NEW message from a DHS insider...copy and paste this, they are actively going from one site to the next and taking them offline.

ah yeah, it takes all of five minutes to peek and see how many idiots 5 stared their latest output. gauging believability is important to their work...

WENT OFFLINE AS I WAS READING IT!!

would a legit news site need to use a proxy???

WHOIS information for canadafreepress.com:

[Querying whois.verisign-grs.com]
[Redirected to whois.godaddy.com]
[Querying whois.godaddy.com]
[whois.godaddy.com]
The data contained in GoDaddy.com, LLC's WhoIs database,

while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is"

with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy. This

information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you

in obtaining information about domain name registration records.

Any use of this data for any other purpose is expressly forbidden without the prior written

permission of GoDaddy.com, LLC. By submitting an inquiry,

you agree to these terms of usage and limitations of warranty. In particular,

you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible,

dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any

purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and

and solicitations of any kind, including spam. You further agree

not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic

processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose,

including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes.



Please note: the registrant of the domain name is specified

in the "registrant" field. In most cases, GoDaddy.com, LLC

is not the registrant of domain names listed in this database.





Registrant:

Domains By Proxy, LLC

ugh...if someone writes something excellent and it's got even one spelling error, they're a shill. if someone writes something TOO well, it's disinfo.

blah blah blah.

the shills on GLP never actually have a handle, almost every one is an anonymous coward.

make an account and we might actually listen to what you have to say. maybe. oh, ok, not. but at least it'd show you aren't just trolling. kinda. LOL!!!

Anne I'm not following what you're saying here, lol. Are you implying I'm a shill because I am suspicious of the author of this material? If that's not what you're implying, then my bad for misinterpreting.

Dude, you are working OVERTIME today. How obvious are you?

You may just get that bonus yet.

Shills FAILED at debunking this one.

It's all over the net. Nice try though.

no, darlin,' just that people get reamed for bad spelling no matter how awesome the post is, or for really minor things and it obfuscates the key points. in this case, you saying that it's too well written reminds me of the recent thread in which a woman in banking wrote a highly insightful, well-considered post (i'm sure you read it) and it went on for three pages or so debating her spelling.

i too considered the too well written factor. however, any self-respecting journalist would at least attempt to write well; i refuse to even click on or read articles from sites like...well, you know. ;)

i think the meat of the matter is that what the article covers is ALL stuff we discuss here on GLP, and whether it is 'true' or not, much of it rings very true to me. i think it's prudent to take everything with a grain of salt, sometimes a shovel of salt, but certainly to keep an eye on some of the things the source brought up, like the flagging support for obama and the creation of a 'false flag' to rally support. a lot of things in there to keep an eye on.

stop feeding it by responding. :)

discuss subject.

I was just now going to say something along those lines.

We all KNOW everything they discuss in that interview is true. The only thing the interview did was cement what we all already knew was coming and let us know that they know that we know what they're doing.


Everything discussed is proven fact.

I've checked out the CFP article and personally, I do not understand why ANY of this is all that far fetched.

Anyone who complains about conspiracy theorys has got to be either a paid shill of a total dumbfuck.

Rich old men meet behind closed doors to make covert deals for personal gain at the expense of innocent Americans. Sounds like bullshit you say? Hey stupid, THAT is EXACTLY what our government officials do and they do it EVERY DAMN DAY! Get over it, this is how it has worked for a very, very long time. Except now, the levels of GREED are astronomical, which will be the catalyst that destroys this once great nation. Interesting times indeed...

We're getting back on track. lol

Oh I gotcha. My issue isn't so much that it's well-written, it's the manner in which it's written. It reads like a captivating plot in a fictional book. The narrative is my issue. If there was concrete and objective information to pass along, I feel like the author would just come right out and present it in a straightforward, no bullshit manner. The way this information has been presented makes me think the author intentionally wanted to 'spruce it up' and make it sound more appealing - which causes me to question the credibility of the author.

proven facts.... ?

I think the one thing that chilled me the most was that the lines between real domestic terrorists and political enemies, are being intentionally blurred.

We've been right all along and this confirms it.

when ye believe ye have the "truth" damn near anything proves it.

Someone needs to read a book for once.

I guess you still think this is all kooky conspiracy theory still eh?

You do know these people openly talk and write about doing these things right?

that threw me as well.

however, it's probably his personal writing style.

That's why it's so easy to pick out the shills, they still think this is all unproven speculation.

The ones who have done their research know better.

I dont think they are blurred at all. They are very clear in their opinion of others.

You are either with them and go along with their plans or You are against them.

I heard them loud and clear years ago.


I listen to Comments like "your either for me or against me" and "its only a god damned piece of paper, and I take them to heart.

Rumsfeld stated once "we shot that plane down" and than retired after that goof.

That's right guys. This mis not the first or will it be the last.

Anybody ever hear of the Watergate Hotel?

Called what hit the pentagon a missile too.

i confess, i have only been on GLP since the fukushima event. and i was scared shitless. i have gone through the gamut of the fear cycle, and recently just removed all of my groups and affiliations because i grew out of it and can't be bothered re-inventing the wheel for those who still choose to fearmonger and by so doing, spread disinfo based on paranoid BS. we have our 'right' and our 'left' info sources, and both have proven to be biased and full of crap in most instances. lack of bias in modern journalism is a rare and wonderful thing.

to me, this article, regardless of ambiguity, gives us some answers that make sense. we know there's all kinds of top secret stuff going on, we know the information is being suppressed and lies are told. 'twas ever thus.

"“Also, this group is often proactive in terms of mitigating potential threats. Their process is to ‘identify, infiltrate, disrupt, marginalize and ultimately, destroy.’” The last part, “destroy,” got my attention. Asking how, my source provided a rather vague answer. “In the most efficient manner possible. The tactics vary. You couldn’t just take down the Drudge website, for example, but things could be done to weaken its effectiveness in a number of areas. Remember, the infrastructure of the internet is being more tightly controlled. Look at the proposed legislation. What do you think that’s for? And it also depends on the nature of the [political] threat.”"

HERE are your shills. ask yourself why they are so heavy on GLP. and how it is that GLP is so spot on with many of the things discussed in the article.

Because we're the smartest ones on the block. =)

yep, glp nails it many times. that does not make any of the threads "truth". even if they make sense, it does not convert to "truth". been my experience folks who claim to have the "truth" really just want ye to stop thinking. and that was and is my only objection to the op. the claim that is was all proven truth. that is where my disagreement comes from. it may well be "true" but what i read was not proven, just stated. i've not seen evidence to "prove" it and i reserve the right to use my own bullshit meter....

don't like using fear myself. it sure persuades a lot of folks, but i don't like fear. smacks of control. for any single item there are always other possibilities and interpretations. i'm not in a position to know which, if any, are true but i do know fear sells nearly as much as sex.

EXACTLY.

&,

it doesn't make it truth. which is why i am going to keep my eye out for key points discussed in the article, and i think it brings up some interesting ideas. definitely not wise to spread fear. prudent thinkers can discuss issues and ideas without fearmongering, no? :) we can't control how everyone reacts to information, only ourselves.

Give me one point in that article that is not proven.

Just because you don't know where to find the information, doesn't mean it's not true.

“Do you know that the ‘[expletive deleted]-storm’ is still going on because of all the attention to your article?”