Pray for Alex Jones

submitted by [deleted] from self.whatever

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

He's a routine liar who engages in lazy make-believe. His job is to take a paper stackie of headlines his employees printed out, read them aloud quickly and often incorrectly, pretend he understands the story, then pretends it's proof he was right about his make-believe enemies.

He said he was delivered a vision of the future by God when he was a baby. He said he once downloaded his grandfather's entire life memories. He said the devil tried to seduce him with girls smoking crystal meth, and he made them have dozens and dozens of abortions.

Most of what he says is made up on the spot, or fudged together out of tips from his callers and the host of shuckster guests he pretends are well-informed. Every single day he predicts mass collapse, Chicago getting nuked, assassinations - and on the once in a blue moon event that he was right, he cuts that prediction and makes a video. He predicted 9-11 the day after Bill Cooper covered the same thing in The Hour Of Our Time.

Once per month for ten years straight he covered sandy hook in a way that defamed the victims. The 4.1million damages (punitive tbd) is a disappointing mockery of what they went through. He's a joke, a shameful con artist.

It was a lot more obvious in the Ted Anderson / Midas Resources days. Alex could talk for 20 minutes about the coming financial collapse, then go to Ted, who has some great offers on gold. Nowadays he talks about how the elite are stealing your vitality, and only Super Male pills will save you. It's a con, a game he runs, with which he became massively wealthy.

If this interests you, you need to know about Knowledge Fight podcast. www.knowledgefight.com check it out.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

That doesn't sound like the assessment of Alex's show that someone listening in good faith and without preconceptions would give. It sounds more like the assessment of someone who went into listening with his mind made up and then cherry-picked quotes to make a point.

Once per month for ten years straight he covered sandy hook in a way that defamed the victims

This I would have noticed. I don't believe this is accurate at all. In fact, I find Alex pretty circumspect about calling specific incidents false flags.

And whatever the truth is, there is evidence Sandy Hook was a false flag and evidence that it was not. This is undeniable.

That guy who was supposedly a witness practicing his outrage? That's real footage and it's bizarre.

Maybe a guy witnessed a real massacre and then practiced reacting to it (inadvertently on camera). Sure. It's not impossible. But it's also very unusual, and would be less unusual if the whole thing really were just theater.

We can't talk about that on the radio? The existence of people related to someone who died violently somehow render illegal any observation that they might find unpalatable?

Man, fuck those people if they think that!

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

That doesn't sound like the assessment of Alex's show that someone listening in good faith and without preconceptions would give

I have listened for many years. He has never warranted an open mind.

This I would have noticed

It's on average, over the period since the shooting. My source on that is Mark Bankston who is suing him. Alex's defense never challenged that fact.

, I find Alex pretty circumspect about calling specific incidents false flags.

Interesting you would say that, because both Owen Shroyer and PJW were asked during deposition - is there any recent mass casualty event which Alex hasn't called a false flag? And there was zero, not one.

And whatever the truth is, there is evidence Sandy Hook was a false flag and evidence that it was not. This is undeniable.

I deny it. Every single item which conspiracists point to was debunked either on the witness stand or in deposition. Name something and I'll show you the clip.

That guy who was supposedly a witness

I think I can discuss every plaintiff witness called in this case. So which 'he' are you referring to - Neil heslin, journalism ethics teacher, or the forensic psych?

The existence of people related to someone who died violently somehow render illegal any observation that they might find unpalatable?

It's called defamation and it a well established section of USA and Texan law. You can talk about it in a non-defamatory way until the cows come home, just simply don't defame anyone.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

The man who was caught rehearsing his lines is named Gene Rosen. I doubt he was a witness in this ridiculous case, but he's relevant to it.

It's damned hard finding that rehearsal video anymore, you know, with extortionist goons winning $4,000,000 judgments, but that's the guy.

I did find a whole article about him on Salon.com: https://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/this_man_helped_save_six_children_is_now_getting_harassed_for_it/

It's along article, and it goes on and on about how horribly he's been harassed, but the article never mentions the video that precipitated it all.

Does that strike you as normal? Is it normal that 1) a guy who'd just seen kids massacred needed to rehearse his outrage, and 2) an objective journalist would completely ignore that disturbing rehearsal video in his article about this guy?

Either one of those aberrations seems sufficient to say that there's not a preponderance of evidence that Sandy Hook happened 100% as reported. There's too much evidence that something else happened, in those two bizarre things alone.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

From how you describe it, I don't find it odd or strange at all.

1) a guy who'd just seen kids massacred needed to rehearse his outrage

You weren't able to find the video to show me, but I'll assume it's how you describe it. And the Salon story you linked says

In the hours and days that followed, Rosen did a lot of media interviews.“ I wanted to speak about the bravery of the children, and it kind of helped me work through this,” he told Salon in an interview.

I do not find it strange that someone who had a lot of media would read from a prepared statement, or would be caught practicing a prepared statement. I think in that situation, I would prepare a statement too, so that I was prepared to talk to the media, and so that I had the right message I intended to convey, having taken time to compose it properly.

2) an objective journalist would completely ignore that disturbing rehearsal video in his article about this guy?

I think most people would assume that he would have a prepared statement for normal reasons, because most people can imagine themselves preparing a statement in similar circumstances.

I think the only reason he's getting any more attention from the internet than any other random person in the news, is because he's connected to a mass shooting that Alex Jones told everyone it was ok to question, just looking into it, just checking out these totally reliable 16 Questions from the man our emails internally refer to as batshit insane.

The plaintiffs showed how Sandy Hook coverage was analytically linked by Alex's sales team to prepper gear, so around the time of sending "kraken" Dan Bidondi to harrass the families in Newtown, his company were running prepper related ad content. Do you find that interesting? Would you like to compare, what product line does Alex's analytics say to push today? It was right there on the plaintiff's exhibits: InstaHard boner pills - today Alex's paying audience is sweaty old pasty men with flaccid dicks and anal leakage. It's right there on your screen when you watch his dumb sales show

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

This is the Rosen video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tiEGwhyjLg

Is it 100% convincing either way? No. Is it a central part of why people don't buy the official narrative? Absolutely. And it's completely disingenuous of Salon to omit that.

It's like 2016 all over again. We're just a bunch of mean right wingers and gun nuts with no legitimate reason for what we do beyond bigotry. Bullshit!

I do not find it strange that someone who had a lot of media would read from a prepared statement, or would be caught practicing a prepared statement. I think in that situation, I would prepare a statement too, so that I was prepared to talk to the media, and so that I had the right message I intended to convey, having taken time to compose it properly.

I wouldn't describe that as a prepared statement. It's intended to look authentic and spontaneous. That Rosen would have to practice it hints at it not actually being those things.

I think the only reason he's getting any more attention from the internet than any other random person in the news, is because he's connected to a mass shooting that Alex Jones told everyone it was ok to question

It's not OK to question the news?

As far as Alex's money goes, and your ad hominem attacks on his listeners (though you claim to be one), I just find it pretty revealing that Slate.com and Salon (people who are supposed to be far more intelligent than Alex and me) can't even turn a $1 profit. And I'd try his penis pills before Viagra just on principle.

People buy what Alex is selling. Your side wants to just say were a bunch of impotent, stupid old men acting without reason... to the tune of 80 million votes and probably billions of dollars sent to Infowars though? Again, that's bullshit. Meet us in an honest debate instead of pulling penny-ante legal stunts.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Meet us in an honest debate instead of pulling penny-ante legal stunts.

I have put forward my statements and various sources.

You responded by dodging the topic and slinging accusations.

Maybe I should be clearer. If you want to debate me, here is my opening thesis.

  1. He blind reads headlines on air, often misreading them, and invents a new interpretation which aligns with his current imaginary enemies.

  2. His imaginary enemies are all-powerful but so weak that Alex can defeat them if you just spend money at infowars store

  3. His ongoing guest rota are either part of the scam, or provably batshit insane. Examples of people part of the scam: Ted Anderson, Dr Group, Bob Chapman, Lindsey Williams. Batshit insane and provably wrong guests include Steve Pieceznik, Daryl Hamomoto, Rema Labeau.

  4. Of the first group, the scammers, Bob Chapman and Ted Anderson have the most interesting connection to Alex. Anderson ran and runs GCN, the syndication network which supports his gold and pills companies like Midas Resources. Chapman was involved in apartheid gold mines to support the enterprise. The two of them partially financed Gary Allen's "None dare call it a conspiracy". These are consummate conmen with state and federal records to match - Chapman has been disallowed by Minnesota to sell gold for a while, because of his scamming.

  5. Of the crazies, let's talk about Pieceznik. For going on two decades now Alex had introduced Steve as a CIA mind control expert. Daria Karpova testified last Tuesday, that they were never able to prove Steve's credentials outside of Steve himself. Steve has variously claimed that he is in contact with Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Il. He claims to have received information from elites through newspaper headlines. Every word is a lie but he moves product because people tune in.

  6. Alex does not have a consistent narrative to his conspiracy. His exact definition of what's going on is in constant flux. At various times over all of his career, he has claimed god gave him a vision of prophetic dreams that disaster is round the corner - Obama youth. Bioweapons. Economic collapse. When he has food buckets for sale, he talks about how the UN is collapsing the global food trade. His craft is to tell you, it's happening! This is the one! This time it's serious - tune in next week to hear more about it! There is no consistent or single narrative or plot which Alex can explain. But it's right around the corner, and has been for decades.

  7. Specifically I want to say you were wrong when you said, Alex doesn't call mass casualty events false flag hoaxes anymore. Literally every single event before and since Sandy Hook has been labelled a false flag by Alex. Here is some evidence that you're wrong

Go to 45:45 of this link to hear PJW answer in deposition https://knowledgefight.libsyn.com/knowledge-fight-formulaic-objections-part-2

Go to 1:47.30 to hear Alex admit in the witness box that he called every mass tragedy a false flag https://youtu.be/x-lxTsqfwkw

I can go on. I can list you more of the reasons why I think he's a phoney. But you accused me of not debating correctly. So i would like to see you respond with some of your thoughts on the points I raised above

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

OK, to be clear, the debate I called for wasn't "is Alex Jones full of it?" (or greedy or anything else). Alex is a blowhard with a radio show who can make a long commute more exciting. He hawks just about anything he thinks his audience will buy because he likes money. Stipulated. (Or as Alex would say "on record." LOL.)

I'm sorry if I failed to get that across and I don't want to move the goalposts on you. I'll even concede point 7, but mention the fact that Alex has basically transmitted his stream-of-consciousness to anyone with a tape recorder for 20+ years.

The debates I actually think we need to have, though, are about specific questions that Alex has become (perhaps unfortunately) the public face of. What is the role of the various organic chemicals that have become pervasive in our environment in shaping sexuality? What are the tradeoffs inherent to tolerating these chemicals (and embracing the behavioral changes they might bring) vs. cleaning them up?

What are the costs and benefits of reducing ambient CO2 compared to those associated with reducing ambient bisphenol? One side is so obsessed with the first thing- why has talking about the second been turned into a pervasive, derisive meme about gay frogs? That has to be the #1 thing the man on the street under 40 remembers about Alex Jones.

And yes- let's ask, "how accurate and fair is the media's coverage of violence?" You know Steve Scalise took a bullet for being a social conservative. There's a guy who shot Reagan in the lung walking around free. Where's the outrage?

Why do we write "Black" but only "white"? What message does that send to children? What message do drag events actually send to children?

I know- that's too many questions. It's waffling, whataboutism, goalpost-shifting. Let me distill it all into one question:

Is there value to the "western" or "Christian" tradition, or is it an ethically lesser tradition compared to, oh, just about everything else? It's Hobbes vs. the idea of the "noble savage." Alex is on the right side of this, and right now he's the broken nose on the public face of this side.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

various organic chemicals

Not an issue on which Alex knows anything more than headlines put In front of him. Alex hates the EPA and red tape regulation. He has no interest in pressing environment matters and the politicians he supports like Ron/Rand Paul and Trump would remove the public's right to even know about those chemicals. Talking about those chemicals serves precisely one purpose - talking about transphobia without talking about transphobia.

There's a guy who shot Reagan in the lung walking around free. Where's the outrage?

No idea what you're talking about. Is Alex supposed to be suppressing outrage about it? Why is this relevant

Why do we write "Black" but only "white"?

I've no idea why you do that, if there's someone else doing that and you wonder why then you can ask them, but this doesn't sound related to Alex either

What message do drag events actually send to children

It depends what story book they're reading. This is another transphobia narrative. Alex does not deserve to exist so that he can peddle more of his racism and transphobia

Is there value to the "western" or "Christian" tradition, or is an ethically lesser tradition compared to, oh, just about everything else? It's Hobbes vs. the idea of the "noble savage."

I totally disagree with the framing of your question. There is value in everyone's traditions. Your framing is such that everyone who doesn't fit into a socially -defined category is savage and I don't like that framing.

Alex is on the right side of this

Of what? Of all the gish gallop talking points you wrote? Am I supposed to accept that because you agree with him on a number of chauvinist and bigoted views that he's actually correct in the real world, too? No, thank you

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

Not an issue on which Alex knows anything more than headlines put In front of him. Alex hates the EPA and red tape regulation. He has no interest in pressing environment matters and the politicians he supports like Ron/Rand Paul and Trump would remove the public's right to even know about those chemicals. Talking about those chemicals serves precisely one purpose - talking about transphobia without talking about transphobia.

We are both to the left of Alex on the issue of environmental regulation, I think. Economic conservatives have complained about every regulation since the abolition of child labor. They were wrong.

I don't agree with your "transphobia" analysis. The evidence that so-called trans people are indulging a fetish in public exists. That's part of the debate. It's not just bigotry.

No idea what you're talking about. Is Alex supposed to be suppressing outrage about it? Why is this relevant

John Hinckley shot Reagan, among others. He has finally been paroled and is espousing leftist causes on the internet.

I've no idea why you do that, if there's someone else doing that and you wonder why then you can ask them, but this doesn't sound related to Alex either

This was not written in good faith. The capitalization of "Black" but not "white" is pervasive. MSN, the New York Times, Slate, Salon... they all do it. That's pretty fucked up, and I say this as a guy who loves Black people.

I am not a White nationalist. Black people are an essential part of my country and my ethnic group.

I totally disagree with the framing of your question. There is value in everyone's traditions. Your framing is such that everyone who doesn't fit into a socially -defined category is savage and I don't like that framing.

If you believe this, I think you have to disavow the idea of "intersectionality." Do you believe in it? Is a man who wears a dress to work and gets fired for it really the moral equivalent of Medgar Evers?

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

Is there value to the "western" or "Christian" tradition, or is it an ethically lesser tradition compared to, oh, just about everything else? It's Hobbes vs. the idea of the "noble savage." Alex is on the right side of this, and right now he's the broken nose on the public face of this side.

There was value to the "western" / "Christian" tradition but now it has failed because it is not ethnocentric enough. I don't see any way to save it, though maybe traditional Anabaptists have a chance. So Alex is on the wrong side of this, fighting to save a sinking ship.

[–]send_nasty_stuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Once per month for ten years straight he covered sandy hook in a way that defamed the victims.

Maybe you're right (personally I disagree); however, the 'victims' should be forced to show damages. They didn't have to do that which means this is a fake trial and not a defamation trial. You can't have defamation is the plaintiff doesn't have to prove damages.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Hello send_nasty_stuff,

First of all, they did show damage. A forensic psychologist who was involved in both Helin's and Lewis' treatment (the dad and mom) talked the jury through the psychological damage which Alex had caused.

A little tangent - not totally caused by Alex of course, but also "batshit insane" (their words from internal emails) Wolfgang Halbig and "the kraken" Dan Bidondi, both of whom had been to personally harrass the sandy hook families. Both were on the infowars payroll in one way or another. Both were dangerously and maliciously given airtime by infowars during a time period in which their own internal emails acknowledged that they were crazy liars.

So once Alex both defamed the victims personally, and tried to cash in on the conspiracy theories surrounding sandy hook via the Halbig and Bidondi proxies, the victims needed counselling.

They needed counselling already, their son died! You might shout. But the forensic psych explained exactly how Alex's actions (plus the many Americans he'd convinced) aggravated their trauma.

So there's your damages.

And that's even before acknowledging how awful and stomach turning your post even is. You have two bereaved parents, who up to 25% of Americans have been convinced are liars by the defendant. They talked about how people would recognise them and turn hostile, how there had been shootings by Alex Jones -inspired crazies at their homes, how the gaslighting of a conman stole their son's last moments from them. You had Owen Shroyer live on infowars laughing at the idea Heslin held his dead son (the only clip within statue of limitations, by the way. If Owen hadn't been so disgusting the whole case wouldn't have happened). So given what these parents went through, the idea that you could sit there and doubt they had any damages is just plain inhumane. Of course they had damages. What world do you live in, where they might not have had damages? What a horrid thing to even say.

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

A forensic psychologist who was involved in both Helin's and Lewis' treatment (the dad and mom) talked the jury through the psychological damage which Alex had caused.

That doesn't normally apply to public figures. That's like saying an actor or a newsman psychologically damaged me with his acting or reporting.

both of whom had been to personally harrass the sandy hook families.

Please stop gas lighting people by calling these assholes 'families'. They are false flag actors.

So once Alex both defamed the victims personally

Again. You can't defame an actor hired to create a political stunt to take people's guns. The court has to prove the incident happened. They didn't do that making this trial a farce. Similar thing happened with the holocaust in the 80's. The judge basically said the holocaust was an unapproachable historical event and it didn't need to be proven in court. Which is a violation of multiple legal standards.

hey needed counselling already, their son died!

Nobody Died at Sandy Hook

You had Owen Shroyer live on infowars laughing at the idea Heslin held his dead son (the only clip within statue of limitations, by the way. If Owen hadn't been so disgusting the whole case wouldn't have happened)

Your emotional tactics won't work. Owen isn't laughing at a real victim. He's laughing at a crisis actor.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That's like saying an actor or a newsman psychologically damaged me with his acting or reporting.

The actor in this scenario would have to be already guilty of defamation against you. And if you can convince the jury that it gives rise to damages, then it's proven under law.

Nobody Died at Sandy Hook

Actually that book played a part in the trial, because Alex Jones tried to profit off of selling it while fanning the flames of his conspiracy theory. And because they had emails discussing book sales against sandy hook coverage, it was shown that infowars were trying to directly profit from their defamation.

You seem to have been convinced by Alex Jones that the school shooting was a false flag.

Jump to 1 hour 9 minutes in this video. It's Alex Jones under deposition for this case.

https://youtu.be/xCnPDSHZR6c

Let's go through how Alex Jones lied to you. Jim Fetzer's book, which you linked, gets a few namedrops.

  1. "No web traffic on way back machine for the school" - Alex acknowledges that's not actual web traffic but the count of way back machine crawls. These screenshots were taken from Fetzer and the book you linked.

  2. "The school was shut down for those years". Alex acknowledges that he doesn't know why he thinks this. He just said it anyway. In fact it's another lie from the Fetzer book you linked.

  3. "Kids going in circles". Alex when pushed agreed that these weren't kids on the video and wasn't sandy hook elementary and weren't going in circles. He says he relied on Halbig and Fetzer.

  4. "Emergency helicopters weren't called". Alex says he doesn't actually know if helicopters were called, if they responded, or if ambulances would have been quicker.

  5. "Split screen interview pretended they were in the same location". Alex didn't look closely enough to notice the same vehicle go past both shots.

  6. "Anderson Cooper's nose". Alex agrees he made no effort to check whether this was blue screen or just a compression artefact. He just said it anyway.

  7. "Bloomberg sent an email". Alex was asked multiple times to show this email and keep fluffing.

It just goes on and on.... seriously, watch the video. And the rest on the channel are great too.

And if you thought sandy hook was true....why the hell wouldn't Alex Jones put up any legal defence? Why would he go five years never responding to discovery or sending a real corporate representative? He knows it's all bullshit, he just managed to fool you.

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

You remind me of a poster named radical centrist. Which share blue division do you work for? I didn't hear about Sandy Hook from Alex Jones. Alex Jones is only one part of the alt media landscape. I don't really listen to Jones much because he refuses to name the Jew.

If you'd like we can go through the points made in the book or we can also go into the points by researcher Wolfgang Holbig in Dear Wolfgang

I don't think that would be very fruitful though. You seem very set in your view of things.

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

You remind me of a poster named

No my prior account was "site_sux" but the admins blocked my home IP in cloudflare and set my account to read-only mode for ...some reason.

we can also go into the points by researcher Wolfgang Holbig

Right, that's the same Wolfgang who I've been talking about. The one who sent infowars about 5,000 emails that they junk'ed but produced in the lawsuit. The one who they called "batshit insane". The one who Alex decided was a nut after Halbig said in an email that the sandy hook kids were singing at the Superbowl, CC'ing both the trump campaign and every single three-letter agency.

I don't have time to watch the hour long video which you linked but I'd imagine everything there is a rehash of the same tired conspiracy yarn. Kids walking in circles, Anderson Cooper's nose, cop's eating lunch in the environmentally condemned schoolhouse. Every word is a lie and has been debunked over and over. The fact you STILL believe it just shows the damage which Alex did in giving these morons airtime.

[–]send_nasty_stuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Anderson Cooper's nose

You do know Anderson Cooper is the son of a Vanderbilt right? Dude is part of inner circle satanist family. The younger brother died mysteriously.

cop's eating lunch in the environmentally condemned schoolhouse.

Dude. Just look at the pics of the school. That wasn't an active school at all. When's the last time you went into a school? That school had clearly been used as a storage facility for several years.

The fact you STILL believe it just shows the damage which Alex did in giving these morons airtime.

The fact you're still gas lighting when people obviously see you're full of shit is hilarious.

So are you operating out of Tel-Aviv? Langley? What do you get paid per reply?

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

Honestly it's so, so cringe and pathetic for you to believe that a necessary part of running the world's major governments, is sending someone to a Q-adjacent reddit clone to argue about grifters with you...the sheer self-importance you ascribe to nonsense about who is or isn't a Vanderbilt. You think the world's governments are interested in this shit. Pathetic, cringe and a bit creepy