Replies

• 

  Malcolm April 29, 2014 at 9:09pm

  But at least you're not trendy!!
• 

  Pet Rock April 29, 2014 at 2:28pm

  huffington puffington post 105 000000?  No wonder the US is in the shape it is -sheeple
  • 

    Acute Observer > Pet Rock April 29, 2014 at 2:35pm

    We better call @nonymous, huffington post needs to go away for a while. ;)
• 

  Acute Observer April 28, 2014 at 10:42pm

  Strange topic.

  Here's what I could find from Alexa on the subject:

  http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/infowars.com

  All they mention about politics is that it is one of the things the site claims to be about.

  Alexa is just a traffic-meter.

  It's the "e-business" that deems the site to be a top7, and that doesn't surprise me. I've always know infowars generates big revenue through their hit.-rate. That's what disinfo campaigns do. They take and sell your time to make big bucks and lots of frustration and powerlessness. ;)

  ""InfoWars Is Now In Alexa.com's Top 10 Best Rated Websites For Politics""
  
  Is a blatant lie. It's the most visited, but to find the best rating you need to look at more than just click-statistics. Clicks can even be bought in todays world. And as I said. Alexa is a traffic-meter. They don't say anything about infowars being the top best of anything..
  • 

    Malcolm > Acute Observer April 28, 2014 at 10:49pm

    Okay, so how will you determine whose site is the best for politics? The one that you find to be the most visited or the one you find most agreeable???

    Politics and political impact is judged by participation of the public, and not by how you BELIEVE it should be. Hence, visitation is a proper system for judging, even though it's my opinion that Huffington has way too much outside influence via the sources of money sent to it.
    • 

      Acute Observer > Malcolm April 28, 2014 at 11:38pm

      I actually don't believe there are any "best" sites at all. If there were, they'd become corrupted in an instant since that's what happens when things get centralized. If you want the whole picture you must read all the news from all the sites and then find the little neutral thread of truth that runs though the entire mass of otherwise very polarized text. :)

      Getting the news as truth is not easy. It takes effort. Far more effort than just visiting a favorite website.

      Welcome to multidimensionality. :)
      • 

        Malcolm > Acute Observer April 29, 2014 at 12:00am

        That's a lousy observation, "Acute Observer."

        It is possible to look for truth in this dimension. IT ISN'T HARD AT ALL. When people in the mainstream media avoid the facts presented by an alternative media competitor and responds to such facts by trying to claim that alternative media is wearing a "tin foil hat" and is therefore a psychiatric case (AND THESE PEOPLE ARE HIGHLY PROBABLE FOR NEVER HAVING STUDIED PSYCHIATRY OR WORKED WITH PSYCHIATRIC PATIENTS AT ALL IN THEIR LIFE), you know that there may be an element of truth with such alternative media, and that such people in the mainstream media ARE FULL OF SH!T (because they can't address the facts presented by a competitor in a logical and meaningful way).

        "When the facts are on your side, use the facts. When the law is on your side, use the law. If neither the facts or the law are on your side, then prove that the other side lacks mental capacity or has a mental illness." - Legal Tactics course, taught at Harvard School of Law
        • 

          Acute Observer > Malcolm April 29, 2014 at 8:25pm

          Well, If I were the owner of Alexa.com, I'd probably be suing the pants off of ACC right now for slander ;)

          Keep up your fake topics and you'll be killing this community in notime.
          • 

            Malcolm > Acute Observer April 29, 2014 at 9:08pm

            DID I SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT ALEXA THAT WOULD AFFECT THEIR REPUTATION??

            You're defining "slander" in terms of the way you BELIEVE it should be defined, as opposed to the way it is properly defined.

            LOL 

            slander n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed
• 

  Drekx Omega April 28, 2014 at 9:09pm

  Good for Alex Jones......He's similar to David Icke in making the "conspiracy theory," into regular public discussion material....Conspiracies reported by Icke and Jones back in the 1990s, have become FACTS ON THE GROUND now, being persued by the elites and their pawns in governments around the world, mainly western....Mass surveillance, 911, contrived cause for swineflu shots, chemtrails, passenger terrahertz scanners at airports, CCTV on every building, false flag wars, GM crops, banking excess, NSA snooping, etc, etc......It's all being exposed as real, not in the public interest and not mere conspiracy, any more.....Somewhat like science fiction becoming science fact.....

  I'd just like to say that when the Sirians asked me to go public with my material, online, which I reluctantly did in July 2009, for the first time, the initial website that I explained things to was Alex Jones's Infowars.com and then Prisonplanet.com....

  I wanted to start with those members that might find my info of use, although initially placed as suspicious, by some other participants......I nevertheless made an impact there and progressed to new age websites like IITM and this one...

   

  Indeed, initially, Alex viewed David icke with great suspicion, because he is English and also because he is new age, which Alex thinks a tool for the elites....However, he has changed his mind and is now a good friend of Icke....and understands more about the material David Icke is aware of...

  This is consciousness raising and has a snowball effect on world consciousness....