Kevin Barrett Gets A Massive Story In The Capital Times - Pictures Inside
- Thread starter Gold9472
- Start date
E
Eckolaker
Guest
Gold9472 said:
Why ask, when we already know?
My guess is Kevin personally sent you the paper.
am I right?
E
Eckolaker
Guest
Gold9472 said:
I hope he does.
I sent him an email offering our support a week or so ago. I doubt he has seen it with the influx of emails he gets now.
He has brought so much exposier to our cause its not even funny. Probably as much as any one person involved with the truth movement.
C
Chana3812
Guest
I think it is SO COOL.
Kevin Barrett, who was this low-key kind of guy, just trying to get us to all get along with each other, gets this massive publicity and blows the 9/1 Truth to the mainstream press.
I couldn't be happier. MUJCA FOR 911 TRUTH - Way to Go, Kevin.
Nothing But Love for Ya,
Chana
Kevin Barrett, who was this low-key kind of guy, just trying to get us to all get along with each other, gets this massive publicity and blows the 9/1 Truth to the mainstream press.
I couldn't be happier. MUJCA FOR 911 TRUTH - Way to Go, Kevin.
Nothing But Love for Ya,
Chana
E
Eckolaker
Guest
Gold9472 said:It wasn't him dude.It was the Honorable Representative Nass. We all owe him a debt of gratitude.
Okay, I will agree with Rep. nass being the catalyst here. However, In my opinion, Kevin being who he is was able to stand up to morons like Sean Hannity and the like. Not once have I seen him come off as a crazy conspiracy theorist, or someone looking to get his "15 minutes".
Again, and Im sure this statement is shared by all here, Im glad he is on our side and is as intelligent and well-spoken as he is.
E
Eckolaker
Guest
So I did a google search today, only using the words "Steve Nass". The last search result on page 1 is a link to The YBBS.
Thanks Steve!
Thanks Steve!
D
dnepr
Guest
I Could Help Barrett complete the puzzle
Found this blog and thought I throw out a post. First, most might think of me as an ultra-conservative, but actually, I consider myself a strict Constitutionalist, and a strong believer in our once Constitutional Republics as opposed to the often tossed about incorrect term 'democracy'.
I've listened to Kevin a few times on TV, with the latest being on Fox News with Judge Nepolotano and Edie. I've seen him with Sean Hannity also.
While I don't propose to know the exact truth of 911, I don't think for a second it all happened like we are being told. However, it is my opinion that people like Kevin and most of you on this list are missing the much bigger point to learn and 'mix in' with our search for the truth.
We actually do live in a 'Matrix' type government. Most people chose sides and call themselves either liberal or conservative, and never stop to really study what this country was originally set up to be and what it was supposed to be. What is was and was intended - we LOST long ago, almost from the beginning (within the first 50 years), and the coup de gras was the Civil War. Its been downhill since, and the slope is increasing!
Our 'government' is nothing more now than a totalitarian corporation. I wouldn't trust a Republican any more than I'd trust a democrat (except for maybe Ron Paul from Texas).
Our 'government' forces us all into 'hidden' contracts from birth and we are all slaves actually. It is not much different than the feudal system in medieval England. Personal freedom and sovereignty no longer have any meaning, and we are rapidly approaching Orwell's 1984.
We don't own our cars or homes or property although we think we do. And I mean after they are paid off. We 'think' we have the Title to our autos when we only have a Certificate of Title which isn't the actual title. The government owns all this and puts all our property (yes, even our birth certificates) up for collateral. This country has been (and still is) since 1932 in Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and all our 'income' taxes go to paying the interest on the national debt to the ultra rick foreign bankers aka the Federal Reserve. The IRS is simply the 'collection agent' for the Federal Reserve. Everything, even your and my future estimated productivity is 'mortgaged' (or put up for chattel) to the hilt!
The only difference now between the United States of America Incorporated and General Motors is that GM doesn't have an army and police force to keep the slaves in line.
The media's main job is to keep the liberals and the conservatives battling each other so they don't dare get together and realize they are both being duped.
Have you ever noticed that all talk show hosts - liberal or conservative - are like broken records? There are certain things they WILL NOT talk about. And I'm not talking about 911 conspiracies. I'm talking about 'normal' things like, for example, the corruptness of our family courts, the sham of the income tax sytem on private earnings, the sham of social security, the sham of US Citizenship, or why the 14th and 16th amendments were illegally ratified. They don't care or either the FCC would yank their license to broadcast!
We have no rights, and the president can rule almost dictatorially by misusing executive orders. Wake up people!
If you hear about Aaron Russo's new film 'America, Freedom to Fascism' by all means do whatever you have to do to get to see it. It will be releasing this fall in many theaters. The powers that be are scared to death over it and haven't figured out how to stop it yet.
I'm just as sick of Sean Hannity, Bill OReilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Laura Ingram as I am of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. They are all taking us on the same path (except I believe the liberals want us to get there faster). I really don't think they know the truth, and I think they are pretty good people, but they still believe in July 4th parades and apple pie. Those days are long gone.
Michael Savage comes the closest to telling it like it is, but even he will not touch some subjects, and you have to listen to internet radio to get the truth and even there you will find 'nut cases'.
So, yes, I believe Barrett is on to something simply by the way he is discredited by smirks and laughs and insults before he can even talk. They DON"T WANT TO LET HIM TALK! It is the CORPORATION at work.
Signed Dnepr
Found this blog and thought I throw out a post. First, most might think of me as an ultra-conservative, but actually, I consider myself a strict Constitutionalist, and a strong believer in our once Constitutional Republics as opposed to the often tossed about incorrect term 'democracy'.
I've listened to Kevin a few times on TV, with the latest being on Fox News with Judge Nepolotano and Edie. I've seen him with Sean Hannity also.
While I don't propose to know the exact truth of 911, I don't think for a second it all happened like we are being told. However, it is my opinion that people like Kevin and most of you on this list are missing the much bigger point to learn and 'mix in' with our search for the truth.
We actually do live in a 'Matrix' type government. Most people chose sides and call themselves either liberal or conservative, and never stop to really study what this country was originally set up to be and what it was supposed to be. What is was and was intended - we LOST long ago, almost from the beginning (within the first 50 years), and the coup de gras was the Civil War. Its been downhill since, and the slope is increasing!
Our 'government' is nothing more now than a totalitarian corporation. I wouldn't trust a Republican any more than I'd trust a democrat (except for maybe Ron Paul from Texas).
Our 'government' forces us all into 'hidden' contracts from birth and we are all slaves actually. It is not much different than the feudal system in medieval England. Personal freedom and sovereignty no longer have any meaning, and we are rapidly approaching Orwell's 1984.
We don't own our cars or homes or property although we think we do. And I mean after they are paid off. We 'think' we have the Title to our autos when we only have a Certificate of Title which isn't the actual title. The government owns all this and puts all our property (yes, even our birth certificates) up for collateral. This country has been (and still is) since 1932 in Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and all our 'income' taxes go to paying the interest on the national debt to the ultra rick foreign bankers aka the Federal Reserve. The IRS is simply the 'collection agent' for the Federal Reserve. Everything, even your and my future estimated productivity is 'mortgaged' (or put up for chattel) to the hilt!
The only difference now between the United States of America Incorporated and General Motors is that GM doesn't have an army and police force to keep the slaves in line.
The media's main job is to keep the liberals and the conservatives battling each other so they don't dare get together and realize they are both being duped.
Have you ever noticed that all talk show hosts - liberal or conservative - are like broken records? There are certain things they WILL NOT talk about. And I'm not talking about 911 conspiracies. I'm talking about 'normal' things like, for example, the corruptness of our family courts, the sham of the income tax sytem on private earnings, the sham of social security, the sham of US Citizenship, or why the 14th and 16th amendments were illegally ratified. They don't care or either the FCC would yank their license to broadcast!
We have no rights, and the president can rule almost dictatorially by misusing executive orders. Wake up people!
If you hear about Aaron Russo's new film 'America, Freedom to Fascism' by all means do whatever you have to do to get to see it. It will be releasing this fall in many theaters. The powers that be are scared to death over it and haven't figured out how to stop it yet.
I'm just as sick of Sean Hannity, Bill OReilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Laura Ingram as I am of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. They are all taking us on the same path (except I believe the liberals want us to get there faster). I really don't think they know the truth, and I think they are pretty good people, but they still believe in July 4th parades and apple pie. Those days are long gone.
Michael Savage comes the closest to telling it like it is, but even he will not touch some subjects, and you have to listen to internet radio to get the truth and even there you will find 'nut cases'.
So, yes, I believe Barrett is on to something simply by the way he is discredited by smirks and laughs and insults before he can even talk. They DON"T WANT TO LET HIM TALK! It is the CORPORATION at work.
Signed Dnepr
P
PhilosophyGenius
Guest
Hey Dnepr! Nice article. Keep posting.
C
casseia
Guest
I was thinking "right on, man" until I got to the part about Michael Savage. None of the political/historical stuff you mentioned in any way explains why he is such a hate-filled asshole.
D
dnepr
Guest
More tidbits...
Our illustrious government tells us all the time they are 'worried' and 'concerned' about the family unit, right? Many of them want to 'protect marriage' with a 'marriage amendment'. Bull---p!
They LOVE divorces and broken homes and families! Don't you know why?
MONEY FOR THEIR LITTLE EMPIRES.
FACT: In 2004 the state of Ohio collected over 2.1 BILLION dollars of child support payments (this number is on their website if you look for it). Now, like in most states (except for Indiana and maybe a couple of others), each person (man or woman) paying child support must pay an additional 2% on top of what their obligation is. This money goes to the state and is disbursed amoung the countys. What is 2% of 2.1 BILLION? It is over 40 MILLION dollars! And this is just the state of Ohio. Other states have similar numbers depending on population.
This amounts to a 2% tax on the backs of the poor souls who have the misfortune of their families breaking up (usually men)!
Did you know that now, 67% of all divorces are requested by women? Well, how many dads, if they knew they could leave their wives for a new girlfriend, take the kids, and have their ex-wife pay them for many years wouldn't do the same thing?
But Oh, our government (who passes these corrupt laws that encourage divorce) are worried about marriage being between a man and a woman! Hell, they are upset that if gays can get married, there won't be any children to charge child support for and therefore they won't get the 2%!
Next post - OUR CORRUPT and FAKE MONEY SYSTEM! Stay tuned
Our illustrious government tells us all the time they are 'worried' and 'concerned' about the family unit, right? Many of them want to 'protect marriage' with a 'marriage amendment'. Bull---p!
They LOVE divorces and broken homes and families! Don't you know why?
MONEY FOR THEIR LITTLE EMPIRES.
FACT: In 2004 the state of Ohio collected over 2.1 BILLION dollars of child support payments (this number is on their website if you look for it). Now, like in most states (except for Indiana and maybe a couple of others), each person (man or woman) paying child support must pay an additional 2% on top of what their obligation is. This money goes to the state and is disbursed amoung the countys. What is 2% of 2.1 BILLION? It is over 40 MILLION dollars! And this is just the state of Ohio. Other states have similar numbers depending on population.
This amounts to a 2% tax on the backs of the poor souls who have the misfortune of their families breaking up (usually men)!
Did you know that now, 67% of all divorces are requested by women? Well, how many dads, if they knew they could leave their wives for a new girlfriend, take the kids, and have their ex-wife pay them for many years wouldn't do the same thing?
But Oh, our government (who passes these corrupt laws that encourage divorce) are worried about marriage being between a man and a woman! Hell, they are upset that if gays can get married, there won't be any children to charge child support for and therefore they won't get the 2%!
Next post - OUR CORRUPT and FAKE MONEY SYSTEM! Stay tuned
D
dnepr
Guest
Photo on Fox News of AA gun on truck
Before I turn in, I must throw this out.
Did anyone see the photo at the beginning of the week that they were showing often on Fox News? It was an olive drab truck with an AA gun mounted on the flat bed rear.
It was touted as showing Hezbollah mixing with civilians because it showed some HZ fighters mixed in with what appeared to be 'normal' civilians who weren't carrying weapons. There was one guy in a blue shirt hanging on the open drivers side door of the truck.
I say this photo 4 or 5 times late Sunday night on Fox.
THEN, Monday morning I wake up and turn on the TV to get the news, and about 5 minutes later (this was on Fox and Friends) they SAME photo of the SAME truck gets shown for about a second or two again. EXCEPT, this time there is a BIG difference. There are only about 3 or 4 HZ fighters on the truck and absolutely NO civilians around it. The drivers side door is swung open, but no guy in blue shirt leaning on it!
I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it with my own eyes!
I wrote Fox to ask 'what gives here', but of course, no answer.
Which photo was fake or touched up? The one with, or the one without the civilians standing around????? And they want to poke fun at Kevin Barrett?? Give me a break! And WHO YA GONNA CALL? Huh?
Before I turn in, I must throw this out.
Did anyone see the photo at the beginning of the week that they were showing often on Fox News? It was an olive drab truck with an AA gun mounted on the flat bed rear.
It was touted as showing Hezbollah mixing with civilians because it showed some HZ fighters mixed in with what appeared to be 'normal' civilians who weren't carrying weapons. There was one guy in a blue shirt hanging on the open drivers side door of the truck.
I say this photo 4 or 5 times late Sunday night on Fox.
THEN, Monday morning I wake up and turn on the TV to get the news, and about 5 minutes later (this was on Fox and Friends) they SAME photo of the SAME truck gets shown for about a second or two again. EXCEPT, this time there is a BIG difference. There are only about 3 or 4 HZ fighters on the truck and absolutely NO civilians around it. The drivers side door is swung open, but no guy in blue shirt leaning on it!
I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it with my own eyes!
I wrote Fox to ask 'what gives here', but of course, no answer.
Which photo was fake or touched up? The one with, or the one without the civilians standing around????? And they want to poke fun at Kevin Barrett?? Give me a break! And WHO YA GONNA CALL? Huh?
D
dnepr
Guest
Do you have courage?
Go to www.freedomdomain.com and listen to some of the transcripts by Roger Elvick. Start waking yourselves up and ask yourself how much do you really KNOW other than how to spell 'dude' and 'asshole'? Such intelligence is mind-boggling!
Go to www.freedomdomain.com and listen to some of the transcripts by Roger Elvick. Start waking yourselves up and ask yourself how much do you really KNOW other than how to spell 'dude' and 'asshole'? Such intelligence is mind-boggling!
C
casseia
Guest
How much do you think states pay in terms of services for children who are not being supported by one of the two parents who are responsible for them? How much do you think they spend to enforce child support laws? Debt collection, via garnishment of wages, etc, costs money.
In Oregon, the state is not involved in collection of child support payments at ALL (and makes no money on it) unless one party does not comply with the agreement as spelled out in the divorce or another claim for support of a minor child.
Gay people, especially lesbians, but gay men as well, have kids all the time -- through insemination, adoption, or (as Susie Bright once put it) "just partying."
I think this whole train of thought is a dead end. Focus on the Federal Reserve, why doncha.
And BTW, if a man asks for a divorce, he may in fact qualify for spousal support, if his wife earns more and he needs it, to go back to school or whatever.
I just think you're barking up the wrong tree here, buddy.
In Oregon, the state is not involved in collection of child support payments at ALL (and makes no money on it) unless one party does not comply with the agreement as spelled out in the divorce or another claim for support of a minor child.
Gay people, especially lesbians, but gay men as well, have kids all the time -- through insemination, adoption, or (as Susie Bright once put it) "just partying."
I think this whole train of thought is a dead end. Focus on the Federal Reserve, why doncha.
And BTW, if a man asks for a divorce, he may in fact qualify for spousal support, if his wife earns more and he needs it, to go back to school or whatever.
I just think you're barking up the wrong tree here, buddy.
D
dnepr
Guest
Matching funds
And how much money do you think states get in matching dollars from the Federal government. And I'd love to see a gay man be arificially inseminated, and I'd venture to say that the percentage is lesbian couples who have children as you've described is a drop in the bucket.
And how in the world did children survive before big government was there to take care of them? I'm surprised this countries population even grew at all according to what I read between your lines!
It all comes down to this (whether one is talking about family court laws or Federal Reserve or whatever) how much freedom are YOU willing to give up so you can get a 'benefit' from the all powerful central federal corporation? Is there a limit beyond which you won't go? (by you I'm speaking to everyone)
And no, I'm not barking up the wrong tree, but there are other more important issues to discuss, granted.
But to fuel the fire, can you tell me why there should even be anything such as 'spousal support' in this modern liberated day in time? I can understand its need in Victorian times.
Then, if a man played around on his wife and left her he had to pay her because women didn't work and this was fair. BUT, if the man (or woman as the case may be) could prove adultery, then all bets were off as far as spousal support.
Today, we have carried forward half of the tradition and left he 'inconvenient' other half in the past.
Two people were taking care of themselves before they met and married, and should continue to do so, each according to his or her own ability, following divorce.
The state (which wants the 2%) has just twisted the system so they can make money, that's all.
And how much money do you think states get in matching dollars from the Federal government. And I'd love to see a gay man be arificially inseminated, and I'd venture to say that the percentage is lesbian couples who have children as you've described is a drop in the bucket.
And how in the world did children survive before big government was there to take care of them? I'm surprised this countries population even grew at all according to what I read between your lines!
It all comes down to this (whether one is talking about family court laws or Federal Reserve or whatever) how much freedom are YOU willing to give up so you can get a 'benefit' from the all powerful central federal corporation? Is there a limit beyond which you won't go? (by you I'm speaking to everyone)
And no, I'm not barking up the wrong tree, but there are other more important issues to discuss, granted.
But to fuel the fire, can you tell me why there should even be anything such as 'spousal support' in this modern liberated day in time? I can understand its need in Victorian times.
Then, if a man played around on his wife and left her he had to pay her because women didn't work and this was fair. BUT, if the man (or woman as the case may be) could prove adultery, then all bets were off as far as spousal support.
Today, we have carried forward half of the tradition and left he 'inconvenient' other half in the past.
Two people were taking care of themselves before they met and married, and should continue to do so, each according to his or her own ability, following divorce.
The state (which wants the 2%) has just twisted the system so they can make money, that's all.
D
dnepr
Guest
Getting a state bill passed
I'll bet most of you think you elect state legislators to pass legislation don't you?
Well, that isn't exactly true.
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that if you really investigated the way your legislature works (no matter what state you are in), you would discover that NO BILL (Megan's law was one exception) gets out of committee and to the floor for a vote without the blessings from your state's Bar association and your state's Judicial Conference (or some similar name).
So who is really the gatekeepers of what legislation even gets up for a vote?
I'll bet most of you think you elect state legislators to pass legislation don't you?
Well, that isn't exactly true.
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that if you really investigated the way your legislature works (no matter what state you are in), you would discover that NO BILL (Megan's law was one exception) gets out of committee and to the floor for a vote without the blessings from your state's Bar association and your state's Judicial Conference (or some similar name).
So who is really the gatekeepers of what legislation even gets up for a vote?