HOW is Alex Jones a shill? Prove it to me.

a reply to: 8BitOperator

For example, just take a look at this clip from the BBC and ask yourself who or what this benefits. Because this is a disgusting example of Jones' behaviour.

I watched this episode of Daily Politics live...
& rest assured the only deliberate disgusting behaviour came from Andrew Neil who was clearly told before hand to interrupt everything Alex said and call him a paranoid irrational CT...

& it's a common occurrence on the BBC unless you indulge in Question Time, the only credible political show on English Television!!!


So going by this example I expect the rest of your examples to be lacklustre attempts at branding Alex Jones...
Remember, live, not clips...
& since then, ironically, I now look at Andrew Neil as a blatant shill!!!


Peace!!!

a reply to: 8BitOperator

Well, well, well... Where does one begin with this despicable, nasty, arrogant, vile man? Yes. Don't even get me wrong about where I'm coming from here, because if you in any way can't accept people "attacking" Alex Jones, and are happy to remain ignorant, then please just skip my post right now. It's not for you.

Ignorant?

Please read my other posts and try to understand where I'm coming from before you start calling names, thanks. Really shows me a lot about your arguing tactics. Your first sentence is filled with direct insults. Shows me a lot about you.

For me, Alex Jones represents everything that is wrong with conspiracy pundits who are placed up on a giant pedestal by their followers and are given a loud voice (in Jones' case, a very loud voice). It's difficult to put into words just how much anger I feel when I hear this man speak (especially on TV or to a large audience). He utterly disgusts me. And, by all accounts, he SHOULD disgust every single person who considers themselves a conspiracy theorist or "truther". I want no association with this man, nor have I ever attempted to ally myself with him. Yet, he claims to speak for ALL conspiracy theorists. Let's get one thing straight: he doesn't speak for me.

Ah, I see. You're one of *those.*

He should disgust everyone in the conspiracy community, huh? Statements like that disgust me. See, by saying this, you're suggesting that everyone should see Alex Jones the way you do. News flash; everyone in the world is NOT going to agree with you and you alone.

Its a basic psychological tactic to speak in a very calm voice when trying to mislead or subdue someone. And if you have a brain stem, you'll be able to piece together that this tactic is often used by mainstream media. Especially when a REAL crisis is going on, and the higher-ups can't afford for us peasants to spiral into panic.

Alex Jones--regardless of your opinion of him--does the very opposite when he speaks. No sugar coating, no manipulative soothing tone, none of that falsifying therapist-voice garbage. You can hate him for every other reason on the planet--but from a psychological approach, as far as "waking people up" is concerned, Alex ranting and raving is a very good thing. It breaks the trance, see?

He's a rude, obnoxious loudmouth who acts like he is on crack, and I'm supposed to believe this is a GOOD thing for this "movement"? Get real, please. You might believe his act. You might believe that he is genuine. You might even believe that he has a right to be angry

Dear Christ, are you suggesting that he--and the rest of us--DON'T have a right to be angry? And you're telling ME to get real? Now its extremely obvious you're typing out of sheer emotional distaste. The more you learn about our government's secrets, the more angry you become. How do you expect a guy to act when his entire life revolves around covering those stories?

So everyone's supposed to be calm, cool, and collected when Obamacare is juicing the blood right out of us, while people are continuously being deployed to invade other countries for seemingly no reason? You're making me a bit physically sick now.

But, the problem is, if you want to be taken seriously, if you want to be able to have a logical, intellectual debate about these subjects, you CANNOT fly off the handle every single damn time! There needs to be calm, rational, and level headed dialogue, NOT insane, vitriolic ranting and over-the-top, faux-dramatic outbursts! Alex Jones has the kind of attitude that is akin to a ten year old in a school playground having a tantrum. Just look at how he acts, look at how he treats people, and ask yourself: does this man hold the moral high ground in debates? Even if you think what he is arguing is CORRECT, that is a non-issue because he acts like a complete imbecilic moron. And doing so will NEVER help the credibility of these issues if/when they hit the mainstream.

The situation is not calm, rational, or level headed. Therefore, it would be foolish to act like everything is hunky-dory when its not. In fact, its disgusting. Its deceptive, pathetic, and utterly cowardly not to face the problems head-on. Putting on a calm show is not the solution. In fact, its one of the biggest methods by which the problem grows, and people continue to harbor under the delusion that things 'aren't that bad' and no one needs to worry.

You underestimate the method that the messenger used to speak his message. If someone speaks in a calm, rational voice, then the listeners--despite what is being said--will understand it to be a minor problem at best.

When they see a ranting, angry man hollering about everything that's wrong with the world, they stop and think, What on earth is he so angry about? That's what moderately intelligent people think, anyway.

does this man hold the moral high ground in debates? Even if you think what he is arguing is CORRECT, that is a non-issue because he acts like a complete imbecilic moron

So the argument doesn't matter at all, because Alex Jones delivers the message in a less-than-calm manner? Shiza. Priorities are a thing, you know.

Just consider for a moment why Alex Jones would be "allowed" (more on that later) to appear on TV, on networks such as Fox and CNN in order to go off on his ridiculous rants, and plug his website. Why do you think that the mainstream media would promote Alex Jones the most when it comes to conspiracy theories, rather than any number of calmer and more rational speakers? Do you think it's because Jones represents a "fair and balanced" view of the other side of the coin? Or do you think it's because he appears to be a raving nut, and by promoting him, they can project the impression and viewpoint that all conspiracy theorists are also crazy nuts or must also agree with this lunatic?

Ben Shapiro appeared on the Piers Morgan Show the day after Alex, and made almost the exact argument Alex made. He stated that Piers acts like a bully, and that governments tend to turn tyrannical, so he's all in favor of keeping semi-auto rifles legal. He even once said "don't lump me with Alex Jones" when Piers proceeded to call "people like him" paranoid and mentally ill, or something of the like.

Very few people I talk to on this matter know Ben Shapiro was on the show the day after Alex, and most conspirators I talk to don't even know who he is. He got very little credit or coverage for making the exact argument Alex made, and you know what? He was using that calm, rational debating method you mentioned. Didn't work out too well, did it?

The google-search craze of the word "Democide" is proof enough that Alex's tactic worked.

the issue with Jones is not necessarily what he says (although that is an issue) it is what he doesn't say. It is the information he omits from his broadcasts. It is the real powerful information that he will not touch, and he does so deliberately to keep people nicely wrapped up in their quilts

You provide no examples or even suggestions as to what he keeps out of his show, so I'll go ahead and assume you're talking about the Zionist conspiracy, or how reptoids rule the world.

-(continued)-

a reply to: 8BitOperator

-(continued)-

Now, when you watch this next clip, keep a close eye on Alex Jones assaulting a man saying the words "peace" to him. Just look at the attitude he is presenting, look at the things he is doing. Is this man aiding the truth movement? Is he doing more good than harm as many have argued when presented with the idea that Jones is a shill? If I'm being honest, I thought the fact that Jones was a shill became self-evident years ago, but apparently not.

I've seen every link you've posted here more than once.

He's not a shill, he's human. I'm not gonna advocate his screw ups--but that's all they are. Screw ups.

And unfortunately for him--unlike the rest of us--because of his position, most of his human screw ups are caught on camera.

Those slip-ups don't equate to him being a Zionist reptilian shill.

lies that he spewed about Bill Cooper, his infamous Y2K broadcast and the absolute web of complete propaganda, outright fear mongering and total rubbish that he thrust upon his listeners causing many of them to head for the hills quite literally

I'm not on the Bill Cooper bandwagon, and I was about two years old when he was big in the world. But as far as the rest of this; now you're suggesting that he's spreading fear and propaganda? I thought he was lulling the conspirators to sleep, as you say, nicely under their quilts?

Jones will never quite get there. Instead he perpetually leads people in circles, never going any higher than the Bilderberg Group, and always using innocuous terms like 'elites', 'globalists', etc., in order to make his points. This perpetuates the endless mystery of 'who' is at the top, whilst never getting you anywhere. It can be said that Jones has the uncanny ability to talk a lot, but say very little.

Tell me, what exactly is higher than the Bilderberg group? A secret meeting of all the top world leaders sounds like the highest of problems.

The mystery of "who" is at the top can be seen in the protest videos made during Bilderberg meetings. They make it a point to film or snap pics of the attendees, and many times, the pics disprove the *official* list of attendees.
If you think it goes any higher than that, you're either referring to God, or the aliens, reptoids, and Jews orchestrating our world and brainwashing everyone into bowing down to Satan (Gimme a break).

It can be said that Jones has the uncanny ability to talk a lot, but say very little.

Maybe you perceive it this way because you expect him to give you all the answers... then you get huffy and angry when he doesn't. No human is going to give you all the answers. All he can do is give you the story. What you do with the information is entirely up to you.

Bashing the messenger does not discredit the message.

If you don't like the way he does it, go out and do it yourself.

Israel... & Zionism in particular have very little to do with America...
Mr.Jones deals solely with American politics...
So it is of little use to him to clean up the World by starting outside his own doorstep!!!


Secondly he has actually said at a conference that many of the Jewish people he associates with do not agree that the State of Israel should exist, primarily because it hasn't been earned as with prophecy of the Torah...
Zionism and Jewish are very different!!!


Finally, to elaborate on my first point...
Why debate Israel when America is in such a state politically...
He doesn't mention European conquest, or UK problems, or Chinese superpowers...
Unless they are directly related to American interest!!!

Rightly so...
You can't fix your Homes problems by discussing how your neighbours or people two streets away are getting on...
& that is the perfect analogy of Mr.Jones' movement & focus!!!


Great thread Angelus
S&F!!!

Peace everybody!!!

The problem with Alex, is that he tends to tie everything together and twist things up a bit...I've heard him start off on RFID stuff and he's asking good questions and doing good stuff and then it turns into the mark of the beast...okay...I can see that maybe and then it turns into Anti Obama and then something about Hillary and then it twists again. That's his problem. He tends to tie all of this stuff together and it gets muddled and confused and that hurts his credibility.

a reply to: amazing

I personally enjoy it being big, general, and muddled. That's how I see the world; big picture.

But I perfectly well understand that everyone can't see it this way, and I can see very well why all-over-the-place rants can lead people astray or get them confused.

Thankfully, they write articles about the topics. So, you have some leads as to where you can look into the topics more deeply for yourself. If nothing else, ATS usually has the latest news on the home page.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord


He's going out of his way to make online conspiracy theorists look like crazy fools by being the poster child of over-the-top imbecilic insanity.

That.........was Fantastic......

well said and couldnt agree more

a reply to: projectvxn

Firstly I'm not a gullible moron...

He knows he can turn any event into a conspiracy theory and make it stick.

Is that his plan???

I notice him sharing already available news sources... But given a full narrative!!!
An inch long column beside a full spread of Miley Cyrus cavorting in a lack of clothing...
Which ideally intelligent people would skip the page and miss the big scoop that has been turned into a tiny tidbit...
Isn't the same as a whole segment from InfoWars!!!


So no I don't think his plan is to make everything a conspiracy, I think his plan is for all major news to receive the fine-toothed comb treatment!!!
Which should be happening already but isn't!!!

Don't blame Alex, blame MSM for not elaborating on these topics!!!
If they did Alex wouldn't have a job...
But then the people would be getting angry...
Which is Mr.Jones' only fault as he seems to get angry for others... They need to get off their lazy arses soon if they truly feel like Alex!!!



Peace Project!!!

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Don't pay too much mind to them, I'm losing hope in these paranoid folks.

Its utterly sad when a man's humanity can be stripped away from him with the mere gossip of speculation, accompanied by delusional paranoia.

originally posted by: XxNightAngelusxX
Ignorant?

Please read my other posts and try to understand where I'm coming from before you start calling names, thanks. Really shows me a lot about your arguing tactics. Your first sentence is filled with direct insults. Shows me a lot about you.

The 'you' was intended as an encompassing, proverbial 'you', and certainly not directed towards you personally. I was replying to the thread as a whole, and my post is not aimed at any one person. However, I apologise if that's how it came across; certainly it was not my intention to personally insult you, Night. Our views may differ on Alex Jones, but all in all, as I see it, we are on the same side in the end. I was merely using the term ignorant as others have used the term paranoid, as a generalisation; but in retrospect I could have worded it differently. Again, I apologise if I offended you as that definitely was not my intention.

He should disgust everyone in the conspiracy community, huh? Statements like that disgust me. See, by saying this, you're suggesting that everyone should see Alex Jones the way you do. News flash; everyone in the world is NOT going to agree with you and you alone.

Its a basic psychological tactic to speak in a very calm voice when trying to mislead or subdue someone. And if you have a brain stem, you'll be able to piece together that this tactic is often used by mainstream media. Especially when a REAL crisis is going on, and the higher-ups can't afford for us peasants to spiral into panic.

Alex Jones--regardless of your opinion of him--does the very opposite when he speaks. No sugar coating, no manipulative soothing tone, none of that falsifying therapist-voice garbage. You can hate him for every other reason on the planet--but from a psychological approach, as far as "waking people up" is concerned, Alex ranting and raving is a very good thing. It breaks the trance, see?

Yes, 'should'; not 'have to', 'do', or 'would'. I know not everyone agrees with my position, but I am not forcing anyone to. People believe what they want to believe, however, believing strongly in your own stance in a debate and hoping that others may consider it and also agree with it is a natural view for a person to take. I'm not really sure what your issue is here? If wanting other people to feel the way you do about something is wrong, then what is the point of having a debate surely?

And, it is possible to be passionate about something and project yourself without needing to shout over people. I think you've slightly missed my point here, the issue is not that I think people should present their arguments in an uninspired manner; it is that Alex Jones regularly interrupts and shouts OVER people, and that isn't a legitimate debating tactic, it's just plain rude and obnoxious. You can be fired up, passionate, and yes, even loud about something without being an arsehole. Politeness is respected in intellectual debate.

Dear Christ, are you suggesting that he--and the rest of us--DON'T have a right to be angry? And you're telling ME to get real? Now its extremely obvious you're typing out of sheer emotional distaste. The more you learn about our government's secrets, the more angry you become. How do you expect a guy to act when his entire life revolves around covering those stories?

So everyone's supposed to be calm, cool, and collected when Obamacare is juicing the blood right out of us, while people are continuously being deployed to invade other countries for seemingly no reason? You're making me a bit physically sick now.

I never once said that you, he, or anyone else don't have the right to be angry. I think you are misconstruing what I am saying. The point I am making is this: you can be as angry as you want, and that is fine, but when you are on the media/political/activist or whatever other stage, you cannot let that anger take over to the point where you come across as arrogant, rude, self-centred and quite simply, an arse. No. I'm not saying people need to be cool about everything; that is very clearly not the point I am making. Again, you can be passionate and angry about subjects without lowering yourself to rudeness and unpleasant outbursts that serve no good. There's a difference between being loud and proud, and loud and rude.

So the argument doesn't matter at all, because Alex Jones delivers the message in a less-than-calm manner? Shiza. Priorities are a thing, you know.

No. The point was the argument isn't going to matter to other people if Jones presents himself like a troll who has no control over himself. Again, it's not about him being loud per se, it's about him stepping on people and thinking that it's an ok way to act. There was no excuse for his actions at the Austin gun rally, and I can't believe people would step up to defend it in any way.

Ben Shapiro appeared on the Piers Morgan Show the day after Alex, and made almost the exact argument Alex made. He stated that Piers acts like a bully, and that governments tend to turn tyrannical, so he's all in favor of keeping semi-auto rifles legal. He even once said "don't lump me with Alex Jones" when Piers proceeded to call "people like him" paranoid and mentally ill, or something of the like.

Very few people I talk to on this matter know Ben Shapiro was on the show the day after Alex, and most conspirators I talk to don't even know who he is. He got very little credit or coverage for making the exact argument Alex made, and you know what? He was using that calm, rational debating method you mentioned. Didn't work out too well, did it?

Of course it didn't. And of course, a lot of people aren't aware of it. Because they had Alex Jones on the day before, so who exactly are people going to remember? I just disagree that people are remembering him for the right reasons. And again, the point is that if Jones hadn't have been allowed to appear on Piers Morgan the day before, Ben Shapiro may well have got much more recognition. But as I said before, the issue isn't your own personal level of passion or how fired up you get about a particular issue, it's about how you conduct yourself when you do so. There is a right way and a wrong way to act in a debate.

You provide no examples or even suggestions as to what he keeps out of his show, so I'll go ahead and assume you're talking about the Zionist conspiracy, or how reptoids rule the world.

No, and no. I fleetingly mentioned Zionism, but only as an aside and as an acknowledgement of what others have mentioned. I don't consider Zionism the be-all and end-all of anything. A part of the problem? Yes. But, like many parts, subservient.

As for Reptilian Shapeshifters, as much as we might disagree about Alex Jones, I think we probably can both agree that is utter stuff and nonsense of the highest degree. I'd like to think we could find a common ground somewhere, and as I said before, it's nothing personal, and I'm sorry if you were offended or took it be so.

a reply to: XxNightAngelusxX

I'm not against people who don't like Alex's approach, but to hate him as a person is quite illogical IMO!!!
I'm personally in your corner and find his passionate side a breath of fresh air!!!

But to buy into the rumours & accusations is truly a shame, as most, if not all of the allegations of being a Zionist originate from some very Anti-Semitic sources, if people knew who started these rumours they'd be disgusted, not in agreement!!!

As a quick breakdown Zionism started early 1900s, was based on a prophetic but earned promised land...
Even a lot of Jews do not agree that it has been earned yet, & that the original movement has been infiltrated by many non-Jewish Zionists whose true goal just seems to be another Middle Eastern ally rather than what's good for the Hebrew people!!!

Here is a good website that will break it down even better for you when you have the time...
True Torah Jews Against Zionism!!!



Peace Angelus!!!

originally posted by: XxNightAngelusxX

I've seen every link you've posted here more than once.

He's not a shill, he's human. I'm not gonna advocate his screw ups--but that's all they are. Screw ups.

And unfortunately for him--unlike the rest of us--because of his position, most of his human screw ups are caught on camera.

But, how many times does a person need to screw up massively before it becomes too much of a habit? I don't know, I'm just conjecturing there, but personally I don't consider an assault a 'screw up'; it's serious business. The term screw up seems a little too flippant for some of these actions. And how can you watch this man shout in a poor woman's face about his 1st Amendment rights, when he is trampling over someone else's! She is simply trying to reason with Jones, and get him to come up to the podium and enter into dialogue with them. And also to stop shouting over THEIR demonstration! Why is it that Jones doesn't listen at all? He just completely ignores them, and like a rude arsehole continues to shout over them and doesn't go over to discuss anything with them! Now, why does Jones act like this, and then continue to stay near the road? Is it because he wants to be the first person people will see when they look over at the demonstration? Why did he hijack it, and then not listen to reasonable requests to cease his actions and talk to them? Just what the hell did he think he was doing?

I'm not on the Bill Cooper bandwagon, and I was about two years old when he was big in the world. But as far as the rest of this; now you're suggesting that he's spreading fear and propaganda? I thought he was lulling the conspirators to sleep, as you say, nicely under their quilts?

It doesn't matter about being on the bandwagon or not, the issue is that he lied more than once, on air about the man. It's that simple.

Why can he not be doing both? Do the mainstream media not spread fear, but also keep people asleep? Why can different actions not have different outcomes, or an action not have multiple outcomes? My comment about people being 'nicely under their quilts' was a point about his aversion to covering certain topics of interest, so I was suggesting the idea that whilst some of his listeners feel like they are 'awake', they are in reality still half-asleep.

And hell, just listen to his Y2K broadcast, and then consider whether he was spreading fear or not.

Tell me, what exactly is higher than the Bilderberg group? A secret meeting of all the top world leaders sounds like the highest of problems.

The mystery of "who" is at the top can be seen in the protest videos made during Bilderberg meetings. They make it a point to film or snap pics of the attendees, and many times, the pics disprove the *official* list of attendees.
If you think it goes any higher than that, you're either referring to God, or the aliens, reptoids, and Jews orchestrating our world and brainwashing everyone into bowing down to Satan (Gimme a break).

No. I'm not referring to God, or Satan, or the aliens, or the reptoids, or the Jews. Do I think it goes higher than the Bilderberg Group? Of course I do. Because it clearly does. I mean, just look at how well known and well covered the Bilderberg Group is now. There may have been a time long ago when Bilderberg had some level of importance and the agenda was actually discussed on some level there, but these days, I don't think so. I very much doubt ANYTHING of interest conspiracy-wise really happens at Bilderberg anymore. The group is way too high profile now for it to be in any way safe to use as a steering group for the "New World Order" (or whatever you want to dub it). I think it's just used as a distraction now; Bilderberg has become a pied piper of sorts, it's there to lead the rats astray. Keep the 'truthers' busy with Bilderberg whilst the real deal stuff goes on elsewhere. Like a magician, it's all sleight of hand and smoke and mirrors. A "look over there" tactic. I mean, the whole thing isn't exactly secret anymore. And I know one thing, if I was in charge, I certainly wouldn't be using it for anything anymore, and I would argue that they are smart enough to have come to that realisation too.

I didn't delve into "they" in my first post, because I ran out of characters and felt I'd said all I needed to say at that point. But, as a fairly general overview, who does Alex Jones cover for? The Jesuit Order, the Knights Of Malta and the Vatican to name a succinct few. He is a gatekeeper for the Jesuits. Here are just a few of his obvious omissions and associations with those groups. Jones loves talking about Bilderberg, but yet he rarely ever speaks about the real founder of the group. The man who commissioned Prince Bernhardt to found it; Joseph Retinger, an agent of the Jesuits. Jones talks about Bohemian Grove, yet as well as misidentifying the owl statue as Molech (Molech was never portrayed as an owl, it is far more likely to be the owl of Minerva), he completely fails to mention a huge statue of Saint John Of Nepomuk at the grove; a man revered by the Jesuit Order for his protection of the seal of the confessional. That being one of the oldest systems of espionage and secrecy and one that the Jesuits used for centuries to control kings, queens and heads of state, and to foment their plots. He talks about the Patriot Act, but won't talk about the lead architect of that document being Viet Dinh, a professor at Jesuit Georgetown University. He won't talk about the US Supreme Court being completely dominated by Jesuit Georgetown educated devout Catholics. He doesn't talk about the Jesuits, the Vatican and the Knights Of Malta's role in the creation of Nazi Germany and their role in the manufacturing of WW2. He doesn't mention the significance of Adam Weishaupt's huge connections to the Jesuit Order, and the reason the Illuminati was founded. And all that is just a very generalised drop in the ocean.

He also associates himself closely with Knights Of Malta, such as Pat Buchannan (also CIA and creator of Project Mockingbird). As well as this, he associates with and lauds Jesuit educated shills and celebrities, such as Martin and Charlie Sheen and Mel Gibson. He regularly promotes Carroll Quigley and his book "Tragedy And Hope", another Jesuit Professor at Jesuit Georgetown University. So, he covers up for Jesuit plots, crimes and influence, whilst at the same time promoting and associating with Jesuit Coadjutors. Can we see why there might be a problem here? Can we see why Jones may not be totally candid about the Knights Of Malta, for instance, when he has brothers of the Order appearing as guests on his radio show, and also considers them very good friends. There are some major conflicts of interest happening here that need to be brought to the limelight. Even if you don't believe that the Jesuits are the be-all and end-all (and I'm not saying there are not other groups involved and above them, so don't get me wrong), even if you don't believe they have much influence, Jones is never going to deal with the subject in a frank and open minded manner; and he needs to if he is to maintain any credibility, as far as I see it.

a reply to: 8BitOperator

To be fair, and not to be argumentative...
But people are giving the Jesuit Order & Knights if Malta too much credit for the current World domination agenda!!!

Both Orders have not really been of influence since the 1700s...
Even then they weren't the top of the elite!!!
An example being that Pope Francis is the first Jesuit Pope!!!

The Holy See is the only real power house in Roman Catholicism, & even then, aside from Vatican City, the Holy See is not pulling political strings IMO!!!


Alex knows the enemy is the Banking System & Corporations and sticks with what he knows best!!!

I haven't seen the "assault" yet so I'll refrain from commenting...

But his Piers Morgan interview was one of his only failures, in that he let Piers get to him, & lost his cool...
Not in a traditional Mr.Jones rant, but he became flustered and beat himself in the debate...
Because Piers is a clever PsyOps manipulator, Alex should have known better!!!

As for Y2K... He got a bad lead, I doubt he went back to that source either...
I don't think he intended to harm his listeners, that would have harmed his movement, and has no logical argument for disinformation because he wouldn't be able to recover that trust unless he genuinely did it for others benefit!!!


Peace 8Bit!!!

a reply to: 8BitOperator

I apologise if I offended you as that definitely was not my intention.

Alrighty

Yes, 'should'; not 'have to', 'do', or 'would'. I know not everyone agrees with my position, but I am not forcing anyone to. People believe what they want to believe, however, believing strongly in your own stance in a debate and hoping that others may consider it and also agree with it is a natural view for a person to take. I'm not really sure what your issue is here? If wanting other people to feel the way you do about something is wrong, then what is the point of having a debate surely?

Sure, that is the point of the debate. But you seem to have a lot of pent-up dislike for Alex Jones, and regardless of your reasoning behind it, to suggest everyone should feel the same way isn't entirely fair.

And, it is possible to be passionate about something and project yourself without needing to shout over people. I think you've slightly missed my point here, the issue is not that I think people should present their arguments in an uninspired manner; it is that Alex Jones regularly interrupts and shouts OVER people, and that isn't a legitimate debating tactic, it's just plain rude and obnoxious. You can be fired up, passionate, and yes, even loud about something without being an arsehole. Politeness is respected in intellectual debate.

I can agree with you here. Jesse Ventura was a prime example of how passive-aggressive debating can get you places when he was on the Piers Morgan Show.

But, I can't demonize Alex for acting that way, because I would have a very hard time keeping my temper in such a position too. I can relate to the anger he spouts.

There's a difference between being loud and proud, and loud and rude.

Fair point, and I agree.

But again, Alex has addressed this himself a couple times on his show, and he sometimes says he's realizing he needs to "shut up" and take it down a notch. He's been in this all his life, so naturally, he's progressively learning how to deal with it properly, step by step. While I don't agree with every detail (he once used the term devil worshiping goths and I, being sorta punk/alternative, got a little annoyed), I still believe he's accurate and inspiring more than he is wrong or flawed, and he is, to me, still worth listening to.

No. The point was the argument isn't going to matter to other people if Jones presents himself like a troll who has no control over himself. Again, it's not about him being loud per se, it's about him stepping on people and thinking that it's an ok way to act. There was no excuse for his actions at the Austin gun rally, and I can't believe people would step up to defend it in any way.

True. I'm not defending his screw ups at all. I was pretty angry and disheartened when I first saw that video a couple years ago. But then, people were saying to me, "See? He's a straight up shill and a disinformation agent!" Then when people started hollering Reptilian, I began to lose all faith in the conspiracy community altogether.

Shortly after, I found myself having similar moments of random rage and frustration, because I was spending WAY too much time on ATS. Then I watched that video of Alex again, and I saw it differently. He's a guy who has no choice but to be consumed in the horrific stories and the daily body count. He's lost a bit of his sanity.

I didn't hate him after that. While I'm not condoning his screw ups, I can better understand where they're coming from now.

if Jones hadn't have been allowed to appear on Piers Morgan the day before, Ben Shapiro may well have got much more recognition. But as I said before, the issue isn't your own personal level of passion or how fired up you get about a particular issue, it's about how you conduct yourself when you do so. There is a right way and a wrong way to act in a debate.

Fair enough

No, and no. I fleetingly mentioned Zionism, but only as an aside and as an acknowledgement of what others have mentioned. I don't consider Zionism the be-all and end-all of anything. A part of the problem? Yes. But, like many parts, subservient.

As long as you're not making the Zionist-shill-reptilian claim, you'll get no arguments from me here.

As for Reptilian Shapeshifters, as much as we might disagree about Alex Jones, I think we probably can both agree that is utter stuff and nonsense of the highest degree. I'd like to think we could find a common ground somewhere, and as I said before, it's nothing personal, and I'm sorry if you were offended or took it be so.

Hear hear

a reply to: 8BitOperator

But, how many times does a person need to screw up massively before it becomes too much of a habit? I don't know, I'm just conjecturing there, but personally I don't consider an assault a 'screw up'; it's serious business. The term screw up seems a little too flippant for some of these actions. And how can you watch this man shout in a poor woman's face about his 1st Amendment rights, when he is trampling over someone else's! She is simply trying to reason with Jones, and get him to come up to the podium and enter into dialogue with them. And also to stop shouting over THEIR demonstration! Why is it that Jones doesn't listen at all? He just completely ignores them, and like a rude arsehole continues to shout over them and doesn't go over to discuss anything with them! Now, why does Jones act like this, and then continue to stay near the road? Is it because he wants to be the first person people will see when they look over at the demonstration? Why did he hijack it, and then not listen to reasonable requests to cease his actions and talk to them? Just what the hell did he think he was doing?

I've mulled this over a lot of times.

As you'll see in my previous response, you'll understand what conclusion I came to. He was being a complete and utter dickbag that day, hands down. But I believe he's trying to better himself.

Do I think it goes higher than the Bilderberg Group? Of course I do. Because it clearly does. I mean, just look at how well known and well covered the Bilderberg Group is now. There may have been a time long ago when Bilderberg had some level of importance and the agenda was actually discussed on some level there, but these days, I don't think so. I very much doubt ANYTHING of interest conspiracy-wise really happens at Bilderberg anymore. The group is way too high profile now for it to be in any way safe to use as a steering group for the "New World Order" (or whatever you want to dub it). I think it's just used as a distraction now; Bilderberg has become a pied piper of sorts, it's there to lead the rats astray. Keep the 'truthers' busy with Bilderberg whilst the real deal stuff goes on elsewhere. Like a magician, it's all sleight of hand and smoke and mirrors. A "look over there" tactic. I mean, the whole thing isn't exactly secret anymore. And I know one thing, if I was in charge, I certainly wouldn't be using it for anything anymore, and I would argue that they are smart enough to have come to that realisation too.

A lot of the information they put out there is false. And also, as long as what's going on behind those hotel doors remained unleaked and secret, they can still use Bilderberg for whatever they damn well please. It doesn't matter how much they're covered on the outside, because the inside of the operation still remains a mystery.

Many people I talk to (face to face, that is, not online) have never heard of Bilderberg. That alone tells me they're still functioning well enough to maintain some level of secrecy and security.

They'd be wasting a lot of money and resources if they were meeting up for Bilderberg just for show. And, the only reason they made a cute little website and started printing false lists was because some perceptive citizens started noticing their little secret meet-ups a couple decades ago, and whistle-blowed their sorry asses.

The whole calm acknowledgement of their existence and the friendly little website was their way of approaching the "calling of their bs" in a calm, cool, and collecet way, so not to alert anyone anymore than they already were.

Jones is never going to deal with the subject in a frank and open minded manner; and he needs to if he is to maintain any credibility, as far as I see it.

You're right. Don't get me wrong here--I'm constantly questioning my take on the most famous conspirators. Don't think I worship Alex Jones. My only argument here was that quite a lot of people who debate with me are quick to play the shill/reptilian card, and it baffles me how such ludacris statements can discredit the guy so easily. It astounds me what some people will believe.

Although I think Alex does speak many truths, I am skeptical of his credibility. Where he lost me was during the 2012 presidential election, AJ himself who's supposed to be a prominent figure in the truth and liberty movement didn't even endorse Gary Johnson (the libertarian candidate), he let opportunities to endorse him slip right through and gave into the two-party tyranny rigged election. The infamous rant on Piers Morgan's show came off as scripted to get media attention. I think it's very possible he's controlled opposition or an infiltrator of some type, to lead the truth and liberty movement into failure.

Greetings,

I've been a lurker for a while but seeing these asshats defending and salivating over Alex Jones, just pushed me to join so I can come argue with you mofos~. I've been awake for quite a while, and I am an avid reader and book collector. Alex is truly cointelpro perfected, because of the inability of the public to discern whether he is truthful or not. Well, any good gatekeeper will feed you some truths, but deep down inside they're rotten to the core. Ever wonder why Bill Cooper is dead and Alex Jones is alive? Well apparently one of them was on the right track, I'll let you decide which one it was. I cannot bring forth proof he is a shill other than my gut instinct to detect liars, and my women's intuition (very valuable, btw). But as a person who has been around the internet a long time, I have been able to see how a cult personality is born and evolves, sometimes into something very dark and sinister. He will forever rage and harp on and on about this and that, but nothing ever changes. Where do you think all the money from the moneybombs, books, t-shirts, dvds, etc go? Sure he might be enlightening you a bit, but its just a taste of sweet information while he swindles you out of your hard earned money. Think he'll be a valuable resource when the civil war eventually comes to fruition? I highly doubt that~

Sincerely,

Mokuren

feel free to flame me at my youtube channel~

originally posted by: Mokuren
Greetings,

I've been a lurker for a while but seeing these asshats defending and salivating over Alex Jones, just pushed me to join so I can come argue with you mofos~. I've been awake for quite a while, and I am an avid reader and book collector. Alex is truly cointelpro perfected, because of the inability of the public to discern whether he is truthful or not. Well, any good gatekeeper will feed you some truths, but deep down inside they're rotten to the core. Ever wonder why Bill Cooper is dead and Alex Jones is alive? Well apparently one of them was on the right track, I'll let you decide which one it was. I cannot bring forth proof he is a shill other than my gut instinct to detect liars, and my women's intuition (very valuable, btw). But as a person who has been around the internet a long time, I have been able to see how a cult personality is born and evolves, sometimes into something very dark and sinister. He will forever rage and harp on and on about this and that, but nothing ever changes. Where do you think all the money from the moneybombs, books, t-shirts, dvds, etc go? Sure he might be enlightening you a bit, but its just a taste of sweet information while he swindles you out of your hard earned money. Think he'll be a valuable resource when the civil war eventually comes to fruition? I highly doubt that~

Sincerely,

Mokuren

feel free to flame me at my youtube channel~

Women's intuition...

I have that same intuition. Reason, logic, psychology, humility...

Oh yes, and mentioning how you joined simply to troll anyone who doesn't hate Alex Jones? That's very big of you. You must be on a very high moral scale. Pat yourself on the back.

You make it sound as though believing in anything and having any sort of leader is a cult-like personality. Is that what it is? Strong beliefs and leaders who advocate them are all cults?

I've explained this to you logically impaired trolls many times; he is too high profile to be killed. Do you know what kind of red flags would pop off if someone killed Alex Jones? He's protected by his documentation.

Oh yes, and since you've invited me to your youtube channel, expect a real, heated argument that I cannot post here on ATS while remaining T&C friendly.

a reply to: XxNightAngelusxX

Lol, no I didn't join for only one purpose, I just had to get that off my chest. Bashing AJ is easy and old news, do you see me trolling anyone?? I am here to gain insight and voice my opinion at the same time; we are all human and we all will err, I am able to accept that I don't know everything and neither do you, NO ONE DOES except God. You will not see me trolling, I'm highly offended that you treat new members this way.

a reply to: XxNightAngelusxX

Oh and by the way, we should look inside ourselves for leadership, not follow like sheep. That is how you get taken to the slaughterhouse.