Rap News 6: Wikileaks-Alex Jones-Hillary Clinton

Robert Foster is a genius.

YES!

YES!

I contacted him...

And thanked him for this video. He said it was his pleasure.

Entertainment for sure

However I have heard AJ say that he hasn't made up his mind that Wikileaks is part of a global conspiracy. Yes he has given a platform to those who claim this but I have heard this same claim from people on this site. Brilliant composition and fun to watch.

Concerns about Alex.

Did anyone see this clip:

There might be a few more from other angles:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=alex+jones+gun+rally&aq=1

This website raises more concerns:
http://www.alexjonesmachine.com/ruleolaw.htm

The woman who runs this "Alex Jones Machine" website is Lorrie Kramer. Lorrie claims to be the woman who introduced Alex Jones to Jeff Rense. Kramer also alleges that Alex Jones' lawyer is a woman named Elizabeth M. Schurig. Elizabeth M. Schurig also represents Holly Lev Bronfman, according to Lorrie Kramer. For those of you who don't know, the Bronfman Family is a VERY prominent *COUGH* "globalist" *COUGH* *COUGH* *COUGH* *COUGH* family. They might have made a little money back in the bootlegging days. There is a possibility that they rubbed elbows with another suspected bootlegger, Joseph Kennedy. And they might have had dinner with Meyer Lansky once. I'm really not sure about any of that. This stuff is all really confusing, and it hurts my little goyim head.

Racist, disruptive, divisive, diversionary, and aggressive.

I note the eagerness of CONSCIOUSNESS to mention the word "goyim" which means gentile in hebrew. As CONSC. uses it to refer to him/herself he/she is insinuating that he/she might be called a goyim therefore he/she is insinuating that non goyim might call him/her that therefore he/she is insinuating that there is some point in defining 2 separate groups - the goyim and the non goyim
as he/she uses the word goyim as if it was the type of word that could be used as an insult to him/her then perhaps CONSC has a problem with those who might use such a term ie non goyim ie CONSC is indicating he/she has a problem with jews or some jews
this seems like racist stirring and the ravings of a madman/woman

i am following the advice of http://www.truthmove.org/content/2008-declaration/

"Such groups and individuals should not be engaged in unproductive ways, such as aggression, name-calling, personal attacks, etc. Instead, the substance of their destructive behavior should be detailed, after which they should be ignored as much as possible."

I have detailed the substance of his/her destructive behavior.

After which I will ignore him/her as much as possible.

Remember Assange said there was no 9/11 conspiracy.

Who's Who at Wikileaks?

by Julie Lévesque

Progressive organizations have praised the Wikileaks endeavor. Our own website Global Research has provided extensive coverage of the Wikileaks data banks and their implications, particularly with regard to US-NATO war crimes.

The Wikileaks Project is heralded as an immeasurable victory against corporate media censorship, without examining its organizational structure.

A distinction should be made between the Wikileaks data banks, which constitute a valuable source of information in their own right, and the mechanisms whereby the leaks, used as source material by the corporate media, are transformed into news.

Wikileaks from the outset has collaborated closely with several mainstream media.

This article by Julie Lévesque focusses on the nature and organizational structures of the Wikleak project.

SNIP

While Wikileaks no longer discloses the names of the members of its advisory board, nor does it reveal its sources of funding, we have to trust it because according to its founder Julian Assange, it “has proven to be the most trustworthy news source that exists”.

Moreover, if we follow Assange’s assertion that there are only a few media organizations which can be considered trustworthy, we must assume that those are the ones which were selected by Wikileaks to act as "partners" in the release and editing of the leaks, including The New York Times, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, El Paìs, Le Monde.

Yet The New York Times, which employs members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) including Wikileaks’ collaborator David E. Sanger, has proven more than once to be a propaganda tool for the US government, the most infamous example being the Iraqi WMD narrative promoted by Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller.

In an interview, Assange indicates that Wikileaks chose a variety of media to avoid the use of leaks for propaganda purposes. It is important to note that although these media might be owned by different groups and have different editorial policies, they are without exception news entities controlled by major Western media corporations.

A much better way to avoid the use of leaks for disinformation purposes would have been to work with media from different regions of the world (e.g. Asia, Latin America, Middle East) as well as establish partnership agreements with the alternative media. By working primarily with media organizations from NATO countries, Wikileaks has chosen to submit its leaks to one single "worldview", that of the West.

As a few critics of Wikileaks have noted, the Wikileaks project brings to mind the "recommendations" of Cass Sunstein, heads the Obama White House's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Sunstein is the author of an authoritative Harvard Law School essay entitled “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures”. As outlined by Daniel Tencer in Obama Staffer Calls for "Cognitive Infiltration" of " 9/11 Conspiracy Groups":

Sunstein “argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via ‘chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine’ those groups”.

Sunstein means that people who believe in conspiracy theories have a limited number of sources of information that they trust. Therefore, Sunstein argued in the article, it would not work to simply refute the conspiracy theories in public — the very sources that conspiracy theorists believe would have to be infiltrated.

Sunstein, whose article focuses largely on the 9/11 conspiracy theories, suggests that the government “enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts.” (emphasis added)

Full article at:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22437

Sunsteinism

Sunstein “argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via ‘chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine’ those groups”.

Sunstein means that people who believe in conspiracy theories have a limited number of sources of information that they trust. Therefore, Sunstein argued in the article, it would not work to simply refute the conspiracy theories in public — the very sources that conspiracy theorists believe would have to be infiltrated.

... and the exact same argument has been used against 911blogger. And the exact same argument could be used against Global Research.

It's pointless.

ETA:

Mind you, Sunstein named one specific entity: Popular Mechanics. Now that's something solid.

popular mechanics

anagrams to

conspire a la chump

(and dont forget the other one- US has my nerd= shyam sunder)

and Rap News 5...

...features Assange in the flesh