Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley spout nonsense and misinformation

[MrPiccolop]

There are things wrong with Alex, Tarpley and this video. The 'democracy' thing made me cringe... Tarpley appears to be quite accomplished academically but people make mistakes...

[Medeasbiggestfan]

@VajinalBloodFart

The Admiralty Laws only apply to the sea. It's flattering that so many people believe these conspiracy theories about the UK secretly ruling the world, but it's not true.

[ColtraneTaylor]

Nice video, NOT. Quoting from the mainstream to "prove" that the Queen does not have the authority to suspend parliament? Ofcourse Jones was not simply reading from the headline which says Canadian PM won the suspension, he's referring to how things happen behind the scenes. What his source is on that I'm not sure but Tarpley is an expert historian and to call him guilty of spouting nonsense is to make yourself look ridiculous.

[ColtraneTaylor]

@ColtraneTaylor Wouldn't the world be an easy place if we could all repeat official mainstream sources and wikipedia for the "truth" as this video uploader does here. Even the Daily Mail in the UK has covered the power of the Queen over the British parliament and media I would be very surprised if that doesn't extend to Canada and Australia. Again, it's easy to use mainstream papers as 'real' sources which if one isn't a shill or misinformed themselves they would have known by now.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

@ColtraneTaylor

Tarpley claims to be an expert on on the Commonwealth and yet he didn't know the sex of the Governor General of Canada.

The Queen does retain power over the UK government but there is no evidence whatsoever that she has ever used it.

[ColtraneTaylor]

@Medeasbiggestfan "No evidence" is a good way to cover up what intelligent people have every reason to suspect IS happening. And once anyone (I haven't yet) looks into it I think they'll find they have. Btw, the royal family just recently did get the British media to shut down coverage to Australia's ABC if they continued running a satirical show about the royals which would include satirical commentary about the wedding. That came from the Haus of Saxe Coburg Gotha.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

@ColtraneTaylor

The BBC prevented ABC's The Chaser from using their wedding coverage for satire. I don't think that means the Royal family runs Australia. If they did, why does the Australian Prime Minister support the idea of Australia becoming a republic when the Queen dies?

[ColtraneTaylor]

@Medeasbiggestfan "Clarence House, ... which doubles as an office for the Prince of Wales and his son, Prince William, demanded the ABC cancel plans to use the controversial comedy group, the Chaser, as royal wedding commentators,” reports the Sydney Morning Herald. They then contacted broadcast suppliers, including the host BBC, Associated Press Television News (APTN), Sky and ITN, to ensure the ABC would have no access to footage if it ignored the request." They will respect the OZ pm's wish?

[Medeasbiggestfan]

@ColtraneTaylor

The head of state of Australia is determined by the Parliament of Australia. Parliament could easily vote to remove the monarchy and there is little the Royal Family could or would do about it. The Queen was once head of state of Malta, Mauritius, South Africa and several other countries, but the Parliaments of those countries voted to remove the monarchy.

[ColtraneTaylor]

@Medeasbiggestfan At present I don't have anything that would counter your statement but I'm far from convinced of that.

[ColtraneTaylor]

@Medeasbiggestfan 'Sex' - Tarpley's not allowed one flub. He normally displays a great memory and according to some a near photographic memory on certain topics. Maybe his thoughts broke down for an instant, it's hardly enough to discredit him.

[plumpinator12]

In Canada, we cannot pass a law without the final approval of the the queen, or her representative, the House of Parlament is there mainly as a front in my opinion. Our tax money goes to her family trips when they come into Canada, how is this fair? She wouldn't pay for my trip to london at a 7 star hotel. The monarchy of the Queen, is just that, a monarchy (which believe that some people have the right to rule over humanity). How can she be for the people, on her golden throne with crown jewels

[Iseeyoursoul]

Wow she(the queen) is full of shit.

[MrDragon1968]

Alex Jones is such a numpty.

Thanks for putting that up.

[ppocka]

OK I don't follow them 100% either.

But the analysis of 911 and power politics is crystal clear, compared to most.

If you disagree why not say so?

[slmrcs]

"Jones also says that the Thirteen Colonies rebelled against Britain because King George III tried to removed the colonists weapons. In reality the war stated because the colonists rejected the right of the Parliament of Great Britain to govern them without representation."

No, you are wrong, there were multiple causes for the start of the revolution, but fighting broke out when the British came to seize weapons...hence the famous warning "the British are coming"

[Medeasbiggestfan]

Paul Revere never said 'the British are coming'. The American colonists thought of themselves as British so that warning wouldn't have made any sense.

You are right to say there were many reasons why the colonies rebelled, but the made one was taxation with representation.

[WhoisJacqueFresco]

@Medeasbiggestfan Wrong once again. It was taxation that broke their backs, but King George taking away the colonies ability to create money without interest and the king specified that the payments had to be in gold which were not as abundant so they had to buy from europe and britian at insane prices that also was like an extra tax and brought the colonies down to hard times which then snapped at the taxation of tea.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

Firstly, it was the elected Parliament and Prime Minister that controlled the colonies. The King had as much power as the current Queen - very little.

As I said, there were many reasons for the revolution. My main point is that Jones is wrong to suggest that is was mainly over the right to bear arms.

[WhoisJacqueFresco]

@Medeasbiggestfan Firstly, it was the house of lords that had the power at that time not the commons. Secondly, it was mostly nobility that were loyal to his majesty as was learned in the war of roses. Thirdly the king did have the percieved power as the current queen. Humility can coat a wolf in sheeps clothing for only so long. I do agree that there were many reasons for the revolution, but it was not the majority that started it.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

Parliament and the Prime Minister ended the fighting in America even though the King wanted it to continue. So clearly the King did not have power over the actions of his government.

[biped19]

Disarmament of the public DID occur I believe after tensions spilled over that resulted in the "Boston tea party." If I'm not mistaken this led to the eventual quartering act of 1774, an so on.

Regarding Jones, I always keep him at a healthy distance. Still, despite his "beck" like outbreaks and other minor issues, his program is better and more reliable than corp. media, for the simple fact that he has on informative guests. But, I still think he is hiding something.

Think for yourself.

[nrf000]

Nitpicking! Listen to the message moron.

[slmrcs]

Yes, this this nitpicking...although I found some of tarpley's errors humerous, calling a woman a man.

The fact of the matter is that for over a decade Alex Jones has proven to be correct in his general analysis of politics again and again and again. It's not possible for someone to be in the media for so long, and produce so much media, without some minor errors or misspeaking. this video does not discredit the body of Jones's work, which I think is the intent.

[piffpete420]

Holy epic fail! part of the definition of a parliamentary system: Parliamentary systems usually have a clear differentiation between the head of government and the head of state, with the head of government being the prime minister or premier, and the head of state often being a figurehead, often either a president (elected either popularly or by the parliament) Not elected by Parliament really so the dictionary is wrong and your right?????????????????????????­????????

[Medeasbiggestfan]

In a Parliamentary democracy, the leader of the largest party in Parliament are appointed Prime Minister by the head of state.

The way Jones describes it you would think there is a vote in Parliament, like there is in a Speakership election. This is not the case.

[nobodysfool67]

British Parliament is so corrupt they re-write the history of everything to suit their 'ascension games' upon the world. And Tarpley is RIGHT in calling this entity alongside New York - The ANGLO AMERICAN EMPIRE.. PERIOD!

[Medeasbiggestfan]

What are you talking about? When has the British Parliament tried to rewrite history?

[nobodysfool67]

That queen bitch does govern us through the federal reserve.

[nobodysfool67]

Webster Tarpley is a godsend. Alex Jones is just a 'vehicle' to have guests like Tarpley on. All these guests do over 100+ other radio shows whether they are free, public, or internet, etc.... Its NOT just Alex Jones, my god get a clue. Type in their names on you tube and you will see. I found Gerald Celente on a health show called The Gary Null Show out of NYC! LMAO.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

How is he risking his life?

[bjr43]

Oh brother, thos two are stupid.