Sheepdipped Alex Jones 

Be the 1st to vote.

I’ll accept the spooks use all available tools to deceive, and am not passionate about whether Bill Hicks is Alex Jones. I’m ok with the concept of reusing characters for psyops. 

I would like to highlight this insightful passage on Alex Jones and sheepdipping.

  Since we have now caught the attention of the spooks, I went looking for photos of the two men in a pose that anyone who knows either or both is familiar with: wild-eyed rage. Hicks was is first an actor, and so was able to project a high degree of venom. Jones has the same talent – this is in fact part of his signature as a fake newscaster, to project enough venom to drive normally curious people away. It is part of what spooks call “sheepdipping.” Jones is meant to be such an inflammatory character that he drives people away, thereby protecting secrets rather than exposing them. By such behavior he is able to taint the entire community of people of curious mind as irrational.
So note that Hicks/Jones is given a high platform and is often referred to as the go-to conspiracy guy by ordinary phony newscasters and pundits. And note that when a person stops by the Jones show, Prison Planet, it is found to be a very unpleasant experience, driving most people of calm demeanor away.…

I get confused by the term. This is the common definition. 

The phrase 0;sheep dipped”, is commonly used in intelligence circles. It’s a way of saying someone has been given an alternate identity. The best known example being Air America, but also in many other covert ops applications. Not necessarily military. “Those who were accepted got “sheep-dipped” and vanished.”

I prefer the literal one, especially in relation to Alex. 

Seems to me they dip him in a sauce so surly that it will keep only the most determined diggers away. 

Sheep dip is a liquid formulation ofinsecticide and fungicide whichshepherds and farmers may use to protect their sheep from infestation against external parasites such as itch mite (Psorobia ovis),blow-flyticks and lice.

No tags for this post.

32 thoughts on “Sheepdipped Alex Jones 

  1. anounceofsaltperday

    One of my little pleasures is to come to this site and squeeze the Tom Dalpra’s and Khammads about the obviously correct analysis of and read their bleating as they clutch at straws while the genuinely curious have absolutely NO DOUBT in their minds at all that Hicks is Jone is Prince Gustave and Kennedy is Carter and Marilyn is Jackie is Roslyn.

    1. ab Post author

      .. And that’s why I get grief for letting you post here. Let there be no doubt that you’re here because your interesting to talk to EXCEPT for your DGB nonsense. You can stop spamming the site with his link too.

      1. stephen

        “And that’s why I get grief for letting you post here.” Am I misunderstanding Ab? People privately contact, telling you to ban other posters!? Out in the open is pathetic, but sneaking… if that is the case?

        What harm does anounceofsaltperday do, people don’t have to read him if they don’t want to. More, different voices the better?

      2. anounceofsaltperday

        We have walked down the road together so many times now Ab. Just ban me for the FOURTH time, I don’t give a proverbial rats arse.

        The ONLY reason I came to this site was to give Khammad a screenful.

        I am guessing that the offer to dialogue with Ed Chiarinni has gone the way of the Trident Nuclear Missile program.

        The exquisite pleasure of DGBing this site. Too suite.

        1. Vespadouglas

          It would be a shame if frank got banned again but it would also be totally understandable. I like your patter frank, DodGeeBee excepted of course.
          I don’t think you really think that shite is real. I think it’s pure wind up on your part. Why? Who knows?
          Im also very intrigued by your comments about Kham being the ONLY reason you’re here when she sorta left this site a year or so ago and now she’s making a reappearance, you self destruct and ask to be banned. Is it the wrath of Kham that you’re bolting from frank.

          Hicks/ jones aside, do Barbara, Stephen and the Langley guy endorse franks views on ed chiarini?

          To the Pom chap. After voice coaching and plastic surgery it’s lucky hicks’ handler wasn’t as clever as you guys and thought about the teeth. ” and we would’ve got away with it if it hadn’t been for you pesky…..

          1. stephen

            “Hicks/ jones aside, do Barbara, Stephen and the Langley guy endorse franks views on ed chiarini?”

            Ed Chiarini is Dallas Goldbug presumably? As I’ve said I don’t really know his stuff. The few times previous I’d visited was so put off by the typeface he uses, the graphics and arrows-n-stuff that seem to point to nothing of significance that I soon left. He’s perhaps a bit like Jungle Surfer? I dig The Junggerler, eccentric, funny, good natured bits-n-bobs and the flow of his stuff resonates with me so I dip in every so often. His Vegan Master-chef Channel had a lovely feel but there’s only so much you can do with a vegan diet… I’m a plenty of meat-n-wine man!

            When Mister Salty mentioned a Prince Gustav of Sayn Wittgenstein-Berleburg link, thought that was worth a look. I was very taken by the similarity in photographs, remarkable really. In a mystical world, trees mean something, planets mean something… an incredibly rich web of interactions. That Prince Gustave looks like a Jones double, if they are not physically the same person, possibly has an esoteric connection. Maybe that’s the world Golden Bug is dabbling with?

            I too would think it a shame if Salty Pants was banned, anyone who calls their website “How To Take Care Of Your Penis” is a Groover in my book!

    2. Mark Tokarski

      I do not know about the other stuff you rattle on about, but it appears to be misdirection, or merely noise. You’ll do anything to avoid evidence, right? Because evidence always undoes you?

      Anyway, we have proven, a word I seldom use, beyond reasonable doubt, that Hicks is Jones. We did a PhotoShop overlay of the teeth of the “two” men and find that they match, something mathematically about as likely as each of two mountain ranges, say the Rockies and Andes, matching up and aligning in a landscape. The dental overlay can be seen at the link below.

      We have our man. Hicks is Jones. Case closed.…

  2. Mark Tokarski

    At POM we put all our evidence up, disclose methods, and urge people to duplicate (or not) our results. We urge people to check the evidence and use their own brains. We are a straightforward operation, searching for truth, nothing more, nothing less.

  3. Tom Dalpra

    Bill Hicks is said to have been 1.85 metres tall. These things aren’t cast in stone, but I think we can probably trust that figure. We can pretty much say Hicks was a six footer.
    Alex Jones isn’t. He’s said to be 178 cm- 5 feet 10 inches – tall and I think we can pretty much trust that figure too. He’s noticeably shorter.

    Game over. It’s not the same guy.
    My normal line is ” Did they shave his legs down ?”

    A strawman is something that’s easy to knock down.
    These celebrity doubles seem just that. ‘Strawmen’, there to make ‘conspiwacy theowists’ look stupid and devalue anything else they may say, by association.

    With Hicks, certainly in the UK, being quite a hero of ‘alternative thinking’ people, this Hicks is Jones idea being pushed, makes some sense. It’s like poison in the bloodstream of the alternative.

    ‘Jones is Hicks’ is disinfo. Their heights are different.
    Anyone pushing this idea here, is either-

    1 ) A fool on this one
    2) An agent of confusion

    Fill your boots, kids.

    1. straightfromthedevilsmouth

      I’m very confident you work in Langley.

      You say 1.85 meters tall for Hicks, then say 178 cm for Jones. Why confuse people with different measures? We’re talking 6 ‘1/2 and 5’10. The difference between wearing regular shoes and shoes with heels. Very common height ranges for men.

      Where did you get those height figures from? Why are they reliable? Based on what? First you say, these things “aren’t cast in stone”, then you say we can “pretty much trust those figures”, and you don’t even say where you got them or why we should think they are accurate. We know they fudge photos, why in the world would we dismiss something based on something so untrustworthy?

      Then you say “game over” based on that lame counter point. You don’t look at any of Mark’s photos, you post a strange picture of Goodman along with your post, which is a quick way of spotting disinfo since you guys love to add weird pictures and videos in your posts (who’s links don’t even work, like last time). Your angry tone every time you post stinks of Langley, who have the most motive to hate conspiracy theorists. Your Google+ page is suspicious. You used the same exact method another disinfo agent on POM tried when he first came on the site (heights with no supporting evidence).

      I knew you were disinfo weeks ago but kept quiet out of respect for AB, who appears to respect you. Well I don’t. Your game is obvious to me, and only slightly better than Nathan on POM who’s pretty terrible at his job. You guys might even be the same guy. $30k a year Langley cubicle workers.

      It’s obvious you guys use the same playbook. That’s why you are so vociferous in your opposition to Joplin and Jones. I don’t see any genuine posters here slamming their feet up and down except you. Your objective is to get people to do anything but look at the evidence on POM. So I’m going to say something you and your superiors dread.

      Everybody reading this, click on the link and read the post. Don’t avoid it because of what “Tom” says. Decide for yourself. Make your own opinions. And don’t let bottom of the barrel disinfo tactics steer you away from the truth.

      1. stephen

        For what it’s worth “I’m very confident” that Tom Dalpra is not some-kinda Agent, he is exactly what he appears to be, unfortunately from Tom’s point of view he is unable to see what that is. You can find him on Youtube.

        I have pointed out to Tom how easy it is to fake height, or outright lie about stated heights, he ignores what he doesn’t want to see, and cherry-picks where he applies certain sorts of reasoning; in this he is no different to people who accept the official story of 9-11-Apollo-Whatever-O.

        This widespread accusing of disagreement as Agents-Meddling is sad, and is probably, what would I know though, simply paranoia, which is not a healthy place to be.

        “Fingerprint File The Rolling Stones”:…

        “Paranoia is distinct from phobias, which also involve irrational fear, but usually no blame. Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia… These individuals typically have a biased perception of the world often exhibiting more hostile beliefs.”:

        Personally I very highly doubt than any Agencies are interested, nefariously, in what any of us say here, it’s not important. If they adversely cared they’d shut down the site, not spend man-hours, days, weeks, months, years trying to divert us down false trails. But little clinical studies, opinion sampling? Yes that’s probably probable, but so what, you discover truth by questioning, observation, coming up with explanations and testing them freely, openly to the best of your ability, open to revision. You use the discernment, intelligence, you’ve spent a life time developing, or not, and will continue to develop, or not.

        Like Barbara has said below I too, an Englishman, knew zero of Hicks until the Hicks-Jones thing, and as I’ve stated before, whilst not certain, I’d plump for Jones being Hicks for the same reasons she gives.

    2. Tom Dalpra

      Here’s Bill Hicks and Kevin Booth. Hicks is quite obviously taller.

      Here’s Alex Jones and Kevin Booth. They look fairly similar in height.

      Jones isn’t a particularly tall man. This is clear. In the picture below we see the fairly squat looking Jones with comedian Eric Andre.
      Eric Andre is said to be 1.83 m tall and we can see he’s clearly the taller man here , and that Jones seems about the 1.78 m it’s claimed he is.
      Hicks is said to have been a further 2 cms taller than Andre – a full 7cm taller than Jones.………

      Bill Hicks was a familiar figure to many, who was around for a few years. That he was quite tall, isn’t really in question. A much loved and studied figure, his stature was evident and well documented.
      Those that think Jones is Hicks have to believe that Hicks lied about his height and said he was 7 cm taller than he was. This seems highly unlikely. People can maybe get away with saying they’re a couple of centimetres taller or shorter than they are, but 7 cm ? I don’t think so.

      Stephen, Barbara Muller, Straightfromthedevilsmouth, Mark Tokarski and anounceofsaltperday,
      are all pushing this disinformation here. They all look stupid and suspect.
      The ‘Jones is Hicks’ strawman is at least a good test.

      1. stephen

        Ironically in this thread you’ve said “… make ‘conspiwacy theowists’ look stupid and devalue anything else they may say, by association.”

        So seeing how we “all look stupid” you won’t be surprised to learn that I, at least, for many many years thought and claimed to be 5ft 10in tall, relatively recently I found out I was only 5ft 8-n-a-arf! And no I didn’t have my “legs shaved down”!

        Tom, I’m not “pushing this disinformation”. To quote me, I’ve said

        “Of the claims I’ve heard, and slightly looked into, though they may or may not originate with Goldiddle, Bill Hicks/Jones and Kennedy/Carter I find compelling; if very pushed I’d state, yes, Hicks being Jones.”


        “… whilst not certain, I’d plump for Jones being Hicks…”

        You might want to construe that as “pushing” but once again you would be seeing something that isn’t there. You’re a Fantasist; accusing five of us as “suspect”. Suspected of what? Disagreeing with you, sharing ideas? Not toeing the line as policed by you? Not passing your Strawman Test? You come over, once again, as a Narcissist.

        “They all look stupid…”, look in a mirror Tom, listen to yourself Tom.

        1. Tom Dalpra

          ‘Pushing’ is perhaps a strong word. Perhaps ‘Promoting the idea’ is better.
          Your ‘whilst not certain’ position is noted, but on this one, I think you’re a fool if you say, as you do, that you’d plump for Jones being Hicks. That’s all. On this issue. Not in general. I’m being a little provocative, but I want to provoke a strong reaction in that I want this idea to be thrown out as bad rubbish.

          My ‘certain’ position remains, based on some simple evidence of two characters I’m very familiar with. Hicks was something of an imposing figure by all accounts. Video evidence strongly supports this. Did you study anything I posted?

          I can believe that you had your height wrong by an inch and a half for years, Stephen, haha, (you always have a handy personal story to draw from ) and you do seem a bit like that sort of person. You know, able to get things a bit wrong sometimes (can’t we all ) , but also you’re 65 years old, I believe you told us, and people can shrink in older age, remember.

          But we’re talking about very nearly twice that, Stephen. An inch and a half is less than 4cm. Hicks is said to have been 7 cm taller than Jones.

          Jones and Hicks happen to be two figures I’ve studied for years and it’s obvious to me on this one. I apologise to anyone who has innocently fallen for it for using the ‘fool’ word, but
          I mean, on this issue.
          I’m certainly fooled by things all the time. My main desire here is only to offer my evidence and firmly informed opinion of something I see as a clearly pushed, false idea.

          You mentioned youtube. It’s a sing along, brother.

          1. Vespadouglas

            A “paranoid, narcissistic, fantasist” . That’s quite a label Tom. This ” old” fella has certainly got the measure of you in the last fortnight huh?
            Saying that, the broadside on Langley from the guy confused by the metric system was a belter too.
            When you’ve got clowns like this having a pop at you, then you know you’re on a good path dude.

            Hicks isn’t Jones isn’t Prince fuckn Gustav.

            BTW, the new buzzwords would appear to be ” applied science”.

          2. stephen

            “Monty’s Double Issue Title Is Pathe Pictorial Looks At Other People’s Problems (1947)”

            Tom I’m 54, I’ll be 55 in October. I’ve never said I’m 65, I’ve never stated my age at all, yet you self-servingly interpret what is presented, and fantasize a self-serving paragraph based on that interpretation but you’re wrong, again.

            I am not “promoting”, I do not CARE whether Jones is Hicks, the same as I don’t CARE whether there were planes or no planes, they are only interesting ideas, I do not CARE whether a Heron is a Ibis is a Stork, it’s not important, it is not the issue. If I’m wrong I’ll shrug my shoulders and say “not the first time”. I’ll have learnt something.

            What I do CARE about is Reality. However it is done, the reality presented to us in many-many situations is illusory, to one degree or another. Me, the Missis, the garden, the animals in it, the sun, the sea, food and drink, moon the stars, things like that are REAL, and I’m concerned to know of that, taste the true interpretation, UNDERSTAND them; but even there I’m soon in realms Speculation let alone beyond in the Mediated World. So then I care about outcomes and why, what does it mean, learning it’s language perhaps?

            Tom you want us to believe a spray painted Heron is in fact secretly an Ibis posing as Thoth with no more evidence than a slight curve in a beak! You have concocted a whole tale around this flawed premiss, yet in Hicks/Jones you “want this idea to be thrown out as bad rubbish.”! Why? What’s the difference? You ignore, conveniently, The Bennu as pointed out to you by someone else yet petulantly, pompously, pronounce “Did you study anything I posted?” When you haven’t presented anything to study apart from claimed heights, [you don’t give the sources], and comparison videos and photo’s when I’ve showed you how easy it is to fake height and that Hollywood does it all the time.

            I am a Fool, Tom, I’ve no doubt about that. The Fool attempting to complete the journey is a way of looking at the riddle of life:

            But a Clown is someone who knows he’s presenting himself as foolish. You seem to be accusing me of something “you always have a handy personal story to draw from”? Why not, I try to make it entertaining to the reader, notwithstanding adding double meanings and depth. When I told the story about getting my height wrong I considered exaggerating, to make myself appear even sillier, fudging the numbers for effect, but it was only a brief thought. I’m not writing just for this audience but to understand, honestly, too.

            You on the other hand do fudge numbers in your “Cambridge Herons” thread yesterday Cambridge to Oxford is both 66.06 and 66 miles apart, “So Oxford is 66 miles from Cambridge, they tell us. That’s sounds about right.” and spin a load of significance but then say finally it’s 67 miles, “‘as the crow flies calculator’ tells me Cambridge -Oxford is 67 miles”! Here it states Oxford is actually 66 miles to Portsmouth and Gillingham, not Cambridge:

            You then say 51 and 49 miles are “pretty close to being equidistant from London”! That’s 2 miles difference, yet with Hick/Jones you get worked up with “An inch and a half is less than 4cm. Hicks is said to have been 7 cm taller than Jones.” And ignore me when I asked, pointed out that

            “You say JFK can’t be Carter because they are different heights? Who provided you the height information?

            “The age old trick though is that of shorter actors resorting to wearing either lifts, or specially designed elevator shoes that can give them anywhere from 1-3 inches advantage in height. In the case of Humphrey Bogart, in one film at least, he donned literally 5 inch wooden blocks to his own shoes so he could tower over others in many shots. If you ever spot Bogart looking near 6ft in a film where his shoes can’t be seen in a shot, now you know why.”

            There are other tricks, “Making Short Stars Tall”:

            I am not stupid Tom, the kind of life I have made and enjoy tells me that. I diagnose you with Narcissism and you come back with a video of yourself! Wincingly derivative and singing in a fake rock accent! And the ropey visuals! The children! Who do you think you are Michael Jackson! If that’s a meaningful joke or something, at my expense, it’s badly backfired. It’s narcissistic crap, or maybe also add diagnosis of masochist, to the paranoid and fantasist; “quickly Doctor this man needs some help!”

            We obviously, appear to, live in different realities Tom and the standards expected in your reality are much lower than mine. That video is embarrassing. No way I’d put something naff as that out let alone draw attention to it, I cringed watching.

            Frank Zappa – Status Back Baby:

            1. Tom Dalpra

              Nah, I never went for Zappa. It’s a matter of taste, of course.
              I did get into another military connected guy in Jim Morrison. That at least familiarised me with the idea of shamanic practice, a knowledge of which might help understand what’s happening with the ‘Cambridge Ibis’ and ‘the ‘Golden Triangle’.
              I’m talking about, for example, the insights that inducing a release of DMT from pineal gland may have given our forefathers about the workings of the brain and the root of our consciousness.

              Because yes, Stephen, we are on different levels and you’re way behind.
              While you’re still going on about herons and ibises, that discussion has developed to a place where it doesn’t really matter anymore, even if Banksy just curved the beak down out of artistic license. You see, by the time we’d thought of the Isis connection in Oxford and found out more about the ‘Golden Triangle’ between Oxford Cambridge and London, we could keep that interesting possible detail in Cambridge as an indefinite.

              What’s more, when we then looked at the London Eye at the apex of this imagined triangle and then found clear evidence of Horus being referenced we knew we had at least two coordinates covered by ancient Egyptian references.

              What was then a thrill to consider was that this area of London may represent The Eye of Horus and hence the real origin of that symbol- the inner brain and the root of our consciousness.
              We saw the snaking thalamic Thames ( we questioned the adding of the H in The Renaissance ) sweeping round the pineal-like O2 arena ( possibly aptly named as a highly oxygenated pineal gland is needed to induce the release of ‘The spirit molecule ‘ DMT).

              We considered the Eastenders titles spiralling out most evenings. Getting into our minds’ eye, like gentle long-term mass hypnosis…

              When my ‘happy amateur’ investigation led me to find that Isis and Thoth went on to have rather illustrious careers outside Their native Egypt as key players in the Western Esoteric Tradition and that in Egyptian Mystery schools Isis and Thoth can be invoked in order to build a physical and etheric (in the ether between God and Earth) Temple, it made some kind of sense.

              I’ve found all this and more very interesting. I appreciated the chance to make my original case to a skeptic Stephen, and have included a link to our fakeologist discussion on my Cambridge ‘Herons’ thread.

              I haven’t got the motivation to exchange insults , or play ‘yes it is, no it isn’t ‘ with you.
              There’s simply too many other interesting things to look at and to do.


              1. ab Post author

                I agree Tom. Too many petty insults. I’d like to hear these entities that are insulting you speak in audiochat. Time to man up, opposition!

              2. stephen

                What has Morrison to do with Zappa, I don’t see the connection? Zappa’s an odd one though, can’t decide what to make of him. I feel he’s not just satire but mocking all his audience, mocking you which often doesn’t make for comfortable listening. There’s lots of interesting music in his vast output, especially for Rock. He worked with LSO, Boulez, Ensemble Modern. But there’s lots of souless rubbish. His guitar solos noodle around, very competently, with lots of notes but go nowhere, and take a long while to do it! There’s lots more to say, he’s an important part of the Sixties-Op but what part I’m not sure.

                Small Faces – My mind’s eye ( Rare Promo Film Probably French TV 1966 ):

                Talking Shamanic-DMT-from-pineal-gland, another of my stories, I wont go into the details, I was taken into the Underworld, Hell whatever, was literally torn apart. Very-very unpleasant. The next time I was somewhere else before a wheel of Gods, Saints maybe, who were to judge me, I had to draw a bow, as far back as possible, and had until I released the arrow, my soul or something, to justify my self as clearly and simply as I could, to sum myself up truthfully in a sentence, my arrow had to go as far as my strength would take it. Measuring of my efforts would decide how I was judged. Very unpleasant again but both times I returned though it’s taken a long time to recover, perhaps I haven’t, I’m a different person in some respects.

                Now you’ve explained Tom I can see how correct you are, accept my apologies, you’ve doing a super job, as Terran Downvale says “This could be a completely original find by YOU.” Keep up the good work. “You’ve All Done Very Well”:

                Like you I was amused when you presented, discovered, the Thames-Thalmus connection. You know this already I’m sure but here is the etymology for “Thames” from 51 BC apparently, and as you say the -h- is unetymological. As I understand it, a mistake, a sort of joke, an “over-correction”:

                “A sound found chiefly in words of Old English, Old Norse or Greek origin, unpronounceable by Normans and many other Europeans. In Greek, the sound corresponds etymologically to Sanskrit -dh- and English -d-; and it was represented graphically by -TH-, and at first pronounced as a true aspirate (as still in English outhouse, shithead, etc.)…

                … To represent it, Old English and Old Norse used the characters ð “eth” (a modified form of -d-) and þ “thorn,” which originally was a rune…

                … The digraph -th- sometimes appears in early Old English, on the Roman model, and it returned in Middle English with the French scribes, driving out eth by c. 1250, but thorn persisted, especially in demonstratives (þat, þe, þis, etc.), even as other words were being spelled with -th-. The advent of printing dealt its death-blow, however, as types were imported from continental founders, who had no thorn. For a time y was used in its place (especially in Scotland), because it had a similar shape, hence ye for the in historical tourist trap Ye Olde _______ Shoppe (it never was pronounced “ye,” only spelled that way). The awareness that some Latin words in t- were from Greek th- encouraged over-correction in English and created unetymological forms such as Thames and author, while some words borrowed from Romanic languages preserve, on the Roman model, the Greek -th- spelling but the simple Latin “t” pronunciation (as in Thomas and thyme).”:


                “How to pronounce “Thames”:

                Thalamus, on the otherhand, from 1753, meaning a chamber or building of somekind, a marriage, a bridge perhaps:


                How to pronounce “thalamus”:

                This might interest the reader:

                “ophthalmo- before vowels ophthalm-, word-forming element meaning “eye,” mostly in plural, “the eyes,” from Greek ophthalmo-, comb. form of ophthalmos “eye,” originally “the seeing,” of uncertain origin. Perhaps from ops “eye” (see optic) + a form related to thalamos “inner room, chamber” (see thalamus), giving the whole a sense of “eye and eye socket.””


                Ab, you seem to have a bit of a fetish for Voice don’t you? A sort of Aural Voyeur? You have noted my name is Stephen, not Stephanie?

                I’ll send you my French landline number if you want, give me an email address. You can call anyday between say 10am and 5pm? French time.

                I’ll go further, to show my manly-man-up, I’ll meet you. Do you travel much? You’re Canadian, do you speak French? I’m on the Côte d’Amour-Finistère border. Or in London, I have a house there too where I spend some of the year, if time matches up, I’ll be more than happy to spend a few hours chatting, trading blows!

                  1. stephen

                    Ab, you’re shifting the onus onto me. Given the choice I don’t want to talk to you on the phone, so I wont. I offer you the choice to call me as a courtesy, a favour to you; it seems important to you, it isn’t to me.

                    I prefer to talk in person. I do not like talking on the phone, I’m okay about it with people I know very well but other than that it’s something I avoid. Hence I have zero interest in skypee-things or mobiles.

                    Way-way back, when TV was just four channels, I was on a few BBC prog’s, I even cooked a telly-meal, a dinner-party, for Rick Stein! These were small unscripted, slice-o-life-reality things, we spent a whole day recording stuff to realise minutes of broadcast material. The cookery one was still filming, and eating-drinking, after midnight. The idea that me and you will talk, off the cuff, for an hour or so and produce anything worthwhile, from my point of view, is laughable.

                    If I wanted, which I don’t, to release podcast-thingys it would be structured, it would have weeks-months preparation and it would have plenty of post-production putting it all together.

                    Three, four, whatever it is, years ago when I was very-very lost-n-disturbed in Truther World it probably would have been very helpful to chat to someone else who was seeing what I was, but not any more.

                    I’ll stick to writing, and if you have any particular, interesting, questions you want to ask me go ahead and I’ll give you a reasoned, written, response.

                    1. ab Post author

                      Ok I won’t push it. Audiochat is just another way to verify that you aren’t HB Gary the sock puppet, since I don’t have time to compare your scribbles to other past entities. I will be content that you are busy in France being sincere. Bonjour.

  4. Barbara Müller

    I never heard of Bill Hicks before I read about Alex Jones being him on Then after I compared the videos I must agree, its him. No way there can be other person looking the same, talking with the same voice and aggression. It’s the same person. Alex Jones entered the stage after Bill Hicks left. How many more coincidences does anybody need? It only proves, they create such characters as it pleases them. Is the life of a Alex Jones much different from the life of the late Bill Hicks? Yes, Alex Jones does not have the pressure of a professional stage-actor/comedian. He works as much as he likes and when he likes. So it was in his own interests to become Alex Jones. And is he more useful to the Intelligence that way? Definitely. Only very few skeptical people consider him being a shill. I have no doubt. It’s the same person.

  5. Tom Dalpra

    ”Insightful passage” ? Well I suppose it exposes whoever wrote it as not knowing what they’re talking about.
    As you rightly show ab, the author uses the term ”sheep dipping” inappropriately.
    It appears he’s using the term in his own way and not as ”spooks” would, as he says in the original post.
    He answers below –
    ”Sheepdipping in the sense I used it is to cast all engaged in an endeavor as fools or dupes by the behavior of one party”.

    Yeh, we got what you meant , but you used the term ”sheep dipping” inappropriately.
    Wrong. It’s confusing and misinformative.

    (That’s without even mentioning the crap about Jones being Hicks and Amy Goodman being Janis Joplin and they have a twin haha!)

    The post seems to have got DGB-disinfo -pusher, Frank, a bit interested, which I suppose shouldn’t be a surprise.

    Whether intentional or not, the mis-use of a ‘spook’ term in the… article, is just the sort of thing one might expect to find from an agent of disinformation.
    This type of stuff could indeed, ”cast all engaged in an endeavor as fools or dupes” if they were to take
    it seriously.

    So, no, I think we should just have a good laugh at the ludicrous idea that Janis was in fact intelligence-controlled twins who are now Amy Goodman, and take anything these old boys are saying with a pinch of the suggested NaCl.

    1. Mark Tokarski

      The evidence speaks. I too was surprised out of my boots. That Joplin was twins is beyond question, but you have to actually go look at photos and do comparative analysis. Start with wiki, her HS graduation photo. Then compare everything available, and you’ll slowly realize there are two, one laid back and never opening her mouth in smile, the other a highly agitated stage performer of mediocre talent. The laid-back Joplin became Goodman, evidence is very strong. We then stumbled on photos of Goodman where she does not even look like herself, and we had the Joplin twin. She too plays Goodman.

      Check the evidence, dammit.

  6. anounceofsaltperday

    and i think they are both right. Hicks and Jones played by Prince Gustav. Queen Lucille Ball etc. Telling us that Hicks (a character) is played by Jones (another character) is not providing any useful data. Suggesting that he may be Prince Gustave gives us something to confirm or disprove. Opinions are like rear passages… we all have one.

    1. ab Post author

      I agree it isn’t really useful other than to show a deception technique, but once more, Goldbug is prima facie wrong and disinformation. Your example is a clear case in point, and I don’t want to argue about it here.

      1. anounceofsaltperday

        Where do you want to argue about it? You must be due a trip to the Land of Oz by now…

  7. Mark Tokarski

    Sheepdipping in the sense I used it is to cast all engaged in an endeavor as fools or dupes by the behavior of one party. Earth First!, for example, sheepdipped environmentalists by advocating violence, making is all look violent. Alex Jones sheepdips ordinary and curious researchers by making us all look angry and irrational, like him.

    Maybe “blackwashing” would have been a better word.

  8. anounceofsaltperday

    I think Ed Chiarrini has got this one right as well.. his model is that Alex Jones is played by Prince Gustav of Sayn Wittgenstein-Berleburg.… . I note that John Adams of Hoaxbusters fame is also making the connections between European Royals and the US stars of stage and screen and media.. both general and alternative.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. logo

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.