• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Alex Jones

Stormkhan said:
The question is who decides what is racism, hate speech etc.?
Click to expand...

fc1d61b7b633f95436d2f98b5551165325d0cdf850a97555da1e3a155082d100_1.jpg


I would advise members to steer clear here.
 
In one way Jones' reinstatement is good news. It may increase his revenue stream to an extent where he might actually be able to pay off a fraction of the very considerable debts he owes to those people who suffered greatly at his hands by reason of him being yet another meat-headed dolt who confuses 'free speech' with 'lying through one's teeth about actual people while making lots of money out of doing so'.
 
Xitter is a cesspool. It has been broken for over a year now. If you are still contributing and reading stuff on there, you are complicit in allowing it to continue to give despicable people like Alex Jones a platform. I am disgusted that government agencies and people who still try to act like journalists and legitimate media personalities can't read the room and get out of the habit.
 
Spookdaddy said:
In one way Jones' reinstatement is good news. It may increase his revenue stream to an extent where he might actually be able to pay off a fraction of the very considerable debts he owes to those people who suffered greatly at his hands by reason of him being yet another meat-headed dolt who confuses 'free speech' with 'lying through one's teeth about actual people while making lots of money out of doing so'.
Click to expand...
Why would it follow that the monster who harassed the parents of murdered children - who lied and tried to hide his money - own up and pay for restitution? That's not going to happen. He's scum, he won't ever suddenly turn legit. I'm pretty sure if you asked the parents, they would prefer he become obscure and ineffective; the object of the suit was to stop his trail of destruction, not provide a windfall.
 
Spookdaddy said:
In one way Jones' reinstatement is good news. It may increase his revenue stream to an extent where he might actually be able to pay off a fraction of the very considerable debts he owes to those people who suffered greatly at his hands by reason of him being yet another meat-headed dolt who confuses 'free speech' with 'lying through one's teeth about actual people while making lots of money out of doing so'.
Click to expand...
Not going to increase the advertising stream for Xitter though. Jones's advertisers aren't going to make up the money lost from big name brands leaving.
 
Sharon Hill said:
Why would it follow that the monster who harassed the parents of murdered children - who lied and tried to hide his money - own up and pay for restitution? That's not going to happen. He's scum, he won't ever suddenly turn legit. I'm pretty sure if you asked the parents, they would prefer he become obscure and ineffective; the object of the suit was to stop his trail of destruction, not provide a windfall.
Click to expand...

As a convicted individual with a court order to pay financial restitution, Jones' revenue streams will be open to monitoring in a way a normal individual's are not (even with a declaration of bankruptcy). Yes, there are still ways round this and, yes, I doubt that he'll ever pay anything near the demanded restitution.

Would I like Jones to fall into deserved obscurity? Yes, I would.

Do I think he is likely to, even if denied the dubious oxygen of X? No, I really don't.

Therefore, I say, hit him where it really hurts - his pocket; and for the rest of his sorry and odious life. It's not about any windfall for his victims, it's about making him pay for his behaviour in the only way easily applicable. Even if he never pays another penny - which is a distinct possibility - the threat at least will be hanging over his head every day he draws breath.
 
FWIW - I'm not a fan of Alex Jones. The factual truth is however (regardless of how much I dislike him) that he has been exposing corruption and illegal activity for over a decade. He exposed Epstein's island over 10 years ago saying that it was a honeytrap for Elites. He went so far down certain rabbit holes that he couldn't see the daylight.

He eventually got swept up in his own world of skullduggery and suffered major mental and psychological issues as well as alcohol and drug abuse which culminated in his Sandy Hook nonsense. The guy was broken, delusional and needed medical help.

Musk decided to buy Twitter after it was discovered that the FBI had made Meta and Twitter restrict distribution of certain information and in some cases just outright block certain individuals from posting. Zuckerberg has admitted that they restricted circulation of posts at the express desire of the US government. Individuals who were more than qualified to discuss certain topics were deplatformed because they spoke up against the governments narrative or drew attention to discrepancies in official stories.

Musk said that he would buy Twitter in order to maintain at least one "town square" when anyone is free to speak - regardless of whether we like their message or not and free from Governmental censorship. And that is why he uses polls - let the people decide if we allow those previously kicked out of town to return.

We may not like that Alex jones is back on X but if the majority of users there say it is OK then that is Democracy folks. And Democracy doesn't always mean that you'll get your way.
 
Last edited:
kesavaross said:
I'm struggling with what you mean exactly. What sentiment or sentiments do you mean? Thanks.
Click to expand...
What I mean exactly is that Musk has only ever tended to support those controversial accounts and views that align his own.

He does not tend to support those that express views and standpoints with which he does not identify.
 
Ascalon said:
He does not tend to support those that express views and standpoints with which he does not identify.
Click to expand...
Just like the old owner.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
 
Ringo said:
FWIW - I'm not a fan of Alex Jones. The factual truth is however (regardless of how much I dislike him) that he has been exposing corruption and illegal activity for over a decade. He exposed Epstein's island over 10 years ago saying that it was a honeytrap for Elites. He went so far down certain rabbit holes that he couldn't see the daylight.

He eventually got swept up in his own world of skullduggery and suffered major mental and psychological issues as well as alcohol and drug abuse which culminated in his Sandy Hook nonsense. The guy was broken, delusional and needed medical help.

Musk decided to buy Twitter after it was discovered that the FBI had made Meta and Twitter restrict distribution of certain information and in some cases just outright block certain individuals from posting. Zuckerberg has admitted that they restricted circulation of posts at the express desire of the US government. Individuals who were more than qualified to discuss certain topics were deplatformed because they spoke up against the governments narrative or drew attention to discrepancies in official stories.

Musk said that he would buy Twitter in order to maintain at least one "town square" when anyone is free to speak - regardless of whether we like their message or not and free from Governmental censorship. And that is why he uses polls - let the people decide if we allow those previously kicked out of town to return.

We may not like that Alex jones is back on X but if the majority of users there say it is OK then that is Democracy folks. And Democracy doesn't always mean that you'll get your way.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should rethink that statement. At the very least, you are confusing democracy with popularity. According to the United Nations, democracy "provides an environment that respects human rights and fundamental freedoms, and in which the freely expressed will of people is exercised."

Xitter is not a democracy. It is run by an unfair algorithm and the whim of a narcissist who fired everyone that kept it running like something that resembled a town square.

I was on Twitter from very early on. I had a blue check and 7000 followers. It was working pretty well until November 2022 when it simply broke and began to stink real bad very fast. When you have to pay (money or homage to the ruler) to have your voice heard, that's not democracy. The people who are left interacting there and voting for Jones are people you do not want making important social decisions.

It's not a good look to be an apologist for despicable meat bag Alex Jones. Sure, in his early days, maybe he wasn't terrible. But now, he's irredeemable.
 
The first time I heard of Facebook was when Andrew Neil was extolling the virtues as it was being accepted by his media pals. I immediately thought ‘If they’re on, it’s not for me’. Of course people say it’s so very useful for keeping in touch but it seems to me to be a big vanity mirror that creates echo chambers and sours the world. Ditto Twitter. No matter who’s in charge, it’s a simple fact it is used by dicks and people whose opinion we are better off not knowing.
This place is as close as I get to interracting on social media but that’s because compared to everyone else out there, it’s you weirdos who seem the most sane.
 
In the old days, I think people like Alex Jones would have simply gone off grid, built a shack and spent their time shouting at trees all day. Thanks to the internet, you can have them spouting forth in your house anytime you like. For this reason alone, we should uninvent the internet.
 
Sharon Hill said:
Maybe you should rethink that statement. At the very least, you are confusing democracy with popularity. According to the United Nations, democracy "provides an environment that respects human rights and fundamental freedoms, and in which the freely expressed will of people is exercised."

Xitter is not a democracy. It is run by an unfair algorithm and the whim of a narcissist who fired everyone that kept it running like something that resembled a town square.

I was on Twitter from very early on. I had a blue check and 7000 followers. It was working pretty well until November 2022 when it simply broke and began to stink real bad very fast. When you have to pay (money or homage to the ruler) to have your voice heard, that's not democracy. The people who are left interacting there and voting for Jones are people you do not want making important social decisions.

It's not a good look to be an apologist for despicable meat bag Alex Jones. Sure, in his early days, maybe he wasn't terrible. But now, he's irredeemable.
Click to expand...
I don't think I need to as I was stating facts and expressed only one opinion - that Alex Jones was broken, delusional and needed medical help. I thikn my opinion there was correct.

I agree that Popularity and Democracy are not the same yet Popular Democracy (i.e. governing by referendum) is a real democratic process. One recent example was the EU referendum in the UK. Musk seems to like doing these polls for some reason.

The definition of Democracy offered in your post is not what Democracy means, it is what Democracy provides. Demos; the power of the people. Governing by the will of the people. The will of the people on X was excercised, not the will of the entire US population but the will of the people on that platform.

This form of direct Democracy doesn't guarantee progression or improvement. Sometimes the people will choose badly.

If that turns X into a bad place then that's what it turns into. Even crazies and bad eggs have the fundamental right to speak. Luckily, we don't have to listen to crazy talk if we don't want to and we can choose not to pay attention to it.

I do not use X. And I didn't claim that it was ran democratically nor did I claim to know what sort of person Musk is. I merely stated that the direct polling option is a Democratic notion.

I never said that I agreed with the outcome of the poll nor did I adopt the bad look of apologising for Alex Jones (my apologies if you weren't referring to me directly). I actually started my original post with "I'm not a fan of Alex Jones". Stating that someone had mental health issues does not mean that I agree with or condone their behaviour. I did think however, that not many people outside of the US will have been aware of why Musk said he bought it, why Alex Jones has been allowed to return or that he was/is mentally unstable.
 
Ringo said:
I don't think I need to as I was stating facts and expressed only one opinion - that Alex Jones was broken, delusional and needed medical help. I thikn my opinion there was correct.

I agree that Popularity and Democracy are not the same yet Popular Democracy (i.e. governing by referendum) is a real democratic process. One recent example was the EU referendum in the UK. Musk seems to like doing these polls for some reason.

The definition of Democracy offered in your post is not what Democracy means, it is what Democracy provides. Demos; the power of the people. Governing by the will of the people. The will of the people on X was excercised, not the will of the entire US population but the will of the people on that platform.

This form of direct Democracy doesn't guarantee progression or improvement. Sometimes the people will choose badly.

If that turns X into a bad place then that's what it turns into. Even crazies and bad eggs have the fundamental right to speak. Luckily, we don't have to listen to crazy talk if we don't want to and we can choose not to pay attention to it.

I do not use X. And I didn't claim that it was ran democratically nor did I claim to know what sort of person Musk is. I merely stated that the direct polling option is a Democratic notion.

I never said that I agreed with the outcome of the poll nor did I adopt the bad look of apologising for Alex Jones (my apologies if you weren't referring to me directly). I actually started my original post with "I'm not a fan of Alex Jones". Stating that someone had mental health issues does not mean that I agree with or condone their behaviour. I did think however, that not many people outside of the US will have been aware of why Musk said he bought it, why Alex Jones has been allowed to return or that he was/is mentally unstable.
Click to expand...
You said that he "suffered major mental and psychological issues as well as alcohol and drug abuse which culminated in his Sandy Hook nonsense". That is a way of making an excuse for his behavior when there is none. He profited off of this. Mightily. For years.

I'll stand by my statement that Jones is irredeemable and there is nothing Democratic about Twitter and Musk's popular "votes" except in the warped sense of vox populi. Musk fan-bros run the site now and voted for that monstrosity Jones to be replatformed because they seem to find expression of cruel sentiments and insane ramblings to be amusing. Many people who would have voted for Xitter to not become a sewer are (mostly) gone.
 
Sharon Hill said:
You said that he "suffered major mental and psychological issues as well as alcohol and drug abuse which culminated in his Sandy Hook nonsense". That is a way of making an excuse for his behavior when there is none. He profited off of this. Mightily. For years.
Click to expand...
Yes he did. And I don't agree with it at all. And I wasn't apologsing for him, I was pointing out that the man was delusional.
Yithian said:
We can agree to disagree here.
Click to expand...
Indeed we can. I don't even think we are in disagreement, I think Sharon believes that I am in support of Alex Jones when I am not.

My point being: If a driver kills a pedestrian with a car then the question asked is "why"; was it a targered attack, a terrorist act, an accident or just plain bad luck. The why doesn't change the fact that a terrible thing has happened but we get more information regarding the terrible event.

If we then find out that the driver was drunk, or on drugs, or mentally unstable we have more information about the subject. Stating or debating that information doesn't make one an apologist - it makes one more informed.

But as Yith said, we can agree or disagree on whether I am an apologist but we cannot agree or disagree over facts. They are what they are and they do not care about either of our opinions.
 
Ringo said:
FWIW - I'm not a fan of Alex Jones. The factual truth is however (regardless of how much I dislike him) that he has been exposing corruption and illegal activity for over a decade. He exposed Epstein's island over 10 years ago saying that it was a honeytrap for Elites. He went so far down certain rabbit holes that he couldn't see the daylight.

He eventually got swept up in his own world of skullduggery and suffered major mental and psychological issues as well as alcohol and drug abuse which culminated in his Sandy Hook nonsense. The guy was broken, delusional and needed medical help.

Musk decided to buy Twitter after it was discovered that the FBI had made Meta and Twitter restrict distribution of certain information and in some cases just outright block certain individuals from posting. Zuckerberg has admitted that they restricted circulation of posts at the express desire of the US government. Individuals who were more than qualified to discuss certain topics were deplatformed because they spoke up against the governments narrative or drew attention to discrepancies in official stories.

Musk said that he would buy Twitter in order to maintain at least one "town square" when anyone is free to speak - regardless of whether we like their message or not and free from Governmental censorship. And that is why he uses polls - let the people decide if we allow those previously kicked out of town to return.

We may not like that Alex jones is back on X but if the majority of users there say it is OK then that is Democracy folks. And Democracy doesn't always mean that you'll get your way.
Click to expand...
Cool story about Musk buying twitter but it's not true, he made a bid like some people go on Amazon shopping sprees when they have had a few drinks he then tried to do all he could to get out of it, but the the shareholders of twitter held his feet to the fire, it was never going to make any money nor will it ever make any money, and the Twitter shareholders go well more than it was worth

He has tried to up the revenue stream without much success, and the more he gives space to mainly right wing cranks like Jones the more mainstream advertisers will pull their adds, would you want your product advertised on a platform tat showcases Alex Jones?

By the way most of the people who were deplatformed like the Hopkins woman were depaltformed because they were inciting hate

Like someone has said Twitter as it was is now a vile cess pit, and if it goes on much longer like this it won't be around for that long, many decent people have left the advantage is Forums like this are getting an increase in traffic
 
I was banned from Twitter for posting links to videos by Robert Malone about the Covid vaccine. I can now post the same on X (if I wanted to) and they wouldn't be removed.

Twitter, along with other social platforms, stopped any free speech or debate about all issues Covid unless it towed the only allowed view point.

Musk is quite happy that Disney has stopped advertising on X. These large companies can end up having a controlling stake by virtue of the big money that they spend. Also, I watched a brief interview by journalists as he was getting into a taxi. He was asked about the Disney thing and he replied words to the effect of that there is much that will come out about Disney in the future. Quite what that meant, I don't know.
 
As someone who has worked in IT all my life I have never used Twitter or Facebook, or any social media of any kind, this forum is one of the very few places where I have any online presence at all. I have always felt social media are "bread and circuses" used by the establishment to distract and manipulate the masses.
Plus it's something for "users" of computers not those of us who actually build them - technology being used by those who have no understanding of it and those who are in control of it intending that they never do.
Yes that sounds condesecending, because it is - ask anyone who has worked in IT what they think of the users :p
I'm also a little lary of any exposer of conspiracies such as Jones, depite being sure there are many quite mundane and sordid conspiracies about - as it suits the powers that be to muddle it all up together, so we cant see the wood for the tree's.
Think there's been a political coverup ?, you must also believe in Bigfoot and Elvis etc.
Something in the news we don't want you to notice ? , oh look a celeb has a superinjunction.
Whislteblower reveals something - it'll be right up after the story about the skateboarding duck etc....
That's why this forum is as valuable as it is, it treats separate matters as well separate.
 
Give money to Alex Jones by playing the Official Alex Jones game.

"Play the OFFICIAL Alex Jones video game! A classic arcade shooter in which you play as Alex Jones and save the world from the evil globalist plot to turn everyone into bug-eating pod-dwelling libtards!" Featuring various thinly disguised political figures, and, as you can see, a super lifelike rendering of Alex himself as the main character.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2487350/Alex_Jones_NWO_Wars/

screenshot_06.png


2024_01_06_20_17_10_Save_20_on_Alex_Jones_NWO_Wars_on_Steam.jpg

2024-01-06 20_19_10-Save 20% on Alex Jones_ NWO Wars on Steam.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top