posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 09:42 PM
This is a fascinating event.
First, let's be clear, I'm not a fan of Alex Jones or indeed Charlie Sheen. AJ seems to me rather childish and makes a great face for "the truth
movement" as far as the MSM goes, because he's more likely to put off the undecided than convert them.
Alex Jones has got form for being careless. He's posted things that have turned out to be incorrect and just like now, there was a feeding frenzy.
It's ok, calm down. AJ is just not that bright and not terribly thorough or careful.
The good people of ATS are not slow to impute to him actions and motives which may or may not have any basis in reality. "Alex Jones is a
hoaxter", he's this, he's that. With utter, utter confidence despite the lack of any evidence that this was not an unintentional
I don't have huge amounts of respect for Jones, but I do have some sympathy.
But here's the thing. I really, REALLY object to getting an email from ATS staff inviting me to jump on the Jones-dissing bandwagon.
It's hypocritical for a start: the T&C makes it very difficult to get people organised... but the Admin team have no problem in doing it. I really
don't like that disparity.
Secondly, everyone is saying AJ did this for ratings. Well, the DIGGing of this thread, and whatever else, will drive up traffic to this site. I
doubt the site owners will mind that very much.
But when all's said and done this is a molehill that's being made into a mountain by a collaborative effort between ATS admin and the members of
ATS. I reckon in a relatively few years people will be claiming that Charlie Sheen really did interview Obama.
As for the article itself... knowing beforehand it was a hoax it's hard to tell how I'd have reacted but there are plenty of things in the interview
that,I'd hope, would have set off alarm bells. Reading that original comments page it was fascinating to see how some few people had their doubts
even before the disclaimer went in.
For my money, the (new) title of this thread is more of a hoax than AJ's antics. The word "hoax" implies intent to deceive and as yet there
has been no evidence that this was anything other than an embarrassing omission or mistake on Jones' part. Of course, his glossing over it
and the removal of comments from the website is poor, but it's no more than I'd expect from someone whose first and last instinct is to bluster.
An earlier poster put all sorts of bunkum up about what we can learn from all this. He/she even said "throw away all your research". Duh. No. I
think we can draw two simple lessons from this:
Check your facts yourself
Don't put your faith in individuals
[edit on 8-9-2009 by rich23]