[Beren]

The videos posted in the OP are made by this channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHrDpT ... VbA/videos

TIG has already posted a list of some of his notable videos, of which include "HIV is a government eugenics program" and "proof of aliens at Roswell discovered," among others

Is this guy supposed to be a conspiracy theorist? Or is he just a YouTuber uploading weird videos randomly?

Here is a real conspiracy theory video:

[colliric]

It is no great conspiracy to say groups like Antifa receive funding from fellow left-wing organizations to assist with their transport costs amoung other things. Some of the lower minions do not, and may not even realize it, hence they might be " joking about it".

To use an analogy, The Church of Scientology in it's upper echelons(OT 3) teachers it's loyal followers about Mr Xenu the Alien Overlord. If you have not reached that level and spent a house getting there, you will not be told this and will operate under the belief "That isn't true" and may make fun of the critics.

My point is Antifa:

A) Operates like known cults
B) Abuses lower level individuals in ways they might not understand they are being abused
C) Has a corporate structure where loyal believers are rewarded with secret knowledge(in this case they'll know they are awarded with cash for organizing the events, that is the secret knowledge)
D) All of the above.

[Beren]

I'm wondering whether the right-wing guys were paid by Soros/Democrats/Liberals/etc. too, and David Duke may be an agent provocateur himself as well. I mean Unite the Right divides and hackneys the right actually and Trump is the only political actor who got hurt.

[SolarCross]

I'm wondering whether the right-wing guys were paid by Soros/Democrats/Liberals/etc. too, and David Duke may be an agent provocateur himself as well. I mean Unite the Right divides and hackneys the right actually and Trump is the only political actor who got hurt.

There was that CNN anchor who claimed someone had witnessed people in BLM, antifa and KKK costumes coming off the same convoy of buses..

If so that is a whole extra level of devious political street theatre. I am inclined to scepticism on that frankly.

[Beren]

We only know what the media tells us, so we don't know anything for sure. Scepticism is always justified I think. However, suspecting the Soros network behind everything is not really original, is it? If we create conspiracy theories the Koch brothers and many others could be all behind this as well.

[The Immortal Goon]

Is this guy supposed to be a conspiracy theorist? Or is he just a YouTuber uploading weird videos randomly?

As cited on page one, he says the explicit intent of his channel is to post conspiracy theories.

Some of, what he himself called conspiracy theories, were put in the conspiracy theory forum.

Controversy follows.

And, as mentioned, George Soros pays me to move anything that interferes with NASA mind control into this section.

[colliric]

I'm wondering whether the right-wing guys were paid by Soros/Democrats/Liberals/etc. too, and David Duke may be an agent provocateur himself as well. I mean Unite the Right divides and hackneys the right actually and Trump is the only political actor who got hurt.

The only really analogous rightwing figure is maybe Rupert Murdoch, but Fox News openly pushes his designed populism agenda as does his newspapers(in particular in his home country Australia). There's very little hiding it, and he's currently only worth half of Soros. I don't know if he sends direct funds to right-wing conservative student protest groups, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he did. I doubt he does because the left have never really blustered about it, and they probably would(they complain all the time about Christian Churches channeling "donation" funds to pro-life protest groups).

[Beren]

As cited on page one, he says the explicit intent of his channel is to post conspiracy theories.

Some of, what he himself called conspiracy theories, were put in the conspiracy theory forum.

Controversy follows.

And, as mentioned, George Soros pays me to move anything that interferes with NASA mind control into this section.

As I see it anybody can claim to be anything which they are not except for being a leftist.

[quetzalcoatl]

The only really analogous rightwing figure is maybe Rupert Murdoch, but Fox News openly pushes his designed populism agenda as does his newspapers(in particular in his home country Australia). There's very little hiding it, and he's currently only worth half of Soros. I don't know if he sends direct funds to right-wing conservative student protest groups, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he did. I doubt he does because the left have never really blustered about it, and they probably would(they complain all the time about Christian Churches channeling "donation" funds to pro-life protest groups).

Interestingly, the largest contributor by far to right wing causes is the Richest Man in the World.

Who is the richest man in the world, you ask? Well you might! He doesn't appear on any Forbes list. His fortune dwarfs the measly $25B of Soros. One hint: he directly controls either directly or indirectly (through intermediaries) the entire means of production of a sovereign nation. And it's not Burkina Faso or Somalia, either - it's a nation in the top 15 ranked GDPs.

[Decky]

Rothschild!

[quetzalcoatl]

Rothschild!

I like that answer. However, the Rothschilds are, like Soros, dedicated to the hegemony of transnational capital. The Richest Man in the World, although not right wing himself, utilizes right wing ideology as a tool to destabilize and weaken the nations aligned under transnational capital.

[SolarCross]

Rothschild!

The Rothschilde are has-beens. Carlos Slim Helu is da man now.

[Decky]

Goldman? Warburg? Weinberg?

[quetzalcoatl]

Goldman? Warburg? Weinberg?

The estimates of his net worth range from $40B on the low side to $200B on the high side (International Business Times), with most analyses converging around $70B. At this stratospheric level, wealth cannot be measured in normal terms. Such wealth cannot be "owned" since ownership is a nebulous legal concept. The true measure is the wealth you control, which is the wealth you are able to use or direct others to use.

Of course, we are talking about none other than Vladimir Putin. Incidentally, if you consider the combined wealth of the oligarchs who are dependent on Putin for their continued existence, the $200B figure might be conservative.

[colliric]

I like that answer. However, the Rothschilds are, like Soros, dedicated to the hegemony of transnational capital. The Richest Man in the World, although not right wing himself, utilizes right wing ideology as a tool to destabilize and weaken the nations aligned under transnational capital.

If you are talking about Vladimir Putin, which I know you are, his total wealth being above that reported on Forbes is only alleged or rumoured with no hard evidence. Forbes is still the best on record indicator of who is the wealthiest individual, and currently Bill Gates is back on top. Putin is still high anyway on the Forbes list with a $70 billion dollar wealth(Gates is in the high $80bns).

Edit: My post was being written for several minutes despite being posted later.

[SolarCross]

The estimates of his net worth range from $40B on the low side to $200B on the high side (International Business Times), with most analyses converging around $70B. At this stratospheric level, wealth cannot be measured in normal terms. Such wealth cannot be "owned" since ownership is a nebulous legal concept. The true measure is the wealth you control, which is the wealth you are able to use or direct others to use.

Of course, we are talking about none other than Vladimir Putin. Incidentally, if you consider the combined wealth of the oligarchs who are dependent on Putin for their continued existence, the $200B figure might be conservative.

Bah, heads of state don't count. If you are including heads of state and their state assets then what of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II she is monarch of 16 different nations 4 or which are among the world's richest nations: Australian, Canada, UK and New Zealand? 16 nations and all Her real estate, 16 different Revenue Collection agencies. She outshines even Saudi Monarchs.
Queen Liz

Largest Landowner
“Queen Elizabeth II the largest landowner on Earth.”

Queen Elizabeth II, head of state of the United Kingdom and of 31 other states and territories, is the legal owner of about 6,600 million acres of land, one sixth of the earth’s non ocean surface.

She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries, and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory. This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies where no such claim is made – Norway, Belgium, Denmark etc.

The value of her land holding. £17,600,000,000,000 (approx).

This makes her the richest individual on earth. However, there is no way easily to value her real estate. There is no current market in the land of entire countries. At a rough estimate of $5,000 an acre, and based on the sale of Alaska to the USA by the Tsar, and of Louisiana to the USA by France, the Queen’s land holding is worth a notional $33,000,000,000,000 (Thirty three trillion dollars or about £17,600,000,000,000). Her holding is based on the laws of the countries she owns and her land title is valid in all the countries she owns. Her main holdings are Canada, the 2nd largest country on earth, with 2,467 million acres, Australia, the 7th largest country on earth with 1,900 million acres, the Papua New Guinea with114 million acres, New Zealand with 66 million acres and the UK with 60 million acres.

She is the world’s largest landowner by a significant margin. The next largest landowner is the Russian state, with an overall ownership of 4,219 million acres, and a direct ownership comparable with the Queen’s land holding of 2,447 million acres. The 3rd largest landowner is the Chinese state, which claims all of Chinese land, about 2,365 million acres. The 4th largest landowner on earth is the Federal Government of the United States, which owns about one third of the land of the USA, 760 million acres. The fifth largest landowner on earth is the King of Saudi Arabia with 553 million acres
Largest five personal landowners on Earh Queen Elizabeth II 6,600 million acres
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia 553 million acres
King Bhumibol of Thailand 126 million acres
King Mohammed IV of Morocco 113 million acres
Sultan Quaboos of Oman 76 million acres

[quetzalcoatl]

Bah, heads of state don't count. If you are including heads of state and their state assets then what of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II she is monarch of 16 different nations 4 or which are among the world's richest nations...

Really bad analogy there.

What counts is control of wealth. Control of wealth is the ability to direct and manage its use. By this metric, QEII is a genteel drone. Her 'wealth' is identified with her role as symbolic head of state, and is closely manged for her by the political establishment. She cannot dispose of this wealth at will, so no it is not really wealth.

The diametric opposite is true for Putin. He directly controls, manages, and disposes of his wealth, and there is no political establishment looking over his shoulder because he is the political establishment. This gives him a much freer reign over how he chooses to use his wealth, in comparison to Western capitalists who have to contend with all kinds of political and legal obstructions. His subaltern oligarchs exist at his pleasure (and they know it), and are obliged to dispose of funds as he directs. Yes, such wealth is difficult to measure, but there is no doubt his effective wealth far exceeds that of Gates.

All this is kind of a side issue, however. The main point is that Putin funds an alt-right Comintern centered in Europe (which is ironically a lot more effective than the real comintern). He also has a hand in funding right wing organizations in America and Australia. I'm not necessarily criticizing him. He is very effective in driving wedges into the already open fractures of Western nations.

[SolarCross]

Really bad analogy there.

What counts is control of wealth. Control of wealth is the ability to direct and manage its use. By this metric, QEII is a genteel drone. Her 'wealth' is identified with her role as symbolic head of state, and is closely manged for her by the political establishment. She cannot dispose of this wealth at will, so no it is not really wealth.

The diametric opposite is true for Putin. He directly controls, manages, and disposes of his wealth, and there is no political establishment looking over his shoulder because he is the political establishment. This gives him a much freer reign over how he chooses to use his wealth, in comparison to Western capitalists who have to contend with all kinds of political and legal obstructions. His subaltern oligarchs exist at his pleasure (and they know it), and are obliged to dispose of funds as he directs. Yes, such wealth is difficult to measure, but there is no doubt his effective wealth far exceeds that of Gates.

It's not an analogy. Queen Liz is the legal owner of one sixth of the world's land area. 16 different tax agencies and armed forces are oath bound to her personally. She is aloof so you don't see it but is far more the master of her domains that Putin is of his. He owns and rules only by proxy through the institution of the Russian state, he has no ability to pass that on to who he wills. Her Maj rules directly and it will be Her eldest son that she can pass it all on to...

[Hindsite]

Is this guy supposed to be a conspiracy theorist? Or is he just a YouTuber uploading weird videos randomly?

Here is a real conspiracy theory video:

I have known about the descrepancies in the Warren report from the beginning. I lived in Tyler, Texas at the time of the JFK assassination and always expected LBJ was some how involved. The Attorney General Bobby Kennedy was reported to have said to LBJ, "Why did you have my brother killed?" Bobby was also later assassinated while running for President. Was this just a strange coincidence?

This guy puts a lot of theories together in a fairly convincing way. However, I think he takes all of this too far. But after the findings of the Warren commission became the official explanation for the JFK assassination, any other explanation will forever be declared another conspiracy theory.

That was a long video, but lucky for me, my bed is in the same room as the computer I happened to be on at the time. So I was able to just relax as it played out.

[quetzalcoatl]

It's not an analogy. Queen Liz is the legal owner of one sixth of the world's land area. 16 different tax agencies and armed forces are oath bound to her personally. She is aloof so you don't see it but is far more the master of her domains that Putin is of his. He owns and rules only by proxy through the institution of the Russian state, he has no ability to pass that on to who he wills. Her Maj rules directly and it will be Her eldest son that she can pass it all on to...

You really don't get the idea of symbolic head of state. She may own the moon for all we know, but she can't actually do anything with this wealth. She is not "aloof," she is powerless. She cannot be the master of any of these domains, SC. She can't wake up one morning and decide to sell the Tower of London, because she is fricking powerless. Lizzy is powerless to dispose of her wealth, or to dispatch her armed forces to protect it. Armed forces are bound to an oath of fealty to Monarchy as a symbol of the nation, in much the same way that armed forces in the US swear an oath to a piece of paper. All this BS has zero to do with control of wealth. Which is what Putin has in spades.