Is ATS out to get Alex Jones?

Originally posted by Ahabstar
reply to post by rich23

 

Just that it causes harm to the one defamed, not necessarily illegal actions nor loss of income from my understanding, although those are the easiest to prove.

You're conflating two different issues here: the subject of damages is settled after it's settled whether or not a person has been defamed. People in UK courts have sued for libel and won the case but were awarded derisory damages of a penny.

I didn't say it was necessarily illegal. The word "or" would have been in there somewhere. But to accuse someone of a criminal offence is deemed defamatory of itself. The issue of whether a person suffered harm from the defamation is another matter. Defendants in libel cases have the burden of proof: they must prove that the reporting was accurate.

The recent case of Richard "Dirty Des" Desmond provides a look at the way things can go in real life. It's also rather entertaining. The link may not last long, so read now, people.

The part about Obama being a fan of Charlie Sheen's show would be enough (or the entire "interview" if it was stated as a cause for scoring lower on Obama's popularity polls) as it could be considered an incidental contributing cause should Obama not be re-elected in 2012.

I seriously doubt it would have any such effect. I think it's a storm in a teacup (which ATS is helping to stir) and doesn't really have anywhere to go without people pushing it along. I see it as just another example of AJ's hopelessly sloppy and annoying approach to things.

Actually, part of what drives me to put this thread up is just my sense of proportion about it. Alex Jones just blew it again, but in a relatively minor way. Get over it people. Yes, tell people it's not a real interview. That's what Springer, earlier in the thread, said was the purpose of the U2U (I called it an email, sorry Springer... but from my point of view that was picking nits). This is not something that the U2U wording itself supports, but let it pass.

Just let's NOT be the angry villagers with brands and pitchforks about this. It's so weird, Ialmost never go to Infowars.com, I hate his bombast and I think he's a liablity.

But I always seem to end up defending him. From mob mentality. That's the thing that gets me. You always wind up feeling for Frankenstein's creation in the end, and why? Because people can be pretty unpleasant.

I realise I'm whistling into the wind here, of course. Everyone's getting worked up into a lather of self-righteousness about this, and if there's anything worse than an angry mob with pitchforks and firebrands, it's a self-righteous angry mob with ptichforks and firebrands.

And one of the deep lures of self-righteousness is that it saves one all the fuss and bother of having to think any more about whatever it is that's getting your goat.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
reply to post by rich23

 

Obama would have to prove defamation of character to prove libel.

OK I am being nitpicking, but I hope I'm being nice about this. I do agree with your point below, a lot, but I'll come back to that. But I do have to deal with the sentence above, I'm sorry, it's just the way I am. The first thing is that your statement is rather tautologous. Libel is a sub-set of defamation. I don't know how it works in the US, but over here what happens is that the plaintiff's lawyers decide on whether they have a shot at convincing a jury that a particular passage is defamatory. The defendent can offer justification (it's true and accurate reporting) or that it's not defamatory, or other options I frankly can't remember.

I did't see anything terribly defamatory in the article, not that I was looking for it: if you did, please quote it. On a strategic level I think it would be a mistake for Obama to even acknowledge it.

Funny how the Bush family completely ignore all the (if untrue) highly defamatory things David Icke and others say about them. It's actually not just funny, it's bizarre. Almost suspicious, one might say.

This is another matter entirely. It's a storm in a teacup. Find me a passage that might be considered defamatory, I'll be interested.

Also, people are immune from liability for stating untrue statements about elected representatives the last time I checked.

I could go and do some checking about how the system works over here but... no. Too lazy right now.

To me the U2U wasn't the worrying part. I could handle someone drawing my attention to something. It was the fact the U2U asked us to dig an article stating the whole of Alex Jones and Charlie Sheen's interview was a hoax without stipulating that the fictional interview was still highly relevant and loaded with facts.

To me, that omission is entirely symptomatic of the pitchfork-clutching mentality that seizes people here from time to time. I personally think it was a mistake getting involved so precipitately, maybe at all, and it was certainly not handled judiciously.

I'm also unimpressed with Skeptic Overlord's attempt to spin the U2U into something it was not. I'm hoping he didn't read the U2U before attempting to summarise its contents. And, like Alex Jones, he hasn't acknowledged this disconnect or apologised for it. Instead, he nit-picked me about it being a U2U not an email. Fine, I got my terminology wrong, but I think we both knew which document we were talking about.

If I were the mob mentality type, I could start a thread saying, Skeptic Overlord lies about email, sorry, U2U! BUUUURN HIM! I could make exactly the same arguments about Skeptic Overlord's evasion on the subject as he has about Jones: if he was going to comment about the email, shouldn't he have read it beforehand? And if he did, then he was trying to LIE and SPIN his way out of the situation! And then completely ignores the point!

But I think Septic Overlord (they tease him about it, you know*) is a busy guy and tried to put a nice face on the situation because we're all nice people here, right? Unfortunately the wording of the email (damn, I do keep calling it that) doesn't agree, and he doesn't want to acknowledge that, which is ok too. One would hope for better and might expect worse.

But the irony of his behaving in a similar way to AJ is pretty interesting.

I think my current thinking can be summed up as this:

If the 9/11 truth movement is important to you, then you should know that divisiveness and in-fighting are mortal enemies. Keep a sense of proportion. If you're attacking AJ, then don't hide behind the pretence of defending any movement for truth, because you're doing more harm than good.

*small print disclaimer: I have no idea whether they do, it's just an obvious joke with no ill intent. OK?

Edited to fix tags

[edit on 9-9-2009 by rich23]

I agree, and I think you really nailed the thing that offended and disturbed me about the U2U (starting to get the hang of not calling it an email)...

Originally posted by kshaund
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

 

... be sure to send us all another U2U and let us know what to believe next.

Whether or not people acknowledge it or realise it, that U2U was a mistake.

reply to post by shortywarn


You do realise your entire post is rather off-topic? The issue is whether the admin here should have incited a mob mentality with their U2U.

It's so weird. I really can't abide AJ, and yet... that whole mob mentality thing just grates on me.

Take a few deep breaths, everyone. Perhaps a nice streeetch up to the sky. Now we're all going to put down our pitchforks, douse the brands, and get on with our lives. There, that's better.

Originally posted by Clickfoot
It is a shame, though, that we now have other sites claiming it as clear deception, and insisting Sheen was in on said deception, because of the way this was handled. I note they've been saying so for a lot longer than 81 minutes. How much better it would have been for everyone if they focused on the content, pointing out it was fictional, instead of labelling it a hoax.


[edit on 9-9-2009 by Clickfoot]

Distressing, if all-too-predictable news that other sites are just claiming it as a deception.

Thanks ATS for shooting the truth movement in the foot. I'm glad exposing AJ's poor journalism is more important to you than conveying the message he was trying to get across.

As I said in an earlier post, keep a sense of proportion, people. Did anyone DIE because of Jones' error? (I'm not dodging the issue by using that word - either it was an inadvertent error or an error of judgement.) Did anybody have to go to jail? No. A few people have had their hopes raised and dashed because they were silly enough to get excited about something on Jones' show.

Boo-hoo.

So the underlying message has been trampled by mob mentality at ATS driven by an unproven assumption as pointed out by myself and others in this thread.

Anyway, I doubt whether anything will come of this. Skeptic Overlord will not apologise for his misleading statement about the U2U (he's had the opportunity to demonstrate his willingness, as he says, to "eat crow" but couldn't quite do it), Jones will bluster on as usual.

It's almost as unedifying as watching Project Camelot interview Steven Greer.

Originally posted by Tentickles
Our Site motto is Deny Ignorance not Tolerate Ignorance.

Just what I'm doing. The fact is, that we will never know for sure what AJ's intent was, if any. People are happy to jump to conclusions.

Of course, if you're just happy to clutch your pitchfork and scream without thinking about what you're actually accomplishing by Digging the story, that's entirely up to you.

reply to post by rich23


You may have a point in the Moderators asking people to Digg the story (I received the same email, and promptly deleted it, I have no interest)

But the fact remains, AJ was and is nothing more than a media whore. Nothing he says is ever proven, nothing he says has any solid foundation in truth, people follow him blindly as though he is some kind of great leader. Well, he isn't, he's a profit driven opportunist with a very poor ability to spin a story so wild and incredible that a minority of equally dubious people believe it.

He does absolutely nothing for the credibility of the people who investigate properly and ask the right questions on the right issues. Standing outside a Bilderberg meeting with a bullhorn does nothing but make you look like a nut job.
Making dramatic (and often insensitive) statements about 9/11 and connecting it to the NWO in such public ways does nothing but cause trouble and stir up more animosity against those who have a logical and genuine point to prove.
Making wild accusations and predicting things that then do not happen does nothing but pollute the genuine information to the point where people won't believe it when real information is discovered.

The fact is, he knew this was a fake, he presented it as real, it was a HOAX!

If you are going to pick a leader or figurehead for your particular cause, at least pick one with a sensible attitude and some intelligence.
Don't pick one who likes to make some easy money off the back of it.

Finally, don't feel one moment of pity for AJ or for those who believed anything he ever said and now feel "let down".
Feel sorry for the people who spent years digging up real evidence of corruption and criminality in government and leadership, because it's going to be harder for them to get their message out there thanks to this tard.

What mob mentality. I thought the U2U was very clear in its aim, to inform people to inform others that they Jones/Sheen thing was just a stunt. If uninformed people go around spreading this like it is true, then it flies in the face of of those seeking to expose the truth.

Why you're all bend out of shape because a site who's motto is "Deny Ignorance" sends a mass pm to its users to rally against ignorance, well, it's beyond me. Seems perfectly fitting with the theme of the site, and exactly the point of the site.

It is not a "We hate Alex Jones" thing, it is a "We hate people who make a mockery of the truth" thing. At least from what I can see.

In a movement dedicated to truth and all things truthful, telling lies is tantamount to sabotage. That being the case, it is natural that there will be people who feel like Alex Jones and Charlie Sheen have spit on their face.

Alex Jones' often likes to embellish the truth with copious amounts of fiction, this is par for the course and if anything good comes of it, it will be that people will see the man for what he is, a FUD spreader.

detached, I'm not sure you've read the thread carefully. You make exactly the same points I make about AJ. I'm not here to defend him.

But you need to learn the difference between "facts" and "assertions".

Originally posted by detachedindividual
reply to post by rich23

 

But the fact remains, AJ was and is nothing more than a media whore.

Now, see, that's an assertion (for which I think there's some justification). But it's not a FACT. People can disagree with it.

The fact is, he knew this was a fake, he presented it as real, it was a HOAX!

Again, this is your opinion, it's not a fact. It is, however, a fact that we will never know whether it was an admin error or a stunt. No matter what Skeptic Overlord does. If he gets through to Jones and Jones actually engages and explains it as a mistake, it wil stilll be a no-brainer for people to say, "well of course he'd deny it, wouldn't he?"

Your judgement on the situation may or may not be well-founded. It's certainly hasty and in another thread there seems to be a suggestion that another website trailed the Charlie Sheen interview as it should have been done. There's way too much computer forensics involved for me to be able to settle that so I'll see how it develops.

But my main point is that ATS should not have got involved. Particularly when threads that might encourage that kind of banding together for a partiuclar aim are banned. It's hypocritical.

... it's going to be harder for them to get their message out there thanks to this tard.

Actually, from that point of view, attacking AJ is also not good either tactically or strategically.

Originally posted by BlackOps719



Can I just point out one thing?


It is the duty of the one presenting the information to make it unquestionably clear that what he is saying is FALSE if it indeed is FALSE.

You can't post something so obviously inflammatory as fact for two full hours, passing it off as the gospel truth, and then expect to be able to come along and recant after the damage has been done.


. . .

Orson Welles did it, and it was the best career move of his life.

I am not an Alex Jones fan, but I have to agree with the OP in everything he has said thus far.

Bad move on the part of ATS admin, and alot of the community.

Shame on you all



[edit on 9/9/2009 by Lemon.Fresh]

reply to post by rich23

There has been no evidence to suggest that it was anything other than a mistake on the part of AJ or whoever works on his website.

My point is, ultimately, that despite a lack of any evidence to suggest a malicious intent, ATS is labelling Jones a hoaxer.

Have you seen this yet?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a few thoughts on this.

first, i never realized alex jones had any credibility. he always came across as highly biased, angry, and hateful. while he was talking out against the government' i also saw him do a lot to create tension between we the people. personally i never had any respect for the man.

second, while when the 'big news' thread on ats was renamed 'hoax' i chimed in to laugh and say 'well it IS alex jones what else would it be silly you...'. but i do have t agree the zeal with which this forum has gone after the man is shocking, almost as if there were some sort of personal grudge or contest between ats and aj.

having already said i dont like the man i still have to say the attack on him makes me feel a little uneasy.

he never had much credibility as far as i can tell so this really is not 'big news'.

so why the white hot hate?

beats me, but you can bet this will be my last contribution to the show.

peace, animal

I think the point remains that AJ hyped this thing up so much, that most were disappointed and some flat out pissed off at this "hoax/slip up"

He said this is the biggest news in years and it will blow peoples minds and so on... i understand peoples frustrations.

The way he went about it was all wrong...

Now maybe if CS sits down with Obama and grills him over the official 9/11 story and some kind of admission is obtained....then it will have been worth it.

Or if millions of people are alerted to the "fact" that 9/11 was an inside job... then it will be worth it.


Will the end justify the means...?


Time will tell i guess.

Originally posted by blupblup
Now maybe if CS sits down with Obama and grills him over the official 9/11 story and some kind of admission is obtained....then it will have been worth it.

I apologize, in advance, for my abrupt directness, but I believe it's sorely needed here.

Anyone who holds out hope that this stunt will result in an interview with Obama (or any member of the government for that matter), is seriously delusional.

This event is a case study in exactly how one could guarantee such an interview will never happen.

Originally posted by quackers
What mob mentality.

Perhaps the mob mentality that gave you siz or seven stars in the time it took me to answer one post.

Which I thought was really funny, actually.

I thought the U2U was very clear in its aim, to inform people to inform others that they Jones/Sheen thing was just a stunt. If uninformed people go around spreading this like it is true, then it flies in the face of of those seeking to expose the truth.

Why pick on Alex Jones for a mass U2U? Why not over the ludicrous birther stuff? Or you could go for mainstream media outlets that are genuinely deceptive? Why SINGLE HIM OUT for that treatment?

Why not, for example, go after John Lear? He's bringing a lawsuit that will actually bring the no-planes theory into a court of law. Unless he has some pretty stunning evidence available, he's going to fall on his ass and make the truth movement look like asses too.

Why you're all bend out of shape because a site who's motto is "Deny Ignorance" sends a mass pm to its users to rally against ignorance, well, it's beyond me.

Then perhaps you should try reading beyond the first post and looking at the arguments already advanced. But to brand Jones a HOAXER without credible evidence to rule out inadvertent error, IS ignorance. And that's the ignorance I'm denying.

In a movement dedicated to truth and all things truthful, telling lies is tantamount to sabotage.

The real damage comes from infighting. And, if you really care about 9/11 truth, by diverting the attention from the message (Sheen's article contained a lot of good points with which his intended audience may be unfamiliar) to the errors of the messenger, you're just doing the PTB's work for them.

Don't try to maintain that you care about 9/11 truth if you support the U2U. Its effect has been to aggravate substantially any damage Jones has done with his grandstanding.

reply to post by AshleyD


I'd seen references to it. My theory, until something turns up, is that it was probably an oversight. I also think AJ is Mr. Bluster, so it's no stretch for me to think he'd sooner blame the servers than admit his own incompetence.

Are you suggesting that such a scenario has never happened?

Because, you know, good luck with that. Anyone who's ever been to work will have seen someone blaming the machinery.

Edit to add... Mind you, if Skeptic Overlord calls him on his unbustable servers, that would be quite funny. That would of course mean Jones allowing contact, which I'm not holding my breath about.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by rich23]

Originally posted by mister.old.school

Originally posted by blupblup
Now maybe if CS sits down with Obama and grills him over the official 9/11 story and some kind of admission is obtained....then it will have been worth it.

I apologize, in advance, for my abrupt directness, but I believe it's sorely needed here.

Anyone who holds out hope that this stunt will result in an interview with Obama (or any member of the government for that matter), is seriously delusional.

This event is a case study in exactly how one could guarantee such an interview will never happen.

You really don't need to point that out to me... I was playing devils advocate.
I don't for one minute buy into any of this AJ BS.
I was merely saying that the only way that any good can come from this, is if CS gets to sit down with BO and get some kind of admission, not i thought it would happen or that there is even a remote chance of it happen.

I said time will tell...

reply to post by rich23


You seem to completely miss the point that it matters not what truth Sheen's letter has, because him and Jones have used deception to put it across. The truth therefore is irrelivent, soiled by the lies. It is not credible. And that is why the U2U was needed.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by quackers]

Originally posted by blupblup
I think the point remains that AJ hyped this thing up so much, that most were disappointed and some flat out pissed off at this "hoax/slip up"

Hardly in dispute. But why should ATS suddenly attempt to mobilise its membership (based on an unproven assumption and in a U2U whic, despite what SO may try and say, was clearly intended to brand Jones as a hoaxer. If, as SO says, the U2U was intended simply to stop people thinking the interview was real, why did it draw attention to the difference between the initial appearance of the article amd its corrected version?

Now maybe if CS sits down with Obama and grills him over the official 9/11 story and some kind of admission is obtained....then it will have been worth it.

I'm with Mister Old School on this. It'll happen the day I become a grandmother.

Or if millions of people are alerted to the "fact" that 9/11 was an inside job... then it will be worth it.

And the U2U has drastically reduced the probability of that.

Originally posted by quackers
reply to post by rich23

 

You seem to completely miss the point that it matters not what truth Sheen's letter has, because him and Jones have used deception to put it across. The truth therefore is irrelivent, soiled by the lies. It is not credible. And that is why the U2U was needed.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by quackers]

You miss the point that you're doing TPTB's work for them by contributing to this controversy.

I guess you'd sooner upbraid AJ for his perceived dishonesty than try and ensure that the overall message about the truth of 9/11 gets out. If the message were more important to you, then you'd recognise that drawing attention to Jones' stupidity not only makes the whole truth movement look more stupid, it also undercuts the message just as effectively as Jones' hucksterism.

This kind of infighting is meat and drink to those who find AJ inconvenient. I'll say it again, I don't like AJ, but he does promulgate some ideas that I think are useful. But I don't entertain unreasonable expectations about him not being a buffoon, or being terribly competent when TSHTF.

And again, the fact that you don't find the mere FACT of the U2U rather unsettling, given the T&Cs on this site, shows you're just so missing the point of this thread.

And you might like being told what to think, but I don't. And certainly not by people at ATS whose intellectual integrity I'm beginning to find suspect.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by rich23]