Epic DUBSTEP REMIX Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan

[Owledge]

Alex Jones was wrong about Morgan being a tool for the NWO and Bush being behind 911.

 

Oh, he was wrong about Bush being behind 9/11?! When did that matter get resolved? Are you also believing Saddam had WMDs when the USA invaded Iraq?

 

Let Alex Jones be angry. It's his thing. He has a place in all of this. Don't be a uniformist.

BTW the rich elite loves new age spirituality telling people to be calm and polite. Makes it easier to succeed with their world domination plans.

I think the world has a dire need for peacemakers and revolutionaries alike. What it has too much of is people who are neither.

 

What I find a bit sad about Alex Jones is that on one hand he's warning passionately about propaganda lies and all that, and on the other hand he's totally a child of the cold war "Communist menace" propaganda of the past. He names Hitler, Stalin and Mao in one sentence with Castro. If he can't apply the same awareness to himself that he preaches to others, then he's a fool. Not completely worthless since he's raising awareness about issues, but not highly trustworthy as a person.

In one video he adds Hugo Chavez to the list of names. Man, that's so fucked up. Hugo Chavez is one of the very few (if not the only) heads of state who are actually trustworthy. So Alex Jones basically says: 'Revolution yes, but it has to be a true American capitalist revolution. Socialism is still evil.' He believes he is right in such a narrow focus that he takes a dump on people who are like-minded.

Edited January 20, 2013 by Owledge

[eye_of_the_storm]

100%... new age movement = genius psyop...

BTW the rich elite loves new age spirituality telling people to be calm and polite. Makes it easier to succeed with their world domination plans.

I think the world has a dire need for peacemakers and revolutionaries alike. What it has too much of is people who are neither.

[Immortal4life]

 

His approach didn't confuse me. "Pattern Recognition" as TaoMeo has recently pointed it. I have it to a certain degree....So, I know where Alex Jones and all his supporters are coming from. I can also recognize conspiracy patterns better than most - and can tell whether they are valid or not.

 

 

 

In general, when you hear someone saying they are "better than most", you can assume they are young and naive. Pattern interrupting is a pretty basic skill. It is going to take a lot more than that to stop the New Word Order propaganda from influencing your thinking.

 

 

>There's a little known mental warfare secret that goes like this "Your emotional response transfers power to your agitator". So, even if he is partially right - - he just set himself back by acting like a jackass and not having an intelligent conversation. I think this is one reason why Obama is so succesful - he stays calm and cool at all times.

 

I see this problem with a lot of younger people who never really had to develop much strength, passion, power, and never had to overcome much adversity in their lives. They just want things to be "calm" and "nice". "I don't like arguing! It makes me uncomfortable. I don't like controversy, or dealing with adversity! I want to put my head in the sand and ignore uncomfortable truths." The problem is, this is exactly what the Elite, those in power, and the New World Order want you to do, and want you to think.

 

You don't sit down and have "intelligent conversations" with evil. You wouldn't sit down have an intelligent conversation with Julius Caesar, Nero, Hitler, Napoleon, members of the CCP, Saddam Hussein, or Osama Bin Laden, so why would you with Globalists, the New World Order, Bush, Obama, Clinton, or any of the western evil beings in the current times?

Edited January 22, 2013 by Immortal4life

[eye_of_the_storm]

You could actually have an intelligent conversation with some of these people...

Bush Obama Clinton I agree...

I get what you are saying... but just who is who is who? haha

Here is something very interesting I found regarding Caesar... its on the to read list...



The story of popular resistance to wealth and power in ancient Rome.

Most historians, both ancient and modern, have viewed the Late Republic of Rome through the eyes of its rich nobility. They regard Roman commoners as a parasitic mob, a rabble interested only in bread and circuses. They cast Caesar, who took up the popular cause, as a despot and demagogue, and treat his murder as the outcome of a personal feud or constitutional struggle, devoid of social content. In The Assassination of Julius Caesar, the distinguished author Michael Parenti subjects these assertions of "gentlemen historians" to a bracing critique, and presents us with a compelling story of popular resistance against entrenched power and wealth. Parenti shows that Caesar was only the last in a line of reformers, dating back across the better part of a century, who were murdered by opulent conservatives. Caesar's assassination set in motion a protracted civil war, the demise of a five-hundred-year republic, and the emergence of an absolutist rule that would prevail over Western Europe for centuries to come.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Assassination-Julius-Caesar-Peoples/dp/1565847970

Saints and sinners... who can tell these days?

Believe nothing, question everything is my motto.

Edited January 22, 2013 by White Wolf Running On Air

[Immortal4life]

It's a good motto.

 

Much better than "can't we all just be pleasant, agreeable, and not think about things too much. Confrontation makes me uncomfortable!!!!"

[eye_of_the_storm]

hahaha

agreed

[Owledge]

Quote Immortal4life:

"You don't sit down and have "intelligent conversations" with evil. You wouldn't sit down have an intelligent conversation with Julius Caesar, Nero, Hitler, Napoleon, members of the CCP, Saddam Hussein, or Osama Bin Laden, so why would you with Globalists, the New World Order, Bush, Obama, Clinton, or any of the western evil beings in the current times?"

 

I'd love to have a chat with Julius Caesar, Hitler and probably Bin Laden.

Regarding Caesar... good that someone wrote a book with a different view, but for me things are alreay quite clear based on the 'popular version'. Caesar was a head of state so to speak, murdered by a conspiracy of wealthy politicians who were afraid of losing their influence. It's easier to corrupt a parliament than to corrupt a ruler with principles.

Julius Caesar is an example of how long propaganda can twist historic perception. He surely was responsible for deaths, wars and the usual that comes with 'the office', but he might have been a bit like Ghaddafi.