Alex Jones on Wikileaks

iamstop

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lTBJAkNyBk

Kinda crazy but actually makes some sense

gizmo

"One of [the women accusing him of rape] is absolutely in Cuba running CIA ops"

Kinda crazy? Some sense?

iamstop

gizmo wrote: »

Kinda crazy? Some sense?

What? Can't make your own mind up? Need me to tell you? Watch it and decide for yourself man.

Brown Bomber

gizmo wrote: »

Kinda crazy? Some sense?

Forget the nonsense, focus on what is verifiable.

Cass Sunstein said this in a 2006 Harvard paper.

Some conspiracy theories create serious risks. They do not merely undermine democratic debate; in extreme cases, they create or fuel violence. If government can dispel such theories, it should do so. One problem is that its efforts might be counterproductive, because efforts to rebut conspiracy theories also legitimate them. We have suggested, however, that government can minimize this effect by rebutting more
rather than fewer theories, by enlisting independent groups to supply rebuttals, and by cognitive infiltration designed to break up the crippled epistemology of conspiracyminded groups and informationally isolated social networks.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585

Cass Sunstein then promoted wikileaks in a 2007 Washington Post piece to a worlwide audience,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301596.html

At that time Wikileaks had not "leaked" anything to warrant media attention.

Sunstein then became Obama's head of the office of Regulatory and Information Affairs and the heavyweight pro-war leaks started coming out pushing the pro-war agenda of the pschyopathic Washington/Tel-Aviv Neocons and Zionists hyped up by a mainstream media orgy resulting in many US Liberals having to reevaluate their position on defence/war.

"enlisting independent groups to supply rebuttals"

Wikileaks and Assange the Messiah could be one of these "independent" enlisted groups to "supply rebuttals" to the anti-war movement as politicians and the mainstream media have zero credibiliy in light of the WMD in Iraq fiasco.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TheJPboU4c

'

gizmo

iamstop wrote: »

What? Can't make your own mind up? Need me to tell you? Watch it and decide for yourself man.

I quoted his exact words from the video after watching it, it's nothing more than typical Jones lunacy.

Interesting info BB although I take a vastly different point from what you've quoted. Sunstein does indeed point out how the government should work to dispel conspiracy theories and suggests doing so via independent agencies which would be able to avoid being burdened with the same suspicion that the government would. That makes perfect sense of course however I'm guessing that some people here will take from that that the government will use these independent bodies as a shill to dispel truthful theories with false explanations.

Now again we disagree on the Wikileaks issue, given the information released and the status of those involved in the leak I highly doubt this was done with the co-operation of the government. While some of the leaks were indeed humorous fluff (Gadafi's buxom nurse for instance) there are far more serious ones in there too, most notably more accurate figures on the casualties in Iraq, China's position on North Korea and closer to home, the attitude of the Church to questioning from our government.

This isn't the type of material you would release to the public in order to sway public opinion in your favour. Not only would it make the ordinary populace more disillusioned with your rather high military spending on the other side of the world (especially given your current fiscal worries) but it also directly damages relations between Nations, the latter of which suits no one.

RGDATA!

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Forget the nonsense, focus on what is verifiable.

Cass Sunstein said this in a 2006 Harvard paper.

good linkage, i think what you've said here and in the other thread about wikileaks are definitely worth considering.
In fact i was listening to link in the original post before i saw that Brown Bomber posted here and was thinking of what he said before in that other thread.

as far as Jones's theory:
I think the idea that the powers that be could use this as a justification to chip away at freedom of the internet is plausible, whether they engineered the scenario for this specific purpose or not.

Jones is big on " the coming crackdown on internet freedom", and it's one of the things I still take him seriously on. I think we should be rightly vigilant and keep an eye on this.

loldog

There are those who are a little suspicious of Alex Jones. They tend to think he's a psy-ops operative. If you think about it, the way he talks is way too much the caricature of a "conspiracy nut" as the general public would perceive it.

.

rathcop

nice one brown for the vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FVn67V-tsE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wAvue6ESJ8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr3cQ2QSzds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8v2yQO27ow