Jump to content

Welcome to IRON Forums Website
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Alex jones and youtube etc


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#21
onbekende

onbekende

    IRON King/Queen of Spam!!!

  • Special Betsy Mask
  • 26,898 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:012501
  • Squadron:Foreign Diplomat

 

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...


Emperor of the Benelux
Founder of the Commonwealth of Planets
Founder and CEO of JF

2021-03-21-sig.jpg


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#22
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo

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.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#23
Finster Baby

Finster Baby

    Former President

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 5,294 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:503943
  • Souls Baptized:2,946,004
  • Squadron:Kilo

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. :P
Finster Baby
Acme States
Proud to be the 5th IRON President.
Happily Retired. Here we go again...

IRON Minister of Defence. That means I get to play with the big guns! :D
Posted Image

Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#24
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo

 

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. :P

 

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


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#25
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

 

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.


Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#26
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo
Freedom of speech is most certainly not absolute, not even in the US. Try yelling "I have a bomb" in a crowded theater.

Wrong. No one will be prosecuted for a crime of saying anything. A person can be held criminally responsible for saying something that incites others to imminent lawless action, causing others to break the law... like starting a riot... but since 1969, it is not a crime to say anything that merely causes panic.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#27
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

 

Freedom of speech is most certainly not absolute, not even in the US. Try yelling "I have a bomb" in a crowded theater.

Wrong. No one will be prosecuted for a crime of saying anything. A person can be held criminally responsible for saying something that incites others to imminent lawless action, causing others to break the law... like starting a riot... but since 1969, it is not a crime to say anything that merely causes panic.

 

 

https://definitions.uslegal.com/i/inducing-panic/

 

Well, I guess it varies from state to state (like almost everything), but it seems to at least be a misdemeanor in most places. I'm willing to bet that if someone gets hurt in a "prank" like this, the charges can stack up pretty quickly.


Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#28
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo

It's nothing like Hogwarts, where it's forbidden to say Voldemort. It's not a crime to say, yell, or write anything... truth or lies. We can be held criminally responsible for effects of our freedom of speech. It's not a good thing to talk people into killing themselves.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#29
Rand0m her0

Rand0m her0

    Steadfast

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 3,259 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:610507
  • Squadron:Alpha

Oh for the love of. No that is exactly  what a restriction on speech looks like lys. What you are describing is the *rationale* for that restriction. 

 

 

 

If you can be held criminally responsible for your speech, that is a restriction on your speech.

 

 


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech"

What part of "Shall make no law abridging" do you think is compatible with "congress has passed a law such that you will be imprisoned for saying this specific thing". Either you think the first amendment is entirely toothless (sure congress can't make a law restricting your speech, but they can punish you for the consequences of it.) or the firstadmentment has value, but limitations on how far it extends. 

 

Have a bunch of quotes from the US surpeme court detailing acceptable restrictions freedom of speech.  Emphasis mine 

 

Schenck v. United States

 

Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances a to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.

 

 

Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc

 


We begin with the common ground. Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries, but on the competition of other ideas. But there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact. Neither the intentional lie nor the careless error materially advances society's interest in "uninhibited, robust? and wide-open" debate on public issues.

 

Miller v. Californa

 

Under a National Constitution, fundamental First Amendment limitations on the powers of the States do not vary from community to community, but this does not mean that there are, or should or can be, fixed, uniform national standards of precisely what appeals to the "prurient interest" or is "patently offensive." These are essentially questions of fact, and our Nation is simply too big and too diverse for this Court to reasonably expect that such standards could be articulated for all 50 States in a single formulation, even assuming the prerequisite consensus exists. When triers of fact are asked to decide whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would consider certain materials "prurient," it would be unrealistic to require that the answer be based on some abstract formulation. The adversary system, with lay jurors as the usual ultimate factfinders in criminal prosecutions, has historically permitted triers of fact to draw on the standards of their community, guided always by limiting instructions on the law. To require a State to structure obscenity proceedings around evidence of a national "community standard" would be an exercise in futility.

 

 

New York v. Ferber.

 

 


When a definable class of material, such as that covered by the New York statute, bears so heavily and pervasively on the welfare of children engaged in its production, the balance of competing interests is clearly struck, and it is permissible to consider these materials as without the First Amendment's protection.
 
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire 
Allowing the broadest scope to the language and purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment, it is well understood that the right of free speech is not absolute at all times and under all circumstances. There are certain well defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words -- those which, by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. 

 

I could go on for a while, the supreme court has consistently ruled that there are exceptions and limitations to the first amendment (and to every other amendment within the bill of rights) for centuries. Some forms of speech are not protected under the first amendment, full stop. 


Posted Image


5 points!
134623
Spoiler

Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#30
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo

Thank you for taking so much time researching a stupid conversation, about meaningless drivel, only to reinforce my point. I know you are well aware that it's not a crime to say the President is a Racist Nazi. You probably have done it yourself a few times during the past couple of years. It doesn't matter if it's a lie... which it is... and everyone knows it's defamatory. Is anyone going to prison for it? No.

 

Since 1969, government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action". That's the red line, and it's never been seriously challenged.

 

All the rest that you labored to paste has everything to do with cases that prove malice and damages, in short... I can say Voldemort all I want, but if someone can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that because I said Voldemort, Road2Victory shot himself in the head. I would be facing some fashion of a manslaughter charge.

 

...and I can still say Voldemort, anytime I want.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#31
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

By this logic, I can go murdering people all I want, unless someone proves beyond a reasonable doubt that I was responsible for their deaths. Then I would be facing murder charges. But yeah, if I'm willing to put up with the repercussions prescribed by the law, I can just go ahead and do it :rolleyes:


Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#32
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo
By this logic, I can go murdering people all I want, unless someone proves beyond a reasonable doubt that I was responsible for their deaths.

Yes. You got the logic right. This is exactly the way it really is. We have people that murder all they want until they are caught. Then we have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they killed all those people. Then, if they are in the right state, and after around 20 years of appeals, we can kill them with lethal injection, cyanide gas, firing squad, hanging, or electric chair. They are called "serial killers".


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#33
onbekende

onbekende

    IRON King/Queen of Spam!!!

  • Special Betsy Mask
  • 26,898 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:012501
  • Squadron:Foreign Diplomat

ITT, freedom of speech is actually freedom to produce pressure waves in air.

 

You can make sound, but we will be darn well prosecute you for the meaning behind that sound!


Emperor of the Benelux
Founder of the Commonwealth of Planets
Founder and CEO of JF

2021-03-21-sig.jpg


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#34
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

ITT, freedom of speech is actually freedom to produce pressure waves in air.

 

You can make sound, but we will be darn well prosecute you for the meaning behind that sound!

 

Haha, nice! :lol:

 

But wait, now we get to the part where I explain that when you hear me say "I want to kill the President", I actually mean "I want bring flowers to the President". It's just that in my vocabulary "kill" means "bring flowers". If you understand it differently, that's your problem, I'm free to use any word in any sense I wish. It's the freedom of speech!


Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#35
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo
But wait, now we get to the part where I explain that when you hear me say "I want to kill the President", I actually mean "I want bring flowers to the President". It's just that in my vocabulary "kill" means "bring flowers". If you understand it differently, that's your problem, I'm free to use any word in any sense I wish. It's the freedom of speech!

You are starting to get it. We also have the freedom to be misunderstood. Happens to me all the time. I'm strongly against Affirmative Action, and I'm constantly accused of being a racist because of that. Any time government steps in and creates a law to bestow a preference to anyone based on the color of their skin... that is what is racist. I'm strongly in favor of Voter ID laws, and I am constantly accused of being a racist, when I only want secure and honest elections. Just a couple of examples of our freedom to misunderstand. The difference is I can handle it... I don't need a safe space, therapy, or a comfort animal. I'm just fine with being an American.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#36
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

You are conflating things here. A stance on policy, such as Affirmative Action and voter ID has nothing to do with someone making up purely fictional stories in order to manipulate the public "in the name of free speech"!

 

On the other hand, I completely agree what you said about Affirmative Action being racist, and it always baffles me how the US lacks a centralized Citizen ID system, that includes...well...every citizen regardless of economic status.


Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#37
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo

You are conflating things here.

Maybe... but you can't restrict one type of speech without compromising others. There have been many times that some people thought what someone was saying was a bunch of lies when it turned out to be true. Edward Snowden comes to mind. There was another time when someone said that our beachfront property would be under water by now... that was bullshit.

 

So in reality... you will all owe Alex Jones a huge apology if what he believes turns out to be true. I have a pretty big problem when big bullies try to shut anyone up. Along with freedom of speech and freedom to be misunderstood... we also have the freedom to believe what we want, and the freedom to be stupid enough to believe anything we hear.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#38
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

Maybe... but you can't restrict one type of speech without compromising others.

As I said before, restricting is not the way to go. But to inoculate against it...absolutely!

Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#39
Lysistrata

Lysistrata

    IRONclad

  • BR|Member
  • 7,133 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:391465
  • Souls Baptized:1,724,782
  • Squadron:Kilo

As I said before, restricting is not the way to go. But to inoculate against it...absolutely!

Be careful Dude. People will see this and go running to their Doctor pushing for that new speech vaccine.


Woke (adj.)

A state of awareness only achieved by those dumb enough

to find injustice in everything except their own behavior.


Awards Bar:

Users Awards

#40
ccabal86

ccabal86

    IRON Rose

  • NM⎪Inactive
  • 12,373 posts
  • Resources:
  • CN Nation ID:362483
  • Souls Baptized:5,083,976
  • Squadron:Kilo

 

As I said before, restricting is not the way to go. But to inoculate against it...absolutely!

Be careful Dude. People will see this and go running to their Doctor pushing for that new speech vaccine.

 

 

I bet some actually would  :lol: 


Posted Image

Posted Image

"Baptized in Fire and Blood"


Awards Bar:

Users Awards




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users