MovieChat Forums > Alex Jones Discussion > Questioning catalizing events is now a c...

Questioning catalizing events is now a crime


When some important event like a school shooting happens, nobody will dare publicly question the event because some idiots might call the families of the victims and harass them leading to that person having to pay 50 million dollars. This is not good for society. The ability to question events such as this necessary for social health. This verdict is a dangerous precedent. The victim's families should have sued the actual people harassing them, not the guy who questioned the event online. But they knew that the losers who actually harassed them didn't have any money, so they sued Jones who has money. Greed got the better of them. If you ask me shame on the families, their lawyers and the judge who handed this verdict.

reply

The key is to create a half assed “media”organization like The Atlantic or Buzzfeed and have them write the story using unnamed sources and “insiders”. Or better yet, just quote “Twitter outrage” as your source.

This is how the Democrat media at ABCNNBCBS have been doing it for decades. It’s how they create fantasies like the Russia Collusion hoax based on no facts. “CNN is reporting that Wapo is reporting that ABCNNBCBS is reporting that Buzzfeed is reporting that someone heard someone say something on Twitter” - The NYTimes

reply

this is how the dems have been doing it? LOL this is the rights entire model. quote 3 people on twitter as "dems call for death of republicans"

reply

I detect a huge lack of empathy in your post.

You do realize that the Sandy Hook shootings actually happened, I assume. What if it was one of your kids that got murdered? How would you react if some smug jerk started taunting you and the other families and made deliberately false statements that caused others to harass you and our family?

This case was absolutely not about the right to question accuracy of stories or the right to voice skepticism. Alex Jones knew he was spreading lies, but didn't care. It gave him lots of attention and extra money. Greed and arrogance got the better of Alex Jones, not his victims.

Believe it or not, there is no such thing as complete free speech. You can't:
- lie under oath in court
- yell "fire" in a crowded theatre
- disregard a publication ban when ordered by a judge
- lie to cops when they question you about some thing (not a 5th amendment issue); ie to mislead the cops when they are chasing a suspect - you say he ran one way when you know he ran another.
- etc.

reply

I would sue the people that harassed me not people who spread conspiracy theories online. The latter are innevitable in any high profile event.

It was never proven Jones knew what he was saying was false.


You can't:
- lie under oath in court
- yell "fire" in a crowded theatre
- disregard a publication ban when ordered by a judge
- lie to cops when they question you about some thing (not a 5th amendment issue); ie to mislead the cops when they are chasing a suspect - you say he ran one way when you know he ran another.
- etc.



This case does not fall in any examples you listed.

reply

He got caught lying under oath. Did you watch the court case? You realize he lied about his email. That is violating the law!

reply

I'm not a defender of Alex Jones. I'm a defender of a right to question things and free speech. I don't care weather or not Jones is 100% honest.

reply

Yes you are a defender of him. You have shown more sympathy to him than the victims of Sandy Hook. That is disgusting.

reply

its not surprising. Overton is disgusting.

reply

He is a nazi scumbag.

reply

ya but hes okay with slavic people and hes slavic, so he cant be a nazi cause nazis hated slavs....

reply

True. Either way he is human garbage.

reply

I was being sarcastic at his piss poor defence

reply

Oh I figured lol. He is one of my most hated users on this board. I truly believe that man is stuck in the 1800's racist mindset.

reply

[deleted]

Wow classy there bud.

reply

[deleted]

I never showed sympathy to him. I was only concerned about social implications to free speech.

reply

which have always been limited by slander and libel for good reason. He had zero evidence of any false flag crisis actors, let alone the parents of dead kids were faking it. he knowingly slandered these people and actions have consequences. grow up

reply

He had plenty of evidence. He is right about 9/11. Ability to questioning important events is cortical to social health.

reply

LOOOLLLLLLL see I knew you were a conspiracy theorist just below the surface and couldn't even hold it back for 3 comments and just pretend its about slippery slope issues.

HHAHAHAHAHAHAAH

reply

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but the fact 9/11 is a lie should be obvious to anyone with half a brain.

reply

Vitim's of sandy hook families are free speech restrictors and deserve no sympathy.

reply

yess they are victims because they want to hold the person accountable who spread lies and had them receive death threats and harassment.

having your kids killed and wanting to stop death threats is bad
spreading lies that lead to death threats is good.

Overton shows his stupidity yet again

reply

Alex Jones never called for anyone to receive death threat you walking, talking human excrement. All he did was question things which is doing a public good. The more people question events like this the less likely is it there will really be a conspiracy.

reply

yes he is smart enough to not say "go harass and threaten them". he just spins a narrative of how evil, disgusting and horrible they are and how its all a plan to take your guns. knowing full well his audience will act.

" The more people question events like this the less likely is it there will really be a conspiracy."

this makes no sense. try again. you can apply that to flat earth's.

reply

He should have a right to question every event he feels like it.

It makes perfect sense, you're just too dumb to get it.

The people who sued Alex Jones are human scum and so are you.

reply

im too dumb to understand slander.. I guess so is the judge. and the myriad of experts who agree this was an easy case....

yaa the people who want the guy who spread lies and got them death threats are scum. how dare they be mad that Alex jones riled up his crowd to harass them and call them and threaten them and call saying they dont have dead kids. what scum!

up is down and down is up to our resident neo nazi

reply

Take a hike scum Leo.

reply

so again slander is madeup right>?? the judge is wrong? ol keep calling parents of dead kids scum. your are the epitome of a garbage person. its why even the right wingers on here dont like you

reply

Take a hike scum Leo.

reply

Alex Jones was the one profiting from from his comments and was the instigator of all this. The parents had copies of what he said on his program (hard evidence). Jones later admitted that the shooting did happen. It really doesn't matter if he actually knew, as it was his responsibility to get the facts before he made the statements.

From Wikipedia:
Court rulings
By February 2019, the plaintiffs won a series of court rulings requiring Jones to testify under oath.[12] Jones was later ordered to undergo a sworn deposition, along with three other defendants related to the operation of Infowars. He was also ordered to turn over internal business documents related to Infowars.[244] In this deposition in the last week of March 2019, Jones acknowledged the deaths were real, stating he had "almost like a form of psychosis", where he "basically thought everything was staged."[245]

On January 22, 2021, the Texas Supreme Court threw out an appeal for dismissal by Jones of four defamation lawsuits from families of Sandy Hook victims. The court allowed the judgments of two lower courts to stand without comment, allowing the lawsuits to continue.[246] On April 5, 2021, the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal against a Connecticut court sanction in the defamation lawsuit.[247]

As for this case not under the list, that's why I had "etc". I should have added you can't make false and damaging statements against anyone. For example, you can't go to the police and accuse a person falsely of a crime. You can't accuse someone falsely of being a pedophile.

reply

He had to say the attack was real because he was being sued. I still think the verdict was wrong. The ability to question important events is more important for society than someone's hurt feelings.

reply

He knew the attack was real. He knowingly exploited trivial circumstances surrounding the reporting of it to promote a theory that was attractive to anti-gun control fans of his. There is evidence of this and so he admitted to it in court instead of perjuring himself. That's justice.

reply

You don't know he knew. There have been previous actual false flags like 9/11

reply

Completely meaningless.

reply

Jones admitted that the Sandy hook shooting did happen.

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/03/1115414563/alex-jones-sandy-hook-case

So why did he say it was a hoax and accuse the parents of being part of the hoax? For publicity for his program where he sold garbage to a gullible public.

reply

He had to say he "admitted it". He doesn't believe it for a moment. That's coercion by lawsuit.

reply

Is this something you made up, or do you have proof?

reply

I didn't keep up with this trial and I don't like AJ's style. So, I rarely listened to his show.

But I do think this could open up other avenues for various law suits. Example, suppose I say something controversial about Brad Pitt or Kanye West, and a few people harass them using my comments as justification, should I get sued over it and forced to pay millions in restitution for alleged pain and suffering Pitt and West "felt"?

I mean, it's one thing to say things that are controversial and saying things that are downright stupid. But even so, how much does 'free speech' protect one's rights to say it? As far as I know, the first amendment doesn't care about your "feelings".

Plus, if anything, this makes Jones a martyr to some degree. He's now a champion in the eyes of free speech advocates. It was the same snowball effect with Donald Trump. He said a "naughty things" on twitter and during press conferences that the left didn't like but many saw him as a hero for it.

Is it not better to ignore fruitless comments than to give them power?

reply

He flat out called the victims crisis actors. Unveiled personal identifying information about the victims which led to them being harassed. That is different from saying it is a conspiracy and leaving it at that. He stepped over the line.

reply

moviefanatic-

Post a link to a video-clip of him saying this. I don't agree with doxxing people, personally, I think it should be a crime to do this but plenty of people had no problems when it happened to members of congress/supreme court that they didn't like. In fact, Trump gave out several phone numbers of various members of congress that he had issues with.

So again, where does "free speech" fall on this issue? Are we just going to do this against people we don't like and ignore those that we do? I can already tell, most of the posters in here simply don't like Jones.

reply

He had videos removed and banned. I would have to do some digging but he mocked specific people on TV for crying about their loved ones. I don't support doxxing no matter who it is.

It goes beyond me not liking Jones. What annoys me is people want me to feel sympathy for someone who caused victims endless amounts of harassment. He was profiting off of people's suffering. Even if you can do that it's rather disgusting behavior. I find it funny how people on this board have more sympathy for Jones than the victims. Isn't that rather disturbing that he gets more sympathy than they do?

reply

Disturbing? Not really. I find it to be typical human behavior to pick sides when it comes to legal cases like this.

Jones is a well known public figure, so it's not too surprising that some people are backing him on this issue. Personally, I don't have a horse in this race but I do feel bad for anyone that gets harassed no matter what they did or didn't do. But blaming an outside force for what others are doing is more disturbing.

reply

No in my book it is disturbing. Why pick a side when it's been proven wrong? That's where corruption begins. I will excuse his behavior simply because he plays for my team.

I don't care if he is well known or public. R Kelly is well known famous musician. Does that mean I should excuse what he did? He doxxed them. That is a crime so no.

reply

When you say "disturbing" that opens up all kinds of emotional issues. Let me ask you fanatic505, are you going to lose any sleep tonight over what is being said in here?

If so, why? People are idiots, they will choose whatever side they can relate to the most. I think it's bad that the parents got harassed over this but to be honest, there are plenty of people that don't sympathize with Jones either.

I wouldn't look at this as some kind of "evil taking place". I prefer to look at it from strictly a legal perspective but that's just me I suppose. I don't like what Jones did but from a legal point of view, I don't see it as "crime" either.

It is probably better to debunk what the guy says rather than get emotionally involved.

reply

Yeah honestly. It's insane people honestly for sympathy for a guy like this.


People being biased is one thing. It's a whole other issue when you will blatantly defend corruption or bad deeds. This isn't hearsay. It's been proven he lied. No sympathy for the victims but they give him sympathy. That's insane.

reply

Suppose you did say something contoversial about an actor. If it's true, you're covered. For example, I call Winona Ryder a thief. She was convicted of the offence, albeit 20 or so years ago.

If I accuse an actor of being a pedophile without evidence, you could get sued. That sort of thing damages careers.

reply

Brock,

I hear ya, but making false statements is not a crime unless you do it under oath. People lie all the time, should we lock'em all up?

reply

He lied under oath... Watch the court case.

reply

If he did in fact lie under oath, is he going to jail?

reply

Not if. He did lie. Watch the court case. Of course not. You know the law doesn't apply to rich folks the same way it does the common man.

reply

its a civil case buddy. how many people lie in cases and dont get time? by definition side is lying in every court case. stop spreading nonsense on here

reply

Leo, I think it depends on what state you're in but according to this article here, Jones could actually do some jail time for perjury. https://news.yahoo.com/alex-jones-could-face-perjury-001144948.html

So, you see, you don't know that much about it either. However, do you ever wonder why we don't put people in jail for lying, unless it's under oath of course? I want you to think about it for a few moments before you answer this question.

reply

ohh its possible I just meant in a civil case its far less likely

"So, you see, you don't know that much about it either. However, do you ever wonder why we don't put people in jail for lying, unless it's under oath of course? I want you to think about it for a few moments before you answer this question. "

completely irrelevant. maybe try and be less clever, it doesnt suit you

reply

By your own weak arguments, do you think Pendulum should sue you and fanatic505 for harassing him and calling him a "nazi" for simply giving his opinion on this case and on top of that, you make false claims that he doesn't sympathize with the victims and he is a "disgusting" person. Goodness, it's the worst example of pot/kettle I've seen on the MC boards in a long time.


I think Pendulum would have a very strong case against you, should he decide to sue you for slander, libel and defamation.

reply

Id have a strong case to make that Overton is a Neo nazi with his disgusting comments about race mixing and jews.

you dont seem to know what pot calling the kettle means.

"I think Pendulum would have a very strong case against you, should he decide to sue you for slander, libel and defamation."

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE have hims tart some case and DM me. ill give him all my private info if he does do something legal. id be happy to own his ass in court like I do on this site

reply

He shouldn't make comments like that, but did Overton make those comments in this thread? I'm strictly going by what's been written in here.

And you keep complaining about the things AJ said then you make accusations against Overton. So, pot/kettle seems alright.

Of course no one is going to sue for what people write in here. It's mostly anonymous posting, and most of us in here have no fear of retaliation, so they feel as though they can say anything and get away with it. Example, calling someone a "nazi" in here. lol...

How often do you use Godwin's law when discussing topics on the MC boards?

reply

not this one but I started a thread about it I could probably find and send the link over to you.

I compiled a few interactions and direct quotes where he said

-white women should be warned about relations with minorities
-their children are far likelier to have lower its and be criminals
-minority abortions should be encouraged to lower crime rates
-and as silly as it sounds, that married with children was a jewish plot to lower white birth rates y making marriage look horrible.

although you'll have to take my word on this, I have only ever called one person a nazi, I dont throw it around lightly. that is Overton. because based on what hes said his opinions wouldn't be out of place in a nazi eugenics pamphlet

here I found my original post

https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/621cfe6906d73d614661cc90/so-we-have-a-literal-nazi-on-here

reply

damn, he is pretty bad. Overton should apologize for those comments immediately.

reply

his excuse is "im not a nazi because my views would align with most people from the 1950s including the troops who fought the nazis". he isnt about to apologize any time soon

but ya he is essentially a neo nazis imo and like I said the only person on here I have ever called a nazi. you couldnt have known all that background

reply

False statements are not always a crime, but you can get sued for them - a matter of civil vs criminal matter.

If someone accuses you of something serious, they may not go to jail but they could be sued.

A person could go to jail for filling a false police report against someone (public nuisance). They could also be sued.

reply

Yep that is true, which is why its amazing that Jussie Smollett is a free man today.

Looks like a select few can get away with it, while others can't.

"Something serious" is decided by whom though? If I call Joe Biden a "hair sniffing pervert" and at his next rally, a few people call him a "hair sniffing pervert" should I go to jail or be sued?

This is why slander and defamation suits are hard to win in court. For the most part, you're just suing someone for what they said, not for what they actually did.

reply

You bring up some good points.

The only thing with Jussie Smollet is that he is out of jail pending his appeal. I believe he is delaying the inevitable. There was a lot of evidence against him.

reply

That has come as a surprise.

reply

I agree that the people doing the harassing should be the one's who get sued. I'm just as puzzled as you are... this isn't right.

reply

A lot of people either dumb or willfully missing your point.

reply

Exactly.

reply

Textbook defamation. Entitled to damages. That said, the whole thing is probably another setup.

I saw a lot of suspicious shit around Sandy Hook, and more of the same in Uvalde. Targeting the victims was some low shit. No one gave conspiracy theorists the benefit of the doubt that they had good intentions after that. It muddied the entire pool of evidence. Alex Jones has long been suspected of being a CIA asset, whose job is to do just that.

reply

"ITS ALL PART OF THE PLAN!!! sandy hook wasnt the false flag!!!!!!!!!!!! the events after are the false flag!!! probably paid fbi actors and shills calling these parents so then the false flag of the false flag cant be questioned!!!!"

seek medical help.........

reply

Another plant pretending to be a nutcase... good for you.

reply

I never questioned Sandy Hook.

Eat Shit, Leo

reply

your implications that if make rulings against slander then all free speech will be ended are hilariously ignorant. but I wouldn't expect anything other than that from you

reply

No they aren't. Plenty of mainstream journalist have made that parallel.

reply

and I care why?? congrats you can find other crazy people who agree. I guess the earth is flat too! I found people who agree with me!

You a day ago. "I never questioned Sandy Hook. Eat Shit, Leo"

you today in response to me saying he had no evidence of false flag and crisis actors in sandy hook

"He had plenty of evidence. He is right about 9/11. Ability to questioning important events is cortical to social health."

overtonliar gets caught lying again!



reply

There's nothing crazy about free speech implications of this verdict. Me saying there is evidence for questioning Sandy Hook is not the same thing as saying that Sandy Hook was a false flag. But someone as rational and smart as you should already know that.

reply

again


first comment "I never questioned Sandy Hook. Eat Shit, Leo"

second comment "He had plenty of evidence. He is right about 9/11. Ability to questioning important events is cortical to social health.""

"here's nothing crazy about free speech implications of this verdict. Me saying there is evidence for questioning Sandy Hook is not the same thing as saying that Sandy Hook was a false flag"

soo did you or did you not question sandy hook? this is you getting caught in your lies contradicting you.

so did you "never question Sandy hook". or did you say " there is evidence for questioning Sandy Hook "

what are you questioning then? and what are you defending? because you are literally defending someone who was questioning if sandy hook was actually a false flag to "take guns"and actually perpetrated by us government forces and hired crisis actors. thats the questioning we are discussing. thats what Alex jones said. what are you questioning about sandy hook?

you are trying to speak out both sides of your mouth again like you did with obese moms. you got caught in the trap of your own lies again. you make this too easy

reply

tldr, moron.

reply