Win / GreatAwakening
GreatAwakening
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to create boxes for people to sort themselves in to, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush, who personally appointed Mr. Carlson to head an important C_A organization right after his son applies to the C_A, is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is itself just a front organization for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (including the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer. That will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to create boxes for people to sort themselves in to, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush, who personally appointed Mr. Carlson to head an important C_A organization right after his son applies to the C_A, is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is itself just a front organization for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (including the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to create boxes for people to sort themselves in to, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush, who personally appointed Mr. Carlson to head an important C_A organization right after his son applies to the C_A, is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is itself just a front organization for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to create boxes for people to sort themselves in to, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush, who personally appointed Mr. Carlson to head an important C_A organization right after his son applies to the C_A, is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to create boxes for people to sort themselves in to, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush, who personally appointed Mr. Carlson to head an important C_A organization, is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to create boxes for people to sort themselves in to, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father became the head of a major arm of the C_A right after Tucker applied to the C_A. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front and Tucker Carlson's father was the head of it. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion. I don't think it's true at all. That is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion, that is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion, that is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. The C_A has working for them all the big names in media. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion, that is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him in the MSM talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. The C_A has working for them all the big names in media. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough pieces of evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion, that is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him in the MSM talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the Carlson family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. The C_A has working for them all the big names in media. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion, that is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him in the MSM talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father, who is easily proven to be a member of the Cabal, is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. The C_A has working for them all the big names in media. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score
Reason: Original

“Alex is a lunatic” is a subjective statement.

It's not my opinion, that is what the world see's (that link is just one of a thousand hit pieces on AJ’s particular brand of crazy). Any article on him in the MSM talks about how crazy he is. He talks about truly whacked out shit all the time and he is quoted on it all the time. Suggesting that statement is controversial in the broader public view is just being willfully blind.

You say he discredits the truth so nobody will believe it, yet millions credit him with waking them up.

I am looking at what actually happens as a result of his actions. It isn't about what I want. I don’t think AJ is a lunatic at all. I think he is a really smart and gifted actor. What I am talking about is the actual effect he has.

Yes, after people start to question their reality, they get a lot of good evidence from Alex Jones. Then they go around trying to red pill their friends. Then they show their friends Alex Jones’ work, or they quote AJ, or they talk about some of the things he says that don’t have any evidential support (as supplied by him, or in general). Then their friends think that Alex Jones is a lunatic, because he acts like a lunatic, and sounds like a lunatic, and says things attributed to lunacy (the human body is just an alien antenna e.g.). Then all the good evidence he shows gets discredited by association with his crazy talk. The most important thing to appreciate here is that by "crazy talk" I specifically mean those statements he makes that are not believable (even if they are true) for which he shows no supporting evidence. Such statements make a person look crazy. Even if they are making statements of the most profound truth, it doesn't appear that way. I suggest that is intentional.

What actually happens is that Alex Jones “wakes up” very few people. The millions that find him, find him because they are already questioning their reality and he is the largest voice speaking the truth. When they find him, they can’t use him as a source, because he has no credibility. His lack of credibility is due not to the really good reports he puts out, but to the other things he says that act to discredit him, and thus the truth.

The truth needs an outlet. If that outlet is not believable by someone who already doesn’t believe, then the truth remains hidden. If, on the other hand, you do already believe something, and AJ is giving further good information on it, you will be a fan of AJ, thus separating you from the other people you wish to show “the truth” to by your association to AJ, either by quoting him, showing his work, or just sounding like him. What actually happens is that he creates division between the truth, those that want to talk about the truth (Truthers) and the rest of society. He helps to created boxes for different people, thus the division. Whether that is intentional or not, that is what actually happens. That is the AJ effect.

It also happens to be how the C_A is noted to control information in their takeover of other countries (see the details of Operation PBSUCCESS e.g.).

He is not alone. All Truther leaders do the same thing. They all talk about whacked out shit (which may or may not be true) and provide no evidence for it. They also all have provable or stated direct ties to the C_A.

Also, you have no evidence they are or ever were on the CIA payroll.

Alex Jones explicitly stated that his father (and other members of his family) was on the C_A payroll. True or not, it is a stated direct connection to the Agency. Q explicitly stated that AJ was a Mossad agent as shown in the link above. Mossad and the C_A are the same agency.

Tucker Carlson spoke at a rally on his campus about the C_A recruiters there, defending them. He then later is explicitly stated as having gone through the application process for the C_A. He is then stated as having been rejected.

Immediately afterwards, his father is appointed the head of the Voice of America by George H. W. Bush and the family moves from California to D.C.. VoA is the C_A’s media front. George H. W. Bush is the former head of the C_A. GHWB was the head of the C_A during the Church Committee hearings and ran interference for the C_A there when the Senate investigation outed the C_A as having hundreds of American media talking heads as their agents.

When his father took over the VoA, Tucker then immediately began working as a “editor and fact checker” for the Heritage Foundation, which is just a front for the C_A. “Fact checkers” are one of the C_A’s primary tools for controlling information. Tucker then became a media star, basically instantly. In his early career he ran interference for the C_A regarding Iran-Contra, one of the most blatant C_A corruption scandals ever (that made it to the public), that no one ever talks about or knows the details of.

You find patterns like this everywhere. Numerous threads leading directly to the C_A/Cabal in the biggest names in media, on all sides, going back to their origin stories. This has always been the case. What are the odds that that pattern exists in all the big names purely by chance? I suggest somewhere in the range of zero, especially given the explicit statements made by numerous people (inculding the Church Committee) that all big media people work for the C_A in some fashion. The C_A has working for them all the big names in media. It isn’t that the C_A subverts top level media stars, it’s that you can’t make it big unless you are already working for them. All evidence suggests that the media is completely controlled.

Now those may not be enough evidence to convince you, and that's fair, but it's just a start, and it is supporting evidence for the assertions, so not "no evidence."

Q said some disinfo is necessary. The Q movement couldn’t be the “Alex Movement,” therefore, that disinfo was necessary.

Citing the "some disinfo is necessary" statement to cover every thing you don't want to be true is not using reason, but justifying belief. Look at the actual facts contained within the Q statements. Look at all the evidence of connections between AJ and Mossad/C_A. Look. Don’t be a True Believer, that will not help you uncover the scope of the deception.

1 year ago
1 score