The Tonka Report

Real News In A Changing World

Archive for February 16th, 2010

False Flag Alert: Is Obama Being Blackmailed Into Attacking Iran?

leave a comment »

February 16, 2010: Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones / Prison – February 16, 2010

Establishment media talking points from every direction strongly indicate that a false flag attempt on President Obama’s life is being considered, to be blamed on patsies from either the “extreme” right or left, in order to silence dissent in America and blackmail Obama into launching a military assault on Iran.

Throughout the presidential campaign, the public was constantly told that Obama was an assassination target and that his safety was always in jeopardy, a claim that was given credibility after numerous odd secret service security lapses at public events where Obama really was put in danger occurred, whether intentionally or otherwise. This had the effect of training people to accept the inevitability of someone making an attempt on the President’s life at some point down the line.

“Since Mr Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent from the 3,000 a year or so under President George W. Bush, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President’s Secret Service,” reported the London Telegraph.

The “gatecrashers” story also served to increase awareness about Obama being vulnerable to attack by people who can seamlessly slip through security and get face to face with the President relatively easily.

Meanwhile, the corporate media and its operatives like Glenn Beck on the phony right-wing side and establishment liberals on the phony left were busy manufacturing ready-made patsies upon which the false flag would be blamed.

Beck forwarded 9/11 truthers as the main threat to the President’s life in a ludicrous continuation of his debunked premise that people who question the official 9/11 story are somehow terrorists themselves, despite the fact that there is not one single example of a 9/11 truther committing a crime or an act of violence in pursuit of their cause.

Lumping them in with radical violent revolutionaries, Beck cited Van Jones in claiming that 9/11 truthers surround the Obama administration and strongly implied that they plan to kill Obama for failing to fulfill their aim of collapsing the system. Watch the clip…

By hyping the threat of assassination, Beck was not only using it to demonize political groups, he was introducing the idea as a foreseeable scenario to his millions of unhinged sycophantic viewers, subtly implying that they should even try it.

Beck’s role in attempting to neutralize 9/11 truth is a measure of how successful the movement has been in taking away the tool of false flag terror from the establishment. By repeating this mantra, Beck is parroting White House talking points that stretch back to 2006. Recall that Beck was one of several neo-con talk show hosts summoned to get their marching orders from the White House in August 2007.

A document cited by President Bush in his September 2006 speech at the Capital Hilton Hotel on how to ‘win the war on terror’ cited conspiracies as one of the wellsprings of terrorism. The strategy document threatens to “address” and “diminish” the problems conspiracy theories are causing the government in fulfilling their agenda, in a similar vein to Obama regulation czar Cass Sunstein’s 2008 paper which called for banning free speech in order to crush “conspiracy theories”.

Meanwhile, the establishment left has constantly exploited, exaggerated, and outright concocted stories about Tea Party members, Ron Paul supporters and other “right wing extremists” taking guns to Obama public events in an effort to fearmonger about the President being at risk of an assassination attempt.

Beck has played both sides of the scam, proclaiming that the threat could come from “White supremacists or “9/11 Truthers” that would also like to destroy the country, and they will work with anyone they can.”

The fact that these talking points are coming from both sides of the phony political paradigm strongly suggests that a false flag is being prepared in the form of an attempt on Obama’s life that will either be blamed on the “extreme” left or the “extreme” right.

If such an incident were to occur, it would undoubtedly be exploited to the maximum by the establishment and used to silence the deafening dissent now being voiced by Americans of all political persuasions. Presuming he would survive such an attempt, it would also reinvigorate Obama’s popularity overnight and instantly provide him with the political capital needed to pursue what would otherwise have been massively unpopular policies.

People have lost all confidence in the system and the big government agenda is collapsing. The establishment needs this kind of event in order to make the people rally round the state once again.

It is clear that the neo-cons are holding Obama hostage and issuing a thinly veiled threat by repeating the mantra that the only way to save his political career and his presidency is to attack Iran. There is undoubtedly a mountain of dirt being held back regarding Obama’s past that is being used to blackmail the President into following the new world order agenda – the same as with any President before him.

A schism between hawks in the Obama administration aligned with Zionist Israel and more sober individuals is clearly causing division over how to deal with Iran, prompting Obama to warn the Israeli government that it should not launch a military attack on the Persian nation.

The neo-cons are essentially telling Obama that they will destroy him if he doesn’t follow their orders, but that they will defend him if he does play ball and launch an assault on Iran.

But a military attack launched by a President who promised peace can only enlist the support of the public if it is justified by a significantly shocking pretext – which from every indication seems likely to be an assassination attempt on Obama.

We don’t issue such bold and serious warnings lightly. A month before the swine fu outbreak, Alex Jones warned that a hoax pandemic was being prepared and that’s exactly what followed. Jones also famously predicted that a false flag attack was being readied to be blamed on Bin Laden six weeks before it happened on 9/11.

Watch the videos below in which Alex Jones explains where the next false flag threat is coming from and how it is connected to Glenn Beck’s repeated demonization of 9/11 truthers as terrorists who want to kill Obama…

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: The media talking points have indeed set this scenario up in incremental fashion to precondition the desired response from the sheeple in order to continue on with their NWO agenda. Be sure of this however, Obama is not a victim here, he is a willing puppet being used in the larger scheme of things in the globalists’ push for their scientific dictatorship… – SJH 

Link to original article below…

Newsweek Article “Know Your Conspiracies” Thoroughly Debunked

leave a comment »

February 16, 2010: Paul Joseph Watson / Prison – February 15, 2010

Newsweek has published what undoubtedly amounts to the most feeble, sophomoric, and embarrassing hit piece ever written, penned by an intern fresh out of college who pathetically attempts to dismiss manifestly provable conspiracies with one sentence throwaway jibes that sound like the fodder of an immature and misinformed middle school debate team.

The author of the hit piece, entitled Know Your Conspiracies, NEWSWEEK’s guide to today’s trendiest, hippest, and least likely fringe beliefs, is one David A. Graham, a 2009 graduate of Duke University and a Newsweek intern since August, a fresh face obviously keen to prove to his bosses that he’ll make for a good journalistic whore so as to seamlessly blend in with the rest of the corporate hacks at the magazine. Unfortunately for Graham, his first mistake was to believe that Newsweek’s reputation alone as a trusted source of information was enough to excuse his lazy journalism and complete lack of research into any of the topics raised. Sadly, since nobody trusts the mainstream media anymore, merely attempting to dictate what constitutes reality by glibly scoffing “enough said” to dismiss a claim does not equate to a thorough debunking, Mr. Graham.

That’s how Graham “debunks” the 9/11 truth movement, prefacing it with, “Not even the staunchest mainstream George W. Bush bashers believe this one.” Graham was obviously too busy making the coffee for his colleagues to take note of an October 2006 CBS/New York Times poll that found that only 16% of Americans thought the government told the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks. No less than six of the ten 9/11 Commissioners are on record as saying the official story is a fraud and yet Graham classes skepticism towards the official story as one of his “fringe beliefs”.

Another “fringe belief” thrown in amongst stupid speculation about Sarah Palin’s baby is the notion that Goldman Sachs was involved in and benefited from the financial collapse. “While Goldman may have profited, that alone doesn’t prove malice or conspiracy,” scoffs Graham.

Oh really? This office tea boy obviously didn’t take the time to read a multi-part eXposé written by Greg Gordon of McClatchy Newspapers, in which it was voluminously documented how Goldman Sachs, “In 2006 and 2007…peddled more than $40 billion in securities backed by at least 200,000 risky home mortgages, but never told the buyers it was secretly betting that a sharp drop in U.S. housing prices would send the value of those securities plummeting.”

“Goldman’s sales and its clandestine wagers, completed at the brink of the housing market meltdown, enabled the nation’s premier investment bank to pass most of its potential losses to others before a flood of mortgage defaults staggered the U.S. and global economies. Only later did investors discover that what Goldman had promoted as triple-A rated investments were closer to junk,” writes Gordon.

No “malice” or “conspiracy” there, Mr Graham? Goldman Sachs betting on a housing collapse right before it happened while telling their buyers everything was hunky dory? No “malice” involved in that one, eh?

Graham’s shoddily bias and vacuous perspective is laid bare when he tries to gloss over the collapsing anthropogenic global warming fraud within the confines of a one sentence tantrum. “Deniers have long taken advantage of scientists’ cautious statements, and “Climategate” breathed new life into the movement, but the science stands: warming is real, and it’s caused by human actions,” he sneers.

In reality, former lead authors of the UN IPCC are now coming forward to state that the “world may not be warming” and the scientist at the center of the Climategate scandal admits there has been no global warming since 1995, as endless scandal after scandal offers mountains of evidence that the progenitors of AGW have been exaggerating and lying about man’s contribution to climate change for decades.

But perhaps Graham’s most egregious falsehood arrives when he dismisses the United Nations’ desire to regulate CO2 emissions as part of a global government power grab as another baseless yarn. A similar faux pas was committed by Time Magazine’s Jonathan Kay, an article Graham links to, in a similarly weak hit piece written earlier this month.

According to Kay, a one world government run by the United Nations that will implement greenhouse gas taxes is another “toxic fantasy” of those crazy Tea Party lunatics, a view shared by Graham. In that case, I guess we must have all just imagined UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s December 16 2009 Los Angeles Times interview during the Copenhagen summit in which he stated, “We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this.”

Ban Ki-moon’s October 2009 New York Times editorial  in which he wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions, “Must include an equitable global governance structure” is also a figment of the imagination if you subscribe to Kay and Graham’s world view.

Yes – shocking as it is – top globalists like Herman Van Rompuy, Gordon Brown, Al Gore and others have all publicly and repeatedly called for a new world order and a global government. This is why even Bloomberg writers like David Reilly and former Democratic advisors like Dick Morris are finally admitting that the “conspiracy theorists” were right after all – a secret cabal of bankers and industrialists really does run the world.

Of course, if you still believe Graham and Kay’s fairytale make-believe world in which there is no “new world order” and no march towards a “global government” which would include a “global currency”, then the following You Tube compilation of top power brokers saying those very things since the 1950’s doesn’t exist either…

By number eight, Graham has ceased even bothering to form a glib sentence to “debunk” the topic at hand, and responds to the “conspiracy theory” about government internment camps with just four words, “Too silly to discuss.”

Just as well that Market Watch didn’t deem a $385 million contract awarded to KBR by the Department of Homeland Security in January 2006 “too silly to discuss”. The contract was for KBR, the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton, to build detention facilities inside America that would allow authorities to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs.”

Project Censored, who also didn’t regard the announcement as “too silly to discuss,” placed the story at number 14 for 2006’s most censored stories. It was explored in depth by numerous prominent and respected writers, including Peter Dale Scott, who highlighted how such “new programs” were a continuation of martial law provisions that first came to light during the Iran Contra scandal in the 1980’s. Scott also made the connection to former Attorney General John Ashcroft’s 2002 call for U.S. citizens to be detained as enemy combatants in detention camps, a story also considered not “too silly to discuss” by the Los Angeles Times’ Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at the George Washington University Law School.

Graham returns to back-slapping his peers at Time Magazine with the claim that Time did not advocate licenses to use the Internet, linking to a two paragraph blog written by Time’s Michael Scherer entitled Despite Reports, TIME Still Not Advocating Internet Driver’s Licenses.

“Time published a story reporting on a Microsoft executive who’d like to see licensing to combat anonymity. Broadcasting such a controversial proposal—regardless of its merits—is quite the opposite of censorship, as Time’s Michael Scherer rightly explained,” Graham smugly proclaims. “The story is not true, of course, but who wants to get in the way of such fun conspiracies?,” smarts Scherer.

Both Scherer and Graham are obviously banking on their audience not actually reading the original Time article to which they refer, in which author Barbara Kiviat clearly does advocate and endorse a licensing system for Internet users.

Kiviat waxes lyrical about how society introduces more laws and regulations as it grows. “There is no reason to think the Internet shouldn’t follow the same pattern,” she writes. “But we’re entitled to anonymity on the Internet!” Really? Are you? Why do you think that?” she asks elsewhere, clearly endorsing stricter controls similar to those first proposed at the Davos Economic Forum earlier this year.

Anyone who reads Kiviat’s article in full comes away with the impression that she, and her publisher Time Magazine, endorse the call for Internet licensing. Scherer did not “rightly explain” anything! He lied through his teeth.

How much more ludicrous can this get? Is Newsweek going to start lecturing us about the “fringe belief” that the sun comes up every morning. That’s not too far removed from Graham’s overriding theme that powerful men never conspire to do bad things to increase their power and that governments are angelic and anyone who says otherwise is expressing a “fringe belief”.

As the excellent George Washington’s Blog explains, the corporate media’s denunciation of “conspiracy theories” is a process in diffusing criticism of the powerful in government or business…

“The government spied on American citizens (even before 9/11 … confirmed here and here), while saying “we don’t spy”. The government tortured prisoners in Iraq, but said “we don’t torture”.

“In other words, high-level government officials have conspired to cover up the truth. The bottom line is that the power of the state is used to crush criticism of major government policies and actions (or failures to act) and high-level government officials.

“Pay attention, and you’ll notice that criticism of “conspiracy theories” is usually aimed at attempting to protect the state and key government players. The power of the state is seldom used to crush conspiracy theories regarding people who are not powerful . . . at least to the extent that they are not important to the government.”

Indeed, if “conspiracy theories” are merely “hip” and “trendy” examples of mindless gossip, as Graham’s article portrays, then why does White House regulation czar Cass Sunstein want to slap a tax on them or even ban them outright?

We are of course familiar with their tired old clichés and smear tactics, but what the mainstream still fails to grasp is the fact that the majority of Americans no longer trust them, so the sophomoric catch phrases just aren’t going to get the job done anymore.

A September 2009 Pew Research Center poll found that, “Trust in news media has reached a new low, with record numbers of Americans saying reporting is inaccurate, biased and shaped by special interests.” The poll found that just 29% of Americans still trusted the corporate media.

By labeling manifestly provable facts, such as the absolutely self-evident and admitted push for a system of global governance as “conspiracy theories” and claiming they are false, the corporate media is only committing seppuku and dispensing with any credibility they had left.

In that case, we invite Mr. Graham, Mr. Kay, Time and Newsweek to continue to lecture us about how overwhelmingly documented facts are baseless “conspiracy theories,” because in doing so they are only making themselves and the corporate media look utterly stupid. Enough said.

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: There is nothing more powerful than truth for all of those who seek it, embrace it, and defend it. Truth, is indelible… – SJH 

Link to original article below…