Thursday, October 13, 2011

A very good Interview: Clint Richardson - Lethal Injection

Clint Richardson- this is the first time I have heard him interviewed.
I enjoyed it immensely!
Be prepared to spend almost two hours listening, to this wide ranging interview.

For myself, some information was a bit surprising...
Just when you think the deviousness of the "power class" can't be any more perverse or blatant
There it is
If any readers are already aware of this fellow, let me know.

With thanks to Jan Irvin at Gnostic Media, who really conducts some interesting interviews. Gnostic Media is always linked in the side bar

"This episode is an interview with Clint Richardson, titled “Lethal Injection: The Story of Vaccines” and is being released on Monday, Oct. 03, 2011. A former Hollywood sound designer and musician, a crisis of conscious led him to begin researching, writing, and eventually producing primary research documentaries exposing the very research that Hollywood is designed to hide from the masses. Now unable to work in his industry of study (for this Hollywood betrayal), Clint applies his professional sound talent and newly learned video skills, as well as a devotion to first-hand, primary research and writing, to contribute to the “Waking Up” of the population at large. His credo… expose “them” until they dispose of him."


Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:53:46 — 80.3MB)

Clint’s Documentaries include:

The Corporation Nation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkfMuvVuETQ
The Corporation Nation 2: The Great Pension Fund Hoax: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhkWueEjewM
Lethal Injection: The Story of Vaccines http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UioC6ARoLEM

Haven't seen any of these but Jan included them as part of Clint's body of work, so I will when time allows try to check them out.
(though, as of late time hasn't been allowing much freedom for video viewing)

12 comments:

  1. Thanks so much Penny.

    This guy sounded great at first, then I got warning signs. He started on about fallacies, specifically those of the truth movement. Saying they are based all on fallacies.

    Federal Reserve - he mentioned it was created by congress, thus, it must be part of the gov't. Of course, he doesn't go into detail about anything that might dispute this.

    Like the fact that a year after it was created in 1913, that federal reserve banks became incorporated.

    That means private.

    Never mentions that they only then started issuing fed reserve notes, alongside the real gov't currency. So if the Fed is really gov't . . . why do we have to borrow the creation of its money? Isn't the gov't us, we the people? Hmm?

    That was the first one.

    Second one was a slight disinformation tint on gold, and its intrinsic value (although the bit about money I agreed with, for the most part). Gold is not the same as fiat currency, no. It cannot be reproduced. It does have actual value because of its beauty, its malleability, its low melting point, its conductivity, etc. Its an important distinction that is never mentioned (although I do agree with the obvious inflation reflection it shows) and deserves mentioning.

    A lot of the rest of the stuff was quite good, IMHO.

    Will comment more later.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I haven't listened to the audio but just picking up on Slozo's comment, it is pretty hard for a professional researcher to not know the true nature of the Feral Reserve.

    All he would have to do, so i'm told, is to look in the New York phone book under government departments and agencies and he would not find the Fed listed.

    It has to be a big red flag as Slozo says

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey slozo

    I believe he is correct that the Federal Reserve was created by an act of Congress.

    Federal Reserve Act 1913

    I am assuming, normally I hate doing that, but....he appears to be coming from the point of view that since the government is a corporation and it created the corporation of the federal reserve
    they are all part of one big corporate entity.

    I take this more as coming at the problem from a different point of view.

    At the beginning of the interview they mention the writer Larken Rose. Who I know little about.
    But the concept of the free man and personal sovereignty is one they Jan and Cliff touched as does Larken Rose.
    He also talks about taxes
    you can find an additional interview here with Larken Rose that might broaden the concepts of what they are talking about

    http://www.gnosticmedia.com/larken-rose-interview-dialectic-and-the-demise-of-government-115/

    "Second one was a slight disinformation tint on gold, and its intrinsic value (although the bit about money I agreed with, for the most part). Gold is not the same as fiat currency, no. It cannot be reproduced. It does have actual value because of its beauty, its malleability, its low melting point, its conductivity, etc. Its an important distinction that is never mentioned (although I do agree with the obvious inflation reflection it shows) and deserves mentioning."

    Isn't it amazing how two people can take away such different ideas from the same interview?
    I didn't come away with the idea that Mr Richardson was saying gold was the same as currency.
    How I understood his referencing of gold was in relation to the way it was promoted amongst the gold sellers.
    Then there was the bit about the treasury setting the price of gold at some flat rate. That was interesting. And the first time I had ever heard of that.

    I am glad you found the rest quite good because I was more concerned with that part, the Lethal Injection part- and all the regulations. Who can be experimented on? When?
    What were the "exceptions"?
    The Talmudic connection
    Angles that had never occured to me.
    The information about the vaccine being successful if it creates an
    "immune response"
    How bogus is that? If you are having an allergic reaction, aren't you having an "immune response"?

    When time allows I intend to spend more time listening, watching and checking out his stuff.
    I linked it all in the post. I can't speak to any of it, because I haven't had the time to take any of it in.
    And the interview I posted, I tried to listen to it a second time. Haven't made it all the way through though.
    ( often interviews such as this this I listen to twice, to grasp all the different concepts in them)
    But some of the vaccine stuff I was familiar with
    I am glad you found some of it worthwhile :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey James!

    Yeah I have a lot of respect for slozo's commentary, I have always considered him one of my toughest readers- he keeps me on my toes

    ", it is pretty hard for a professional researcher to not know the true nature of the Federal Reserve."

    IMO he knows, but, as I explained to slozo, he appears to be coming from the government is a corporation angle, which of course, it is.

    Therefore the corporation enshrined another corporation?

    Even the local city governments are all running corporate cities?
    Why?
    What does this really mean to us all?

    Perhaps Clint Richardson's documentary "corporation nation" would shed some light on this angle.
    When I have time, I would like to watch it but I am in the thick of things so to speak.
    Or should I say the dust and dirt?
    Oh well whichever?!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pen - then why wouldn't he explain that?

    The way he does explain it is by way of stopping the conversation about the Fed being an arm of gov't at it's INITIAL creation - and then fails to mention that it is LATER - a year afterward - made into a corporation.

    If he were in fact arguing what you are saying - coming at it from a different angle - wouldn't he be actually explaining it in a different way? Wouldn't he then explain it became a corporation, then explain how the gov't is somehow a corporation / incorporated? But no, he does not do that.

    Hence, he is disinforming.

    Subsequently, everything after that is suspect for me, and I look for what angles he is fishing at.

    And no matter what anybody says Penny, no one in the public forum can elect anyone in the Fed. Thus, it is not true gov't.

    I think turning arguments on their side as this corporation angle does tries to make one forget that the whole scheme of money/debt creation is done by a few people who make a profit on the american people borrowing that money they created out of thin air. They might as well be God, never mind kings or queens. They have that kind of power.

    "Then there was the bit about the treasury setting the price of gold at some flat rate. That was interesting. And the first time I had ever heard of that."

    Oh, and the price of gold is set by Rothschild and another fellow every morning at the London stock exchange. Seriously. Look it up.

    Not the first time I have heard of the flat rate thing . . . and it is true some of the points they bring up about inflation and such. But what they don't mention is that inflation is a reflection of how badly in debt the country is to the bankers, and how far away they are from ever being able to pay it (hint: they never can). Intrinsically, that has quite little to do with the actual value of gold, but of course, there is lots of fiddling in between . . . because the controllers like to use gold themselves as a hedge and controlling device - because they have a lot of it, and they make the rules.

    Conclusion: don't listen to anyone telling you anything, and just buy some gold and silver and sit on it. You'll know when to sell - there will be "bank holidays", and it will be an arrestable offence to have bullion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I might suggest that you read some of my recent research about the Federal Reserve and American history. We've all been fooled...


      http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/the-incontrovertible-conundrum-of-dr-ron-paul/

      http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/07/04/why-the-supreme-court-claims-obamacare-is-constitutional/

      http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/03/20/the-fallacy-of-the-dollar-crash/

      Delete
    2. 10 hours of interview might have let me scratch the surface of the issues you mention, but then that wasn't really the subject.

      Delete
    3. Hi Clint:

      Thanks for stopping by here. I have moved your responses and links up to my latest post.
      They will get more attention there, then back here

      Thanks again! :)

      Delete
  6. Hey slozo!

    "Pen - then why wouldn't he explain that?"

    I don't know.

    I can think of a number of reasons- possibilities why he did not explain in a broader manner.

    Editing of the interview?
    Time constraints?
    Not really the topic of the interview, which was about vaccines?

    But, there is no way I can know.

    "But what they don't mention is that inflation is a reflection of how badly in debt the country is to the bankers, and how far away they are from ever being able to pay it (hint: they never can)"

    I agree that was not mentioned and it is an important point, but, keep in mind slozo the interview is largely on vaccines.

    There is no way the topic of banking and all it's inherent problems will get a good airing in an interview on vaccines.

    "Hence, he is disinforming."

    I understand that is the opinion you hold and I respect that.

    Let me put this thought out to you slozo-

    When I make a post on this blog, there is no way in hell I can cover a topic in depth-
    I don't have the resources or the time to do so.
    I am quite certain there are many aspects of any given subject I miss due to these limitations.
    But, I can assure you I do the best I possibly can.
    For some reason, somewhat obsessively, I take my blog very serious.
    I reference everything.
    So readers know how I came to the conclusions that I did.
    I follow up on stories
    I regularly delete spammers
    I block followers that link to porn
    I don't want my blog to be degraded or dismissed.
    Despite all that, I have seen just that. My work dismissed.
    I have seen the postings on this blog and "Penny" dissed as a conspiracy freak, tin foil hat and all other labels.
    Despite my hard work.
    It is disheartening but there is nothing I can do about it.
    So far no one has accused me of being disinfo. Yet. But, I suspect it will happen at some point in time. I will shrug my shoulders and keep on keeping on.


    good god, does all that rambling make a bit of sense to you..
    Well... I hope so.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Makes sense Pen. And we saw it with Nobody calling out what appears to me to be a sincere John Friend. Mistakes can be made in judgement, certainly.

    Which is why I coin it as "it sounds like disinfo". Which is why I say that everything after that must be "suspect" - not bullshit, but suspect of being bullshit. Any great disinfo is half full of truth and half-truths . . . and if it's not disinfo, maybe everything after that sounds great to my discerning eye? Maybe it is explained why he has that point of view? Maybe his contention is explained in greater detail later?

    I certainly have no hard proof of it. But there were no good answers whatsoever to my questions. More to the point, your only decent reason - it was a thing on vaccines, and he probably didn't have enough time to spend on it - has little merit when you consider the amount of time he actually spent on talking about vaccines (less than 2/3 of the entire interview). He certainly took the time to explain other things . . . why not take the time to illuminate on the one controlling structure that is the most powerful one, the creation of money as debt by private persons?

    That's all my point was. Just a study in logic. The key to it, when something doesn't add up or sound right, is doing a good job of putting yourself in the speaker's shoes, and acting it out as if you are disinfo, versus if you are true blue searcher of truth. The tirck is getting inside the mind, which is a damn sight harder than almost anything to be honest.

    But I try.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Penny Quote"
    When I make a post on this blog, there is no way in hell I can cover a topic in depth-
    I don't have the resources or the time to do so.
    I am quite certain there are many aspects of any given subject I miss due to these limitations.
    But, I can assure you I do the best I possibly can.
    For some reason, somewhat obsessively, I take my blog very serious.
    I reference everything.
    So readers know how I came to the conclusions that I did.
    I follow up on stories
    I regularly delete spammers
    I block followers that link to porn
    I don't want my blog to be degraded or dismissed.
    Despite all that, I have seen just that. My work dismissed.
    I have seen the postings on this blog and "Penny" dissed as a conspiracy freak, tin foil hat and all other labels.
    Despite my hard work.
    It is disheartening but there is nothing I can do about it.
    So far no one has accused me of being disinfo. Yet. But, I suspect it will happen at some point in time. I will shrug my shoulders and keep on keeping on.


    good god, does all that rambling make a bit of sense to you..
    Well... I hope so.

    Reply.
    Yup, makes a lot of sense, to me anyway.

    Let's just take a moment to see why we have 2 hands.

    On the one hand we have this argument .While n the other hand we have the opposite argument.

    There will always be opposing views on any given subject.

    The reason is we perceive based on our own map of the world which is designed by how we grew up the influences we were subject to and the values we adopt while growing up. This develops our map of the world.
    Sensible argument you can cope with and answer in the end mature people will understand that and you will still have respect for one another.
    At other times you will agree to meet somewhere in-between the two opposing hands.

    The rest, you know those perfect people , well in their own underwear anyway, are always wrong head thinking and incapable of giving sensible argument, ergo links to tinfoil hats et al.
    l Delete them from memory as it's not worth even trying past the second or third response or even the first in some extreme instances.

    I as well as many whom I have read on your blog do respect you and your opinion.

    I thank you for all your time and effort in making a lot of sense from what can be a very confusing issue.

    Cheers

    KamNam

    P.S... A little moral encouragement does help balance the books I hope. K

    ReplyDelete
  9. Re : FED Reserve Bank : Gov created the FED and then made it impervious to ANY GOV REGULATIONS.

    The FED became an autonomous entity, and in loaning money to the U.S.A. became it's creditor.

    Worse, by controlling the AMOUNT of either Fed's note and money of account (book entries) the FED can put the U.S. A. in a stranglehold resulting in situations similar to the 1929 crash.

    Central bank can create inflation or deflation at will.

    Bank of Canada say publicly that "they aim to llimit inflation between one and 3 % a year"

    For those who understand inflation, this is theft pure and simple. So BAnk of Canada aim to take an average of 2 % a year of your hard earn money.

    Rising Sun

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS & SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS