>>1401554

Perhaps this can serve as a final word on Alex Jones. Maybe Corsi and the others to some extent too.

I think we're collectively doing a fantastic job guys, even despite the waves of bots, trolls & clowns. And this machine is evolving. God bless you all and your heartfelt dedication

Concerning Jones:

His work over the years has most definitely opened many eyes in some beneficial capacity, easy to see by the content and the reflections in his followers. However, a few things kept me from ever placing my full trust in him.

• Learning of Mockingbird

• Learning of the "limited hangout" CIA methodology

• He had a knack for speaking over guests in most cases, but seemingly in particular when certain guests were in the midst of laying down bombshell information. And those tactical "sudden" needs to take a show break.

• The whole monetization of proper health thing. Reinvigoration and Excellence in health is easy, and in full consideration, cheaper than the alternative of being bound to packaged products and Big Medicine & Pharma 'til you die. He has been a resource for revelations in this realm, he well exposed & harped on tap Fluoridation & Atrozene for example. But IMO, the whole trendy array of "superproducts", that not only he perpetrates but MANY others as well, is a rake on the wallets of people who really want excellent health. Knowledge in this realm is the real key. Though many of his products will do some element of good to individuals, the efficacy of any supplement is bottlenecked by the quality of the system processing it, the body. And boy does he push his products HARD.

To me, he's certainly compromised in some respect, anyone who has the appropriate scrutinous eye can see the "off-ness" in many respects. One has to wonder of which style of compromise. Is he in it for cashola by himself? Or his shareholders? Has he been threatened? Is he part of one of the groups part of the cabal? Is he a "Useful Idiot"?

He said on one of his shows that his friend Joe Rogan was threatened over the phone. Probably true, if you watch his short lived TV series on "conspiracy theories", made to make valid, supportable, curiosities look completely stupid. Mockingbird to reinforce the negative emotional associations to "conspiracy theorist" and the presented information to "tag" to it in the subconscious. Was fun to watch him squirm like a naked worm in a sunbeam when question came up on his show. Not to mention Rogan clearly tries to kill very specific topics on his show with millions of viewers,

That being said, the whole idea of "limited hangout" is to arrange a "hero" character to appeal to a certain group/audience. [What is a STAR?] Mammals auto fashion emotional bonds to ones they find trust and resonance with, quite easily when one "looks up" to another in some regard. Automatically. [Be careful who you follow]

The hero character acts as a leader to whoever falls into the relevant "capture basket" by means of emotional attachment on some level. It's a manipulation of what is a natural human behavior by preconceiving the hero to "move" specified groups in desired ways in accordance to agenda. [Against the Flow of Nature]. The buckets held by the preconceived, and the compromised who've been "briefed", are built from "appeals" to individual personality traits/complexes, worldviews/paradigms, emotions, attitudes and preferences. AJ appeals to Patriots, hungry to know, truth seekers, the "true health" focused, etc.. I'll assume you anons can see the point.

In the future, the nature of Celebrity, Television Programming, "Fans", Mirror Neuron Mimicry, and Archetypal Personality Complexes must certainly come into the light under many eyes.

That being said,

TIME TO MOVE ON

>>1401675

> Ever wonder what actually in those contracts we all agree to without reading the fine print?

One surprising thing in the fine print of some cell phone manuals is a warning to never give the cell devices to children, under 7 I believe

>>1402747

We essentially agree, you should re-read what I wrote.

>Why let people to "let it go" after you write your own "definitive statement"?

For the record "definitive statement" and "let it go" are your words. In what I wrote, I am reflecting the directive: to MOVE ON from the Paytriot situation. Exposure was successful, impact felt. If you or others still interested in digging on these characters, I support you, but main focus in the research board should be on the continuation of fleshing out the crumbs.

Agreed that my previous statement should be amended to remove my attribution of "final word", I was too eager to move on to the curiosities of what is not yet concrete and stop seeing redundancy

>>1402364

Relevant Info

>>1402892

>>1402616

Solid work anon, keep it coming

Some suggestions:

Do Not Track option being respected by companies should become mandatory, punishable by law if deliberately ignored as they do now, and permanent with the lifespan of the entire bill.

On the right to be forgotten note, it should include system backups that would include past copies of your profiles (albeit this might not be easy for companies across the board)

User data mined for monetization purposes that are arranged into profiles & aggregates must legally omit any aspects of data that could by themselves, or when taken in conjunction with any other given collected data, identify the PERSON behind the user.

Full disclosure of companies who purchase data or form partnerships in regards to uses of user data, and full transparency of relevant financial exchanges between said companies, all made easily available to, reachable and readable by the layperson.

>Also gossip based sites like ‘thedirty’ …. should also be made to take down slanderous posts if someone demands it to be.

>he won’t reveal the identity of the people who make up lies and post it there.

That's dangerous precedent against free speech, the takedown part and the reveal identity part. The latter is antithetical to the principles you set out before it. Slander can be prosecuted with existing law, law authority accesses should probably largely remain the way it is now.

There should be penalty for censorship, unless explicitly laid out in individual EULAs. None of this vague purposely ambiguous language like Twitter & YouTube employ in order to have the power to ban anyone they want for easily conjured reasons, Yet still PRETEND the company is open and balanced so it can coax a wider audience to monetize.

Permanently bar any law that could allow for the threat of legal action, workplace reprisals/firings, and/or incarceration in response to jokes, perspectives of any kind, manners of speech, behaviors on the internet. This should not negate nor affect the capability of law enforcement to conduct investigations under judicial orders.

I'm thinking there should be something addressing campaigns certain groupings of people do to "destroy" or intentionally and systematically harass targets.

Something must be mentioned about Doxxing.

Peer to Peer trade agreements should be addressed

Online tracking, whether for analytics or otherwise, must be wrangled and regulated. Study is needed to further understand the economic and functional impacts of limiting the scope & breadth of tracking.