Is it time to make Infowars [i]non grata[/i]?

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Typical liberals.. wanting to ban peoples opinions.

Reading comprehension issues, I assume. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, no-one is entitled to their own facts. Infowars serves up its own facts. You have your opinion and she has hers. They are equally stupid in my eyes, but you both have every right to express them.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Typical liberals.. wanting to ban peoples opinions.

Reading comprehension issues, I assume. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, no-one is entitled to their own facts. Infowars serves up its own facts. You have your opinion and she has hers. They are equally stupid in my eyes, but you both have every right to express them.

See you in the debates.. looks like springer gave you your answer dude.

a reply to: DJW001

Ya, it's tricky. I really do understand where the site owners are coming from here because I run a similar policy on my own website. On the other hand, I think site owners also have a responsibility to make their boards a positive reflection of their subject matter. A bunch of closed minded bigots and partisan hackery which is what this site is devolving into isn't a good reflection on alternative news or conspiracies.

It's a tough line to draw, and I'm not even sure it can be done without it being arbitrary and subjective. But something needs to be done. Years ago when I first started coming to ATS I felt a sense of paranoia like I shouldn't be learning the things I was learning. That feeling is gone now, and it's replaced with a feeling that I don't want to be associated with the website because the people should be social rather than intellectual outcasts.

a reply to: DJW001

The problem with your suggestion is it would stop us from posting opinion pieces, articles commenting on other articles that might point out issues or holes in the logic of the original article.

I vote no.. and don't tell me the latest batch of liberals don't want to ban free speech, this sentiment is widespread on college campuses and in Europe it is already a reality.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

The problem with your suggestion is it would stop us from posting opinion pieces, articles commenting on other articles that might point out issues or holes in the logic of the original article.

No it would not, provided that they are presented as opinion, not fact. Infowars presents their "facts" in a modified form.

I vote no.. and don't tell me the latest batch of liberals don't want to ban free speech, this sentiment is widespread on college campuses and in Europe it is already a reality.

Everyone is free to express their opinion, just don't try to present opinion as fact.

originally posted by: starfoxxx

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Typical liberals.. wanting to ban peoples opinions.

Reading comprehension issues, I assume. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, no-one is entitled to their own facts. Infowars serves up its own facts. You have your opinion and she has hers. They are equally stupid in my eyes, but you both have every right to express them.

See you in the debates.. looks like springer gave you your answer dude.

Let's see how the economics of the situation pan out. Springer doesn't need to pay for Alex Jones' bandwidth.

a reply to: DJW001

You act like the mainstream media isn't just as guilty of doing this.

I don't even agree with the bans already in place, I think it should be up to the reader to discern such things for themselves. Do we really need parenting in this regard? Critical thinking is more important than banning specific sites, material or sources because ideally it supercedes such propaganda.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

You act like the mainstream media isn't just as guilty of doing this.

The mainstream media has a vested interest in the world and its people surviving, if only for commercial purposes. Certain groups do not.

I don't even agree with the bans already in place, I think it should be up to the reader to discern such things for themselves. Do we really need parenting in this regard? Critical thinking is more important than banning specific sites, material or sources because ideally it supercedes such propaganda.

In an ideal world, people would be educated in the use of critical thinking; the sites that have been banned oppose critical thinking, dismissing the scientific method as being a religion, and claiming that logic and reason are not valid ways of dealing with the world. When this anti-rationalism is mixed with politics, you get aberrations like the occult philosophy influenced Third Reich. It can happen again.

a reply to: DJW001

The mainstream media also has a vested interest seeing as most of it is controlled by six corporations with numerous ties to other nefarious groups and interests. Yeah, let's trust them.

Oh really? You know official history doesn't really acknowledge occultism to have been a powerful influence or factor at all in Nazi Germany. Just look at the account of it on Wikipedia, it's very dismissive. I know better but this is largely the accepted view.

But yes, you support censure in some capacity then.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

The mainstream media also has a vested interest seeing as most of it is controlled by six corporations with numerous ties to other nefarious groups and interests. Yeah, let's trust them.

At least they are not dismissive of critical thought.

Oh really? You know official history doesn't really acknowledge occultism to have been a powerful influence or factor at all in Nazi Germany. Just look at the account of it on Wikipedia, it's very dismissive. I know better but this is largely the accepted view.

Ah; so you consider "racial science" to be a rational science?

But yes, you support censure in some capacity then.

Nope, I just expect people to differentiate between fact and opinion. I also object to organizations using ATS as a cheap amplifier for their agenda. They can say what they want, so long as they are honest about it.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: DJW001

Ya, it's tricky. I really do understand where the site owners are coming from here because I run a similar policy on my own website. On the other hand, I think site owners also have a responsibility to make their boards a positive reflection of their subject matter. A bunch of closed minded bigots and partisan hackery which is what this site is devolving into isn't a good reflection on alternative news or conspiracies.

It's a tough line to draw, and I'm not even sure it can be done without it being arbitrary and subjective. But something needs to be done. Years ago when I first started coming to ATS I felt a sense of paranoia like I shouldn't be learning the things I was learning. That feeling is gone now, and it's replaced with a feeling that I don't want to be associated with the website because the people should be social rather than intellectual outcasts.

what you perceive as bigotry is not per definition bigotry.
And so ATS wont remove the posts that you dont like just because.

a reply to: DJW001

At least they are not dismissive of critical thought.

Which sites specifically is it that "oppose critical thinking"?

Ah; so you consider "racial science" to be a rational science?

Maybe you should go back and read that again. I don't see how you got that from what I wrote at all. Ridiculous.

What I said was the official view doesn't really credit occultism in being such a big influence on Nazi Germany. Your opinion seem to run contrary to that view.


Ok.. then critical thinking should suffice and no site should be banned. This babying of the members you support suggests otherwise.

Yeah, like some specific site could hijack ATS even if it tried. The effect would be negligible at best, drowned in the endless variety of other sources.

a reply to: DJW001

I feel your pain - but I don't see any way around it. There are people here that would no doubt have something to say about Slate or the Washington Post. In fact, I believe I saw someone complaining about WaPo yesterday or this morning. Agendas are in the eye of the beholder :-)

I think that the more ridiculous the source the more interesting the argument - but maybe that's just me. I have a backwards sense of humor sometimes

I know you're like me - and you care about this place. I know a lot of people might assume we're talking about censorship

If only...

I don’t even see guest’s any longer on Info wars


People realize it’s a KKK site more or less.


Jones now drinks deep at the alter of ignorance, bigotry, and racial sensationalism.

a reply to: Aazadan

Other websites I visit have the same problem. People are literally going crazy. One website I know, it's all been the same posters for 10-15 years now. Over the past couple years the tone has gradually shifted, and is radically shifting now.

Here's a few interesting links - so many more out there. This is a real thing. I'm including one from Breitbart - which - comes at this from a different angle, but I think kind of makes a point it wasn't planning on making

Should websites remove their comment sections?

The Left’s War on Comment Sections

A Brief History of the End of the Comments

No comment: Why news websites are ditching comment sections

I just read a thread on that forum where people are calling for the widespread execution of Muslims, and to remove gun rights... but only from blacks. These are people that a few months ago I thought were completely level headed.

I've been noticing the exact same thing. It's like a virus. I think what we're seeing in this country right now is frankly terrifying - and maybe unstoppable. Is that over the top? I hope so - I really want to be wrong

Here's a favorite quote of mine:

A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

Radicalization and a panicky herd

Banning is problematic for a few reasons.

One is ATS might lose needed traffic.

Two, these people however odious should be able to vent their stuff


Usually it doesn’t take much energy or intelligence to refute this stuff so in this case win your argument and let higher ideals and ideas win the day

a reply to: DJW001

I know what you mean. There is a problem, but it is certainly bigger than ATS. If Denying Ignorance is the motto, then denying the ignorance (and false/misleading headlines) of infowars is what needs to be done, not banning.

Sure the site is riddled with extremist thinking coming from infowars and the John Birch Society. This is exactly the type of extremist, ignorant thinking that conservative William F. Buckley, Jr. railed against and warned us about in the 1960s.

My 36 year old son and I were recently discussing the problem of tunnel thinking nowadays. He said, "Mom, when you were growing up, you had one book, or magazine, or newspaper to read, and you probably had to walk to go get them. You read differing viewpoints in one publication. Young people now have all the information on the internet, and literally can surround themselves with it [all the info on different devices]. They can choose only the info they agree with and surround themselves with only that info."

Illegitimi non carborundum. That is a good motto to follow. At least for me, or else I would have been ground to a non-functioning, blabbering human being.

ALEX JONES IS A CHARACTER PLAYED BY A PAYED ACTOR!!!!!! Read that again & again & again. Let it sink in. Accept it, unveil the truth. This actor also played the roll of Bill Hicks the comedian. Take some time and cross examine each character. Take away Bill's glasses, beard and demeanor....add a few years of aging, add a raspy voice and Adderall and you have Alex Jones. Please somebody do this and report their findings.......PLEASE SOMEONE ON ATS DO THIS!

BUMP!

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Thank you. Please have a look at these threads which exist solely to further Alex Jones' "race war" agenda:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Alex Jones has his own radio program and website. He does not need ATS's bandwidth.

so why are you furthering his (alex jones) agenda by using these?.....