Alex Jones Hit With Nearly a Billion Dollars in Damages Against Him For Saying Sandy Hook Was a Hoax

submitted by raven9 from self.politics

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Alex gets this outrageous fine for stating his opinion

Defamation

but pharma companies, who knowingly gave untested "vaccines" to people who then died or became disabled

Not defamation. (Unless you're talking about what you just said).

Not obviously related.

[–]ActuallyWhat 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

What do you mean "talking"? Do you hear words as a monkey on a typewriter? Monkeys can't type old chap. Are you a madman?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you mean "talking"?

to use (a language) for conversing or communicating - transitive verb, meaning 4 from here

Is English not your first language?

[–]mifu 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Do try to make sense when posting comments. One was defamation and the other was multiple murder. Which is worse? I believe AJ was right on this so charge me with defamation.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

You don't get a fine for multiple murder. It's a criminal case.

(Leaving side that vaccines obviously save lives).

[–]ActuallyWhat 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

What do you mean "lives"? Do you think people have freedom to live a life without being told what to wear, what to eat, where to.walk, what to spend, what tax to pay, what rules to follow? People don't have freedom man, this isn't a picnic at Legoland old chap. Are you a madman?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you mean "lives"?

The existence of human beings.

Do you think people have freedom to live a life without being told what to wear,

Yes. There's places where you have to not have your genitals hanging out, but mostly you can choose what to wear.

what to eat,

Yes. So long as you don't want to eat human flesh.

where to.walk

Generally, no. You might invade privacy, damage property or inconvenience others.

But you can find places where you can walk where you like.

what to spend,

Money?

what tax to pay

You can influence that by being conscious of that as you choose what you do, and where to live.

what rules to follow?

Laws? You can choose which ones to break. You might lose your freedoms for a bit, or have to pay a fine though.

People don't have freedom man, this isn't a picnic at Legoland old chap.

Do lego people have freedom?

Are you a madman?

No

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

In UK Health and Safety law, a business and it's responsible persons may receive an unlimited fine, imprisonment or both in circumstances where death occurs through negligence or breach of duty. I'm quite sure this is similar in the US, and compensation claimes are of course separate to these fines.

Nobody can deny that vaccines (in general) save lives, this obviously wasn't the point. Airbags save more lives than they kill, and there have only been around 17 fatalities worldwide caused by airbags, but if a design were deemed more dangerous than others then it would be pulled from the market and investigated, and if found to be negligence then somebody would be prosecuted.This detracts from the point that specific vaccines, such as the COVID vaccine, may have led to an excess number of deaths compared with other vaccines which we consider safe.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

In UK Health and Safety law, a business and it's responsible persons may receive an unlimited fine, imprisonment or both in circumstances where death occurs through negligence or breach of duty.

Sure. Murder, in the other hand, does not get a fine.

Airbags save more lives than they kill, and there have only been around 17 fatalities worldwide caused by airbags,

That number might be a bit low.

design were deemed more dangerous than others then it would be pulled from the market and investigated,

No, if it meets the standards, it's legal. Higher tech ones detect the weight and location of the person, and alter the speed of deployment. Or they detect the crash and deploy prior to impact. Although cheaper designs are more dangerous, they don't get pulled from the market, and no one gets persecuted.

This detracts from the point that specific vaccines, such as the COVID vaccine, may have led to an excess number of deaths compared with other vaccines which we consider safe.

Which CoVID vaccine may have led to an excess of deaths compared with others?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Sure. Murder, in the other hand, does not get a fine.

Pharmaceutical companies are exempt from damages caused by vaccines. They had to change the definition of a vaccine to fit the new COVID injection so that they would be exempt from damages from this treatment. If found to be negligent by releasing a harmful untested substance on the public, they would otherwise be subject to fines for subsequent deaths.

That number might be a bit low.

Probably 😐

No, if it meets the standards, it's legal.

No, standards are revised when found that they are not sufficiently safe.

Which CoVID vaccine may have led to an excess of deaths compared with others?

We would never be told such a thing, as far as we are led to believe, there are no COVID vaccine deaths 🙄

But the J&J vaccine was pulled for example due to the heightened risk of blood clots, which in turn could be seen as being a danger to one's health, or in vulnerable persons a danger to life.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

They had to change the definition of a vaccine to fit the new COVID injection so that they would be exempt from damages from this treatment.

The definition of vaccine in which act?

No, standards are revised when found that they are not sufficiently safe.

If it meets standards, it's legal. If the standards change, there's not generally a recall. You just have to meet what the standard was at the time of manufacture.

But the J&J vaccine was pulled for example due to the heightened risk of blood clots, which in turn could be seen as being a danger to one's health, or in vulnerable persons a danger to life.

Ha. All that fear mongering by the anti vaxers about the mRNA technology, and it turns out they're so much safer than the J&J vaccine, that the J&J vaccine has been pulled.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sometimes I wonder if you're being difficult for for sake of it.

[–]ActuallyWhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you mean by "manufacture"? Do you mean the act of commercially producing a product as a profitable business in exchange for money? What money do you think.was.made by the vaccine? Are you a madman? Money doesn't grow on parrots old chap!

[–]mifu 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

DuUh? Are you in law school?