Re: FW: Was Alex Jones on BBC to Tar Anti-Vaccinators with Same Brus

From: realiseyourefree

Date: 2013-06-10 17:44:44

It could also be that allowing Alex Jones to rant about vaccines and FEMA camps etc, is to give more impetus to both the truth movement and the NWO by helping to speed up the creation of a NWO through confusion, fear and discontent. On the other hand the BBC could now be forced to give voice to the alternative media because it is losing the battle for viewers and they are now panicking because of the potential launch of David Icke’s new TV and radio station. — In Cognoscence@yahoogro…, “Andrew Johnson” wrote: > > An important observation from Kathy here…. > > > _____ > > From: Kathy Roberts [mailto:khr@…] > Sent: 10 June 2013 03:39 > To: undisclosed-recipients: > Subject: Was Alex Jones on BBC to Tar Anti-Vaccinators with Same Brush? > > > Andrew Neil’s got it right that maybe Jones is alive because he’s “part of > the conspiracy”. But I wonder if it’s all about the last 30 seconds? This > show aired amid headlines about MERS and H7N9 threats. Notice that Neil gets > in a word about Jones claiming that vaccines contain cancer viruses as part > of a eugenics program. This implies that the notion of vaccines being part > of a depopulation effort could only come from a lunatic like Jones. > Moreover, it places attention on cancer viruses rather than on > openly-labeled ingredients that have proven fatal or those tested and > discovered (http://thinktwice.com/birthcon.htm) that can induce sterility. > When Jones closes the show like a barking seal, the tin foil hat impression > of those opposing vaccines is cemented. > > > > ——– Original Message ——– > Subject: Alex Jones Gets on the BBC… > Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 00:01:38 +0100 > From: Andrew Johnson > > Reply-To: > > To: Andrew Johnson > > > > Now there’s a thing… I think the 3 of them were building up to the last 30 > seconds or so. > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded > > &v=YB7ZaK7Oa88 > > Of course, they have no idea of the sorts of things Jones says, right? They > just “let him on” with Andrew Neil to allow “freedom of speech”, correct? Or > am I missing something. > > Perhaps it’s just the “programming” that they have on the BBC now…. (The > YT vid may get taken off though due to BBC copyright) >