The government has ‘weather weapons’
Chemicals in the water are turning frogs gay
Robert Mueller is a demon, and also a pedophile
The Sandy Hook shooting was staged
Hillary Clinton is running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor
Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/14/alex-jones-5-most-disturbing...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Con... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_warfare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Popeye
Chemicals in the water are turning the frogs gay.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-potomac/sex-c...
For Mueller, Sandy Hook, and Pizzagate, Alex Jones speculated and reported on these existing conspiracy theories. He did not invent them. He apologized for Pizzagate and Sandy Hook, and blames his rants on psychosis.
Lewis v. Jones deposition[1] @ 6:15-9:10 you'll find a clip of Jones on the day of the Sandy Hook shooting saying it was staged. If Jones didn't "invent" the ridiculous theory then whoever did got word of it to Alex Jones at record speed.
Did you know they are putting chemicals in the water that change the sex of frogs? Did you know that the government has weather weapons? The article supporting the claims talks of disturbing and ridiculous conspiracy theories, while these theories are factual.
Even the pizzagate emails deserve scrutiny. How is this in any way normal?
>> We plan to heat the pool, so a swim is a possibility. Bonnie will be Uber Service to transport Ruby, Emerson, and Maeve Luzzatto (11, 9, and almost 7) so you’ll have some further entertainment, and they will be in that pool for sure.
But not the food supplies? Just air and water?
I'm sure you could easily say that, but whether you can justify that is the real question. Because if we're just going to censor people based on groundless rhetoric simply because we don't like what they're saying or thinking, well there are quite a few dystopian ends that follow that line of thought.
I wish I were making that up.
And yet the opposing simplistic narrative of "Terrorists hate our freedom" has caused orders of magnitude more harm. Hundreds of thousands of lives lost! But since that is the power-structure-approved message, it was/is heartily repeated (along side yellow cake, aluminum tubes, etc).
If someone can't grasp the bigger ideas of multiple independent actors each with their own divergent motivations, suicide attackers acting out of desperation for long term grievances, etc, I'd rather them end up at "inside job" instead of the officially sanctioned propaganda that ended up mobilizing so much death.
Conspiracy theories are direct responses to the official narrative being crafted as a gradient of opinion-facts that frame a political conclusion as if it's irrefutable. When rationality is abused to marginalize a viewpoint, that viewpoint shirks rationality.
Suppressing counter-sanctioned viewpoints ultimately just causes that divergence to continue growing, setting it up to pop even more drastically. If the goal is to prevent fire, the best approach is to not have fuel sitting around. If you truly want to prevent violent collapse, then work to oppose the corrupt controlling agenda that's being pushed "rationally", rather than low-effort shouting down of wacky opposition.
PS note that's all from a solely USian internal perspective. It's not really any consolation to eg the dead Iraqis that the US avoided a domestic revolution by killing them instead.
Do you have any source at all for this?
He seemed to be beyond 'chemtrails' from what I had seen of him, and indeed he has a video stating:
> Another viral YouTube video purporting to show a pilot forgetting to turn off chemtrails as a plane comes in to land is another example of how baseless conspiracy theories distract from genuine issues and cover-ups.
Legit studies confirm that soy products adversatively alter testosterone in men. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15735098 http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/16/4/829?ijkey=4c972127... The meta-study from 2010 that is used to debunk the soyboy conspiracy also confirms that soy consumption lowers testosterone (just that it does not manifest the adverse effects associated with lowered testosterone) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19524224
PJW promoted and speculated on the chemtrail conspiracy (which is about weather modification, not mind control). The mind control part was later conflated and it makes the theory way less credible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgellons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_controversy. The chemtrail conspiracy has its roots in this document: https://web.archive.org/web/20090716000939/http://www.fas.or... which is about weather warfare, which the US already engaged in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_warfare
Paul Watson does not incite hatred or violence against Muslims (can't source a negative, so you please source your affirmative). He even criticized Trump for retweeting anti-Muslim rhetoric https://www.businessinsider.com/infowars-paul-joseph-watson-.... He is very critical of radical Islam, but that is hardly a fringe position in the West.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks_advance-k...
I really don't want to get into nitty gritty debate over people like PJW, but most of what you bring up plays into my point.
What's your threshold for considering an idea to be dangerous? It could be argued that there are ideas that can cause harmful effects on society, but people also have a right to be stupid. I don't see how believing in the illuminati, chemtrails, soy causing feminization, or that 9/11 was an inside Job are dangerous in the same objective sense that promoting racial violence is.
If you have a problem with people believing bogus things, then think about considering issues around education to be a priority, as people who grow up in societies that don't value critical thinking, science, skepticism, etc., are probably prone to believing dumb things. People won't stop talking about chemtrails because platforms consider it dangerous, and restricting speech around "fringe" topics only validates people's beliefs that the authorities are hiding the truth.
I don't know enough about what PJW has said about Muslims. Can you elaborate?
It is. You have heard of PJW. Enough to defend him here. So presumably you're aware of his views, which is what he's known for.
> I really don't want to get into nitty gritty debate over people like PJW
But that's what you've done.
> I don't see how believing in the illuminati, chemtrails, soy causing feminization, or that 9/11 was an inside Job are dangerous in the same objective sense that promoting racial violence is.
He stops short of promoting outright violence precisely because he knows that will get him kicked off of places. What he has done is portray muslims as boogeymen, saying that they are all rapists, that they turn cities into ghettos, and that the west needs "islam control." If you don't think that's dangerous, look into the anti-semitic conspiracy theories that spread throughout europe before the holocaust. Very similar language.
His association with conspiracy theories is the main thing he's known for. In order to claim that his views are not dangerous, you have to had heard of him. And if you've heard of him, very likely it was because of the fringe views he has.
> All I did was ask a question, and you're accusing me of bad intent.
Perhaps I'm wrong, and I apologize. The internet is swarming with people who argue in bad faith to promote an agenda. They feign ignorance of things, hold contradictory positions, and derail discussions all while claiming to be perfectly innocent. I mistook you for one of the trolls. And that's exactly what the trolls want.
I couldn't really tell you why I've been exposed to Paul Joseph Watson. Maybe it's because I watch Joe Rogan and Tim Poole's shows.
> Perhaps I'm wrong, and I apologize. The internet is swarming with people who argue in bad faith to promote an agenda. They feign ignorance of things, hold contradictory positions, and derail discussions all while claiming to be perfectly innocent. I mistook you for one of the trolls. And that's exactly what the trolls want.
No hard feelings, and I apologize for any ignorance I may have on the issue. It's understandable, and I know what you mean about those sorts of trolling tactics. I'd rather people sometimes mistake others for trolls than fall for trolls all the time.
- 9/11 was an inside job
- The illuminati is controlling your mind with chemitrails
- Soy beans are making men docile and feminine.
Sounds pretty fringe to me. Don't care how many views he has.
He also incites hate against muslims, which I'd say, makes him pretty dangerous.
My opinion of Facebook's actions is a separate matter. But the narrative you're pushing to justify your argument - it's complete BS.