Alex Jones..

[RaohNS]

Do you know for an actual fact that he's making up lies? If not I guess you just made up a lie? Should we ban you from all social media for that lie?

Lol he does spout some crazy stuff. But I havent seen any remarks telling him to go and violently attack people.

The BBC should be banned for lies too and the internet would be a virtual wasteland populated by Evan alone as he would demand evidence of evidence of evidence of evidence in a closed infinity loop using the mind stone level power and thus keep the operators blind and confused.

What is needed is an internet bill of rights that is not written by old people who on the whole have no idea of how computers/internet/SM work. It should absolutely be kept out of the hands of cultural clowns like Jeong and co. who think its a tool of fascism to be used to silence people with different opinions.

 

[Amnesia]

Still though, they would buy the supplements anyway, your honestly telling me people listen to a troll segment and then think, 'oh I think I'll buy vitamin D now'.

If they are stupid enough to believe what he says then they probably do

 

[IronWarrior]

Even this guy is worried about it.

 

[Scam]

Till the web server hosts take it down I guess? With so much of the popular web controlled by a few companies, does it not worry you that they have this enormous power to shut people down they don't like? I don't even know why I'm asking though really since frankly you don't give a **** because this guy is "right wing".

Nothing stopping him hosting his own webserver. You can do it out of your garage...

Oh right, you think he's entitled to use other companies tools and products to further his own misinformation and hatred.. I see

 

[jsmoke]

Someone of here has already said that Jones has won the Sandyhook lawsuit against him. Which means he didn't actually say it never happened, he says that there are a lot of irregularities involved, big difference, real journalism, questioning all aspects instead of a regular mainstream news channels style of sticking to one linear narrative that suits their agenda.

 

[PlacidCasual]

I haven't read the entire thread and I don't know anything about this fellow. That said the argument about private companies having no duty to provide a platform is a troubling one with regards to free speech. Between a small number of Tech Giants there is a virtual cartel on access to information Google with search and YouTube, FaceBook on search and social media, Apple with it's massive user base and Spotify with it's huge user base. Arguments about the duty of a private company to provide the platform were rational in a world with large numbers of broadcasters the plurality of supply was guaranteed. The new Tech Giants have such a disproportionate share of certain groups that if they blacklist people it undermines free speech. We may not squeal too much about some horrid conspiracy theorist but what if more legitimate areas of discussion are so constrained. The risks associated with the offendeshpere lobbying non "sanctioned ideas out of public discourse might be low at the moment but are surely growing if our media is any fair reflection.

 

[VincentHanna]

Someone of here has already said that Jones has won the Sandyhook lawsuit against him.

Eh? Who said that?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/23/us/alex-jones-sandy-hook-suit/index.html

 

[Roar87]

Just one example - chemtrails aren't real. He's lying. Maybe he doesn't know that he's lying, but he is.

I don't believe in chem trails, maybe he does, if he does he isn't making up a lie, he's simply stating an incorrect opinion. Clearly there's a difference. VincentHanna said he's making up a lie, yet he doesn't know for a fact he's making up lies, so he himself just made up a lie.

Alternatively VincentHanna is entitled to state what he wants online as long as he doesn't directly incite violence, if someone wishes to attack me because VincentHanna made an incorrect statement about me, then the person attacking me should be held accountable for their actions, not VincentHanna for his correct or incorrect statement of me.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

I don't believe in chem trails, maybe he does, if he does he isn't making up a lie, he's simply stating an incorrect opinion. Clearly there's a difference. VincentHanna said he's making up a lie, yet he doesn't know for a fact he's making up lies, so he himself just made up a lie.

Alternatively VincentHanna is entitled to state what he wants online as long as he doesn't directly incite violence, if someone wishes to attack me because VincentHanna made an incorrect statement about me, then the person attacking me should be held accountable for their actions, not VincentHanna for his correct or incorrect statement of me.

No no, either they are creating chem trails or they aren't. There is a right and a wrong answer, and the fact is that they aren't creating chemtrails. That's it. Maybe he is making up a lie which he genuinely believes, but jsmoke asked for 5 lies, and this is one.

 

[VincentHanna]

I don't believe in chem trails, maybe he does, if he does he isn't making up a lie, he's simply stating an incorrect opinion. Clearly there's a difference. VincentHanna said he's making up a lie, yet he doesn't know for a fact he's making up lies, so he himself just made up a lie.

10/10 on the mental gymnastics scale

 

[jsmoke]

Eh? Who said that?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/23/us/alex-jones-sandy-hook-suit/index.html

That doesn't mention the outcome of the previous suit(s). They are all in it for the money which is a crime in itself.

 

[RaohNS]

Someone of here has already said that Jones has won the Sandyhook lawsuit against him. Which means he didn't actually say it never happened, he says that there are a lot of irregularities involved, big difference, real journalism, questioning all aspects instead of a regular mainstream news channels style of sticking to one linear narrative that suits their agenda.

I'm saying that only with the admission from PJW that this has happened and he cited the media frenzy when it was announced but now they lost the case the media has remained silent (eg the damage is done).

I think smoke the media has an awful lot to answer for, and by that I mean the mainstream. They are perhaps only a little more reliable than other outlets - yes infowars included - and that is only some of the time.

With the boom in independent journalism and investigations, light is being shed on things. It was not mainstream news reporting on Charity Rescue boats working with people smugglers... It was sites like infowars.

The same was true with the HSBC tax dodge. Infowars released that wayyy before the BBC (because the Chairwoman at the time was also on the HSBC board).

Organizations like the BBC do lie by omission (keeping the Telford rape gang out of the news for example and taking over 24hrs to publish and then it was tucked away in local news despite 1,000 girls being raped, drugged, pumped, threatened, harassed and even killed)...

... or invite people to give a preponderance of a view to support their narrative. Case in point I saw a UKIP Brexit person trying to argue the merits or Brexit and what was happening with the "deal" up against 2 remainers (one a vociferously using the "where's the £378,000,000,980,451,629 a week for the NHS YOU personally... Personally promised and signed in blood!!!"), and the host was clearly a remained as every time the guy tried to make a point or respond he was interrupted or asked a different question. That is the distraction tactic the BBC is known for. A tactic it uses is also to circumvent its own policies of impartiality eg Black and BAME only candidate job hiring (by rewording that means the same).

The Guardian has posted some pretty nasty things too.

 

[Roar87]

10/10 on the mental gymnastics scale

Quote half the post and don't even attempt to reply. 10/10 you should get a job at Youtube.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Looks like social media websites are doing a Cull of the Right wing in general, do you think violent far left groups like Antifa will get the same treatment ?

 

[VincentHanna]

Is one man a cull? Methinks not.

 

[RaohNS]

Eh? Who said that?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/23/us/alex-jones-sandy-hook-suit/index.html

Date:
23rd May 2018

This was said in the last few days. Also CNN... Such a reliable news site there. This is the same news website that thinks Trump conspired with Russia LOL

Also there is no result of the complaint. And according to the article - which makes it even more credible from Watson - is that he cannot be held accountable for broadcasting the opinions of others... That's like me saying you spoke to a guy once who thought terrorists were justified in their actions, therefore you are as liable as him for their views when something happens of that nature...

 

[chroniclard]

Looks like social media websites are doing a Cull of the Right wing in general, do you think violent far left groups like Antifa will get the same treatment ?

Anyone who violates their Terms and Conditions gets treated the same.

 

[StriderX]

Looks like social media websites are doing a Cull of the Right wing in general, do you think violent far left groups like Antifa will get the same treatment ?

I have no idea, i've never once seen a video with Antifa commentating, probably because it doesn't make sense for them to blast their face on social media.

Gotta love all the folks in this thread though, defending this fat ****, i thought he was mildly humorous for a while, got bored of the schtick ages ago. But people still defending him because he's one of the lads, even if he's just riding the far-right money machine that appears to be rather lucrative.

The less money in the hands of plebs the better i suppose, maybe he'll start a kickstarter to steal more from them.

 

[Felon]

I haven't read the entire thread and I don't know anything about this fellow. That said the argument about private companies having no duty to provide a platform is a troubling one with regards to free speech. Between a small number of Tech Giants there is a virtual cartel on access to information Google with search and YouTube, FaceBook on search and social media, Apple with it's massive user base and Spotify with it's huge user base. Arguments about the duty of a private company to provide the platform were rational in a world with large numbers of broadcasters the plurality of supply was guaranteed. The new Tech Giants have such a disproportionate share of certain groups that if they blacklist people it undermines free speech. We may not squeal too much about some horrid conspiracy theorist but what if more legitimate areas of discussion are so constrained. The risks associated with the offendeshpere lobbying non "sanctioned ideas out of public discourse might be low at the moment but are surely growing if our media is any fair reflection.

Good post - this is exactly the reason I created the thread.

For me it's not entirely about Alex Jones, I merely use him as the main example - it's about the discomfort around how these gigantic companies, with unprecedented levels of data, information and arguably - control, are able to impose restrictions or controls against certain individuals or groups, when they have no legal duty to do so, where no laws are being broken. The ramifications of this 'becoming the norm' are significant and worrying in my view.

It seems that having an 'off' switch, or the ability to look away or turn the volume down, isn't enough - we seem to be going down the road of handing that ability to third parties with unknown agendas and interests, whilst taking our own ability to make decisions out of the process, which I think in the end could be undesirable to society.

For me, the only point where those things are desirable are when it enters legal territories - as prescribed by actual law, not by a media company's 'danger' algorithm or terms and conditions.

 

[deuse]

The young turks channel should be next to go then?