Friday, September 5, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
PLEASE SUPPORT REVERE RADIO:
SUBSCRIBE to the RSS feed
DONATE to Scholars for 9/11 Truth:
---------
(Right-click on guest name to download mp3)
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F:
---
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2014
(158)
-
▼
September
(13)
- Gordon Duff, Jim Fetzer, Preston James
- Wolfgang Halbig, Joyce Reilly / Preston James
- Douglas Horne / New JFK Show #28
- Nick Kollerstrom / Wolfgang Halbig
- Paul Taylor
- Kathryn Forrester Thro / Larry Rivera
- Jim Fetzer
- Jim Fetzer / Dennis Cimino
- Meria Heller / Gary King
- Clare Kuehn
- Frater X
- Rick Adams / Gary King
- Ibrahim Soudy
-
▼
September
(13)
I think I am the only person in America who believes OJ innocent due to the total lack of evidence in the case as well as the probability the evidence was planted. Must read Christopher Springer's book also Donald Freed"s "Killing Time."
ReplyDeletehttp://scribblguy.50megs.com/furman.htm
Framed: America's Patsy Tradition
“Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery”
By Christopher Springer
O.J. did not kill Nicole and Ron!
When properly scrutinized, not a single piece of evidence implicates O.J.
Police investigators lied and covered up! Evidence was mishandled and contaminated! Evidence disappeared! Evidence was fabricated!
No eyewitnesses – fingerprints – murder weapon – bloody clothes – or bloody shoes! No motive! And not enough time!
The “M.O.” didn’t fit! The gloves didn’t fit! And how could O.J. have killed two strong, healthy people simultaneously, with a knife, without any of them screaming for help?
Against such astounding facts and contradictions, how can anyone claim that O.J. killed Nicole and Ron?
The LAPD did not solve this murder case. This book does!
A central part of the murderers’ plot was not just to frame O.J., but to “set up” the investigators to complete the framing – with evidence the murderers did not have access to. That nailed O.J. But it also nailed the investigators – so they could never, later, pursue the real killers.
By the time Detective Vannatter realized he was “set up” – it was too late! He had to continue pursuing O.J. – not to solve a murder case, at this point, but – to cover himself! The LAPD’s “code of silence” which protected Vannatter and his colleagues – also protected the murderers!
This theory is supported by overwhelming, new (and suppressed) evidence – much of it uncovered after the two trials.
“Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery” – does what the title suggests. Logically and convincingly this book demonstrates how all the evidence – also the blood and the Bruno Magli shoes – point to the same person – and he is not O.J.! [End of quote]
Joannie: ur expo is miserable, consisting of mere assertions without substantiation (question-begging fallacy). U can't even make a case, though u insist there's clear explanation, which u fail to give urself.
DeleteFurther, what's significance of OJ Simpson anyway? Typical Jew-trolling dis-info and distraction on ur part, I'd say.
Look to the East, and behold the "son." Could a monster be a noble father? It would keep in the theme of this show that you may not know what you know...
ReplyDeleteBut regarding the show, I salute Dr. Fetzer for appearing on diverse shows, conducting discourse with those that love wisdom. Such dialectics become a kind of rare beautiful music in this minefield of epistemological warfare. Your gifts show your magnanimous heart, which you dole out freely to discerning minds that will appeal to higher truth, and I only wish I could return my gratitude in more than these earnest words. Many blessings to this bastion of liberal thought and it's many guests, contributors, and followers.
ReplyDeleteI think I wrote my correction before you replied but who knows? I thought the topic started off nice and began a message of thanks before the terrible "paranoid plant" was introduced. So you didn't disagree with me; I jumped the gun before having heard while show. I notice on Frater's site he has broken up the show into two sections. And O think fetzer was tough and fair. Fetzer was not privvy to the Red Ice issue, so was only placating their caricature of a very somber topic. Note Frater opens up with a sympathetic chord by telling of finding no "white" organizations on campus, but ends by caving to the peer pressure applied by the two disengenuous Jewish guys who were just "appalled" that such a notion as revisionist history should vector topic for an alternative revisionist show. And I give my highest honors to Red Ice right now for correctly pivoting into warrior mode defending my homeland Sweden, where all truthers are awash in merely discussing their abuse in a sado-massochistic style, leaving nothing ever changed and our moods and prospects forever darkened. And the moment someone gets too close to the Verboten, guys like this destroy otherwise great discussions that could illuminate the issues without the psy- ops and hysterics of the planted shills. Shame on Frater. Seriously, people should write him or comment to the show to let him know how unprofessional he was.
DeleteYes, solfeggio, I agree--but I say it's better to not even bother w. the pea-brains. Fetzer was hot to talk to somebody, evidently, and he did great job w. "Andras," pt-ing out idiot lies and hypocrisy, etc.
DeleteAlas I spoke to soon. The sweet hermetic music was interrupted by a vile man, ushered in by his own crude announcements of his own inability to speak to any of the issues. Shame on Frater for having a sublime conversation -- already diluted -- interrupted by man not up to par, and who took the conversation off rails. Great job Jim on playing nice. Red Ice is no apologist for Nazis. Why did no one ask about this sensitive man's assumptions. Do we see Nazis everywhere or do we see them vilified? And when one show has a contrary opinion, this man claims the world wants to drown him in the ocean. He repeatedly claims ignorance of all geopolitics, but has enough vinegar to disturb a thoughtful discussion. If this man merely questioned his own dogma -- he might find that lo and behold! people don't see Nazis everywhere, and antisemitism when it truly finds a home, does so as consequence, not causality. Would this man look to why people suspect Jews or Zionists, he might understand. But his glasses are awash with dogma-- the enemy of truth. People should email Frater X for allowing this issue and for discussing Red Ice in this light. this man is a plant, and I cannot believe they all tolerate such slander. So much for open inquiry. Did you guys forget the theme? Only Jim was worth listening to, especially in his prudent silence. If Dr. Fetzer was privy to the Red Ice issue, he would redress it, but why did they go off topic like that?
ReplyDelete
DeleteFetzer deserves some serious criticism: (a) he's too well trained for political-correctness which has been thoroughly drilled into him, unfortunately--otherwise he couldn't have survived such a career in public edjumacation as he did.
(b) Fetzer also has many books he wants to keep on the market, not to mention keeping marketability for being invited to "conferences" and "symposiums," even appearing on TV, occasionally. So he's careful to keeping his own criticism confined to "Zionists."
Unfortunately, our good Prof. Fetzer is too wary of criticizing Jews qua Jews who are the REAL oppressors--and who are thus held ABOVE criticism, the sure-fire mark of the real dictators, as Voltaire pt'd out (though I find, upon searching, it is alleged Voltaire never really said this--original speaker is un-known).
Fetzer deserves credit for speaking out on holohoax, AIPAC, USS Liberty, Israeli mass-murder of Palestinians at Gaza, however.
And, my dear good prof., IF u think I'm in any way exaggerating about Jews being the un-disputed rulers/oppressors, just ck this outrage: http://libertyfight.com/2013/911_widow_lawyer_sanctioned_for_raw_ugly_anti_semitism.html, whence 911 lawyer AND client were "sanctioned" by Jew judges for pt-ing out OBVIOUS conflicted interests.
DeleteI honestly couldn't get through that tedious monologue at the beginning by that moron saying how much of a genius he must have been to be head of the philosophy club as a freshman! Seriously, WTF? Does the audience care?
ReplyDeleteHo ho ho--we're super Fetzer fans here--willing to wade through muck and put-up w. much. Prof. Fetzer is retired, much older than those poor morons, but was still tremendous for showing-up that Jew, for example, ho ho ho ho
DeleteI noted that too- that he was adopting the very model of Red Ice, a show he has appeared on several times. I think it thus ugly that he returns the favor of exposure by adding to a false chorus chiming that Red Ice has gone rogue for having a few shows on a very important theme. For those that don't track the subtlies involved, Henrik has made it clear that imminent legislation will curb all such content in the sane mannir that Canadians or Germans cannot discuss contrarian views on a simple talk show. It is to this clamp down on the very ideals of liberal thought that has Red Ice addressing such issues while they still can. And Henrik is always polite and prefaces his shows with appeals to make one's own mind up after doing their own research and contemplation-- I'll say it again, to do one's research and to dig into the knowledge for themselves, if only to have reasonable discussion about such topics so that we can know all sides of a subject. Do you think these clowns watched that documentary or were they more likely dispatched to attack a prominent and beloved alternative radio Internet site to quench the satiation of such esoteric subjects. But the indignity to go full board in the opposite direction and then claim Red Ice are a bunch if Nazis! That is a page right out of Abe Foxman's Playbook. And it hinders free thought, the theme if the very show they were waxing philosophic on. So when Germans were made bad guys in Die Hard, did we all claim Hilkywoid is a bunch of ethnocentric German- haters? How many movies depict the Jews or the Mossad as bad guys. Quick, think if at least one or two popular fare. Stuck? Now think of how many times Arabs have been depicted as terrorists or villains in movies, even in movies like Back to the Future, if you recall the Libyan terrorists Mart evades in the beginning? So despite this reality bias that suggests Voltaire is indeed correct that you can discover who rules over you by who you are not allowed to criticize. And one show, or a few thematic threads has this one guest on the show -- who's website is under construction did you notice -- all up in arms that Jews are threatened. Indeed, if they believe even discussing Israeli crimes is intolerable when on the same breath he claims no knowledge of Israili politics or geopolitical affairs in general,
DeleteThen we are all-- as a human race -- fuc**ed. This thought control must stop regardless if the truth. If we are not allowed to discuss issues, it only elicits deep suspicion. Jim Fetzer has never appeared on Red Ice to my knowledge, so it seems strange that these two people would pivot to discussing Red ice without a dissenting voice to comment. I seriously urge thoughtful followers if this issue of free speech to direct such comments to Frater X, as I assume the guilty guest will not be found easily, unless he is someone of notoriety and I missed it. It seems he came on mid-show, without a polite clue to what was being discussed, and then merely says he was in ited to bring thunder that Red ice is a Nazi site. While I know the readers here are more educated to these issues, Frater X may not realize that what he did was at best, impolite, and at worst, a kind of thuggery. If anything, I splayed the way Fetzer politely backed out while saving face for all involved. Better than they deserve, but that behavior makes it easier for people to overcome their conditioning. Everyone is a representative, an ambassador if you will, of his viewpoints. We need to show that thoughtful people have qualms with the official narrative, be it Sandy. Hook.. Or yes... national socialism. Hell, Hitker was Time magazine's man of the year, and even JFK gave the man a subtle nod-- but see, that was before they looped off his head and got a real toe-hold on the country. Eisenhower and JFK had firm policies that were in the Anerican interest. Nixon was taken down by the sane forces and Black Op Radio just called Nixon a total anti-Semite. (Side note: the problems with Black Op and that clique in JFK research is precisely this and not "doorway man", though they can never admit it. even Garrison thought so and hence why he is much reviled still. And this was all before the Dimona issues were declassified. Why do you think the media coveted it up except for a few Philadelphians who knew the score. If JFK could speak now, what he or his father say?). Anyway, I believe this taboo must be destroyed and it can only happen by the winds shifting and real numbers pushing the other way instead if giving into intimidation. Lo, we are in that threshold now, particularly around the 9/11 date, and if you see this Zionist apparatus as being "made", their cover "burned", you can now explain the police state, the purchase if Buckley's, the surveillance issues, and on and on. Finally, to topple the logical fallacy that a little country cannot push a around a big country; I iffer that it is not a little country, but a transnational oligarchical collective that practically founded our country under the Masonic rubric-- only what was once a more rational enterprise has mutated into a corrupt strain if ideology, capturing both the above-board government and the sub-rosa world of organized crime. They have legions of witting subscribers who appeal out of avarice, but legions more if ordinary Anericsns who woefully injure themselves out if misplaced loyalties to their religion, ideology and conditioned epistemology. The only enemy of this juggernaut is the philosopher, the true lover if wisdom who understands that all of us are in the sane boat, and any system thT benefits some at the cost if another will doom us all, and make life miserable along the way to that Armageddon.
DeleteSolfeggio: for goodness sakes, break up ur text into more digestible paragraphs to make for easier reading.
DeleteI agree the anecdote about the philosophy club was asinine. Apparently, this at least somewhat daft Frater is some kind of "career contrarian". At least that is how he views himself... I don't see where the anecdote made much sense, it seems he was some kind of conciliator in the philosophy club. Evidently, this was some sort of apotheosis or climax though in this man's life!
DeleteI comment your patience in being able to get through that monotonous guy at the beginning talking about his amazing achievement of being the head of the philosophy club!
ReplyDelete*Commend
ReplyDeleteYou know what sounds nice right now ? A nice VT article defending Red Ice and it's attacks, if not just this specific case, the millions like it for which it serves but a microcosm. And we have the hypocrisy of this show and it's supposed theme of free thought as a perfect example of the hypocrisy. The article would use the smaller affair to illumine the larger issue since many may not know these players, but they surely know the stage. It can be a big hug to those who feel intimidated to discuss true independent thought. Just a notion.
ReplyDeleteNot only did the jew got owned in that show, but he also exposed, unwillingly, the way jews think. That was interesting.
ReplyDeleteJim should have hit those people over the head with some facts. That show was a waste of time.
ReplyDeleteRed Ice Radio supports doing your own research and thinking for yourself. Frater X, Mater X, and Asmad only support their own unexamined beliefs
Jim was much to kind here. This was a horrible 2 hours, only getting worse when the jew came in to wine and accuse.
ReplyDeleteohh and when that jew through out the word antisemit that was the frosting on his turd cake. When you said he was naive that was just being to kind. And did you notice the other young brats all trying to smooth it over? You had great restrant Jim, If you would have continued like I knew you wanted to, he would have left taking half the room with him....in tears of course.
ReplyDeleteOne of my favorite online listening moments was when Jim Fetzer, said in response to a totally inappropriate, repeated display of egregious inanity, "If you don't stop, I'm going to have to get insulting". A welcome, beautiful silence ensued.
ReplyDelete