Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Alex Jones and the First Amendment...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by kccd View Post

    Jones is an evil person who also promulgated the claim that the Sandy Hook shooting was a false flag operation and that there were no dead children and the parents were crisis actors. Some of those parents have been hounded for years by threats to the point that one had to go into hiding.

    There are limits to Constitutional rights and it seems to me that Jones crossed that line.
    Well, heckydarn then, the Supreme Court need not waste their time!
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #17
      In Jones' defence, his divorce lawyer called him a "performing artist", so InfoWars is fake news.



      Source: https://www.statesman.com/news/20170418/exclusive-in-travis-county-custody-case-jury-will-search-for-real-alex-jones

      At a recent pretrial hearing, attorney Randall Wilhite told state District Judge Orlinda Naranjo that using his client Alex Jones’ on-air Infowars persona to evaluate Alex Jones as a father would be like judging Jack Nicholson in a custody dispute based on his performance as the Joker in “Batman.”

      “He’s playing a character,” Wilhite said of Jones. “He is a performance artist.”

      Source Statesman

      © Copyright Original Source



      P1) If , then I win.

      P2)

      C) I win.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
        In Jones' defence, his divorce lawyer called him a "performing artist", so InfoWars is fake news.



        Source: https://www.statesman.com/news/20170418/exclusive-in-travis-county-custody-case-jury-will-search-for-real-alex-jones

        At a recent pretrial hearing, attorney Randall Wilhite told state District Judge Orlinda Naranjo that using his client Alex Jones’ on-air Infowars persona to evaluate Alex Jones as a father would be like judging Jack Nicholson in a custody dispute based on his performance as the Joker in “Batman.”

        “He’s playing a character,” Wilhite said of Jones. “He is a performance artist.”

        Source Statesman

        © Copyright Original Source


        So he was exercising artistic license! What a defense!
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

          So he was exercising artistic license! What a defense!
          Showing (and reposting apparently) a decapitated head of Trump is defendable by "artistic license", so why not Jones' nuttery?
          Last edited by Diogenes; 03-04-2021, 11:00 AM.
          P1) If , then I win.

          P2)

          C) I win.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

            Showing a decapitated head of the now former POTUS is defendable by "artistic license", so why not Jones' nuttery?
            Believe me, I'm fer it!!!
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
              I favor maximal civil liberties, so even evil speech should be protected.
              As the saying goes, Offensive speech is protected speech by definition, because inoffensive speech needs no protection.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                So he was exercising artistic license! What a defense!
                That's the same defense Rachael Maddow used when she was sued for something she said on her show. The argument her lawyers made was something along the lines of, "It's an entertainment program; therefore, nothing Maddow says should be mistaken for a statement of fact."
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post

                  I completely disagree. Nutjobs will take inspiration wherever they can excuse their actions. Manson claimed inspiration from the White Album. Are you suggesting that be banned just in case someone else takes similar inspiration?
                  What nonsense. Nutjobs will always find crazy ideas by playing music backwards or whatever. But when a broadcaster deliberately claims that Sandy Hook was a false flag operation, there are bound to be consequences, and there were. These things are not remotely equivalent.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by kccd View Post

                    What nonsense. Nutjobs will always find crazy ideas by playing music backwards or whatever. But when a broadcaster deliberately claims that Sandy Hook was a false flag operation, there are bound to be consequences, and there were. These things are not remotely equivalent.
                    What nonsense. People are responsible for their own actions. And people are free to interpret events and say their interpretation of any event, no matter how idiotic. But that's on them, not anyone else. "The devil made me do it" excuse is tired and pointless.
                    That's what
                    - She

                    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                    - Stephen R. Donaldson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                      You forget about the conspiracy theories that were that the people were moved off of the aircraft. There were attacks.
                      However, even if you neglect that, it doesn't mean that they didn't cause harm to the victims families. After all, dragging out the tragedy through conspiracies is hateful.

                      But, lets go further, what about those who lied in ferguson and helped contribute to the vast amounts of harm done through the riots. Do we charge them?

                      Where do we draw the line?
                      I made no effort to list all the variations on 9/11 Trutherism, only to point out two extremes and to note that one of those extremes has a basis in reality (that GWB was given a daily briefing that included warnings).

                      What deliberate lies were told in Ferguson? If someone deliberately tells lies that are then directly responsible for injuries and/or property damage, they should be held responsible. Would you charge Trump for lying about the election results, a lie that lead to the Jan 6 riot?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                        Again, we have laws against libel, slander and harassment. But to limit free speech because you don't like it or you think it is false leads to many problems. 1. Who becomes the arbiter of "Truth?" 2. What happens if those same people decide what YOU say should be restricted?

                        There will always be conspiracy theories, cults, and just outright liars out there. If you try to outlaw their speech, you just end up with them going underground. Much better to be out in the open where we can see what they are up to. And we can deal with their speech with counter speech, debate, and if they break the law, like inciting riots, or causing someone direct harm, we can deal with that with the laws he have for such things.
                        You are right that, for example, all speech from certain conspiracy theorists should not be banned, but the platforms they use can impose standards and either censor obviously false claims, or slap a warning label on such claims. After all, such platforms could be responsible for disseminating falsehoods that lead to violence or other types of harm.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by seer View Post

                          So the left has been calling Trump supporters Nazis and White Supremacist - should that language be verboten?
                          If someone is chanting Nazi slogans and wearing Nazi symbols, it is not out of line to describe them as Nazi sympathizers.

                          White supremacist groups do not hide the fact that they are White Supremacists.

                          This is not to claim that ALL conservatives or Republicans should be lumped together with these people, but it would be helpful if the rest of the conservatives and Republicans were more forceful in their denunciation of those groups.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                            Well, heckydarn then, the Supreme Court need not waste their time!
                            Where did I say that the Supreme Court has no role in determining the limits to Constitutional rights?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                              Showing (and reposting apparently) a decapitated head of Trump is defendable by "artistic license", so why not Jones' nuttery?
                              Kathy Griffin is clearly a performer. Jones has a radio show and does not identify himself as a performer on that show.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                                That's the same defense Rachael Maddow used when she was sued for something she said on her show. The argument her lawyers made was something along the lines of, "It's an entertainment program; therefore, nothing Maddow says should be mistaken for a statement of fact."
                                I am not familiar with this. Do you have a link?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                234 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                183 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                310 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X