If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Google and YouTube have banned Alex Jones, says Alex Jones in a YouTube video   (enews-press.com) divider line 165
    More: Fail, Apache Helicopter, debra medina, bush jr., Texas governor, Google Chrome, censorship  
•       •       •

12510 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Dec 2010 at 5:15 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



165 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-12-03 01:47:18 AM
spaten: Damn, I just see sheep.

Bah Bah Bah...

Winston


My favorite part of the conspiracy theorist: "Why don't you farktards agree with me? Because you suck 8 levels of ass? Be more like me, stupid!"
 
2010-12-03 01:51:33 AM
Fireproof: leadmetal: For example, we are supposed to believe that these body scanners, the well timed underpants bomber, and personal profits of a certain former high level homeland security employee were just a magical coincidence.

I know you're just a kook, but what, and who, the fark are you talking about?


I guess you live in the same intentional ignorance as most americans.


JohnnyC: It wasn't a coincidence... it was a series of events and opportunities... Let's break it down with "common sense":

Right, it's just random events that a guy with a bomb who is being WATCHED by US intelligence agencies gets to board a plane bound to the USA WITHOUT a passport, just as the body scanners are READY to go into service. Just coincidence. Just a series of things that randomly happen that are exploited by the right people all by themselves. No effort made to play them up, no buddies in places to help exploit them, nobody talking behind the scenes, no phone calls made, etc and so forth. All completely random and luck.

It a version of the same bullshiat that comes out of those who practice class warfare, that the successful were just lucky and the unsuccessful unlucky, therefore tax the shiat out of the successful and give it to the unsuccessful. No hard work involved.

JohnnyC: The guy was appointed by the Bush admin to head up Homeland Security. His job was to oversee and identify the best ways of preventing a terrorist attack here in the States. He recognizes that the backscatter tech will serve the purpose of detecting most things that they want to detect and recommends it's use. Initially it's used mostly to scan shipping crates and such, but in a few places it is used to try and find hidden drugs or bombs. Generally the public is not all that receptive to the idea and so his recommendation isn't implemented everywhere. Then he's asked to leave his job by the Obama admin. He has some "clout" as being knowledgeable about security and forms a consulting group. Rapidscan hires him on as a consultant knowing full well that he likes their backscatter system and has connections that could prove profitable for both of them. Then the jackass attempts the Christmas bombing. Seizing on the opportunity that is presented and the lessened resistance from the public about backscatter machines, he helps get backscatter machines sold to the TSA as a sure fire way to catch bombs like the one used in the recent attempted bombing... then he gets pretty rich for having done a good job as a consultant for Rapidscan.

See how that all makes sense now?


Yeah, you've just put forth a conspiracy theory that relies on remarkably good timing. But you ignore a few facts to avoid the consideration that people in the government are self serving and don't give a fark about anyone else but themselves and allies.

You want to see it as a series of randomly occurring seized opportunities, but those things don't usually happen by accident. At every stage people are pushing for this or that, talking with each other, teaming up, etc and so forth. According to you I am supposed to believe that people who work in government rely on what comes their way, very much unlike what happens in the corporate world. People who rely on what comes their way do not end up like Chertoff(sp?). The kind of people who are successful in/at politics are always talking with others and making things happen. Very rarely is someone just chosen out of the blue to go into government "service" and those people when they leave usually don't end up in a job that involves selling stuff to the government.

Or are you still going to try and imply that Rapidscan and Micheal Chertoff somehow convinced a militant extremist that he should blow himself and a plane full of people up so they could make a profit? Oh... and of course, being appointed by Bush, and fired by Obama must all have been part of the plan going all the way back to 2005... right?

So no... your conspiracy theory certainly doesn't trump reality or common sense.


I didn't offer a conspiracy theory, you did, as a strawman. But if you do even a little research you'll find that US intelligence agencies knew about the underpants bomber and someone with some kind of authority got him on that plane. That's mainstream media, no alex jones required. The man did not have a passport. I flew internationally BEFORE 2001 and I had to show my passport and get it stamped to get on the plane home, yet in 2009 the underpants bomber didn't even need a passport. Doesn't that strike you as a bit odd? Of course not, you just ignore that. Call it a conspiracy theory because it would mean something more than astounding incompetence, it would indicate intent to allow a terrorist to go forward with his plans. And that's exactly what government employees admitted when cornered on this, that they wanted to let him go forward and watch and see what he did. If not for the body scanners, for some other reason, but just using this official admission puts us in a realm of conspiracy (multiple people agreeing upon a course of action) even if ends up unlinked to the body scanners. But considering the nature of the security state, that's unlikely.

But, what is interesting is how time keeps showing conspiracy to be the nature of political events. Denied at the time, people called kooks for believing such things, but decades later it is simply admitted and/or tapes and documents come out and then becomes historical fact. By then most people don't care any more. What's done is done but the lesson to avoid it from happening again isn't learned because people refuse to believe it still goes on.

Simply look at current events with an eye of widely accepted past history and coincidence theory becomes silly. People conspire. It's the nature of politics.

The thing that is most damaging about wikileaks isn't that people know about any specific items, but that people can SEE THE PROCESS. That's what has got government types so pissed off. Nobody in the public is supposed to see what they do behind the curtains while its still relevant to the present.

JohnnyC: leadmetal: just a magical coincidence.

Oh... one last thing... Things only seem "magical" when you don't understand them.


What's there to understand about considering everything to be disconnected random events? That's exactly what people who don't wish to have any understanding do.
 
2010-12-03 02:01:53 AM
It is unfortunate that so many fail to investigate the many different "conspiracy topics" themselves. Much easier to call the messenger crazy than to find books and quotes that blatantly call out the truth to the ravings of the various mad men like Alex Jones.

"There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments ... I have objected both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies ... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known ... The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) ... the American Branch of a society which originated in England (by diamond king, Cecil Rhodes) ... believes national boundaries should be obliterated and [a] one-world rule established."

Professor Carroll Quigley, CFR member, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (1966

Good luck to humanity when the vast majority have come to love their servitude as Huxley said.

/Baaaaa
 
2010-12-03 02:25:06 AM
Veni_Vidi_Vici: It is unfortunate that so many fail to investigate the many different "conspiracy topics" themselves. Much easier to call the messenger crazy than to find books and quotes that blatantly call out the truth to the ravings of the various mad men like Alex Jones.

It simply doesn't matter how many government documents or well researched history books or anything else that they are confronted with, they won't believe it. That's how people who've read it, who've researched it become raving mad men. People simply refuse to consider it. They cannot admit they believed something that wasn't true so they block out the truth.

One of the best examples is President Lincoln. All the historical fact of what he did but people refuse to shed the myths they were taught in grade school.

As to the quote you included, there are many such admissions. They are taped, videoed, in people's own books where they ADMIT doing this that or the other thing. It's still dismissed as conspiracy theory. There's no theory involved when the principles of the conspiracy admit it. It's usually long after the fact, but it's still from the horse's mouth.

I recommend ignoring everything alex jones or his people or those like them write or say but instead read, listen to, or watch what they cite from solid sources like the foundations themselves, the released government documents, the text of legislation, the video or audio of principles, etc and so on. Just that alone is scary enough.

Just the other day I ended up with a search going to an alex jones site. I ignored his text and went right to the links of Rockefeller foundation annual reports. Sometimes I just put 'infowars' into a google search because the articles are cited such that I can go right to the mainstream news article or appropriate documentation. I don't read their article, I'm interested in what they read to write it.
 
2010-12-03 02:29:29 AM
Ishkur: Yeah, but it's all bullshiat. It's called apophenia, and it's a hallmark feature of paranoid psychotics and a serious error in logic, judgment, and investigative inquiry. This is the precisely the problem with Alex Jones -- nothing he's railing against is actually there. He finds an article on A, finds a spurious or dubious connection with G, and then rants for an hour about B,C,D,E and F to connect it all together. But there is no evidence or factual basis for any of those middle letters. He made it all up. It only exists in his head.

^^
 
2010-12-03 03:21:35 AM
mirazh1976: What Alex basically does is takes articles in relation to politics, bills, laws, local corruption, banking corruption, international/global agencies, climate science etc, reports them on his show and connects the dots to a design of our system that very few talk about and probable systematic take over of our freedoms. Articles that most main stream media finds little interest with along with sadly most other people in our country. The man actually has a very big following. His channel views are well within the 10s of millions.

img593.imageshack.us
 
2010-12-03 03:31:19 AM
^^
 
2010-12-03 03:58:11 AM
I must be really messed up because Alex Jones makes more sense to me than almost any other new source. Well, him and Randi Rhodes.

Basically, unless you're rich, you don't matter.
 
2010-12-03 04:15:47 AM
See here's the thing about this global conspiracy to control our lives and unite the planet into one world government. If these conspirators actually exist, and this is their plan, they are so ridiculously ineffectual at carrying it out, that their little club is more 'cute' than 'sinister'. Because from what I can see, this cabal is about as effective as the US senate. They've made no significant progress in achieving any of their supposed goals in North America, and they obviously have no control over the media whatsover, as evidenced by the fact that anytime the concept of globalization is emitted from my TV set, it is being portrayed in a negative light by both pundits and masses alike.

At any rate, even if such a conspiracy did ever exist, it has been rendered utterly impotent by the information age. Governments are under a constant digital microscope, and have lost almost all ability to effectively wield propaganda. It's gotten to the point where the greatest superpower in the world can't even launch a missile quietly without everyone on the planet knowing about it 20 minutes later.

So it's pretty much over for the New World Order, it was killed and eaten by an innovation it couldn't see coming. At this point the only chance these conspirators have of seeing their plans come to fruition would be to destroy the internet. Controlling it simply isn't an option, wherever basic connectivity exists, human beings far smarter than their inbred 'overlords' will be subverting it to keep information free and available.

So I'm sorry to shatter your delusions. There's nothing more fulfilling than feeling like a lone hero, an underdog fighting to save the world from a sinister force. But it's not real. It's a common fantasy, prevalent in all cultures, in different forms. In the Arab world, it's the struggle against the 'great satan' and it's efforts to destroy Islam. For Christian republicans, it's the scary Liberal Socialist Agenda! that seeks to Stalinize America. And for people with apophenia issues, it's the Illuminati.

The good news, is you're only one epiphany away from waking up from this silly dream that's been swirling in your head for countless years. Hopefully it will be sooner rather than later.
 
2010-12-03 04:36:34 AM
leadmetal: Right, it's just random

No... no... it's all an evil conspiracy. You're right. Keep chasing those demons. Maybe you'll catch them someday.

Oh... and keep an eye on your mailman... he works for "them", and "they" are always watching, you.

/psst... the only people who use the term "coincidence theory" are "conspiracy theorists"... and "they" know that too.
 
2010-12-03 05:59:23 AM
JohnnyC: leadmetal: Right, it's just random

No... no... it's all an evil conspiracy. You're right. Keep chasing those demons. Maybe you'll catch them someday.

Oh... and keep an eye on your mailman... he works for "them", and "they" are always watching, you.

/psst... the only people who use the term "coincidence theory" are "conspiracy theorists"... and "they" know that too.


Yknow, someone noticing a pattern and saying "gee, isn't that mighty convenient", and then you piling on them makes you a bit of a dick.

The DHS guy/backscatter tech thing. I'm sorry, but you are painfully stupid if that whole deal passes the smell test in your mind.

Follow the money.
 
2010-12-03 07:57:26 AM
That Collateral Murder video was AWESOME!
 
2010-12-03 02:00:43 PM
TsukasaK: I'm sorry, but you are painfully stupid if that whole deal passes the smell test in your mind.

So you're in the "he planned the underwear bomber attack on Christmas so he could make some money" camp, but you think I'm the one who is painfully stupid.

You guys give people like Chertoff too much credit. He is an opportunist for certain, but a master planner who hired a guy to blow himself and a plane full of people up, not so much. And you really think that if that was the case the guy wouldn't have squealed when the plan fell apart due to a poorly designed bomb?

Follow the logic.
 
2010-12-03 02:46:55 PM
JohnnyC: So you're in the "he planned the underwear bomber attack on Christmas so he could make some money" camp,

Figure 1-A: A strawman argument. The strawman is an argument that one didn't actually make, but your opponent sets up and knocks down for the purposes of discrediting you.

Did I say that? I don't think I said that, Johnny.
 
2010-12-03 03:22:25 PM
TsukasaK: Did I say that? I don't think I said that, Johnny.

If you weren't implying that, what were you implying?
 
Displayed 15 of 165 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report