Alex Jones content removed from Facebook, Youtube, Apple

batgoat

Patty Hearst wrote: »

You still support Antifa even though they're associated with the killers of Lyra McKeee?

Firstly, you're exploiting the murder of a girl because of your own views. You do have a tendency to make outlandish statements and fail to back them up. Eg your ravings that got sourced back to weird nazi forums about antifa Ireland.... :P

Posters such as yourself are terrible at pretending to be reasonable.

Patty Hearst

batgoat wrote: »

Firstly, you're exploiting the murder of a girl because of your own views. You do have a tendency to make outlandish statements and fail to back them up. Eg your ravings that got sourced back to weird nazi forums about antifa Ireland.... :P

The photographs above show a clear link between Antifa and Saoradh..quite clear.

But as I said this is off topic

ohnonotgmail

Former Observer wrote: »

Yes, my point, or rather my question, is how can Alex Jones be held responsible for what other people do on the back of his right to express his opinion that Sandy Hook was a hoax. I haven't heard anyone suggest that he was literally handing out road maps and sending columns of drivers that way. A bunch of people on the spectrum listened to his radio station and took their own initiative.

He encouraged them. He provided them with information on where the parents lived. He expressed an opinion that is libellous. he is being sued for libel. No company wants to be involved with that.

ogsjw

Patty Hearst wrote: »

You still support Antifa even though they're associated with the killers of Lyra McKeee?

Oh my god my brain just exploded.



Wanting a United Ireland makes you 'associated with the Real IRA' now apparently.



Ohh.... I need a lie down... but I'm out in public... what do I do here, do I just crawl up into the foetal position on the ground?



Someone please send help.

super_furry

Seems like the brains-trust have jumped ship from the Tommeh thread to defending the Infowars bottom-feeders.

20Cent

Are there a left wing version of Alex Jones and PJW etc?
Have they been banned as well?

It seems to me grifters cashing in on ignorance seems to be a mostly right wing phenomenon.

Billy86

Former Observer wrote: »

If somebody thinks there is something fishy about the Sandy Hook murders (for example) they should surely be able to express those opinions on social media, including but not limited to the hypothesis that the children and parents involved were crisis actors. I understand that this may be upsetting to parents etc. but that's just the way it is.

If i decided to launch a campaign on boards accusing you of being a pedophile and spread it into other social media sites, doxing you (revealing your offline identity) in the process and making everyone in your everyday life know that you are accused of being a pedophile, resulting in you and members of your family receiving daily death threats, your tune would change on that extremely quickly with regards to my boards.ie account (and other social media accounts, and bank account, etc if I were using these to continue to spread these lies about you).

Billy86

turbbo wrote: »

Billy86 wrote: »

Yeah, it is social media. It's their forums that they ban you off of,and forums (including this one we are posting on right now) are social media.

Yes it's a fine line for Social Media and I predict a legal backlash for any of the big ones for suddenly wanting to control their content. Afaik boards has always controlled the content through it's mediators - which gives them a free pass - they always considered themselves as content providers. FB on the other hand never claimed to be content providers. Where will this lead? Imagine trying to regulate FB. Must be close to impossible.

Facebook have had TOS and have been been banning people for breaking them since their inception. Nothing has changed there.

Billy86

Patty Hearst wrote: »

batgoat wrote: »

Firstly, you're exploiting the murder of a girl because of your own views. You do have a tendency to make outlandish statements and fail to back them up. Eg your ravings that got sourced back to weird nazi forums about antifa Ireland.... :P

The photographs above show a clear link between Antifa and Saoradh..quite clear.

But as I said this is off topic

So as per your earlier comment, what country was it that forced Facebook to put this ban on Paul Joseph Watson etc in place?

mcmoustache

Former Observer wrote: »

Surely a person should be able to publicly express the opinion or otherwise speculate as to whether the parents of the children are crisis actors?

Interesting question as to when/if that becomes libel though.

He didn't speculate. He said it straight out.

Even better, only a couple of weeks ago he admitted that it was nonsense and blamed it on a psychosis. His deposition is up there on youtube.

This wasn't just some guy sharing an opinion in good faith.

Former Observer

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He encouraged them.

My understanding is that he expressed his belief that the shooting was staged and that other people bought into that theory.

If I'm the Pope and I encourage people to read the bible does that make me responsible when someone goes on a killing spree citing the word of God?

And for those of you of an anti-theist persuasion, there are plenty of secular examples also.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He provided them with information on where the parents lived.

Surely no more than any other news site/TV channel did.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He expressed an opinion that is libellous.

But is it libelous? If I believe Elvis Presley is alive but his family disagrees and moreover find the very notion upsetting, surely there is enough space in the world for both opinions.

mcmoustache

20Cent wrote: »

Are there a left wing version of Alex Jones and PJW etc?
Have they been banned as well?

It seems to me grifters cashing in on ignorance seems to be a mostly right wing phenomenon.

Louis Farrakhan, the anti-semite and anti-white racist cnut was also banned but you'll notice that the Alex Jones fans ignored him in their whataboutery. It's almost as if this talk of free speech is little more than a smokescreen.

Former Observer

Billy86 wrote: »

If i decided to launch a campaign on boards accusing you of being a pedophile and spread it into other social media sites, doxing you (revealing your offline identity) in the process and making everyone in your everyday life know that you are accused of being a pedophile, resulting in you and members of your family receiving daily death threats, your tune would change on that extremely quickly with regards to my boards.ie account (and other social media accounts, and bank account, etc if I were using these to continue to spread these lies about you).

It's an interesting comparison of course but I'd argue that what Alex Jones did falls short of what you're describing. Being a pedophile is illegal. Being a crisis actor is not, as far as I know.

mcmoustache

Former Observer wrote: »

Being a pedophile is illegal. Being a crisis actor is not, as far as I know.

Being a pedo is not illegal.

Former Observer

mcmoustache wrote: »

Being a pedo is not illegal.

Ok. But the accusations against me would surely need to involve incriminating (and spurious) evidence.

ohnonotgmail

Former Observer wrote: »

My understanding is that he expressed his belief that the shooting was staged and that other people bought into that theory.

If I'm the Pope and I encourage people to read the bible does that make me responsible when someone goes on a killing spree citing the word of God?

And for those of you of an anti-theist persuasion, there are plenty of secular examples also.

your attempt at a comparison is just nonsense.

Former Observer wrote: »

Surely no more than any other news site/TV channel did.

Is it normal for news sites to repeatedly dox members of the public?

Former Observer wrote: »

But is it libelous? If I believe Elvis Presley is alive but his family disagrees and moreover find the very notion upsetting, surely there is enough space in the world for both opinions.

Well jones is now claiming that he didnt actually mean any of it because he is being sued for libel. So i'm pretty sure he thinks it is libelous.
If i posted publicly that i thought you were a paedophile would that be libelous?

Former Observer

mcmoustache wrote: »

Being a pedo is not illegal.

Ok. But the accusations against me almost certainyl need to include incriminating (and spurious) evidence. Whichever activity I'm accused of would be illegal.

If it's merely the case that you're saying I'm standing outside schools then I'm not sure.

Interesting conundrum though. As I've said, I'm happier to live in a world where there are forums where people can discuss unpopular opinions, including those of the crisis actor/staged shooting variety. Where you draw the line and what that line looks like is the question.

ohnonotgmail

Former Observer wrote: »

Ok. But the accusations against me almost certainyl need to include incriminating (and spurious) evidence. Whichever activity I'm accused of would be illegal.

If it's merely the case that you're saying I'm standing outside schools then I'm not sure.

Interesting conundrum though. As I've said, I'm happier to live in a world where there are forums where people can discuss unpopular opinions, including those of the crisis actor/staged shooting variety. Where you draw the line and what that line looks like is the question.

There is no need for the accusations to be incriminating for them to be libelous. If you think that they you dont understand libel.

mcmoustache

Former Observer wrote: »

Ok. But the accusations against me would surely need to involve incriminating (and spurious) evidence.

No. There are reasons why countries have laws against slander and libel and the accusations don't need to include any illegality.

Alex Jones accused the parents of victims of a school shooting of making the whole thing up and being actors resulting in his fans harassing them.

When they sued, he admitted that he made the whole thing up and blamed it on a psychosis.

This isn't as complicated as you're trying to make it.

ogsjw

mcmoustache wrote: »

His deposition is up there on youtube.

Genuinely incredible watch, the man is as intellectually dishonest as he is cracked. The amount of answers he refused to give, his hack legal team who don't understand basic american law, and the irate lawyer trying to conduct this deposition makes it a hell of a watch.

Former Observer

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

your attempt at a comparison is just nonsense.

Your method of argumentation is childlike. Too much emotion with no reason.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Is it normal for news sites to repeatedly dox members of the public?

As in reveal their identities? Absolutely.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If i posted publicly that i thought you were a paedophile would that be libelous?

I'll continue this conversation with a person a little more able.

MrFresh

P_1 wrote: »

Have to say I'm not a fan of no platforming. Irrespective of how abhorrent you may find someone's opinions its better to leave them in the open and open to public scrutiny and ridicule. As was mentioned in another thread its shït like this that will get the Orange Buffoon reelected in 2020.

That may have been the case in the past but the rules have changed. These people don't care about debate or being ridiculed. Most of them are only in it for the money. As long as they have a platform they will always find people gullible enough to join them in their bubble. As you mention Trump, look at all the number of discarded rules, broken laws and ethic violations to his and his administrations name. No consequences.

mcmoustache

ogsjw wrote: »

Genuinely incredible watch, the man is as intellectually dishonest as he is cracked. The amount of answers he refused to give, his hack legal team who don't understand basic american law, and the irate lawyer trying to conduct this deposition makes it a hell of a watch.

And yet, people still defend his behaviour.

Former Observer

mcmoustache wrote: »

Alex Jones accused the parents of victims of a school shooting of making the whole thing up

Sure he did. And there are plenty of people out there that still believe it discussing it right now on other forums. Should they all be brought up for libel?

mcmoustache wrote: »

When they sued, he admitted that he made the whole thing up and blamed it on a psychosis.

I don't understand the significance of this to your argument. I mean, if he stood by his belief and it could be proved that it was sincere and deeply felt what would change for you?

ohnonotgmail

Former Observer wrote: »

Sure he did. And there are plenty of people out there that still believe it discussing it right now on other forums. Should they all be brought up for libel?




I don't understand the significance of this to your argument. I mean, if he stood by his belief and it could be proved that it was sincere and deeply felt what would change for you?

It would change nothing. what he said is not true, or rather he cannot show it to be true, so it is libel.

ogsjw

Former Observer wrote: »

I don't understand the significance of this to your argument.

You cannot be serious with this.

scamalert

every platform have their rules and while in some cases it might seem unfair, not hosting any of that clown ideas should be encouraged. He can go and shout crap while selling his ****ty supplements to those brainwashed on his own site.

mcmoustache

scamalert wrote: »

every platform have their rules and while in some cases it might seem unfair, not hosting any of that clown ideas should be encouraged. He can go and shout crap while selling his ****ty supplements to those brainwashed on his own site.

This Scam Alert was brought to you by your friendly neighbourhood scamalert.

Billy86

mcmoustache wrote: »

20Cent wrote: »

Are there a left wing version of Alex Jones and PJW etc?
Have they been banned as well?

It seems to me grifters cashing in on ignorance seems to be a mostly right wing phenomenon.

Louis Farrakhan, the anti-semite and anti-white racist cnut was also banned but you'll notice that the Alex Jones fans ignored him in their whataboutery. It's almost as if this talk of free speech is little more than a smokescreen.

I mentioned the same when Saoradh (another pack of extremist ar*eholes) were banned from Twitter a few days back too. Not a single peep from any of the supposed free speech enthusiasts in response. I was about as shocked as I am sure you are reading this.

Quite like Gemma odoherty supporters harping on about free speech while also claiming her critics shouldn't use theirs. It's par for the course.

20Cent

mcmoustache wrote: »

Louis Farrakhan, the anti-semite and anti-white racist cnut was also banned but you'll notice that the Alex Jones fans ignored him in their whataboutery. It's almost as if this talk of free speech is little more than a smokescreen.

Is Farrakhan left wing though? Thought he was anti white, anti semite, believes in aliens etc.

Who is the left wing equivalent of PJW or Infowars?

Patty Hearst

So it seems that even mentioning Alex Jones name will get a person banned on Facebook.

Do people really think thats reasonable?

20Cent

Patty Hearst wrote: »

So it seems that even mentioning Alex Jones name will get a person banned on Facebook.

Do people really think thats reasonable?

Does it though?

ohnonotgmail

Patty Hearst wrote: »

So it seems that even mentioning Alex Jones name will get a person banned on Facebook.

Do people really think thats reasonable?

I presume you have a source that confirms just mentioning his name is sufficient to be banned?

98q76e12hrflnk

Patty Hearst wrote: »

So it seems that even mentioning Alex Jones name will get a person banned on Facebook.

Do people really think thats reasonable?

Same with saying Tommy Robinson.

Sonics2k

Patty Hearst wrote: »

So it seems that even mentioning Alex Jones name will get a person banned on Facebook.

Do people really think thats reasonable?

Wait, are you actually Alex Jones?

I ask this because it's the only way I can believe someone would dare to say such a bold faced lie.

ohnonotgmail

declan2693 wrote: »

Same with saying Tommy Robinson.

I presume you also have a source that confirms just saying his name will get you banned?

98q76e12hrflnk

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I presume you also have a source that confirms just saying his name will get you banned?

https://twitter.com/OzraeliAvi/status/1121181494389530624

Woodsie1

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I presume you also have a source that confirms just saying his name will get you banned?

theyre both wrong.you have to say it 3 times like in the movie beetlejuice then you get banned!

Patty Hearst

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I presume you also have a source that confirms just saying his name will get you banned?

Why don't you type the words Alex Jones on your Facebook status and find out?

98q76e12hrflnk

Woodsie1 wrote: »

theyre both wrong.you have to say it 3 times like in the movie beetlejuice then you get banned!

Did you do that with your last boards account:pac:

ohnonotgmail

declan2693 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/OzraeliAvi/status/1121181494389530624

I'm pretty sure that is twitter not FB. Also that is not the post they received the warning for. that post is a reply to the warning.

Woodsie1

declan2693 wrote: »

Did you do that with your last boards account:pac:

Nope did it on facebook and they banned me.

98q76e12hrflnk

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that is twitter not FB.

Can you read?

ohnonotgmail

declan2693 wrote: »

Can you read?

My mistake. We still dont know what he posted that led to the warning.

98q76e12hrflnk

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

My mistake. We still dont know what he posted that led to the warning.

My god man go to specsavers

mcmoustache

20Cent wrote: »

Is Farrakhan left wing though? Thought he was anti white, anti semite, believes in aliens etc.

Who is the left wing equivalent of PJW or Infowars?

Yeah, Farrakhan isn't really right or left. Just racist.

As regards left-wing equivalents of infowars types, I'm sure they exist but they are very much on the fringes as opposed to Infowars who are quite mainstream when it comes to right-wing social media.

Off the top of my head, the best I can come up with are people like Cenk Uigher or Glenn Greenwald but they don't even come close. They're more akin to spin-merchants than they are outright liars.

Cienciano

Patty Hearst wrote: »

So it seems that even mentioning Alex Jones name will get a person banned on Facebook.

Do people really think thats reasonable?

You've been asked for a source on that and haven't provided one. Sounds like bullshít. And after spending 10 seconds searching facebook has confirmed it to be bullshít.

20Cent

declan2693 wrote: »

My god man go to specsavers

Can't see the bit where he was banned, where is it? Post went against community standards so presumably the post was blocked but was he banned?

20Cent

mcmoustache wrote: »

Yeah, Farrakhan isn't really right or left. Just racist.

As regards left-wing equivalents of infowars types, I'm sure they exist but they are very much on the fringes as opposed to Infowars who are quite mainstream when it comes to right-wing social media.

Off the top of my head, the best I can come up with are people like Cenk Uigher or Glenn Greenwald but they don't even come close. They're more akin to spin-merchants than they are outright liars.

Thanks yeah have asked this before in other threads but it is notable how right wingers fall for the most obvious spoofers.

98q76e12hrflnk

20Cent wrote: »

Can't see the bit where he was banned, where is it? Post went against community standards so presumably the post was blocked but was he banned?

It was blocked/banned for using someone name. Censorship of the highest level by the left.