Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

END The Alex Jones GAME

page: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   
You know Alex makes quit a few good points, but his attitude that you accept all or none of his theories hurts his movement. I believe we are moving toward a NAU, but when he constantly brings up 9/11 he begins to lose crediablity. I find Alex entertaining and thought provoking, but I think some of his theories our poorly thought out, IMHO!




posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


Our little discussion here is starting to veer way off course.

I'll bring up my basic points again, and if you want, we can begin to discuss those. But as it stands now, we're venturing into far too many "what ifs" to even have a sensible debate.

My basic points are:

A lot of what he says has false information

He censors out topics like the Vatican

He has connections with people who I don't think a "truth seeker" should, if he's genuine

We can argue why this or why that until the internet gets censored, but we're never really going to accomplish anything.

So those are my basic points about him. The disinformation agent thing is my opinion.

My points, however, are facts. He does have these connections. He does have false information in his news stories. And he does leave out topics like the Vatican.

So, rather than addressing each other's opinions, let's address the information. I think we'll get a little further that way.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


Stating your original points doesn't exactly add much to the discussion either. Let's leave at that then, if you can't respond with reason to my previous comment.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


I understand what you're saying in your previous post, but the bottom line is, we have different opinions on how they would do it. So that's what I'm saying, we're just debating each other's "what if" opinions. "What if" opinions really have no facts to back them up. That's why they're "what if" opinions.

So without facts, we really can't convince each other of anything. So we'd just be going back and forth accomplishing absolutely nothing, all the while, becoming more frustrated at each other, and I don't want to fight with you.

So, if you want to leave it at this and agree to disagree, I'd be more than happy to do so.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   
If there is any "truth" organization that is public, within very short time, most of the important members will be - agents of the secret service(s), planted to take the movement of track, to mix half-truth, lies and truth and discedit the movement. That is how it works.

I do not trust anyone, ANYONE, who has a show on any official media.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


We are coming up with "what ifs" because every time I ask you how someone that gives the NWO so much exposure, can be a disinfo agent, you come up with a "what if" scenario that makes no sense. When I try to explain how that scenario doesn't make sense, you say we're digressing. I say I'm debunking your disinfo agent claims.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Saying AJ is a disinfo agent is like saying George W is a truther. Although its fun to speculate about, the evidence just doesnt support it. The NET result does not coincide with the agenda of a disinfo agent.

As far as people blindly believing what AJ says. Im sure there are. But I would say that the majority of people who visit and listen to AJ are there with a very critical eye. He certainly does not have all the facts straight, but like everything else you have to pick and choose what to believe. To me, this is good enough.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by swimmer
 


I don't trust anyone either, but I can see that AJ is definately doing the NWO more harm than good. I mean how could exposing them be benificial to them? Even if half the things he says are not true. The fact that people can see that politicians are that corrupt, can never benefit their cause, since consciousness is their biggest enemy.

[edit on 28-10-2007 by enigmania]



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


Well I see it the opposite way. I think we're both coming up with what if scenarios that don't make sense.

So I'll offer one more time to agree to disagree so that this doesn't turn into a fight. After that, I'll assume that you don't care for any compromise, and I'll just avoid your responses.

You made some good points. I do admit that. But apparently you're not willing to compromise on your side. It seems you're convinced of everything you say and no discussion or debate will convince you of anything else.

So again, we can agree to disagree and end this on good terms, or we can just ignore each other. It's up to you.

I'd rather end on good terms since I respect the fact that you've made good points and put up a good debate.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 

So I guess you support the creation of North American Union?

You support Eugenics?

Want to see 80% of World's population eliminated?

You want to live in on a Prison Planet?

Want to give the Global Elite even more power the they have over us?

Well - I do not.

And I am sure that Alex does not want that to happen to.

But I guess with your nickname, your avatar and your location - you already do.

One more thing;
You have a great quote at the bottom - but do you understand it?


[edit on 28/10/07 by Souljah]



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Souljah
 


I'm not even going to put time into this response


If you've ever seen me on this board, or have been reading this thread, you'd know what my beliefs are and which side I tend to lean towards in terms of "conspiracy" or "mainstream".

The tactic of grouping me in with the opposite side simply because I question your hero is old and pathetic.

Please read over some of my posts and read this thread before you post. You only embarrass yourself.:shk:


EDIT: Yes I understand my quote, and maybe if you look at what it says as my "Mood", you'd understand a little more what side I lean towards.

[edit on 10/28/07 by NovusOrdoMundi]



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 

So - you do question Alex Jones; but you do not question what he is trying to say?

Or you just do not belive a single word he says?



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Souljah
 


The very basic and general topics he talks about, I completely agree with. He's not all over these alien or reptilian theories, so that I do support about him.

What I mean by basic and general topics are 9/11, the fact that the world is run by bankers, de-population, the stuff in our food and vaccines etc. I agree with that.

But I think he can get out of control and he throws in things that he doesn't verify as fact, and it's for shock or fear.

Just present the facts. That's what I want him to do.

If he just presented the facts and allowed his viewers to decide, and he wasn't constantly screaming over people and interrupting to make his point, in all honesty, I'd ignore his "connections" simply because he was reaching people with facts.

But since he throws in lies and over reacts and scares people away, I think he has to go.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 

Looks to me, that you DO agree with him on the strongest and basic points he is trying to make. You think his is overreacting and over-dramatizing? I don't. In my humble opinion, no matter how radical he sounds, he is still just scratching the surface with the information he can get his hands on. Yet it is only a scratch on the surface of something, that is much bigger and much worse then he is trying to make it. I mean the real secrets deals which are going on, are usually never recorded - nor to they take meetings in public hotels. And that is where things are really decided by the Banking Elite. Everything else is just a PR move. So - if you think Alex is overreacting, then the REAL truth would hurt you a lot more...



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Souljah
 


You're really doing a bad job of understanding what I'm saying.

What I mean by "over reacting" is he screams in people's faces. You don't need to do that to get your point across. A calm civilized debate full of facts is much more effective.

For example..

"THE WORLD ELITE WANT TO ENSLAVE YOUR FAMILY AND KILL YOUR BABIES IN DEATH CAMPS!!!" (yelling)

"There are men in this world that own much of the central banks, and have a large stash of money. Money equals power. They are passing laws, such as this (give an example) and this (give an example). These laws take away your rights as an American and as a human. There are camps that exist in this country, much like the Nazi concentration camps. They're in these locations (give information)."

Which is more effective?

He does have the locations of the camps on his website, but what my point is, is that he resorts to fear mongering rather than just presenting the facts calmly to keep people listening to him.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


You're damn right I'm not willing to compromise. AJ either is a disinfo agent, or he's not. No room for compromise there. And I'm not worried this turns into a fight cause we're both pretty polite, and I respect that.

In the end this is the most important question for us both:

Is the total package of AJ actions beneficial for the NWO or is it bad for them.?

Sofar, if you look at the situation, I can only find that the things he did were NOT beneficial for the NWO. He's exposing them, no matter how you look at it.

So if you look for things that he did, that were benficial for NWO, I can't find one. Then you might say, it might be something we don't see yet. Then I say, apply Occam's Razor, go with the most logical explanation that uses the least amount of assumptions.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 

OK - so correct me if I am wrong;

You do agree with what he is trying to say and have no problem with the information he is presenting - for example is his newest documentary - but you do not like the WAY he is saying it? I did not hear him yelling once in the documentary. I think you are trying to describe his radio shows, when he really does get angry and frustrated and well, starts to yell. You never yell? You never get angry? Frustrated?



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Novus why don't you watch Endgame first? You said you didn't see it yet. How can you make the accusations you make, if you haven't even seen the man's biggest and most important piece of work sofar. That movie is the collumnation of years of his work.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


Hello -this is my first post on ATS! Please forgive my formatting I have no Idea what I'm doing. I just wanted to ask you NovusOrdoMundi why you think people blindly follow Alex Jones and what do you mean by blindly folowing?? Alex Jones is entertaining the way he gets all crazy PO'ed at the NWO so I think part of his show is entertainment value. I would think that the majority of listeners(though I may be wrong and you right) have learned to think for themselves and question what they are being told by the Media -thus the appeal of the jones show which shows things from another angle- I have listened to Alex's show but I don't agree with everything he says. I also think he is sometimes rude by the way he often cuts off callers before hearing everything they have to say like he he knows everything. But I must say that being in the line of work he is I think its very plausible that he did used to listen to william cooper's show - why wouldn't he - birds of a feather flock together. You maybe right in that his prediction was merely an echo of cooper's but i don't think it makes any difference. I am also curious since you use cooper in your argument and point towards his mysterious death after 911 if you believe this is more evidence of a 911 inside job conspiracy?



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


What I am saying is that we ultimately don't know if *ANYONE* is an agent. How can we know? But we use certain things to help us make educated guesses. Using that, I 'believe' he is legit. Legit but misguided at times, over zealous and tries to use fear to wake people up, but nevertheless probably legit.

There is a difference between 'knowing' and 'believing'. I know my brother, but I choose to believe in theories etc.






top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution