Honestly there's not really a whole lot to say here. Alex Jones is a shitheel who deserves everything coming to him and it's kinda pathetic it took this long for youtube and apple to finally boot infowars off their respective sites. 

 

 

but naturally people are now whining about sensor sheep and frozen peaches because apparently ultra wackadoodle conspiracy theories and targeted harassment campaigns make a "reasonable conservative news source" in some people's minds, I feel the need to share a nice little quote right out of the infowars ToS

 

You will not post anything libelous, defamatory, harmful, threatening, harassing, abusive, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, racially or ethnically objectionable, or otherwise illegal.

You will not make threats to other users or people not associated with the site.

If you violate these rules, your posts and/or user name will be deleted.

Remember: you are a guest here. It is not censorship if you violate the rules and your post is deleted. All civilizations have rules and if you violate them you can expect to be ostracized from the tribe.

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20180808074952/https://www.infowars.com/terms-of-service/

 

So yea. Not sure what else to say after that? Fuck Alex Jones, because you can't really say that too many times? 

 

Fuck Alex Jones. 

 what happened now?

 what happened now?

 

Apple, facebook, youtube and a few others have been pulling the plug on Alex Jones' and Infowars profiles, channels, etc due to his long history of using them to publish libel and kick off harassment campaigns (see, hillary and child porn, see 9/11 was an inside job, see "crisis actors" after every mass shooting"). Presumably since people are now suing his ass, the legal departments there have woken up and gone "uhhhhhh maybe we shouldn't be hosting this shit..."

I myself have never been interested in anything Alex Jones. I do believe that if you want to be a conspiracy theorist in the U.S.A., you can be a conspiracy theorist. Just like you can be a Communist if you want to be a Communist. You can be a racist if you want to be a racist. You can be a Global Warming Alarmist if you want to be a Global Warming Alarmist. You can be a rabid Nazi if you want to be. You can be an environmental activist, a Greenpeace soldier, a Capitalist Corporation zillionaire, or anything you want to be in this country. It's called freedom... and if Facebook wants to lock any of them out because they believe it's best for their business, then they can do that to, but I draw the line on social engineering. This is the U.S.A., and freedom is what it's all about.

I myself have never been interested in anything Alex Jones. I do believe that if you want to be conspiracy theorist in the U.S.A., you can be a conspiracy theorist. Just like you can be a Communist if you want to be a Communist. You can be a racist if you want to be a racist. You can be a Global Warming Alarmist if you want to be a Global Warming Alarmist. You can be a rabid Nazi if you want to be. You can be an environmental activist, a Greenpeace soldier, a Capitalist Corporation zillionaire, or anything you want to be in this country. It's called freedom... and if Facebook wants to lock any of them out because they believe it's best for their business, then they can do that to, but I draw the line on social engineering. This is the U.S.A., and freedom is what it's all about.

 

I agree 

I myself have never been interested in anything Alex Jones. I do believe that if you want to be conspiracy theorist in the U.S.A., you can be a conspiracy theorist. Just like you can be a Communist if you want to be a Communist. You can be a racist if you want to be a racist. You can be a Global Warming Alarmist if you want to be a Global Warming Alarmist. You can be a rabid Nazi if you want to be. You can be an environmental activist, a Greenpeace soldier, a Capitalist Corporation zillionaire, or anything you want to be in this country. It's called freedom... and if Facebook wants to lock any of them out because they believe it's best for their business, then they can do that to, but I draw the line on social engineering. This is the U.S.A., and freedom is what it's all about.

 

 

Sure, but it ain't the government ordering him off the sites. It's those companies going "We don't want to do business with you, kay bye", 

 

And even then it's not like freedom is unlimited. Like your freedom of speech deafinitely stops short of defamation and libel. Saying that the family of children killed at sandy hook are paid actors and encouraging people to harass them isn't protected speech. Which is sorta the issue here. Alex jones can say and think what he wants, but he and his supporters seem to think that other people not wanting to pay to give him a megaphone and a platform is "Censorship™"

 

Which is made hilarious by Infowars enshrining "we do not owe you a platform and booting you for violating our basic standards is not censorship" right into their ToS. Kinda underscores how their brand of Censorship™ is bascily pure crocodile tears and hypocrisy. While hopefully no one here has to deal with the more...lunatic Alex Jones supporters,  I've had the displeasure of dealing with a couple over the last couple days, and quoting that bit of the infowars ToS at them seems to make their brains explode. 

 

 

Like your freedom of speech deafinitely stops short of defamation and libel. Saying that the family of children killed at sandy hook are paid actors and encouraging people to harass them isn't protected speech.

Sorry, but it doesn't stop short of defamation and libel. We have courts that sort out if anyone says something that actually harms anyone, but their absolute right to say it remains the same. If everyone that defames and libels is not protected by the 1st Amendment, then I'm still waiting for all these media people to lose their jobs, and my compensation checks to arrive, from all these morons that have called me, and 60 million other Trump supporters, Nazis, Racists, and White Supremacists. Alex Jones is not the only one who says really stupid things.

 

Like your freedom of speech deafinitely stops short of defamation and libel. Saying that the family of children killed at sandy hook are paid actors and encouraging people to harass them isn't protected speech.

Sorry, but it doesn't stop short of defamation and libel. We have courts that sort out if anyone says something that actually harms anyone, but their absolute right to say it remains the same. If everyone that defames and libels is not protected by the 1st Amendment, then I'm still waiting for all these media people to lose their jobs, and my compensation checks to arrive, from all these morons that have called me, and 60 million other Trump supporters, Nazis, Racists, and White Supremacists. Alex Jones is not the only one who says really stupid things.

 

 

 

The very fact that the courts are able to penalize someone for libel means it's not protected under the first amendment Lys. There are multiple limitations to the first amendment; specifically it does not protect speech that is defamatory,  it does not protect speech that leads to illegal activity, it does not protect speech that incites violence, and it does not protect obscenity (defined currently as anything that falls within the scope of the Miller test)

 

WHen you lose a libel case and the court orders you to pay restitution that is literally the government enforcing a penalty upon you for something that you have said. If you refuse to pay, the person you now owe money to can file a lien against your assets, and the government can literally do shit like take your house away. If during that court case you decide to call the judge a monkey fucking asshole for ruling against you, the judge can find you in contempt of court and the government will literally send you to prison for something that you said. 

 

All of those are necessary powers for the government to have: If the courts can't enforce a judgement, then the courts have no power and the law is worthless. If you can't be peanizled for disrupting a trial or otherwise defying or undermining the authority of the court, then the court has no authority. I don't think we're going to disagree that you should be able to seek restitution if someone claims you're a kiddie diddler. But there is no possible way for "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" and "It's legal for the government to force you to pay restitution to someone whom you have defamed or libeled" to coexist if the freedom of speech acknowledged in the first amendment is unlimited. And that's because there is no right in the US constitution that is unlimited. Scalia had a pretty solid quote on the topic, although the case was in reference to the second amendment (The Heller decision)

 

  

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

 

The first amendment does not prevent the US government from penalizing some member of a cult who thinks prayer alone is a perfectly fine way to treat their diabetic child or  from enforcing a libel verdict, or ordering the press to not release information about military movements in war time, or breaking up a riot, any more than the second amendment prevents the government from restricting the ownership of weapons to felons, or preventing you from carrying firearms into establishments serving alcohol. 

 

It also does not protect you from experiencing consequences for your speech. Alex Jones has no first amendment right to a channel on Youtube 

 

 

Alex Jones has no first amendment right to a channel on Youtube

YouTube is not the property of Alex Jones, therefore YouTube has discretion on what they will allow on their platform. But, YouTube runs the risk of being held responsible for other things they may allow, since they wish to start banning specific content that... in their opinion... is not adhering to their personal world view. They would soon be held to the same standards as any media organization that limits what they say, and what they edit. They cannot claim that they are not responsible for what people do.

 

Alex Jones can say, or publish, anything he wants. That is protected freedom of speech. If someone sues him for defamation, and holds him libel for damages, they must prove that what he said was untrue (harder than you might think), and there was monetary or physical harm from what he said (much harder than you might think). He would not be punished for what he said (speech is a protected right)... he would be punished for the harm he caused. Hurt feelings are listed in the "tough shit" category.

Freedom of speech =/= freedom from consequences of said speech.

 

The government isn't ordering Facebook, etc to remove Alex Jones. If he were, then it absolutely would be a 1st amendment/free speech issue.

 

But its not.

 

Alex Jones (AKA, consparacist asshole/whackjob) can say anything he wants. Facebook, a private company, can do whatever they feel is necessary to protect their business from his drivel, since it runs contrary to their TOS and their business model. I sure hope the parents from Sandy Hook sue the pants off him and win. I don't think they will, as the Libel standard in the US is very high to attain.

 

THAT, my friend, is the American way.

 

Also, if you notice, Twitter hasn't removed him. According to their CEO, he hasn't broken their TOS yet, but they're watching.

 

 

Alex Jones (AKA, consparacist asshole/whackjob) can say anything he wants. Facebook, a private company, can do whatever they feel is necessary to protect their business from his drivel, since it runs contrary to their TOS and their business model.

Quoted for every single word as truth

 

Also, if you notice, Twitter hasn't removed him. According to their CEO, he hasn't broken their TOS yet, but they're watching.

 

I mean, he totally has, but twitter is apparently chill with littreal nazis so uh... yea

As far as freedoms go, there is a quote by Harlan Ellison I really like.

 

 "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."

About a year ago I had a conversation at work with a fellow coworker. We both agreed Alex Jones has got to be one of the stupidest people on earth. And in that moment it hit me, he isn't an idiot. The guy is a genius! He found a way to manipulate gullible and uniformed people into listening to him, eating up every word he says, while he kicks back and collects tons of advertising $ and gets more fame/notoriety. I honestly don't even think Alex Jones believes everything he says himself. His entire show is a circus act and the content so bizarre because he found a paying audience that blindly accepts this garbage, and chose to turn it into a cash cow.

 

The guy definitely believes in some wacky conspiracies, but I am highly suspect that he thinks his show's content is 100% true, because you have to possess some form of intelligence to recognize the business opportunity he had and how to successfully achieve it.

 

If I had the chance to create a bizarre internet persona and get rich off of it, I'll be the first to admit I would be quite tempted to do it. Not that I would do anything immoral or outright lie, but playing up a nutty character with some embellishing is relatively harmless. And I think that is true for most people. They see the $ signs hanging on front of them and the plunge head first into it.

 

Alex Jones may be a loser, but he is an intelligent, manipulative loser.

I suspect you are right. The really sad fact is that he has actual followers, and several millions at that.

 

This and many other observations have led me to believe that Homo Sapiens is in fact - on the average - a very stupid species.

 

As far as freedoms go, there is a quote by Harlan Ellison I really like.

 

 "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."

 

Welcome to America, where ignorance rules the day.

It's definitely not just America. You're just in the limelight most of the time.

 All civilizations have rules and if you violate them you can expect to be ostracized from the tribe.

 

Thats a rather specific line to have in there, specifically the use of "civilizations", "ostracized" and "tribe". Very specific "us vs them" mentality.

 

 

 

As for government being "allowed" to intervene, doubt many here would mind gov having the power to silence someone going around telling that CO₂ is a wonderfull gas and we should all inhale it frequently.

 

 

As for government being "allowed" to intervene, doubt many here would mind gov having the power to silence someone going around telling that CO2 is a wonderfull gas and we should all inhale it frequently.

Oh yeah? *raises hand* I'm one that really likes my government absolutely not having that power.

I would like to know, how many here would like the government to have the power to silence anyone, saying anything?

Not silence, but do everything possible do discredit those talking horseshit, like anti-vexxers. And the government should do evering it can to equip its citizens to see horeshit for what it is, by giving them a good solid education.

 

As for government being "allowed" to intervene, doubt many here would mind gov having the power to silence someone going around telling that CO2 is a wonderfull gas and we should all inhale it frequently.

Oh yeah? *raises hand* I'm one that really likes my government absolutely not having that power.

I would like to know, how many here would like the government to have the power to silence anyone, saying anything?

 

 

not "anything", I mean clear and present dangerous "info" that can harm people actng on it.

 

Heck, you folks have security clearances anyway, so don't go all holy on me unless you go now to a closed chamber discussion in your Senate and tape the whole deal. See how your gov reacts to that...

 

 

Not silence, but do everything possible do discredit those talking horseshit, like anti-vexxers. And the government should do evering it can to equip its citizens to see horeshit for what it is, by giving them a good solid education.

We're talking freedom of speech... it is absolute. Not just freedom of speech you, or whoever is in control of government at the time, deems to be not "horseshit", at the time. We the people, are qualified to sort it out for ourselves. We have been doing just that for over 200 years here in the U.S.A., you guys should give it a try sometime. Most of the time we arrive at the truth, except when it came to anything involving the Kennedy's.

 

There are many things the government attempts to keep confidential. There are good reasons for that... most of the time. When the government attempts to keep things confidential for the purpose of advancing an agenda, or saving themselves from embarrassment, well that's not a good reason. After the secret is out... our freedom to speech it, is absolute. I like it that way.

except when it came to anything involving the Kennedy's.

I've told you this....Jackie had Jack Kennedy Killed. She was sick of his sleeping around on her and his lies.

 

except when it came to anything involving the Kennedy's.

I've told you this....Jackie had Jack Kennedy Killed. She was sick of his sleeping around on her and his lies.

 

I heard that... and Rosie O'Donnell said it was Trump money that paid OJ Simpson to do the deed. Oswald was a patsy.

 

Not silence, but do everything possible do discredit those talking horseshit, like anti-vexxers. And the government should do evering it can to equip its citizens to see horeshit for what it is, by giving them a good solid education.

We're talking freedom of speech... it is absolute. Not just freedom of speech you, or whoever is in control of government at the time, deems to be not "horseshit", at the time. We the people, are qualified to sort it out for ourselves. We have been doing just that for over 200 years here in the U.S.A., you guys should give it a try sometime. Most of the time we arrive at the truth, except when it came to anything involving the Kennedy's.

 

There are many things the government attempts to keep confidential. There are good reasons for that... most of the time. When the government attempts to keep things confidential for the purpose of advancing an agenda, or saving themselves from embarrassment, well that's not a good reason. After the secret is out... our freedom to speech it, is absolute. I like it that way.

 

 

Freedom of speech is most certainly not absolute, not even in the US. Try yelling "I have a bomb" in a crowded theater. You might say you were just exercising your freedom of speech, but it will not stand in court. False information spread deliberately is only marginally better in the sense that it may not have as immediate and as severe consequences as the former, but still pretty bad. As for "we the people" (not talking about US citizens here, but "the people" in general, everywhere) are anything BUT qualified to sort it out themselves. We as a species are hard-wired by evolution to act and think in a certain way and it has been proven that by and large, humans are ill-equipped to responsibly use modern information networks in general and social media in specific. Fake news and false information spreads much faster than the boring old truth (http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/03/fake-news-spreads-faster-true-news-twitter-thanks-people-not-bots - one example, but I could cite a million articles)

 

Again, I am not advocating for government control or censorship here. I'm talking about educating people from a very young age to be critical thinkers - in the sense that they should consider any given problem from at least a few other perspectives/narratives, and certainly NOT in the sense that they should doubt whatever the government says, but take at face value any hoax that their Facebook friend Cindy LooHoo puts up.