Conspiracy Chicks 02: G-20 Protest Agents Provocateur

page: 3
74
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
So whats the point to this Its all things we all ready know Move on Nothing NEW here.

Again whats the poinT





posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Regarding the agent provocateurs, the intelligence agencies routinely infiltrate groups from the Quakers to ACLU to campus protestors. Sometimes they attain leadership positions.

A visit to your local library, (while it is still open) will lead you to a whole section devoted to books about the various intelligence agencies. After reading a dozen or so of these, written by historians, journalists or former agents, one sees the world differently. You can no longer accept anything at face value.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Willbert
 


You need to do some research, there is only one image from Quebec and it was used to show that it's been done before and they were forced to admit it.

ALL the video we used is from Toronto, last month, period. The point of the thread covered is to show the evidence that it looks like the Canadian Police (Toronto in this case) pulled the same stunt they pulled in Quebec.

Springer...

[edit on 7-8-2010 by Springer]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I think the conspiracy chick reports definately have a certain charm that could be built upon.

Watching this and the previous installment i have always thought that, rather than switching between the presenters with each story, both could be on screen at the same time.

I find it a bit disjointing flicking between the hosts like that. It is as though the conspiracy chicks are two separate entities rather than a double act. It would give them the opportunity to create an on-screen rapport.

Wouldnt it be better to film the presentation outside? It would give the impression that Ashley and Asala were 'out in the field', as it were.

The production of the video is impressive, but in my opinion overblown. Sometimes less is more and some subtlety and refinement wouldnt go amiss.

I'd also recommend a trip down the pub (bar) beforehand for some Dutch courage!

I hope these comments are taken in the spirit that they are intended - just one members humble opinion.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Great Show!!!!

What's the use of the MSM anymore, just tune into the Conspiracy Chicks!!

I'm glad you touched on the G20 Summit and police vandalist-wannabees
what a bunch of losers I swearrr
Seriously, what complete idiots!!!

Luckily there's plenty of evidence
further proof that Govt. should never go beyond it's role
whether positive or negative, they just cannot handle it!!!

Can't wait for Episode 3!!!



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by Willbert
 


You need to do some research, there is only one image from Quebec and it was used to show that it's been done before and they were forced to admit it.

ALL the video we used is from Toronto, last month, period. The point of the thread covered is to show the evidence that it looks like the Canadian Police (Toronto in this case) pulled the same stunt they pulled in Quebec.

Springer...

[edit on 7-8-2010 by Springer]


The photo before the Quebec video is from Quebec. and she did not indicate it. she does mention the video from Quebec.. more like she slips it in.

But regardless.. "looks like" and is are two differant entities. tyvm.

And what's with this "period" attitude. It's ok to question things out side this forum within tolerance.. and now you wish to enforce you're view on me and others by dictating what is and isn't .. I was under the impression within tolerance that we can express out view? Has the direction of ATS altered to where any view or objection is only at the discretion of the owners of this site?


Peace

[edit on 8-7-2010 by Willbert]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Willbert
The photo before the vedeo is from Quebec. and she does not indicate it. she does mention the vedeo from Quebec.. more like she forced the city name out.


Not all of us are conversant in French Canadian. It's French +. I bet people from France have a hard time with it. Like we do with Newfanese.

This is supposed to be real, not Connie Chung Live. I think they need a glass of water beside them so that they can wet the pipes. That's natural. You see it in debates. Why not for a newscast?



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Willbert
The photo before the vedeo is from Quebec. and she does not indicate it. she does mention the vedeo from Quebec.. more like she forced the city name out.


Not all of us are conversant in French Canadian. It's French +. I bet people from France have a hard time with it. Like we do with Newfanese.

This is supposed to be real, not Connie Chung Live. I think they need a glass of water beside them so that they can wet the pipes. That's natural. You see it in debates. Why not for a newscast?


Never commented on their speech.. but regardless I applaud them as its not easy public speaking.. well not for me or quite a few others.

Quebec is a mostly francophone province who have their own laws and enforcement officers. The province is devided in wishing to seperate from the rest of Canada.

Comparing the pic from Quebec is like comparing a pic from the US due to similar policing and/or ppl and buildings they have.

And if it does not matter as to were you think the photos and videos are coming from. then why even mention as an afterthought to state a video from Quebec?

nvm..

Peace.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
On a side note. .yes, the police did use excessive force. And I also don't view them as representatives of our city or province. There are more like hired thugs.

If I recall some individuals who were enforcing the security of the G20 were also from private security companies.

So not all those in uniform at the G20 in Toronto were actually police men/woman.

I live a stones through away from Toronto so I was tuned in during that weekend.

Peace



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by Willbert
 


there is only one image from Quebec and it was used to show that it's been done before and they were forced to admit it.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by Springer]


I think the problem lies in the way in which the story and pictures were presented. It was confusing. I know I was certainly scratching my head going "what the hell?".



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Thank you, awesome episode, please keep spreading the truth.

Beautiful and intelligent girls too!



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Much respect.

I truly consider this site and its peers and admins to be a great bunch a people



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Only one complaint about the Conspiracy Chicks...

I want it 'daily'!!!


Seriously you guys are the best and most interesting news type report on the WWW. Also we know that you are honest and true and that is worth its weight in gold.

Please keep them coming and faster!



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 02:05 AM
link   
It just keeps getting better.

Thanks and a huge
to all involved.


TheAssoc.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:01 AM
link   
that was really classy!

include some good news too



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Great job Ashley & Julie!

For me, there's a wealth of information about current topics and I really like the way it is compiled and presented in this episode. I thought I was fairly well-versed in the topics the Conspiracy Chicks covered, and yet I learned things in each segment -- things that rekindle my interest to research more.

Production was good and the whole thing flowed very well -- very easy to watch and entertaining as well as informative. I think you all are onto something wonderful that will continue to increase in views and popularity.

I like the paintball-like graphics in between segments -- sort of a mental and visual pause-point. I hope you all keep your unique indivuality as the Conspiracy Chicks evolves -- please don't strive for the wooden delivery of the MSM. You all demonstrate that a newsperson can be professional and personal at the same time.

Looking forward to the next episode



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Not everyone loves the conspiracy chicks...
I was going to comment on the video itself, but apparently, I'm not "allowed" to. Nice touch also to "not allow negative comments there"
So rather than start my own thread here I am...

Here's my problems with this second pilot:
The girls cant talk. They talk too slow, (especially the brit, which is wierd) they can't read, they mispronounce things. They might want to work on that, Johnny Anonymous wasted less of my time.

(By the way, I'm not down on the idea of ATS news or the girls doing it. They're just not doing it well yet.)

Secondly, don't report things as truth when you know damn well you're embellishing. The "Provincial Police" did not admit to using agents to incite violence. They admitted to using agents inside the protest group. (Yes, they did use agents to incite violence, but that's not what you said, you said, "They admitted to using agents to incite violence." which they did not.

Thirdly, one of the girls used the expression "When you Jew it down." (And incorrectly I might add.) I guess you're certainly within your pervue to use antiquated racist slurs if you like, but if you do, may I suggest a couple of tips? 1.) Use them correctly. and 2.) Don't count on my continued viewership.

The production of this show is fine. The information collected, of course, is ATS worthy. Just work out a couple of the kinks related to the "word choice" and "phrase sourcing" and you might be onto something.

Good luck
Proud ATS user
Brian Taylor



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by briantaylor
Here's my problems with this second pilot:
The girls cant talk. They talk too slow, (especially the brit, which is wierd) they can't read, they mispronounce things.


I totally disagree on the "talking too slow" bit. I thought both Ashley and Julie did a great job this time around on trying to slow it down. In general, I find people (myself included) have a tendency to rush through speech especially when it's being read directly.


Secondly, don't report things as truth when you know damn well you're embellishing. The "Provincial Police" did not admit to using agents to incite violence. They admitted to using agents inside the protest group. (Yes, they did use agents to incite violence, but that's not what you said, you said, "They admitted to using agents to incite violence." which they did not.


Here I have to agree that the coverage was somewhat misleading. I didn't catch the transition from talking about this year's G20 to the earlier incidents, though I was confused about what the Quebec forces were doing there. I think I'm still confused about what was what, though I suppose that could be solved by actually going and reading through the threads about the incident.


Thirdly, one of the girls used the expression "When you Jew it down." (And incorrectly I might add.) I guess you're certainly within your pervue to use antiquated racist slurs if you like, but if you do, may I suggest a couple of tips? 1.) Use them correctly. and 2.) Don't count on my continued viewership.


I didn't catch this either, and I'm surprised they would use that term. Which story was it in?

Overall, I thought it was great and much improved from the pilot. I have some issues with how some of the stories were covered (for instance, I think a big part of the "orthorexia nervosa" issue is how badly distorted the source article for the popular ATS topic was) but that's bound to happen. While I respect both Ashley and Julie a great deal, I know that my opinions on various stuff around the boards are different to theirs. It's hard to walk the line between "balanced reporting" and personalized presentation, and I think they're finding their own ground.

Well done Ashley and Julie (and Joe, SO, and Springer for production)!



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by briantaylor
Thirdly, one of the girls used the expression "When you Jew it down." (And incorrectly I might add.) I guess you're certainly within your pervue to use antiquated racist slurs if you like, but if you do, may I suggest a couple of tips? 1.) Use them correctly. and 2.) Don't count on my continued viewership.


I went through the video twice and I heard nothing like that.

You misinterpreted and cast unnecessary aspersion...



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I'm very, very sorry.
When I listened to the broadcast it was very early in the morning and my little netbook speakers aren't very good.
So I misheard the Jew comment.
I listened again on headphones.
There is no Jew comment.
Either that or it's been edited out. Just kidding

I wouldn't appreciate it if someone accused me of that so I humby apologize for my misrepresentation.

However, I still miss the phoney radio announcer voice of Johnny Anonymous.

Good luck with your show.





top topics
 
74
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join