Becks Plan is Working - Stop taking the BAIT and COUNTER IT!

[Romulus]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!

If someone has a youtube of Beck endorsing Perry post it!!

[evilfunnystuff]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!

If someone has a youtube of Beck endorsing Perry post it!!

excelent post

[NerveShocker]

Uhm.. can people grow up. This cult-like trust of the government and attacking people for daring to question the government is very pathetic. I don't see any reason we should back down when the majority of the public already agrees 9/11 should be investigated further.

These people must also think that no individual would ever murder another individual because well it's just so mean and they've never seen it happen. ;/

[evilfunnystuff]

Uhm.. can people grow up. This cult-like trust of the government and attacking people for daring to question the government is very pathetic. I don't see any reason we should back down when the majority of the public already agrees 9/11 should be investigated further.

These people must also think that no individual would ever murder another individual because well it's just so mean and they've never seen it happen. ;/

not the point

the point is this question was entirely irrelevant

we should not be debating 9/11 truth on this we should be debating the question being asked in the first place

ps im a truther

[jmdrake]

Good point Romulus! As I've said elsewhere this is a psyop with multiple levels. We've been sucked in by Palin and Beck playing nice with Rand and now there's the backstab of Medina. This gives Palin more cover for endorsing Perry. I've already seen comments on blogs saying "Well I guess Palin wasn't so dumb to endorse Perry after all". The way to beat this it to moneybomb the hell out of Medina.

[Stary Hickory]

First I don't believe he has a plan. Second I don't think he is out to get you. And third stop freaking out and it all goes away. I think Medina is done, but other than that it all goes away.

[nayjevin]

Official lines, depending on audience:

- Yeah, Beck sucks, but Medina shoulda... (replace blame)
- Stand up for 9/11! this can be a win! (ignoring Medina's actual position in favor of personal agenda)
- Medina's Momentum is all gone now! (blowing out of proportion)

Easy to see where the news outlets are at now.

[NerveShocker]

not the point

the point is this question was entirely irrelevant

we should not be debating 9/11 truth on this we should be debating the question being asked in the first place

ps im a truther

There are no rules or regulations on the types of questions she can be asked so therefore anything is fair game. Saying that it is irrelevant is just an opinion, one I disagree with. I think the question is important because awareness of false-flag tactics is critical to preventing further attacks.

I believe that because of the strong 9/11 truth movement and the majority of people asking questions about 9/11 it makes it very unlikely another false-flag of that magnitude will occur again, at least until we fall back into complacency.

I support what Medina said but not how she said it which unfortunately is more important. She sounded cornered and nervous when she should have sounded strong and sure of herself.

[Stary Hickory]

There are no rules or regulations on the types of questions she can be asked so therefore anything is fair game. Saying that it is irrelevant is just an opinion, one I disagree with. I think the question is important because awareness of false-flag tactics is critical to preventing further attacks.

I believe that because of the strong 9/11 truth movement and the majority of people asking questions about 9/11 it makes it very unlikely another false-flag of that magnitude will occur again, at least until we fall back into complacency.

There ain't no majority asking questions about 9/11. It's a very scary thing to embrace politically. And the reason why Medina should have kept her distance when that question was asked.

[FrankRep]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!


Truth is: Debra Medina made a Major Political Mistake.

[nayjevin]

Truth is: Debra Medina made a Major Political Mistake.

Why are you so focused on that aspect?

[paulitics]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!

If someone has a youtube of Beck endorsing Perry post it!!

Point out that Beck was disrespectful enough to refer to Medina as "What's her name" a half dozen times on the lead up to the interview.

How the fuck do you conduct a fair interview with that kind of attitude.

[NerveShocker]

Truth is: Debra Medina made a Major Political Mistake.

Yup and Ron Paul and anyone else who questions the governments story in the slightest bit.. sigh. Maybe people like Medina and Ron Paul who actually ask questions aren't the problem it's everybody else. Nah that's crazy.

[FrankRep]

Yup and Ron Paul and anyone else who questions the governments story in the slightest bit.. sigh. Maybe people like Medina and Ron Paul who actually ask questions aren't the problem it's everybody else. Nah that's crazy.
Debra Medina is NOT a 9/11 Truther. Neither is Ron Paul.

[jmdrake]

First I don't believe he has a plan. Second I don't think he is out to get you. And third stop freaking out and it all goes away. I think Medina is done, but other than that it all goes away.

:rolleyes: Yeah he just came up with that question off the top of his head. It doesn't go away unless liberty candidates stay away from Beck or are ready for his crap before hand. And Medina isn't "done" by a long shot. That's just what Beck wants you to think.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Debra Medina is NOT a 9/11 Truther. Neither is Ron Paul.

How do you define truther? I define it as anyone who questions the official story. I would count Ron and Debra in that category, and I would also count a majority of America in that category also. I guess truther has the connotation that we believe tomahawk cruise missles were launched from a Destroyer sitting outside NY Harbor, and was instigated by CIA and Bush to cover up for Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan, etc.

[ravedown]

Will Beck use his tv show to slam medina? the last couple callers seemed to really get to him and had him literally screaming...he seemed confused and frustrated.
if he attacks her on the tv show- she's in big trouble.

[Stary Hickory]

Yup and Ron Paul and anyone else who questions the governments story in the slightest bit.. sigh. Maybe people like Medina and Ron Paul who actually ask questions aren't the problem it's everybody else. Nah that's crazy.

I have never heard Ron Paul give that kind of a statement. You have to believe that the government was able to orchestrate the crashing of 3 passenger planes into the twin towers and the pentagon. And that there was a huge immoral conspiracy allowed that involved killing thousands of Americans.

The risk of this being exposed would be waaaaay too much to attempt such a sloppy operation. Internationally it would discredit the nation and cause incredible consequences, not to mention here at home. What possible motivation could possibly overcome all of this risk? I mean be logical. I believe there are warmongers in DC. But I do not believe in some huge conspiracy to constantly go to war.

I think people believe in aggressive war amongst Neocons and that they look for excuses to attack countries they believe are a threat. However I do not buy it that they would be willing to create the excuse for war themselves, and not at such a huge risk. We do have an industrial military complex that thrives on war and fear, so it does have an interest in perpetuating war, however it is not a giant conspiracy. It never has been. War is easy because there are so many people who live on it in this country. They don't collude together to create war, they merely encourage it.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I have never heard Ron Paul give that kind of a statement. You have to believe that the government was able to orchestrate the crashing of 3 passenger planes into the twin towers and the pentagon. And that there was a huge immoral conspiracy allowed that involved killing thousands of Americans.

The risk of this being exposed would be waaaaay too much to attempt such a sloppy operation. Internationally it would discredit the nation and cause incredible consequences, not to mention here at home. What possible motivation could possibly overcome all of this risk? I mean be logical. I believe there are warmongers in DC. But I do not believe in some huge conspiracy to constantly go to war.

I think people believe in aggressive war amongst Neocons and that they look for excuses to attack countries they believe are a threat. However I do not buy it that they would be willing to create the excuse for war themselves, and not at such a huge risk. We do have an industrial military complex that thrives on war and fear, so it does have an interest in perpetuating war, however it is not a giant conspiracy. It never has been. War is easy because there are so many people who live on it in this country. They don't collude together to create war, they merely encourage it.

Power. Plain and simple. War is the health of the State. I bet Bush was just so giddy with the Patriot Act and all his new powers.

I mean, it's not like the Government has never done anything against the people. Nope...Operation Northwoods, Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, Massacring Indians, and thats just the major players. There are countless "minor" atrocities. If we go international I can give you 20 other examples just from the 20th Century alone.

[NerveShocker]

I have never heard Ron Paul give that kind of a statement. You have to believe that the government was able to orchestrate the crashing of 3 passenger planes into the twin towers and the pentagon. And that there was a huge immoral conspiracy allowed that involved killing thousands of Americans.

The risk of this being exposed would be waaaaay too much to attempt such a sloppy operation. Internationally it would discredit the nation and cause incredible consequences, not to mention here at home. What possible motivation could possibly overcome all of this risk? I mean be logical. I believe there are warmongers in DC. But I do not believe in some huge conspiracy to constantly go to war.

I think people believe in aggressive war amongst Neocons and that they look for excuses to attack countries they believe are a threat. However I do not buy it that they would be willing to create the excuse for war themselves, and not at such a huge risk. We do have an industrial military complex that thrives on war and fear, so it does have an interest in perpetuating war, however it is not a giant conspiracy. It never has been. War is easy because there are so many people who live on it in this country. They don't collude together to create war, they merely encourage it.

Hmm you've never heard Ron Paul make what kind of statement? That he thinks there has not been a proper investigation? He says it all the time... as for your rationalization of why it would be just too far-fetched to pull this off I guess I can just say a few quotes (in my own words). A big lie is easier to tell than a small lie(for the reasons you just stated) and desperate times call for desperate measures.

[Romulus]

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

Beck has set up Medina and is Framing the Debate here.

His mission is accomplished...

I hope everyone HERE can learn from it.... although it doesnt appear that way due to trolls and koolaiders fueling the fire.

[Stary Hickory]

Power. Plain and simple. War is the health of the State. I bet Bush was just so giddy with the Patriot Act and all his new powers.

I mean, it's not like the Government has never done anything against the people. Nope...Operation Northwoods, Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, Massacring Indians, and thats just the major players. There are countless "minor" atrocities. If we go international I can give you 20 other examples just from the 20th Century alone.

Ah this is silly you mischaracterize Bush. It shows a bias that does not let you see the real Bush. Bush was an uneducated idiot for sure. You present Bush as something other than human and that is always a telling sign your judgment is being clouded by preconceived notions. Bush made bad judgment decisions. He was sure he was defending the nation, he got really caught up in himself and attempted to be a "great" leader. He went into crisis mode, got arrogant, and lost his judgment and perspective and Americans paid the price.

But this G. W. Bush as some kind of inhuman monster is a fabrication of the left. The fact you embrace it tells me something about you.

[NerveShocker]

Beck has set up Medina and is Framing the Debate here.

His mission is accomplished...

I hope everyone HERE can learn from it.... although it doesnt appear that way due to trolls and koolaiders fueling the fire.

Way to quote yourself.. does that somehow make what you say true now? A toddler could have guessed this would get 9/11 discussions going again temporarily. This is if anything a good thing.. if you were at all paying attention to the Christmas bombing event where the CIA literally placed the bomber onto the plane.. Do people really need this spelled out to them?

It's quite odd that as soon as the number of people questioning 9/11 starts to drop (according to polls) dramatically another false-flag attack occurs. Man these coincidences sure are annoying. ;(

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Ah this is silly you mischaracterize Bush. It shows a bias that does not let you see the real Bush. Bush was an uneducated idiot for sure. You present Bush as something other than human and that is always a telling sign your judgment is being clouded by preconceived notions. Bush made bad judgment decisions. He was sure he was defending the nation, he got really caught up in himself and attempted to be a "great" leader. He went into crisis mode, got arrogant, and lost his judgment and perspective and Americans paid the price.

But this G. W. Bush as some kind of inhuman monster is a fabrication of the left. The fact you embrace it tells me something about you.

Other than human? Wrong.

Lord Acton - Power corrupts and absolute power absolutely corrupts. This is a goddamn truth if I ever heard it. You do know Lord Acton was one of the last great Classical Liberals right?

[Romulus]

Oh boy... the trolls are on this thread like flies on shit!

[undergroundrr]

Remember Paul vs. Giuliani. It was a moment like this that caused people to sit up and take notice.

This is the hottest nerve in the neocon nervous system. The comments on blogs and media websites will be WAR between those who think it's all right to question and those who think it should never be questioned.

I'm not a truther and neither is Debra Medina. Medina is right in taking the issue to the level of free inquiry.

[NerveShocker]

Oh boy... the trolls are on this thread like flies on shit!

I've been here since 2007 buddy how about you? When someone disagrees with you try to engage them in debate (even if your no good at it you'll learn) rather than make personal attacks. Thanks.

[Stary Hickory]

Hmm you've never heard Ron Paul make what kind of statement? That he thinks there has not been a proper investigation? He says it all the time... as for your rationalization of why it would be just too far-fetched to pull this off I guess I can just say a few quotes (in my own words). A big lie is easier to tell than a small lie(for the reasons you just stated) and desperate times call for desperate measures.

You still lack motivation for the "setup" The evidence against you is HUGE. It's a shame people get into these traps. I mean we have to operate from some basis of common probability. What you argue for is so remote as to be absurd. And all of this without any evidence.

What kind of investigation are we looking for here? The details of this case are everywhere. I suppose Osama Bin laden is a secret CIA operative who works with us and helps lead this war on his own people? How nutty do we have to get here?

[AuH20]

Over at Hot Air, there are a few who actually believe that Ron Paul is employed by a liberal organization so as to take over the Republican Party. Meanwhile, we have a thread like this. Secondly, I'm not going to think any less of Austrian Econ Disciple or any other poster, just because they don't share my enjoyment of Beck's show. Different strokes for different folks.

[NerveShocker]

You still lack motivation for the "setup" The evidence against you is HUGE. It's a shame people get into these traps. I mean we have to operate from some basis of common probability. What you argue for is so remote as to be absurd. And all of this without any evidence.

What kind of investigation are we looking for here? The details of this case are everywhere. I suppose Osama Bin laden is a secret CIA operative who works with us and helps lead this war on his own people? How nutty do we have to get here?

Okay I think I took you out of context. You can say the evidence against a 9/11 conspiracy is huge (and settled).. but if that were the case I don't believe this conversation would be occurring right now.

Oh and to answer your question I am looking for them to do a thorough investigation.. got a problem with that?

Edit-

[BuddyRey]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!

If someone has a youtube of Beck endorsing Perry post it!!

This!

Beck's plan was most certainly to divide the liberty movement. Don't let him succeed!

[constituent]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!

If someone has a youtube of Beck endorsing Perry post it!!


This!

Beck's plan was most certainly to divide the liberty movement. Don't let him succeed!



I'd just like to echo these sentiments before burning off for the evening.

This can still be a win, just use your heads. Resist the temptation to get heated over it (which is tough:().

[awake]

Put 9/11 aside, ask yourself is there historical evidence of a state provoking or allowing an attack on itself to justify a broader strategic objective? Has this ever happened before?

Now start reading...

As for Medina, she is up against more than she will ever understand or know. When you can print money out of thin air everything can be bought.

[sevin]

Beck's plan was 2 part.

1. to smear Medina in a trap about 9/11 truth.

2. to ignite a 9/11 truth shit storm in the liberty ranks.

It has worked: 9/11 truth - it leads us to be divided and conquered. Where you stand is irrelevant - the issue was PLANTED to DIVIDE us and SMEAR. It's an attempt to FRAME THE DEBATE.

Counter it & Attack!: Dont debate or acknowledge 9/11 truth no matter WHERE you stand on it. Point out that in FACT Beck publically endorsed PERRY, Before the BELO debates. Expose BECK that his tactics and agenda are to serve Perry, NOT Texans!

If someone has a youtube of Beck endorsing Perry post it!!

Great post.

I think we need a "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy when it comes to whether you're a truther.

[BlackTerrel]

We can be pissed all we want but it's not going to make a difference. If Medina had answered as she did in her statement a few hours later the whole thing would have been a win.

She wasn't "trapped" anymore than John Mayer was trapped in his Playboy interview.

[LibForestPaul]

I don't see any reason we should back down when the majority of the public already agrees 9/11 should be investigated further.
/


not important. Ending the Fed, firing government bureaucrats, ending the IRS, this is what is important. I do not care if Bloomberg ordered the attack, I want my fn money!!!

[Catatonic]

Yup and Ron Paul and anyone else who questions the governments story in the slightest bit.. sigh. Maybe people like Medina and Ron Paul who actually ask questions aren't the problem it's everybody else. Nah that's crazy.

The problem is, 9/11 is an impossible subject for any libertarian. There's really only two answers as far as the media and shills like Beck are concerned - either

A) you're full statist and think daring to question the government about 9/11 is crazy

or

B) you dare to entertain the idea that the government may not have been 110% upfront in regards to 9/11 and that people have valid criticisms about how 9/11 was handled. (in other words you're a tinfoil hat wearing lunatic)

Either way you lose. Going statist is never a good thing for a libertarian, and without the endorsement of corporate America you'll get smeared for it, nevermind smeared by real libertarians. Option B...well...Dr. Paul managed to dance around that bullet very well during the campaign but he is a rare bird. There's no win possible in that subject for a libertarian, and Beck knows that.