Alex Jones

[preacherman76]

'1390580040' post='5054965']

I listened to an entire show while at work. Almost everything he says is a gross misrepresentation and intentional misrepresentation of science.[/b] He's also clearly selling stuff to remedy the false alarms he is sounding.

But it's very entertaining and I'll continue to listen from time to time for fun. It's pretty much a comedy act.

Hu? Almost everything he says? I have never heard a show where science was the subject of an entire show. While we are on the subject though, he does have several top of their field doctors and scientist who back what he says about many of those topics.

I dont know what news you find to be credible, but I have to wonder if you have a problem with what they sell for major corperations to continue working? Do you think there might be a conflict of interest when a main stream outlet makes millions from say drug companies who advertise on those net works? You think if said drug company was found to be in some type of coruption, that the people making millions from them would properly, honorably, tell the truth about it?

Edited January 24, 2014 by preacherman76

[preacherman76]

No, I'm asking for proof the US government is using DMT to contact aliens.

Well I already said that was something I couldnt prove. Least as far as I know, being I havent really looked into it. All Im saying is there are other things about these people that are proven, that could lead one to believe that its certainly possible.

However eradicating a race or group of people existed long before Darwin ever proposed his natural selection.

Well sure. But that doesnt take away from the fact that many eugenics base their beliefs on the theory. I dont know if you can point to a genocidle case where one group slaughtered another, just cause they believed those people were somehow physicaly inferior to them. Those were typicaly over resources, or religious beliefs ect ect.

[Phaeton80]

Wait, you would really hit someone over that dirt bag Anderson Cooper? Really? Thats sad.

I can only laugh at that fanboy. ;-)

[Iron_Lotus]

why is that ? does violence really solve anything ? I mean really , when the civil rights movement was happening people wanted to violently attack those that were speaking out against injustices.

If he came out and said that artificial intelligence is happening behind the scene , and that they want to mess with life in this way , you probably wouldn't believe him. Actually , i think he was one of the first to talk about it ...He was probably called all sorts of crazy too..

I like what Dave Chapel said , when he said don't ever call people crazy , cause maybe they ain't, maybe it's just that others are just sick..

A difference between the civil rights movement and alex jones one involves providing better rights and equality for african americans, the other an obese middle aged man that you can smell the bull**** coming off him from miles away. So please don't mix the two agendas together, one was for a very real and good purpose the other a buffoon blowing hot air up gullible and foolish individuals asses.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Iron_Lotus

[Neognosis]

Hu? Almost everything he says? I have never heard a show where science was the subject of an entire show. While we are on the subject though, he does have several top of their field doctors and scientist who back what he says about many of those topics.

Yea, he kept going on and on about floridated water, followed by a commercial for a water filter that removes flouridated water.

I guess that's how you know an Alex Jones fan... they have a lot of dental work and kids with rotting teeth.

The science also does not support any of the things I heard him claim on the one show I listened to. He also doesn't have any "top of their field doctors and scientists" who back his silly stance on flouride.

[Phaeton80]

For the record P76; with 'Cooper', I meant Bill (Milton William) Cooper.

[preacherman76]

Yea, he kept going on and on about floridated water, followed by a commercial for a water filter that removes flouridated water.

I guess that's how you know an Alex Jones fan... they have a lot of dental work and kids with rotting teeth.

The science also does not support any of the things I heard him claim on the one show I listened to. He also doesn't have any "top of their field doctors and scientists" who back his silly stance on flouride.

Yes they do Neo. Here is a small example outta several people who were fired by the EPA for doing their jobs.

In this age of repression on genuine scientific research, we need to take note that scientists free to do open and honest research, and report on it, have often taken stands that dispute their agencies’ officials stances. Nowhere has that been more true than in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the issue of fluoride. Rank and file EPA scientists have strongly opposed water fluoridation.

EPA scientists protected by the National Treasury Employees Union were approached by an employee in 1985. His concern was that he was:

… being forced to write into the regulation a statement to the effect that EPA thought it was alright for children to have “funky” teeth. It was OK, EPA said, because it considered that condition to be only a cosmetic effect, not an adverse health effect. The reason for this EPA position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter. At that level, EPA knew that a significant number of children develop moderate to severe dental fluorosis, but since it had deemed the effect as only cosmetic, EPA didn’t have to set its health-based standard at a lower level to prevent it.

^[1]

A statement issued by EPA scientists stated that they tried to “settle this ethics issue quietly, within the family, but EPA was unable or unwilling to resist external political pressure.” Therefore, they went public with it and filed an amicus curiae brief supporting a public interest group’s suit against the EPA. In their statement, from which the above quote was extracted, the scientists avered that their opposition to fluoridation only grew stronger after that incident.

Studies Showing Fluoride Lowers Intelligence

That article goes on to document research by Phyllis Mullenix, PhD, who had established the Department of Toxicology at the Forsyth Dental Research Institute. She was also involved with a research program at Harvard’s Department of Neuropathology and Psychiatry. That research documented significant neurotoxic effects of fluoride.

Dr. Mullenix described going to a conference of the National Institute of Dental Research, a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to present her findings and realizing, on walking in, that she was in hostile territory. The entry areas were filled with propaganda declaring “The Miracle of Fluoride”. Of her experience at that conference, she stated:

The fluoride pattern of behavioral problems matches up with the same results of administering radiation and chemotherapy [to cancer patients]. All of these really nasty treatments that are used clinically in cancer therapy are well known to cause I.Q. deficits in children. That’s one of the best studied effects they know of. The behavioral pattern that results from the use of fluoride matches that produced by cancer treatment that causes a reduction in intelligence.

^[2]

On meeting with dental industry representatives afterwards, she was asked if she’d been saying that fluoride lowers children’s IQ. She says, “And I told them, ‘basically, yes.’”^[2]

That was the end of her career. She was fired from Forsyth Dental Center and has gotten no related grants since then. Shortly after her firing, Forsyth received a quarter million dollar grant from Colgate, the toothpaste manufacturer. She has since stated:

I got into science because it was fun, and I would like to go back and do further studies, but I no longer have any faith in the integrity of the system. I find research is utterly controlled.

EPA scientists also noted a Chinese study documenting that children between ages 8 and 13 consistently score 5-10 IQ points lower than children subjected to less fluoride.

Fluoride and Cancer

Dr. William Marcus, the chief toxicologist of the EPA’s Office of Drinking Water, was fired for his refusal to be silent about his work on fluoride.

Dr. Marcus was particularly concerned about several studies showing that fluoride causes osteosarcoma (bone cancer), particularly in young men. A 2-year study was conducted by the National Toxicology Program. It documented bone cancer and cancer in other tissues in rats. This coincided with other studies documenting fluoride’s ability to cause cellular mutations, which are associated with cancer, and osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey.

Dr. Marcus called for an unbiased evaluation of these studies. He was vindicated, though it didn’t result in full restitution of his losses, when he won his lawsuit against the EPA, which found that he was clearly dismissed for his anti-fluoride advocacy.

http://gaia-health.c...r-fluoridation/

Edited January 26, 2014 by preacherman76

[preacherman76]

WHY EPA HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS

OPPOSES FLUORIDATION

http://nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/NTEU280-Fluoride.htm

[preacherman76]

http://fluoridealert.org/content/hirzy_portland/

Dr. William Hirzy, former VP of EPA’s HQ Union, Recommends Portland Flush Fluoridation Proposal

[aquatus1]

Yes they do Neo. Here is a small example outta several people who were fired by the EPA for doing their jobs.

But Alex Jones claims that Fluoride is toxic to children and that it should be removed completely. This article you posted isn't completely about the EPA scientists calling for the removal of fluoride; they are calling for the politicians to get out of the medical business and let the people who know medicine set the fluoride level at 1.5 mg/l, not the 4 mg/l that the politicians wanted. I don't think you will find any scientists objecting to that.

WHY EPA HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS

OPPOSES FLUORIDATION

http://nteu280.org/I...80-Fluoride.htm

It's right in this link you posted:

The reason for this EPA position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter. At that level, EPA knew that a significant number of children develop moderate to severe dental fluorosis...

For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.

They have other concerns, of course, but their findings are, at best, even with the findings of opposition views. The biggest difference between the EPA scientists and Alex Jones is that the scientists want the evidence to be reviewed and policy to be based around the science, whereas Alex Jones, just like the politicians, just wants policy based around his demands.

http://fluoridealert...hirzy_portland/

Dr. William Hirzy, former VP of EPA’s HQ Union, Recommends Portland Flush Fluoridation Proposal

Dr. Hirzy has excellent suggestions. Unfortunately, he forgets that the U.S. doesn't have a school-based dental health system, and has no way of getting children to rinse with flouride drops in a monitored fashion like they do in other countries. I do find his conclusions a bit questionable though, in that he doesn't qualify his conclusions with the facts that it is difficult to determine an accurate rate of decay when the halo effect of fluoridated water is such a significant factor in the US, unlike in other countries. After all, if the reason kids are getting fluoride from secondary sources such as prepared food items, and those other sources are getting it from the fluoridated water, then the secondary source is really largely due to the primary source.

This is a common tactic, not just among conspiracy theory political tactics, but among scientists as well. The amount of variables that affect a given study are often hard to pin down. There is no question from any camp that 1.5 mg/l of fluoride does indeed decrease the occurrence of cavities. Alex Jones never bothers to mention that tidbit. He also doesn't mention that the large part of the objections are not merely medical in nature, but ethical or moral as well. He just kind of lumps anything negative as support for whatever position he happens to take on a given subject.

Has Alex Jones ever actually offered a solution and supported it with credible research? Or has he just stuck to complaining about what other people have done?

[Neognosis]

Thank you, aquatus1.

So, it turns out that Alex Jones does exactly what I suspected, based on all the signs: He takes a grain of truth and distorts and misrepresents it into a mountain of fear... and sells a product to conquer it.

Guys like Alex Jones... their act is the same. They start with something that is true, blow it up, and point back to the studies that they base their "truth" on, though it is distorted. Here's an example. I'll pretend that I have a job as a radio talk show host and I want to have an Alex Jones type show:

"You know people, the science is sound. It has been PROVEN (**when someone says this a lot, they are about to distort a small truth into something big**) It has been PROVEN that acids eat through solid material. Acid can eat through metal, carbon fiber, wood, even steel. If you haven't read Dr. So-and-so's study, I suggest you do. It PROVES through HUNDREDS of experiments, how acid, time and time again, eats through steel.

Now let's talk about what you're drinking RIGHT NOW. Coca-cola. Yes, the folks at CocaCola beverages have tried to pull me from the air, they've tried to silence me time and time again (** It's important that these guys set themselves up as martyrs suffering for truth, even if it isn't true**) and time and time again I've refused to be silences... CocaCola contains carbonic acid. That's right.... you're drinking acid right now. Every kid has put a tooth, made of calcium, one of nature's hardest substances (**it's not very resistant to acids, but nevermind that, I know nobody will look it up, and if they do, they'll not really care that I've exaggerated here again**) into a cup of coca cola, and see it dissolve before their very eyes.... And you're drinking this.. Imagine what it's doing to your insides.

***Now I would go on to talk about how caffeine is INTENTIONALLY put into coke to addict the american population, and make some reference to a paper showing that caffeine has been experimented with as a mind-control substance (**it has, but so has hyper-hydration**) and I'll now make the LEAP that they all make... a leap of what SEEMS to be logical, but is NOT: ***

"Coke is responsible for all the bowel diseases... crones, irritable bowel syndrome...just connect the dots, people. Before Coke started being consumed by the masses... encouraged by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (***point to coke being included in disaster relief packages sent to new orleans or something like that**) there was NO irritable bowel syndrome.

**Now make the grand irrational conclusion**** The government is trying to keep you weak by forcing ACID into your stomach! I'll be back after these messages.(*** now we play an add for a miracle powder that is a base that neutralizes acids that you can take after you drink soda **)

Wow, I just became Alex Jones. Never mind that the acid in your stomach is stronger than the carbonic acid that is in coke, and your stomach has evolved over a million years to produce and handle this acid, so my claims that the carbonic acid in coke are at the same time true, yet entirely false because I'm only giving you the information that I know will scare and excite you, and not the other pieces that negate the fear mongering.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Neognosis

[preacherman76]

I just clean my battery terminals with coca cola. Worked as good as any acid I have ever seen. It is poison.

Thanks for not responding to the floride thing with the typical cliche's. They deserve a responce that I just dont have time for right now. Will be back soon.

[Skep B]

I just clean my battery terminals with coca cola. Worked as good as any acid I have ever seen. It is poison.

Thats more chemical reaction than proof of poison.

You can clean off oil w/ acid from orange peels too. different combinations allow different reactions.

[FLOMBIE]

I just clean my battery terminals with coca cola. Worked as good as any acid I have ever seen. It is poison.

Thanks for not responding to the floride thing with the typical cliche's. They deserve a responce that I just dont have time for right now. Will be back soon.

Well, Coca Cola contains citric acid, that's not a secret. Less citric acid than there is in orange juice, though.

Edited January 26, 2014 by FLOMBIE

[Iron_Lotus]

I just clean my battery terminals with coca cola. Worked as good as any acid I have ever seen. It is poison.

no... words... too describe... are you ret.... no never mind. not gunna do it.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Iron_Lotus

[Space Commander Travis]

Thank you, aquatus1.

So, it turns out that Alex Jones does exactly what I suspected, based on all the signs: He takes a grain of truth and distorts and misrepresents it into a mountain of fear... and sells a product to conquer it.

Guys like Alex Jones... their act is the same. They start with something that is true, blow it up, and point back to the studies that they base their "truth" on, though it is distorted.

I think that's exactly right. And what that leads to is that people assume that, if there might be something in one of the things he rants talks about, just one, and that may be only half true, then they think "well, maybe there is something in the idea that there are secret alien bases on earth/secret earth bases on the moon/that Nazi flying saucers operate out of the Hollow Earth or whatever else stuff he might make up." But the same people always pride themselves on saying "you believe everything you see on the MSM. Wake up, sheeple!". It's very clever really, it just shows that he's not at all a nut but is in fact very very subtle.

[preacherman76]

I think that's exactly right. And what that leads to is that people assume that, if there might be something in one of the things he rants talks about, just one, and that may be only half true, then they think "well, maybe there is something in the idea that there are secret alien bases on earth/secret earth bases on the moon/that Nazi flying saucers operate out of the Hollow Earth or whatever else stuff he might make up." But the same people always pride themselves on saying "you believe everything you see on the MSM. Wake up, sheeple!". It's very clever really, it just shows that he's not at all a nut but is in fact very very subtle.

Accept he doesnt talk about aliens or secrete bases on the moon, or anything you said here.

[Space Commander Travis]

Accept he doesnt talk about aliens or secrete bases on the moon, or anything you said here.

He has, though, accused the U.S. government of being involved in the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology^[10] and the killing of "thousands of astronauts".

that should be enough to be going on with, shouldn't it? Doesn't that, well, embarrass those who use him in support of the more, you might say, 'mainstream' Conspiracy theories like 9/11 and so on? It's a bit like DAvid icke; there might be a nugget of truth in some of things he says, but the other stuff he comes out with doesn't really encourage people to take him seriously, do they.

[preacherman76]

But Alex Jones claims that Fluoride is toxic to children and that it should be removed completely. This article you posted isn't completely about the EPA scientists calling for the removal of fluoride; they are calling for the politicians to get out of the medical business and let the people who know medicine set the fluoride level at 1.5 mg/l, not the 4 mg/l that the politicians wanted. I don't think you will find any scientists objecting to that.

Wow Aq, you are either being dishonest, or you only read up till that point. Give me a second and I will show you.

It's right in this link you posted:

The reason for this EPA position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter. At that level, EPA knew that a significant number of children develop moderate to severe dental fluorosis...

For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.

If you would have read further you would see this union comprised of 1500 people are completly against any water floridation.

Since then our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion. These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis. First, a review of recent neurotoxicity research results.

They have other concerns, of course, but their findings are, at best, even with the findings of opposition views. The biggest difference between the EPA scientists and Alex Jones is that the scientists want the evidence to be reviewed and policy to be based around the science, whereas Alex Jones, just like the politicians, just wants policy based around his demands.

Ya think??

In 1995, Mullenix and co-workers \2 showed that rats given fluoride in drinking water at levels that give rise to plasma fluoride concentrations in the range seen in humans suffer neurotoxic effects that vary according to when the rats were given the fluoride - as adult animals, as young animals, or through the placenta before birth. Those exposed before birth were born hyperactive and remained so throughout their lives. Those exposed as young or adult animals displayed depressed activity. Then in 1998, Guan and co-workers \3 gave doses similar to those used by the Mullenix research group to try to understand the mechanism(s) underlying the effects seen by the Mullenix group. Guan's group found that several key chemicals in the brain - those that form the membrane of brain cells - were substantially depleted in rats given fluoride, as compared to those who did not get fluoride.

Another 1998 publication by Varner, Jensen and others \4 reported on the brain- and kidney damaging effects in rats that were given fluoride in drinking water at the same level deemed "optimal" by pro-fluoridation groups, namely 1 part per million (1 ppm). Even more pronounced damage was seen in animals that got the fluoride in conjunction with aluminum. These results are especially disturbing because of the low dose level of fluoride that shows the toxic effect in rats - rats are more resistant to fluoride than humans. This latter statement is based on Mullenix's finding that it takes substantially more fluoride in the drinking water of rats than of humans to reach the same fluoride level in plasma. It is the level in plasma that determines how much fluoride is "seen" by particular tissues in the body. So when rats get 1 ppm in drinking water, their brains and kidneys are exposed to much less fluoride than humans getting 1 ppm, yet they are experiencing toxic effects. Thus we are compelled to consider the likelihood that humans are experiencing damage to their brains and kidneys at the "optimal" level of 1 ppm.

In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China\5,\6 that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.

Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride's interference with the function of the brain's pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body's internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty. Jennifer Luke\7 has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956, as part of the Kingston/Newburgh study, which is discussed below. In fluoridated Newburgh, young girls experienced earlier onset of menstruation (on average, by six months) than girls in non-fluoridated Kingston \8.

From a risk assessment perspective, all these brain effect data are particularly compelling and disturbing because they are convergent.

Guess those "other concerns werent worth meantioning. Maybe cause it proves Alex Jones 100% Not 75%, not 50 % but 100% right on why we should never floridate the water supply.

Dr. Hirzy has excellent suggestions. Unfortunately, he forgets that the U.S. doesn't have a school-based dental health system, and has no way of getting children to rinse with flouride drops in a monitored fashion like they do in other countries. I do find his conclusions a bit questionable though, in that he doesn't qualify his conclusions with the facts that it is difficult to determine an accurate rate of decay when the halo effect of fluoridated water is such a significant factor in the US, unlike in other countries. After all, if the reason kids are getting fluoride from secondary sources such as prepared food items, and those other sources are getting it from the fluoridated water, then the secondary source is really largely due to the primary source.

This is a common tactic, not just among conspiracy theory political tactics, but among scientists as well. The amount of variables that affect a given study are often hard to pin down. There is no question from any camp that 1.5 mg/l of fluoride does indeed decrease the occurrence of cavities. Alex Jones never bothers to mention that tidbit. He also doesn't mention that the large part of the objections are not merely medical in nature, but ethical or moral as well. He just kind of lumps anything negative as support for whatever position he happens to take on a given subject.

Has Alex Jones ever actually offered a solution and supported it with credible research? Or has he just stuck to complaining about what other people have done?

Sure he has. Its the same advice All these EPA scientist gave. Of course that is to Oppose floridating the water supply. Cause truth is there is no difference in tooth decay between places that are and are not water floridated. Guess you skipped over that part of the info I provided as well.

Edited January 27, 2014 by preacherman76

[preacherman76]

He has, though, accused the U.S. government of being involved in the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology^[10] and the killing of "thousands of astronauts".

that should be enough to be going on with, shouldn't it? Doesn't that, well, embarrass those who use him in support of the more, you might say, 'mainstream' Conspiracy theories like 9/11 and so on? It's a bit like DAvid icke; there might be a nugget of truth in some of things he says, but the other stuff he comes out with doesn't really encourage people to take him seriously, do they.

I have never heard him say the moon landings were fake. Though I must admit, that is one subject I personaly just cant seem to care about. Even a little. I tryed to read some of the thread on this MB, and just couldnt care either way. I cant prove him wrong on it.

I dont understand how you can say Alex Jones isnt taken seriously. Just over the last 5 years he has gain millions of regular listeners. He is why most people now see what a corupt group we have elected.

[preacherman76]

For the record P76; with 'Cooper', I meant Bill (Milton William) Cooper.

I didnt find out about Cooper till after he died. He was doing some good work. Obviously had some really good inside sources. Heck the guy called out 9/11 2 months before it happened. Read the whole script. But like Icke he lost me soon as he talked about how we are being ruled by reptilians, and any number of crazy theories he claimed as fact.

[Neognosis]

I listened to all of Alex Jones' show today. A few observation:

1- There seems to be relatively little "show and a LOT of advertisements. It seemed I had to skip past 3 1/2 minute commercial blocks prett often.

2- He lied to you AGAIN today. He said that "you can't get your cash from the bank" and "you can't transfer money out of the country."

As is typical, there is a small grain of truth, and Jones used wording that will allow him to slink away with enough plausible deniability if someone checks up on his ranting.

It is true that "you" can't access your cash IF "YOU" are a small business, using a small business checking account, and "your cash" is a more than 50,000 CASH a month.

It's also true that "you" can't transfer money overseas if "you" are a small business, using a small business checking account, UNLESS you pay a fee.

Of course, if you need to move more than 50,000 dollars in CASH, you can upgrade to a Premium Small Business account, which will cost you in fees.

Not only did Alex Jones LIE to you, he heavily implied that this was the doing of the President.

so, again, he took a small grain of truth (JP Morgan/Chase and a few other banks are hitting you with penalties and limiting the cash withdrawals from SOME small business accounts) and blew it up into a very scary falsehood, namely the implication that President Obama is going to take your cash away and prevent you from withdrawing funds from your personal checking account.

IMO, this is very dangerous and irresponsible. If he had a much larger group of people eating this silliness up, it could be damaging to the economy.

He also said that obama was conducting a "purge" of political enemies. Again, use of a very inappropriate word here. I don't doubt that obama has sat down and made a list of those in congress who have made this year particularly bad for him, and that he'll do what he can to punish them. It's politics. But to use the word "purge" repeatedly is to intentionally put a much, much darker spin on this, evoking actual political purges, where people are dragged into the streets at night and shot. In fact, IIRC, he even used the words "kristallnacht type political purges."

He should be ashamed.

Ah, he probably figures that his listeners actually think that is what is happening anyway, and most of them probably don't know what kristallnacht was anyhow.

from Forbes:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2013/10/17/no-jpm-isnt-banning-international-wire-transfers-no-limits-on-withdrawals-either/

[preacherman76]

Of course, if you need to move more than 50,000 dollars in CASH, you can upgrade to a Premium Small Business account, which will cost you in fees.

Yea you can do that, if 1 you can afford to, and 2 if you "qualify". In other words, yes there are many small businesses who can no longer do business through JP.

Also, can you provide some info that says you can wire money outta the country if you pay a fee, with just a regular small business account?

[preacherman76]

Guess you didnt wanna talk about the floride thing any more hu?

[Phaeton80]

I didnt find out about Cooper till after he died. He was doing some good work. Obviously had some really good inside sources. Heck the guy called out 9/11 2 months before it happened. Read the whole script. But like Icke he lost me soon as he talked about how we are being ruled by reptilians, and any number of crazy theories he claimed as fact.

Exactly. Cooper's Mystery Babylon series is invaluable, paramount research, essential - paradigm shaking - information. And he called out Jones for what he was. Must say I agree completely with Cooper's analysis of this character.

I used to like Jones when I only knew him from the movie 'Waking Life'.. Not anymore though. I thought his appearence in that Pierce Morgan show was ridiculous, disturbing even, and very damaging to the non / anti mainstream movement (aka 'conspiracy nutters').

Edited January 28, 2014 by Phaeton80