Debunking Some Infowars BS

a reply to: theantediluvian

Very nice work as usual!

originally posted by: FlySolo

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: seeker1963

So it's okay to lie to you if it's not all the time?

Do you believe everything the MSM tells you? I don't!

Like I already said, I am disturbed by those who are whining for ATS to BAN anything from Infowars being posted! Where do we go from there in denying ignorance when all we do is cater to those so easily offended to demand something being banned?

Slippery slope don't you think?

Oh settle down. Yes, BAN infowars because it's purposely misleading. There's enough gullible racists, we don't need to fuel the fire with crap from Alex Jones.

What does this have to do with Racists?

Getting desperate?

I am man enough to admit when I am wrong and the OP and I have went rounds in the past over many issues! I gave the OP a credit where credit is due and here you are still wanting to argue?

WTF is wrong with you?

a reply to: seeker1963

Ok, islamaphobia will take the torch and run with it. Almost like you did in the other thread until i tried to correct you.

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: seeker1963

Ok, islamaphobia will take the torch and run with it. Almost like you did in the other thread until i tried to correct you.

So your assuming I hate Muslims now?

You have some issues.....

a reply to: seeker1963

I am man enough to admit when I am wrong and the OP and I have went rounds in the past over many issues! I gave the OP a credit where credit is due and here you are still wanting to argue?

WTF is wrong with you?

Right ok. Then go back to the other thread, respond to me where I pointed out the 5 lies and say, "ok, you're right and I'm wrong" You won't. Which makes your statement hypocritical.

a reply to: seeker1963

Oh now I have issues? Listen, you don't have to agree with me, but getting to borderline insults isn't going to help your cause.

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: seeker1963

I am man enough to admit when I am wrong and the OP and I have went rounds in the past over many issues! I gave the OP a credit where credit is due and here you are still wanting to argue?

WTF is wrong with you?

Right ok. Then go back to the other thread, respond to me where I pointed out the 5 lies and say, "ok, you're right and I'm wrong" You won't. Which makes your statement hypocritical.

I move past that thread and came on this one and gave the OP a star and flag for proving one of the videos was from a few years ago!

You! Were on that other thread DEMANDING that infowars should be banned and calling people names for even believing in anything that Infowars posted. I chose to move on rather than argue with someone who just chose to call people names and demand things be banned. I didn't even see you post on the 5 lies because you already lost me as a person who had a care in the world to read anything further you said.

I haven't called any one a name in that thread or this thread!

It's okay though, I still respect your freedom to speak your mind with out whining for you to be banned from saying it!

a reply to: seeker1963

There's a difference it seems to me in that if for no other reason than greed, mainstream networks will hold one another to task and so there's at least some modicum of accountability. This of course wouldn't apply in cases where they're all reporting the same crap they've been spoon fed from a common source (such as the White House or Pentagon) but as we've seen in other instances such as the Brian Williams debacle, none of them will pass up an opportunity to make their competitors look bad if they can do so without looking incompetent/untrustworthy themselves.

In contrast, Infowars will post garbage like this and it'll stand unless they get called out by members of the public and then if anything, they'll just remove the article and pretend like nothing happened.

So while there are lapses in adherence to journalistic standards and integrity all around, sources like Infowars go largely unchecked and aren't being held nearly as accountable.

Furthermore, as Xeuchen pointed out (whether he was attempting to defend Infowars or not), it seems clear that author ("editor at large" even), Paul Joseph Watson, knew that footage in the video was actually from France which makes me think that there's a better than average chance that he knew that it also was a 5 year-old video of people who weren't Syrian refugees. That makes the whole look of the thing change from sloppy journalism to sinister misinformation.

Alex Jones is a right wing shill, imo.

He pretends to be conspiracy theorists but is obviously doing that to besmirch conspiracy theories.


He espouses right-wing garbage in the guise of a conspiracy theorist

Some say he is CIA, but I think he likely works for a Koch type organization or some similar think tank of “ libertarian” right-wing peopaganda

Jones like the owners of Red Ice creations have probably been ordered to come out of their fake alt-conspiracy shill mask to espouse direct right-wing propaganda

a reply to: seeker1963

I move past that thread and came on this one and gave the OP a star and flag for proving one of the videos was from a few years ago!

Right ok, if the shoe fits. But I have a different intuitive understanding. You were pretty vocal about it and seeing you're responding to me here, doesn't explain why you couldn't respond to my post there. Anyway, your sour grapes, not mine.

You! Were on that other thread DEMANDING that infowars should be banned and calling people names

First, yes, I DEMAND infowars gets banned. Second, wrong, I never called anyone names. Show me? Oh, you can't because I've been edited and now i know why. You complained.

I chose to move on rather than argue with someone who just chose to call people names and demand things be banned

Wrong. You're arguing with me now.

I still respect your freedom to speak your mind with out whining for you to be banned from saying it!

Right. That's why you complained to the mod. And why should I be banned for calling out infowars? It's a crap site. I'm not hoaxing anyone, infowars is. Why can't you come to terms with that?

nvm I can't even

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: seeker1963

There's a difference it seems to me in that if for no other reason than greed, mainstream networks will hold one another to task and so there's at least some modicum of accountability. This of course wouldn't apply in cases where they're all reporting the same crap they've been spoon fed from a common source (such as the White House or Pentagon) but as we've seen in other instances such as the Brian Williams debacle, none of them will pass up an opportunity to make their competitors look bad if they can do so without looking incompetent/untrustworthy themselves.

In contrast, Infowars will post garbage like this and it'll stand unless they get called out by members of the public and then if anything, they'll just remove the article and pretend like nothing happened.

So while there are lapses in adherence to journalistic standards and integrity all around, sources like Infowars go largely unchecked and aren't being held nearly as accountable.

Furthermore, as Xeuchen pointed out (whether he was attempting to defend Infowars or not), it seems clear that author ("editor at large" even), Paul Joseph Watson, knew that footage in the video was actually from France which makes me think that there's a better than average chance that he knew that it also was a 5 year-old video of people who weren't Syrian refugees. That makes the whole look of the thing change from sloppy journalism to sinister misinformation.

Where do we draw the line though?

I am not sticking up for Infowars as the gospel of truth by any means! But I did give earlier a few examples of why I am disappointed with members who wanted them banned as a source on ATS because of a few things I could bring to mind at the moment that I would have never known about, let alone led to research on my own to find it to be true! The MSM would never talk about those issues!

As far as sloppy journalism goes, I think that is a rampant disease in our media period! It doesn't matter what MSM news I watch, but as far as I can guesstimate, you get 3 hours of factual news and the rest of it is a parade of Senior Fellows from government THINK TANKS that come on and give you their opinion as to what is happening in the world versus what is actual facts!

I just want you to know? When I gave you that star and flag? I had to use my left hand to force the finger on my right hand to click my mouse!

a reply to: theantediluvian

It's all about how they "flow" an article.

"People" register what they want to "register".

And yes, I wasn't defending Jones.

Just pointed out one segment of the "Flow" writing.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
The following "news" appeared at Infowars.com today and I thought I'd post this to draw attention to just how worthless Alex Jones & Co. are...

S&F for you!

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: theantediluvian

Star and flag!

You proved that the story wasn't true and backed it up with research!

I am just a little peeved that people are asking the owners of ATS to ban anything from Infowars because this wasn't true. If that happens then we would ban ALL MSM outlets as well, because ALL of them have been caught doing the same thing?

Appreciate your research! Thumbs up again!

If ATS banned everything from InfoWars then we wouldn't have threads, like this little gem, to enlighten people.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Nice job. Nothing needs to be banned, but we do need to keep an eye on the information and vet it for "truthieness" (Yes, Steven Colbert, I said it)

a reply to: seeker1963

I don't know I'd agree with banning all MSM, particularly the wire services, but.....if they want to ban Alex Jones, then I'd suggest they ban HuffingtonPost. Its nothing more than opinion disguised as fact and fact cherry picked to match an agenda. I'm not interested in some panty waist liberal ivory tower pseudo-intellectual's moon bat Progressive opinions and I'm not interested in distorted facts put forth to support some crappy socialist agenda!

Otherwise, let them both be utilized and let the ATS crowd figure it out for themselves.

I do know one thing; this is the third or fourth time an alarmist right wingnut so-called "news site" has been caught peddling out of date video's and I know that CGI has ended any "video" evidence on YouTube as having any credibility.

So, yeah......most ATS'ers have figured it out.

Truth is the first victim in any war.

a reply to: TonyS

I've yet to see an Infowars article that didn't overly sensationalize its information or outright lie about the information it provided. Meanwhile, Huffington Post may get facts wrong here and there and has a liberal slant to their presentation, but they actively don't set out to deceive their readership. Saying that Huff Po is propaganda on par with Infowars just shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

I'd be more apt to agree with you if you had compared Infowars to Mother Jones, but calling out Huff Po makes you look ridiculous.

a reply to: theantediluvian
you havn't proved jack, you took one word out of the title of that Youtube video to try too discredit infowars, thereby exposing your own nefarious agenda. the article was about Muslim “refugees” not ISIS and the pivotal point shown in the video still holds true,, Muslims yelling "death too the Infidels" in France...

a reply to: theantediluvian

I quit reading inforwars when they perpetuated the Boston bombing false flag hoax and never apologized or acknowledged that they were wrong.