Free Republic: Israel Comes First


by Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action
http://www.Public-Action.com
Copyright May, 2000
May be reproduced for non-commercial purposes

May 16, 2000--In earlier posts I discussed the banishment of Hugh Turley and this writer from Free Republic, the putative "conservative" source of news on the Internet.  In both cases, Free Republic's owner and operator, Jim Robinson ("JimRob") also deleted certain Turley/Valentine articles and resultant threads.

Hugh Turley is the co-author of "Failure of the Public Trust"
[ http://www.FBIcover-up.com ].  Turley's e-mail: <Turley@acninc.net>,
Free Republic's URL is [ http://www.freerepublic.com ].  "JimRob's" e-mail:
<jimrob@psnw.com>

In those posts, I compared Free Republic to a feeding tank for guppies who were given strictly controlled doses of truth pellets.  For past history, see "Free Republic: Color Inside the Lines, Please," http://www.trionfopublishing.com/pretenders/FR-Color.html and "Free Republic Bans Top Foster Researcher." http://www.trionfopublishing.com/pretenders/FRBans.html

Now, in a Free Republic thread called "Phony Opposition," Robinson tells why he banished Hugh and me after we had posted articles characterizing certain Internet journalists as "fake opposition."

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3916363d1443.htm

When Turley called Drudge, WorldNetDaily, and Newsmax.com fake opposition, Turley gave reasons for doing so (see "Free Republic Bans Top Foster Researcher.")  Now go back to the FR URL "Phony Opposition," and notice that what Robinson says about his banning of Turley:

"I have no idea what his [Turley's] personal feud is with the owners of these sites, but he is not going to carry it out on FR."

Either Robinson is lying, or he can't read.  "I have no idea what his personal feud is ..."  Hugh Turley gave his reasons, and they definitely were not "personal."  Robinson now sidesteps these issues and  pretends Turley was banned because he used FR to further a "personal feud."

On the other hand, Robinson has been an outspoken critic of Clinton, going so far as to call for Clinton's impeachment.   Was that not a "personal" attack on Clinton?

Robinson would say no, he criticized Clinton in Clinton's public persona as President of the United States.  But that's how Turley was criticizing Drudge, WorldNetDaily/Farah, Newsmax.com/Ruddy--in their public personas as messengers of truth.  You'd have to be a very stupid guppy to swallow Robinson's excuse for the Turley banishment.

Of this writer, Robinson says Carol Valentine was banned in part because I, too, engaged in "personal" criticism of Matt Drudge.   But note my January 30, 2000 posting, "Gen. Partin Shot Down in Flames."

http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3894f7e25dd9.htm

Robinson had no argument when I criticized General Benton Partin ... why is it "personal" when I criticize Matt Drudge?

Robinson also charges:  "And, more than that, after following the link to her [Carol Valentine's]  site that she provided, I saw that she also promotes links to holocaust revisionist sites.  Posting racist or anti Semitic materials to FR or posting links to such sites is forbidden. Thus her FR posting privilege was revoked."

Strange, isn't it, that when people examine the record concerning the deaths of Jews during WWII, Robinson uses ADL invective and calls them  "anti-Semitic."   But when people examine the record concerning the death of a goy, Vince Foster (http://www.FBIcover-up.com), Robinson gives them a prominent link on Free Republic (see left side of FR homepage, under "Resources.")  Robinson even lists Patrick Knowlton, co-owner of FBIcover-up.com, as a "notable" FReeper; see sixth paragraph of
http://www.freerepublic.com/about.htm .

So it's OK to question the Official Story of the death of a goy, but not OK to question the Official Story of the death of Jews during WWII.  When I provide links to sites that examine the record on the deaths of Jews during WWII, Robinson uses that as an excuse to throw me off his site, citing Free Republic posting rules.
http://www.freerepublic.com/help.htm

Robinson had to stretch those rules to cover my case: note that Robinson does not accuse me of posting racist or anti-Semitic material (yawn), but merely of having links on my website to other websites that Robinson does not want his guppies to see.  Free Republic's posting rules contain no prohibition on posting URLs that contain naughty links, nor URLs that contain links to links to naughty links, etc.  I wonder if links to links to links to naughty links would be far enough removed to suit Robinson's ADL tastes?

:-)

If Robinson were an American patriot, his posting test would be my loyalty to America's founding principles, not my loyalty to the Nation of Zion and the ADL.

The truth is I have been "promoting" the URLs of my website ever since I began posting to Free Republic, and those URLs have ALWAYS linked to naughty links.    My postings to Free Republic are too numerous to list here, but try my September 26, 1999 FR posting, "Waco Meets the Kennewick Man,"

http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a37ed78171613.htm

or my April 26, 2000 posting, "Shaping Public Opinion: An Eyewitness Account,"

http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3906d05e64d7.htm

or go through the archived discussions of Waco on Free Republic.  You will see plenty of live links to my site, put there by "FReepers" during discussions of the Waco Holocaust.

But Robinson did not notice the links on my site until the Drudge controversy.  I should point out that on September 11, 1999, I had occasion to write to Robinson on another matter.  In that e-mail, I asked him to give a link to the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum [ http://www.public action.com/SkyWriter/Waco Museum ].  I compared the importance of the Museum to the importance of another FR link, FBIcover-up.com (ironically, the site is co-authored by Turley, Clarke, and Knowlton).  I told Robinson:

"I think FBI Cover-up.com is an excellent site, don't get me wrong.  The Museum has a link to that site, too.  But you must admit that the probable murder of one Clintonian pales in comparison to the most certain premeditated murder of dozens of innocent children and their moms.

"In the Foster case, there is not even a suspect.  In the Waco Holocaust, we know who the murders are, and we have voluminous and incontrovertible evidence for indictment and trials.  Free Republic is in a position to help create the public mood for those indictments and trials, using the best evidence.  Given Free Republic's stated goals, how could you say no to this request?"

Robinson responded to my e-mail, all right, but utterly ignored my request as if I had never made it.  Had he visited, the Museum, it might have given him (a Navy veteran) the cold shivers, because it demonstrates the Waco Holocaust was a military/intelligence event from Day One, a domestic Gulf of Tonkin incident set up to provide an excuse for overt military intervention civilian life.  Without any personal pride, I can unequivocally state that the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum is the premier Waco site on the Internet.  People who inform themselves on "patriot" issues visit this site, for sure.

But despite all the mentions of the Museum and the posting of the URLs on Free Republic, despite my personal request, despite what should have been natural curiosity about Waco, Robinson apparently never had bothered to look at the Museum.  For if he had he surely would have seen the links and kicked up a fuss way before now.   Does that tell how much interest Robinson has in Waco?   He's quite a "patriot," isn't he?

As of this writing, May 16, 2000, the Free Republic postings containing my URLs (which lead to the naughty links) are alive and well.  In the future, should Robinson remove all those posts, we will know that protecting the Jewish holocaust industry is more important to him than broadcasting the truth about the American Waco Holocaust.  But perhaps he has told us that already.

As noted earlier, it was only after my suggesting that Drudge was "fake opposition" that Robinson bothered to check out my site.  Having done so, he could have looked at the content of the Museum.  He could have written back to me and said something along these lines:

"Carol, I had no idea that the US military was the prime mover in the Waco Holocaust, I had no idea there was such voluminous and convincing evidence the moms and kids were murdered with malice aforethought.  Surely we could impeach Clinton on the basis of this evidence ..."

But no.  Instead, Robinson focused on holocaust revisionist links and banned me because of "anti-Semitic links." Now we see whose ox Robinson is protecting.  What does his reaction tell you about his loyalties?

Let's turn to Bob Djurdjevic for more history,
http://www.truthinmedia.org/Bulletins2000/tim2000-5-1.html
See "FreeRepublic.com - an Oxymoron: Truth Censorship on the Internet."
Then look at:
http://www.truthinmedia.org/Bulletins2000/tim2000-5-2.html

This second URL is a Truth in Media Readers Forum wherein readers have been discussing other incidents of censorship on Free Republic.  You will see Jim Robinson quoted thus:

"The American military is our fighting machine and is made up of our own men.  Clinton may be a traitor, but we must stand behind our own military 100%."

If Clinton is a traitor issuing traitorous orders, why should we support our military when they follow those traitorous orders?  Surely their actions make them traitors, too.  Now back to Robinson:

"The ONLY way possible to get out of this mess is for our Congress to impeach Clinton.  But they are too cowered by the media to do this.  I say impeach him again ... "

In truth, though, Robinson is as serious about impeaching Clinton as Matt Drudge is.  It was safe enough to create an uproar about the Lewinsky affair.  Personal extra-martial affairs of a president are not impeachable.  And can you seriously imagine Clinton would be impeached because he lied in a civil suit, considering the gravity of other crimes for which he is not impeached?

And all the time we spend waiting for Clinton to be impeached on the unimpeachable, "we must stand behind our own military 100%," according to Robinson.   What a convenient arrangement--for the military.

If Drudge and Robinson were serious about impeaching Clinton, they would publicize a real, impeachable offense.  How about this one ...

President Clinton was Commander-in-Chief at the time the Special Operations Command flew its black helicopters over the Mt. Carmel Center on April 19, 1993, and strafed the living quarters of mothers and children with machine gun fire.

[ http://www.public action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/war/page/w_l.html
Beware of wrap-around URL.  Public-Action must be hyphenated.]

Since then, the Commander-in-Chief has been knee-deep in the cover-up.  Surely there is far more legitimacy in seeking to impeach Commander-in Chief Clinton for the Waco Holocaust--the premeditated murder by the military of over 80 innocents, including many mothers and children--than there is in seeking to impeach him for having an extramarital affair and lying about it?

But you will never hear JimRob utter a word in this direction.   For one thing, suggesting Commander-in-Chief Clinton be impeached over the Waco Holocaust would draw attention to the very group Robinson wishes to protect--the US military.  Robinson would rather have the guppies' attention on a semen-stained dress.  On this, Robinson and Drudge share the same agenda.

Clinton is offered as a whipping boy.  Robinson, along with Drudge and others, march the dissidents around and around in circles on false issues, exhausting their time and effort.  The false leaders make sure the real issues are kept buried while the work of the Jewish/Zionist takeover of America continues.

False leaders take time to install and to gain credibility.  They are an expensive and precious resource, and must be protected from exposure.   Thus when one of the takeover team's false leaders is exposed, "JimRob" yells "Anti-Semite!"

Robinson's cry tells the story and shows us where his loyalties are.  "JimRob" is not opposing the Jewish/Zionist occupation forces.  He's playing a role, helping them.  "JimRob," our famous Navy veteran and "patriot," is really a traitor to America.

Now here are comments on recent events at Free Republic from some Public Action readers.

* * *

RB:  " ... it's becoming increasingly clear that outfits like Free Republic, NewsMax, and a host of others are acting as shock absorbers for our NWO masters. Nothing like a few carefully placed sponges to soak up people's anger, bitterness, and distrust of the feds. Can't recall if F.R. is on my list of links...if it is, I'll be removing it. And thanks for the intelligence."

PR: "Your model with guppies and sharks is very appropriate.  My experience is that they maintain holding tanks with different degrees of truth.  The biggest idiot (smallest) guppies swallow the propaganda crap in purest form.  Others need a little more intellectual challenge but basically remain within the fold, which aims to keep the rotten system of brain washing in place.  With this approach they seem to be able to maintain enough guppies, although of different sizes, and then simply dump tellers of real truth, which is the old approach from newspapers and TV. They *have* to do that in order not to upset their apple cart. This is their achilles heel and only sure way of telling what they really are. As the saying goes, a tree is known by the fruit it bears."

FL:  "Is someone Jewish, maybe?"

JN: "I have purged over the past three years my website of links to 'guppy rooms' or 'heat sinks' (electronics: 'drain off heat') ... Any site with links to the 'mainstream media' which Free Republic has is 'null and void' to me."

RM:  "You are 1,000% correct in all your assertions.  We'll deal with Freep in due course."

BS: "I thought your article on Drudge ... was very good.  You take a tack on some of these stories that is not one that I would think to take, but after I see it in black and white, the light comes on."

DW, in an e-mail to Jim Robinson of FR: "Jim...what is this all about? How can you have a "Free Republic" if you kick out what you consider to be unpopular views? You should be ashamed of yourself for even considering kicking someone out of your little club like this. You are being very hypocritical..."

DM:  "Great analysis!"

JL:  "This is sort of a two way dynamic. Indeed the oppressors attempt to establish false institutions purporting to represent their opponents, both identifying those of opposite viewpoints for future reference, and limiting the scope of their discussions, forestalling their gathering in unmonitored and unshepherded forums. Orwell covered the point in 1984, of course.

"The other way is by assimilation, as witness the Republican Congressional Class of '94, many now indistinguishable from what they went to Washington to dismantle. That's done by congenial inclusion, We're all just folks, it's all just a game, the principles are for the suckers, welcome aboard -- and don't rock the boat. That's how the mandarins repeatedly absorbed the barbarians in China, and the Brahmanic Hindus soaked up Buddhism, and continue to absorb other sects, in India."

TC:  "So you got kicked out of the wine and cheese country club set.  Well, consider it best for the long run.  Let those bone heads stew in their
own juice till the war is in the streets outside their homes, then we'll have some fun.  Hang in there."

TB: "I agree with you that Jim Robinson and Free Republic are fakes .... We don't need 'patriots' who are afraid of some of the truth.  Such, if not operatives for the ADL, CIA or whatever, or in it for the profit, are pansies that want to solve all our problems without sacrificing anything or alienating the very elements that are creating the police state we now live in."

SF: "Amazing.  So Free Republic is neither free nor republican -- the orders
come from top down.  A one-man autocracy with no appeal process, and there really are NO rules.  JR's word is law.

"And he calls his little captive guppies 'freepers'?  'Freeper' sounds like a
Newspeak contraction of 'free person.'  Another newspeak lie.

"In Orwell's 1984, the ministry of propaganda was officially called the
'Ministry of Truth', but contracted in Newspeak to 'Minitrue'.  It was a lie
compressed into a small pill, to slide past the intellect unnoticed.  The
Freepers in JimRob's sandbox are to free persons as Orwell's 'Minitrue' was to a ministry of truth."

"Or as some might say, freepers are to free persons as Velveeta is to cheese."

See also a reader's query to Hugh Turley about his banishment, and Turley's response at:
http://www.trionfopublishing.com/pretenders/HT-CR.html

===

Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.

Have you seen the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum?
See what they did to the Gentile mothers and children--
http://www.Public-Action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum

If those mothers and children had been Jewish, do you think their murderers would still be on the government payroll?

Do you think Esquire magazine would have run this cartoon had the victims been Jewish?
http://www.public action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/burial/fig/b_fig01.html

"In an age of  universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell