PDA

View Full Version : Congress Steps In To Shut Down InfoWars




DamianTV
07-19-2018, 04:01 PM
https://youtu.be/hBZQZtnLFTY

What The Hell? Congress Steps In To Shut Down InfoWars
InfoWars Link: https://www.infowars.com/what-the-hell-congress-steps-in-to-shut-down-infowars/

Even if you dont like Alex Jones / Infowars, do you think he has a Constitutional Right to exercise Free Speech and Free Press? Is it not more important to protect the Rights of people to express statements we do not agree with rather than only protect expressions that we do agree with? Is it only the "popular" thing to say that deserves the protection of the First Amendment?

Alternatively, do you think Alex Jones abuses his Free Speech by yelling Fire in a crowded theater, since its the most common example of what "not" to say? Does Alex Jones bully people? Does he lie? Does he misconstrue the information to distort perception?

Whats your take?

Schifference
07-19-2018, 04:04 PM
Not going to happen.

Madison320
07-19-2018, 04:17 PM
What The Hell? Congress Steps In To Shut Down InfoWars
InfoWars Link: https://www.infowars.com/what-the-hell-congress-steps-in-to-shut-down-infowars/

Even if you dont like Alex Jones / Infowars, do you think he has a Constitutional Right to exercise Free Speech and Free Press? Is it not more important to protect the Rights of people to express statements we do not agree with rather than only protect expressions that we do agree with? Is it only the "popular" thing to say that deserves the protection of the First Amendment?

Alternatively, do you think Alex Jones abuses his Free Speech by yelling Fire in a crowded theater, since its the most common example of what "not" to say? Does Alex Jones bully people? Does he lie? Does he misconstrue the information to distort perception?

Whats your take?

Is there a source other than Infowars that says Infowars is getting shut down?

Anti Federalist
07-19-2018, 04:20 PM
Is there a source other than Infowars that says Infowars is getting shut down?

This please, with links to legislation, orders to FCC, warrants for arrest and so on.

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 04:27 PM
Free Speech should be supreme.

Even though he has at times crossed the lines of decent speech and said things like these:


Alex Jones: "F-word Trump and F-word these F-wording people" After Trump attacks Syria (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?519979-Conservative-leader-on-Trump-He-s-a-fraud-and-has-betrayed-us-twice-now&p=6618543&viewfull=1#post6618543)

Swordsmyth
07-19-2018, 04:31 PM
Free Speech should be supreme.

Even though he has at times crossed the lines of decent speech and said things like these:

Can't you stop spamming disconnected threads with old and usually irrelevant or fake news?

I've been waiting for the mods to do something about it but you are getting worse.

-Rep

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 04:35 PM
You have to be specific and can't just make baseless claims without evidence. Are you saying AJ did not use this language/this is fakenews?


Alex Jones: "F-word Trump and F-word these F-wording people" After Trump attacks Syria

Danke
07-19-2018, 04:36 PM
This please, with links to legislation, orders to FCC, warrants for arrest and so on.


I think what he is saying they are trying to get Facebook to take them down/off. Which seems apparent from that congressional hearing/which hunt.

Swordsmyth
07-19-2018, 04:37 PM
You have to be specific and can't just make baseless claims without evidence. Are you saying AJ did not use this language/this is fakenews?

I'm saying it has nothing to do with this thread and it is old and irrelevant.

And you know exactly what you are doing.

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 04:43 PM
Now you are changing your claims, you called it 'fakenews'... that is bit different claim than saying that a post is not relevant to the topic.

Way I see it , AJ using inflamatory language containing f-words is very relevant to Free Speech discussion. Let's not derail OP's discussion and stick to Free Speech topic.

Swordsmyth
07-19-2018, 04:48 PM
Now you are changing your claims, you called it 'fakenews'... that is bit different claim than saying that a post is not relevant to the topic.

Way I see it , AJ using inflamatory language containing f-words is very relevant to Free Speech discussion. Let's not derail OP's discussion and stick to Free Speech topic.
What about the word "or" don't you understand?


Can't you stop spamming disconnected threads with old and usually irrelevant or fake news?


The old link is entirely irrelevant to whether InfoWars is being attacked or should be shut down, you only posted it because it is negative about Trump.
This is just one example of your spamming, you do it all the time and have been called out for it by at least one other poster for dragging Israel into a thread that Israel had nothing to do with.

DamianTV
07-19-2018, 04:53 PM
Shutting down InfoWars may not be the actual goal here, but Free Speech.

Regardless of what is shown in the videos, what is being normalized is the assaults on the mental images of people who use Free Speech to expose Lies of the Govt. If the real target was Free Speech itself, they would not attack the popular thing to say. Having control of the narrative can be exploited to change the mental perceptions of people who are not Liberal or Liberal leaning, while simultaneously validating existing perspectives. By attacking InfoWars, they are also attacking the perceptions of everyone else who does not believe their narrative. I must consider that it is very plausible that the real goal is not InfoWars itself, but everyone else by using InfoWars as a scapegoat. Once you convince the people to change their perspective on a given subject, they will openly support change that further restricts freedom.

There are Four sides to an argument. There is always a Speaker and there is always a Listener. Another perspective is Agreement opposed by Disagreement. The Four sides are a Matrix by combining those two categories. Listeners can choose to either Agree or Disagree with any given narrative. Speakers will also lean toward expressing ideas they only Agree with, so Speaking your own idea that is Disagreed with rarely ever happens without manipulation. With nearly full control of the Narrative, what youre hearing seems to be universally supportive of one idea, which is Big Govt. What theyve done with the Narrative is to create an Illusion of Choice by saying "support this point of view" or "support that point of view", but both points of view end with the same result, which is Bigger Govt.

The way the MSM works is to control "who" is allowed to speak. If an opinion is expressed that supports either Trap of Big Govt, then the opinion is allowed. So its what is not said here, as usual, that is more important. For the majority of Listeners, they hear one side of the argument, which silences their own opinions, and further reinforces the cycle. That leaves the majority of Listeners with a set of arguments that end up supporting one idea. They hear no other perspectives which would support Smaller Govt, which is why the Internet is so important to Freedom. They control the masses by telling people what to think, which means they must not tell people what they do not want people to think at the same time. The latter being MUCH more important than the first. Thus, in order to control the Internet the same way as one way MSM works, every major communication platform must incorporate Self Censorship and exploit Private Property to control that Narrative.

The way to control the Narrative on the internet incorporating the previous ideas of silencing specific opinions is to create and support major platforms that choose to Self Censor, or heavily bias the way information is presented to people. I think we all know that Google and Twitter and the likes of the major platforms that reach a broad spectrum of people is very very Left Leaning, while the Right Leaning are only supported if the Narrative is for Big Govt, thus maintaining the Illusion of Choice. The reality is there is no difference between MSMs brand of Left and Right as both sides call for Big Govt, and the ones that are constantly shut down is anyone who supports Smaller / Less Govt.

A man can die of thirst as easily as they can drown in an ocean. This means there are two ways to cause harm to sources of information, a Positive and a Negative way. Positive meaning only that Action is taken against that source, while Negative means a Lack of Action. Big Govt only wants to get bigger, so they will fund and fuel sites they do want. But they cause just as much harm to sources of opinions they do NOT want. For example, do you think that Govt would have paid for the Ron Paul Forums? No. Absolutely not. Not directly anyway. This is how they currently control the Narrative. If you dont support desired opinions, you dont get funding. If you do, then you get huge funding. Facebook got its start by funding pretty much from the NSA. Do you think the NSA would support Ron Paul Forums.com?

Their real goal here is to have full control over both the Action and Lack of Action. They already cause a lot of harm by Lack of Action. If they could take any Action they want against sources of information they do not want to spread, they want the power to shut them ALL down, NOT just InfoWars. They want people to openly support repealing the First Amendment. Why? Fake news. InfoWars. They do this by causing exceptional damage to the reputations of any sources of information they dont want spread by again playing both sides. The very people that cry about Big Govt are probably the very same ones that fund Fake News in order to create a presence and an issue. Lets say for example they do fund Fake News. How would they do it? Would they simply use a shadow company to buy advertisements on definite and obvious Fake News sites in order to keep them talking? If the source of Fake News becomes big enough, it can be given focus. That focus damages the reputation of anyone who is not a "reputable news source" such as CNN or NBC, so it hurts you and me also. It hurts everyone. The result is the public opinion causes people to choose to stop listening to you and me, even if the information is factual and completely accurate. The following consequence is more important. This leaves those people who have chosen to stop listening to choose the sources of information only from sources that support their Narrative.

Of the Four measures of Discussion, each and every choice is manipulated so people choose to accept information from the MSM only and reject Non MSM information from sources like Ron Paul Forums.com or InfoWars.com. If people do have opinions that oppose the Narrative, and try to post on controlled major internet outlets like Facebook, those posts are prevented from reaching a broader audience. That gives Big Govt almost Total Control of each of the Four methods of Discussion.

The real goal here is to cause people to support Repealing the First Amendment, and that is tricky business. Dig deep enough and it is obvious. I think what they are doing here is testing the waters to see if people are ready to support Repealing the 1st Amendment, but in the end, it IS their real goal.

---


Is there a source other than Infowars that says Infowars is getting shut down?

If the US was in fact Nazi Germany, do you think they might come after Ron Paul Forums.com also? How about Zero Hedge? Any Pro Liberty Blog? Read above the --- part and you can see its exactly how Propaganda works.

donnay
07-19-2018, 05:06 PM
Based on this hearing trying to kill the first amendment.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IF_W9jKxVk&list=PLQAYtsaRq92f2AlebzYhx-DaGBDJ-LrwA

Anti Federalist
07-19-2018, 05:12 PM
I think what he is saying they are trying to get Facebook to take them down/off. Which seems apparent from that congressional hearing/which hunt.

Ah, the old "use the corporate structure to carry out tyranny" plan...got it.

Yeah, if that's the case, he's probably right.

RonZeplin
07-19-2018, 05:34 PM
Free Speech should be supreme.

Even though he has at times crossed the lines of decent speech and said things like these:


Alex Jones: "F-word Trump and F-word these F-wording people" After Trump attacks Syria (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?519979-Conservative-leader-on-Trump-He-s-a-fraud-and-has-betrayed-us-twice-now&p=6618543&viewfull=1#post6618543)

https://joefollansbee.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/trump2words.jpg?w=748&h=405

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 05:42 PM
https://joefollansbee.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/trump2words.jpg?w=748&h=405


Just to make sure this is not fakenews, have to ask.. did he really say this?

Because this could be more serious than non-disclosure agreements with victims of sexual harassment that Harvey Weinstein's expensive lawyers used for decades to keep NYT and rest of media from publishing any reports of assaults by Weinstein.

Swordsmyth
07-19-2018, 05:45 PM
https://joefollansbee.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/trump2words.jpg?w=748&h=405


Just to make sure this is not fakenews, have to ask.. did he really say this?

Because this could be more serious than non-disclosure agreements with victims of sexual harassment that Harvey Weinstein's expensive lawyers used for decades to keep NYT and rest of media from publishing any reports of assaults by Weinstein.

What would be wrong with actual libel perpetrators being sued?

Zippyjuan
07-19-2018, 05:47 PM
Is there a source other than Infowars that says Infowars is getting shut down?

Jones has been claiming for years that the government was going to shut him down. His usual schtick.

Danke
07-19-2018, 05:50 PM
Jones has been claiming for years that the government was going to shut him down. His usual schtick.


Again, you didn't watch/read the posted information before responding.

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 05:54 PM
What about the word "or" don't you understand?

The old link is entirely irrelevant to whether InfoWars is being attacked or should be shut down, you only posted it because it is negative about Trump.


Few months old example is not old at all in politics, heck few years or even decades old examples in proper context will not be old as track record built over time is part of a person's character and history tends to repeat itself. That is not to say any singular event should be used to make final judgments.

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 05:59 PM
What would be wrong with actual libel perpetrators being sued?


I don't know know much about technical aspects here but if these tools are anything like non-disclousre agreements used by the rich to keep 'free press' like NYT from reporting on events that show tham in bad light, it would be at least in sipirt against freedom of speech/press. People who cannot afford expensive lawyers like Weinsteins of the world could be disadvantaged too.

Swordsmyth
07-19-2018, 06:04 PM
I don't know know much about technical aspects here but if these tools are anything like non-disclousre agreements used by the rich to keep 'free press' like NYT from reporting on events that show tham in bad light, it would be at least in sipirt against freedom of speech/press. People who cannot afford expensive lawyers like Weinsteins of the world could be disadvantaged too.

Truth is a defense against libel, there are dangers either way, the rights of libel victims are as important as the right to free speech.

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 06:15 PM
Truth is a defense against libel, there are dangers either way, the rights of libel victims are as important as the right to free speech.

It's true that false reporting can do serious damage at times (fake Iraqi WMD reports published by NYT/much of MSM just one major example). But lawsuits are also abused sometimes by parties to bankrupt the opposing party by drowning them in legal fees.
On some issues it seems like we live in a corporate freedom society.


Semi-related


Ex-Playboy Model Karen McDougal Sues to Speak on Alleged Trump Affair
March 20, 2018
A former Playboy model who claimed she had an affair with Donald J. Trump sued on Tuesday to be released from a 2016 legal agreement restricting her ability to speak, becoming the second woman this month to challenge Trump allies’ efforts during the presidential campaign to bury stories about extramarital relationships.

Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who says she had an affair with Donald J. Trump, is suing a media company to be freed from an agreement to remain quiet.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/us/ex-playboy-model-sues-to-break-silence-on-trump.html

Swordsmyth
07-19-2018, 06:23 PM
On some issues it seems like we live in a corporate freedom society.


Semi-related



https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/us/ex-playboy-model-sues-to-break-silence-on-trump.html

If you want freedom of speech don't take hush money and sign a nondisclosure agreement.

enhanced_deficit
07-19-2018, 06:30 PM
NYT did not take any money from Harvey Weinstein, yet for decades they were somehow severely discouraged with lawsuits threats from reporting on his assault stories. In fact NYT stock fell the day they reported on Wenstein assaults scandal.
That's strange freedom of press.

Madison320
07-20-2018, 10:21 AM
Again, you didn't watch/read the posted information before responding.

I'm guilty. I skipped the video at first but went back and watched the beginning of it. The over the top headline "Congress Steps In To Shut Down InfoWars" is not accurate but it still seems like a 1st amendment violation. For anyone who doesn't want to watch the video, congress was specifically threatening Facebook to remove InfoWars from its website. The 1st amendment says "Congress shall make no law …" but in this case Congress is making verbal threats. To me that's the same thing. In a way it's even worse because if they pass a law at least you have something concrete to fight against. This is a verbal threat to a private company. It's hard to fight something like that.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
07-20-2018, 11:34 AM
Jones has been claiming for years that the government was going to shut him down. His usual schtick.


Links?

donnay
07-20-2018, 12:16 PM
Again, you didn't watch/read the posted information before responding.

That's Zippy's M.O.

DamianTV
07-20-2018, 04:04 PM
Lets play with an idea here...

The idea is how to shut down InfoWars instead of how to keep them going, or if InfoWars is protected by First Amendment. And, lets do it legally.

Easy concept that respects Freedom of Press, called Free Market. So, if we wanted InfoWars shut down, then people would not watch, and companies would not associate with InfoWars by advertising products. First, InfoWars would adjust their prices for Law of Economics, for Supply & Demand. If that did not work, then InfoWars would go out of business because no one listened and no one bought advertising or sold products or provide services. Free Market and Free Press both work as neither Right is even remotely infringed.

The reason that Free Market has not worked in shutting down InfoWars is exactly because of Free Market, protected by Free Press. InfoWars has a Demand for people to get information that does not fit the MSM's Official Narrative about more war and bigger govt and terrorists and socialism / communism. InfoWars offers their own flavor with the exact opposite, that bigger govt is not the solution, socialism / communism does not work, more war hurts everyone, and individuals and small groups in high positions of power really are out to cause harm to people in various forms.

Both Alex and MSM offer different flavors of Sensationalism. That Sensationalism is a drug that can get people addicted as it plays on Emotions. Trouble is, people stop watching for the Truth, but rather how much information is Sensationalized in the way it is presented.

Anyone agree / disagree with that?

Anti Globalist
07-20-2018, 04:34 PM
Yeah nothing is going to happen to Infowars.

DamianTV
07-20-2018, 05:04 PM
Yeah nothing is going to happen to Infowars.

Again, its not just about InfoWars, it IS about Free Speech and Free Press for ALL people in general. That is what their Narrative is really designed to shut down. InfoWars is a Scapegoat.

Weston White
07-20-2018, 08:37 PM
Well, according to his ex, he is the devil incarnate. Though I did see watch a video interview of his on YT a month or two ago and she does not appear to be as crazy as I had originally though; in fact she appeared to be rather reasonable.