Alex Jones crashes protest against enemies of the 2nd Amendment in Austin TX. Makes nasty remarks to Catherine Bleish and members of the Continental Congress & others

Source: Daily Paul.com

Bill Cooper was right about A.J, What is the best way to control the opposition? To be a leader of it.

( Comment from American Resistance Radio) – Alex Jones is an enemy agent in my opinion he is there to discredit the patriots by helping feed the mainstream media’s effort to make the true Americans look like morons and paranoid lunatics therefore effectively drawing attention away from the blatant and illegal disregard of our 2nd amendment right by the ATF and  the rest of the federal government

Alex Jones oversteps the line here. A group of people includingwww.libertyrestorationproject.org organized an event to protest and defend their 2nd ammendment rights and A.J decides to speak over them and even calls some of them nasty names. Keep in mind that these people reached out to A.J and asked him if he would be a speaker at the event and he told them NO! 

He then decides to attempt to take over the event. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_X-CVR5L14

Updated : New Video : This video thread has been deleted twice and I don’t know why, this video shows where A.J yells in the face of an organizer of this event to “GET THE HELL OUT OF MY FACE” here is the video that keeps getting deleted :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdJ4zhiB2s4

Here A J claims Catherine has a hard on for him, as she tries to talk with him all he does is try to belittle her. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWM17wiHhww

Updated : This comes from one of the people at the protest : Originally Posted by pfarley
There was NOT just one agenda at the event Monday.

The legitimate rally was organized to call attention to a 2nd amendment infringement issue. Organizers were extremely deliberate in aiming to focus the message on points relevant to firearm rights and the issue at hand. The organizing groups have worked very hard to establish good media relationships and they had blasted out to numerous media outlets some precise talking points in a well-crafted press release. The media vans were positioned across the street from the police station by 3:30 when I arrived – multiple media trucks had their booms up ready to run live broadcasts on the 5pm news.

Now let me tell you what I observed about Alex.

Alex swaggered up to the protest area with an entourage of 8 or 9 people (mostly his videographers) at just a couple of minutes past 5 o’clock. The first thing I noticed was that it looked like he was wearing makeup… so I thought ‘Oh, I guess Alex is here to get some footage for an upcoming NWO film’. But then it became apparent to me he was there to do more than that…

He looked directly at the *legitimate* rally organizer already speaking on the police department steps. He positioned himself directly in front of the ongoing rally (between the rally and the media trucks) and began bullhorning *extremely* loudly about how the “Media are LIARS!! Mainstream media is nothing but BS!!” Yadda yadda. Now, you’d think Alex – with all his years of experience – would realize the effect this would have. It, of course, resulted in cancellation of all the LIVE broadcasts. They couldn’t air live. Period. If he had actually been yelling about gun control issues, maybe they could have.

Alex could have chosen to jump right into the 2nd amendment issues, if his agenda was to bring attention to the problem of gun control. But he didn’t. That stuff became mixed in here and there later.

For two hours, Alex stayed on a maniacal trajectory insulting numerous people at the event – including his fans, including Catherine Bleish, and including the director of the Texas Libertarian Party. He was a grotesque caricature of himself, IMO.

Mostly I was heartbroken that he would trash the hard work of the organizers by neutralizing the press coverage they had at-the-ready.

And then there’s the fact that Alex over-spoke an excellent lineup of planned speakers. In the lineup were two local attorneys who have been examining the specifics of the gun show shutdown case that prompted the rally, Catherine Bleish (Liberty Restoration Project), Robert Butler (Director of the LP Texas), and Darwin Boedecker (the owner of the gun store that was shut down).

Organizers tried to work with Jones, first by offering him his choice of speaking positions in the lineup — then, when Alex declined their speaking invitation, by moving their rally (again, already in progress) about 20 feet away to another corner of the pavilion in front of the PD building. Guess what Jones did. Yep, went up the steps so he could bullhorn within 20 feet of them again.

The whole scene involving AJ was reprehensible.

Obama budget to drop US return to Moon

Citing administration and NASA officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the reports said the White House would call on the space agency to focus on other programs, including the development of commercial services to ferry US astronauts to the International Space Station.

The Constellation program envisioned the return of US astronauts to the Moon by 2020

Florida Today and the Orlando Sentinel, two papers based in the area around the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, said Obama would seek to boost NASA’s budget by six billion dollars over five years, despite a pledge to freeze most discretionary spending.

But the boost will fall far short of the money NASA needs to finance the Constellation program launched in 2004 by then-president George W. Bush after the space shuttle Columbia crash in 2003 effectively brought the shuttle program to a close.

Constellation envisioned the return of US astronauts to the Moon by 2020, with them then using Earth’s nearest neighbor as a base for manned trips to Mars.

But the Bush administration did not set aside a sufficient budget to develop the program, according to the Augustine commission, a group of independent experts who examined the program at Obama’s request.

The commission’s report, released at the end of 2009, proposed a range of alternatives for the future of manned space travel.

The Obama administration’s approach will give priority to development of a way to get US astronauts to the International Space Station after the shuttle program winds down in September 2010. Astronauts will have access to Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft until an alternative is available.

There are five more shuttle flights planned, all of them to the ISS, with the next scheduled for February 7.

The possibility of keeping the program running until 2015 has not been ruled out by the administration, officials said.

Reports said Obama’s cut backs could face tough opposition, with a spokesman for Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson telling Florida Today the proposals could “decimate the space program.”

A spokesman for Boeing, a key NASA subcontractor, said the company had not been advised about the proposals and urged patience.

“This is the first step, Congress will debate it, there will be a lot of hearings… before a final decision is made,” Edmund Memi told AFP.

Water in atomosphere affects climate?

David Derbyshire 
UK Daily Mail
Friday, January 29th, 2010

Climate scientists have overlooked a major cause of global warming and cooling, a new study reveals today.

American researchers have discovered that the amount of water high in the atmosphere is far more influential on world temperatures than previously thought.

Although the findings do not challenge the theory of man-made global warming, they help explain why temperatures can rise and fall so dramatically from decade to decade.

The study, published in the journal Science, says a 10 per cent drop in humidity 10 miles above the Earth’s surface explains why global temperatures have been stable since the start of the century, despite the rise in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

And a rise in water vapour in the 1980s and 90s may also explain why temperatures shot up so quickly in the previous two decades, they say.

Full article here

Obama Laughed at After Calling Climate Change Evidence Overwhelming

hootervillegazette.com
Friday, January 29th, 2010

While giving a speech designed to show America that he is not out of touch, Obama delivered a real howler of a line that ultimately caused his audience, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and even Obama himself to laugh. It’s taken him a year to understand that what concerns Americans the most is the economy.

It remains to be seen how long it will take President Obama to realize that the manufactured evidence embraced by climate change alarmists has been crumbling for some time. The only thing overwhelming about it is the outrage one feels after learning the truth.

Barack Obama opponents urge census boycott

Daniel Nasaw 
London Guardian 
Friday, January 29th, 2010

Conservative opponents of the Obama administration are urging supporters to resist the upcoming US census, saying it asks too many questions and reflects increasing government intrusion into private matters.

The census, held every 10 years since 1790, is becoming a focal point for the growing anti-government movement in the US.

The government will endeavour to count every person living in the US, regardless of legal, immigration or citizenship status. The count, which helps determine political representation and the distribution of hundreds of billions of dollars in government funds, is mandated by the constitution.

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, a virulently conservative, anti-Obama Republican from Minnesota, has urged supporters to give only the number of people living in their household, saying nothing more is required by the constitution.

Full article here

Swiss halt deal with U.S. that IDs Americans with secret UBS bank accounts

David S. Hilzenrath 
Washington Post
Thursday, January 28, 2010

Americans who hid money from the Internal Revenue Service in secret Swiss bank accounts may escape exposure, at least for now.

An agreement between the U.S. and Swiss governments that was supposed to blow the cover on 4,450 accounts at Switzerland’s largest bank is in danger of collapse.

The Swiss government said Wednesday that it has suspended the disclosure of information to the United States under the agreement and may seek to renegotiate the deal.

The announcement came days after a Swiss court ruled that it would be illegal for Switzerland to comply with the August accord. The court essentially declared that long-standing secrecy protections trumped the agreement. The decision came in a test case involving a UBS account holder who was fighting to stay in the shadows.

Full story here.

Authorities Quietly Reverse Underwear Bomber Official Story

Eyewitness Kurt Haskell’s description of accomplice vindicated after weeks of denial

Paul Joseph WatsonPrison Planet.com
Thursday, January 28, 2010

Authorities have quietly reversed the official story behind the Christmas Day underwear bomber attack and acknowledged that an accomplice was involved, despite weeks of denial and derision of eyewitness Kurt Haskell’s description of a sharp-dressed man who helped Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab board Flight 253 in Amsterdam.

Buried in the last two paragraphs of a story about alleged female suicide bombers coming from Yemen, an ABC News report contains the following bombshell.

“Federal agents also tell ABCNews.com they are attempting to identify a man who passengers said helped Abdulmutallab change planes for Detroit when he landed in Amsterdam from Lagos, Nigeria.”

“Authorities had initially discounted the passenger accounts, but the agents say there is a growing belief the man have played a role to make sure Abdulmutallab “did not get cold feet.”

Detroit lawyer Kurt Haskell maintained from the beginning that he saw a well-dressed Indian man aid the accused bomber to board the plane despite the fact that he had no passport and was on a terror watch list.

“While Mutallab was poorly dressed, his friend was dressed in an expensive suit, Haskell said. He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. “The guy said, ‘He’s from Sudan and we do this all the time,’” reported the Michigan Live news website.

FBI agents interviewed Haskell and he told them about the sharp-dressed man but officials refused to admit that a wider conspiracy was at hand, stoically maintaining the official story thatAbdulmutallab had acted alone. Authorities claimed that videotapes did not show a second man accompanying Abdulmutallab and yet they refused to release any footage of the alleged bomber.

“Why is this not total breaking news?” asks Haskell’s wife on their family blog. “I think we now know WHY the video is not being released. Because IT SHOWS WHAT KURT SAID!!!!!! I mean, where is his apology? Where? They come out in the media, basically calling Kurt a liar, then they take it back, but it is in the bottom of another nonrelated article. Ridiculous. And still, to date, no authorities contacting KURT to ask him to look at the freaking video and help identify the guy. It’s so insane to me. We have an eyewitness to this, and they just don’t care.”

 There seems little doubt that Abdulmutallab had at least one accomplice if not more. Authorities have remained silent on other eyewitness reports which described a man intently filming the alleged terrorist throughout the whole flight, a connection that strongly suggests the attempted bomber was involved in some kind of drill and that his strings were being pulled by people in more senior positions.

In addition, Flight 253 passengers reported seeing a third man connected to the incident being handcuffed by FBI agents after sniffer dogs found something suspect in his luggage. After initially denying any knowledge of this individual, authorities were forced to acknowledge his existence but claimed he had nothing to do with the attempted attack, completely contradicting multiple eyewitness accounts that state passengers were moved from a waiting area after it was made clear to them that a bomb had been found.

The fact that Abdulmutallab’s accomplices were all described as being Indian in appearance would contradict the story that has been spun around the issue in an effort to sell the public on naked body scanners in airports as well as deeper U.S. military involvement in Yemen.

The ludicrous spectacle of long-deceased boogeyman Osama bin Laden apparently claiming responsibility for the attempted attack this past weekend only confirmed that a fairytale was being contrived which was totally at odds with what eyewitnesses described.

Now that Haskell’s eyewitness account has been vindicated, it remains to be seen whether evidence of a wider conspiracy will be investigated or buried. There seems little doubt that the latter will be the case if Abdulmutallab’s accomplices don’t conveniently lead back to the Al-Qaeda patsies the establishment has already framed for the attack.

Obama Tells Putin US Will Surrender To Afghan Taliban

Shocking reports circulating in the Kremlin today are stating that President Obama placed an “urgent” call to Prime Minister Putin on Tuesday wherein he “pleaded” for Russia to withdrawal its objections to removing Afghanistan’s top Taliban leadership from the United Nations list of the World’s most wanted terrorists that the United States, under former President Bush, had ordered to be put on this list in the first place after their, the Americans, being attacked on September 11, 2001.

When asked by Putin why the United States was seeking such a dramatic reversal in their war policy, these reports continue, Obama replied that in order to stave off a complete American military defeat, and to defend his Presidency against the Central Intelligence Agencies (CIA) al Qaida forces, he was left with “no choice” but to seek an immediate peace deal with the Taliban.

Upon his conferring with the Russian General Staff, and President Medvedev, about Obama’s “urgent plea” Putin, these reports say, ordered Russia’s UN Ambassador to withdrawal the Motherland’s objections to the Taliban being placed on the terrorism list, and as we can also read as confirmed by the Washington Post News Service:

“A U.N. Security Council committee announced Tuesday that it has lifted sanctions against five former Taliban officials, bolstering Afghan and U.N. efforts to pursue peace talks with the group, Security Council diplomats said. The decision came after Russia agreed to stop blocking a U.S.-backed proposal to delist the men.

The action marks a dramatic shift by Russia, which for years had opposed requests by the U.S. and European governments to delist former Taliban members who say they back the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. No Taliban member had been delisted since the Security Council first imposed sanctions on the group more than 10 years ago.”

Putin further ordered Russia’s NATO envoy, Dmitry Rogozin, to offer assistance to the West to help rebuild Afghanistan, provided, of course, that the West provides the funds, and as we can also read as confirmed by China’s Xinhua Net News Service:

“Russia is ready to help reconstruct Afghanistan provided that the West offers the money, Russian business daily Kommersant reported on Wednesday, citing the country’s NATO envoy. Kommersant quoted Dmitry Rogozin as saying that Russia could restore more than 140 industrial and infrastructure facilities built by Soviet specialists in Afghanistan.”

To how dire the situation in Afghanistan has become for the Americans can been seen the words of US Gen Stanley McChrystal who told the UK‘s Financial Times newspaper this past week that there had been “enough fighting”. General McChrystal further stated that a political solution in all conflicts was “inevitable”.

After eight years of war and the loss of thousands of lives, Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense further stated: “The Taliban … are part of the political fabric of Afghanistan at this point.”

To the “truer” cause though of Obama’s preparing to surrender his Military Forces in Afghanistan to the Taliban, these reports say, is the staggering cost of America’s wars since 2001, which are now reported to be over $1 Trillion for an economy already staggering under a debt load many financial analysts believe will cause the United States to implode this year.

Obama is not alone either in his quest for a quick ending to his Nations war in Afghanistan, and as we can read as reported by the United States Fox News Service:

“After giving up on winning victory in Afghanistan by military means, the international community is resorting to the centuries-old method of buying its way out. In London this week, Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, will launch a British and American-backed plan for “reintegration” of the Taliban and call for international funding to offer jobs and bribes to bring insurgents in from the cold.”

Not being understood by the American people about their war in Afghanistan against the Taliban is that it was entirely avoidable as all they, the Taliban, had requested of the United States after the attacks of September 11, 2001 was proof that they were indeed carried out by the alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden, an offer which President Bush replied by saying that the United States demands were “non-negotiable”.

Equally important to note about America’s war in Afghanistan to capture, or kill, Osama bin Laden is that neither Obama or General McChrystal have ever mentioned him in their speeches, or reports, for justifying their war. Osama bin Laden has not only never been charged for the 9/11 attacks even though he does remain on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted List.

To the likelihood of the Taliban accepting the United States and NATO’s “defacto surrender”, these reports conclude, “there isn’t a single chance in hell”.

Home Office spawns new unit to expand internet surveillance

Chris Williams
The Register
Thursday, January 28, 2010

The Home Office has created a new unit to oversee a massive increase in surveillance of the internet, The Register has learned, quashing suggestions the plans are on hold until after the election.

The new Communications Capabilities Directorate (CCD) has been created as a structure to implement the £2bn Interception Modernisation Programme (IMP), sources said.

The CCD is staffed by the same officials who have have been working on IMP since 2007, but it establishes the project on a more formal basis in the Home Office. It is not yet included on the Home Office’s list of directorates.

The intelligence and law enforcement agencies have pushed hard for new laws to force communications providers to store details of who contacts whom, when, where and how via the internet.

However, following a consultation last year, when the Home Office’s plans were heavily criticised by ISPs and mobile companies, it was widely assumed progress on IMP would slow or stop. The CCD has continued meeting with industry to try to allay concerns about the project’s costs, effect on customer privacy and technical feasibility.

“The Home Office has long been working with communications service providers to take forward legislation providing for the retention of communications data,” a Home Office spokesman said. “That is continuing.”

Full story here.

The Value of Government Surveillance of Citizens

Jacob Hornberger
Campaign For Liberty
Thursday, January 28th, 2010

It’s amusing to watch U.S. officials protest the Chinese government’s surveillance of its own citizens. After all, isn’t it the U.S. government that secretly and illegally conspired with private telecom companies to record telephone conversations of private American citizens? And isn’t it the U.S. government that secured both civil and criminal immunity for the telecoms’ decision to sell out the privacy of their customers to the feds?

One of the aspects of the federal government’s telecom surveillance scheme that is rarely mentioned by the mainstream press goes to the heart of why government surveillance of its citizens is so valuable — to provide a means to keep the citizenry subdued and subservient through an subtle form of blackmail.

Prior to the NSA-telecom scandal, Americans had a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to their telephone conversations. They would feel free to talk about things with friends and relatives that they would never expect the authorities or the public to find out.

Some of the things discussed might be illegal in nature but other things might just be things that would be embarrassing if the public were to find out.

For example, conversations about the use or purchase of illicit drugs. Or married people having adulterous affairs. Or business people engaged in unethical conduct at work. Or hurtful gossip about friends and acquaintances.

The range of private communications that people would not want to be made public are endless — conversations that most everyone figured were private at the time they were taking place.

But little did everyone know, that wasn’t necessarily the case. As it turns out, the U.S. government, operating through the NSA in cooperation with U.S. telecoms, was secretly recording countless telephone conversations of countless Americans for an extended period of time. The recordings of those conversations are now in the permanent databases of the NSA and possibly other government agencies.

What better way to keep an entire populace subdued, subservient, and obedient? People who are now tempted to, say, join a Tea Party protest movement now have to factor in their deliberations the fact that the government potentially has some very incriminating or embarrassing information that it could use against them in retaliation.

How could the government use that type of information against someone? Simple — by simply leaking it to a favored journalist, who proceeds to share the gossip with others until it begins to percolate within society, in much the same way that U.S. officials ensured that people found out that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.

Would U.S. officials do something that dastardly?

Well, sure they would. After all, don’t forget that when Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio refused to go along with the illegal telecom surveillance scheme, the feds retaliated with an insider-trading prosecution against him. Why wouldn’t they retaliate against someone who wasn’t playing ball by simply leaking embarrassing information about him?

Let’s not forget what the feds did to Martin Luther King when he began shaking up the establishment. They secretly recorded his telephone conversations and then attempted to blackmail him into ceasing his civil-rights activities by threatening to release information about extramarital affairs that he was purportedly having.

Why did they believe that King was having such affairs? Their secret recordings of his telephone conversations provided them that information.

To his credit, King refused to succumb to the federal blackmail. But he paid a big price for it. The feds leaked the evidence they had acquired in their secret surveillance to some favored journalist stooges who then made the information public.

Would Americans who have had their private telephone conversations secretly and illegally recorded by the NSA respond like King did? Some would. But by the same token, there undoubtedly is a certain number of Americans who would say, “Not me. Count me out. I’m keeping my head down. I can’t afford to have my telephone conversations disclosed to my family, my company, or the public.”