Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Rlyeh

Alex Jones

257 posts in this topic

Oh I loved Jones on the PM show. It got a little over the top twards the end, but it gave many gun owners what they needed at the time. The second amendment was under heavey assault. It was time to get in someones face and say back off.

Personaly I dont pay much attention when 2 radio hosts go after each other.

What do you think about Cooper's alien theories?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everybody can make mistakes. The 'alien' thing was Cooper's. He got it from official documents, witnessed certain phenomena himself.. and at the time he had no reason to mistrust the documentation.

You must remember, he has been at the vanguard of all that is 'occult' [hidden] from the very dawn of the movement.

Have you listened to [parts of] the Mystery Babylon series?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

That's not really true. And it is certainly not even close to what Alex Jones said and heavily implied.

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?

it's in the link.

As for fluoride, it is exhausting to argue fluoride with you people. The majority of what you post is untrue or largely exaggerated, including the opinions that you claim certain experts have. The problem is, much like Alex Jones, you barrage your opposition with a mountain of rhetoric... and it is simply exhausting to look up everything you claim. For instance, when you claimed that doctor was against fluoride, but it turned out that she was really against a certain level of fluoride, and not for the elimination of fluoride altogether.

However, if you want to discuss fluoride, we can do that one point at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everybody can make mistakes. The 'alien' thing was Cooper's. He got it from official documents, witnessed certain phenomena himself.. and at the time he had no reason to mistrust the documentation.

You must remember, he has been at the vanguard of all that is 'occult' [hidden] from the very dawn of the movement.

Have you listened to [parts of] the Mystery Babylon series?

I havent. But I will definitly take a look. I just got done with Behold a Pale Horse from him though. That was good reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it took 7 years, I dedicate my 10,000th post to you Neo. LOL :tu:

That's not really true. And it is certainly not even close to what Alex Jones said and heavily implied.

But it is true. We here at UM have already covered this subject at length in another thread. Listen man, Im not saying the guy doesnt go over board sometimes. Personaly I love his passion for freedom, and exposing coruption. Personaly I think its dangerous for low info listeners to listen to any news. Folks who have no ability to to think for them selfs.

it's in the link.

As for fluoride, it is exhausting to argue fluoride with you people. The majority of what you post is untrue or largely exaggerated, including the opinions that you claim certain experts have. The problem is, much like Alex Jones, you barrage your opposition with a mountain of rhetoric... and it is simply exhausting to look up everything you claim. For instance, when you claimed that doctor was against fluoride, but it turned out that she was really against a certain level of fluoride, and not for the elimination of fluoride altogether.

However, if you want to discuss fluoride, we can do that one point at a time.

Neo, that Doctor WAS completly against water floridation. Not only that doctor, but a entire union representing several scientists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent. But I will definitly take a look. I just got done with Behold a Pale Horse from him though. That was good reading.

One of my Bibles..

Have a look see (Mystery Babylon):

http://www.hourofthetime.com/wordpresstest/?page_id=7576

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh, alright. I think I'm against fluoridation in my community. We have money and fluoride toothpaste.

As for his ridiculous statements about you not being able to get your cash out of the bank.... FALSE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am against fluoridation in communities with secondary sources of fluoride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh, alright. I think I'm against fluoridation in my community. We have money and fluoride toothpaste.

Wow, thanks for saying so Neo. Seriously

As for his ridiculous statements about you not being able to get your cash out of the bank.... FALSE.

He did exaggerate. But, Im all but certain it will soon be a reality. In fact Im pretty sure its gonna get way worse, soon. I totaly believe they are gonna pull a Cyprus(sp?) on us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am against fluoridation in communities with secondary sources of fluoride.

You werent moved at all by the very serious concerns they have in regard to ingesting floride? Of which I only posted some of the concerns.

One of my Bibles..

Have a look see (Mystery Babylon):

http://www.hourofthe...t/?page_id=7576

Listening right now Phaeton. Thanks for the link.

Edited by preacherman76
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were moved at all by the very serious concerns they have in regard to ingesting floride? Of which I only posted some of the concerns.

You didn't present anything I haven't heard before. The fluoride paradox is not at all new. And being "moved" is not something that I will ever allow myself to apply in an objective examination of the facts. It would defeat the purpose of critical thinking.

You cannot freely mix arguments about the damage from relative levels of fluoride with complaints about the morality and ethics. The union protecting the scientists who were fired due to politics is admirable and exactly what unions are for, however that is an ethical and political issue, not a medical or scientific one. The EPA employs over 18,000 people, over half of them being scientists, researchers, and analysts. The NTEU has about 1500 union members, and any professional in the EPA is invited to join, not just scientists. Even if every single member of the union opposed artificial fluoridation, it still wouldn't be a majority (about 16%, if my rough math is correct, just regarding scientists. If we include all the employees, like the union does, we go down to 8%). No one is questioning the union's work in protecting their members. What is under review are the arguments regarding safe levels of fluoridation.

I mentioned earlier that I agreed with the doctor, but did not agree that what he said could be universally applied. If you check in the EPA site, the NTEU site, and most serious research sites, you will find the phrase "Dose Response Analysis" used over and over again. All the research is about the safe levels of fluoride. Some places have naturally occurring sources of fluoride already in the water. Other places has secondary sources, such as toothpaste, that are used regularly enough to not merit additional fluoride in the water. Not all of them do, however. In places where there isn't the effective dosage of fluoride available from secondary sources, the fluoride in the water is the only place where it will come from.

Much like the vaccination argument, the question isn't whether or not there are side-effects. Of course there are. No medication exists without side-effects. The question is whether the benefits outweigh the risks.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't present anything I haven't heard before. The fluoride paradox is not at all new. And being "moved" is not something that I will ever allow myself to apply in an objective examination of the facts. It would defeat the purpose of critical thinking.

You cannot freely mix arguments about the damage from relative levels of fluoride with complaints about the morality and ethics. The union protecting the scientists who were fired due to politics is admirable and exactly what unions are for, however that is an ethical and political issue, not a medical or scientific one. The EPA employs over 18,000 people, over half of them being scientists, researchers, and analysts. The NTEU has about 1500 union members, and any professional in the EPA is invited to join, not just scientists. Even if every single member of the union opposed artificial fluoridation, it still wouldn't be a majority (about 16%, if my rough math is correct, just regarding scientists. If we include all the employees, like the union does, we go down to 8%). No one is questioning the union's work in protecting their members. What is under review are the arguments regarding safe levels of fluoridation.

I mentioned earlier that I agreed with the doctor, but did not agree that what he said could be universally applied. If you check in the EPA site, the NTEU site, and most serious research sites, you will find the phrase "Dose Response Analysis" used over and over again. All the research is about the safe levels of fluoride. Some places have naturally occurring sources of fluoride already in the water. Other places has secondary sources, such as toothpaste, that are used regularly enough to not merit additional fluoride in the water. Not all of them do, however. In places where there isn't the effective dosage of fluoride available from secondary sources, the fluoride in the water is the only place where it will come from.

Much like the vaccination argument, the question isn't whether or not there are side-effects. Of course there are. No medication exists without side-effects. The question is whether the benefits outweigh the risks.

Translation- no I didnt actualy bother to read the article.

Cause there is no way anyone could have read and understood it, and come out believing the conclusions werent based in science, and was strickly a eithcal problem. On top of that, you assume every other scientists out side of this union are for water floridation. Good luck proving that.

BTW again There are no measurable benefits to water floridation. Of course if you had read the article you would knw that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Translation- no I didnt actualy bother to read the article.

Wrong.

Cause there is no way anyone could have read and understood it, and come out believing the conclusions werent based in science, and was strickly a eithcal problem.

Wrong.

On top of that, you assume every other scientists out side of this union are for water floridation. Good luck proving that.

Wrong.

BTW again There are no measurable benefits to water floridation. Of course if you had read the article you would knw that.

Wrong.

I'm not going to waste time reasoning with you anymore. It's just not worth the time and effort.

Edited by aquatus1
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its probably best for you to walk away.

For those reading this, this is why Aq bowed out of this conversation after he said the union didnt base their decision on being against water floridation on a scientific basis, but only a political/moral basis.

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.

Its a real interesting read from there. Here is the link again.

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He did exaggerate. But, Im all but certain it will soon be a reality.

EXAGGERATE?!

He outright LIED. And you seem to take the tack that most of his fans take.. when he lies, it's "ok" because, well, you're certain it will be a reality soon, so....

BTW again There are no measurable benefits to water floridation.

I'm pretty sure that is false.

This report by the CDC and Surgeon General claim evidence of a benefit. How are they mistaken? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely interested.

http://www2.nidcr.nih.gov/sgr/sgrohweb/chap7.htm#fluoridation

the section "Effectiveness" seems to indicate a pretty significant reduction in tooth decay contributed to fluoridated water.

Edited by Neognosis
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EXAGGERATE?!

He outright LIED. And you seem to take the tack that most of his fans take.. when he lies, it's "ok" because, well, you're certain it will be a reality soon, so....

I can understand why you feel that way. But like I said, every news outlet pushes their agenda. Low info listeners are dangerous for that reason. I guess there is a fine line between a lie, and a exaggeration. Of which I still say it was a exaggeration. Cause it is true that many small businesses cant afford, or will not qualify for a high cost account. And can no longer do business through JP.

You yourself are quilty of it when you said small businesses with a regular business account could tranfer money over seas by paying a fee. Forgive me if Im wrong, but I couldnt find that anywhere. You were in the heat of the moment, and exaggerated your message. Now I like you Neo. Always have. Im not going to throw you on the back burner and say you are totaly discredited cause of it.

Same as how I see Alex. I dont agree with everything he has to say. But he has a similar passion for exposing coruption as I do. I agree with him more often then not. I believe he is responcible for a lot more exposure of coruption then nearly anyone else, and thats a really good thing. On the other hand, I see main stream constantly lie to protect this government and corperations, and their wars, ect ect ect, And would rather listen to a guy like Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can understand why you feel that way. But like I said, every news outlet pushes their agenda. Low info listeners are dangerous for that reason. I guess there is a fine line between a lie, and a exaggeration. Of which I still say it was a exaggeration. Cause it is true that many small businesses cant afford, or will not qualify for a high cost account. And can no longer do business through JP.

Alex Jones said "YOU" cannot withdraw cash.

He did NOT say that "YOU" means "some small businesses checking accounts with a limited number of banks."

He was INTENTIONALLY misleading you, and intentionally and heavily implying that everyday, average Joes could not go to the bank and take out cash.

ou yourself are quilty of it when you said small businesses with a regular business account could tranfer money over seas by paying a fee. Forgive me if Im wrong, but I couldnt find that anywhere. You were in the heat of the moment, and exaggerated your message. Now I like you Neo. Always have. Im not going to throw you on the back burner and say you are totaly discredited cause of it.

I don't think I said anything about "regular business account" because there's no such thing as a "regular" business account. The limitations are imposed on certain small business accounts. If you want to WIRE TRANSFER money out of the country, you need to pay for it. Jones INTENTIONALLY heavily implied that there was a BAN on international wire transfers. There is not. SOME banks have made it a policy that small businesses must pay for international wire transfers and to make them, they must upgrade to another type of business checking account.

Alex Jones did what he does every day... he took a small grain of truth and made you think it applies to YOU in a very exaggerated way. What he did was essentially tell you that the government is not allowing you to buy a cheeseburger anymore, when what really happened is that a few restaurants have stopped selling cheeseburgers unless you also get fries.

Hold please while I go retrieve the link.

http://www.forbes.co...lcome_mjx.shtml

The reports are referring to a new $50,000 limit on monthly cash activity being imposed on small business checking accounts and a ban on outgoing international wire transfers on those accounts........Upgrade to Chase’s Performance Business Checking and there’s no cash activity limit. Plus, you get two domestic wires transfers per month at no charge and international wires are available for an additional fee. Of course, there’s a $20 monthly fee that’s waived if you can maintain $50,000 balance.

If you cannot see how what he said is FAR BEYOND a small exaggeration, and is an intentional effort to misinform you, then you are biased beyond the ability to clearly reason.

Edited by Neognosis
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex Jones said "YOU" cannot withdraw cash.

He did NOT say that "YOU" means "some small businesses checking accounts with a limited number of banks."

He was INTENTIONALLY misleading you, and intentionally and heavily implying that everyday, average Joes could not go to the bank and take out cash.

MM Neo, I listen to the show. I have heard him talk about this at length. You are taking what he said outta context. I have heard him directly say this was for small business accounts several times." YOU" obviously meant people who have small business accounts. To start anyway. Cause its not like we dont have very clear recent examples what these banks have done to other countries who's government has racked up to much debt. Controling the flow of money through consolidating rules, and controling the flow of money are warning signs.

I don't think I said anything about "regular business account" because there's no such thing as a "regular" business account. The limitations are imposed on certain small business accounts. If you want to WIRE TRANSFER money out of the country, you need to pay for it. Jones INTENTIONALLY heavily implied that there was a BAN on international wire transfers. There is not. SOME banks have made it a policy that small businesses must pay for international wire transfers and to make them, they must upgrade to another type of business checking account.

Alex Jones did what he does every day... he took a small grain of truth and made you think it applies to YOU in a very exaggerated way. What he did was essentially tell you that the government is not allowing you to buy a cheeseburger anymore, when what really happened is that a few restaurants have stopped selling cheeseburgers unless you also get fries.

Hold please while I go retrieve the link.

http://www.forbes.co...lcome_mjx.shtml

If you cannot see how what he said is FAR BEYOND a small exaggeration, and is an intentional effort to misinform you, then you are biased beyond the ability to clearly reason.

No you didnt say a small business account directly. But you did imply that if you are among those now banned from international wire transfers,(small business accounts) that you can just pay a fee and it will happen. And that isnt true. What is true, is that probably thousands of businesses who depend on international wire transfer's can no longer do so through their account. And many of those same businesses cant afford, and or will not "qualify" for a account that suits their needs. In other words JP in a dictoral fashion now tells people what they can and cant do with their own money. Unless you are privliged enough to pay.

The reports are referring to a new $50,000 limit on monthly cash activity being imposed on small business checking accounts and a ban on outgoing international wire transfers on those accounts.

http://www.forbes.co...drawals-either/

Edited by preacherman76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EXAGGERATE?!

He outright LIED. And you seem to take the tack that most of his fans take.. when he lies, it's "ok" because, well, you're certain it will be a reality soon, so....

I'm pretty sure that is false.

This report by the CDC and Surgeon General claim evidence of a benefit. How are they mistaken? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely interested.

http://www2.nidcr.ni...tm#fluoridation

the section "Effectiveness" seems to indicate a pretty significant reduction in tooth decay contributed to fluoridated water.

I dont personaly believe they are mistaken. I believe they are politicaly motivated to lie. Same as they are politicaly motivated to fire any scientist for speaking out against water floridation. Think about it. You read the article I posted. After understanding how harmful this is, told to us by the very people we hire to protect us from such things, it still goes on right now. I dont think this would have happened if the science was known before hand. But once the money started flowing, there was no way to shut it off. Not even for the EPA

Edit to add- this is another reason why I listen to Jones, over main stream. How on Gods green earth is it not common knowledge that water floridation is harmful? Heck I have seen main stream defend it, and not show any of the finding's from the people who again are suppose to protect us from such things.

Edited by preacherman76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to waste time reasoning with you anymore. It's just not worth the time and effort.

I don't blame you I've gotten better conversations out of turbonium and that's saying something.

Edited by Iron_Lotus
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is true, is that probably thousands of businesses who depend on international wire transfer's can no longer do so through their account. And many of those same businesses cant afford, and or will not "qualify" for a account that suits their needs. In other words JP in a dictoral fashion now tells people what they can and cant do with their own money. Unless you are privliged enough to pay.

FALSE.

A bank does not have to provide you free international wire transfers.

You are not forced to keep your money in a JP Morgan account.

You want to force a BUSINESS to provide a certain service WITHOUT the customer having to pay for it?

Please show how business can't afford to upgrade their account and pay for international wire transfers. I suspect it may be true in some cases, but ANYTHING can be true in "some" cases. And please state why you think that a bank should have to provide these for free.

Small businesses have to pay a second party (usually) to ship their goods to market. If a conglomerate of trucking companies decides they are not shipping goods out of the country unless the business pays an additional export fee, would Alex Jones be justified in claiming that "they" (implying the gov't) is banning the exportation of goods? Should a trucking company be forced to truck your goods around the country without a fuel surcharge? If they add on a fuel surcharge, are "they" banning shipping of goods?

I would not like it if my bank made me pay a fee for transferring my OWN money between accounts. I would be pretty upset if..... Hey, wait a minute! I just looked at the agreement on my capitol 1 360 online account...Turns out I only get SIX free money transfers out of my account.

IF I make more than six transfers out of my account to another account, I have to pay a fee for each transfer, or upgrade to an account with a monthly fee.

GASP! Call Alex Jones. He can now go on his podcast and tell you that banks are NOT ALLOWING "YOU" to transfer money between your OWN ACCOUNTS!

would that be accurate? No, no it would not be accurate. It would start with a grain of truth, but it would be misleading and fear-mongering.

Which is Alex Jones' bread and butter.

Edited by Neognosis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex Jones' business model is fairly clear. Take a story that seems a bit odd (government buying ammo). Instead of explaining it (tons of ammo gets used in practice) instead turn it into a huge evil plot (the government is going to murder you). While sometimes he does come up with some reasonable stories and important matters that should be looked at further they get lost in all the crazy he put out (juice boxes make you gay!). His goal is to use fear to make his listeners not only terrified of any kind of authority but also put in the idea that he's the only person who will tell them the "truth". Thus they only listen to him and he gets more money. Given the fear that he's always pumping out I wonder how long until his hardcore listeners snap and try to start a violent revolution.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His goal is to use fear to make his listeners not only terrified of any kind of authority but also put in the idea that he's the only person who will tell them the "truth".

He also uses the fear to sell you products you don't really need.

Like a device that filters the fluoride out of your water, or "My Patriot Supply" where you can buy all the stuff you need to stock your prepper bunker and fill your Bug-out-bag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to look up "My Patriot Supply", sounds as if that might be good for some amusement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They just sell stuff for "when the siht hits the fan."

Energy bars, water treatment, bug out bags, "emergency seeds"

http://www.mypatriotsupply.com/?Click=27924&gclid=CLDAvsPcq7wCFQtgMgoduSoAVg

I actually dig some of the stuff they stock, but I'm ALWAYS leery of anyone who used the word "Patriot" often, or who calls others "a patriot" or "great american." As if to imply that those who disagree with them are not. And you know how that is the first step to dehumanizing a group before you can lynch them or put them into a camp.

(heh... I just Alex Jones'ed you right there...)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.