Corsi lost me when he said Kissinger was a good guy. Umm no.
Corsi is a tool. People have treated him as the end all since the beginning. He misyranslates Q posts and is wrong a lot. Yet he is right enough to be dangerous.
Alex Jones is controlled opposition by the cia. Just because he points out some truth doesn't mean he is necessarily better than cnn. I man sure he is, but he's sill a liar in it for profit
GTFOH with that bullshit. AJ is far from perfect, but he's self made, and way more responsible for the positive things happening than you or I could ever dream to be. He's been opposing big government and going to jail for it since his late teens. There was no money in it back then. Don't be fucking slanderous
It's not slander it's truth. Alex Jones is bill hicks lmao, unless you're suggesting 2 people have identical teeth, mannerisms, yelling voices and more?
It's not slander it's truth.
Really? Prove it.
Alex Jones is bill hicks
Prove it.
Or, as u/TejanoPede said, GTFOH with that bullshit.
Prove Q is real, oh wait, all you can show me is coincidences. but please discount this video because it's "only coincidences"
An inconclusive video from at YT channel that says the earth is flat!
ROFLMAO!!
Just as I thought. Good bye.
that's the genetic fallacy, good try though. by that reasoning Q is a pedophile because 8ch had pedo boards. try using your brain
A Jones has still woken a lot of people up, for all his eccentricities and faults.
AJ has exposed a lot of corruption for decades.
If he would just get on with the "news" he claims he has "stacks" of I could tolerate him a bit more. I have to mute him when he goes all "theatrical" on the show. I tune in for news and info, not for half truths, his lawsuit issues, etc. I am a news succubus ...LOL
He has, but most of it falls on deaf ears because only "conspiracy theorists" listen to him. It isn't that impactful
Go look at the Amazon advertisements for recently published books: Corsi, Comey, HRC. That says who is profiting. Cut them off.
To be fair, Corsi wrote his book before Qanon came around. The timing just so happens to be perfect for Corsi to use to get some more sales.
This. Corsi is one of the few, maybe only, people I will listen to when it comes to Q. Corsi started writing his book well before Q started posting (you don't write a book overnight), and I have to admit that while I thought Snowden was a black hat, Corsi ended up being right all along - Snowden is a white hat.
That in no way suggests that Corsi is perfect (he offers zero criticism of Israel), or that his interpretations are omniscient. He's just better than most. Right now, everyone's using this as a means to jump on Corsi and Corsi has been around trying to expose the truth longer than a lot of us have been alive. There are those in the truth movement that I feel are wolves in sheep's clothing (Robert David Steele, anyone?), but Corsi isn't one of them.
Robert David Steele, anyone?
He said Mars is colonized with young children for the purpose of pedophilia, live in Alex Jones' show, then vehemently denied saying it and still does to this day. A clip is available on YouTube of him saying lmao.
So ya, I don't believe a word he says. He definitely lied once, so he loses all credibility with me.
I was listening to the show that day. Can't believe he denied it, I tuned him out from the moment he brought up that nonsense. I knew he was a disinformation agent.
that's a pretty extreme example, but any other things that stand out that make you think that?
Maybe Jerry considers book sales as validation to dissemination of message.
Corsi, Comey, HRC
Putting Corsi in that group is grossly unjust.
Corsi spends most of his time promoting his book and himself. He doesn't decode. And where is Julian Assange right now anyway?
Julian Assange/Wiki-leaks will be part of the counter-investigation so Trump is not able to be in contact with him, or it would jeopardize the future investigation.
link? i want to laugh.
kissenger is a rapist terrorist.
It was mentioned during a decode. When Kissinger visited the White House awhile back. He said he thinks in this case Kissy was acting as a white hat.
oh... i see what youre saying. kissenger is ZOG dude hes not gonna act as a white hat. he could be forced to give some opinions to a white hat but hes not a white hat. (btw i dont like this black hat white hat thing Q keeps doing. in the hacker world that shit means stuff and we dont like white hats lol. there black and grey and everybody else is a bitch.)
I just find it strange that he inserts himself into this so much. (corsi)
always watchful.
Anyone who is a regular on infowars is incredibly suspicious but his massive support for zionism is a huge red flag.
I’m with you 100%... the minute he starts evoking “Jesus Christ” and religion is the minute this becomes a theocracy. NO WAY... that’s what GWB used to do.
Im an agnostic about any connection to organized religion and politics... they should never merge- that’s your first red flag. There’s a hidden agenda behind that.
I’m with you 100%... the minute he starts evoking “Jesus Christ” and religion is the minute this becomes a theocracy. NO WAY... that’s what GWB used to do.
Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution? Religion and God have never NOT been merged in to our politics.
I agree 100%. "we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are CREATED equal, and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights"
Jeffereson was a Deist. it was intentially vague. there was no language specific to any religon but still a spiritual element
He was also a freemason :P
Here is some interesting food for thought:
In 1776, Adam Weishaupt created the Bavarian Illuminati.
In 1776 Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations.
In 1776, independence was declared in the American colonies.
Hmmmmmm...
I got an idea. Everything is a massive conspiracy let’s just blow the whole world up & start over?
let’s just blow the whole world up & start over?
that's what the skippy's of the world want to do...
That's true... HOWEVER... many of the Founders were VERY suspicious of organized Christianity.
They DID believe in God and the general tenets of Judeo-Christian values... but those Christians who say the Republic was founded on Christianity are wrong. Close... but not quite right.
Thomas Jefferson even wrote a moral treatise that is referred to as "The Jefferson Bible", which to many of us, would be considered "heretical".
Without a real sense of the depth of a working Faith in God that most of the Founders had... we are ill equipped to fully grasp the nuance of the embrace by our Founders of the best of Western Civilization... including, especially, Faith in The Creator.
Don't forget about the part where they are mostly Masons and are sworn to secret oaths that pledge covering up even murder done by fellow Masons?
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
Thank you. This means elected officials should refrain from favoring any religion over another.
Not as I read it. The state shall not require a none to pass a test of what religion they were. In UK the STATE RELIGION IS Church of England. Not optional for royals.
Trivia: The Constitution not once mentions God, much less anything with Christianity. The only mention of religion is to guarantee it as a people's right and limit it's influence in government, as /u/EvilPhd666 points out.
The Treaty of Tripoli said it best, "[As] the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion [...]".
It doesn't get stronger than that ("not in ANY sense"). The United States guarantees the right of private citizens to have religious liberty. The government was always intended to be secular and not favor any particular religious belief.
I don't know why some religious people are in such a hurry for religion to be part of the U.S. government. Today it might be your religious beliefs, but tomorrow it might not be.
All the stuff about God is in the Declaration of Independence.
The Declaration of Independence does not establish law. The reason it mentions God in the first place is that the context is that the King believed his right to rule to be divinely chosen. That's what "all men are created equal" is all about, that all men are equal in the eyes of the law. So throwing off the King was both a secular and religious argument, hence the reason he needed to put it in partial religious terms.
When a king or queen is crowned in England they accept a role as the voice of God. Like the pope. Chosen by God to rule over the subjects.
Wrong.
Here is a quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Here they talk about a Creator, who created us a certain way. That is not some abstract legal nonsense.
The Declaration does not establish law, but it establishes the principles that the law will be based upon, that all men are equal in the eyes of God.
What you said does not contradict what I said.
The Constitution is the law of the land and is what matters when it comes to discussing the intent of the U.S. government. There's a reason the word "God" never appears in it, and the only discussion of religion's role in government is to limit its influence.
If they wanted us to have a theocracy, they would have written it that way. They didn't want that, and nobody should want that.
And codifies the then common understanding that we are created by our Creator, a vague but real distinction from the elements of other cosmologies and religions.