It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Shock jock' disrupts BBC's Sunday Politics show

page: 4
45
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


Ah, yes!

Lest we forget AJ is a Texan.

I lived in TX for 2 years, and as Rick Perry can probably attest to, they have refined "big talk" into an art form.




posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


so how is it right in a democracy? we could debate whether it is lawful or should be, and that is my point. That is the debate they should have been having. Not that...



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Whatever Alex is doing he is getting his name out there big time.
I knew about him years ago but between this latest outburst covered in all media and the Morgan Interview
everyone must know his name by now.
Gone from being a guy some people knew to a lot of people in a lot of countries know.

P.S Now also wouldn't be a good time to have a heart attack that would really send people off.
Shocked he is only 39.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by CallYourBluff
 


Why? Because I have a different view to you?

Newsflash - not everyone thinks the same.

Jones has his fans among the ATS staff. I'm not one of them.

And that's life.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siberbat
They stated that the Bilderburg Group never existed, only to say years later that it does.


Proof please.


If you want to talk about credibility, I think Jones has a one up on them.


The BBC is an internationally respected media organisation that was setting the standard for journalism 50 years before Jones was even born.

Jones is just a funny, fat little Texan with an internet-based radio show and a nice fat pay packet from his corporate masters.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by CallYourBluff
 



So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste (woo woo)
Use all your well-learned politesse
Or I'll lay your soul to waste, um yeah (woo woo, woo woo)




Rules are rules, CallYourBluff.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Sankari
 


Say whatever you want about Jones but I've been watching as well as reading about the bbc long enough to know how utterly biased and corrupt they are.
Say what you want about Jones but please don't try and make out like the bbc is some kind of gods gift to journalism because thats an insult to journalism as a whole.
edit on 9-6-2013 by SpaceMonkeys because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-6-2013 by SpaceMonkeys because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   
I like how he throws in the quick "infowars.com" here and there.

That, to me, is more telling than anything else. We know what his motivation is.

What a fool.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 


Product placement isn't foolish, it's genius!



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Sankari
 


The BBC is an internationally respected media organisation that was setting the standard for journalism 50 years before Jones was even born.


It's their lack of Bilderberg coverage which is the indictment, as we do know it indeed exsists. Let's look at the respected BBC and look at the standard it set.

Seems the BBC had several brushes with controversy.

1930s to Cold War: MI5 vetting
From the late 1930s until the end of the Cold War, MI5 had an officer at the BBC vetting editorial applicants. During World War II 'subversives', particularly suspected communists such as the folk singer Ewan MacColl, were banned from the BBC. The personnel records of anyone suspicious were stamped with a distinctively shaped green tag, or "Christmas tree;" only a handful of BBC personnel staff knew what the 'Christmas trees' meant.


1950s: Independent television controversy
In the 1950s Sir Winston Churchill retaliated against the BBC because of his treatment at the hands of Sir John Reith who had banned him from the BBC airwaves prior to World War II. Lord Moran (Sir Charles Watson), recorded that Churchill denounced the BBC as a communist operation which resulted in Churchill leading the campaign to introduce commercial television into the UK


1960s: Offshore radio controversy
In the 1960s BBC Radio once more began to lose its audience to commercial radio, just as it had prior to World War II. This time the causes of the competition were offshore pirate radio stations. The British Government reacted by rendering the stations as illegal by passing the Marine, &c., Broadcasting (Offences) Act 1967, which made it an offence for British citizens to work on the pirate ships, or to advertise on them. Many pirate radio DJs eventually transferred to the new BBC Radio 1 service, which started on 30 September 1967.


1970: Jamming controversy
In the 1970s pirate radio reappeared on a well financed offshore station only to be jammed by the British Government using high-powered military transmitters with the help of the BBC. The station effected a change during a General Election and the winning political party continued the jamming policy of its predecessor in power.


1984: "Maggie's Militant Tendency" controversy
The BBC programme Panorama on 30 January 1984 broadcast "Maggie's Militant Tendency" which claimed that several Conservative MPs had links to far-right organisations both in Britain and on the Continent. Two of the MPs named, Neil Hamilton and Gerald Howarth, sued the BBC for slander. In 1986 after the BBC withdrew from the case Hamilton was awarded £20,000 damages.


2004: Hutton Report
The publication in January 2004 of the Hutton Report into Dr Kelly's death was extremely critical of Andrew Gilligan, and of the Corporation's management processes and standards of journalism. In the aftermath, both the Chairman of the BBC Gavyn Davies and the Director-General Greg Dyke resigned, followed by Gilligan himself. Lord Hutton was accused of failing to take account of the imperfections inherent in journalism, while giving the Government the benefit of the doubt over its own conduct. Large parts of the media branded it a whitewash.


July 2007: A Year with the Queen
In early 2007 the BBC commissioned RDF Media to make a behind-the-scenes film about the monarchy, titled Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work, for BBC One. A sixty second trailer was shown at the BBC1 autumn launch in London on 11 July. The trailer showed two clips of Queen Elizabeth II; one in which she tells photographer Annie Leibovitz that she will not remove her crown to make the scene look "less dressy", and another in which The Queen says "I'm not changing anything. I've done enough dressing like this".

The shots in the trailer were edited out of order, making it appear as if The Queen had abruptly left the photoshoot, when in fact, the second shot showed her entering the shoot. BBC 1 Controller Peter Fincham told journalists at the launch that it showed the monarch "losing it a bit and walking out in a huff".

The next day national newspapers and other media sources broke headlines stating that The Queen had stormed out during the session. On 12 July, the BBC released a formal apology[40] to both The Queen and Annie Leibovitz. On 16 July, RDF Media admitted it was "guilty of a serious error of judgement". Thereafter, both Peter Fincham, the BBC 1 Controller and chief creative officer of RDF Media, Stephen Lambert resigned.

^^^This one was my favorite out of the lot. lol

And who could forget about Jimmy Savile. The list goes on and on. So the government run BBC, as it appears, is not the tower of integrity and respect as you claim it to be.
edit on 9-6-2013 by Siberbat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siberbat
reply to post by Sankari
 


The BBC is an internationally respected media organisation that was setting the standard for journalism 50 years before Jones was even born.


It's their lack of Bilderberg coverage which is the indictment, as we do know it indeed exsists.


So, you now admit they've never denied it exists? That's a complete backflip from your previous claim.

And what do you mean by 'lack of Bilderberg coverage'? They've been covering it for years. I've read a BBC article on the Bilderberg Group from 2004!
edit on 9/6/13 by Sankari because: typo...



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


He wants to look like a "nut". That's the scheme. The sheeple think infowars is a joke. They go to his site and they try to debunk H2SiF6 in the water,WTC7 official story violating known physics, mkultra, cia funded terrorism or operation gladio. After that they wake up to this corrupt imperialist system.

AJ knows what he is doing. He is loring the masses to his website.

I don't know why they allow him on tv. Its a win-win.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by Siberbat
They stated that the Bilderburg Group never existed, only to say years later that it does.


Proof please.


If you want to talk about credibility, I think Jones has a one up on them.


The BBC is an internationally respected media organisation that was setting the standard for journalism 50 years before Jones was even born.

Jones is just a funny, fat little Texan with an internet-based radio show and a nice fat pay packet from his corporate masters.


So BBC doesn't get a "fat pay packet" from thier corporate masters?

Stop it.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Sankari
 

The group has been around since the 50's, you call that coverage? The BBC did deny it's purpose, in which, they would call those who say it is a one world cabal, nutters. Even from 2004-present, they have misrepresent it, I mean it not like they have misrepresented other stories like say...the Queen? Maybe it's because Rupert Murdock is a Bilderburger...perhapes?

You are strangely silent on the BBC's credibility? What about, ...respectability...and setting the standard for jurnalism.(paraphrase)?



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by Siberbat
They stated that the Bilderburg Group never existed, only to say years later that it does.


Proof please.


If you want to talk about credibility, I think Jones has a one up on them.


The BBC is an internationally respected media organisation that was setting the standard for journalism 50 years before Jones was even born.

Jones is just a funny, fat little Texan with an internet-based radio show and a nice fat pay packet from his corporate masters.


So BBC doesn't get a "fat pay packet" from thier corporate masters?

Stop it.


But the BBC recently hosted a show about their corporate masters getting a pay-off from their corporate masters.

I'm getting confused about the corporate master bit.
edit on 9-6-2013 by Knobby because: spelling



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
So BBC doesn't get a "fat pay packet" from thier corporate masters?


The BBC doesn't have corporate masters, it's a government owned media corporation.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siberbat
reply to post by Sankari
 

The group has been around since the 50's, you call that coverage?


LOL, I was just providing one example. Good grief, I don't have an entire list of every BBC story on the Bilderberg Group since the 50s.


The BBC did deny it's purpose, in which, they would call those who say it is a one world cabal, nutters.


OK, so now you've changed your tune again. This time it's 'deny its true purpose.' Well hey, if you think the Bilderberg Groups' true purpose is not what they say it is, you need to prove this.


Even from 2004-present, they have misrepresent it, I mean it not like they have misrepresented other stories like say...the Queen? Maybe it's because Rupert Murdock is a Bilderburger...perhapes?


Why would Murdoch being a Bilderberger make any difference to the BBC? The BBC has run plenty of stories exposing the lies and corruption of Murdoch's media corporation and the conservative media elites who work for him. They're in competition, not co-operation.


You are strangely silent on the BBC's credibility?


No I'm not, I said the BBC is credible -- and it is. Alex Jones is not. He's been caught lying more times than Dick Cheney.




posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Sankari
 


government owned media...yeah.

I rest my case.



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
reply to post by Sankari
 


government owned media...yeah.

I rest my case.


Gosh, what a open and shut case you have not.

Is that it?



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by neformore


Sigh.

Once again this man proves that he should never be allowed near a sensible discussion.

Seriously, any measure of truth in anything that people might find conspiracy wise is simply blown out of the water as soon as Jones opens his mouth, and then starts shouting.

The man is a walking credibility disaster.

How long before people wake up and realise that he's doing more harm than good?

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)


You are right, but what he is doing is genius. They stated that either he was a puppet of the NWO or he is crazy and they don't exist. They left out the third option, which is that he is genuine to what he believes, which they both equated to crazy. The third option is what Alex states. They DO exist, he is not crazy and he would become a Martyr, allowing giant exclamation marks to end all of his sentences, stories, documentaries and news casts. The hero who is killed becomes the ax at the root of the tree that hung him. Christ demonstrates this point clearly and they know this to be fact. Spin and counterfeit truth can only come in one package. Truth must be present in the package, but the marker of the counterfeit is a twisting of that truth to a mirrored reality. Of the three, only one of the people presenting information kept to truth and refused to let it spin downward. Alex denies ignorance by retaining the high ground above the pit that is dug. Those who dig the pit fall into it. Denying truth is IGNOREance.

In his early documentaries, Jones was showing us what UNESCO was doing with biosphere reserve sites. Today, our new currency will be backed by carbon credits. The reserves are areas of land that become credit if no carbon emissions are present. All nations have them setup and UNESCO and the UN are behind this planned collapse of our current system. I knew, from the moment I saw this video, that Jones was genuine. Take a look at the first 5 minutes.









edit on 9-6-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)


Oh...my...goodness Alex Jones sure has gotten fat over the years. I guess all that organic stuff he hawks hasn't helped him any. At least he wasn't a shouting lunatic back in his tenderfoot days, makes it a bit easier on the ears to listen to.
edit on 9-6-2013 by CyberneticProphet because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
45
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join