Alex Jones is Nuts
Radio talk show host, and conspiracy-theory promoter, Alex Jones has an especially remarkable theory concerning the Aurora, Colorado massacre: it was planned by the Obama administration (along with Fast and Furious and the Gabriel Giffords shooting) as a plot to let the UN take our guns away.
Here’s the video clip:
One the one hand, I recognize that the man’s audience is minuscule relative to the population, but it is depressing that there is any kind of audience for this nonsense at all. This clip also solidifies my opinion that Ron Paul deserves criticism for frequently appearing on Jones’ show and lending it legitimacy.
h/t: LGF
Well I can see why Fast and Furious looks suspicious but he lost me at “this was absolutely staged” in reference to the Shooting.Not to mention all that other crap he tried to jam in there like it was exculpatory evidence.
Small point Steven, how can Ron Paul lend something he has none of?
Because history has shown no government, especially ours is capable of behaving in such a way to peruse its interests (the government and those who comprise it) at the peril of its citizens. Nope. And no country, especially this one has ever done anything against liberty, or the individual and tried to cover it up. Nope.
Your opinions of this man may be valid, and his ideas may indeed be ‘out there’, but is he advocating the harm of any individual? Doesn’t seem so. His premise, if faulty on this occasion, is not invalid. Governments do and have harmed people to pursue their interests, and it is wise to be cautious of this.
On the idea of criticizing someone who has been on his show: Ok, good. But if your criticism is to maintain any validity you should first note what they were discussing, I am sure it has nothing to do with Aurora and being an inside job. You are in essence stating that what Mr. Jones says is 100% wrong 100% of the time (I wouldn’t know, as I don’t subscribe to his show but it seems unlikely).
If it were honest to maintain a level of criticism against an individual for the company they keep I think the company Barrack Obama kept is still valid in the public discourse. Lest we slip, and forget he has a notorious history of hanging with radicals and racists as well as radical racist preachers. After all, Obama’s preacher himself may be of the same ilk as Jones: “Governments lie, kill, and steal…” (paraphrase)- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whNE40AwVNo&feature=related
@OzarkHillbilly: Because Paul has contributed nothing to the public discourse and he has not inspired nor are there anyone in the populous that share his ideologies. “Quick point” should be amended to “cheap point.”
When did he stop?
Once, someone stood up and said “The US government is experimenting with deadly diseases on the American people!” Conspiracy! cried the crowd, blind to the motives of US politicians and government agencies. Turns out, it was true… Sometimes referred to as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, the idea was that the United States government was going to monitor the effects of syphilis and perform experiments on those who had a developed form of the disease. That doesn’t sound so bad, right? Well you’re a terrible person for thinking that, because the experiments were exclusively performed without consent, and on the very poor, mostly illiterate black males.
At some point someone once said “The US is experimenting with ‘mind control’ on the American people. CONSPIRACY! It is depressing that anyone would actually listen to this blather. Then comes the revelation of MKULTRA, It was actually a series of CIA experiments in which they tried to figure out how to control your mind. Over a hundred sub-projects were authorized under the MKULTRA heading, though the documents on many of those have been destroyed….
Doesn’t mean 100% of conspiracy theories are valid, but the urge to question and be skeptical is as valid as they come.
@B. Objective: You seem not to be able to differentiate between “having evidence” and “rampant, unsupported speculation.”
This is unfortunate, especially since you claim to be objective.
How about Jones has found yet another way to boost his number of subscribers and rally those who grow bored waiting for Russians with blue helmets to herd them into FEMA death camps? Like Paul, there is a huckster element at play. Perhaps more so in the case of Jones.
Consider these lines a mini-rant on the use of the word crazy to demonize. My cat tells me that’s not right.
“This clip also solidifies my opinion that Ron Paul deserves criticism for frequently appearing on Jones’ show and lending it legitimacy.”
The alternative being that Ron Paul is sincere and … actually believes this kind of loony crap.
@B. Objective:
Please open a dictionary and read the definition of the word “objective”. You will then realize to what extent your nom de plume is ill chosen.
@Steven L. Taylor: What more is there to a conspiracy than “unsupported speculation”? I did not validate said conspiracy nor do I pay it homage, I will however give credence to the idea that it is possible the government would conspire against the people it holds power over.
@Murray: I am sorry noble sir, I do realize that the idea of people having opinions and perspective that differ from yours is dangerous to your identity. I assume in your aware that it is almost impossible to be ‘objective’ thus the name is a play on words. However I would note that my refusal to toe the party line and consume every piece of blather that comes about on the interwebs is probably a far more objective position than your own. See, even that wasn’t objective.
@B. Objective: You are comparing a real event with a real one. Hence, my statement.
@Steven L. Taylor: Also, the amazing thing about the internet is that once you put something on there, it stays.
One can simply google your writings and “Jeremiah Wright” or “”Ayers” and with relative ease come to many examples where you refute the idea that because Obama shares time and space with certain individuals that it means Obama is of like mind, or as you say ‘lends it legitimacy’.
“Are you really suggesting that Obama shares ideological or political space with the Weather Underground.” You – Well he must! He did after all socialize with these people did he not?
“Again: you are assigning Ayers far more significance than he deserves.” You- But of course, this blow hard and Paul’s presence on his show garner some sort of ‘significance’ in your world view now.
“Can you detail, in any substantive way or provide any evidence whatsoever that Obama’s association with Ayers matters in any way?”- You again. Why does Paul’s presence on this show matter whatsoever?
Im sorry, but in regards to your Paul comment your own logic is self serving. It obviously doesn’t matter, so why say it if it were not a cheap shot?
Quotes above from:
@Steven L. Taylor: Pardon me? I am not discussing the Aurora shooting in conspiracy context. I am simply defending the methodology, even if I don’t agree with it, which brings people to conspiracy theories. And yes, conspiracies do often pop up around “real events”… That is an important part of the conspiracy.
@B. Objective:
Wild-ass guessing and rampant speculation is not a “methodology” by any definition of which I am aware.
@B. Objective:
I don’t question your right to an opinion or your right to fantasize about conspiracies. Just making fun of your childish “play of words”.
Let’s see: Bad, pompous writing — check. Adolescent self-importance — check. Woefully misguided overestimation of his own itelligence — check and double check.
I think B. Objective might be the most perfect specimen of the Paul-bot we’ve ever seen here…
@Murray: @Steven L. Taylor: Murray and Steven, I never said I believe any of the theories this guy espouses, as I am not aware of them and if I were the likelihood of me believing them would be slim to none. However, ‘conspiracies’ happen. Probably more than we know (ewwww, conspiracy!), and I don’t acknowledge, much like Steven in regards to Bill Ayers and Obama, that Paul’s presence on any such show would delegitimize him nor does it lend any legitimacy to the show.
@ Steven: Well since conspiracies are, well, conspiracies there is certainly an amount of ‘wild ass guessing’ going on. However, when the government’s cards have been shown it is often the case that the facts are so crazy anyone who acknowledges them before the majority would be marginalized as ‘nuts’ or ‘crazy’ by default. Is Alex Jones a nut? Maybe. But is being skeptical of the government sufficient to call him (or others like him) so? This is my premise. And your note about Ron Paul? Nonsense.
@B. Objective: For your point to have an validity, you would have to show a case in which there was a conspiracy that was revealed by nothing more than wild ass guessery.
You are condoning behavior that does not deserve condoning.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Noble effort Steven. Your patience shows why you succeeded in education whereas I …. miserably failed. (Or is it that the weather is particularly lousy in your neck of the woods today and you haven’t got anything else to do?)
I do find it interesting how the NRA and the right wing at large does not care the least about how guns are procured, how they are moved across borders, how unregulated much of the gun traffic is …. until you bring up”Fast & Furious.”
@Murray: Patience in the face of ongoing misunderstanding is part of my job description, I guess. 😉
The degree to which I have ultimately succeeded is a whole ‘nother issue.
@B. Objective:
So do you believe Alex Jones, or not?
@Steven L. Taylor: It is not ‘wild ass guessing’ so much as an interpretation of the facts.
Of course, skepticism should not be condoned- said no free person, ever.
@B. Objective:
– Earth is round is a fact.
– Oranges are round is a fact.
The earth is blue like an orange is wild ass guessing.
@B. Objective:
Not only are you not advancing your argument, you are showing yourself to be rather poor at understanding how to sift through information to come to defensible and logical conclusions.
Alex Jones has been right in his predictions 98 percent of the time. When will everyone that posted on this board wake up to the Tyranny that is being hoisted onto the American population? My guess is when it’s too late, and we are living in a Nazi Germany but here in modern times. Fiat currencies always collapse. Historically, they always have. US dollar collapses, and martial law sets in, and everyone will say that Alex Jones told you so. While I do not have a solution to these many problems that the shadow government is creating, I would start with a Constitutional Convention, to review all the Executive Orders that have been made since 1776, and revoke The Patriot Act, The Federal Reserve Act, [both unconstitutional], and many many more. I am glad I am not responsible for raising young children in this day and age. They are the ones who will suffer the most eventually.
We have a winner!
@Murray: You beat me to it.
Your teach is showing doc…
@JOHN DICKERSHANK:
What predictions comprised the 2% failure rate?
It will be proved that Pamela Anderson’s breasts are not enhanced
It will be proved that the 2008 financial crash was engineered by William Ayres,
It will be proved that Orthodox Jews were behind the September 11th conspiracy.
This is what you get for posting something about Jones. It’s always attracts crazy.
@mantis:
I think it’s possible that Alex Jones was behind the Fast & Furious operation.
This thread is yet anothe example of why the conservative movement is doomed. If I were a conservative and had even one remaining functioning brain cell devoted to thinking rather than autonomous operations such as breathing, I would try to think of some other identifier.
@Steven L. Taylor: This is dense. You are not grasping what I am getting at. ‘Interpretation of facts’, everyone does it on some level. Most just drink from the tap. Others analyze data and conclude other interpretations than your or my own. I have never defended any conspiracy in general, nor any conspirator. That is beside the point. The idea is that skepticism should be welcome, even when you don’t agree and does not appear to be logical to you.
A chain of events such as the combination of the Patriot Act, the Provisions of Indefinite Detention in the 12′ NDAA, Military Branches training MP’s at a record rate, the UN proposal on illegal arms trades, the deterioration of state sovereignty, expansion of federal powers, etc etc etc could lead someone so inclined to deduce something sinister, throwing it on top of the tendency of conspiracy theorist to hark on the infamous “NWO” speech . Others such as myself and perhaps you sees a string of public policy, not necessarily connected in any specific matter. But it is all an interpretation of data and we should welcome skeptics… god forbid they be right about a thing or two.
I assume those involved with Tuskegee Experiments or aware of its existence, or even dared to question the government should have been quiet forever. We wouldn’t want to come to any conclusions not in accordance with the status quo.
@B. Objective:
About this much we can agree, although I expect for different reasons.
I’m guessing Objectivism as in Ayn Rand, not objectivity.
The fact is, most conspiracy-believers are bored people who can’t find enough interest in their own lives. So they have to jazz up their mental universe with Teh Seekrit Ebil Commies, or Teh Seekrit Ebil Nazis, or Teh Moon Landing was Faked! or whatever.
Of course, when you start believing in a conspiracy, all evidence that anyone shows you that the conspiracy doesn’t exist is immediately labeled as a cover-up. The reasonable explanation is always thrown away for the wild, crazy-assed one. (Witness A: the Birfers, and nitrous-addled drag queen who leads them.)
As said, they’re bored little schmucks. And Alex Jones panders to them.
@JOHN DICKERSHANK:
Yeah, global warming is really going to kick the piss out of them young’uns.
@B. Objective:
Illogical skepticism is the worst waste of a brain I can imagine. That’s the breeding ground of solipsism, narcissism, maybe nihilism, all sorts of nasty isms there. Too exhausting.
To be fair, there are actual conspiracies. They’re just never as grandiose as we’d like them to be. They’re all concerned with minor stuff like “improving quarterly profits” or “electing our jackass” or “concentrated media blitz to convince the public there is uncertainty concerning the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change.” Considering how difficult those conspiracies are to pull off in terms of hours worked and money spent, ruling the world would be hell on any conspirators daft enough to try.