![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#2
|
||||
|
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7jJMYJbAKc Ive always felt that Jones is the designated alt media gatekeeper. Not much of his info has been original (mostly lifted from people like Eustace Mullins, Cooper, Fritz Springmeier and some others). I think Paul Joseph Watson is probably MI5 or works something similar as the Anglo version of Jones. Both are disinfo agents. It was always suspect to me his rise after Cooper was killed and the whole romp through Bohemian Grove. That really cemented him as legit with many people. Threw up some flags with me(people get suicided on the reg for less). Also if you have watched/listened since the beginning he changes depending on what the current "thing" is. For a long time he wouldn't entertain people like Icke, Maxwell, Tsarion, Duke etc. Then he started having them on because he was losing his audience to YouTube and podcast. Now he is all "race war!" since the alt right began taking away his viewers. He has to keep the eyes on him so he can slowly let out the disinfo along with the old information everyone has known for decades.
__________________
![]() | |||
|
|
||||
|
#3
|
||||
|
Quote:
Yeah, AJ has pissed me off, I've mentioned it a number of times here, that's a fact, sometimes downright idiot. Won't say why (he toned it down), but I stopped bothering with him too for years. I heard him before he went to radio, when he was just on his own, so many years ago. I know what he's about and where it comes from. An agent? naaah. He is an opportunist though, and that's ok. He has managed to present some original stuff that turned out true. My rule of thumb, listen to everyone's point of view, even I listen to yours no prob, you have some really good points to make at times, but I think for myself.
__________________
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#4
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#5
|
||||
|
Quote:
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
__________________
![]() | |||
|
|
||||
|
#6
|
|||
|
The problem with the non-establishment right, is it doesn't really have any power centers except people in numbers and maybe a few religious leaders. Anything like economic plans -- doesn't exist outside of the establishment.
Any kind of information you want in general -- the alt right or whatever we're calling these non-establishment right wingers -- you're basically dependent on hucksters and your own ability to research. You don't -- like the left -- have a huge power center called college. Not that our higher education system is completely for the non-establishment left, but a huge swath of it is. In the end. The non-establishment left and right reach a lot of the same conclusions. But there is a big difference between getting your information from a AM radio huckster, and tenured professor. And it will show when it comes to the final viewpoint. This is the left wing Chomsky, who way more popular in colleges than Hillary Clinton: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILcKbKTlzfc It is so close to the viewpoint of the alt right. But its missing all the bullshit. Unfortunately, hell never make the kind of money Ann Coulter made off her first book. And Chomsky's book is filled big words and difficult concepts -- making it much less appealing to the masses. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
What constitutes a huckster tho? Lets do what libs never want to do - talk specifics. Specific things these "hucksters" say. Maybe look over the last month for something that is untrue, without going back years to cherry pick stupid things as you can do that with any major journalist, commentator or pundit.
What is it that disqualifies them from legitimacy. This being asked by someone who will make fun of the stupid things that anyone says including AJ and his snake oil.
__________________
Pro-Rustler since 1974.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#9
|
||||
|
Quote:
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
__________________
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#10
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
| ||||
|
|
|||||
![]() |
|
|