Infowars And Alex Jones Banned On Multiple Online Platforms

WTF2008 said:
Which video?
If you have the video that got him banned from twitter, Facebook, YouTube etc.
I want to see it.
Click to expand...
The one where he threatened to shoot Robert Mueller I believe was the one. I can't view it since it has been removed.
 
tonni said:
The one where he threatened to shoot Robert Mueller I believe was the one. I can't view it since it has been removed.
Click to expand...

It'd be nice if we could see it and decide for ourselves.

Remember when we could watch beheading videos from isis on Facebook?
Now we can't watch this video?
 
As many left-wing podcasters/political commentators have already figured out, this isn't about Alex Jones, but it's more so about setting a precedent. And even more so than that, setting that precedent by using a guy who happens to be very unlikeable and inconvenient to most people, particularly those that don't agree with his politics.

The people who think it's about what Alex Jones has said or how he has conducted himself, are missing the forest from the trees. He has been saying this shit for close to a decade and nothing has changed in that regard.

This is about flexing muscles, taking out a guy who has a million subscribers, and basically showing to everyone using these platforms that they can be silenced on a moment's notice, in a coordinated effort. And if you think it's only going to concern right-wing guys like Alex Jones, well, you might want to think again.

It's not like these platforms are such big supporters of socialist/progressive positions either, not when they become inconvenient. They'll do whatever needs to be done to avoid contracting any unwanted attention to their unregulated nature, and to continue being taxed and regulated as little as possible (which means that your "progressive" politics, unless endorsed by one of their paid-off air-headed goons like Trudeau/Macron, are off the table). And they'll sacrifice whoever in doing so. Even if it happens to be a man criticizing police officers or authoritarian governments, because after all, hating on cops and politicians is "hate speech" too.

Jones is just going to be a drop in the ocean in that regard. He's just a lightning rod, a scapegoat.
 
WTF2008 said:
It'd be nice if we could see it and decide for ourselves.

Remember when we could watch beheading videos from isis on Facebook?
Now we can't watch this video?
Click to expand...
The thing is he didn't actually threaten him at all. Yeah he made guna with his hands but anyone with a brain could see its a metaphor.
 
Last edited:
Lmao... Funny to see the same exact arguments used on both sides of the pond.

You guys remember the Starbucks controversy? Yeah, that was just a private company exerting it's "right" to let in and throw out whoever it wants for any reason.

But no... YouTube and Facebook are a big librul cunspriracy and shouldn't be doing that.

Hypocrites.
 
JuniorSonGoku said:
Lmao... Funny to see the same exact arguments used on both sides of the pond.

You guys remember the Starbucks controversy? Yeah, that was just a private company exerting it's "right" to let in and throw out whoever it wants for any reason.

But no... YouTube and Facebook are a big librul cunspriracy and shouldn't be doing that.

Hypocrites.
Click to expand...


I'm fine with Starbucks throwing out people who are taking up space and not buying anything. Their product is food/drinks in a comfortable environment. Their space is very limited and they need people to buy drinks/food to turn a profit. Also, Starbucks is not primarily a communications platform. In sum, the incident you mentioned wouldn't dissuade me from patronizing Starbucks. (Starbucks's inane response to the incident might, but that's a separate issue.)

A policy of censoring people on a social media platform like Facebook would tend to dissuade me from using the platform. Its product is a platform for connecting with people and sharing ideas. I'd rather be part of a platform in which bad ideas can be attacked and debunked (e.g., the Sherdog War Room) than a platform in which people with bad ideas/misinformation are banned.

Here in the War Room, there are a couple of posters whose writings I find inane and ignorant. I typically ignore them, and I never "report" them or otherwise hope they will be banned.
 
Last edited:
tonni said:
The one where he threatened to shoot Robert Mueller I believe was the one. I can't view it since it has been removed.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the video you are referencing?
 
JuniorSonGoku said:
Lmao... Funny to see the same exact arguments used on both sides of the pond.

You guys remember the Starbucks controversy? Yeah, that was just a private company exerting it's "right" to let in and throw out whoever it wants for any reason.

But no... YouTube and Facebook are a big librul cunspriracy and shouldn't be doing that.

Hypocrites.
Click to expand...



Starbucks had a rule "only customers can use the restroom". Simple.

These Silcon Valley companies are banning people for 'hate speech' which they themselves refuse to define, not to mention now guys are being banned for even talking about their policies now which has nothing to do with 'hate speech'


But yeah, it's the EXACT same thing...
 
GetTheseHands said:
Starbucks had a rule "only customers can use the restroom". Simple.

These Silcon Valley companies are banning people for 'hate speech' which they themselves refuse to define, not to mention now guys are being banned for even talking about their policies now which has nothing to do with 'hate speech'


But yeah, it's the EXACT same thing...
Click to expand...
lol and in their TOS that you agree to before you even get an account, they tell you they can ban you for any reason.....what's the problem again?
 
vengeful said:
lol and in their TOS that you agree to before you even get an account, they tell you they can ban you for any reason.....what's the problem again?
Click to expand...


Because some people are actually fundamentally against censorship (including many on the left) while others in embrace it because it works in their favor.
 
GetTheseHands said:
Because some people are actually fundamentally against censorship (including many on the left) while others in embrace it because it works in their favor.
Click to expand...
So your answer is to take away a private company's right to choose who can and can't be on their network and use their platform?
 
Throwin Bombs said:
Have you seen the video you are referencing?
Click to expand...
I've seen a clip of it. It is my own conspiracy theory that Alex Jones got himself banned on purpose because he needs his dickcheese fans to donate money to him for his court case.
 
tonni said:
I've seen a clip of it. It is my own conspiracy theory that Alex Jones got himself banned on purpose because he needs his dickcheese fans to donate money to him for his court case.
Click to expand...

Alright, then you know he didn't make a death threat to Mueller assuming you really did watch it.
 
Interesting video on Jared Holt being a big player behind Alex Jones getting disappeared.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,354
Messages
58,278,060
Members
175,990
Latest member
dobetterinc

Share this page

Back
Top