jjjamson

I'm curious about the motivations behind zeitgeist. I enjoyed the first edition quite a bit. Yes, the arguments were rather over-simplified (part 1), extremely derivative of previous work (part 2) but then really finds it's groove in part 3 on banking. It seems like the 2nd and 3rd? editions were rather lackluster and uninspired: maybe they were just bad instead of coopted?

Still not answering the question: do you even hold yourself to 1/10th or 1/100th of the standard you hold others to? Since all booksellers are corporations and therefore tainted by association, what do you suggest? Should he sell books out of the trunk of his car? Delivery companies are financed by evil bankers. That means David and his family must start their own shipping company as well. David utilizes the internet which was intended as a mass surveillance device by US and other foreign intelligence. Should he then communicate by carrier pigeon? Why are you on the internet if your "purity" is of such concern? Seems you are just as guilty as anyone but somehow hold yourself unaccountable. Easier to hit the 'ignore' function rather than have a civil, thoughtful, logical discussion where you examine your own behavior in light or your own lofty standards. FAIL.

LOL, never seen a grown person so desperate for attention. Talk about bitter, obsessing over where someone far more successful sells his books. But nice try ducking the questions, troll. Holding others to standards you are so far below you refuse to even discuss it.

So much fake outrage. Let's see you've NEVER purchased ANYTHING EVER from a big box store, ever in your life. You've NEVER done anything wrong, illegal, immoral or ever made a mistake in your life, right? Yeah, we know where this is going.... I certainly don't agree with everything he says or does, same as any other person. But, the reality is, you're harping on every perceived (mainly yours) negative you can conjure up, which is the hallmark of a troll. Nice try though. :-)

It's just the nature of the beast. Just about any public figure is going to get attacked. Whether it's due to jealousy of their fame or notoriety, and/or the anonymity of the internet, there's simply no way of avoiding it. Many find personal attacks to be a convenient method of smearing someone when they don't have the facts to back up their criticisms. Or they just hope no one calls them on their speculation. No big deal as all of this gets sorted in the face of reality sooner rather than later.

I don't know if that's the case. Again, pure speculation mainly to defame him. It could be waterstones, amazon, ickonic, or in the past his live shows. Do you have the figures to back up any of your claims? No. Also, it's very naive to think in such black and white terms. Life is never that clear cut. The disinfo agents I speak of, or the independent operators who make major, fundamental errors, still get a lot right. I've met hardcore pathological liars who say common sensical, factually correct things from time to time as well.

The difference is, David doesn't necessarily rely on amazon for a living. He sells on other platforms, including his own website, and has other revenue streams aside from book sales.

In order to save yourself time, simply assume EVERYONE is either an overt shill, financially, legally and/or personally compromised, or simply not knowledgeable to be considered a credible source. Now, you've eliminated at least 99% of all public figures. This is not to say that that 99% is spouting lies 24/7. Anything but. What it DOES mean is that some or many of their fundamental premises and assumptions are completely wrong therefore rendering anything they discuss on or related to that/those particular topic/s pointless. Let's take an American example: ted and austin broer. I believe they genuinely believe what they 'preach.' The problem is, a lot of is just completely wrong. They believe, without merit or basis in fact that: a. covid is real b. that it is deadly c. and that vitamins help you to recover from covid All of these premises are false for obvious reasons. No transmissible virus has ever been isolated, therefore it goes without saying that non existent objects cannot possibly kill, and therefore taking supplements cannot possibly protect you from something that does not exist. Sadly, even though the broers especially ted, cites a lot of david's work (almost always without citation), they profit from the same problem reaction solution model they claim the elites exploit. Even public figures I have a lot of respect for, including David Icke, make lots and lots of mistakes or pass off (or at least attempt to) conjecture as fact. For example, David Icke regularly cites out of body experiences as if they were factual, but the reality is, researchers, some quite sympathetic to the claim, have never been able to verify even a single instance of such. I could cite dozens of such examples from david's work where there is simply no direct evidence to support his claims. Nonetheless, I still respect those facts that he DOES get right, and in this particular case, he's spot on with regards to the corona hoax. The difference is, david is not as compromised by his sponsors and/or family ties like Tucker or Alex Jones are. The point is, his intent is different. Tucker, Alex, Jordan Peterson etc are all ultimately dependent upon their masters for a paycheck and a platform, whereas david is not. I don't think ted and austin are compromised in this way either, they just happen to get the facts wrong on their own without any prodding. Multiple paths to the same disinfo I suppose.

One can easily identify less than noble personality traits not only in professional athletes but in people you may have met casually, or even in those who are or have been subjects of extensive credible research (increasingly rare these days). I'm hard pressed to recall a time where I wished injury or illness on an athlete, for any reason, whether it was because of their political view or for any other reason. At worst, their traits or behavior might generate some mild sense of annoyance, but usually I just find it amusing or don't think much of it. Sports figures tend to elicit highly polarized responses which always struck me as strange. Typically, they're not very eloquent, and can't really articulate a political or philosophical position. They're just there as a curio or laughingstock or in rare cases, a coaching model for those rare athletes who could benefit from such (almost never). Djokovic is likely the best to have played the game of tennis, but running around in shorts and hitting a yellow ball on a lawn, well, that doesn't form any basis for a position of esteem in any culture, or at least it shouldn't.

I've been on a bit of a spiritual roller coaster ride the past few months. I feel like I'm living life a little more fully, a little more courageously, and have felt a stronger sense of peace for a variety of reasons. I attend a church on a semi-regular basis and have mixed feelings about it. I do feel like my attending church has contributed to some of the positive changes in my life, along with my own determination to make some positive changes. The church pastor does occasionally contradict himself (the longer you attend a church the more often this will occur) and I am well versed in all of the criticisms of the historicity or lack thereof of christian origins. However, since I feel better and am better in discernible ways, I follow my intuition and incorporate some church attendance into my routine. What's interesting is that David Icke has developed a much more sympathetic approach to christianity in recent years. In one recent interview he says his world view and that of christianity are basically one and the same, although of course couched in different terminology. David did not elaborate on how this was so, but alluded to the claim that both christians and himself both act fundamentally from a position of love, the foundation of which is pursuing truth and not being afraid to speak it and apply it, or something like that. I also sometimes stumble upon a christian author and their writings can sometimes make a lot of sense, again, from a primarily christian world view. David however is quick to point out that he is not a christian, but for whatever reasons, I am not as quick. Anyway, I just wrote this up to express some ambivalence about how faith seems to be powerful even if logic dictates that it should not be.

Respect for Bryce Mitchell vs respect for the UFC are not one and the same. Dana's been pretty open about his disdain for the corona scam, but nonetheless, he's imposed every fake measure upon all of his athletes: fake tests, masks, quarantines, social distancing, etc. I've never seen him wear a mask, but obviously he flies and therefore wears a mask when it's "required." He did want to continue holding events during the fake news flatten the curve nonsense early on. Nonetheless, of course he bowed to his masters at ESPN and canceled events and eventually held events without spectators and continues to do so. He doesn't need gate revenue for the smaller events because of ESPN/Disney's unlimited banker backed dollars. He did push to hold events in "open" states such as TX and FL as early as possible which is to his credit. He's definitely done some things right, but by and large he's a fucking douchebag. He's a cokehead, whoremonger, gambling degenerate and fucks his players out of as much dough as possible. Dana even threatened to kill one of his fighters when he wanted to leave the promotion (BJ Penn). He's petty as fuck, refusing to put the belt on Ngannou personally because Ngannou wanted to make real money in a boxing ring. He's up to his eyeballs in any and every vice imaginable. It's even obvious he's a steroid abuser and makes no attempt to hide it. Back to fighter pay: it's up to the fighters themselves to organize and eventually enter collective bargaining. But fighting is an individual game, and by it's nature makes labor organizing difficult to impossible. Even members of the same gym have a tough time getting along, hence Colby vs. Jorge. Fighter pay is approximately 20% of UFC revenue, compared to I believe 52% in the NBA. He spread fake rumors about Cyborg not wanting to take certain fights, so much so that Cyborg was forced to confront Dana face to face on camera, politely calling him a liar. Of course Dana lied to her face, on camera, just as he did behind her back. Dana then fired Cyborg and she went on to become a champion in another promotion. Dana passed the human feces/scumbag test with flying colors. I just can't imagine anyone actually respecting Dana as a human being. As a piece of shit fight promoter who will do anything in his power to disempower fighters and fuck them out of market value paydays? Yeah, he is that, but do I respect him for it? Absolutely not. As far as being fan friendly? This fucker is charging $80 for a PPV! And that's only AFTER paying for an ESPN+ subscription! A double fuck to fight fans! FUCK DANA WHITE.

NFL suspends all fake corona protocols: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33413223/nfl-suspends-covid-19-protocols-cites-decreasing-spread

That rascaly cunt rense is at it again. Now he's resorted to making fun of Andrew Kaufman's hairline. How desperate the disinfo agents are. How long has this douchebag been running his allison c scam? We're separating the wheat from the chaffe very quickly these days.

Far Left Hawaii ditches all "covid" travel "requirements" https://www.yahoo.com/news/no-more-covid-tests-vaccine-005930007.html

I wish I were as optimistic as you. It's just too easy to figure out that coronavirus doesn't exist and that germ theory is bogus. Not much research is required here. Just the initial hunch that a wildly exaggerated response to a "virus" likely has nefarious motives behind it. Dig a little further and it's basically inevitable that you'll discover within a very, very short period of time that viruses don't exist. This is not something that requires exhaustive research, you'll come across this information over and over again. Sure the masses are too lazy to do any research beyond watching the evening news, but supposedly, "professional" researchers and journalists, or even just news aggregators should be able to piece things together since they claim to be engaged in acquiring knowledge on a full time basis. After 2 years of researching full time or even a lifetime, they're all out of excuses. Take Alex Jones for example, he'll humor david pretending to agree with him, then in the very next segment he's right back to spreading fear porn about chicomms manufacturing a new bioweapon, yada yada yada.