Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Ferguson: When Is Everyone Going To Wake Up To The Government and Police Protest Tactic Of AGENT PROVOCATEUR and LOOTING?

Our Top Story: Government and Police Agent Provocateurs are at it again...WHOOPS! I mean...LOOTING AND MOLOTOV COCKTAILS BY PROTESTERS IN FERGUSON



The first thing you will hear in the "news" about every major protest is: "LOOTING" (and to some extent "MOLOTOV COCKTAILS"). 

Here's why:

First, you need to realize that for every major protest since the 1960's, the government has employed the AGENT PROVOCATEUR/LOOTING strategy. That is a strategy where the government sends in people who work for them to mingle with the protesters and "LOOT" so the media can then discredit the protest by focusing on stories of LOOTING instead of what the protest is about.

*** WHAT WE NEED TO DO, IS FIGURE OUT A WAY TO STOP THE AGENT PROVOCATEURS THE GOVERNMENT SENDS IN, HOW DO WE DO THIS??? ***

When are we all going to wake up and realize the government does this AGENT PROVOCATEUR/LOOTING routine for every major protest?

I'm sure there were "agent provocateurs" connected with the government inciting and actually doing a lot of the "looting". This has been going on since the 1960's. It's sad more people are not aware of this. Then the "news" is part of this agent provocateuring by publicizing the "looting" of the agent provocateurs and saying they were the protesters. Governments ADMIT doing this, it's been going on for a LOOOOONG time.

There will never be a HUGE "peaceful protest" because the government will MAKE SURE they send in agent provocateurs to "loot" and the media will publicize this as the protesters doing the looting, thereby discrediting the protest and making the focus the LOOTING instead of what the protest is about.

And the thing is, it's guaranteed to work every time.

And often times they wear masks and no one knows them.

And they're often times off to the side "doing their thing" away from the main action.

And the police are aware of the agent provocateurs. In fact, the police WAIT for the agent provocateurs to "do their thing" so they have a REASON to brutalize the protesters.

The M.O. of agent provocateurs is: LOOTING. Part I is the agent provocateurs looting, Part II is the media saying there's looting 24x7 to discredit the protest.

What is the first thing you hear on the "news" for every huge important protest: not what the protest is about, you hear LOOOOOOOOOOOOTING all over the "news". That's all you hear. It's a PLAN. It happens EVERY HUGE IMPORTANT PROTEST.

Your and my entire life, haven't we heard "LOOTING" and "MOLOTOV COCKTAILS" for every single major protest? What are the odds that every single major protest has massive LOOTING in it and none of them are every peaceful?

One of the counter-strategies to combat this that I can think of is for the REAL protesters to surround the agent provocateur, subdue them, and start chanting, "AGENT PROVOCATEUR, AGENT PROVOCATEUR, AGENT PROVOCATEUR", and hold down the agent provocateur and start questioning them, find out who they are, take pictures and video of them.

Here is a government/police agent provocateur being caught in Ferguson:



For the August Ferguson protest, I wrote this:

BIG DAN'S BIG BLOG August 17, 2014: You Can Be Assured That Agent Provocateurs Are "LOOTING" And Throwing "MOLOTOV COCKTAILS" In Ferguson


Here is the best example of protesters catching and outing agent provocateurs:





AGENT PROVOCATEURS from August Ferguson protest:





Another AGENT PROVOCATEUR from the previous Ferguson protest:





Police Tactics Exposed - Provocateur Inciting Agents At Protests - Ferguson - Oakland - Canada





Tariq Nasheed Ferguson/ST. Louis Lecture and Suspected Agent Provocateur Tries To Disrupt The Show





California Highway Patrol Officers Retreat to Vehicles as Ferguson Protesters Ascend



Live Stream VIDEO: Protesters Shut Down Three New York City Bridges In Reaction To #Ferguson

Flares and protest moving outside U.S. Embassy in #London #Ferguson

London to Ferguson: Crowd protesting police racism tears down Parliament Square barriers









Cleveland Highway Shut Down By Mike Brown Protesters, Police Afraid to Make Arrests

Video: Cops Didn’t Seem to Hesitate for One Second Before Gunning Down 12-Yr-Old Boy - See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/video-cops-didnt-hesitate-for-one-second-before-gunning-down-12-yr-old-boy_112014#sthash.8m9Ip1q8.dpuf











QUESTION: Why is FOX/Limbaugh/Hannity/rightwing media/militias AGAINST the police in the Cliven Bundy case, but FOR the police in the Michael Brown case?






Sunday, November 23, 2014

Mainstream Media Annually Pretends They Believe The "Official Story" Of The JFK Assassination

JFK assassinated November 22, 1963


This time each year we have to put up with the mainstream media pretending they believe the "official story" of the JFK assassination. They lied back then, and they continue to lie now. Anyone who researches the JFK assassination can come to only one conclusion: Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot JFK.

Big Dan's Big Blog November 23, 2013 - U.S. Government And Their Mainstream Media Celebrate A Half Century Of LYING About The JFK Assassination


This lying by the media and anyone in any sort of an "official" capacity, like everyone in congress and every president since JFK and every mainstream "news" person, is an insult to the intelligence of the American people. This continuing lying is reason enough not to trust anyone in any "official" mainstream capacity in government and in media. Even on the local level, media "characters" pretend they believe the "official story" of the JFK assassination because they know they would lose their job. That is how they keep the lie going: you'd lose your job if you said you didn't believe the "official story" of the JFK assassination. All these media "characters" are COWARDS. No one is that stupid to believe the "official story" of the JFK assassination, so therefore these media "characters" are COWARDS who are afraid to get fired. COWARDS are the best people to be employed in the media to keep the "official story" myth alive.


Lee Harvey Oswald tells the truth: I'M JUST A PATSY





The Deathbed Confession of CIA Agent, E. Howard Hunt to his son on the JFK Assassination. Hunt was one of the people who brought down the Nixon Administration during the Watergate scandal. Made famous for being one of the "Plumbers" in the Watergate Hotel Break-In which eventually forced Nixon to resign.





George H. W. Bush involved in the JFK assassination:




George H. W. Bush laughs speaking about JFK assassination:





Lee Harvey Oswald was shot on live television by Jack "Ruby" Rubenstein:





Kennedy Assassination: Proof LBJ Knew





The President Who Told The Truth.. Remastered





THE 1961 SPEECH THAT GOT JFK KILLED



Meet Lee Harvey Oswald, Sheep-Dipped Patsy





JFK Secret Societies Speech (full version)





Order my friend's book on Amazon:

Reclaiming Science: the JFK Conspiracy: A mathematical analysis of unnatural deaths, witness testimony, altered evidence and media disinformation





Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Police Deny Eric Frein's Attorney Access To Him

(Apparently, when you NEED your rights, you don't get them. If you DON'T need them, you THINK you have them. Rights appear to be a popularity contest, not rights. If you're not popular, you don't get your rights. If you're not breaking any laws and don't need your rights, they tell you that you have them.)

A few weeks back I made a post entitled:

I Don't Believe The Eric Frein "Diary" Story



Since I wrote the above post, "officials" have caught Eric Frein. In addition to all the lies, anomalies, and ridiculous non-believable stories "officials" told us throughout the Eric Frein "manhunt" (officials love the word MANHUNT), WHEN they actually caught him they, of course, told another LIE. Frein's face in photos of when police caught him showed that he was obviously beaten in the face. "Officials" first said they found him like that, then they admitted it was a LIE.

Here is the press conference where police said they found Eric Frein "like that" with the facial cuts, bruises, and black and blue marks already on him:




...and here is CNN later coming out with:

CNN: Frein was forced to be face-first on the asphalt looking away from the marshals (so that a suspect can't anticipate an officer's next move). In the process, his nose got cut and his face scraped.

Notice this, though: there is not ONE story I can find pointing out that at first police said Frein was found that way, and then second they said that they caused the cuts, bruises, black and blue marks on his face. Another way of putting it, the compliant media DIDN'T POINT OUT THE LIE. "Officials" and the media think you're too STUPID to notice this.


NOW...if I was on the right path with my post that "officials" LIE and are LYING, then you would expect this latest story to come as NO SURPRISE. It was buried as a small story in both my local papers, neither one having it on the front page:

Frein lawyer denied access?

If there was something funny going on, if "officials" were LYING about their "official story", then there would be 100% chance that they would prevent Eric Frein's attorney from having access to him.

I would like to cut/paste the entire article below, and highlight the key points in in BLACK HIGHLIGHT and any of my commentary will be in RED:

A LAWYER hired by Eric Frein's family to represent the ambush suspect the night of his capture said yesterday that police prevented him from seeing Frein and refused to tell his client a lawyer was available.

James Swetz, a veteran criminal defense lawyer from Stroudsburg, Pa., said he called ahead, then showed up at the Pennsylvania State Police barracks in Blooming Grove about 9:30 p.m. Oct. 30, about 3 1/2 hours after Frein's arrest.

"I was told, 'He's an adult and has not asked for a lawyer,' " Swetz recounted. (BD: I'd like to paraphrase this: "TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT, NOT YOUR CLIENT: HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE YOU ~ THE POLICE". Right there, that is illegal, because police for ANYBODY can say to their attorney, "HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE YOU, JUST BELIEVE US AND DON'T ASK HIM YOURSELF". Is this any way a country based on law acts? Is this any way for an "official" of the government to talk: "HE'S AN ADULT"? Is this official his Dad? Or his schoolteacher? "HE'S AN ADULT"? That's something your father or mother might say to you, but this is serious business - it's an official thwarting a U.S. citizens' rights! It doesn't matter if this "official" didn't explicitly "HEAR" Eric Frein SAY he wanted an attorney. This opens up so many cans of worms, such as this "official" has plausible deniability by saying he didn't "HEAR" Eric Frein ask for an attorney. Eric Frein COULD'VE asked for an attorney, but this "official" can simply say he didn't "HEAR" him? So then he doesn't get one? This "official" ought to be thrown in jail for, among several things, BEING A WISEGUY!)

Authorities have not revealed what Frein, who is charged with killing one state trooper and seriously injuring another, told them in an interview at the barracks. (BD: so he was grilled without his attorney? Can this case be thrown out then?) His public defenders could try to get statements Frein made to police ruled inadmissible at trial, although U.S. and Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions could make that difficult.

Under legal precedent, "the police have no affirmative duty under the Fifth Amendment to notify a person being interviewed that an attorney is seeking to speak with them," Pike County District Attorney Ray Tonkin, who is seeking the death penalty against Frein, said via email yesterday. (BD: I spoke with several of my fellow Pa. residents, and no one heard of this law. So if this law exists, it's an OBSCURE law that no one ever heard of. YET...DA Ray Tonkin had this obscure law quotable right on the tip of his tongue, which proves he knew he was going to deny Frein's attorney access to Frein, and he researched ANY POSSIBLE LAW he could quote, even an obscure one no one ever heard of, to be able to give plausible deniability for infringing on Eric Frein's rights. Notice, also, the words "under legal precedent". Exactly what does that mean? Here's a refresher on the 5th amendment which they refer to: The Fifth Amendment, or Amendment V of the United States Constitution is the section of the Bill of Rights that protects you from being held for committing a crime unless you have been indicted correctly by the police. The Fifth Amendment is also where the guarantee of due process comes from, meaning that the state and the country have to respect your legal rights.)
Swetz, whose involvement in the case was limited to making sure Frein was represented early after his arrest, said in an email that the state "created an unnecessary issue" by having barred access to the suspect.

Frein is charged with opening fire outside the Blooming Grove barracks on Sept. 12, killing Cpl. Bryon Dickson and seriously wounding Trooper Alex Douglass. He led police on a tense 48-day manhunt through the northeastern Pennsylvania woods before U.S. marshals captured him outside an abandoned airplane hangar about 30 miles away from the shooting scene. (BD: and when they caught him, they LIED about beating him...see above).

Swetz said he tried to see Frein at the barracks later that evening.

"I called and invoked his right to counsel and was told I would not be given access to Eric, and Eric would not be told counsel was retained and available to him," Swetz said. (BD: so if we all have the same rights in this country, this case should be thrown out if the courts aren't rigged.)

Swetz spent about two hours at the barracks, then left.

He wound up meeting with Frein at the Pike County prison the following day, long after Frein had spoken with police. Frein then signed paperwork indicating he did not want to be questioned without his lawyers, Swetz said.

Frein is being held without bail. He has not yet entered a plea.
Notice the cop didn't say that Frein said anything out loud to do with a lawyer. Frein didn't say he did or didn't want to see the attorney. In fact, Frein couldn't have even known the attorney was there, so how could he say he would like to see him? So, the cop's point is that he didn't let Frein see his attorney because Frein didn't explicitly vocally state to the cop that he wanted to see him. Did you get that? Frein may have wanted to see his attorney, but was denied because a cop didn't hear him vocally state it. So, one of our Constitutional rights is based on a cop hearing you ask for the right. The cop didn't hear Frein explicitly say he didn't want to see the lawyer, either. So, since the cop didn't hear Frein say he did or didn't want to see the lawyer, the cop gets to interpret Frein's rights and assume what Frein wanted...in this case the cop assumed he didn't want to see his lawyer...ummm...because that's what the cop thought.

So our new "right" is this: if you don't know your attorney is there, and can't possibly ask for him because you don't know he's there, the cop is allowed to deny you access to your attorney who is there because the cop didn't hear you say out loud that you wanted to see your attorney that you don't know is there!

Let me make this important point: you need your Constitutional rights when you are the MOST in trouble. You don't need them when everything's going fine. In fact, you ONLY need them when you need them! It seems in this country, we "THINK" we have Constitutional rights only when we're NOT breaking any laws or charged with any violations by "officials". Yep! Those are the people saying "founding fathers" and "Constitution" all the time...THE ONES THAT DON'T NEED IT. They are also the ones who are very vocal about saying Eric Frein (and people like him) should NOT get their rights. But THOSE ARE EXACTLY THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO NEED THEM!!! So what good are your rights if, ONLY WHEN YOU NEED THEM, YOU DON'T GET THEM??? We may as well flush our rights RIGHT DOWN THE SHITTER, because that's what they're good for: NOTHING. Our "rights" are only to be talked about by people who don't need them, saying how great our rights are...BUT NOT THEIRS. I find that online on social media, those who say "patriot", "liberty", "founding fathers" the MOST, are also by far the ones who say the MOST that Eric Frein is a "cop killer who doesn't deserve his rights". That is why I don't have the time of day for these FAKE PATRIOTS who pay LIP SERVICE to our rights. RIGHTS are not a POPULARITY CONTEST.



11-3-2014.. ‘Silence Is Compliance LIVE’ Broke another huge international scandal concerning the Pennsylvania State Police, the U.S. Marshals and the story of how Eric Frein was taken into custody. While the main stream were still supplying cover and most people hammering us as “conspiracy nuts” that just hate cops. It turns out that we forced them to mold their “official story” once again. The facts were displayed from all sides, the story was picked apart and dismantled piece by piece. Now, whether it’s damage control, molding the story or just populist reporting, news outlets are reporting on this story and saying how they are the first to report it. So they either saw my show last night and decided it was time to catch up, or they realized they couldn’t avoid the story. Just remember, when I broke this story we couldn’t even talk about this without getting called derogatory names, now it’s okay to ask questions. Once again “Silence Is Compliance” is so far ahead of the curve other outlets can barely see us.

‘Silence Is Compliance LIVE” Eric Frein Case LIES !!

Eric Frein Case Bumbles Reaches Hat Trick




UPDATE: And here we go with the "lone nut gunman" & "manifesto" blueprint:

Frein hit with terror charges

I guess you can call this his "manifesto":

The text of a letter state authorities say Eric Frein wrote to his mother and father:

“Our nation is far from what it was and what it should be. I have seen so many depressing changes made in my time that I cannot imagine what it must be like for you. There is so much wrong and on so many levels only passing through the crucible of another revolution can get us back the liberties we once had. I do not pretend to know what that revolution will look like or even if it would be successful.

“Tension is high at the moment and the time seems right for a spark to ignite a fire in the hearts of men. What I have done has not been done before and it felt like it was worth a try.

“If I am dead I would like to be buried in a wood casket (no lead lined casket!) so that my remains can return to where they came from. I realize that this may not be possible though, laws and what not, so don’t sweat it. Also, light a candle for me at the Russian or Greek Orthodox church in Stroudsburg from time to time. It doesn’t need to be during a liturgy, just whenever they are open. I am sure you can figure it out.

“I do not have a death wish but I know the odds. I tried my best to do this thing without getting identified, but if you are reading this then I was not successful. If I am still alive and free know that I will do my best to remain as such. And as time goes by, if circumstances change, if my spark hit good tinder, then I may be able to return one day.

“I am sorry. You guys are great parents, I am just not a good son. I squandered so much opportunity and support and rarely tried my best at anything. God knows I do not deserve the things I had, maybe He knew I would be sacrificing all of it in the end, or maybe this is just the final squander. Who knows.

“I love you. Please forgive me of my many faults. And thanks for putting up with me for so long.”


I have to say, TO ME, this is getting even MORE suspicious because it's fitting to neatly into a government "LONE NUT GUNMAN/MANIFESTO" formula.

Lots Of High-Profile And "LONE NUT GUNMAN" Shootings Conveniently Coincide With Government/Media Pushing "GUN CONTROL"

Since he couldn't afford a vehicle, Tully, 39, was forced to walk through the Frein manhunt zone twice a day on his way to and from his second-shift job at a Mountainhome manufacturing firm. He has said he suffered bruised ribs after an unidentified officer threw him to the ground one night, thinking he was Frein.

Killed by Police had listed more than 1,450 deaths caused by law-enforcement officers since its launch, on May 1, 2013, through Sunday. That works out to about three per day, or 1,100 a year.