Alex Jones content removed from Facebook, Youtube, Apple

batgoat

Taytoland wrote: »

I have already said that is wrong. But it's opening a can of worms. It's not just fringe elements who push conspiracy theories. I see plenty of it from US tv shows.

It isn't. The average news outlet does not do what Alex Jones does, they don't encourage people to go after the families of tragedies or accuse them of being 'crisis actors', they don't claim that FEMA are running top secret death camps. They don't engage in any of the bollocks that Alex Jones does.

Taytoland

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's the problem right there. It's people viewing these things as though they're in one of two tribes which is nonsense. I try not to do that and I get into arguments with people who identify with both tribes. It's possible to believe that Jeong was making racist statements and at the same time see that Alex Jones was ditched because he was a libelous nutter that companies wouldn't want to be associated with and not as some conservative purge.

His Sandy Hook stuff is outrageous. But this has been known for years. Why didn't they decide it was too far years ago? His claims on Sandy Hook are just bizarre. They bear as much in reality as those who say a billion people live on the moon.

Taytoland

batgoat wrote: »

It isn't. The average news outlet does not do what Alex Jones does, they don't encourage people to go after the families of tragedies or accuse them of being 'crisis actors', they don't claim that FEMA are running top secret death camps. They don't engage in any of the bollocks that Alex Jones does.

Plenty still push "lesser" conspiracies. We see it currently.

batgoat

Taytoland wrote: »

His Sandy Hook stuff is outrageous. But this has been known for years. Why didn't they decide it was too far years ago? His claims on Sandy Hook are just bizarre. They bear as much in reality as those who say a billion people live on the moon.

The lawsuit against him in relation to Sandy Hook only began last week. It's incredibly bad PR for any social media network to be giving a platform a conspiracy outlet that has literally wrecked lives and is presently being sued for it.

Taytoland wrote: »

Plenty still push "lesser" conspiracies. We see it currently.

Currently much of what we're seeing on news outlets is reporting on actual investigations into Russia for example. All security agencies in the US agree that they attempted to influence the election and there are questions over if the president colluded. Over 20 people have been indicted. That is very much so news.

Venom

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's the problem right there. It's people viewing these things as though they're in one of two tribes which is nonsense. I try not to do that and I get into arguments with people who identify with both tribes. It's possible to believe that Jeong was making racist statements and at the same time see that Alex Jones was ditched because he was a libelous nutter that companies wouldn't want to be associated with and not as some conservative purge.

There really is far too much an "it's ok when one of ours does it" attitude on both sides.

Outlaw Pete

mcmoustache wrote: »

I'm not seeing that. From what I can tell, Jones was being enough of a douche that some private companies no longer wanted to be associated with him.

Now, I get that he has been adopted and legitimised by Republicans in the US and I get that many self-described conservatives dislike when one of their own is being attacked but this is really just a case of private companies protecting their brand by getting rid of a douche.

He's not being picked on for being conservative; he's being picked on because he's a major asshole.

So you believe they have no dog in the race? Come on, both FB and Twitter have been found manipulating their platforms to favour democrats.

Anyway, I think Ben (someone who's regularly attacked by Jones) calls the situation quite well with the following (jump to 1m 42s in)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnKiaJtzgpM

JJJJNR

Looks like he got too close to the truth.

Ipso

JJJJNR wrote: »

Looks like he got too close to the truth.

If by close you mean light years away, then yes. Yes he was.

Taytoland

batgoat wrote: »

The lawsuit against him in relation to Sandy Hook only began last week. It's incredibly bad PR for any social media network to be giving a platform a conspiracy outlet that has literally wrecked lives and is presently being sued for it.



Currently much of what we're seeing on news outlets is reporting on actual investigations into Russia for example. All security agencies in the US agree that they attempted to influence the election and there are questions over if the president colluded. Over 20 people have been indicted. That is very much so news.

Evidence is required that he colluded with the Kremlin. By presenters just saying he did is conspiracy territory. Russian interfering is not the same as collusion between Trump and the Kremlin.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Grayson wrote: »

You said people kill all blacks is hate speech but kill all whites isn't. So you've never seen an occasion where someone said kill all white, never mind where it was tolerated?

How can you say that kill all whites is tolerated whereas kill all blacks isn't?

As for Sarah Jeong, that's whatabouttery since she didn't call for any group of people to be killed, and she was responding to trolls mimicking their own language. She never said any racist views except when already presented with that language.

As opposed to your example which was kill all whites/blacks or even what Alex Jones did when he said burn all drag queens.

That Sarah Jeong defense is odd. If she was just repeating what was said to her we’d see those tweets.

Ipso

Taytoland wrote: »

Evidence is required that he colluded with the Kremlin. By presenters just saying he did is conspiracy territory. Russian interfering is not the same as collusion between Trump and the Kremlin.

He just admitted on twatter that his dim son met with Russians for info.
I don't think Russia changed the outcome of the election, but trump surrounded himself by some dodgy (and Roger Stone is basically a clone of Alex Jones) people, so it's more guilt by association.
It's hilarious that he spent eh campaign chanting "lock her up" and now his former campaign manger is on trial.
And we still have to get to anything Michael Coen may have.

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

So you believe they have no dog in the race? Come on, both FB and Twitter have been found manipulating their platforms to favour democrats.

It's not that I lack a dog in the race. It's that I can look at a situation and ask "Is this right" without first asking "Is this someone from my side?". When Jeong says racist stuff, I see racist stuff - I don't think "Oh a liberal! It must be sarcasm or irony or anything else but racism".



As for manipulating their platforms, I'll need you to narrow that down or be more specific because that could mean a lot of things.

Ipso

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

That Sarah Jeong defense is odd. If she was just repeating what was said to her we’d see those tweets.

Yeah, it's like some people think that only white people can be racist.
Some of the tweets smacked of complete and utter stupidity, like thinking there is a monolithic white culture.

Taytoland

Ipso wrote: »

He just admitted on twatter that his dim son met with Russians for info.
I don't think Russia changed the outcome of the election, but trump surrounded himself by some dodgy (and Roger Stone is basically a clone of Alex Jones) people, so it's more guilt by association.
It's hilarious that he spent eh campaign chanting "lock her up" and now his former campaign manger is on trial.
And we still have to get to anything Michael Coen may have.

Let's see what the final report says. But none of us can say right now that Trump colluded with Russia without the evidence presented until the report comes out. I want to see evidence that Trump colluded with the Kremlin (Putin) to influence the US election to help him win.

2 Scoops

Whatever happens via Trump/Mueller there will be a hell-storm, I hope I'm alive to see it

Personally I don't believe there was some big hidden conspiracy, I think Trump realized Russia were helping him and he went along with it.

JJJJNR

Ipso wrote: »

If by close you mean light years away, then yes. Yes he was.

What if the truth is stranger than fiction. I don't watch alex jones but deleting him from the internet is going to increase his profile.

ohnonotgmail

JJJJNR wrote: »

What if the truth is stranger than fiction. I don't watch alex jones but deleting him from the internet is going to increase his profile.

he has not been deleted from the internet. his own website is still up.

Owl.

And she always seemed like such a nice, mild mannered, Welsh lassie. Hate speech eh? Who'd have thought it.

It goes against to essence of free speech. If you love him, that's your argument. If you hate him, you say it's a private platform.

Personally, I dislike him and think he's a wanker, but I don't think he should be taken off services which are pretty much public utilities at this point.


If Putin bought YouTube and promoted this stuff, people who supported the removal of Jones would implode and their argument would quickly change.

Donald Trump

Taytoland wrote: »

Evidence is required that he colluded with the Kremlin. By presenters just saying he did is conspiracy territory. Russian interfering is not the same as collusion between Trump and the Kremlin.

There never was collusion. And even if there was, it wasn't illegal anyway :pac:





We never agreed or coordinated anything. I just blindly did what me oul' bestie Vlad told me to. That's hardly collusion now is it?

prinzeugen

Hopefully Russia Today will be the next to go. While the internet has allowed us to see and do wonderful things, it has also allowed nutjobs to spout "facts" and the wifi enabled tinfoil hats are lapping it up.

Just look at the comments section under a story involving the UK or US on the Russia Today website.

These people need physiological help!

The Legend Of Kira

Twitter has decided not to ban Alex Jones from its website for the moment.

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1026984242893357056

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1026984245925793792

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1026984247750316033

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1026984249960755200

Oh and journalists are upstanding people with the interests of the public in mind, they seek to investigate and spread the truth ? my arse !

Alex Jones is now gone from Tune In Radio and as a result I've deleted the app from all my devices.

Think 1984, North Korea, China, New World Order ? this is just the beginning and it won't be the end.

What next ? twitter, Facebook and Youtube are already censoring material they "they" deem unsuitable.

manual_man

prinzeugen

prinzeugen wrote: »

Hopefully Russia Today will be the next to go. While the internet has allowed us to see and do wonderful things, it has also allowed nutjobs to spout "facts" and the wifi enabled tinfoil hats are lapping it up.

Just look at the comments section under a story involving the UK or US on the Russia Today website.

These people need physiological help!

Well you do see what's happening here don't you ? yes, the internet has brought freedom of speech like we never imagined possible but now you will have to abide by the rules set out by commercial companies and Governments and soon you won't be able to say anything they don't agree with, do you actually not see a problem with this ?

What's going to get banned next ? what about an intranet like internet the North Koreans have where it's only Government approved sites and media you can listen to and see ? I guess you'd like that, after all the Government and the Media are there to protect you and look out for your best interests !

manual_man

manual_man wrote: »

Exactly !

Peatys

listermint wrote: »

Trump has no chance of re-election in 2020 so let's put that to the side.

That's ok, he had no chance of election in 2016 either, so we're definitely safe.

manual_man

We ALL need to fight against this. This 100% AFFECTS US ALL. I can't stand Alex Jones myself, but i 100% stand by his ability to make a fool of himself. The co-ordinated nature of his removal from various platforms should SEND A CHILL DOWN ALL OUR SPINES. And if we care in the SLIGHTEST for the freedoms that we enjoy (that were HARD fought for by our predecessors) then we ABSOLUTELY need to fight back against this CENSORSHIP and infringement on free speech that can ONLY lead down a slippery slope and be used to censor those who hold (ANY)opposing opinions going forward. FIGHT BACK against this evil. Fight back against Totalitarianism. America, nor anywhere else, is not immune from this EVIL. Subduing speech has been the principal tool of evil in the past, is the principal tool of evil in the present, and will be the principal tool of evil in the fiture, UNLESS we fight back in unity against it.

Peace out, motherfúckers.

Outlaw Pete

Indeed, and surprise surprise, the democrats support it.....


https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1026580187784404994

Jelle1880

lmao at all the people claiming this is Orwellian, North-Korean,...

It's hardly the government doing it, is it ? It's private platforms with their own rules, terms and conditions,... deciding that this absolute waste of oxygen can go somewhere else with his idiotic claims. Freedom of speech in the US is only about not having the government infringe on it, that's it.
He still has other platforms he can spout his moronic stuff on, this doesn't infringe on freedom of speech one bit.

Anyway, it's all a hoax, he hasn't been banned from those sites and he's a crisis actor. Clearly.

I blame the ultra liberal media and RTE for making people here blind as to what's really happening, whether you like Jones or Watson it really marks the end of free speech on the internet.

Perhaps this was the plan all along ? get as many people as possible on the internet with Complete control of media content ?

Free speech means expressing your views and others may not like that , so what, it's life, grow up !

North Korean style "INTRAnet" it's coming .........

manual_man

manual_man wrote: »

We ALL need to fight against this. This 100% AFFECTS US ALL. I can't stand Alex Jones myself, but i 100% stand by his ability to make a fool of himself. The co-ordinated nature of his removal from various platforms should SEND A CHILL DOWN ALL OUR SPINES. And if we care in the SLIGHTEST for the freedoms that we enjoy (that were HARD fought for by our predecessors) then we ABSOLUTELY need to fight back against this CENSORSHIP and infringement on free speech that can ONLY lead down a slippery slope and be used to censor those who hold (ANY)opposing opinions going forward. FIGHT BACK against this evil. Fight back against Totalitarianism. America, nor anywhere else, is not immune from this EVIL. Subduing speech has been the principal tool of evil in the past, is the principal tool of evil in the present, and will be the principal tool of evil in the fiture, UNLESS we fight back in unity against it.

Peace out, motherfúckers.

You can see it and I can see it but many people here can not and that worries me a lot, more than anything.

manual_man

Deleted User wrote: »

You can see it and I can see it but many people here can not and that worries me a lot, more than anything.

Well we can only pray that eyes are opened. For, if not, and i am absolutely not exaggerating here, then the possibility exists that the next totalitarian nightmare, accompanied by the loss of millions of lives, is just around the corner.

Jelle1880

manual_man wrote: »

Well we can only pray that eyes are opened. For, if not, and i am absolutely not exaggerating here, then the possibility exists that the next totalitarian nightmare, accompanied by the loss of millions of lives, is just around the corner.

That's not dramatic at all.

I get that your previous post could have been straight out of The Sun with all those capitalised words, but removing one crackpot conspiracy theorist from some platforms (who really is only in it to peddle his scam products) doesn't equate mass murder of millions.

dr.fuzzenstein

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You can see it and I can see it but many people here can not and that worries me a lot, more than anything.

For all the people shouting about free speech:

I can't remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it's not literally illegal to express.

It's very simple. You may have a right to say stuff, but you can still be moved on, thrown out or get your head split open.
It doesn't mean I HAVE to listen to it or facilitate it.
Of course some agenda driven people don't WANT to get this.
So for your counter arguments, I refer you back to this post.
"But! But! Free speech!"
Please read the above.

edit:
It's the same on Boards ferchrissake, you'd have to be a special kinda thick to not get this.
YOU DON'T GET TO SAY WHATEVER THE FCUK YOU WANT!

Be an asshole = your ass thrown out.
Do I need to explain this with a book with big pictures and dogs and balls?
Are you over 5?
Is your IQ?
Then it should be crystal.

super_furry

Deleted User wrote: »

You can see it and I can see it but many people here can not and that worries me a lot, more than anything.

Do you feel the same way about the likes of Abu Hamza, Muslim radicalsists and those seeking to use YouTube and Facebook to radicalise younger people?

P_1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

For all the people shouting about free speech:





It's very simple. You may have a right to say stuff, but you can still be moved on, thrown out or get your head split open.
It doesn't mean I HAVE to listen to it or facilitate it.
Of course some agenda driven people don't WANT to get this.
So for your counter arguments, I refer you back to this post.
"But! But! Free speech!"
Please read the above.

I'd generally agree with that but in this case it seems to be companies rather than people showing him the door. Atm were in a rather liberal phase particularly where these companies are concerned but it does set a rather chilling precedent. Imagine if the world were to take a swing to the right.

manual_man

Jelle1880 wrote: »

That's not dramatic at all.

I get that your previous post could have been straight out of The Sun with all those capitalised words, but removing one crackpot conspiracy theorist from some platforms (who really is only in it to peddle his scam products) doesn't equate mass murder of millions.

Perhaps you don't get it. Perhaps you are willingly blind to the possibility of what this could lead to (and which i, and others, have explicitly laid out).

You may gleefully think that 'ooh this content that i don't like has now been demoted', but that is to entirely to miss the point. This is akin to digital book burning. Those with aspirations of power see that they can justify ANYTHING they see as inappropriate worthy of censorship or elimination from certain platforms. Opposition voices (regardless of how absurd any one voice may be) are vital to a functioning democracy. If you wish for totalitarianism and the erosion of personal freedoms, then you should support this co-ordinated move by these powerful digital platforms. On the other hand, if you believe the freedom you presently enjoy (i repeat PRESENTLY) to express your opposition to any given idea is something WORTHY of fighting for, then by god you should fight for it.

cursai

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

For all the people shouting about free speech:





It's very simple. You may have a right to say stuff, but you can still be moved on, thrown out or get your head split open.
It doesn't mean I HAVE to listen to it or facilitate it.
Of course some agenda driven people don't WANT to get this.
So for your counter arguments, I refer you back to this post.
"But! But! Free speech!"
Please read the above.

edit:
It's the same on Boards ferchrissake, you'd have to be a special kinda thick to not get this.
YOU DON'T GET TO SAY WHATEVER THE FCUK YOU WANT!

Be an asshole = your ass thrown out.
Do I need to explain this with a book with big pictures and dogs and balls?
Are you over 5?
Is your IQ?
Then it should be crystal.

What's the first amendment?

super_furry

super_furry wrote: »

Do you feel the same way about the likes of Abu Hamza, Muslim radicalsists and those seeking to use YouTube and Facebook to radicalise younger people?

I don't think Alex Jones is trying to radicalise anyone .

Parents should be held accountable for what some of these younger kids get up to on the internet, there's a responsibility we all have as parents to teach our Children right from Wrong and limit and/or remove smart phones and tablets and the internet if it's necessary for their health and Children under 17 , in my opinion of course should not be allowed smart phones and tables with access to the internet.

I've said it before that Children should not be allowed access to facebook and certainly not the internet without supervision.

This is about the Left against the Right and the Right against the Left.

The Right is trying to express an opinion the left does not want to hear, so the left shuts off more communication to try shut up the right. I see that as a problem in fairness.

Social media is bad for young peoples mental health at the end of the day, I'm not saying that but the experts are.

P_1

P_1 wrote: »

I'd generally agree with that but in this case it seems to be companies rather than people showing him the door. Atm were in a rather liberal phase particularly where these companies are concerned but it does set a rather chilling precedent. Imagine if the world were to take a swing to the right.

What we need is a balance, we need both sides to listen to each other rather than trying to shut the other up because they might hear what they don't want to hear.

And we certainly don't want a liberal agenda forced upon us.

dr.fuzzenstein

cursai wrote: »

What's the first amendment?

2nd panel me old buddy me lad.

Jelle1880

manual_man wrote: »

Perhaps you don't get it. Perhaps you are willingly blind to the possibility of what this could lead to (and which i, and others, have explicitly laid out).

You may gleefully think that 'ooh this content that i don't like has now been demoted', but that is to entirely to miss the point. This is akin to digital book burning. Those with aspirations of power see that they can justify ANYTHING they see as inappropriate worthy of censorship or elimination from certain platforms. Opposition voices (regardless of how absurd any one voice may be) are vital to a functioning democracy. If you wish for totalitarianism and the erosion of personal freedoms, then you should support this co-ordinated move by these powerful digital platforms. On the other hand, if you believe the freedom you presently enjoy (i repeat PRESENTLY) to express your opposition to any given idea is something WORTHY of fighting for, then by god you should fight for it.

Mate, you're getting upset over something that's not gonna happen.

Sure, you can moan all you want about free speech (although as shown this doesn't infringe on it at all) but to then immediately jump to oppressive regimes and the murder of millions is just a bit crazy. You make it seem like he's locked up for his opinion.

He's still perfectly able to spout his bull**** on his own website and other platforms.

P_1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What we need is a balance, we need both sides to listen to each other rather than trying to shut the other up because they might hear what they don't want to hear.

And we certainly don't want a forced liberal agenda forced upon us.

Indeed. The lack of hearing out the other side of an argument, which is largely led by the extremes in both sides is bloody annoying and starting to get dangerous.

What do you mean by a forced liberal agenda though? If that means people treating other people with kindness then I'm all for that

manual_man

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Mate, you're getting upset over something that very likely won't happen.

Sure, you can moan all you want about free speech (although as shown this doesn't infringe on it at all) but to then immediately jump to oppressive regimes and the murder of millions is just a bit crazy.

I pray you wake up. Sincerely. The totalitarian nightmares of the 20th century were explicitly enabled by the indifference of the masses. Good day.

Jelle1880

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Mate, you're getting upset over something that's not gonna happen.

Sure, you can moan all you want about free speech (although as shown this doesn't infringe on it at all) but to then immediately jump to oppressive regimes and the murder of millions is just a bit crazy. You make it seem like he's locked up for his opinion.

He's still perfectly able to spout his bull**** on his own website and other platforms.

I'm not really sure about that, you take the largest 3 companies in the World with major audiences and then suppress opinions that you do not want expressed , I'd say that comes pretty close, it's still censorship no matter how you look at it.

super_furry

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think Alex Jones is trying to radicalise anyone .

Parents should be held accountable for what some of these younger kids get up to on the internet, there's a responsibility we all have as parents to teach our Children right from Wrong and limit and/or remove smart phones and tablets and the internet if it's necessary for their health and Children under 17 , in my opinion of course should not be allowed smart phones and tables with access to the internet.

I've said it before that Children should not be allowed access to facebook and certainly not the internet without supervision.

This is about the Left against the Right and the Right against the Left.

The Right is trying to express an opinion the left does not want to hear, so the left shuts off more communication to try shut up the right. I see that as a problem in fairness.

Social media is bad for young peoples mental health at the end of the day, I'm not saying that but the experts are.

I disagree with you right off the bat. Alex Jones is not only trying to but is succeeding in radicalising people. All his rhetoric about taking to the streets in ‘rebellion’ about how people on the left are paedophiles looking to prey on their children, the very, very thinly veiled death threats to Thomas Mueller, et all.

To view this entire thing through a prism of right v left as you seem to be doing is worrying as you automatically appear to be ascribing a role of spokesman for the right to Alex Jones. In reality he’s every bit as guilty as trying to dehumanise his enemies and of attempting to radicalise his audience as Abu Hamza.

Jelle1880

manual_man wrote: »

I pray you wake up. Sincerely. The totalitarian nightmares of the 20th century were explicitly enabled by the indifference of the masses. Good day.

I think you misunderstand me.

If the US government would have banned him and/or locked him up I'd be totally with you. But this isn't what happened. Platforms have decided they do not want his content on it, just like a book store can decide not to sell a certain book or a record company not to sell someone's albums.

That doesn't mean these people can not get their message out, there are multiple platforms that would be more than happy to take him on.

dav3

For people concerned about poor Alexander, just continue buying his snake oil health supplements, that way the multi-millionaire will be able to continue living the lifestyle he is accustomed to.

Who knows, you may even develop a body as amazing as his. Remember though, you're not the crazy one, it's everyone else who's crazy. This is all a conspiracy from the liberal, commie, nazi, leftist, MSM to silence the truth.

Jelle1880

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I think you misunderstand me.

If the US government would have banned him and/or locked him up I'd be totally with you. But this isn't what happened. Platforms have decided they do not want his content on it, just like a book store can decide not to sell a certain book or a record company not to sell someone's albums.

That doesn't mean these people can not get their message out, there are multiple platforms that would be more than happy to take him on.

But banning him on some of the largest platforms in the world is trying to suppress free speech.

Tune in Radio now has him banned as well, he's on another youtube alternative and he's on Shortwave which can be clearly heard here on 4840 Khz on Shortwave after about 10PM and sometimes 6115 Khz. And of course on his own app and site until that's shut down......