Skip to main content

Are Michael Savage, Skojec & Alex Jones the Controlled Opposition?

As more Catholics are starting to realize that the coronavirus hysteria is as Catholic lawyer and journalist Chris Ferrera said a "monumental fraud," it appears that One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec wished to continue the fraud by hitching his wagon and crumbing credibility to pro-abortion eugenicist Michael Savage.
(Michael Savage.com, "Savage: No Easy Choice in Abortion Debate" & Mere Orthodoxy, "A lesson in Discernment: Michael Savage and Mandated Birth Control," October 9, 2010)

On April 17, in his "Coronavirus Update" One Peter Five podcast he linked to the leftist New York Times (at the Chicago Tribune website) and an article by the pro-abortion newspaper that lionized the so-called conservative radio host.

In the Skojec link, the leftist newspaper admiringly wrote that the fake conservative Savage whom it claimed was a "conservative media star" despicably called the real conservative pro-life Rush Limbaugh as well as others pro-life conservatives "intellectual dwarfs" and even "mock[ed]" him as "Rush Limbaugh,M.D., Ph.D."
(ChicagoTribune.com, The New York Times, "Why Michael Savage is blasting Sean Hannity and the ring-wing media on the coronavirus," by Jeremy Peters, April 16, 2020)

The article reported that his wife Janet Weiner (Savage's real last name is Weiner) in an interview shamefully also attacked Limbaugh and other conservatives saying they have the "culty hero worship of the uneducated" and "I don't want to identify with the conservative movement anymore."

It appears that the pro-abortion eugenicist  Savage and his wife like Hillary Clinton are calling the millions of listeners of Rush and other pro-life conservatives the "deplorables."

The New York Times piece portrayed the pro-abortion Savage as being another Albert Einstein because he has a Ph.D. in "nutritional ethnomedicine" from leftist Berkeley University.

The new Einstein Savage was apparently the first "media star" to start the harebrained conspiracy theory that "65 million" were going to die due to the coronavirus.

On January 24, he started the panic hysteria by claiming that "65 million [will be] wiped out" by the new virus in a Savage Nation podcast.
(The Savage Nation Podcast, "Deadly coronavirus outbreak quickly spreading," January 24, 2020, 10:45)

On January 24, in The Alex Jones Show, space alien believer Mike Adams told Jones that Bill Gates' model show "65 million deaths will occur globally from a very similar strain of the coronavirus."
(The Alex Jones Show, "Learn the Secrets of the Coronavirus Outbreak Who's Behind it," January 24, 2020 1:20:57-1:21:02)

It appears the three Einsteins: Savage, Adams and Jones were all reading from the same conspiracy theory script.

On February 9, Skojec was one of the first Catholic "media stars" to promote the panic hysteria by posting a link in Twitter to a coronavirus scare video of Alex Jones' InfoWars protege Paul Joseph Watson.

Is it possible that the panic promotion could have been a coordinated and synchronized media effort begun by the apparent controlled opposition "conservatives": Savage, Adams, Jones and Skojec?

Is it a coincidence that Savage and Adams on Jones' show stated on the exact same day that "65 million" could die from the coronavirus?

Is it also a coincidence that Skojec only two weeks after Savage, Adams and Jones began the promotion of the virus hysteria started promoting Jones' InfoWars protege's virus scare video?

Moreover, is it a coincidence that just two days ago that Skojec is still promoting the pro-abortion eugenicist Savage who together with Adams and Jones let loose the first virus panic trial balloons which soon became the hysteria that led to the unconstitutional totalitarian lockdowns and banning of the Mass?

In the last few days, the four appear to be backtracking a little while still not disclaiming their harebrained conspiracy theory that "65 million" people will die from the supposed new Black Plague Coronavirus.

Skojec has never personally promoted that "65 million" will die from the virus, but he obviously is in league with the three in propagandizing that the coronavirus is supposedly a new Black Plague.

All the above could be coincidental or is it conceivable that Savage who suddenly is being lionized by the leftist New York Times, a few days ago, as a Einstein with the other three are part of a possible controlled opposition.

Remember that Vladimir Lenin said:

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."
(Urban Dictionary, "Controlled Opposition")

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Aqua said…
I saw a protest sign today, against the lockdown drama, drama, drama.

“Give Me Liberty, Or Give Me Covid19”.

I hope it spreads - liberty, that is.
Alexis Bugnolo said…
Just watch the documentary, Our of Shadows, and you will begin to understand that the reason why so many public media figures tow the same line is that they are funded by the CIA.

S.S. seems to have gone bankrupt in AZ, came to VA and magico presto became a Catholic personality taking in 250k a year, insisting only on one thing, The Bergoglio is the pope, precisely at the time S.S. expressed concern that Catholics were being scandalized by the Argentine.

A detailed study of the history of the Vatican in the last 50 years shows that the CIA has washed a lot of money through the Vatican and that Benedict's removal furthered the interests of Barrack Obama, head of the CIA, in 2013.

Open you eyes, see the dots, connect the dots.
Janet R said…
Dear Mr Martinez,

The article is tremendous but I do take issue with calling Michael Savage a pro-abortion eugenicist. I have listened to him daily for twenty years and to put him in the category of these monsters is unfair. I didn't read the NY Times article and I am glad I didn't as my blood pressure rose just from the information in your article.

Savage has been angry at President Trump since he recognized Rush at the state of union address and his jealousy showed the next week on his radio show. The Times article was used as a club to hit the conservative voices and Savage is not a dumb man and not know it wouldn't be used as that. I have never listened to Rush or Sean not because I do not like Rush although I dislike Sean. Sean is for same sex marriage and he claims to be a Catholic and he thinks he is smarter than he is. Rush is a decent man but I just never listened.

After Savage's heart attack in December, he changed and not for the better. I do not know what is in Savage's heart only God does. For this long time listener, it is sad to see his show become nothing but a two hour infomercial about his degrees and his books. He is now only doing three days a week so retirement should come shortly. A very sad ending.
Trg said…
Alex Jones changed because he led a protest in Austin. His wife now wants to get custody of their daughters. She thinks he was exposed to the virus since he was shaking hands and had no mask. Mike Adams and some of his viewers do believe in aliens. I can't figure Adams out because he's against vaccines and yet he's for these lockdowns. He's like Bergolio speaks with two tongues.

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk