Fall of the Republic is out now

[NWO Sentryman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDQ6nIsgKW0&feature=related

Expect the same rubbish from alex Jones gerald Celente and George Humphrey

 

[Sunray Breaker]

This movie has been out for years under a different name....Endgame...I'd swear to god its the same damn film, only they replaced Bush with Obama. It's funny because the new great dictator was supposed to be Bush, that is until Bush's attempts to enslave America and declare martial law we're found to...NOT EXIST!!!

 

[Brainster]

Looks like the usual stew of "The media won't tell you this!" followed by, "Just watch this clip from CBS News!"

 

[dudalb]

Alex Jones has been making the same film for about ten years, the only thing that changes are the film clips he uses to prove that whoever happens to be in the Oval Office is controlled by dark evil forces.

 

[Edx]

I think it was the Obama Deception that really made me facepalm once and for all Alex Jones, since it just seemed like he was going to come out with nonsence like this regardless of what happens in the world. Because they wont elect anyone like Ron Paul he will always have a market to sell his conspiracy crapola.

 

[Juniversal]

Ahhhh!!! We're all gonna dieeee!!!!

 

[Juniversal]

Btw...I love the comment by laceydilbert.

"The word needs to get out before it is too late. If the U.S. falls, humanity is finished."

Cause we all know if the U.S. wasn't here the Earth would stop spinning.

 

[cwalner]

I think it was the Obama Deception that really made me facepalm once and for all Alex Jones, since it just seemed like he was going to come out with nonsence like this regardless of what happens in the world. Because they wont elect anyone like Ron Paul he will always have a market to sell his conspiracy crapola.

I actually have a sneaking suspicion that if somehow Ron Paul got elected (I really don't have the stomach to try to figure out how) that Jones would turn on him so fast it would be breathtaking.

 

[zaphod2016]

"The media won't tell you this!" followed by, "Just watch this clip from CBS News!"

Everything that's wrong with the "alternative media" summed-up in one sentence. Well done.

 

[joe911]

Final nail in the nwo coffin?

 

[Edx]

I actually have a sneaking suspicion that if somehow Ron Paul got elected (I really don't have the stomach to try to figure out how) that Jones would turn on him so fast it would be breathtaking.

Would love to see that

 

[Tippit]

Everything that's wrong with the "alternative media" summed-up in one sentence. Well done.

I don't really understand the idea of why it's hypocritical to criticize the mainstream media, but use selected mainstream news as evidence. While the media is close to monolithic, it isn't. Nobody has complete control of what stories are released, and one can recognize an overriding theme in media despite the fact that there are exceptions in what is reported and what isn't. There's nothing wrong with "alternative" media, and to think otherwise comes with the ridiculous implication that the consolidated corporate media and it's associated pap is perfectly suitable for a free and informed public. It isn't.

 

[Brainster]

I don't really understand the idea of why it's hypocritical to criticize the mainstream media, but use selected mainstream news as evidence.

Sort of depends on how you are using the mainstream media as evidence. If you are criticizing the MSM and using their own broadcasts against them, then refute their broadcasts and nobody will say that you are doing something wrong; they may disagree on individual items, but that is normal. What Jones does is agree with their broadcasts, but string them together in the "connect the dots" manner. It strikes me that if you are going to say that you agree with the MSM, but you want us only to look at A, C and D, then any skeptic worth the name should be screaming, "What about B?" That's how Jones operates, although it's more like, "Look at A, L and Z," and we're asking about the rest of the alphabet.

While the media is close to monolithic, it isn't. Nobody has complete control of what stories are released, and one can recognize an overriding theme in media despite the fact that there are exceptions in what is reported and what isn't. There's nothing wrong with "alternative" media, and to think otherwise comes with the ridiculous implication that the consolidated corporate media and it's associated pap is perfectly suitable for a free and informed public. It isn't.

I agree with what you are saying here enough not to quibble.

 

[zaphod2016]

There's nothing wrong with "alternative" media, and to think otherwise comes with the ridiculous implication that the consolidated corporate media and it's associated pap is perfectly suitable for a free and informed public. It isn't.

CT Logic:

1. The mainstream media is controlled, and not credible
2. Except when it agrees with me

I think we all agree that the media sucks. But as Brainster already said, the majority of Jones' last 5 documentaries has been footage from the mainstream media. The same media broadcasts that he himself considers unreliable.

Unreliable, that is, until he has the chance to selectively edit the clips to agree with his point of view, and then re-release them months, if not years, after the fact.

In my opinion, it would be akin to the CIA releasing a newspaper from 2006 today, with the majority of content redacted (blacked out). If the CIA did that, we would all laugh at this failed attempt at propaganda. And yet, when Jones does it, some applaud it. Usually the same folks who hate the CIA more than most. Go figure.

 

[Squidgy]

I am watching this now, boring. Endgame revamped for sure. However I do think some of the Obama stuff is fairly accurate. In the satanic NWO sense, NO. Selling America out to globalism, YES.

 

[cafetimes1991]

Looks like the usual stew of "The media won't tell you this!" followed by, "Just watch this clip from CBS News!"

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I saw this on the front page of Google Video, and before I even looked at it I knew what it was. Yes, it's Alex Jones, back with more random, vague, sparse articles ripped out of newspapers from all corners of the world, all converging together like a finished jigsaw in which the pieces don't fit, but you hammer them in regardless. Messy, but finished.

 

[Tippit]

CT Logic:

1. The mainstream media is controlled, and not credible
2. Except when it agrees with me

I think we all agree that the media sucks. But as Brainster already said, the majority of Jones' last 5 documentaries has been footage from the mainstream media. The same media broadcasts that he himself considers unreliable.

I think you either don't understand, or are willfully misrepresenting my position. While I do believe the media is controlled, in the sense of promoting a monolithic globalist agenda, I don't necessarily think it isn't credible. The problem lies with what facts, and perhaps most importantly what facts are not reported, and how they are spun or otherwise framed. I'm not prepared to say that the media is outright lying or misrepresenting facts on a grand scale, because I don't believe they could get away with it, and I don't believe that's the case. It's about the stories they're selecting and not selecting, and how they're framed.

On what basis do you conclude the media "sucks"?

Unreliable, that is, until he has the chance to selectively edit the clips to agree with his point of view, and then re-release them months, if not years, after the fact.

So you're accusing Jones of compiling prescient news clips from the past, and ostensibly taking them out of context. I would agree, with the exception that most of this stuff you just can't take out of context, it's that blatantly obvious. I've never heard Jones call the mainstream media "unreliable", he just deconstructs it and separates the facts from the spin and puts them in the context of freedom and liberty.

In my opinion, it would be akin to the CIA releasing a newspaper from 2006 today, with the majority of content redacted (blacked out). If the CIA did that, we would all laugh at this failed attempt at propaganda. And yet, when Jones does it, some applaud it. Usually the same folks who hate the CIA more than most. Go figure.

That's a baseless analogy. Jones isn't trying to pass off old news as current news, but rather establish patterns in history that lead to political awareness.

 

[BazBear]

I actually have a sneaking suspicion that if somehow Ron Paul got elected (I really don't have the stomach to try to figure out how) that Jones would turn on him so fast it would be breathtaking.

Going by what I've seen of Jones' MO, I'd have to agree. He couldn't let a little bump in the road like that put him out of business, after all.

 

[BazBear]

I don't really understand the idea of why it's hypocritical to criticize the mainstream media, but use selected mainstream news as evidence. While the media is close to monolithic, it isn't. Nobody has complete control of what stories are released, and one can recognize an overriding theme in media despite the fact that there are exceptions in what is reported and what isn't. There's nothing wrong with "alternative" media, and to think otherwise comes with the ridiculous implication that the consolidated corporate media and it's associated pap is perfectly suitable for a free and informed public. It isn't.

I agree with you to a point. I think the downtrend in print media based news, as well as the increase in many (or even most) people only getting their news from a very limited number of sources from their television sets has indeed brought news media closer to a monolithic status than it's been, at least in my lifetime. However calling the product Jones puts out "news" is like saying what O'Reilly or Beck or Olberman put out is "news". It's not news, it's opinion using news clips.

Just my 1/50 of a dollar.