U.S. Invasion of Libya Set for October

Bob Hubbard

Retired
MT Mentor
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
47,245
Reaction score
772
Location
Land of the Free
So says Alex Jones
http://www.infowars.com/u-s-invasion-of-libya-set-for-october/

Geo-political expert Dr. Webster Tarpley also told the Alex Jones Show today that wider war is being planned for Libya, while the count of simultaneous U.S. wars has reached five conflicts– including Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Yemen. The potential for an even greater spread of regional conflict could well provoke a World War III scenario, drawing in tenuous nations like Syria, Lebanon, Iran or even Saudi Arabia, according to Tarpley.

Interesting stuff, if true.
 


I was reading up on this as well...its just another world police conflict..Alex has been pretty precise on his predictions...he talked about gas prices spiking up to 5 dollars a gallon this summer, and he talked about the riots/protests in the middle east spreading like wildfire..which they have.

I would be intrested to see what happens.
 
Interesting stuff, if true.

It wouldn't surprise me too much if it was true, but this is Alex Jones we're talking about - the people he brings on his show don't carry much credibility with them, nor does Alex himself.

I'm not sure that the Obama Administration wants a wider war. Their actions so far have been somewhat hands off, and allowing others to direct the war and take the heat. That seems to make an invasion unlikely. On the other hand, the US has not stopped running combat sorties, and the "no boots on the ground" line was an obvious lie. So it remains possible but still I think unlikely. I actually think the US would be OK with a long term stalemate.
 
It wouldn't surprise me too much if it was true, but this is Alex Jones we're talking about - the people he brings on his show don't carry much credibility with them, nor does Alex himself.


Just to name a few...

Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Jesse Ventura...

All creditable. All have held office.
 
I like Jesse...but he's a bit out there at times.

Then again, his books are on my 'to snag' list
 
Just to name a few...

Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Jesse Ventura...

All creditable. All have held office.

So which of his views do you find more credible, the 9/11 truther conspiracy or the FEMA death camps?

Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist whose views are completely unmoored from the need for evidence. If Alex wants to believe it, he'll find a way to make it so, no matter what the evidence says. Such a person is not a good source for geopolitical analysis. You might as well listen to Art Bell.

The men you list have some of their own credibility issues (particularly Ventura), but it actually makes them look worse that they would be willing to lend their names to a known conspiracy theorist. Why would they be willing to do so?
 
But Alex is a marvellous ranter!

One of my favourites when I spent a while walking through the conspiracy theorists 'pool' after David Icke caught my attention (as I couldn't believe it was the same one who used to do football commentary on the tele :D).

Because the whole 'genre' tends to be a shotgun blast, 'they' do get the occasional 'hit' where there really is something behind the blather.
 
A wise man said it best...
"Well we like war, we're a war-like people, we like war because we're good at it! We only been a country for a little over 200 years and we've had (14) major wars. So we're good at it! Might as well be good at it, can't make a decent car anymore, can't make a tv or a dvd player worth a **** but we can bomb the **** out of your country alright!"
~George Carlin (updated a wee bit)
 
So which of his views do you find more credible, the 9/11 truther conspiracy or the FEMA death camps?

Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist whose views are completely unmoored from the need for evidence. If Alex wants to believe it, he'll find a way to make it so, no matter what the evidence says. Such a person is not a good source for geopolitical analysis. You might as well listen to Art Bell.

The men you list have some of their own credibility issues (particularly Ventura), but it actually makes them look worse that they would be willing to lend their names to a known conspiracy theorist. Why would they be willing to do so?


Don't get me wrong, I do think that Mr Jones is somewhat out there...along with Ventura...

Now the Pauls, most likely, is trying to appeal to there voter base by appearing on the show...that and Jones supports both of the Pauls, and a politician is going to get votes where he/she can get them, but I see no credibility issues when it comes to the Pauls.

Now as for Ventura and Jones themselves. Why is it that someone automatically has creditbility issues whenever they go aginst the socially accepted story? Why does it hurt there creditbility to QUESTION the system, and those who run it?

Also wanted to point out that Jones has also held office.
 
I didn't know that, SP - what office did Mr. Jones hold? I suppose I could ask the Tinernet ... {scampers off to have a look}.
 
I didn't know that, SP - what office did Mr. Jones hold? I suppose I could ask the Tinernet ... {scampers off to have a look}.


Sorry, I must have read his bio wrong.

In early 2000, Jones was one of seven Republican candidates for state representative in Texas House District 48, an open seat swing district based in Austin, Texas. Jones stated that he was running, "to be a watchdog on the inside."[1] He aborted his campaign and withdrew before the March primary when polls indicated he had little chance of winning.


:: shurg ::

I thought I heard him ranting one day that he did hold office as a State Rep...and resigned because, of the corruption..etc etc...but yeah...sorry bout that.
 
Back
Top