Hi Maxmars. I now have time to respond to your well-written post.
Originally posted by Maxmars
...I can tell you, very honestly, that I have NOT based any assertion I have made on Alex Jones' work
Well that's a relief, because IMHO you would be wise to ignore Jones' deluded propagandist ranting if you want to keep a grip on reality and don't
want to be carried off to live in CT-fantasy land.
Insofar as your comments on the history of the ascent of the Rotschild empire and the fate of King Edward, your opinions are based on
'everyone knows.' Really? I suggest that you have not even seriously considered the sources of 'everyone knows.' The Higher Education system
has been suspect ed of 'molding' accepted history for more than a century, just because 'they' say so, most definitely does NOT make it so
No. On historical research and primary sources. If you have any hard evidence to the contrary, please share it. My problem with some of the
preposterous claims made in 'Endgame,' which is the OP of this thread, is that they are simply proclamations made contrary to all available
evidence, and nothing is offered to back them up. So you would be a fool to believe them without question, surely?
Original research is not an easy task, but if you were to engage in some...
I am quite familiar with the academic rigors of primary historical research, thanks. I have done plenty, and have a university degree and a postgrad
doctorate which required this kind of discipline to a high level.
...you might find that you will become uncomfortable with some of the editorial liberties your 'everyone' has taken with history. People,
not necessarily you, are often quite ignorant of just how 'malleable' history can be to the established historian. Find a professor, and ask if he
or she agrees with everything history says 'i.e. everyone knows.' I would be surprised if you found a total conformist anywhere among them
This is true. I would differ with many of the accepted popular views of historical events, which are open to other interpretations than those commonly
offered, and known as a 'nonconformist'. But to make assertions and proclamations, you need to supply evidence to back them up which then stands up
to analysis and questioning.
There were severe reservations regarding the German-royal connection, these were not available for 'public consumption' can you imagine if
they had been? - We know only from the insiders who wrote memoirs - should we disregard their personal accounts because it doesn't fit with what
'everybody knows'?
The proclamation made in 'Endgame' was that Edward VIII was 'forced to abdicate because of his sympathies for Hitler.' This statement is an
outright lie. There is no historical evidence for this. On the contrary, the cause of the abdication is very well documented and was even debated
openly in Parliament.
His younger brother accepted the crown instead, being next in line. Are you saying that Edward had 'German connections' and his brother didn't?
What????
Remember, Britain had already fought a bloody 4-year war against Germany 1914-18, when the British Royal Family were actually related (though by then
distantly) to the German one. This did not prevent WW1. By 1939, the Kasiser was long gone and Hitler and the Nazis had no connections whatsoever with
the Brit Royals.
The Waterloo Battle story was QUITE real, just because you can't imagine how it could be turned for Rotschild profit doesn't mean it
wasn't.
Again, you can't just invent something like 'The Rosthchilds bought up the British economy' and proclaim it as fact when there is absolutely no
evidence whatsoever that anything of the kind ever happened. This is called LYING.
While you proffer that 99% was in private hands you fail to mention how many hands those were...
Then let's mention it now. It was about 2.4 million, mainly small businesses.
also, what was the actual capital amount in question and who ended up losing economic relevance while the Rotschild family's grew
An extremely complicated question which is unlikely to ever have a complete answer, but again not relevant to the propagandist and demonstrably false
proclamation made by Jones in his video.
There is no simple way to enumerate the impact it had because if it had been a simple matter it probably would have been easily thwarted
Not provable one way or the other.
I nevertheless agree that Alex Jones appears somewhat self-serving
He is a propagandist zealot, who constantly perverts and distorts the truth to serve his own political agenda and ignores any evidence which might
throw doubt on his message.
...but I accept this as the price for focusing on a single person to explore these unusually secretive and high-powered gatherings. I don't
expect anything from his work, and should it prove something - then so much the better
Well, OK. Whatever.
But to sit on our hands while 'every knows' is the phrase of the day is a bit too trusting for me. Too many agendas, too many power
brokers, too many people dedicated to aggrandizing themselves and lusting for power and wealth exists for me to just assume - 'it's no skin off my
nose' let it be
I don't understand your point here relative to my post. My point is you should not take anything you are told on trust, but question it and research
it. It is especially relevant when confronting dangerous and deluded professional propagandists like Alex Jones. Just examine the claims, do the
primary research and make your own mind up before swallowing it all and joining the madness. If you do, you will discover that most of the claims are
bunk, and easily disproven.
BTW this is why I despise and distrust 'religions' so much, and those that subscribe to them surrendering their own independent will to think. Same
process at work. CTs can become a kind of religion for some people, rejecting reason and common sense in place of a fantasy which is then unthinkingly
evanelized to all who do not 'see the light.' Fanaticism is a dangerous thing.
We didn't even get into the ignorant and transparently ill-informed claims made in 'Endgame' about genetic engineering and microchips. Thankfully.
