Featured US Drops First Bombs in Syria!

Thanks for the link! This is worse than learning that 0bam@'s homework in Indonesia was to eat his dog.

 

Given up on finding that evidence of a "Russian invasion" yet? I'd still be interested in seeing it if and when you find it.

 

That was awesome!

[from March 2009] "And then they'll (the U.S. government) release the big one (a staged biological attack), and kill perhaps half the population of the United States."

[May 2009] "We're going to have World War III in the next few years. That's not fear mongering, that's reality."

[Sept 2009] "They're going to shut down the internet in 2 years."

[Feb 2010] "They're going to bring down at least 15 European nations in the next 16 months."

[March 2010] "They're going to stage terror attacks on April 15th or 19th because that's when CNN, Fox, etc. are putting documentaries about the Tea Party on the air."

[May 2010] "The U.S. dollar will be devalued by 50% within 2 years."

[Dec 2009] "They position satellites above gun shows, and when you get out of your car they take your heat resonance, ah, ah, your body biometric body print, and they upload that into the sat grid and they can now track you off your heat resonance pattern."

[Dec 2009] "And now the head of the U.N. and Al Gore have announced a new global religion [around stopping global warming] and you must be a part of it, I mean you can't make this stuff up!"

 

But apparently Poncho still wants me to prove this guy willfully lies to his own fanbase.

 

I bet the first six items have been repeated since 2009-2010. That would be proof, but any proof you offer will be inadequate for Poncho. [I better be quiet about him. I will be accused of sniping him from behind the cover of the Ignore List. Seriously.]

Five to six years ago on another forum (and here, too) there were people predicting rioting in the streets, marital law, starvation, and total collapse of the US economy. When I politely asked them to say when that would happen, the answer was "soon". I imagine if the same question was asked of Poncho the answer would be "soon".

 

Oh yeah, I have a cousin like this. The thing is, I can see how someone might feel that a certain situation seems fishy and maye subscribe to a few of them but this guys swallows ALL OF THEM! Every single theory out there. He feels that every significant news event is some nefarious plot concocted by the NWO or it's labeled a false flag operation.

 

See how this works folks?

UOT made the claim Alex is "willfully lying". When asked to prove his claim is true he tries to make us think that because Alex sucks at predicting the future that means he's "willfully lying".

There's not supposed to be a difference. Making bad predictions = willfully lying. Or so we're supposed to believe.

When that doesn't work it's time to start demonizing "conspiracy theorists" in general.

That's typical of the "debunkers". When asked to prove their own claims they go off on wild tangents and start pointing fingers instead. SEE THIS . . . http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=95197

And ITL? He isn't worth responding to. He's a cowardly liar and he knows it.

The fact he has to live with his past cowardly actions and continually lie about them is good enough for me. :smilewinkgrin:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-terrorists-r-us-the-islamic-state-big-lie-and-the-criminalization-of-the-united-nations/5404146

 

Whatever dude. He states them like they are fact and when it doesn't happen he just moves on like it never happened. An endless cycle designed to keep the audience in a constant state of panic.

 

Since you quoted Poncho I can see his reply. So I'm a "cowardly liar"? OK, Poncho. Prove it. Prove that I'm a liar.

 

Don't have to. You just saved me the trouble.

You said, "I better be quiet about him. I will be accused of sniping him from behind the cover of the Ignore List. Seriously."

Which means you deny taking cheap shots at me in public while I was on your ignore list.

Then . . .

You said "Since you quoted Poncho I can see his reply". Which means I am on your ignore list. And you are taking cheap shots at me in public again while hiding securely behind the ignore feature so you don't have to see any of my replies to your cheap shots.


This proves three things maybe even four about you.

1. You like to take cheap shots at people who are on your ignore list in public.

2. You don't want to see your victim's replies to the cheap shots you aim at them them in public. Which means you are cowering behind the ignore feature.

3. You have no problem lying about doing so.

4. You can't resist again doing what you "claim" you never did. Even if it proves you have been lying all along.

According to the evidence here you are a cowardly liar and YOU just proved it yourself!

Good going slick. :thumbsup:

 

Evidently you haven't been listening to his show when he admits being wrong and apologizes for it.

He does it quite often actually. That's something the mainstream media rarely does and then only after they've been caught and been forced to admit being wrong.

What you accuse Alex of doing is no different than what the mainstream corporate media does on a daily basis.

They state things as if they were fact. Some latest examples include "Russia Invades Ukraine", "Russia Is Shelling Ukraine", "Russian Separatists Shot Down Flight MH17" . . .

Then when no evidence can be found to support the claims (bold headlines) they move on as if it doesn't matter. SEE THIS . . . http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=95197 By then it usually doesn't matter. Mass public opinion has been formed in favor of another war or restriction of our liberties. And that was the purpose of the bold headlines to begin with.

Not to inform us but to scare and manipulate us.

They also keep us in an endless cycle of fear to gain our consent to wage unconstitutional wars abroad and reduce our liberties here at home.

"Give up your rights or the terrorists will get you". "Drop bombs here or the terrorist will get you".

Nevermind Washington has been one of the biggest supporters of these "terrorists" for decades. When Washington wants to give them money and weapons the mainstream corporate media calls them "freedom fighters", "rebels for democracy" or as in the case of Saudi Arabia, "allies". But when Washington wants to bomb them or use them to scare us into accepting more restrictions on our liberties the mainstream media calls them "terrorists" and "deadly threats to our national security". All to manipulate us.

To be "fair and balanced" wouldn't you have to condemn the mainstream media as well as Alex Jones for acting deceptively?

I have to wonder about those who can rightly identify the international conspiracy behind the "global warming" hoax but refuse to even consider the same internationalists might be conspiring in other ways to undermine our national sovereignty or use our blood and treasure for their own selfish ends.

I see people like that as being blind in one eye. Seeing only what they want to see when it fits their own political agenda or preconceived notions and rejecting everything else as "kooky conspiracy theory" or "liberal/conservative convolution".

Here you are bashing Alex Jones for doing the same thing the mainstream corporate media does on a daily basis but I doubt that you'll admit that the mainstream corporate media is guilty of acting in the same manner even though the evidence is manifest.

Am I right?