• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Idiot’ Bilderberg conspiracy theorist Alex Jones disrupts BBC politics show

j-mac

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Mr Jones, who runs a conspiracy theory website, began shouting and ranting after the Sunday Politics host told him to “shut it”.As he screamed “freedom will not stop, you will not stop freedom” Mr Neil tried to bring the show to a close, telling him he was the worst guest ever, then stifling a laugh and pulling faces as he said: “We have an idiot on the programme today.”

Mr Jones appeared on the Sunday morning show as the secretive Bilderberg Group - comprising politicians, economists, academics and business leaders - is meeting at a hotel in Watford.

Video: 'Idiot’ Bilderberg conspiracy theorist Alex Jones disrupts BBC politics show - Telegraph
Click to expand...

Just as what so often happens with these types of people in every day discussion, just watch, and listen to how the interview went....

[video=youtube;xgBq6q4x8Fw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xgBq6q4x8Fw[/video]

Jones was supposed to be in a discussion panel on the Sunday show, and just take notice how he constantly interrupts, over talks, and then when he is told that he needs to let the other guest talk, he goes into a shouting rant of self promoting, and blather that is pure nonsense...

This is not a new tactic to people like him, and the tactic crosses political lines, the other group that so often tries to use this tactic? Progressives.

And with deeply ideological progressives embedded in our own halls of government today, we see this often on our own shows, when these members are using this, and other tactics to stifle others speech. Even from hosts like Gregory from Meet the Press is guilty of this. (Although in a more muted sort of way.)

So, let's discuss why we give these people the time of day today....Do they offer anything other than pure entertainment like dancing bears? Do we really get anything out of our own Sunday policy discussion shows when the panels are packed either with 100% like minded lemmings, or at the very least 4:1 progressive liberals vs. one mushy conservative?

:doh
 
Okay, maybe it is me.. but are you defending this right wing nutjob or being critical of him for his behavior?

What I dont get is, how the hell did he even get into the UK in the first place since he was once banned as far as I remember.
 
j-mac said:
So, let's discuss why we give these people the time of day today....Do they offer anything other than pure entertainment like dancing bears? Do we really get anything out of our own Sunday policy discussion shows when the panels are packed either with 100% like minded lemmings, or at the very least 4:1 progressive liberals vs. one mushy conservative?

:doh
Click to expand...

The reason they are allowed on? Money. People like drama, anger, chaos, and they like crazy, hence why so called "reality" shows are such a big hit and along with that they advertisment that goes along with that. It's a huge cash cow.
 
I don't think Alex Jones is a left/right thing. All the people I've met who sympathize with him act just like him (they go into hysterics when confronted). I think it's more a deep ignorance, paranoia and chemical imbalance thing. The Bilderberg CT is founded in class-warfare, from the left's perspective. His trutherism is anti-republican. Other things come from a right perspective. All of his things come from a whacked out perspective.
 
Last edited:
I think what it really comes down to is that some people want to feel out of control and ignorant. Presenting the world as one big conspiracy theory relieves us of obligation to success. We can sit back and proclaim "see! It's a giant conspiracy, no one knows the truth, we have no control over our lives and we don't have any clue what's going on! THAT'S why my life is ****ed up!" As if, in some grand revelation, they will someday be relieved of all responsibility officially and stand vindicated for their helplessness. Alex Jonesians are as scary as they are hopeless.
 
TheNextEra said:
The reason they are allowed on? Money. People like drama, anger, chaos, and they like crazy, hence why so called "reality" shows are such a big hit and along with that they advertisment that goes along with that. It's a huge cash cow.
Click to expand...

There is a ring of truth to that TNE. What ever drives the producers to set up these shows like they do, they are NOT rooted in journalism of any kind, and delve more into entertainment than they do inform.
 
I'd say Jones was just a nutjob...if it werent for the fact that the federal government cant account for gun running schemes, warrantless wiretaps and spying on US citizens, spying on reporters, using federal agencies for election tampering, etc.
 
VanceMack said:
I'd say Jones was just a nutjob...if it werent for the fact that the federal government cant account for gun running schemes, warrantless wiretaps and spying on US citizens, spying on reporters, using federal agencies for election tampering, etc.
Click to expand...

The government accounts for "warrantless" wiretaps.

1. A person at either end of the conversation must be on the terrorist watch list.
2. A person at either end of the conversation must be outside the country.
3. A quasi-warrant must be obtained from a special court prior to the tap taking place.
4. After the tap takes place, a proper warrant must be acquired (without anything from the tap) before anything from the tap can be used against someone.

In these ways, the government does account for the "warrantless" wiretapping.
 
ecofarm said:
The government accounts for "warrantless" wiretaps.

1. A person at either end of the conversation must be on the terrorist watch list.
2. A person at either end of the conversation must be outside the country.
3. A quasi-warrant must be obtained from a special court prior to the tap taking place.
4. After the tap takes place, a proper warrant must be acquired (without anything from the tap) before anything from the tap can be used against someone.

In these ways, the government does account for the "warrantless" wiretapping.
Click to expand...
Considering all the recent revelations regarding phone records data gathering, internet website data gathering, what we know about Carnivore, Omnivore, Prism, etc......are you buying it?
 
ecofarm said:
I don't think Alex Jones is a left/right thing. All the people I've met who sympathize with him act just like him (they go into hysterics when confronted). I think it's more a deep ignorance, paranoia and chemical imbalance thing. The Bilderberg CT is founded in class-warfare, from the left's perspective. His trutherism is anti-republican. Other things come from a right perspective. All of his things come from a whacked out perspective.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think they are on a political paradigm either in the traditional sense. These are largely anarchists, and anti government people that are imbalanced following this pap. But, think about it, the model has bleed out into what we think of as traditional political information.

24/7 newsfotainment like the MSNBC's, FNC, CNN models drive this sensationalism as well, and journalism is dead in this world. In listening to the 'Sunday show replays on C-SPAN' during my drive back from Indy that I do every Sunday, I counted the disparity in panel representation on the shows. Here's what I came up with....

NBC/MTP - 4 progressive liberals vs. 2 Republican congress members
ABC/TW - 3 progressive liberals vs. 1 Conservative Moderate
CBS/FTN - All progressive liberals
CNN/SOTU - 2 progressive liberals vs. 2 Conservative Moderates
FNC/FNS - 1 progressive liberal vs. 1 Conservative, 1 progressive republican, 1 republican moderate.

This type of thing is corrosive to information. And sadly, most people are not like us in here, they don't hang on politics like we do, so they watch maybe NBC/MTP, and the evening news, and think they are informed....No, they are led.
 
VanceMack said:
Considering all the recent revelations regarding phone records data gathering, internet website data gathering, what we know about Carnivore, Omnivore, Prism, etc......are you buying it?
Click to expand...

Well, the procedures for the wiretaps under the PA are clear. I expect our government to abide by those standards. If officials do not, they should be prosecuted.

Regarding the data gathering, this is a different thing. While still technically surveillance, it's a different creature. I have not delved far into the details of this issue, but I will say that it looks like the government has far overstepped its bounds in collecting basically all records available.
 
ecofarm said:
Well, the procedures for the wiretaps under the PA are clear. I expect our government to abide by those standards. If officials do not, they should be prosecuted.

Regarding the data gathering, this is a different thing. While still technically surveillance, it's a different creature. I have not delved far into the details of this issue, but I will say that it looks like the government has far overstepped its bounds in collecting basically all records available.
Click to expand...
I agree they have overstepped their boundaries and think the curent administration (at least-surely others as well) have decided to wipe their ass with the constitution and do whatever they want and if they get caught simply ignore it, claim it wasnt their fault, claim they dont knwo who is authorizing who to do what, or blame previous administrations. While Alex Jones is certainly an over the top nutjob, current scandals indicate...in at least some cases...he may not be bat**** insane...just annyoing as hell.
 
VanceMack said:
I'd say Jones was just a nutjob...if it werent for the fact that the federal government cant account for gun running schemes, warrantless wiretaps and spying on US citizens, spying on reporters, using federal agencies for election tampering, etc.
Click to expand...

Well, isn't that what brings people to conspiracies? Just enough of the shred of truth to draw one in?
 
j-mac said:
Well, isn't that what brings people to conspiracies? Just enough of the shred of truth to draw one in?
Click to expand...
Yep...thats kinda the point.
 
PeteEU said:
Okay, maybe it is me.. but are you defending this right wing nutjob or being critical of him for his behavior?

What I dont get is, how the hell did he even get into the UK in the first place since he was once banned as far as I remember.
Click to expand...

Oh no....I think Jones is a pure, certifiable nut. As far as banned from the UK, I thought that was someone else...
 
j-mac said:
As far as banned from the UK, I thought that was someone else...
Click to expand...

Michael Savage. A raving nut, but a different beast. I actually have found Michael entertaining on occasion, in his non-political musings. Of course, banning a radio show host is pathetic and demonstrates what a pansy-boy version of free speech England enjoys. We have a radio show on 5 days a week, for years, and it has not caused any violence whatsoever; however, it would surely bring England to her knees.
 
j-mac said:
Oh no....I think Jones is a pure, certifiable nut. As far as banned from the UK, I thought that was someone else...
Click to expand...

Yea was Michael Savage and Fred Phelps... almost the same thing tbh.
 
I love how some people believe that "conspiracy theories" are far fetched ideas concocted by people who sleep with tinfoil hats however, does anyone bother to think that is one of the objectives of the conspiracy itself?...

Conspiracies are by far more likely to exist (and do exist) than transparency... It's naive to think that those with power (those in government and those with money) don't have a nefarious authoritarian agenda....

Not to mention - our government is currently spying on 300 million Americans KGB style and playing partisan politics and people STILL believe conspiracies are for "kooks?"

Also, getting to the content of the video -- why the hell are world leaders in government meeting with global financial icons in private? What could they possibly be discussing/manipulating?
 
j-mac said:
Well, can't argue with that.....heh, heh....
Click to expand...

You can't argue with the notion that someone is banned from a country for ideas?

The funny part is that we are arguing conspiracies here and we're talking about the UK straight up banning people for holding "wrong ideas."

Of course they're progressives.... Progressivism is a conspiracy against democracy and freedom...
 
ecofarm said:
Michael Savage. A raving nut, but a different beast. I actually have found Michael entertaining on occasion, in his non-political musings. Of course, banning a radio show host is pathetic and demonstrates what a pansy-boy version of free speech England enjoys. We have a radio show on 5 days a week, for years, and it has not caused any violence whatsoever; however, it would surely bring England to her knees.
Click to expand...

Michael Savage is honest and tells it how it is and doesn't give a **** about political correctness and mocks PC ideas -- and it is his Goddamn right to do so...

Michael Savage is 97% correct in everything he says and exposes and those who don't like being exposed for what they are turn around and paint him as a nut to hide their shame or agenda.

I would love for someone/anyone to explain how Michael Savage is a "nut" or wrong?
 
Mr.Nick said:
The funny part is that we are arguing conspiracies here and we're talking about the UK straight up banning people for holding "wrong ideas."
Click to expand...

The UK has their own laws. It's called sovereignty. Whether or not you like that is immaterial unless you are British.
 
ecofarm said:
Start a thread.
Click to expand...

No.

I asked a simple question which no one can answer....

How is Michael Savage wrong?

No one can answer that question.
 
rocket88 said:
The UK has their own laws. It's called sovereignty. Whether or not you like that is immaterial unless you are British.
Click to expand...

I understand that, however I also understand the UK attempts to paint themselves as a free nation yet bans people, guns and free speech....

The UK is an authoritarian "collective" and hardly a free union operated by progressive ideas that if not acknowledged by banning individuals and ideas bluntly in plain view of the world would be considered a "secret conspiracy theory" and that was the point I was trying to make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom