Paranoid?

[LaDominio]

nomad wrote:

Stranger don't worry Alex Jones is still alive

after so many years ... the movement is now

too big.

Alex Jones is a distraction created to keep the 'movement' flowing into a harmless direction.

[Draken]

From what I've seen of Alex Jones he is trying to communicate the knowledge and meaning of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill Of Rights to as many Americans as possible. Since the gangster government in the U.S. have been shredding these rights, any knowledge by the masses of these documents and what they contain is not considered "harmless" by the gangster government, since they've murdered many dissenters for the same views Alex Jones proliferates. So the gangster government don't seem to consider such thinking "harmless".

If Alex Jones is harmless, what "direction" would NOT be harmless in your opinion, LaDominio?

[Insider]

No, I think it would be good to be a little paranoid in this world. We are way past much faith in government, business, organized religion, and the education system. You have to learn it on your own or so it has been for me.

[igwt]

LaDominio wrote:

Alex Jones is a distraction created to keep the 'movement' flowing into a harmless direction.

Are you inferring he's a disinformation agent?

[BlueAngel]

Originally Posted by Arjuna

Let's suppose that Robert takes up the study of conspiracies and becomes so worried about the NWO's activities in the world that he loses his appetite, stops going to work, stops paying his bills, starts to spend more and more time sleeping, and withdraws from his family and friends. A month later he dies from starvation. Did he have a pathological condition? Was it in his best interest to die? Most people would agree that the answer to the first question is yes, and no to the second question. However, if Robert has decided that he does not want to live in a world where the NWO perpetrates so many evil deeds, then it is in his best interest to withdraw from the world and end his life.

Let's suppose that, before starving himself, Robert kills his wife and six children with a handgun, because he cannot bear the thought of them living in such an evil world. Is killing his family pathological? Was he acting in their best interests? Perhaps it was a brilliant decision on his part to end the lives of his family and himself. Who are we to impose our beliefs on him?

Or perhaps Robert creates a virus in his laboratory, releases it through the local water supply, and kills every single human being on earth. Is that pathological? Let's face it, the NWO is totally evil, and they are enslaving everybody worldwide. Perhaps ending the madness by killing everybody was a brilliant decision. Who are we to question his sanity?

I agree that the NWO would love to diagnose all of us at this forum as paranoids, and enforce the cure of a lobotomy on each of us.

But what if a truly sane and holy person, perhaps Jesus, were given the task of defining the words "paranoia" and "pathological". What would those definitions be?

By extension, if we really wanted to create the Kingdom of God on earth, how would we go about achieving that goal? Satan certainly has a plan. What is ours?

Draken, you have offered us The Soviet Art of Brainwashing, a diabolical plot by the enemy. Well, if you don't like that system of mental health, then please tell me a little bit about the system of mental health that you prefer.

Yeah.

What a brilliant decision by Robert to kill his wife and six children and/or create a virus in a laboratory that wipes out civilization before he starves himself to death because he believes the NWO to be evil.

Can't get more brilliant than that, Arjuna!

Who am I to imose my belief on Robert that these actions are wrong?

I mean, seriously, killing your wife and six children because you believe the NWO to be evil is certainly justification for mass murder and/or the wiping out of civilization.

Robert's actions are pathological either way.

Whether he believes the NWO to be evil or not.

There are many people who believe the NWO to be evil and they don't resort to mass murder.

[albie]

Why get paranoid about ambiguous threats from conspiracy nuts?

[Out of the Box]

Originally Posted by igwt

Are you inferring he's a disinformation agent?

In recent years it's become more and more obvious that AJ is indeed a shill.

Originally Posted by Draken

From what I've seen of Alex Jones he is trying to communicate the knowledge and meaning of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill Of Rights to as many Americans as possible. Since the gangster government in the U.S. have been shredding these rights, any knowledge by the masses of these documents and what they contain is not considered "harmless" by the gangster government, since they've murdered many dissenters for the same views Alex Jones proliferates. So the gangster government don't seem to consider such thinking "harmless".

Real dissidents who managed to reach a significant part of the public are usually bribed, ridiculed, financially ruined, socially ruined, terrorised and/or murdered. However, common folks like you and I are just directed to Cointelpro assets like the John Birch Society, Alex Jones or Eric Hufschmid. It's easier that way than killing us all.

So what is the purpose? First of all, the want to monitor dissident activity. Second, they want to mix disinformation with the facts to make your views easily "debunkable" as you repeat your sources and you withhold you from the really juicy information.

Originally Posted by Draken

If Alex Jones is harmless, what "direction" would NOT be harmless in your opinion, LaDominio?

I'm thinking of Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique or David Duke's Jewish supremacism. I'm thinking of Henry Ford's The International Jew or Dietrich Eckart's Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin. The direction they shun at all costs is the direction where the J-word is openly spoken (unlike AJ) and accurate information is offered (unlike Hufschmid or the Judicial.inc website). What they fear most of all, is for another Hitler to arise and lead the people to freedom.

[albie]

Let's face it. It will be sad day for the world if most of the population become followers of conspiracy theory. What that would mean is that we had become a race of non-thinkers. People who believe with little evidence. Surely a sign or moronic consciousness.

It isn't going to happen. Jones and Icke will never convince enough people. There's no more whackjobs than there has ever been. It's just that they have more figure heads to buy books off. The number of people who find conspiracy theories weak and offensive will always remain the same:dominant.

You have failed, even if the NWO do exist. They either DON'T exist or are far too clever to be defeated.

[Out of the Box]

Originally Posted by albie

Let's face it. It will be sad day for the world if most of the population become followers of conspiracy theory. What that would mean is that we had become a race of non-thinkers.

We're all followers of some conspiracy theory. Whether you believe 9/11 was organised by rogue Muslem fundamentalists or by the CIA/Mossad, both are conspiracy theories. Whether you believe Hitler was responsible for the murder of 6 million Jews or this is just a propaganda hoax, both are conspiracy theories. Also, the official story of the murder of Julius Caesar, the gun powder treason, the French revolution, the American revolution and the Russian revolution are all conspiracy theories.

There are quite a lot of conspiracies that are accepted by mainstream historians. Why are conspiracies not accepted by mainstream historians by default the consequence of lack of thinking? Why do you take the mainstream account for fact even though it is pretty clear to anyone that our leaders lie to us constantly?!?

Originally Posted by albie

People who believe with little evidence. Surely a sign or moronic consciousness.

I guess those who believe Hitler was responsible for the murder of 6 million people or those who believe Muslem-extremists are responsible for 9/11 all have a moronic consciousness since there is no evidence for those claims.

Originally Posted by albie

Jones and Icke will never convince enough people.

Of course not. Both are disinformants.

Originally Posted by albie

The number of people who find conspiracy theories weak and offensive will always remain the same:dominant.

I disagree. As time progresses, I see more and more people (regardless of race or social status) waking up to the reality that we're dominated by a small capitalist oligarchy. In fact, I don't think I know anyone in my immediate environment who still believes in "democracy".

Originally Posted by albie

You have failed, even if the NWO do exist. They either DON'T exist or are far too clever to be defeated.

If enough people are aware of the facts and the crisis takes another blow at the middle-class, enough people may wake up to make a revolt become a possibility. There's no better wake up call than an economic crisis.

[Algebra]

Theres no raeson to be paranoid if you've got nothing to hide

But if any one calls at your house unannonced be very carefull what you say. It maybe doctored in to an admition of guilt. If you let them in, be sure to body search them for listening devices and or tracking devices. Dont sign anything or you could be checking your self in to a mental home from which you will not return. If the person at the door does anything at all that you would deem out of the ordinary. Shoot them right there and then. Get a fake passport and bail to the first country that doesnt have extradition treatys.

welcome i look forward to your posts