nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Alex Jones content removed from Facebook, Youtube, Apple

Kermit.de.frog

http://www.fox10tv.com/story/38822431/youtube-apple-and-facebook-remove-content-from-infowars-and-alex-jones

The lunatic has been removed from the asylum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH4WF-JUdR4

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ohnonotgmail

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Sorry I wasn't paying attention when listening, was trying to think of a different narrative and just meant to give an example. Realised when writing I was fuzzy on the details :P

I've been following the meuller indictments via a couple of us lawyers and they have not mentioned guccifer (which i presume is what you mean) once as being used.

conorhal

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Look forward to you justifying your own banning some day. You seem to have no problem with this worrying trend. This was hateful. That was disinformation. What happens when there are two opposing narratives in your view? One has got to go! Was watching an ex intelligence official on Jimmy Dore today saying that the deep state is responsible for Meuller indictments which use the fraudulent Goosifer files as a large part of the case. Mainstream media says something very different. Who do we ban?

In Facebook we trust.

It's hillarious the enthusiasim lefties have for trans national corporations when they get ban happy regards speach they don't like. Unanimously a lot of these companies supported Hillary Clinton and her socially liberal, but corporate friendly policies,
This move is little more then their determination that next time, the candidate they paid good money to sit in their pockets actually wins.

The smile will be on the other side of such peoples faces when the realise that neoliberal corporates will be no more tolerant of them than the right. Do the really think those companies intend to pay the sort of taxes that Bernie supported or will allow the banning of zero hour contracts and tolerate legislation that empowers unions?
The left are cheering as they're walked into a corporatocracy.

Dohnjoe

Malayalam wrote: »

Who is going to decide what is true and what is not?

The same way media watchdogs distinguish the difference, the same way thousands of platforms (like boards) distinguish each day whether their terms or standards are being breached

Facebook has a responsibility to fight harassment, false news, disinformation, breaches of their policy

Of course not every case is black/white

Decrying all cases as censorship is ridiculous and personally subjective

Malayalam

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The same way media watchdogs distinguish the difference, the same way thousands of platforms (like boards) distinguish each day whether their terms or standards are being breached

Facebook has a responsibility to fight harassment, false news, disinformation, breaches of their policy

Of course not every case is black/white

Decrying all cases as censorship is ridiculous and personally subjective

Have these media watchdogs stopped mainstream news channels from publishing false information / political spin like the supposed stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that led to a war that resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths?

Give me a break. There is so much misinformation, and yet people call it reputable news.

Dohnjoe

Malayalam wrote: »

Have these media watchdogs stopped mainstream news channels from publishing false information / political spin like the supposed stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that led to a war that resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths?

Don't play the Alex Jones card and try to "blur the lines" with absurd examples. There's a clear and fundamental difference with the consensus and coorboration of free press vs disinformation. If a politician wants to make a claim, reporters will report it - that's literally their job

Malayalam

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Don't play the Alex Jones card and try to "blur the lines" with absurd examples. There's a clear and fundamental difference with the consensus and coorboration of free press vs disinformation. If a politician wants to make a claim, reporters will report it - that's literally their job

I have never watched Alex Jones, so I would not know how to ''play his card''. 500,000 deaths (possibly many more) due to purposeful government spin and propaganda via the compliant mainstream media is far from an absurd example. If or when ever so-called alt-media have caused such carnage let me know. I've made my point, you have responded largely with ad hominen and I am not engaging further in this stupid back and forth that often makes this place so tiresome.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Alarmism and hysteria over nothing. Common sense controls and rules for private platforms should not be conflated with censorship

Again, Boards.ie bans people every other day, it's not censorship

Who decides what 'common sense' is? That's far too vague a term.

The closest thing we have that can be considered 'common sense' is the law.

Call Me Jimmy

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I've been following the meuller indictments via a couple of us lawyers and they have not mentioned guccifer (which i presume is what you mean) once as being used.

[Offtopic]

Wait, have not mentioned guccifer?

"Both DC Leaks and Guccifer 2.0 are specifically named in the indictment as fronts for Russian GRU agents."

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/13/17568660/russia-dnc-hack-indictments-gru-mueller-guccifer-dcleaks

If you've been following this could you explain what I'm misunderstanding about what's being said here https://youtu.be/JHZXVWUxxDU?t=2m56s (less than a minute of the clip)

(No bother if you're not arsed btw)

Cheerful Spring

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Look forward to you justifying your own banning some day. You seem to have no problem with this worrying trend. This was hateful. That was disinformation. What happens when there are two opposing narratives in your view? One has got to go! Was watching an ex intelligence official on Jimmy Dore today saying that the deep state is responsible for Meuller indictments which use the fraudulent Goosifer files as a large part of the case. Mainstream media says something very different. Who do we ban?

In Facebook we trust.

That is true you can't really trust intelligence services to tell you the truth. Obviously, all people working in intelligence are not bad people some of them actually try to tell the truth but you notice they don't last long or lose their jobs for speaking up. The problem with intelligence gathering there is an inherent bias already in play and they skew the intelligence if their bosses tell them to. This what happened before the Iraq War, intelligence was showing Saddam likely didn't have a WMD program post the first gulf war, but Bush and Cheney and others in a position of political power wanted a war and they told the intelligence chiefs to sex up what they had and corporate media fell into line.

Washington Post confirmed the deep state was real a couple of weeks ago, but they put a spin on it that you need these guys around to prevent Trump from damaging the country. Sure tell that to a million or so innocents who have died due to neocon zionist American wars in the last decade. Are they upset with Trump because he prefers not to join them in supporting new wars?

Dohnjoe

Malayalam wrote: »

I have never watched Alex Jones, so I would not know how to ''play his card''. 500,000 deaths (possibly many more) due to purposeful government spin and propaganda via the compliant mainstream media is far from an absurd example. If or when ever so-called alt-media have caused such carnage let me know. I've made my point, you have responded largely with ad hominen and I am not engaging further in this stupid back and forth that often makes this place so tiresome.

It's a lazy mischaracterisation of the entire (free) media. If Jong Un, Trump, Ergodan, etc want to make a statement (false or not), it's up to the media to report it. AP and Reuters aren't "compliant" with the lie if they report it, likewise by reporting it they weren't "compliant" with the Iraq war

If an individual outlet like a tabloid makes the decision to "back" the war, that's their decision and doesn't reflect the entire press. Especially far more credible and impartial outlets

That's in direct contrast to manufactured false information that is spread by specific outlets on a large platform e.g. Facebook with an express purpose e.g. affecting an election

Alex Jones constantly creates false stories to fit a narrative that sells to a particular audience - he does so for profit

batgoat

Malayalam wrote: »

Have these media watchdogs stopped mainstream news channels from publishing false information / political spin like the supposed stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that led to a war that resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths?

Give me a break. There is so much misinformation, and yet people call it reputable news.

Generally if a respected news outlet reports something that's outright wrong, they correct the record. They apologise if necessary but they don't tend to make up ****e. Jones making up **** about FEMA death camps, 911 being an inside job and the Sandy Hook families being actors is not news. It's David Icke territory but more vicious as it has targeted entirely innocent and ordinary people. Comparing that to news journalism is pretty dishonest.

Malayalam

batgoat wrote: »

Generally if a respected news outlet reports something that's outright wrong, they correct the record. They apologise if necessary but they don't tend to make up ****e. Jones making up **** about FEMA death camps, 911 being an inside job and the Sandy Hook families being actors is not news. It's David Icke territory but more vicious as it has targeted entirely innocent and ordinary people. Comparing that to news journalism is pretty dishonest.

Do they also perform fcuking magic when they are coming clean years later with their oh-so-respectable correction of the record and revive the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dead innocents killed by wars they were complicit in? Who exactly is dead as a result of this Alex Jones gobshyte?

batgoat

Malayalam wrote: »

Do they also perform fcuking magic when they are coming clean years later with their oh-so-respectable correction of the record and revive the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dead innocents killed by wars they were complicit in? Who exactly is dead as a result of this Alex Jones gobshyte?

The Sandy Hook families currently can't visit their children's graves. Because of threats from followers of Infowars. He also has an audience that he regularly tells to arm up against the state. There was also shooting that was as a result of the pizzagate conspiracy that he was a huge proponent of. He had to apologise for that one...

So not remotely similar to cnn.. He's also a hateful dick who has promoted anti semetic views and racism for years. So not a news source!

Cheerful Spring

batgoat wrote: »

Generally if a respected news outlet reports something that's outright wrong, they correct the record. They apologise if necessary but they don't tend to make up ****e. Jones making up **** about FEMA death camps, 911 being an inside job and the Sandy Hook families being actors is not news. It's David Icke territory but more vicious as it has targeted entirely innocent and ordinary people. Comparing that to news journalism is pretty dishonest.

Fema thing was not really a conspiracy. FEMA would naturally want to be prepared for any natural disaster and would store things to put dead bodies in or store harmful substances in sealed containers, just in case. Alex just blew it up out of proportion.

Sandy Hook. I agree Alex lied.

9/11 was clearly an inside job. We have known for a while now the CIA had kept information about hijackers from the FBI and just telling the FBI what they knew would have prevented the attacks. We also know the hijackers attended US military schools in the 90's for studies, they obviously are coming there in exchange programs and send there by their country of birth ie Saudi Arabia. Bush and Cheney did their utmost to stop all investigations of Saudi Arabia involvement in the attacks. The FBI well documented felt dishearted by this and felt that these links should have been investigated. What we do know is Saudi officials diplomats and spies were regularly meeting the hijackers in restaurants and hotels. Most of the general public don't know about this fact well-evidenced information.

Were it does get murky did someone plant explosives in the towers and WTC7 to bring them down? Planes alone would not have done the job?

Wtc7 probably has the best evidence the building was brought down by explosives. NIST study of WTC7 has not stood up to scrutiny over time.

Ipso

Funny how people say he's not mainstream, but he has tens of millions of followers. Then again the same people have deluded themselves that they're special by not believing what d'sheeple believe.

Call Me Jimmy

One thing I just thought about was why they went the whole book burning route. I mean they could kick people off and at least keep the history of videos/tweets /posts in tact. Maybe they could remove the tweets/videos that were deemed to have broken their terms of service. Especially when we're talking about such popular figures. It does seem a bit weird to have a whole catalogue of content removed, never to be seen or heard of again due to a small number of infractions.

CinemaGuy45

Meanwhile, his website with the must not miss sale is still up and active.

The Real Red Pill Plus is now on sale $69.95 down from 79.95.
The same great formula, now with an added kick - try The Real Red Pill Plus today to help you reach your peak!

Think I will stick to the blue pills for my peak.

splashuum

batgoat wrote: »

The Sandy Hook families currently can't visit their children's graves. Because of threats from followers of Infowars. He also has an audience that he regularly tells to arm up against the state. There was also shooting that was as a result of the pizzagate conspiracy that he was a huge proponent of. He had to apologise for that one...

So not remotely similar to cnn.. He's also a hateful dick who has promoted anti semetic views and racism for years. So not a news source!

Jones has retracted all Sandyhook comments quite some time ago. He has made multiple videos retracting same. Mainstream media makes mistakes as does Jones. I’d suggest you do your own research before making comments on media outlets. I’m also not sure where you have seen him promote racist and anti-semitic views. CNN articles maybe?

Dohnjoe

splashuum wrote: »

Jones has retracted all Sandyhook comments quite some time ago.

He only retracted after lawsuits were filed. He has maintained the view that Sandy Hook was an inside job for years, over many broadcasts, interviews and articles

It's not like he got one of their names wrong or quoted the wrong source, he spent nearly 6 years labeling relatives of slain children as "actors". The fact that he dropped it as soon as lawsuits threatened instantly betrays the fact that he knew it was horse**** all along

He literally ****ed up peoples lives for money, people who lost their kids. Not just that, but it's pretty obvious he knew it was a lie. His lawyer describes him as a "performance artist" and that he shouldn't be taken seriously.

He has nothing to do with journalism, and a 6 year view is not a journalistic "error"

WinnyThePoo

Remember folks. Anyone trying to legitimise Alex Jones is not worth arguing.

batgoat

splashuum wrote: »

Jones has retracted all Sandyhook comments quite some time ago. He has made multiple videos retracting same. Mainstream media makes mistakes as does Jones. I’d suggest you do your own research before making comments on media outlets. I’m also not sure where you have seen him promote racist and anti-semitic views. CNN articles maybe?

Jones is currently being sued by by families who have had their lives ruined by him. So a little bit too late on that front. He's referred to the 'Jewish Mafia' in reference to a loads of Jewish business people which stinks of anti-semitism. Quotes such as “They run Uber, they run the health care, they’re going to scam you, they’re going to hurt you,”. But not anti-semitic?

You've got his employees such as Paul Joseph Watson who utilise infowars to spread hate speech about muslims. The site is filled with that too obviously. Here's some more about Jones though. All mainstream propaganda. :rolleyes:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/alex-jones-accused-of-sexual-harassment-bullying-at-infowars

Call Me Jimmy

And as expected we now see Mastercard forcing Patreon to remove another 'hate speaker'. So he didn't even break Patreon rules, just pressure from a payment service.

Let's just keep ramping it up and hearing the justifications. Where it's pretty much a given that you can be taken off the internet and have your ability to make a living taken away to boot

Sal Butamol

He's a clown but this censorship is insidious.

Dohnjoe

Sal Butamol wrote: »

He's a clown but this censorship is insidious.

I can say something anti-Semitic right now and be banned off the site, no one bats an eye

Another individual does it for 10 years and people are up in arms about censorship

These are private platforms, they can kick him off. He has his own site and that's still running

Billy86

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

And as expected we now see Mastercard forcing Patreon to remove another 'hate speaker'. So he didn't even break Patreon rules, just pressure from a payment service.

Reading that put a smile on my face, thanks.

The only thing that kept from being booted from YT etc so long was the simple reason of money (clicks). Now that the stink is out in the open he's instead getting kicked off other platforms for the simple reason of money.

Chris_Heilong

batgoat wrote: »

You've got his employees such as Paul Joseph Watson who utilise infowars to spread hate speech about muslims. The site is filled with that too obviously. Here's some more about Jones though. All mainstream propaganda. :rolleyes:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/alex-jones-accused-of-sexual-harassment-bullying-at-infowars

I have watched him on youtube and I would not say he is spreading "Hate Speech" he is criticizing and playing the outrage card, which is needed with the political landscape is so skewed in one direction. Maybe people opposed to Trump are trying to prevent his re-election but de-platforming opposing views.
Big corporate companies are such a monopoly and are pushing things into a dangerous place.

I think Mastercard have banned someone for their political views recently.
EDIT: yep, dont know the guy but this seems wrong

KKkitty

Take him off the internet completely before he blows a gasket. He always looks like he could spontaneously combust at any second.

Call Me Jimmy

Billy86 wrote: »

Reading that put a smile on my face, thanks.

The only thing that kept from being booted from YT etc so long was the simple reason of money (clicks). Now that the stink is out in the open he's instead getting kicked off other platforms for the simple reason of money.

I don't know how you get to a place where ye like this trend. I can't imagine anything anyone could say where I could justify this sort of stuff bar actual threats to people. What part of this do you enjoy exactly. I can't imagine someone being anti catholic or even saying the Irish are the scum of the earth all day every day so much that I want this sort of crap to happen to them. Genuinely baffled.

rossie1977

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I have watched him on youtube and I would not say he is spreading "Hate Speech" he is criticizing and playing the outrage card, which is needed with the political landscape is so skewed in one direction.

Whatever he is doing the guy has zero credibility. He posted this on twitter even though CNN hadn't even released a photo of the person involved at that time and it was of the wrong guy completely..

http://archive.is/13ODk

Billy86

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I don't know how you get to a place where ye like this trend. I can't imagine anything anyone could say where I could justify this sort of stuff bar actual threats to people. What part of this do you enjoy exactly. I can't imagine someone being anti catholic or even saying the Irish are the scum of the earth all day every day so much that I want this sort of crap to happen to them. Genuinely baffled.

If a boards.ie poster lead a charge that Ana Kriegel's death a few months back was a hoax and goaded others into sending her parents death threats to the point they had to move house, multiple times and hundreds of miles away from her grave... and then continued to goad about it being a hoax, would you want that poster banned, or would you scream about 'free speech' in their defense?