Jeff Rense EXPOSED!!

Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

WOW!

I have been traveling for the past few days while the SOTT-COUNTER-COINTELPRO-ACTION was in full swing.
Damn, I really missed the main action, it seems.

But then again - this just may be the beginning.

In any case, as I continue to travel and may not be able to find the time and focus to post, my heart and soul is with the "sotties"!!!

Just keep giving those agents mental bloody noses. Excellent performance by everybody who sided with the truth!

:P :P :P
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

I guess at this (late) point I don't have to bother responding to Jupiter J..
That saves some time and energy.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Strange, I don't think i was gallucinating, but before Fifth Way stepped in, there was Grizlie70 post I read, it was like someone latent got activated to discredit Lisa Guliani so i went to look whois Judy Andreas @mail of whom he mentioned in post. When i returned to post reply to Grizlie, his post wasn't there any longer. Was he deleted? I went to his profile as maybe he posted in other thread, but there is no mention of Grizlie post I read 10 minutes or so before. Anyway this Judy Andreas is author of "Judyisms" book and columnist for Rense, i found Dr. Lorraine Day's Response to Judy Andreas here
http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/zionism.htm
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

CarpeDiem said:
Strange, I don't think i was gallucinating, but before Fifth Way stepped in, there was Grizlie70 post I read, it was like someone latent got activated to discredit Lisa Guliani
Good observation. A few of the mods have had their eye on Gritzle70 for a while, and it seems like he just "popped".

For more information about Judy Andreas, you might want to listen to the recent SOTT podcasts on COINTELPRO. She's the one that seems to be doing a number on some of the more sincere types in the alternative media scene, most notably John Kaminski.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

For Immediate Release
June 26, 2006
Albany, NY

To Whom It May Concern:

Lisa Guliani is a friend of mine. We have been communicating with each other for a long time.

Some years back, Lisa mentioned to me that she was extremely upset with some obscure
Radio Show Host who had been slandering her on his little Show. I advised her to ignore this
jerk, as he was simply trying to garner attention for himself at Lisa's expense. I went so far
as to download this idiot's attack on her, and tried to listen to it. It was so offensive in tone
and language that I was immediately offended. I spotted this fool for what he was, right away:
a brain-dead, shock-jock wannabe with no standards, integrity or scruples of any kind. When
he made reference to his wishes regarding Lisa's anatomy, I had enough. I erased this worm.

Sonny Crack was the name of this criminal, and he was apparently a Caucasion who wanted
desperately to be thought African-American. As a former Radio Show Host, myself, I can tell
by tone, alone, where the person behind the microphone is coming from, immediately. When
my Friend, Lisa, felt the need to defend herself against these bogus claims, spewed by this
cracker, I told her to ignore him, as he was very obviously lying to get attention for his Show.

Mr. Crack is at it, again. This time, however, his efforts at self-aggrandizement may have
crossed over into the prosecutable realm, as he has incited internet attacks upon my Friend.

A pattern of directed harassment is now emerging. This is, of course, a felony violation, as
well as a cause-of-action for civil Libel litigation. The results of these legal proceedings will
result in the termination of the Crack Show, formal charges against any distributor of these
lies, innuendos and defamations, a financial debacle of biblical proportions for "Sonny Crack",
personally, and an exhaustive trace-back investigation uncovering accomplices, facilitators
and co-conspirators. It goes without saying that Mr. Crack will be behind bars for a very long
time, additionally. Any career, in anything, can be forever forgotten, as well.

Mr. Crack is a liar. He knows it, and Lisa and I know it. Now, you know it, too.

Justin Stark

Lisa adds for clarification: Justin got the chronology a bit off, as this all started just over a year ago, not years ago. I contacted Justin about this and he explained that he re-formatted his computer and couldn't get his hands on the exact timeframe. It does seem like it's been going on for years though..
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

trouble is, pursuing the legal course of action, despite the fact that you might have a clear cut case, I would think that you're likely to get the same response from the justice system, as Laura did, ie: "if you don't like what they are doing, then stop what YOU are doing". in other words saying: "tough. we don't like you, so you're on your own."

Thats the price of sticking up for the truth :(
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

CarpeDiem said:
Was he deleted?
Indeed. Evidently, judging from his deleted post, he was having "problems" with wingtv for quite a while, but he did not toutch the subject until now. Now he has revealed his agenda that was well hidden for quite a while. We must have hit the nerve.

It is instructive to analyze his 70 previous posts on the forum....

:cool:
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Time will tell. We'll just have to wait and see what unfolds.

Lisa
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

CarpeDiem wrote:
OK, so that means that he deleted own post. [...] Author was Grizlie, and it was long and nasty post[...]
No, I deleted his post. I also deleted your post, as quoting, even in part, as you call it "nasty post", serves only the agenda of the "nasty poster".
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

I would like to ask permission to post links to the Sonny Crack broadcasts at issue. These are mp3s archived on Michael Langston's audio directory and do not take one to the Revere website.
The content at issue is very graphic, so this is why I am asking permission to post the links to this audio, for the purpose of letting everyone listen for themselves as to what exactly has been said about me by Crack and his "interviewees".

Please advise.

Lisa
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Sure, Lisa, as long as the links don't go to revereradio. We are not interested in helping their google rankings. I think it will be useful for some of the readers to get an idea of the kind of twisted lies and filth these people come up with. It can always be compared to the kind of filth that Vincent Bridges has written about me.

What I find most interesting is that these particularly vile and vicious attacks are aimed at two women. We notice that any man with whom such cretins disagrees gets only one tenth - or less - time and attention and the "disgust factor" of what they say about them is way down on the scale. So it seems to me that the fact that we are women is something of a lightning rod for this type of ad hominem attack.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Fifth Way said:
But then again - this just may be the beginning.
From the way things have been escalating so far, it looks like it is just the beginning. At the same time, there is a limit to what defamers can do, so after a certain point all they can do is repeat themselves.

I just want to summarize some observations, although they may not be original given the extensive analyses in this and other threads.

What strikes me is that there is a convergence of what to me at first seemed like unrelated attacks. Given the circumstances, the presented poll and the podcast, anyone can see that the conspirational atmosphere of these attacks goes beyond any semblance of coincindence.

Another thing that strikes me is that these apparent disinformants have gone a long way to establish buddy networks. Instead of people working toward a common ideal, it seems alliances are formed of the "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" variety. The people coming here to support psychopaths are reacting as if it is a personal matter for them. They are acting as if friends, family or one's religion are offended.

But there are no deep social bonds here, and the issues are specific, not ideologically abstract. This is the Internet, not a church or a clan gathering. People live far away from each other for the most part. It, therefore, seems to me that defenders of disinformants are reacting as if a source of income is being threatened. From the varied intense postings of these defenders of disinformants it seems to be a matter of material interest, not ideology.

If disinformants want to be effective, it stands to reason they need allies. They need people obligated to them in some manner, people with whom they made deals, people who will lose something if these disinformants go down.

I would think that people running shock radio, although crass, have some kind of sense of humour or lighthearted attitude toward life. The Revere people are not humourists, however, but attack dogs plain and simple. That is their job, and how they put food on their tables (or doggie dishes as the case may be).

For them and their allies to come on the attack like this they must sense a threat (again, I am probably stating the obvious). But I want to emphasize that the attacks have escalated even from a few days ago, and they have the nature of a cornered animal.

The thing about bullies (which has also been stated before on this forum, osit) is that they cannot abide a true challenge to their alleged supremacy. They prey on the weak, and usually isolate individuals and gang up on them. They have never dealt with a cohesive network before (one that is becoming more cohesive all the time), and this is out of their league.

The symptoms of rabid emotionalism (whether real or scripted) indicate that all they have is the same strategies they use to prey on those with little or no group support. I would expect them to try to come up with a strategy fitting the new and improved set of circumstances, but instead I see desperation and a kind of mental retardation exhibited.

This indicates to me that they cannot afford to sit back and think about some new strategy. Either they are incapable of doing so, or they are pressured by something or both situations apply.

And yes, the attacks are strongest on women, even though gender does not really carry over electronically. This seems to me to be the mark of a coward bully targeting what they think are weaker prey. And men who are pornographically oriented in such a blatant manner most likely have serious manhood issues.

That, to me, indicates that they are incapable of coming up with any real strategies for dealing with a network, because their mind can only function through the filter of their issues of inadequacy. This limits mental function, obviously, and thus undermines adaptability to the full spectrum of personal modes of expression a network manifests.

They might have pat attack patterns for individuals, but there is no way they seem to be able to adapt to the complexity of group expression. So the bullies seem to be threatened in a deep psychological manner, and also through threats to their very livlihood.

I cannot even imagine what their state of mind must be at this point. Psychopaths may have no emotions in terms that healthy people can understand, but they do have dramatic instinctive reactions when they percieve they are being threatened.

The only time a psychopath gives up an attack is when they know it is the only way to survive. But these people, by their actions, have shown that being uncovered is the worst threat to their survival.

I believe that if they cannot keep their cover, they are more of a threat to those they are protecting than those uncovering them. With so many out there wanting to just "make a buck" at the expense of the truth, they are probably expendable. And while it is not in the best interests of the PTB for a real truth seeker to be martyred, putting a disinformant on the martyr pedestal would not be such a bad thing for those who seek to confuse.

In short, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes right now.

For what it's worth, in addition, I think everyone is handling this in a manner that can be described as professional, even those members who are just people voicing opinions. There is definitely panic, but none of it is coming from regular forum members. It rather pours but from the bullies and their groupies, who are sure to still be in denial of the blatant indicators that they just can't cut it anymore.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Thank you. The third mp3 link listed is the most recent one from the other night.
They are all disgusting, but the third one is even more putrid, if this is possible.
The Langston Audio directory is located here: http://911verses.com/911/underground/
Lots of good stuff to listen to regarding every single one of the alternative media fakes we've exposed, and the following Sonny Crack mp3s.

http://911underground.com/Over_the_Edge_2005-05-27_and_-06-10_Crack_Hangs_Himself_and_Revere_Radio.MP3

http://911underground.com/Over_the_Edge_2005-05-27_and_-06-10_Revere_Radio_Obscenity_and_Slander.MP3

http://911underground.com/Over_the_Edge_2006-06-25_Revere_Radio_Network_Filth_and_Decadence.MP3
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

ark said:
It is instructive to analyze his 70 previous posts on the forum....
Leaving the content for what it is: gritzle posted 74 times, while starting 47 topics. Obviously he isn't interested that much in interaction.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

MILLER OBSCENITY TEST: the Miller test determines whether material is obscene and thus not protected speech under the First Amendment by assessing (a) whether the average person applying contemporary community standards would find that the material as a whole would appeal to the prurient interest; (b) whether the material depicts an actual or simulated sexual act in a patently offensive manner; and (c) whether the material, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

PARODY: parody is when one artist satirizes the work of another for the purpose of commenting or criticizing that original work, and not only for the purpose of commenting or criticizing society in general. Parody is a valued form of fair use that is protected under copyright law.

SPEECH: Constitutionally protected speech does not only include spoken words, but also includes other forms of _expression such as painting, sculpture, performance, film, theatre, etc.
PROTECTED SPEECH: speech that is protected from government censorship and/or regulation to one extent or another depending upon the nature of the speech and the nature of the regulation.
UNPROTECTED SPEECH: speech that may be subject to complete prohibition and unfettered regulation by the government. The five categories of unprotected speech are obscenity, fighting words, fraudulent misrepresentation, advocacy of imminent lawless behavior, and defamation.
http://www.ncac.org/art-law/glossary.cfm

A Quick Guide to Libel
What is libel?
Libel is any published communication that falsely harms a person's reputation. It can occur anywhere in a newspaper or on-line publication. There are four elements, all of which must be proven in court:
1. Publication
Plaintiff must prove the statement was communicated to someone other than the person it was about.
2. Identification
If statement in question doesn't mentions the person's name, plaintiff must prove that people who read it believed the plaintiff was the one identified.
3. Harm -- also called defamation
Plaintiff must prove the statement harmed his/her reputation in the eyes of the community.
4. Fault -- one of two standards applies.
a) Negligence: failure to exercise ordinary care. A private person must
prove this.
b) Actual malice: knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the
truth. A public person or public official must prove this.
How can I avoid libel?

* Confirm or verify all defamatory material.
* Make sure that questionable material can be proven true.
* Be especially careful of arrest reports, damage suits and criminal court proceedings.
* Watch out for charges, assertions and claims -- it doesn't matter whether we're saying it or we're quoting someone else directly. If we print it, we're responsible for it.
* Libel can be found not only in news stories, but also letters to the editor, cartoons, classified ads, display ads and electronic publications. Again, it doesn't matter who's saying it. If we print it, we're responsible for it.
* Words such as alleged and reported are not protections against libel.
* Be careful of unofficial statements made by police, or by court officials outside the courtroom.
* Truth is a defense. Good intentions are not. It doesn't matter how you intended something to be perceived. What courts look at is how it was perceived.
* Running a correction (the legal term is retraction) is not a defense, but doing so can reduce punitive damages if you're sued for libel and lose.
 
Back
Top Bottom