Part 1: He “employed hate speech and violated community standards.”
Rivers of elite revenge are flowing.
THEY are out to get him and drive him into oblivion.
He, and his huge website, Infowars, stand as a threat to the empire they are building, where free speech is a thing of the past and only correct speech that supports THEIR objectives is permitted.
Monday, the coordinated war against Alex Jones escalated along several fronts, within a space of about 12 hours, according to infowars reporter Paul Watson:
“Apple, Facebook, YouTube and Pinterest clamped down on content by Alex Jones Monday.”“Apple confirmed on Monday that it had removed five out of six podcasts, which includes Jones’ infamous ‘The Alex Jones Show’ as well as a number of other InfoWars audio streams.”“Facebook and Google made similar decisions later on Monday. Facebook removed four pages controlled by him, while Google removed the official “Alex Jones Channel” on its platform. The YouTube channel for InfoWars, the media company owned by Alex Jones, still remains live. Pinterest also removed the InfoWars board.”
I just saw a report that YouTube has taken down Jones’ channel altogether. That would mean tens of thousands of videos of his past shows are gone from that platform. Here are links you would go to, to listen to his show now:
Live stream: 4pm to 7pm ET:
There are several reasons for this war against Jones and infowars. One is: he rallied untold numbers of “deplorables” and helped elect Donald Trump.
Another is: over and over, he has described the differences between nationalism and globalism—and he favors nationalism, in particular for America.
The tech giants/social media who are aligned against him ARE CORPORATIONS.
Therefore, they can ban Jones and not face the raft of rules they would have to deal with if they were public utilities.
However, there is no doubt these corporations are colluding in restraint of trade, to invoke an old phrase pertaining to trusts and monopolies. They are waging a COORDINATED COLLABORATIVE war against Jones.
In fact, several years ago, major news giants approached social media giants and pleaded for help. The news businesses were fading further into the background. They needed Facebook, for example, to feature their coverage of the news.
The dark side of this collusion was and is: put big alt.-news operations out of business. Delist them. De-platform them. Delete them.
And so it has been happening, and it is escalating now.
Here is where the free-speech angle enters the scene: suppose a member of a favored minority (fill in that blank yourself) launched a podcast mercilessly attacking “traditional American values” and those Americans who support those values. Would Facebook or You Tube lift a finger to stop them? No? Then why attack Alex Jones?
The answer is simple.
This issue is not about Jones engaging in “hate speech” or “violating community standards.”
It’s about whose speech and ideas are favored and whose are opposed.
The solution and the response to the war on Jones (or any number of other so-called conservatives) is:
GO DIRECTLY TO THEIR SITES AND BLOGS. DON’T USE SOCIAL MEDIA TO GET THERE.
Part 2: Many strange things can be implemented on the basis of “protecting the herd.”
“You see, censorship is good if the person being censored is someone you don’t like. That’s right. You didn’t know that, did you? That’s the secret meaning of the 1st Amendment.”
—Here is how foul the political air is now, how low the ‘logic’ has sunk. If you don’t agree that Facebook censoring a particular person is a good thing, then you must be supporting
that censored person. You must be on his side. There is no middle ground. There is no Bill of Rights. There is only like and hate, and hate implies there is a target to be censored—
Whole generations are being raised to think of censorship as a pleasant solution to speech they don’t like, people they don’t like, ideas they don’t like.
I’ve received an email outlining reasons not to like Alex Jones. It stopped short of saying he should be censored. Instead, it accused me of supporting him. Which of course ISN’T THE ISSUE. The issue is, should Jones be banned.
Several generations know NOTHING about the 1st Amendment or corporate monopoly of the news. All they know is: “shut bad people up.”
You could run the following Noam Chomsky quote by such people and see what reaction you get: “If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.”
The reaction you’d get? Some form of non-comprehension. In the case of the massive social-media banning of Alex Jones that occurred yesterday, these know-nothings would say:
“Good. I’m glad he’s censored.”
But if social media giants can ban Jones, they can move right along to another target. They can decide that anyone who speaks out against vaccination is a danger to the community and must be silenced. They can decide anyone who defends Russia for any reason is by implication a Trump supporter, and a menace, and should have his social media presence diminished; perhaps covertly.
Many strange things can be implemented on the basis of “protecting the herd.”
The animals in the herd have a boss and if they obey the boss all goes well. The boss knows what language they should be exposed to, and what language they shouldn’t encounter. The boss understands the herd’s needs.
The Washington Examiner: “Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., is calling on other tech companies to ban more sites like InfoWars, and says the survival of American democracy depends on it.”
“’Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart. These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it’,” Murphy tweeted Monday.
So ignorance of the 1st Amendment easily reaches as high as the US senate. Who is this moron, Chris Murphy? What lies is he talking about? What hate? Let’s see the examples and the evidence—unless Murphy isn’t a standard moron at all. He’s a Democrat pushing an agenda: get rid of Alex Jones because Jones is a threat to the political Left.
Major media, in particular, have their knives out for Jones, because he is taking away chunks of their audience, and they have no solution for it—except to appeal to their social media brethren to censor Jones, block him, and declare war against him.
In this day and age, the easiest way to do that is to say a person is a hater and a bigot and a violator of community standards. It falls out this way:
“MR. JONES, YOU’VE INSULTED SO MANY GROUPS AND RAISED SUCH HATRED AGAINST THEM, WE’RE CENSORING YOU AND BANNING YOU. YOU’RE SUCH A PARIAH THE SPIRIT OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOESN’T APPLY TO YOU.”
What Jones, IN TOTALITY, has actually been doing and saying for the past couple of decades is another matter entirely. You’re not supposed to explore that. You’re not supposed to go to Infowars.com and find out, because you might become exposed to dangerous thoughts or facts. You’re supposed to pretend you know what’s happening at infowars by listening to its critics and leave it at that. You’re supposed to be incurious and oblivious and, therefore, a “perfect citizen.”
You’re supposed to be apathetic about censorship.
IF YOU DON’T LIKE A PERSON FOR ANY REASON, YOU’RE NOT SUPPOSED TO CARE IF THEY’RE CENSORED.
“Well, you see, Jones is not a good person. Therefore, ban him. Yes. Who cares? And if anyone is against banning him, they are supporting him and they’re bad, too.”“That new criminal running around? He just posted a piece about keeping Mein Kampf on library shelves and not banning Hitler. That means he supports Hitler and Hitler’s ideas. So he is a copy of Hitler. Ban him. Censor him. Excommunicate him.”
“Colored people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it.” (Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451 (1953).
“The FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, decided all by itself that radio and television were the only two parts of American life not protected by the free speech provisions of the first amendment to the Constitution. I’d like to repeat that, because it sounds… vaguely important! The FCC—an appointed body, not elected, answerable only to the president—decided on its own that radio and television were the only two parts of American life not protected by the first amendment to the Constitution. Why did they decide that? Because they got a letter from a minister in Mississippi! A Reverend Donald Wildman in Mississippi heard something on the radio that he didn’t like. Well, Reverend, did anyone ever tell you there are two KNOBS on the radio? Two. Knobs. On the radio. Of course, I’m sure the reverend isn’t that comfortable with anything that has two knobs on it… But hey, reverend, there are two knobs on the radio! One of them turns the radio OFF, and the other one [slaps his head] CHANGES THE STATION! Imagine that, reverend, you can actually change the station! It’s called freedom of choice, and it’s one of the principles this country was founded upon. Look it up in the library, reverend, if you have any of them left when you’ve finished burning all the books.” (George Carlin, 1988)
“To whom do you award the right to decide which speech is harmful, or who is the harmful speaker? Or to determine in advance what are the harmful consequences going to be that we know enough about in advance to prevent? To whom would you give this job? To whom are you going to award the task of being the censor?…To whom you would delegate the task of deciding for you what you could read? To whom you would give the job of deciding for you – relieve you of the responsibility of hearing what you might have to hear? Do you know anyone? Hands up. Do you know anyone to whom you’d give this job? Does anyone have a nominee?” (Christopher Hitchens, 2006)
Here are links you to go to, to listen to the Alex Jones shows now:
Live stream: 4pm to 7pm ET:
Part 3: Where is the bill of particulars against him?
When several big-tech companies remove a person from their platforms in a 12-hour period, which is what happened to Alex Jones, you need to ask:
Where are the specific violations Jones is charged with?Where is the bill of particulars against him?Where is the “hate speech” he is accused of spewing to his audience?What definition (if any) of hate speech is being used as a measuring stick?Asking those questions, you come up very short on answers.
Jones is being made into a SYMBOL of a hater by social media and the mainstream press—and when THAT is the objective, the whole idea is to avoid specifics and just smear the target with a very broad and general brush.
“Hate speech” is replacing the 1st Amendment as a standard of judgment. The question now is: did you express hate toward someone? Rather than: did you commit slander or libel?
Did you utter something that could offend and might disturb a victim or victim-group? Yes? YOU’RE BANNED. CENSORED. Of course, social media giants decide what constitutes hate and who is designated a victim-group with “protected status.”
The term “hate speech” is very elastic. Its definition can be changed on a moment’s notice.
Don’t like someone?
Upset at their actual ideas?
Disturbed at their success?
Embroil them in charges of being a hater and expressing hatred toward victims. Ban and censor them from online platforms based on that accusation. Ignore millions of their words—instead, invoke a few outbursts they committed over the years.
And finally, make the conversation all about whether the accused—in this case, Jones—is good or not, is honest or not, is caring or not, is worthy or not—AS IF THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS WOULD DECIDE WHETHER BANNING JONES FROM ONLNE PLATFORMS WAS A CORRECT ACTION.
This is the ultimate diversion and distraction, for increasing numbers of the dumbed-down public.
And toss the brain-challenged a bone—permission to HATE THE HATER.
“You see, in this case, it’s OK to hate, because the target is a hater. So go to it, express all that bottled-up emotion. Have a field day.”“With every molecule of hate you express, you change the meaning of the Bill of Rights and the 1st Amendment. And this is exactly what we need: a new society based on less freedom and more goodness.”
Less freedom, more goodness.
If you buy that package, I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon.
Here are links you to go to, to listen to the Alex Jones shows now:
Live stream: 4pm to 7pm ET:
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)
Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
Please follow and like us: