It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Next Level BS #20: Alex Jones Gets It Wrong on Net Neutrality

page: 5
105
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
Alex Jones believes in Nut Neutrality.

This right-wing tea party fake conspiracy theorist is a shill for some right wing think tank Koch type sinister group

Who cares what he thinks.

He spouts typical right-wing, fake freedom (2nd amendment, hate the government across the line dogma of love the rich and hate paying taxes) even though his fat ass lives off the
Largess of this civilizations wealth and infrastructure just like ALL these fake, phoney right-wingers


Yah he makes a living in the dreaded private sector media just like Ed Schulz and Rachel Maddow. I bet Rachel and Ed are both pretty wealthy right now.




posted on Nov, 15 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   
I've had a chance this weekend to communicate with many Internet business owners. Some of what I learned/confirmed will be part of what I talking about on ATS Live in the second hour of the show -- one hour from the time of this post.



posted on Nov, 15 2014 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Here's hoping it won't raise taxes


Reclassifying broadband as a regulated common carrier under Title II of the Communications Act would expose broadband services to a 16 percent telecom service fee that supports the FCC’s Universal Service Fund, said several speakers at net neutrality discussion hosted by antiregulation think tank the Free State Foundation [FSF].
Title II regulation would open broadband up to several new regulations, including USF fees and state and local telecom taxes, speakers at the event said. “Consumers of these services would face an immediate increase in their bills,” said Republican FCC member Michael O’Rielly.

Supporters of broadband reclassification say the FCC could exempt broadband from most telecom-style regulations. Title II is the only way the FCC can ensure “clear, bright-line” rules prohibiting broadband providers from selectively blocking or throttling Web content will be enforceable, countered Michael Weinberg, vice president of digital rights group Public Knowledge.

The FSF’s event, titled “thinking the unthinkable,” came just days after Obama waded deep into the net neutrality debate by endorsing the reclassification of broadband from a lightly regulated information service to a regulated telecom service


www.pcworld.com...



posted on Nov, 15 2014 @ 11:48 PM
link   
The Prez basically says Net Neutrality already exists de facto


That seems to be the president’s concern, too. But why he would fear it is a mystery, given that, as he says in the video:

Ever since the Internet was created, it’s been organized around basic principles of openness, fairness, and freedom. There are no gatekeepers deciding which sites you get to access. There are no toll roads on the information superhighway. This set of principles – the idea of “net neutrality” – has unleashed the power of the Internet and given innovators the chance to thrive.

That is, “net neutrality” de facto already exists, without the aid of any governmental entity to enforce it. Why, then, is government enforcement suddenly necessary to maintain the status quo?



www.nationalreview.com...

He even says there are no gatekeepers....

Maybe what he really wants is a federal gatekeeper



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: theNLBS

Joe, you've really settled into your role now and I salute you. Best episode yet by a long way, smart work sir!



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: myselfaswell

agreed hes full of BS

i used to listen to him until i saw something that made him look like a right asshole



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
You know Alex's rhetoric speaks more truth to my heart than anything I've ever heard from the "government" since JFK.

He has a passion and intent that rings true to me.

He may not get every little fact straight but that means little to me. The overall picture is clear.

When he goes off on a tirade I pump a fist and cheer him on and laugh out loud with the realization I got someone else who gets it.

Drive it like you own it Alex!
edit on 11/16/2014 by dezertdog because: grammer



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: dezertdog
He may not get every little fact straight but that means little to me.

Significantly altering the words of a transcript of the President's message, to completely change the meaning to suit his narrative, means little to you. Got it.







I'll never understand acceptance of lies.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:42 PM
link   
I'm seeing a lot of generalizing of Alex in this thread again... Though surprisingly, not as much as I thought I would. Still, I think it's important to point out that--in my opinion, anyway--the technicalities you point out in this picture don't really make much of a difference in the overall story.

For example; when you pause at Obama's phrase, and Alex says 'new law.' After you point this out, he continues on and names the law shortly afterwards. I don't think that's blatant lying or anything. Just sounds like a slip-up. I was listening the day this was going live, and there was quite a lot of news they covered. A big-picture ranter like Alex could have easily just made a mistake. He's got a ridiculous amount of information in his mind on a constant basis, after all.

Keep that in mind when you guys wanna call him a nutjob--if you kept your sanity entirely in tact with a job like his, something is seriously miswired in your brain. It is a maddening perspective that very few of us can understand to any large extent. That's where the rants come from, see? And I'll be honest--he handles it much better than I do. Scary, right...?

I am also seeing people here making the famous accusation--suggesting that he's just in it for the money. Come on. Alex Jones is a lot of things, but a silver-tongued businessman? We all know he doesn't have the tact for that (I mean no disrespect towards him, its just the way he is). I think his earliest video was him walking around with a single camera guy following him as he pointed out some buildings which belonged to Chinese corporations. It seems unlikely that he'd start with almost nothing and climb his way to the top of the alternative media using money as his only motive. There are a lot of jobs he could have attended college for, and he would have been paid handsomely without the headaches and stresses his current position comes with. Making movies, running a media operation, paying the people, dealing with the taxes attached, caring for a family, taking constant demonizing from everyone--including all of us in the conspiracy community--and always covering a colorful variety of depressing and horrible news on top of all that. From a psychological point of view, I don't see Alex Jones being a business man. Not at all.

And anyway, the products are all life-promoting methods of alternative health. I don't see anything bad about that whatsoever.

I don't want the op or anyone else on ATS to think I'm simply on Alex's "side" and that's that. I'm not on anyone's "side," though I do realize that, regarding all the nonsense that our government tries to get away with, all of you reading this, along with me, my loved ones, your loved ones, and Alex Jones are ALL on the losing side of their operations, therefore we all stand a much greater chance at snatching back our country if we stand side by side while doing so, rather than clinging to the minor differences that set us apart from one another. Divide and conquer, ya know.

Brings me to another point; I completely understand why some people can't wrap their minds around Alex's news coverage, because rather than breaking down the minor details of a story--he sums it up with a statement or two, often times channeled into a rant. Personally, grasping big general concepts is much easier for me than grabbing onto a bunch of details, though it's completely understandable for those of you who don't think in big fat lumpsums like I do. But if you've got the general idea , mission accomplished. You seem to focus on smaller details of the rant, on bits and pieces that--in the grand scheme of the topic--don't really matter. Im not saying your arguments are wrong, I just feel like the point of the coverage is painfully legitimate, which is all important. As someone broke down on the first page of the op, the idea of "robust regulation" over our internet by the government is NOT desirable or okay for us. And that point, Alex Jones expressed for us flawlessly. That matters quite a bit more than the screw-ups in his sentence structure. I like the idea of NLBS, but its important to decide what issues are most important when you're reaching out to so many people on the web. Sorry if I sound pretentious, just my 2cents.

There are a lot of comebacks you guys could throw at me here, but I promise, I've heard them all before. And if you're going to play the zionist/reptoid/alien card, PLEASE save me the headache and DON'T. No offense intended. Just... Ugh. Some people who suggest that Alex Jones is a nutcase are the same people who think he's a reptilian or a satanic jew (??!). Kinda ironic...

Alex Jones is just a person. He bleeds red blood, just like the rest of us. I look forward to the day when all of us "patriots" will stop drawing invisible lines in the sand between one another, and look past our differences long enough to make some moves and ensure we don't get screwed over by those with more power than us. I don't know if I'm gonna follow this thread or not, as ATS is avlittle difficult to use on my android, but have a good debate, and remember we're all members of the same species first, and individuals second (as much as it pains me to say, I'm quite an outcast). Much love and peace, everyone.
edit on Xx744101030PM1110 by XxNightAngelusxX because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Dezertdog

On this I am i have to say SO is correct

There is a difference between an error and a mistake
I will word it this way

I am practicing the art of writing in hopes of getting my 10000 hours of experience writing

I have made several key mistakes
I have used my own character's names and got them wrong
I have wrote stories and mixed up facts I created for the fiction story

Those are mistakes

In trying to understand subjects here, I have not kept my facts straight
I have had to stop and rework an idea or twelve because the rules of physics and me had disagreements


I have also had disagreements with one of the show persons on science
My understanding is different then theirs
(I still think the magnetic poles moving affect the climate, but thats me)


Not once have I tried to take a statement made
re-edited it and then turned around and said this is what they said

That is the difference between
Mistake in writing
mistakes in context of my writing
Mistakes in knowledge
Disagreement with scientist

And Deliberate misrepresentation

I cant even give credit for a different understanding in the definition of is (bill clinton style)

The main thing is to remember my first quote

A mistake does not become and Error till you refuse to correct it

SO and NLBS are 100% correct in calling Alec Jones out on this

It diminishes the value of his exposing of conspiracies

Again their is a huge difference between him covering of FEMA ordering coffins
1) odd
2) planning for something
3) and caskets used only for one thing

And
Editing transcript to get it to sound like you want it to



IMHO
looks bad for him to use the same tactics on his show

If I did not know any better sounds like someone higher on the food chain is planning a meme

"Makes anyone who disagrees with us sound like the Alex fellar.."



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Alex stopped being relevant along time ago,he ran out of ideas or stuff to expose how else can one explain the man crush he have for Ted Cruz??..I mean he does have some sorta research budget so how can he not know that Ted is a paid Comcast shrill ,unless...OMG!!.. he is also a paid Comcast shrill.
edit on 17-11-2014 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

And one of three things is going to happen, very soon…

1) "Nothing," because of either delays in doing something, or the rare chance nothing is done.

2) New regulations/laws/legislation, being written by corporate interests, to implement the FCC's Hybrid Approach.

3) Reclassification of the Internet as a Title II utility under existing laws (the entire content-side of the Internet wants this)



So..while I hope beyond hope the outcome is #3, the realist in me strongly believes we are headed for #2...That seems to be the strategy.

Net Neutrality has reached a high enough profile where they can't do nothing, which is the first option of the ISP monopolies.

With that off the table, the 2nd best option is #2 achieved via..
Step #1...Smoke cover...
- obfuscate and confuse the issue with misinformation...turn up the "noise".
- Categorize it (inaccurately) as a culture-war/political ideology issue ..emotional hot button item. AKA get people to THINK less.
Step #2...Offer a false compromise
- Under cover of the smoke and confusion and political shouting pass a complex bill that is incapable of surviving court challenges and is destined for near immediate obsolescence in the context of a quickly evolving technology. The bill will be written by the Media Barons via backroom direction and demands.

We will end up with a "net neutrality" regulation that will be as appropriately named as the "patriot act" and as effective and fair as the tax code.
edit on 17-11-2014 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-11-2014 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
The bill will be written by the Media Barons via backroom direction and demands.

And THAT will be "Obama Care for the Internet," not the Title II reclassification Alex Jones and Republicans are bleating about.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Willtell
Alex Jones believes in Nut Neutrality.

This right-wing tea party fake conspiracy theorist is a shill for some right wing think tank Koch type sinister group

Who cares what he thinks.

He spouts typical right-wing, fake freedom (2nd amendment, hate the government across the line dogma of love the rich and hate paying taxes) even though his fat ass lives off the
Largess of this civilizations wealth and infrastructure just like ALL these fake, phoney right-wingers


Yah he makes a living in the dreaded private sector media just like Ed Schulz and Rachel Maddow. I bet Rachel and Ed are both pretty wealthy right now.


Ideas and dogma, political or otherwise, right or left, are just another commodity in this capitalist system

Everything has a price tag on it especially our NASCAR politicians and ideologues.

Jones is nothing but a tea party right-wing gun nut hiding behind the skirts of conspiracy...probably to besmirch it.


edit on 17-11-2014 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: Indigo5
The bill will be written by the Media Barons via backroom direction and demands.

And THAT will be "Obama Care for the Internet," not the Title II reclassification Alex Jones and Republicans are bleating about.


And I forgot #3 in the plan for the demise of Net Neutrality
...Stall to let the issue fade from the general publics attention...



FCC chair said to balk at Obama's Net neutrality plan

.....
"What you want is what everyone wants: an open Internet that doesn't affect your business," a visibly upset Wheeler told executives, according to sources in attendance. "What I've got to figure out is how to split the baby."

www.cnet.com...

Split the baby?

"an open Internet that doesn't affect your business"...ISPs business plan involves them charging and profiting for a selectively "open internet" of their choosing.

I have never heard of a split baby living.



FCC press secretary Kim Hart confirmed to the BBC that the decision on the issue will be put off until the new year.

"There will be no vote on open internet rules in the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules would now be finalised in 2015."

Earlier the FCC had said that it would make a decision by the end of the year.

www.bbc.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
Split the baby?

"an open Internet that doesn't affect your business"...ISPs business plan involves them charging and profiting for a selectively "open internet" of their choosing.


Yes. "Off-Ramp" ISP's have created the fiction that they need more money from prioritizing a segment of web traffic in order to continue investing in infrastructure. It's a fallacy, borne from IPS's over-selling their available bandwidth from consumers. Instead of holding ISP's accountable like airlines (if an airline over-sells a flight, they get FAA fines) for over-selling capacity and giving consumers less than what was paid-for, legislators are preparing to support the lie and give the ISP's what they want.

For the "On-Ramp," meaning content creators like ATS. I already pay a premium for very-fast very-high bandwidth connection to the Internet backbone. Why should I be forced to pay more to the off-ramp connection providers?


I've been in conversations with several people in trade/networking groups I belong to, that range from advertising-side to content side. The unanimous opinion is that the "splitting the baby," or "Hybrid Plan" will be utter disaster for a huge (and currently growing) segment of small business: online business. Once I get more data, I may create a separate thread on this specific but somewhat ignored aspect of the problem.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: theNLBS

Are you qualified to throw the first stone at jones? I'd say not. Isn't he also just a man like you and I, not perfect or blameless?
Of all the things this man has exposed in the past many years, Why get into him like so?
Look at the log in your own first before picking the splinter out of his.
Nice work faultless one




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: AvoidBadCompany
a reply to: theNLBS

Are you qualified to throw the first stone at jones? I'd say not. Isn't he also just a man like you and I, not perfect or blameless?


If we must first be sinless before recognizing sins of others...then doesn't that absolve the entire world from fault or responsibility?....Or do you reserve any judgment for the second coming of Christ?

Sorry..but this was one of the strangest retorts I have seen in a long while. The idea that we must all achieve perfection before recognizing any measure of BS in others actions.

How about we all just do our best to call BS when we see it in ourselves and others?

You can practice that by thinking a little bit about your post above IMO.
edit on 18-11-2014 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: XxNightAngelusxX

I have to agree with you. I like Alex though I may not agree with every position, but he gets frustrated with the apathy of Americans, and the unwillingness to look at this stuff and see it for what it is. I think he has a pulse on the cabal like no other.
It is sad truly that people here are so critical of him, when he spends his days trying to wake up sleeping apathetic Americans.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

No it doesn't.

There was no need to execute Alex over this and not give credit to his good works which by far outway his bad. This the op would have known.


It was a week attempt to discredit Alex.
You can't see that?

The man (Alex Jones) has woken up millions of sheepoeole.

Sure point out his mistakes if you must but why not also thank him as well. He's done more to wake up people than this whole site put together IMO.

This is just another bash Alex Jones thread. Ats should have a SurpressTheTruthOverLord co owner, but that would be more honesty than some could handle.



new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join