This.
Which is why I laughed at the Jones CNN comparison. Even with a bias at CNN (far less of one than Fox, MSNBC and others IMO) they still try to adhere to provable stories and have standards. Nothing like Jones.
Despite the insistence of Dutch and babe
I like Alex Jones, despite the health products he sells and his lack of sophistication. Anyone who can go
onair with his defiant "come and get me if you can" impudence for the alleged conspirators who he believes wanna reduce world population to under 500 million while making the world a virtual Brit "King's Forest" royal hunting preserve just warms the cockles of my
Braveheart.
I have a sister who supplied me with his info base since 1965, while I worked for do-gooder pushers of the globalist agenda. I knew she was crazy, just as crazy as the blithely ignorant do-gooders.
well, perhaps the globalist do-gooders are just pragmatic idealists dancing on their strings. If Alex Jones errs in some details, he's got a better sense of what is going on, jousting at the windmills though he may be. Prince Phillip and David Rockefeller don't like him, that's certain, and "liberals" would shut down his genre of "press" if they dared. Do you realize that is what some some liberals mean when they talk about vetting the information the public can access on the internet, or over the regulated licensed broadcast media?
So, whatever else Rev may claim, I haven't heard a convincing denial that Dutch's annoyance is not at least in part his viewpoint, though certainly he lacks the finer points of genteel conversation.
Still, if a privately-owned discussion forum really wants to promote a congenial progressive political vision, certainly the mods have a right to steer things that way. If I want the right to promote an alternative I'd need to invest in my site, and pour out my heart, my lifeblood, and my time.
nah, I'll just say thanks for the chance to prattle on in here a while, and hope to make the point somehow that if we're really gonna have a world government, we need it to actually have elected public servants, and some meaningful limits on government powers. And a Bill of Rights that doesn't go on 28 &2/3 articles about a dreamy socialist idyll before yanking out every supposedly-granted human right with these words:
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30.
*
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-hu
This is the ultimate Statist declaration, that human beings have no rights "contrary to the purposes and principles" of the State.
[MENTION=14]colton[/MENTION] I give you this as a personal challenge. Defend our human rights as intrinsic to human existence, inherent with human nature, and not as a mere list of state-granted privileges. If you love the UN, fix that Declaration of Universal Human Rights and get some balance in the scheme that will prevent any tyrant from wiping out our human dignity.
Sadly, our hopes in this world are intrinsically limited, as limited as our good character. Human beings can not be "fixed" by authoritarian schemes. Any degradation that is conceived in the human heart is competent to completely deny justice to others, however we construct our governance.
But perhaps I err in being "sad" about that, because of the reality of an actual Savior.
