secret societies , religious groups , banks and governments , are under constant scrutiny . Anyone who steps out of line or does anything suspicious , will be brought to justice and punished accordingly .
By the way , Operation Barbarossa failed because of the Russian Winter .
The Nazionists ARE preparing for the 3rd Reich . The New Jerusalem !"
Okay, You are Using a Non sequitr. Saying ."After 9/11 , the whole world went on paranoid alert . Therefore , anyone who pops their head up , is liable to get it shot off !" is like saying, After I tried to commit suicide, The family went on paranoid alert, Therefore, Anyone who makes fun of me is liable to get expelled!" Then you move on to another irrelevant point by saying 'People in power , all secret societies , religious groups , banks and governments , are under constant scrutiny . Anyone who steps out of line or does anything suspicious , will be brought to justice and punished accordingly ' Well, How come so many 'whistle-blowers' Are doing JUST THAT??? That part of the comment had nothing to do with my statement WHATSOEVER! Then, You throw in a THIRD irrelevant point:'The Nazionists ARE preparing for the 3rd Reich . The New Jerusalem !' 'Nazionism' had nothing to do with anything I stated. Throwing in a red herring will NOT work, My friend. Better luck next time. Why would you associate Nazis with Jews when they HATED eachother, Does not look logical to me.
This one goes.
LOL what did you do copy and paste that from your favorite propaganda site? good job!!! now remind me you wrote this to me in a few days when i actually have the time and actually give a fuck to respond to it.
from briefly looking over your post, i can already say this.
you make a hell of a lot of assumptions!!! (like usual)
like i said remind me in a few days, and i will gladly clean this mess up and prove point for point why you are wrong, but right now i need to tend to my business.
He responded to
Only people who want to believe this garbage do so. Youtube videos are not a form of research. They are cooked propaganda films. The only Sheeple are the believers of this FEMA conspiracy crap. It's all paranoid right wing anti United Nations propaganda from Neo Nazi groups created in the 70′s. There are many books about it. There have been authors like William Guy Carr and others who have been accused of fabricating grand conspiracy ideas throughout the last 30 years. It's all anti Zionist propaganda dealing with banking families being in control of everyone behind the curtain. Sure there are powerful people who control politics, the Kotch brothers are a prime example and the banking families have had their spots of influence and power but there is not a particular race of humans who are satanic hell bent on creating totalitarian world communism. The Illuminati is not in control of president Obama anymore than the royal families of Europe are reptilian shape shifters controlling us.
Ps these right wing conspiracy theory's are my favorite hobby. They are a fairytale created by paranoid delusional sociopaths.
WHY AMERICA IS NOT A POLICE STATE!
A. Lack of meaningful access to the courts. I would have to say this is the #1 characteristic of a repressive society, as well as the top thing you can point to that proves we aren't there yet. Every single day, someone in America sues the government (whether federal or state). Every single day, somewhere in America, a court rules against the government and in favor of a private citizen. Government agencies are often enjoined from taking actions, or forced to pay damages, or otherwise compelled to take actions by independent courts at various levels. This would NEVER happen in a true police state. If you look at true police states such as Nazi Germany, USSR, North Korea, etc., you will see that their court systems are very weak and pathetic and don't do very much. By contrast, American courtrooms are full all the time, and I'm not just talking about criminal cases where the government prosecutes an individual citizen.
B. Repressive actions are routinely experienced by ordinary people in the normal course of their lives and are not out of the ordinary. I like to ask conspiracy theorists, how many people they personally know have been detailed without trial in America? How many people do they personally know who have been prosecuted under the PATRIOT Act? How many people do they personally know who have been executed or forcibly relocated? In a true police state you wouldn't read about repression and persecution on the Internet. It would happen to you, to your husband or wife, to your kids, to your friends. You could rattle off the names of people personally known to you who have been personally harmed by the government (and not just traffic tickets or TSA searches). Read the accounts of anyone who lived in Nazi Germany or the USSR and you will instantly see that the repressive presence was everywhere all the time. If you don't personally know someone who has been detained without trial, you don't live in a police state.
C. People want to stop you from leaving the country. This is another question I like to ask conspiracy theorists-how many people are desperately trying to flee the United States, and how much trouble are they encountering in doing it? Answer: virtually no one, and not very much. A characteristic of police states is that people want to get out and they'll do anything to accomplish it. That was why the Berlin Wall got built, but it didn't help much-people were willing to cross barbed wire under machine guns to get out of East Berlin. Conversely, unless you're a fugitive from justice, no one will care if you want to leave the US. In a true police state, ordinary people would have a very hard time leaving the country. This is simply not true of the US. You can walk across the border at El Paso or San Ysidro into Mexico and literally not a single officer will stop you. This would absolutely not happen in a police state.
D. No free media. Conspiracy theorists have no idea what media repression really is. The fact that Alex Jones and his fans can say whatever the hell they want, whenever they want, proves we don't live in a police state. If we did, you'd have to take extreme measures just to find a website that isn't government run. SOPA, PIPA and the other Internet acts that were recently proposed (and NOT passed, I might add!) would not have even come close to creating the type of media censorship that you would see in a real police state. In a real police state, there would be like 2 or 3 channels on TV and it would be illegal to access more. Not only would the web be behind a central firewall, but probably individual computers would have to be licensed by the government. (In the USSR and Soviet bloc, typewriters had to be licensed by the government, so the secret police could trace the source of subversive literature. It's much easier to license and trace a computer than it is a typewriter).
E. Major shortages of consumer goods. This sounds trivial but it's not. When was the last time you went to the store and had a hard time buying meat? When was the last time you had to stand in line for a specific consumer good, like shoes or toilet paper? Is there a black market for "good" stuff that is ordinarily hard to get? I'm not aware of a single example of a real police state where there weren't severe shortages, black market economies, etc. This is partly because most police states tend to control their economies centrally, but also because makers of top notch products don't want to to business directly in countries like these. One trip to Costco should be able to convince anyone that America is not a police state. This isn't likely to make sense to conspiracy theorists, but history shows us it's mostly true. (This will be in my debunking blog later)
"LOL what did you do copy and paste that from your favorite propaganda site? good job!!! now remind me you wrote this to me in a few days when i actually have the time and actually give a fuck to respond to it"
First off, Did I curse at you? No, I just sent you a comment. You went in and cursed at me, and do you think that anything else than what you believe is propaganda? more importantly do you even QUESTION your beliefs? No. did you even research what I said researching both sides? No. you just called me out over pure facts.
"from briefly looking over your post, i can already say this.
you make a hell of a lot of assumptions!!! (like usual)"
Yes and No, My assumptions are not entirely unrooted in fact. If you look up your history (not just the history that agrees with you), you might actually learn something. Note Briefly, You did not look over my post thoroughly enough and then made the claim:" LOL what did you do copy and paste that from your favorite propaganda site? good job!!! " You did not read it thoroughly enough to see what I was actually trying to say. if you read it more carefully than you did, you might see my point.
"like i said remind me in a few days, and i will gladly clean this mess up and prove point for point why you are wrong,"
Yeah, NOT going to bother... You'll just give me regurgitations of common truther theories.
Date: Mar 30, 2013 at 12:46
Article that I debunked is here : 
Claim: President George Bush in a speech to Congress on SEPTEMBER 11, (9/11) 1990, SAID THIS: "[The war in Iraq is] a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times...a New World Order can emerge."
Clock: Here is the full quote, thanks to Wikiquote : "Clearly, no longer can a dictator count on East-West confrontation to stymie concerted United Nations action against aggression. A new partnership of nations has begun. And we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective -- a new world order -- can emerge: a new era, freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony."George H. W. Bush
Of course, the people at the website Wake Up America have to quote mine and make the statement fit their view. What Bush Senior was talking about was a world where countries can cooperate with each other and not constantly have to face war.
Claim: In his September 21, 1992 speech to the United Nations, President George Bush announced that foreign troops, would occupy America and train for a New World Order Army. He stated:
"Nations should develop and train military units for possible U.N. peacekeeping operations. ... If multinational units are to work together, they must train together. ... Effective multinational action will also require coordinated command & control and inter-operability of both equipment and communications." New World Order and E.L.F. Psychotronic Tyranny
Clock; This is a made up quote. In a quick Wikiquote search, I have found no statements of Bush Senior ever saying this, heck, it is not even considered to be missatributed.  A quick search on Google led me to nothing but directories to his website or other conspiracy-minded places. As a result, it is fake.
Then they explain what the New World Order is. Not much bunk here except for the fact that it doesn't exist +
Claim: The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control...Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent. (Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976) In 1981 Congressmen McDonald calls for comprehensive congressional investigation of the CFR and Trilateral Commission. Congress is urged to investigate these organizations. Congressman McDonald was killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets in 1983
Clock: Something many conspiracy theorists never answer is why does it take many generations to make a plan for this NWO. I mean, how long does it actually take? If the government is so smart in 'slowly but surely' making these secret plans, why are there so many people who know about it? Also, where is this guy getting all of this information? He surely must be part of it all! Yeah there is that whole thing about David Rockefellar and his internationalist ideas like that has been debunked and explained already . It's also important to know that there are some quotes of David actually saying that a one world government is not necessary.  Also, how the hell does one combine Capitalism and Communism together? They are 2 completly different political ideologies, that absolutely do not go hand in hand. Capitalism is an economic system in which resources and production are privately made on someone's own terms, and the prices are all based on the competition of free market.  Communism refers to everything related to the economy to be owned by a single political party. If Capitalism is about doing anything to make some money privately without the intrusion of the government, and communism being about everything controlled by a government, that is hypocritical and does not work.
Claim: "If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging new world order we now see, this long dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long." -- President George Bush (January 1991)
Clock: Again, no reference of him saying anything like this. There have been only 1 or 2 times where Bush Senior has actually said the phrase New World Order.
Claim: The New World Order program has been on the drawing board for many decades, despite denials and smears from the proponents, the insidious world domination and control preparations continue being set in place, the secretive terms of One World, New World Order, New International Economic Order etc have now been replaced with the more public term of Globalization.
In hundreds of books, articles, and speeches in the 20th century, many influential and powerful people, including many in Congress, have called for a New World Order, and the surrender of U.S. sovereignty and individual freedoms to a one world government, usually involving the U.N. military and the transfer of it to a one world U.N. army.
Clock: When has Congress ever said that they wanted to make a NWO? The author here provides no evidence of this, just talk.
Claim: "Lets forgive the Nazi war criminals" (George Bush, New York Times, April, 14, 1990)
Clock: That is just silly. Again, no evidence of Bush actually saying this but on conspiracy websites.
Date: Mar 09, 2013 at 14:44
It's debunking time once again.
In the beginning of this video, Alex says some very true things, about the the earth and the universe, and how much humanity is capable of creating and doing things. It is actually very made, good job on Alex and his editing team. It all goes well until the 4:00 minute mark in the video above, when he mentions "The Globalists".
As I often say, before you start talking about the NWO or Globalists theory, you need to prove a correlation between the Governments, the industries and the media. If you cannot, then that automatically debunks the whole NWO thing. A good article (http://thrivedebunked.wordpress.com/...enda-debunked/)
discusses this here. It is well worth a read, and lays the smack down on the theory.
Alex Jones: The entire development of these systems [technology] are in the hands of The Globalists, super predators, who have a lustful disdain, and hate for humanity.
Why do they have a hate for humanity? They are humans themselves, and if they want to kill off to kill off half of humanity (or all of it, while you're at it), what's the point? Then, there will be nothing to run and nothing to do. This line is also very silly, it sounds like they are talking about the evil empire in the Star Wars movies.
Alex Jones: Globalists and social engineers talk about the total population like we are animals, and our main use is to be manipulated
-Nothing to say here. This is Alex's typical line of paranoia and opinion
Alex Jones: ...to be controlled, to be tested upon,
If they did not give a damn about us why would they bother testing us? Besides, most scientists test their experiments with rats or mice. If you see in this link, (http://www.scripps.edu/news/press/20...1101taffe.html)
the journalists write that the first tests on the rats were successful. They would not test on humans. In an article by the Telegraph, (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3353960/Should-we-experiment-on-animals-Yes.html)
they state that testing on lab rats is still the best way to determine to cure or the cause of a disease. Not only that but they are reliable and cheap. Plus, since they have similar genetics as us, humans.
Alex Jones: Foster children have been used to be tested upon by the US Military for the past 60 years
-The only case of humans being tested upon was during the cold war, in St. Louis/ Texas. However, this has been debunked here: http://metabunk.org/threads/888-Army...s-and-St-Louis
The whole "for more than 60 years" line lacks evidence and is false. He does not even bother to give us examples of children used for testing.
Alex Jones: I'm asking humanity to realize that a very small group, of inbred, unhappy, twisted and wicked people, have seized control of human development, and are attempting to establish a total control system of technocratic surveillance systems and de-humanization. It is now that we must begin to struggle against their bureaucracy. Fighting their 1984 system, with liberty and enlightenment and truth, until the levers of technological development, are leveraged from the hands of the globalists. Humanity has a very dark future.
-Technically we all have control of human development. If you look up human development on google, you get this wikipedia page: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_d..._%
28biology%29) Sex is human development, it is not only something the "ultra mean globalists" have. And if he is talking about alternating a human gene and cloning it, well think again. Many countries are banning genetic human testing and cloning,(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_cloning#Current_law)
so this entire statement is false and plain feermongering.
Alex Jones: The real threats facing humanity are not the fake environmental threats that Al Gore and the UN talk about.
Alex Jones: There are unchecked, cross-species genetic engineering. Tens of thousands of biotech companies, universities and governments, randomly splicing viruses, bacteria from plants and animals and then injecting them into other animals, which is already giving a rise to mutated viruses and bacteria and irrevocable vandalization of the genetic code of the planet.
-Although he is right here, it is taken entirely out of context. Mutated virus are created by mistake, in which there is not enough protein in the gene of the substance. If there is a mistake in the mutation, it cannot give any offspring, and if a DNA system is broken, it can be fixed using the DNA Repair system in order to prevent mutation. Although mutations can be problematic, they have lots of benifits as well: for ecample a cell named CCR5 can help delay the AIDS disease from having an effect your body, and people who naturally have mutations in their body can help fight very harmful diseases, such as the mutation CCR5-Δ32 help the human body to be immune from the Bubonic Plague. "...Mutation may enable the mutant organism to withstand particular environmental stresses better than wild-type organisms, or reproduce more quickly. In these cases a mutation will tend to become more common in a population through natural selection."-wkipedia Also, Mutations are not unchecked, I am not sure where Alex got that from. They are obviously checked if they know it can cause cancer, as seen in the wikipedia article below.
Alex Jones: High tech chemical and most importantly biological weapons development, unchecked nanotech,
-Unchecked Nanotech is pure fiction. This technology is always checked, and some of the problems that conspiracy theorists say about it (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nanotechnology#In_fiction)
are just plain false.
Alex Jones: the artificial creation of black holes,
-Alex pulled that out of his @ss. This is what a physicist has to say about it:
"Not with any current, or remotely feasible technology. The method in use by the universe today; get several Suns worth of mass into a big pile and wait, is a pretty effective way to create black holes.
In theory, all you need to do to create an artificial black hole (a "black faux"?) is to get a large amount of energy and matter into a very small volume. The easiest method would probably be to use some kind of massive, super-duper-accelerators. The problem is that black holes are dense, and the smaller and less massive they are the denser they need to be."
Although I see where Alex saw his info about the 2 phycists in china creating a black hole, this is actually what their experiment was about:
"after a related paper was published by researchers at Purdue University, Indiana. The paper proposed a device that could mimic the properties of a black hole in space, causing space-time in the surrounding area to bend and warp and spiral inwards toward the center of the black hole. But unlike a cosmic black hole, this one (hopefully) won't rip us apart."
It mimics the properties of a black hole, the machine does not create a cosmetic black hole.
Alex Jones: any matter weapons of the air force, who admits they developed a new viral vaccine that re-engineers the brain by attacking certain gangly i systems in which you could no longer feel emotions.
This is false, a pure fabrication. It you can't find it on google, where can you?
Alex Jones: ...and in the incoming years they are going to override every major life form on this planet without asking you.
Once again this is false, there are many groups that are against human cloning, again, look at the list of countries who refuse human testing.
Alex Jones: That's a trillion times what Monsanto does planting your crops next to yours, and they come and charge in on your property and charge copyright infringement when they polluted your property.
Gmos debunked here: http://metabunk.org/threads/177-GMO-conspiracy-theories
And then... Alex goes on another well spoken about how unethical it is to do all of these transformations. He still says his typical BS of "NWO are trying to distract you" but Alex is actually being a well spoken person in this, and I must say that he is doing a good job. It's really a shame that Alex Jones is a Conspiracy Theorist, as he is pretty well spoken when he is not yelling and screaming like an ape. But then, he goes back to the whole wake up message, which is dumb.
At one point he talks about those times when scientists say the planet would be better off without us. Alex says that is a plan by the NWO to make humanity seem as a disease. And honestly? The Scientists who say so are right in a sense. Michael Crichton once wrote in The Lost World that humans are so destructive, that is so easy for us to manipulate things that we are somewhat like a disease on the earth, and we abuse its resources to hell. And to be fair? we sort of do. Would Climate Change be an issue if we were not extracting oils from tar pits or decomposed fossils? Would have less floods and landslides if we did not cut as many forests down? Alex takes these quotes by scientists way out of context. However, these claims by both Alex and the Scientists should not be taken seriously. They are merely statements and observations of how the human being acts. Nothing more, nothing less.
He says that they are openly planning to release biological weapons in order to kill us all, which is false as the US, UK and Russia banned the developement of stockipiling bio weapons, and they is also a lack of proof that the other countries will launch all of them on us to kill us all.
More rambling on trying to dumb us down. Yawn.
And.. he talks about that for the rest of the vid. I hope you enjoyed this debunking. And now, I will take a nice shower, this guy is giving me a headache!
Date: Mar 09, 2013 at 14:08
Once in awhile, I admit, I go on Vigilant Citizen, to see what paranoid assumption they are talking about at the moment. And guess what? it's the music industry! The folks at VC say that having these random signs and other things prove that the NWO exist. (This whole theory has been debunked by a very good debunker, right here : http://thrivedebunked.wordpress.com/?s=Global+)
Of course, they are not sure why video editors and artists would spend so much time putting in satanic*** symbols (for not even 4 seconds a video on most cases) in music videos in order to supposedly advertise their symbols inside of popular media (as if that will accomplish anything)
***: the satanic symbols that represent symbols of god, but whatever.
This week they decide to attack Ke$ha. Lovely. I decide to dive right in, and, of course, debunk it. It seems to be about a tweet that she made on twitter. This is the article that VC wrote:
Vigilant Citizen: Ke$ha Claims She Was Forced to Sing "Die Young"
In the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, radio stations across the country are dropping Ke$ha's single Die Young from their playlist. The song's constant repetition of the words "we're gonna die young" is now apparently deemed inappropriate for airplay. As I've stated in The Illuminati Symbolism of Ke$ha's "Die Young" and How it Ridicules the Indoctrinated Masses, the entire imagery of the video and of the live performances that accompanied the song were about glorifying death and ritual sacrifices. All of this was interlaced with Illuminati symbolism, hinting that the whole thing was yet another way of the elite to push a culture of death on the masses.
Clock: The tweet that they are talking about can be seen here: http://metabunk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=1262&d=1356494994
Vigilant Citizen: This tweet was later deleted because it probably pissed off her bosses.
But who exactly forced her to sing those lyrics? Why was she credited as a writer of the song? As I stated in the Die Young article:
"In reality, Ke$ha didn't do anything for any LOLs. She did not direct the video. She is just performing what she is told to perform, like most pop stars. The fact of the matter is: Illuminati symbols are becoming more prevalent because that was the plan all along - to gradually make them part of popular culture. The occult elite is revealing itself and the masses are dancing to their tunes."
Pop stars have no control over their careers, they are puppets used to push Agendas. Die Young was all about celebrating the sick culture of death that is prevalent in mass media today. Ke$ha's temporary tweet gave us a small glimpse of the coercive and forceful nature of the music industry and how it imposes content on stars.
It apparently took a mass shooting to make some people realize that there is something sick and unhealthy in popular culture. I am not for censorship of any kind, but for people to wake up and reject the crap that is pushed on them. Let's hope other tragedies won't be needed to make more people see the obvious.
These guys sure are a ball of joy.
OK, first thing's first: I love the fact how Vigilant Citizen loves making assumptions, and jumping to conclusions (Everything someone rich does has to do with the Illuminati or being controlled OMG OMG) in order to fit their own view, that is the only right idea and you are considered stupid and brain-washed if you disagree.
What Ke$ha meant by this tweet:
She responded to many of the conspiracy theorists and fans about her tweet, and this is what she said on her website:
"MESSAGE FROM KE$HA
December 20, 2012
After such a tragic event I was feeling a lot of emotion and sadness when I said I was forced to sing some of the lyrics to Die Young. Forced is not the right word. I did have some concerns about the phrase "die young" in the chorus when we were writing the lyrics especially because so many of my fans are young and that's one reason why I wrote so many versions of this song. But the point of the song is the importance of living every day to the fullest and staying young at heart, and these are things I truly believe."
Now, what she means by forced, does not mean manipulated by someone to sing the song. She was forced, to sing the lyrics as is, because let's face it, that's the song. If someone would make a song about peace and war, having it become a smash single, and then a war breaks out somewhere, well, the artist playing live is going to have to sing the song as is, because that's what people pay to see, sometimes.
Later, VC goes on this tangent about agendas and manipulations. This is entirely debatable and I'm going to prove it, using another popular artist these days, Bruno Mars. He recently released his second studio album, Unorthodox Jukebox.
"This is me going into the studio and recording and writing whatever I want. This album represents my freedom. I've had big record label presidents look me in the face and say, 'Your music sucks, you don't know who you are, your music is all over the place, and we don't know how to market this stuff. Pick a lane and come back to us.' That was disgusting to me, because I'm not trying to be a circus act. I listen to a lot of music, and I want to have the freedom and luxury to walk into a studio and say, 'Today I want to do a hip-hop, R&B, soul or rock record'"
After the success of his first album, Doo-Wops and Hooligans, the record label wanted his 2nd album to be a variation on the same theme, as it is usually the winning formula, and he instead did his own thing. The album follows a variety of styles, from Disco to an Elton John ballad, and finally to a Police-ish rock song.
Some people might say that he is forced to say this, but again, is there any proof of him being manipulated by the "evil" record companies? You probably can't.
There are tons of of artists I could think of that were like this, but Bruno Mars is a great example because he is modern.
There are other people in bands that 'control' a band in a certain way, and these guys are called managers. These guys book, advertise and take care relations between the band and the record label, and to make sure that the artist continues to be successful and make lots of money. ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091018085326AAGAwlC
Vigilant Citizen is a paranoid website that is full of fear mongering, and lack of proper research. They did not bother to prove that she was being controlled by others and that she told to sing this song, which makes no sense considering she wrote the thing.
In the next thread, I will debunk Ke$ha's video "Die Young" and artists commonly recognized for being part of the NWO. (oops! I already did this! You can find it here: http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5490/the-illuminati-symbolism-kehas-die-young-video-debunked/
Until next time,