Alex Jones shutdown on YouTube, Facebook, and Apple

Post Reply New Topic

Indeed! A big high five to Fnord for soundly thrashing my argument with a wonderfully amusing meme! Why bother addressing any of the points I've made when you can just be a cheeky monkey? Let's ignore the political corruption involved and just applaud an arbitrary act of censorship because we all know Alex Jones is hate mongering, nutty conspiracy theorist. Let's ignore that the fact that's it's hilarious to consider that Infowars even comes close to the worst examples of hate speech on social media.


If everyone is perfectly fine with a political faction exercising this much power over media giants, then we will deserve another election cycle with, perhaps, even worse choices than the last one. Corporatism has won! Let's all just bend over and allow the government to do what they do best.

It is hypocritical to defend Mr. Jones against the very same rules he promotes on his own website.

<* End of Thread *>

You posted no points worth the energy to thrash.At least we agree on this. Besides, as has already been pointed out, It is hypocritical to defend Mr. Jones against the very same rules he promotes on his own website...

Last edited by Fnord on 10 Aug 2018, 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

There's nothing hypocritical about it, since this really isn't about what Alex Jones says or does, it's about pointing out the politics involved. I'd have no problem with the decision if the rules were equally applied to all users.


I think you're horribly wrong if you don't see that as an issue of free speech. It has EVERYTHING to do with free speech and political censorship by the Left. Like I said earlier, it's become a circular conversation. Nothing I say will make you understand my position, and vice versa.

So? Point them out all you want. Your boy has been banned from Facebook, YouTube, Apple, and others. THAT is all that matters.Then why submit your whiny little posts to THIS website? You should be submitting them to Facebook, YouTube, Apple, and the others that have banned that "hate-mongering, nutty conspiracy theorist" (... as you so eloquently stated).It has NOTHING to do with "Free Speech", and everything to do with Alex Jones being a lying ignoramus who panders to the basest fears of a racist, sexist sub-culture of the white patriarchy.Oh, believe me, I really DO understand your position -- I just don't accept it.

Run along now ...

You know, Fnord, you are a prime example of how badly Americans have been brainwashed by the "divide and conquer" agenda. I've already pointed out that I don't have any respect for Alex Jones. But I guess you don't believe me. "My boy?" What's next, I'm a Donald Trump supporter? Yeah, I've been accused of that before, since I don't buy into the whole Russia malarkey. I guess I just need to pick a team, and stick with it regardless of facts, truth, and what's right. That's the American way. Well, I guess I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions.

Oh, s**t, I forgot! I meant to sink down to your level just for a laugh!


You did not make any points that I felt worthy of a response in your last post. Now, run along!


Wait, here's an annoying little emoji to punctuate how silly I think you are!

As pointed by a number of posters it is not a free speech/first amendment issue. It is about what social media companies SHOULD or SHOULD NOT censor.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 10 Aug 2018, 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Simple fix: FB, Twitter, Youtube, Google, MSNBC, NBC, Huffpo et. al. should proudly "come out" and declare what is fact: They are left leaning or far left leaning organizations run by people who not surprisingly have left or far left leaning ideology. They shouldn't mask it or pretend they're something they're not. Something like:

"Yes, we proudly declare according to present day labels we are "leftist". We believe there is no other moral or ethical way to be and counter-ideologies we believe to be immoral and unethical or even evil. We believe, in the future, our ideology will not be known to be "leftist", it will be known to be center and "right" (ie correct). We're proud of the way we think and we're not going to hide it or apologize for it!"

Say what you mean/think and mean what you say/think.

I know, but I still disagree. How is targeting Alex Jones instead of the plethora of users who violate their TOS far more not constitute an assault on free speech? How is letting Jihadist pages on Facebook remain, but taking down Infowars fair an equitable? How about hate speech mongers like Louis Farrakhan not being touched?


Maybe legally social media cannot be held accountable for their actions. But make no mistake, this is an attempt to silence voices the Left doesn't want heard. I should think it would be much more productive to simply debunk his nonsense. I guess it's more about much influence he has on his followers as we approach the mid-term elections.

Whoa, hang on! If start interjecting honesty into politics, the whole f*****g system will fall apart!

The court ruled in favor if the baker but the idea and situations surrounding refusal of service was an ethical grey area to me at the time. My bakery situation was merely a thought exploration to better help me resolve my views on the right or wrong of the matter...I decided it was best for me to try to avoid the situation it all together by limiting options.

Know this... what you call the UNITED STATES and the FEDERAL RESERVE are also actually private entities (masquerading as public/government). See 28 U.S. Code § 3002(15)(a) for the «status» of United States being a CORPORATION by definition. Try to find out who the owners (who happen to be ten share-holders last I checked) for stocks in the Federal Reserve. Read G. Edward Griffin's book, «The Creature From Jekyll Island» and double-check his resource-references, for yourself. Search the listings for the courts on Wall-Street, Dunn & BradStreet, Standard & Poors, etc., and you will see that they are listed as FOR-PROFIT PRIVATE CORPORATIONS.

If I am incorrect about any of this, then feel free to video-capture your research, and post it in response so that I can correct/update my information. For now, this is what all others who seem to have done their homework seem to have discovered, for as far as I am aware and I have no good-faith reason at this time to believe otherwise.

VegetableMan, you need to stop attacking people.

You appear to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of freedom of speech in this country, which doesn't allow the government to censor people. It doesn't apply to websites that aren't run by the government.

I have a very sound understanding if it. And thanks for singling me out for a reprimand, while letting the other guilty party in the discussion go on his merry way. If you read back up a few posts, you'll see that I tried to return the conversation to one of civility. But he continued to be snarky, so I returned it in kind. I don't have a problem with snarkiness, but let's be fair, shall we?

It is an assault on freedom of expression not free speech.

Hate crime laws are an assault on free speech.

Hate speech codes with in public universities are assaults on free speech.

The government refusing to prosecute violent attacks on people whom they disagree with is an assault on free speech.