1) If you think that just by Ron Paul getting elected the entire U.S. government including the House, Senate, judiciary, and unelected bureaucrats will all magically fall in line and follow Dr. Paul's dictates then you are more naive than I ever could have imagined.Originally Posted by BlackTerrel
2) Even if the entire U.S. government automatically fell in line behind liberty, there's still the U.N. to deal with as well as a host of treaties and alliances we would need to disentangle ourselves from.
3) There would be the ever present worry of "Will the globalists try to off Ron Paul".
4) If everything goes right, that means that on a daily basis Ron Paul would be reviewing and seeking to overturn unconstitutional laws and executive orders from the past fifty years. That would give Alex Jones more than enough to talk about for 4 hours a day.
He'll quote mainstream media when mainstream media promotes news that is similar to his view. Not based on accuracy.You said he didn't use MSM. You were wrong. Just admit you were wrong and move on. And for the record he will quote the MSM when he disagrees with them as well for the sake of pointing out why he disagrees with them. Any other news commentator does the same thing. I'm not even sure what you are expecting or where you're trying to go with this line.
Were you actually listening that day? Somehow I doubt that. If you were then you aren't reporting accurately what he said. He said it was suspicious. And it turns out....it was suspicious. VA Tech was the home of the CIA's admitted MK Ultra program. (Google it). That said, that wasn't the only angle AJ covered or even the bigger angle. The bigger angles was the effect of psychotropic drugs, (he predicted as soon as the shooting happened that the shooter would be on psychotropics...and he turned out to be right), and the fact that the media would use the to push gun control, even though gun control was really part of the problem. (The only reason the shooter could kill so many is because universities are largely victim disarmament zones).Really? 10 minutes into the VA Tech shooting he was saying conspiracy.
I'm glad you can admit you were wrong. Now if you could also admit you are wrong about so called "conspiracy theorists" you would be a more reasonable person. Additional information is "fake" only if it is actually shown to be fake. Let's take the Trayvon Martin case. When additional information came out showing that Zimmerman actually did have a bloody head, did I say "That's probably just ketchup"? No. I was more than willing to concede that point. Now that I've seen video demonstrations that someone can scan a document into Acrobat and it might automatically create layers I'm not talking about the birth certificate issue. When I had reason to think the online version was fake I voiced it. But you will jump at the flimsiest piece of "evidence" that "confirms" the comforting story you want to believe and cling to it for dear life. Oh Iran says it's got video of the compound the Navy SEALs raided. Without any direct quote from any Iranian you assume that must mean that the Osama narrative, in it's 10th form after the government finally settled on a story, must be true.I don't recall the specific post you're referring to but if you quote it I'm happy to respond. It's very likely I was wrong. I'm wrong many times. I change my views based on additional information. Conspiracy theorists will claim that additional information is fake and part of the conspiracy. It's a nice way to live life because all data against your world view is false data.
He actually covers Ghandi quite a bit as an example to follow. Here's someone else Alex Jones has covered quite a bit. Peter Schiff. Do you think Alex Jones thinks Peter Schiff is part of some conspiracy? Because AJ has never said that. You want another example? How Lord Monckton, the British member of the House of Lords who's been debunking man made global warming? Has Alex Jones said "This guy is so high up he must be one of them"? No? Then your making stuff up as you go along.I said that a big part of conspiracy theories is claiming that successful people are part of a conspiracy. I don't believe that Alex Jones dedicates his particular brand of conspiracy to every single successful person in the history of the world - particularly he does not spend much time covering Indian leaders from 80 years ago.
Has Alex Jones ever accused Kobe Bryant or LeBrawn James as being part of the illuminati? NO! Come up. Don't be ridiculous. Just because somebody somewhere makes a YouTube like that doesn't mean that's par for the course for who conspiracy reporting works. You're being like the racist who says that a black person robbing a convenience store means black people rob convenience stores. Alex Jones works by putting together pieces of reporting that other people have overlooked together with his own sources to paint a picture of the world as he sees it. That's the way journalism works in general. Is he high strung at times? Yep. Does he get it wrong sometimes? Sure. And he's said it. Does he just say someone is part of some conspiracy because they are "successful"? No. That's a ridiculous assertion.Success is what drives this stuff. Is it a coincidence that there is a YouTube video with 3.5 million views claiming the two best American athletes of the past 10 years are part of the illuminati and have received their skills and success by evil dealings? It has to do with success. No one would make a video about Flip Murray being a part of the illuminati because no one would care.
Reply With Quote
