"IMPORTANT" Judge Andrew Napolitano on The Alex Jones Show :False Flag Event To Save Obama's Pres

to save the Obama presidency??

this is the problem I'm having with all of the "truth" sayers .(..including Alex J.) ... they villify Obama ...when he is nothing more than a front man with more visible strings than the Apollo astronauts on the "moon"...

I highly doubt the motive will be that ..... unfortunately ..its much more sinister...

Isnt expecting a "false flag" to save a politicians career like expecting the sun will rise in the morning?

It isnt news. Just a lot of chest thumping and breath wasting.

Something will blow up eventually. A lot of people will die eventually. Whatever the real cause or reason is doesnt matter because everyone will make their own.

In the end the "why" and the "who" doesnt matter. If we dont roll over and hand control of our lives to anyone but ourselves anyway. But then we already did that a long time ago didnt we?

It's time we start ignoring the "attacks" and the "officials" and the "governing." It's really the only way to fix things. Not vote anyone out or in. Not revolt. Just ignore them. Ignore them until they start shooting and imprisoning. Then defend yourself against those crazy wierdos attacking you.

That way the enemy becomes clear, the governments stop their song and dance and people can get back to living their lives they way they should have been all along.

I agree we should be cautious of another false flag, it is their trump card when some of their evil plans fall through.
If it doesn't happen soon they will probably have it planned for 2012, they will probably want to keep Barry NObama in office.

Originally posted by WarloriousCreed

Originally posted by OpTiMuS_PrImE
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

 

I personally think Alex is dead on with everything he says it just takes time for the events to occur and the people to realize he was not full of it.

You think he is 'dead on' when he says offshore banks control America? What a joke. Thats a complete contradiction between you seemingly strong connection with Ron Paul. Ron Paul thinks the Federal Reserve or the Central Bank of America that is controlling America.

You think he was dead on about those forced injections ehh?

Whatever

[edit on 4-2-2010 by WarloriousCreed]

A little newsflash for ya: THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS A FOREIGN BANK.

I don't really like Jones much. I will say his got one heck of a haters brigade on ATS though. I really don't understand why we are discussing Jones. Yes it's his show but, it's Napolitano saying it. Discuss that.

If the source had been anything besides Jones there might have been a chance to stay on topic. Now it's just gonna be a fight between people who love jones and people who hate him.



[edit on 4-2-2010 by antonia]

I like the Judge. I like listening to how he explains things and I find him to be very passionate about "what is right".

One of the biggest problems we face as a country is the "2 party system" we find ourselves dealing with. One side is just as bad as the other and while on the surface the Dems and Reps are fighting from 2 different sides the "bureacracy" that actually runs the country seems to remain the same.

The Central Government (both Dems and Reps) seem to use the Constitution as a "doormat" and stepping on it every time they go through a door when in fact the Constitution is the "pillar" holding up the whole building. The Constitution is the map that should guide the country and its leaders on how to govern.

reply to post by Silicis n Volvo


Your 9 iron vs a firearm? You see the flaw in your argument here. America isn't the UK. There is a greater criminal element in the US that without the deadly deterrent of firearms would run rampant. I daresay the government would also be so inclined to enact any legislation that the people don't want but the socialists in government do.
Gun ownership is a key right, not PRIVELEGE, just like free speech and press. When they take those away we have no rights left. No rights = no freedom and life isn't worth living. I will not leave a legacy of slavery to my kids and grandkids as long as I'm alive.
I appreciate your sentiments and they might well work in the UK, the US is a very different populace that requires more severe methods to keep in place.

Originally posted by CaptChaos

Originally posted by WarloriousCreed

Originally posted by OpTiMuS_PrImE
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

 

I personally think Alex is dead on with everything he says it just takes time for the events to occur and the people to realize he was not full of it.

You think he is 'dead on' when he says offshore banks control America? What a joke. Thats a complete contradiction between you seemingly strong connection with Ron Paul. Ron Paul thinks the Federal Reserve or the Central Bank of America that is controlling America.

You think he was dead on about those forced injections ehh?

Whatever

[edit on 4-2-2010 by WarloriousCreed]

A little newsflash for ya: THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS A FOREIGN BANK.

Give me a break, It is on American soil owned by Americans.

You care to list exactly how you define the Federal Reserve as a Foreign Bank without the attitude. I guarentee more than just myself would like that definition/explanation mr. newsflash. Keep them comming.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


We've never had a gun culture in the U.K. If your house gets broken into the chances of the intruder carrying a firearm are extremely slim. That's why, thankfully, the average Bobby on the beat is only armed with a big stick.

The U.S. will never be able to give up its guns. They are to ingrained into society. I don't see any Government ever trying that one. They might Tax to death the ammunition though. You can keep your gun but can't afford any bullets.

reply to post by shagreen heart


For the record, to make the ¢ symbol, you just press the NUM LOCK button, the press and hold ALT, type 0 1 6 2, then release ALT. Will look like this : ¢

Now, as for the topic at hand, the Judge isn't some nut job. He did an analysis for the SoTU recently even. This guy is Fox's go-to guy when it comes to many things legal. He's knowledgeable, intuitive, well known, etc. I personally don't like Alex Jones, but as previously mentioned, this isn't the "Bash AJ" thread.

Many of us only started this truth journey after the events of 9/11. But there are many other people who have been watching the government so shadow ops for many years to obtain their own selfish agendas.

A false flag is imminent. It may or may not be to save Obama. It may or may not happen this year even. But the government plays the card when it needs something done. (The wars we're currently in, the Patriot Act, The Military Commissions Act of 1996, etc)

I've read more threads in the last few years about how this date or that date would be the next false flag. To be honest, I'm starting to become cynical and hate those threads. We all know it's coming, but my .02 is that no one really knows when it's going to happen. Or why it's going to happen.

I like the Judge, but I just don't know about this...

This Judge is a joke. I'm sure he's one of the few idiots who called french fries "freedom fries."

Oh freedom this, liberty that. Fear = ratings and that's all he and that fat coward sensationalist Alex Jones care about.

Originally posted by shagreen heart
my 2 cents on this subject: (anyone know how to make a damn cent symbol?)

a lot of high ranking people in the military have been predicting big attacks for the last two months now. meaning that they are telling you they are goin to happen instead of preventing them, and that they will be holding the attacker's hands. (******* xmas day bomber anyone?? they predicted and were DIRECTLY involved in it)

Originally posted by WarloriousCreed

Give me a break, It is on American soil owned by Americans.

You care to list exactly how you define the Federal Reserve as a Foreign Bank without the attitude. I guarentee more than just myself would like that definition/explanation mr. newsflash. Keep them comming.

1. Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
2. Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
3. Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam
5. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
6. Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
7. Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
8. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Controlled By Rockefellers)

Originally posted by Silicis n Volvo
i understand the concept of keeping guns in your house to protect you, your family and your posessions...but honestly..i think that banning guns is a great idea..its banned here in the UK and although gun crimes still occurr..they are much lower because it is more difficult to get a gun here than in the states.
-snip-
i know that here in the UK if someone attempts to burgle my house while im in it...my 9 iron will do the trick...a couple of blows to the knees and a phonecall to the police and the guy will wish he'd been shot. theres plenty of things you can protect yourself with

im just saying...no guns? probly more of a good thing imo

Probably not more of a good thing, really. Because something is illegal or prohibited doesn't mean it's unavailable, it just means it is legally discouraged and the law abiding citizen will typically not try and obtain it.

For instance, in the States, a lot of drugs are illegal. That doesn't mean they magically disappear from the streets though. People that want to do drugs, still do drugs. Making guns illegal (a ban on them) keeps guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens while placing a small roadblock for criminals to have to step around. They'll still get their guns, but the good guys won't.

Just a small point to add, a person practiced and well-trained in the use of a firearm is indeed deadly, but that also means you're dead if you confront one with a 9 iron. Given the confrontation, who would you rather be? The guy with the golf club or the guy with the gun?

[edit on 4-2-2010 by Fiscal]

Yes, -- We should respect the judge. but man I disapprove of the fear mongering that leaks off the alex jones web site onto this good site..

We should make a new folder for all the topics from there on the Top Forums and call it "Bull Crap"

Originally posted by shagreen heart

a lot of high ranking people in the military have been predicting big attacks for the last two months now.

---edit. Should read: "a lot of high ranking people in the military have been predicting big attacks since the military was established and will do so until the last star falls from the sky to justify a overinflated budget"

no charge for the fix

If one assumes that the puppet masters of Obama are not stupid and they desire to remain in power alot of what they are doing does not make sense. Their agenda is crashing around their ears yet thay still appear to be making moves that will further animate the right and doom their agenda. Trying terrorists in civilian courts comes to mind. However, I believe that the leftist gang currently in charge will not give up power easily and that we will be aghast at what they will do in the next nine months to stay in power. There is nothing out of the realm for probability that they are capable in their effort to retain power to institute their agenda to create their vision of a utopian society. Something as meaningless as an election and the constitution will not stand in their way.

I hope I am wrong and that we will have a legitimate peaceful election that will make Obama a lame duck for the remainder of his term.

reply to post by gYvMessanger


Why don't you ask your friend what he was saying and start a thread on this.. i think alot of us will be interested in what this judge was saying.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by shagreen heart

a lot of high ranking people in the military have been predicting big attacks for the last two months now.

---edit. Should read: "a lot of high ranking people in the military have been predicting big attacks since the military was established and will do so until the last star falls from the sky to justify a overinflated budget"

no charge for the fix

you should be paying me for wasting my time.

the only times we have been attacked are steeped in deep conspiracy, and you know it. name any of them.

however, to stay on topic, and you know what i was referring to, "al quieda" or some "islamic/middle eastern generalization extremist on us soil". we were promised by what's his name last month that a plane WILL be going down within the next 3-6 months (depending on how we can work out the logistics on that and try extra hard to cover our asses).

don't try to split hairs with me.

reply to post by Silicis n Volvo


A simple Google search using the search engine "crime rate in England" offers a first page filled with articles that directly contradict your claims. A BBC online news article, reported in 2001 that handgun crime was up despite the ban. The article says that a study suggested that hand gun crimes in England rose by 40% in the two years after hand guns were banned there.

BBC News

That's just a report on had gun crime rates in England. It has been reported by numerous news articles and magazine articles that the overall crime rate in England has risen dramatically since the ban of guns. Reason Magazine reported, in 2002, that in just a few days during the summer of 2001, armed men burst into an English Court and freed two defendants, five men and three women were left wounded after a shooting outside of a London nightclub, and in a quiet residential area of North England, two men were brutally slaughtered by machine guns. By New Years Day of the following year, a young woman was shot in the head by a petty thief who wanted her cell phone.

While the gun control legislation of the U.K. has been touted by those advocating the banning of weapons, ad nauseum, what never gets mentioned by these zealous gun control advocates is that England has had a level of very low armed crime for a very long time prior to the draconian gun bans implemented. One government study showed that between they years of 1890 to 1892, there were only three homicides in a population of 30 million people, which is an average of one a year. In 1904, London was the largest city in the world, but there were only four armed robberies.

Reason Magazine

A website known as the Free Republic posts a Telegraph U.K. story, written in 2002, with the sensational headline: "England has the worst crime rate in the world", and reports that according to a U.N. study, that England and Wales had led the world's leading economies in crime rates. Indeed, this U.N. report claimed that America had 8,517 crimes for every 100,000 people, (No doubt higher than South Africa, Germany and Russia to name just a few), both England and Wales had a crime rate of 9,766 per 100,000 people.

Free Republic

A book written by Professor Joyce Lee Malcom of Bentley College titled Guns and Violenc, where she examines the history of firearms, gun control laws, and violent crime in England, claims that while the State of New York, in the United States, had in 1911, instituted one of the most stringent gun control laws of the U.S., at a time when England did not have any gun control laws, the murder rates in New York City remained consistently higher than that of London.

Malcom further states that the "rise of the interventionist state in the early 20th century", was when England began disarming its populace, and it was during this period where the relatively low crime rates of England began to rise dramatically. Particularly murder, and while in 1954 there were merely a dozen armed robberies in England, by the 1990's that rate had risen to nearly a hundred times more.

Link

These links are just four from that search engines Google page that are only complimented by many more on that same page, and I could keep posting more links to belabor the point, but that would be akin to clubbing baby seals. The facts just don't jibe with the propaganda put out by gun control advocates, and when those zealots do use facts, they are facts taken out of context, in order to push forth the agenda of an empowered state over a helpless population.

Finally, it should be noted that in Carl von Clauseitz seminal book On War he echoes what Sun Tzu had said nearly 2,500 years before, which was that the first thing any military campaign wants to do when engaging the enemy is to disarm them. When the state is attempting to disarm its populace, from a military standpoint, it should be clear who those statesman view the populace...as the enemy.

Edit to Add: After testing the links provided it appears I entered the wrong address to the first link of the BBC article. Here is that address:

news.bbc.co.uk...

[edit on 4-2-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]