Alex Jones -Are the censorship measures against Alex Jones a harbinger of a new false flag operation?
The internationally well-known US investigative journalist Alex Jones runs a daily radio program, the web-site “infowars.com” and the internet based TV channel “prisonplanet.com”.
From the front-line he reported critically as one of the first about the 9/11 attacks, claiming that the US administration had its fingers in the pie.
Moreover, he revealed secret Bilderberg meetings and much more. But now all of a sudden, his YouTube, Facebook and Twitter accounts have been closed.
Manfred Petritsch (alias Freeman), operator of the german internet platform “Alles Schall und Rauch” has thoughts about it. [continue reading]
License: Creative Commons License: Attribution CC BY
29.08.2018 | www.kla.tv/12937
The internationally well-known US investigative journalist Alex Jones runs a daily radio program, the web-site “infowars.com” and the internet based TV channel “prisonplanet.com”. From the front-line he reported critically as one of the first about the 9/11 attacks, claiming that the US administration had its fingers in the pie. Moreover, he revealed secret Bilderberg meetings and much more. But now all of a sudden, his YouTube, Facebook and Twitter accounts have been closed. Manfred Petritsch (alias Freeman), operator of the internet platform “Alles Schall und Rauch” has thoughts about it. Here we’ll share with you a part of his personal and frank opinion: “Reading the reports of the media on both sides of the pond about the coordinated sacking of Alex Jones by most of the internet platforms and reading the related comments, it can be summed up like this: YouTube, Facebook and Twitter are private enterprises and therefore are allowed to banish users at their discretion. This would not be censorship or restriction of the freedom of opinion. Mega corporations can be compared with a Restaurant host who can issue a house ban to his guests at will if he does not like what they are saying. This comparison is only superficially valid and only people who don't understand what this is all about will fall for it. The truth is that the exclusive Internet providers are not some small landlords, but must be compared with the postal services, telephone providers and electricity suppliers, hence with public utility services. Comparing the obviously pre-agreed upon proceedings against Alex Jones, it is as if the postal services would stop delivering letters, because the sender expresses an off-mainstream opinion. This is clearly an outrageous discrimination and disadvantage. After all the postal service is a private enterprise too or all the telephone providers or the electricity companies or many of the water suppliers. ‘Hey, we don't like what you say, therefore we shut down your electricity, the water, the phone etc.’ And then this boycott could be extended: ‘Oh, this is a conspiracy theorist, he will not be picked up by the ambulance, not admitted to a hospital, he will be not treated by doctors because he has funny ideas.’ The private financial corporations such as banks and insurances could say: ‘You cannot keep an account with us, your cards will be blocked and we won't insure you, because you believe that the Americans have never been on the moon and the earth is flat.’ The big supermarket chains could get the idea to stop selling food to customers who think 9/11 was an inside job. Or for the USA: whoever voted for Trump should starve to death! ‘What, this guy voted for Trump? He won't get a mobile phone subscription or a cable connection or the Netflix streaming service.’ Do you see what it comes down to when the example of the Internet service providers would become general practice? He who has disagreeable opinions, who expresses a different view, who puts forward assertions that do not comply with the general “consensus”, who does not vote for politicians approved by the media, will be excluded from utility services. This would be an extreme existential endangerment. […].” Intermediate conclusion: When private Internet providers ostracize people arbitrarily for their opinion, this could be applied just as well by any other private supplier, no matter in which sector. But now back to the question about the hidden backgrounds for the exclusion of the well-known and influential journalist Alex Jones and his information platforms. Here again, some extracts from Manfred Petritsch’s personal, frank opinion: ”The aggressive, unprecedented shutting down of Alex Jones (...) underlines the desperation of the totalitarian Deep State, which silences critical counter-voices. Why? Because they are planning something big. I would like to remind, that just a few days before 9/11 - as of the 5th of September, 2001 - 500 web-sites of Arabic and Muslim origin were shut down by the FBI (...). Everything points to something big. They are planning something so big, that only the official version of what happens may be heard, seen and believed. (...) The reason for 9/11 was to be able to wage “the war against terror” in foreign countries. Namely to attack and destroy one country after the next in the near and middle East. Domestically, it was about setting up a police-state. (...) Today the foreign enemies are Iran, Russia, and China. (...) It could be that again an attack against oneself is staged - a much bigger one than 9/11 - and one again “coincidentally” finds the passport of an Iranian, a Russian or a Chinese, on the crime site, like with Saddam al-Suqami an alleged airplane hijacker whose passport was found on the smoldering debris of the World Trade Center. (...). Without the censored alternative media, the enforced conform press would bring the “correct” version of the events. (...) It is the preparation for something big, something that will shake everything and hit everyone. (...)” This is Manfred Petritsch’s frank opinion. Whatever you might think of this, it is certainly good advice to carefully pay attention to what will happen and question media reports more than ever.