• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

As Infowars faces doom Alex Jones Threatens Civil War

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,557
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Alex Jones is calling for his supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against antifa, the mainstream media, and “Chicom operatives” on... Periscope.

Periscope is one of the only platforms left that will still have him, and in case you didn't think so, this definitely violates the terms and conditions of periscope, which is owned by Twitter.

Jones: It's time to act before the media carries out a “false flag”

Transcript and video

As of this moment, Infowars.com is down.
 
Call the question

Alex Jones is calling for his supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against antifa, the mainstream media, and “Chicom operatives” on... Periscope.

Periscope is one of the only platforms left that will still have him, and in case you didn't think so, this definitely violates the terms and conditions of periscope, which is owned by Twitter.



Transcript and video

As of this moment, Infowars.com is down.

I've heard the name Alex Jones. Does he actually have anything to say? Has he said anything valuable or useful in the past?
 
Alex Jones is calling for his supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against antifa, the mainstream media, and “Chicom operatives” on... Periscope.

Periscope is one of the only platforms left that will still have him, and in case you didn't think so, this definitely violates the terms and conditions of periscope, which is owned by Twitter.



Transcript and video

As of this moment, Infowars.com is down.

Just went on to Infowars.com. It is not down as of 8:34 AZ time.

Guess "they" are not very good at taken down websites yet. :mrgreen:

Infowars is junk. Only those who buy into Jones warped sense of most things are a conspiracy support his views.
 
Last edited:
Re: Call the question

I've heard the name Alex Jones. Does he actually have anything to say? Has he said anything valuable or useful in the past?

Apparently Trump is a fan.
 
Alex Jones is calling for his supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against antifa, the mainstream media, and “Chicom operatives” on... Periscope.

Periscope is one of the only platforms left that will still have him, and in case you didn't think so, this definitely violates the terms and conditions of periscope, which is owned by Twitter.



Transcript and video

As of this moment, Infowars.com is down.

Premature celebration.
Infowars is not down.
 
Re: Call the question

I've heard the name Alex Jones. Does he actually have anything to say? Has he said anything valuable or useful in the past?

He has so much to say that he is being censored.
 
Lots of static?

He has so much to say that he is being censored.

Jones? I understood he was being thrown off several commercial sites - for violating their terms & conditions (? that's what I read). He can't run his own site, from his own computer? I figured all he needed was connectivity, & some tech guru to keep the site up & running. He doesn't have that?

If he does, then What's the beef? Surely he doesn't claim to be mainstream in his political stances - that would defeat the whole purpose of his act, I assume. Being tossed from commercial sites isn't the same as being censored - as long as he can get to the Internet, he can communicate, talk & listen.
 
Re: Lots of static?

Jones? I understood he was being thrown off several commercial sites - for violating their terms & conditions (? that's what I read). He can't run his own site, from his own computer? I figured all he needed was connectivity, & some tech guru to keep the site up & running. He doesn't have that?

If he does, then What's the beef? Surely he doesn't claim to be mainstream in his political stances - that would defeat the whole purpose of his act, I assume. Being tossed from commercial sites isn't the same as being censored - as long as he can get to the Internet, he can communicate, talk & listen.

Obviously, humans censor. Humans individually, and organized into groups like churches and governments.

What is happening to Jones is a modern electronic version of censorship. I'm no fan of his and consider him to be another bombast like Rush Limbaugh, but the fact remains that the narrative he advances, some of it true and some of it not, is being censored by the powers that be. They are making it more difficult for him to get his story out. Not 100% efficient, I agree, but censorship nonetheless.
 
Re: Lots of static?

Obviously, humans censor. Humans individually, and organized into groups like churches and governments.

What is happening to Jones is a modern electronic version of censorship. I'm no fan of his and consider him to be another bombast like Rush Limbaugh, but the fact remains that the narrative he advances, some of it true and some of it not, is being censored by the powers that be. They are making it more difficult for him to get his story out. Not 100% efficient, I agree, but censorship nonetheless.

You are somewhat correct on censorship. It is all on how the word is being used. It doesn't take away from southwest88 point of Jones violating the terms and condition of use. The company has the right to suspend or cancel Jones based on the violations.

Is it censorship when P4911T web site banned someone because they do not like what was posted? One could say it is. Just like this site when someone gets banned for breaking the rules. In your view it is a type of censorship. How about when a publisher rejects a submitted article or book? Is it censorship? Maybe the article just didn't meet the editors criteria for publication.

Interesting that you seem to want Jones to get his "story" out even though you stated not all of it is true. At times false "stories" do harm. Those who spread them should be held accountable.
 
Re: Lots of static?

Obviously, humans censor. Humans individually, and organized into groups like churches and governments.

What is happening to Jones is a modern electronic version of censorship. I'm no fan of his and consider him to be another bombast like Rush Limbaugh, but the fact remains that the narrative he advances, some of it true and some of it not, is being censored by the powers that be. They are making it more difficult for him to get his story out. Not 100% efficient, I agree, but censorship nonetheless.
Not so much.

To start with the obvious bit: No government is going after Jones. There are no investigations into his businesses, no federal injunctions, the government isn't raising a finger against him.

Second, a handful of parents that he defamed, and who are now suing him for defamation, are not part of the "powers that be." They're ordinary citizens whom he's harmed.

Third, maybe we can classify Facebook and YouTube as institutions of a sort, but they're ultimately private entities, and he broke their rules. Twitter bent over backwards and basically ignored their own codes of conduct to keep him on, and he still couldn't obey the rules. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he deliberately violated Twitter's TOS by inciting violence, in order to get bumped and proclaim himself as a martyr.

Even so, Big Tech doesn't owe anyone a platform. They are private businesses, and if you don't obey the rules, you can expect to get bumped -- no matter what your political leanings. I do think Big Tech needs to be much more transparent about their policies and how they are enforced, but anyone who calls for violence is ultimately going to get the same treatment, regardless of ideology.

Fourth, he isn't like Limbaugh. Last I checked, Limbaugh is not a conspiracy theorist whose listeners threaten the survivors of mass shootings, and he doesn't advocate for violence. He's a blowhard, but (AFAIK) he abides by the rules.

So no, this is not about the "People In Charge." Jones is reckless, irresponsible, harmful and is now advocating violence. No one owes him a platform, and he should not expect to have one as long as he keeps it up.
 
Re: Lots of static?

You are somewhat correct on censorship. It is all on how the word is being used. It doesn't take away from southwest88 point of Jones violating the terms and condition of use. The company has the right to suspend or cancel Jones based on the violations.

Is it censorship when P4911T web site banned someone because they do not like what was posted? One could say it is. Just like this site when someone gets banned for breaking the rules. In your view it is a type of censorship. How about when a publisher rejects a submitted article or book? Is it censorship? Maybe the article just didn't meet the editors criteria for publication.

Interesting that you seem to want Jones to get his "story" out even though you stated not all of it is true. At times false "stories" do harm. Those who spread them should be held accountable.

Is that like being "somewhat pregnant"? :mrgreen:
 
Re: Lots of static?

Not so much.

To start with the obvious bit: No government is going after Jones. There are no investigations into his businesses, no federal injunctions, the government isn't raising a finger against him.

Second, a handful of parents that he defamed, and who are now suing him for defamation, are not part of the "powers that be." They're ordinary citizens whom he's harmed.

Third, maybe we can classify Facebook and YouTube as institutions of a sort, but they're ultimately private entities, and he broke their rules. Twitter bent over backwards and basically ignored their own codes of conduct to keep him on, and he still couldn't obey the rules. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he deliberately violated Twitter's TOS by inciting violence, in order to get bumped and proclaim himself as a martyr.

Even so, Big Tech doesn't owe anyone a platform. They are private businesses, and if you don't obey the rules, you can expect to get bumped -- no matter what your political leanings. I do think Big Tech needs to be much more transparent about their policies and how they are enforced, but anyone who calls for violence is ultimately going to get the same treatment, regardless of ideology.

Fourth, he isn't like Limbaugh. Last I checked, Limbaugh is not a conspiracy theorist whose listeners threaten the survivors of mass shootings, and he doesn't advocate for violence. He's a blowhard, but (AFAIK) he abides by the rules.

So no, this is not about the "People In Charge." Jones is reckless, irresponsible, harmful and is now advocating violence. No one owes him a platform, and he should not expect to have one as long as he keeps it up.

Do you remember what happened when it got out that AT&Treason and other telecoms were doing the government's dirty work by intercepting electronic communications in violation of FISA and the 4th Amendment? Probably not, but if you do, you will understand that in fascist societies government and industry work hand-in-glove, they scratch each others back.

Let the aggrieved parents sue in court. Let discovery take place, let the truth be found. They've been talking about such a suit for some time now, maybe more than a year. To my knowledge it has not yet been filed, but maybe you can show me it has. I'm betting it won't be filed, or at least that the discovery process will be heavily restrained and redacted by the court. Time will tell.

Full and open discovery will reveal the story of Sandy Hook is completely full of holes.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...=Air+Force+one+Sandy+Hook+survivors&FORM=IGRE

Why do you suppose those aggrieved parents were flown around on Air Force One?
 
Re: Lots of static?

Let the aggrieved parents sue in court. Let discovery take place, let the truth be found. They've been talking about such a suit for some time now, maybe more than a year. To my knowledge it has not yet been filed, but maybe you can show me it has. I'm betting it won't be filed, or at least that the discovery process will be heavily restrained and redacted by the court. Time will tell.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43799449

Jones doesn't seem as interested as you are in the discovery process since he's been trying to get the cases thrown out on free speech grounds rather than fighting them on the facts. Read in to that what you will.
 
Re: Lots of static?

Is that like being "somewhat pregnant"? :mrgreen:

You agree then when someone is banned from P4911T, etc., it is censorship. Doesn't matter to you if someone violates the terms and conditions of the site.

I expected you to not really address the questions and statements I made. I agree, your answer is " like being "somewhat pregnant"?"

Let me put it another way. Does any private internet forum have a right to establish terms and conditions of use?
 
Re: Lots of static?

Do you remember what happened when it got out that AT&Treason and other telecoms were doing the government's dirty work by intercepting electronic communications in violation of FISA and the 4th Amendment? Probably not, but if you do, you will understand that in fascist societies government and industry work hand-in-glove, they scratch each others back.

Let the aggrieved parents sue in court. Let discovery take place, let the truth be found. They've been talking about such a suit for some time now, maybe more than a year. To my knowledge it has not yet been filed, but maybe you can show me it has. I'm betting it won't be filed, or at least that the discovery process will be heavily restrained and redacted by the court. Time will tell.

Full and open discovery will reveal the story of Sandy Hook is completely full of holes.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...=Air+Force+one+Sandy+Hook+survivors&FORM=IGRE

Why do you suppose those aggrieved parents were flown around on Air Force One?

You do realize that Jones admitted he was wrong about Sandy Hook. I expect you believe the government or "they" got to him. :mrgreen:

https://www.google.com/search?ei=m6...i131k1j0i67k1j0i22i30k1j33i21k1.0.h0bqX7ObpRY
 
Alex Jones is calling for his supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against antifa, the mainstream media, and “Chicom operatives” on... Periscope.

Periscope is one of the only platforms left that will still have him, and in case you didn't think so, this definitely violates the terms and conditions of periscope, which is owned by Twitter.



Transcript and video

As of this moment, Infowars.com is down.

If that is how he gets people to follow him. Next step, set his hair on firer and putting it out with a hammer.
 
Re: Lots of static?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43799449

Jones doesn't seem as interested as you are in the discovery process since he's been trying to get the cases thrown out on free speech grounds rather than fighting them on the facts. Read in to that what you will.

Many of the facts are well known, and covered by people other than Jones, and NOT covered by the mainstream media, naturally. Whether those facts become part of the discovery process will depend upon the integrity of the judge in the case. My bet is that the judge will be compromised. I hope I'm wrong.
 
Re: Lots of static?

Many of the facts are well known, and covered by people other than Jones, and NOT covered by the mainstream media, naturally. Whether those facts become part of the discovery process will depend upon the integrity of the judge in the case. My bet is that the judge will be compromised. I hope I'm wrong.
You appear to have subtly dodged my point. If Jones is so certain of his accusations against the victims and families and that the discovery process of a libel case would clearly prove him right, why would he be putting so much effort in the having the case thrown out before it even reached that point?

Exactly what you called to happen already is happening, you were just unaware of it for some reason. Jones is the one trying to stop it happening and apparently not telling his supporters anything about it.
 
Re: Lots of static?

You appear to have subtly dodged my point. If Jones is so certain of his accusations against the victims and families and that the discovery process of a libel case would clearly prove him right, why would he be putting so much effort in the having the case thrown out before it even reached that point?

Exactly what you called to happen already is happening, you were just unaware of it for some reason. Jones is the one trying to stop it happening and apparently not telling his supporters anything about it.

No, his point about First Amendment concerns is valid, but obviously up to a court to determine. Many or most of our courts are utterly compromised, and have been for a long time.

Any lawyer would advise him to make that motion regarding FA issues. An honest court would agree, but honest courts are few and far between.

Assuming the court denies that motion and allows the case to continue, THEN comes the discovery process. Stay tuned.
 
Re: Call the question

He has so much to say that he is being censored.

He has a lot of words to say, yes. Ask him why the frogs are gay.
 
Re: Lots of static?

You... didn't actually respond to anything.

T72 has also avoided follow up post questions.

For example I asked if Pilot for 911 Truth banned someone from their forum is it censorship? Doesn't matter if the poster violates the terms and conditions of posting. T72 seems to believe Jones is being censored despite him violating the terms and conditions. Then when a conspiracy site like P4911T or AE911T forums ban someone, it has to be censorship, right?

Someone posted that Jones as a lot to say. True. Unfortunately most of it is garbage, but not to his followers.
 
Re: Lots of static?

Pretty sure Jones is loving all the attention hes getting when he screams censorhip every time a site bans him.
He can use that to pretend they are trying to keep him fro telling DA TWOOTH!
The guy is an admitted liar but that doesnt stop his flock of sheeple believing every word he says
 
Re: Lots of static?

It took me less than an hour to figure out how to host my website on the computer on my desk. It's free, and only my ISP or the electric company can shut me down.
Jones? I understood he was being thrown off several commercial sites - for violating their terms & conditions (? that's what I read). He can't run his own site, from his own computer? I figured all he needed was connectivity, & some tech guru to keep the site up & running. He doesn't have that?

If he does, then What's the beef? Surely he doesn't claim to be mainstream in his political stances - that would defeat the whole purpose of his act, I assume. Being tossed from commercial sites isn't the same as being censored - as long as he can get to the Internet, he can communicate, talk & listen.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom