Alex Jones life Threatened On National TV

page: 3
74
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 





actually you'll find the law doesn't discern between jokingly calling for harm to another or seriously calling for harm to another, they are both considered terrorist threats and should be prosecuted. it's the laws we currently live by and so should tv hosts as well.


Sometimes laws are just BS or way too politically correct to be taken seriously.

Since your such a law abiding citizen and care about the law so much, when they ban guns I assume youll be the first in line to hand yours in? Its the law and if TV hosts should follow them then so should the rest of you




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by randyvs
 




I didn't feel bad seeing Piers look to be at a loss for words..........


I thought he looked amused, he would have been thinking "MUAHAHAHAHA your an idiot and everyone is gonna see it"

.


Bang on the money Puddy tat. That was him trying not to laugh.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Can you link a source showing he knew they were fake?

Ive read nothing about that and would be very interested

I agree the joke was in bad taste and he should have realised that this would ensue, but it was a joke never the less and no one, not even the people using sensational headlines, actually thinks it was serious and that AJs life was in danger
edit on 9/1/2013 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)


actually you'll find the law doesn't discern between jokingly calling for harm to another or seriously calling for harm to another, they are both considered terrorist threats and should be prosecuted. it's the laws we currently live by and so should tv hosts as well.


*Don's rose tinted glasses*
I remember, once upon a time when people realised the difference between taking the piss and people actually being super cerial.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 





actually you'll find the law doesn't discern between jokingly calling for harm to another or seriously calling for harm to another, they are both considered terrorist threats and should be prosecuted. it's the laws we currently live by and so should tv hosts as well.


Sometimes laws are just BS or way too politically correct to be taken seriously.

Since your such a law abiding citizen and care about the law so much, when they ban guns I assume youll be the first in line to hand yours in? Its the law and if TV hosts should follow them then so should the rest of you


they wont be banning guns but yeah if all the military, police, criminals and all other govt agencies hand in theirs, i'll jump on board.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 
I saw this via the Drudge Report this morning

Can there be any doubt about the subhuman dregs we face in defending our Constitution?!

Sometimes, one of the ways to judge an issue is to look at who is For and who is Against and in this case it could not be a better indicator.

It is like when I see these Luciferians come out for this or for that; it immediately gives me reason to look closer at being against this or that issue or that person. If the Godless are against, I am FOR.

People should be very careful who and what they allow to represent them but then, please feel free to stand and be counted.

edit on 9-1-2013 by MajorKarma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Suspiria

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Can you link a source showing he knew they were fake?

Ive read nothing about that and would be very interested

I agree the joke was in bad taste and he should have realised that this would ensue, but it was a joke never the less and no one, not even the people using sensational headlines, actually thinks it was serious and that AJs life was in danger
edit on 9/1/2013 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)


actually you'll find the law doesn't discern between jokingly calling for harm to another or seriously calling for harm to another, they are both considered terrorist threats and should be prosecuted. it's the laws we currently live by and so should tv hosts as well.


*Don's rose tinted glasses*
I remember, once upon a time when people realised the difference between taking the piss and people actually being super cerial.


you mean the same rose colored glasses that the wealthy, famous and elite get to wear, sure.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Whacked out or not, NO ONE deserves to have their life threatened by someone for speaking the truth. Much less by someone who is in the public eye and making an impression on others. Do they realize just by making statements like that they can be held accountable if something does happen to him?
Let's put on our big boy underwear, use our big boy words and not resort to violent threats just because we got verbally b***h slapped by the truth. Thank you and have a nice day.
edit on 9-1-2013 by oonkala because: double word.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   
that wasn't a threat



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 





they wont be banning guns but yeah if all the military, police, criminals and all other govt agencies hand in theirs, i'll jump on board.


LOL

No no no, you dont get to make that call, if they bring in a law that says all citizens must hand over their guns will you comply?

Ill save you the trouble of replying and answer for you, No you wouldnt which makes you, talking about PM and Buzz (do parents really call their kids Buzz?) breaking a law which hurt no one, hypocritical.

I bet also that if it had of been Alex who made the comment you would be arguing my side of this, basically that it was harmless and people pushing it as anything serious are either deluded or trying to demonise someone.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
that wasn't a threat


What are you talking about not a threat?

Do you honestly believe the Obama Phone Woman understands what "Tounge in Cheek" means?

Of course it was a threat, there will be people who heard this on TV who may well carry out the act thinking its legally justified because they heard it on the "Truth Box".



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by oonkala
 





Let's put on our big boy underwear, use our big boy words and not resort to violent threats threats just because we got verbally b***h slapped by the truth.


Bitch slapped by a torrent of verbal diarrhea is more accurate


Once again I actually like AJ, I cant understand how anyone can defend him and the train wreck that was his "debate" he acted like a tool.

Cmon people be honest with yourselves, yeah you like him, yeah you agree with his side of the argument but anyone can see he acted like an absolute nutcase



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 





they wont be banning guns but yeah if all the military, police, criminals and all other govt agencies hand in theirs, i'll jump on board.


LOL

No no no, you dont get to make that call, if they bring in a law that says all citizens must hand over their guns will you comply?

Ill save you the trouble of replying and answer for you, No you wouldnt which makes you, talking about PM and Buzz (do parents really call their kids Buzz?) breaking a law which hurt no one, hypocritical.

I bet also that if it had of been Alex who made the comment you would be arguing my side of this, basically that it was harmless and people pushing it as anything serious are either deluded or trying to demonise someone.



well in a world of BS, what's swimming in a little more with you? oh hey and thanks for creating an illusionary law and an illusionary reply for me, have you ever thought about politics?




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


If AJ had said that he would be in prison.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by oonkala
 





Let's put on our big boy underwear, use our big boy words and not resort to violent threats threats just because we got verbally b***h slapped by the truth.


Bitch slapped by a torrent of verbal diarrhea is more accurate


Once again I actually like AJ, I cant understand how anyone can defend him and the train wreck that was his "debate" he acted like a tool.

Cmon people be honest with yourselves, yeah you like him, yeah you agree with his side of the argument but anyone can see he acted like an absolute nutcase


I think an absolute nutcase is someone who drops an atomic bomb on a city, or maybe blow up a child day care center, or maybe blow up a tower in new york and blame it on another religion. This is the definition of acting like a nutcase mate


Alex has a loud mouth, so what, i would rather be freinds with a loud mouth than a war criminal enterprise who get off on killing children. Lets just put that into perspective.
edit on 9-1-2013 by TheMindWar because: Typo



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Unless you're a right-winged fanatic, it's hard for anyone else to believe that AJ thinks his tirades are helpful to the cause.

It's people like him who are obviously mentally unstable and emotionally unhinged, who should not own a gun until.... some high level evaluation clears him first.

He's either the biggest evangelistic-idiot to hit the airwaves or one of the best acting shills the establishment has churned out.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheMindWar
Of course it was a threat, there will be people who heard this on TV who may well carry out the act thinking its legally justified because they heard it on the "Truth Box".


OTHER people carrying out the action does not mean the one who said it made a threat!

To say it is the same means you stand on the opposite side of the fence regarding gun control then where you think you stand.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Unless you're a right-winged fanatic, it's hard for anyone else to believe that AJ thinks his tirades are helpful to the cause.

It's people like him who are obviously mentally unstable and emotionally unhinged, who should not own a gun until.... some high level evaluation clears him first.

He's either the biggest evangelistic-idiot to hit the airwaves or one of the best acting shills the establishment has churned out.


I hate that term, "the cause". Sounds like the IRA of old and makes people sound like terrorists. This isnt a "cause", this is "fighting tyranny" and "slavery".



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Fighting tyranny and slavery doesn't sound like a just cause to you?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 





well in a world of BS, what's swimming in a little more with you? oh hey and thanks for creating an illusionary law and an illusionary reply for me, have you ever thought about politics?


LOL

No I havent but judging by how well you deflected my question you should
edit on 9/1/2013 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by TheMindWar
Of course it was a threat, there will be people who heard this on TV who may well carry out the act thinking its legally justified because they heard it on the "Truth Box".


OTHER people carrying out the action does not mean the one who said it made a threat!

To say it is the same means you stand on the opposite side of the fence regarding gun control then where you think you stand.


check the laws, again you are incorrect or else every Mob Don who ever lived would be innocent.





new topics
top topics
 
74
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join