Veterans Today becoming the opposition??

[Matt P]

I love Veterans Today and I also hate it sometimes. We all know that admission of 60/40 truth to disinfo crap but, as I've said before, clues are given how to discern which is which. However, there's a couple other things that concern me more with the direction the site is going.
I have noticed in the past that when a website begins to put restrictions on comments or takes away simple controls that allow anonymous postings, it's a sure sign that the website is controlled by forces other than who you think controls them and that efforts are under way to limit the spread of truth. As an example, over the last couple years, Info Wars has been destroying their public comments. It used to be the comments on Info Wars were the best thing about the articles. Then they eliminated the login and allowed anonymous posts and the level of comments went through the basement and most of the great posters left. Now, aside from a couple people, reading the comments at Info Wars is like going to a backwoods carnival. Why would a site destroy one of their greatest draws??

I noticed this with my local "news"paper a couple years ago, too. Comments were a place where readers could fill in gaps the writer missed or counter arguments and offer a different version of the truth from the corporate line. Even if corporate papers published lies, you could go in and offer counter arguments and readers got both sides. Then moderators started disallowing anything that contradicted the "official" story. Then dirty tricks were employed where readers were tricked to think their comment was posted when they were the only ones seeing them. Now, comments are turned off on most stories or you have to comment through facebook, which I and many others don't use. Again, a site destroying one of the best ways to draw readers and expand the conversation, seemingly against their own interests. Makes no sense.

Veterans Today, another site where the comments are as good or better than the articles, just changed their comments standards. There is a max length allowed now. I realized this when responding to Gordon's wife, Carol, for one of her articles on diabetes. When I had finished writing a fairly detailed and cited comment, I clicked "post" and when I did I got a message indicating the comment was too long and the last half of my comment was just deleted! Gone! You know that frustrated feeling when you spend so much time writing something that's good and then something happens and it's gone? Oy! In my frustration, instead of trying to rewrite the entire comment, I just wrote a couple (admittedly crappy) short ones because I didn't have the time or energy at that moment to redo it. I had to run some errands. When I got back to the site a couple hours later to fill in some gaps, and hopefully engage Carol on her ridiculous statements about diabetes and vaccines, I was stunned to see that the comments for Carol's two diabetes articles had been turned off. She couldn't defend her position so she just turned the comments off like a coward. I can't prove it but I can tell you it happened right after my posts, which were the last two allowed.

You know what kind of people do this. Only those with an agenda and things to hide.

This is Veterans Today, senior editor Gordon Duff's wife, Carol Duff, RN. This is not the first time she, as Health Editor, has published ridiculous tripe trumpeting the mainstream medical mafia cons and the NWO propaganda we (and supposedly that site) fight so hard against. So, she writes these articles pushing medical myths, using data that has long since been exposed as crap, then torches some lady who dares to offer a different point of view (who was obviously much more wise than Carol) and then when I step in to defend the lady and offer my own data, comments are turned off.

This is the Gordon Duff who claims to have a more sophisticated intelligence apparatus than most countries in the world and he doesn't know the real deal on vaccines and the western medical mafia that kills more people every year than our bloodiest wars?? Pleeeeeeease! Any of you read Jon Rappoport's latest? Wow.

My gut tells me Veterans Today is being pulled back in and I'm not sure I can trust anything from them anymore.

Sorry for the venting.

Thoughts?

Matt

[Desire]

I know what you are saying about the change in newspapers.A friend works for a well know florida paper and used to cover important events.
A couple of years ago they told him they were no longer going to carry important stories but instead only local interest ones.They took
him off international reporting and put him on sports.

Thanks for venting ,Desire

[naste.de.lumina]

Hey mpennery.

Dealers of death are happy. The confusion continues being generated while the business is going very well.

[QUOTE]Shameless Commerce, the Merchants of Death - Posted by Gordon Duff on December 12, 2014

VT Only Specials (Staff and Readership)
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/vt-syria_013-640x434.jpg

By Gordy and Mikey
For our .308 users, link to Cabela’s ammo (http://www.cabelas.com/product/Herters-reg-Winchester-reg-Ammunition/1154496.uts?avad=48247_d793e50a&WT.mc_id=al35987&rid=12&WT.tsrc=AFF) at .34 per round.

-New- Immediate Delivery!
We have for immediate delivery, shipping within 24 hours:

1. AR 10/LR with 24 inch “lite” stainless target/match barrel, 15 inch quad rail and 3-9 x 40mm Brunton Echo scope. Includes Harris type bipod (UTG) and top quality components. $1399

2. AR 10/LR with 16 inch stainless barrel/Articulated Sniper Stock/15 Inch Midwest Industries quad rail and Brunton Echo scope. Includes Harris type bipod and top quality components. $1399

3. Ar 10/LR with 20 inch barrel/Articulated Sniper Stock/15 inch quad rail and Leatherwood 4x16x 44mm scope. Includes Harris type bipod and top quality components. $1399

4. Ar 15 .223 with 24 inch match/bull barrel/Articulated Sniper Stock, choice of optics, Brunton/Leatherwood and bipod. $999

5. Ar 15 .300 Blackout 16 inch HBAR/15 inch Super Slim quad rail, Magpul ACL Stock, 40 round magazine, NC Star 6x Tri-Rail Scope $899

6. Ar 15 .223 with 16 inch stainless barrel and 12 inch Super Slim quad rail with optic and Articulated Sniper Stock. Price: Open

7. Ar 15 10.5 inch SigTac pistol in .223 with 12 inch ultra light keymod rail, KAK flash can, Ergo grip, NiBo BCG, KAK buffer and super-premium iron sights. $829

8. SAR “Special Purpose” 12 Ga shotgun (our choice for premium “home defense”) $219.00

http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/vt-syria_032-640x141.jpg

(Our complete .308’s with optic priced near auction wholesale for “stripped” uppers only…even then not up to our standards…their “starting price”)

More (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/12/13/black-saturday-sale-starring-a-new-308-tactical/)

The weapons advertising explores a tentacle created by misinformation that sophisticated to incorporate it.

It's like I see VT today. I still keep an eye on them.

Hugs.

Naste.

[justntime2learn]

I feel like I can put everyone in one of the following categories.

Psychic Vampire:

Drains the positive emotional energy of others. They use any methods to fill in the void they have deep within themselves. Best way to stop a psychic is to set emotional boundaries. Psychic Vampires require direction in life to learn how to become independent and not codependent as they are so used to. Like an addict they can drain others rapidly and always have 1 main characteristic of being needy emotionally and requiring some form of reassurance. Psychic Vampires always attract each other as they love to be social. There is always a head Psychic Vampire that leads the others that they respect. Psychic Vampires should avoid psychic poisoners at all cost for they will lead the psychic vampires to feel more drained and desperate.

Psychic Donor's like to provide reassurance for others by constantly giving and providing positive emotions. They must watch out for they can easily be drained dramatically of all their joy and feel almost dead. Psychic Donor's need to recognize that they have to also watch out and push themselves beyond their capabilities. Psychic Donor's naturally are optimistic about encouraging and helping others. Psychic Donor's should watch out for psychic poisoners as they will completely drain all of their energy and turn them into a Psychic Vampire to a certain extent yet they know its not right inside.

Psychic Healers very rare to find they know the correct amount of positive emotional energy to provide to others. They have a safety switch inside that lets them know when they are being depleted. As a save yourself before its too late. Psychic Healers transfer their positive energy in exchange for the others negative ones then begin healing the negative one and turning it back into a positive energy. Psychic Healers can help Psychic Vampires and Psychic Donor's to decrease their need since they can pin point the source of the taint and reverse it. Psychic Healers really despise Psychic Poisoners since they can instantly spot them and know what they are doing is bring death to all instead of life for everyone including themselves.

Psychic Poisoners are the worst of the worst they can never give only take. Psychic Poisoners are almost completely deprived of all positive emotions except the one that is keeping them alive. They have a very negative outlook for others saying if I cant have it then no one can. Psychic Poisoners are very 2 faced one to get your guard down the other to keep you in a mirage while they are secretly stealing your positive emotions in-exchange for their negative ones. By the time one realizes or escapes the damage has already been done. Psychic Poisoners love Psychic Vampires to manipulate and use them as minions while feeding them poison to keep them under control. Psychic Poisoners are highly attracted to Psychic Donor's since they give selflessly always. Psychic Poisoners can't stand Psychic Healers since they force themselves to really question about how long do you really wish to feel really dead inside knowing that if others find out you'll really be alone to face yourself.

Your thoughts ?

[rgray222]

The questions becomes when visiting sites like VT, is one a discerning reader or a useful idiot? A discerning reader will question everything and useful idiot will not ask questions, believe what is written and spread the misinformation/disinformation far and wide. Usually when a discerning reader questions something and the response is over the top that should be a read flag. If comments are discarded, turned off or commentators are banned you can usually write the story off as intentional disinformation.

The more over the top a story and its headline...............the more readers pay attention. I have noticed over the years that VT is getting more and more outrageous with their headlines and their claims. Their stories have become very egregious and in most cases it becomes impossible to check out their claims. Once trust is loss with a source, I abandon it, I refuse to become "their useful idiot."

[David Ansible]

Turning comments off seems kind of weak. The comment length limit has been
there for many months now. I liked the old design of the site better.

But I don't think there's some grand conspiracy. Carol Duff just didn't want to have to deal with comments so she turned them off.

[KiwiElf]

Agree with you on that one, David. Their "new" layout sucks in terms of getting information, compared to the old one. (Sure, like many things these days, "it looks good" - ...with little substance ;)).

[Kryztian]

I enjoy reading Veterans Today articles, InfoWars articlkes, seeing Youtube videos, etc. when they are linked from Project Avalon, because, I can see the comments here, on Avalon - they are usually among the most thoughtful and insightful. I guess many feel it is safer to comment when they are anonymous (like the NSA really doesn't know it's you posting Tim Smith of 123 Maple Lane, Kokomo, IN Social Security #123-45-6789) and want to make it easier and keep people from holding back.

I agree that trying to screening out short meaningless comments of gut reactions is a good idea and yes, long thoughtful responses are a good thing and more worthwhile reading.

[jake gittes]

I love Veterans Today and I also hate it sometimes. We all know that admission of 60/40 truth to disinfo crap but, as I've said before, clues are given how to discern which is which. However, there's a couple other things that concern me more with the direction the site is going.

I have noticed in the past that when a website begins to put restrictions on comments or takes away simple controls that allow anonymous postings, it's a sure sign that the website is controlled by forces other than who you think controls them and that efforts are under way to limit the spread of truth. As an example, over the last couple years, Info Wars has been destroying their public comments. It used to be the comments on Info Wars were the best thing about the articles. Then they eliminated the login and allowed anonymous posts and the level of comments went through the basement and most of the great posters left. Now, aside from a couple people, reading the comments at Info Wars is like going to a backwoods carnival. Why would a site destroy one of their greatest draws??



Veterans Today, another site where the comments are as good or better than the articles, just changed their comments standards. There is a max length allowed now. I realized this when responding to Gordon's wife, Carol, for one of her articles on diabetes. When I had finished writing a fairly detailed and cited comment, I clicked "post" and when I did I got a message indicating the comment was too long and the last half of my comment was just deleted!
My gut tells me Veterans Today is being pulled back in and I'm not sure I can trust anything from them anymore.

Sorry for the venting.

Thoughts?

Matt

Matt, I've been wondering what the heck is going on at VT myself and agree, particularly with what I bolded. Barrett wrote something recently but none of their other main guys -- Duff, James, Dean, Fetzer -- have recently. Did they get whacked in Syria? Plus many of the commenters are gone. Vamoose. Usually there were several who would comment about many articles, but they are gone, too. I didn't like the new layout but could live with it.

This other stuff is strange, though. Many of the articles have no grit and who is this new guy pumping up "what the military can teach leadership in the corporate world?" Huh? wtf is this rah-rah crap of two of the most corrupt entities - military and corporate - in existence? Kaplan?? Even referencing the Wounded Warriors, which VT has labeled totally a corrupt sham multiple times. Not only that but he has TWO articles, both the same rah-rah stuff. It may as well be Fox News. So among the most recent articles, writers are Kaplan (2), Lendman, Sherwood Ross and Rosenstein. That's a disturbing trend. Scroll through the horizontal mugshots of the featured columnists and look how out of whack Kaplan is to the others. It's like the site has been hijacked by idiots.

That is strange about your quote. I recently commented on one of the Sandy Hook articles and my comments were "awaiting moderation" or something forever - in effect silencing them. That raises a red flag. I have always noticed a word limit, but a warning would come up when I would reach it. So I'd then copy and paste the whole thing into a document and either finish it there then split it up as replies, or just add on replies at good break-off points. I tried doing that with my SHook comments but they never seemed to make it or if they did, it was when the article had already long dropped off the "main" board.

Agree about Infowars. I quit going there quite a while back but the comments section used to be the best part of it, as you could sometimes find intelligent comments and links to other, better sites among them.

Maybe that's just it. Maybe we enjoyed the comments at each because there were good comments, which is why they're disappearing now by whatever powers. VT? Something between us and VT? Something that's taken over VT? But something is definitely amiss at VT. By the thanks on your post, looks like others are noticing it, too.

[Hanson]

My gut tells me Veterans Today is being pulled back in and I'm not sure I can trust anything from them anymore.

Thoughts?

From Veterans Today article "WW3 Face Off (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/12/06/ww3-face-off/)" by Preston James:


Is there a chance that Dr. Brzezinski will assert the control that he has probably attained and decide to work directly with President Putin via back-channels to avert a WW3 which seems inevitable unless the WZ Confederacy is stopped cold.

If this new American Populism arises in enough prominence, it may be a signal to Dr. Brzezinski and his compatriots in the top faction of the SSG that any move by this top faction of the SSG to take control of the USG and reestablish Rule of Law, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights would be fully supported by the High Command of the US Military, the good half of the US Military, and as well as the American People in mass.
So Brzezinski is going to change his spots and return Americans to the principles under which the USA was founded.

Right.

Yes, I've noticed Veterans Today may be doing the "bait and switch" thing that a controlled opposition likes to employ. Suggesting that Brzezinski is the super hero who will save the day is absurd. Ask the Taliban.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYvO3qAlyTg

[jake gittes]

Hanson, I thought the Ziggy claim was from bizzaro-world too.

I see today articles are up by Preston James & Fetzer and the video of GD's speech.

[ghostrider]

mind control and the swaying of public opinion on every topic is the second step of a system based on tyranny ... hence loss of freedom of speech - we will tell you what to think , then you'll know what we want said about the topic of the day ... we can't have you reading the thoughts of others or we might lose control of our agenda ... out on limb on this one but , Veterans today may have been infiltrated by the CIA spooks ... I've seen a lot of changes in the last two months about internet blogs , rules , procedures etc ... they are at a mad feverish pace to control internet traffic anyway possible , they are preparing for something big they don't want to lose control of the narrative on ... what's strange is it's across the board on all venues not just alternative media ...

[ThePythonicCow]

Followers of this Veterans Today thread might find this video, which Gordon Duff uploaded to his Youtube channel a few days ago, interesting.

It is the first time that I recall seeing Gordon Duff speaking, on video. Previously I have only read his words and listened to him calling into various shows and interviews.
jE2_qmlKFVU

Keynote Speach, Damascus Terror Conference
Gordon Duff is the heavy set white haired man wearing the open neck white dress shirt and suit. The other man speaking is translating what Duff speaks for the Syrians present.

[NancyV]

Even if Gordon Duff is correct about his obvious anti Israel views and opinion that Israel basically owns and manipulates the US congress, he seems to be falling into the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" by telling his theories to the Syrians and others at the conference. Either that or he is deliberately arousing/increasing anti-Israeli sentiments. What he said, if believed, would deepen hatred of Israel by the attendees, who probably don't need much inspiration to hate Israel more than they already do.

I have never trusted one word that Duff says, especially after he disclosed that much of what he says is misleading. When I know someone lies much of the time I don't bother to try to figure out when they are lying or when they are telling the truth. It seems wiser to me to stop paying any attention to what they say, other than for entertainment purposes, because you can never know for sure what is true and what is not true.

So.... is he lying in what he's saying in this video? Who knows! Whether he is lying or not he's either trying to foment a war, which would probably help those who may have propped up ISIS and other jihadists, or he has some other agenda. If he IS telling the truth then I think he has misplaced his trust by telling the Syrians what he thinks he knows. If what he's saying is even partially correct, then I think his judgment is extremely poor by saying this at the conference. If he is not assassinated for saying this, then that might tell us that he is on some kind of mission approved by those who would otherwise kill him. I don't think the controllers would let him get away with this unless he is part of an overall agenda.

[lucidity]

I thought everyone already knew that the Isreali lobby dominated the US congress.
It seems to me that Duff is simply spelling out the obvious... but quite brave of him
to do so in Damascus; it's not what you might call a safe part of town.

I am puzzled by suggestions that Duff has lied, or is a liar. Where are the details ?
It comes across like a base-less smear since there are no specifics in the suggestion.

be happy

lucidity

[Hanson]

So.... is he lying in what he's saying in this video? Who knows!
That seems too dismissive. Duff appears to be genuine and truthful to me.


I don't think the controllers would let him get away with this unless he is part of an overall agenda.
That seems too presumptuous. Anyone can dismiss anything with that kind of reasoning.

[David Ansible]

I don't think anything is really "amiss" at VT, unlike Jake Gittes above. There is an ebb and flow, and we are in an ebb. That's it.

Another point: I do not agree with people who take VT as a monolith and dismiss it because it sometimes has crappy articles, or even "disinformation." The writers there have freedom to write pretty much what they want. That is the beauty of the site. You will get things you disagree with, you will get utter crap, and you will get pure brilliance. That's VT. Reject the crap, take the brilliance.

I too dislike the removal of comments. Occasionally comments need to be removed, but some of the writers, Preston James in particular, have shown remarkably thin skin of late, and have been removing too many comments, some with valid points, or that are at least stating a coherent, reasonably plausible opinion. It makes VT look bad when writers do this, as this thread shows!

It's not because "some entity" has gotten ahold of VT though. Some writers have just decided (wrongly in my view) to police the comment board excessively.

Other writers, Barrett and Fetzer, and Duff (perhaps to a lesser degree), rarely remove comments.

But VT is a great site. There is no other site like it. Duff is genuine, as are the rest of them. I think if you watch the above video you can see that (with Duff). Cheers.

[jake gittes]

It does seem back to normal today, David. Maybe I got paranoid in the ebb while they were overseas. I try to remain objectively discerning of everything I read and had detected an odd shift. Nobody gets a free pass from me, though -- not even VT, which has been my most-visited site this past year. Maybe the severe downturn in comments has something with administrating the new set-up. Or maybe reading so much intel has me thinking like intel now, always aware of a possible leak at the circus.

[David Ansible]

I detected something as well. Fewer articles for one thing. So I am with you on
that....

[Sean]

I thought everyone already knew that the Isreali lobby dominated the US congress.
It seems to me that Duff is simply spelling out the obvious... but quite brave of him
to do so in Damascus; it's not what you might call a safe part of town.

I am puzzled by suggestions that Duff has lied, or is a liar. Where are the details ?
It comes across like a base-less smear since there are no specifics in the suggestion.

be happy

lucidity

there's audio Of Gordon saying that 40% of what appears on VT is inaccurate. what the people who use that to smear him never mention is, that's on purpose. It's because certain things are too classified to post, sources would be revealed and so forth. we have to read between the lines on a lot of stuff there. Gordon isn't a liar,but, with the intel he has access to, if he told it all, he could find himself getting killed for it. VT is solid, imo. the comments thing is overblown. I've conversed with Gordon and Jim Dean via email before, and I've read VT for a good 2 years now. They're not controlled opposition, they're not lying, they're not making stuff up. We get,from them, arguably the best intel a civilian(as in non-military, and not a member of an intel agency) could get. I think these guys risk quite a lot to bring us this intel. Now..if you REALLY want something to speculate on..what was that story I saw about Franklin Lamb trying to plant drugs and set up the whole VT crew in Syria? never got the full story on THAT.

[Hanson]

there's audio Of Gordon saying that 40% of what appears on VT is inaccurate. what the people who use that to smear him never mention is, that's on purpose. It's because certain things are too classified to post, sources would be revealed and so forth.
That's a critical point that I wanted to highlight. I went back to the October 12, 2012 interview (https://archive.org/details/GordonDuff.FalseInformationControversy) to make sure I remembered it correctly. Duff can't be brutally honest because he would most likely be brutally dead in short order. I also believe that like most humans, Duff doesn't know the whole truth anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if 50% of what we each believe to be the truth is wrong. So if VT can hit the 60% mark, it is probably doing better than most of us.


They're not controlled opposition, they're not lying, they're not making stuff up.
I suspect that is mostly the case, but like everyone else, they rely on incoming information from other humans that are only maybe 50% correct on average. So they are going to get some things a little wrong, and a few things really wrong. The Brzezinski as super hero scenario may be one of those "really wrong" speculations. I've studied Brzezinski for a while, and he is a real snake, just like his former mentor Kissinger. Though both are often painted as white hats by the media, they aren't. They are wolves in sheep's clothing, and their hats could hardly be blacker.