Alex Jones doesn't play Piers Morgan's game, destroys him on his own show

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#151 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="Treflis"]Seems the TC doesn't understand what a debate is.hartsickdiscipl

No, Piers Morgan doesn't understand what a debate is. He has demonstrated that several times in the past few months. Alex Jones came in prepared for his crap, and didn't even let him get started. That was the strategy. Don't play on his terms. TBH, it was the only way for Alex to say what he felt he needed to say. He may have come across as a lunatic to many people, but he got to say what he wanted to say. Normally Piers manipulates his "debates" so that can't happen.

IF, and this an important question, IF you think a debate is designed to sway people to your point of view... ...who exactly do you think was swayed by Alex's tirade? Who, that didn't already agree with him, do you think came away thinking: "Wow, what a reasoned, intellectual and calm approach he took. He really struck me as a responsible gun owner that I'm glad has access to automatic assault weaponry. I can't ever envision him being anything less than a responsible mature adult with his 50+ guns that he claimed to have." I think Alex gave a giant boner to people like you who already agree with him and made anyone who was on the fence on the issue sit up and say, "Whoa...that dude was AMPED. Needs a chill pill before he hops on Piers and bites off his ear Mike Tyson style."
#152 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"][QUOTE="Chris_Williams"] its scary to think there are thousands and thousands of people who agree with the guyGreySeal9
Millions. He has many more listeners than even the highest-rated CNN show has viewers.

[citation needed]

Seems he does have over a million listeners according to a few sources. Not sure how many actually believe anything he says and how many are there for laughs though At any rate I found this while looking http://truthernews.wordpress.com/2012/02/19/10-reasons-why-radio-host-alex-jones-is-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/ Made me laugh so I'll share.
#153 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"] its scary to think there are thousands and thousands of people who agree with the guyGreySeal9

Millions. He has many more listeners than even the highest-rated CNN show has viewers.

[citation needed]

http://www.gcnlive.com/wp/2011/04/15/truth-shock-how-alex-jones-and-gcn-have-revitalized-the-talk-radio-industry/

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/alex-jones-day-life-libertarian-radio-host/story?id=10891854&page=2#.UOyn82_Ad8E

Fun stuff here too-

http://www.examiner.com/article/alex-jones-crushes-piers-morgan-on-primetime-cnn

#154 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Treflis"]Seems the TC doesn't understand what a debate is.nocoolnamejim

No, Piers Morgan doesn't understand what a debate is. He has demonstrated that several times in the past few months. Alex Jones came in prepared for his crap, and didn't even let him get started. That was the strategy. Don't play on his terms. TBH, it was the only way for Alex to say what he felt he needed to say. He may have come across as a lunatic to many people, but he got to say what he wanted to say. Normally Piers manipulates his "debates" so that can't happen.

IF, and this an important question, IF you think a debate is designed to sway people to your point of view... ...who exactly do you think was swayed by Alex's tirade? Who, that didn't already agree with him, do you think came away thinking: "Wow, what a reasoned, intellectual and calm approach he took. He really struck me as a responsible gun owner that I'm glad has access to automatic assault weaponry. I can't ever envision him being anything less than a responsible mature adult with his 50+ guns that he claimed to have." I think Alex gave a giant boner to people like you who already agree with him and made anyone who was on the fence on the issue sit up and say, "Whoa...that dude was AMPED. Needs a chill pill before he hops on Piers and bites off his ear Mike Tyson style."

I know that he didn't appeal to the ridiculously unenthusiastic, passive sheeple that populate most of the the US. There is so little passion for liberty, good, and conscience here in America that this reaction doesn't surprise me in the least. People don't even know good from bad, so they can't recognize it when they see it.

#155 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
Rush has a few million listeners. Fox is the most watched cable news network. It's a big country and there are a lot of people with pretty extreme views relative to the rest of the world. I actually took Hart's disciple on how many people follow Alex without needing verification and decided to just shut up and try and not make a big deal out of it before some of the more prominent international members of GS started teasing us poor Americans. I was hoping that particular item would be overlooked without further comment.
#156 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

No, Piers Morgan doesn't understand what a debate is. He has demonstrated that several times in the past few months. Alex Jones came in prepared for his crap, and didn't even let him get started. That was the strategy. Don't play on his terms. TBH, it was the only way for Alex to say what he felt he needed to say. He may have come across as a lunatic to many people, but he got to say what he wanted to say. Normally Piers manipulates his "debates" so that can't happen.

hartsickdiscipl

IF, and this an important question, IF you think a debate is designed to sway people to your point of view... ...who exactly do you think was swayed by Alex's tirade? Who, that didn't already agree with him, do you think came away thinking: "Wow, what a reasoned, intellectual and calm approach he took. He really struck me as a responsible gun owner that I'm glad has access to automatic assault weaponry. I can't ever envision him being anything less than a responsible mature adult with his 50+ guns that he claimed to have." I think Alex gave a giant boner to people like you who already agree with him and made anyone who was on the fence on the issue sit up and say, "Whoa...that dude was AMPED. Needs a chill pill before he hops on Piers and bites off his ear Mike Tyson style."

I know that he didn't appeal to the ridiculously unenthusiastic, passive sheeple that populate most of the the US. There is so little passion for liberty, good, and conscience here in America that this reaction doesn't surprise me in the least. People don't even know good from bad, so they can't recognize it when they see it.

Okay, followup question then. You've stated that most people will have a visceral negative reaction towards Alex in that interview. You then proceeded to call that vast majority "sheeple". What, exactly, is your goal here? To insult and annoy and make people who don't already agree with you less likely to ever be persuaded to support your point of view by showing something that they'll think is a crazy person ranting on national television and then calling them stupid for thinking that the person they are watching is crazy? In other words, you kind of just said you think most people who watch that interview will come across with a negative impression of Alex Jones and his viewpoints and then insulted them. You obviously AGREE with Alex's views. ... Why are you doing something that is, from your point of view, likely to harm and weaken your cause by giving it greater exposure and visibility? What's your end game here?
#157 Posted by Jagged3dge (3895 posts) -

That was an awesome interview. I'm not all that familiar with Alex Jones, but he didn't convince me he's a lunatic. He said some stuff that would frustrate the average viewer though. Nevertheless, it was nice to see somebody not sit around and take Morgan's ****

#158 Posted by EJ902 (14398 posts) -
I'm disappointed alex jones didn't start singing his national guard song but piers is a douche so I'm glad someone actually got the opportunity to shout at him. Please don't deport him though we don't want him back
#159 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] IF, and this an important question, IF you think a debate is designed to sway people to your point of view... ...who exactly do you think was swayed by Alex's tirade? Who, that didn't already agree with him, do you think came away thinking: "Wow, what a reasoned, intellectual and calm approach he took. He really struck me as a responsible gun owner that I'm glad has access to automatic assault weaponry. I can't ever envision him being anything less than a responsible mature adult with his 50+ guns that he claimed to have." I think Alex gave a giant boner to people like you who already agree with him and made anyone who was on the fence on the issue sit up and say, "Whoa...that dude was AMPED. Needs a chill pill before he hops on Piers and bites off his ear Mike Tyson style."nocoolnamejim

I know that he didn't appeal to the ridiculously unenthusiastic, passive sheeple that populate most of the the US. There is so little passion for liberty, good, and conscience here in America that this reaction doesn't surprise me in the least. People don't even know good from bad, so they can't recognize it when they see it.

Okay, followup question then. You've stated that most people will have a visceral negative reaction towards Alex in that interview. You then proceeded to call that vast majority "sheeple". What, exactly, is your goal here? To insult and annoy and make people who don't already agree with you less likely to ever be persuaded to support your point of view by showing something that they'll think is a crazy person ranting on national television and then calling them stupid for thinking that the person they are watching is crazy? In other words, you kind of just said you think most people who watch that interview will come across with a negative impression of Alex Jones and his viewpoints and then insulted them. You obviously AGREE with Alex's views. ... Why are you doing something that is, from your point of view, likely to harm and weaken your cause by giving it greater exposure and visibility? What's your end game here?

The type of message that Alex brings to the American public isn't something that most will accept, period. It doesn't matter if you sugar-coat it or shove it in their faces like he did to Piers last night. It doesn't matter how many relevant facts, statistics, and historical references he presents. This is the type of message that the public has be pre-programmed to reject, largely by the mainstream media. People don't want to believe that bad things just happen in an imperfect world, so they try to ban guns to fix it. People like to think that they can fix things with solutions that are band-aids at best. They do it to feel good about themselves, like they're really making a difference. Unfortunately the only real difference they are making is restricting the liberties of people who remember what the 2nd Amendment was really about. History teaches us that giving up firearms or weakening the public's ability to arm themselves often leads to tyrannical government doing unspeakable things.

Humans by and large don't want to hear the type of message that Alex Jones presents. They're too busy with their smartphones, playing games, watching sports, Jersey Shore, Kardashians, or even educating themselves in fields that they hope to spend their lives indulged in. So why is this a bad thing? Because it distracts people from what's going on around them. They hear someone like Alex Jones, and immediately think that he's nuts and even potentially dangerous. He doesn't fit in with the mold of what they have been conditioned to think is normal. They don't see an immediate, in-your-face fulfillment of the things that he preaches, so they dismiss it. However, a quick look at the direction the US has taken post-9/11 should show us that all is not well. A few minutes spent researching admitted false flag events in the history of many powerful nations teaches us that this isn't far-fetched at all.

It's all an issue of perspective and conditioning. It's about what people want to hear, and what they're programmed to reject. I'd like to be able to tell you that all is well, and that there aren't a bunch of powerful, rich people at the top of the world's top 6 monopolies pulling almost all the strings, but I'd be lying. I'd like to be able to tell you that their intentions are good, and that they're just normal people who care about others. That too would be dishonest.

The question has always been- Are you even open to the truth if you hear it? We are so used to hearing meaningless crap that when something really hits hard, it scares us. It makes us want to call someone a nutjob and dismiss it so we can go on with our everyday lives. I understand. Truly, I do.

#160 Posted by Person0 (2944 posts) -

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I know that he didn't appeal to the ridiculously unenthusiastic, passive sheeple that populate most of the the US. There is so little passion for liberty, good, and conscience here in America that this reaction doesn't surprise me in the least. People don't even know good from bad, so they can't recognize it when they see it.

hartsickdiscipl

Okay, followup question then. You've stated that most people will have a visceral negative reaction towards Alex in that interview. You then proceeded to call that vast majority "sheeple". What, exactly, is your goal here? To insult and annoy and make people who don't already agree with you less likely to ever be persuaded to support your point of view by showing something that they'll think is a crazy person ranting on national television and then calling them stupid for thinking that the person they are watching is crazy? In other words, you kind of just said you think most people who watch that interview will come across with a negative impression of Alex Jones and his viewpoints and then insulted them. You obviously AGREE with Alex's views. ... Why are you doing something that is, from your point of view, likely to harm and weaken your cause by giving it greater exposure and visibility? What's your end game here?

The type of message that Alex brings to the American public isn't something that most will accept, period. It doesn't matter if you sugar-coat it or shove it in their faces like he did to Piers last night. It doesn't matter how many relevant facts, statistics, and historical references he presents. This is the type of message that the public has be pre-programmed to reject, largely by the mainstream media. People don't want to believe that bad things just happen in an imperfect world, so they try to ban guns to fix it. People like to think that they can fix things with solutions that are band-aids at best. They do it to feel good about themselves, like they're really making a difference. Unfortunately the only real difference they are making is restricting the liberties of people who remember what the 2nd Amendment was really about. History teaches us that giving up firearms or weakening the public's ability to arm themselves often leads to tyrannical government doing unspeakable things.

Humans by and large don't want to hear the type of message that Alex Jones presents. They're too busy with their smartphones, playing games, watching sports, Jersey Shore, Kardashians, or even educating themselves in fields that they hope to spend their lives indulged in. So why is this a bad thing? Because it distracts people from what's going on around them. They hear someone like Alex Jones, and immediately think that he's nuts and even potentially dangerous. He doesn't fit in with the mold of what they have been conditioned to think is normal. They don't see an immediate, in-your-face fulfillment of the things that he preaches, so they dismiss it. However, a quick look at the direction the US has taken post-9/11 should show us that all is not well. A few minutes spent researching admitted false flag events in the history of many powerful nations teaches us that this isn't far-fetched at all.

It's all an issue of perspective and conditioning. It's about what people want to hear, and what they're programmed to reject. I'd like to be able to tell you that all is well, and that there aren't a bunch of powerful, rich people at the top of the world's top 6 monopolies pulling almost all the strings, but I'd be lying. I'd like to be able to tell you that their intentions are good, and that they're just normal people who care about others. That too would be dishonest.

The question has always been- Are you even open to the truth if you hear it? We are so used to hearing meaningless crap that when something really hits hard, it scares us. It makes us want to call someone a nutjob and dismiss it so we can go on with our everyday lives. I understand. Truly, I do.

Or he is completely insane (or just in it for the money) and says crazy things that are not backed up by evidence or even common sense.

#161 Posted by Saturos3091 (14938 posts) -

I think Alex Jones is an asshat and Piers Morgan is essentially a less intelligent version of that same hat. I didn't find what Jones was saying to be "frightening" or anything though. You have to remember it is a debate - there's strategy and quite a bit of tactics involved. It's like a football game where the score was zero for Morgan and fifty-two for Jones. Morgan essentially went back to the locker room and cried.

Once again though, statistics are not facts regardless of how Alex Jones was spinning them. He tends to do that.

#162 Posted by sonicare (53548 posts) -

Who is Alex JOnes?

#163 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
Hart: While this may surprise you, I've actually changed my own viewpoints a lot over the last 10-15 years. I used to be a Republican and my family used to tease me by calling me Alex Keaton when I was younger. I consider myself pretty open minded and I'll say this...even if you think that most people are unlikely to come over to your point of view unless they have some sort of "enlightenment" moment where they experience an eye opening awakening, Alex was an AWFUL messenger in that interview. The very last thing you want a gun freedom advocate to come across as is an angry, unhinged lunatic. You want to DESTROY the stereotype of "gun nuts" by showing counterpoints of someone who is easy going, everyday sort of guy who people wouldn't necessarily cross the street to try and avoid if they saw them coming. Alex came across as completely unhinged. He was yelling, talking over, interrupting constantly, throwing dictator names from everywhere. To you, who have a lot of the context of where he was coming from, you could fill in the logical steps that he was just rushing through. You heard the "full" message since you've probably heard and/or read the entire script a hundred times or so. You probably also know that Piers has a history of being a dick to people who he interviews. But anyone who doesn't have all that extra detail? Anyone who is surfing through You Tube or watching any of their own normal sources of news? Dear. Sweet. Jesus. Alex came across as a POSTER CHILD for the sort of person who looks utterly divorced from any sort of control over his emotions and as a tinfoil hat type who probably things "they" are out to get him. He was the WORST sort of spokesman imaginable because he came across as the living embodiment of EVERYTHING people think of when they think "gun nut'.
#164 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] Okay, followup question then. You've stated that most people will have a visceral negative reaction towards Alex in that interview. You then proceeded to call that vast majority "sheeple". What, exactly, is your goal here? To insult and annoy and make people who don't already agree with you less likely to ever be persuaded to support your point of view by showing something that they'll think is a crazy person ranting on national television and then calling them stupid for thinking that the person they are watching is crazy? In other words, you kind of just said you think most people who watch that interview will come across with a negative impression of Alex Jones and his viewpoints and then insulted them. You obviously AGREE with Alex's views. ... Why are you doing something that is, from your point of view, likely to harm and weaken your cause by giving it greater exposure and visibility? What's your end game here?Person0

The type of message that Alex brings to the American public isn't something that most will accept, period. It doesn't matter if you sugar-coat it or shove it in their faces like he did to Piers last night. It doesn't matter how many relevant facts, statistics, and historical references he presents. This is the type of message that the public has be pre-programmed to reject, largely by the mainstream media. People don't want to believe that bad things just happen in an imperfect world, so they try to ban guns to fix it. People like to think that they can fix things with solutions that are band-aids at best. They do it to feel good about themselves, like they're really making a difference. Unfortunately the only real difference they are making is restricting the liberties of people who remember what the 2nd Amendment was really about. History teaches us that giving up firearms or weakening the public's ability to arm themselves often leads to tyrannical government doing unspeakable things.

Humans by and large don't want to hear the type of message that Alex Jones presents. They're too busy with their smartphones, playing games, watching sports, Jersey Shore, Kardashians, or even educating themselves in fields that they hope to spend their lives indulged in. So why is this a bad thing? Because it distracts people from what's going on around them. They hear someone like Alex Jones, and immediately think that he's nuts and even potentially dangerous. He doesn't fit in with the mold of what they have been conditioned to think is normal. They don't see an immediate, in-your-face fulfillment of the things that he preaches, so they dismiss it. However, a quick look at the direction the US has taken post-9/11 should show us that all is not well. A few minutes spent researching admitted false flag events in the history of many powerful nations teaches us that this isn't far-fetched at all.

It's all an issue of perspective and conditioning. It's about what people want to hear, and what they're programmed to reject. I'd like to be able to tell you that all is well, and that there aren't a bunch of powerful, rich people at the top of the world's top 6 monopolies pulling almost all the strings, but I'd be lying. I'd like to be able to tell you that their intentions are good, and that they're just normal people who care about others. That too would be dishonest.

The question has always been- Are you even open to the truth if you hear it? We are so used to hearing meaningless crap that when something really hits hard, it scares us. It makes us want to call someone a nutjob and dismiss it so we can go on with our everyday lives. I understand. Truly, I do.

Or he is completely insane (or just in it for the money) and says crazy things that are not backed up by evidence or even common sense.

Classic reaction. He doesn't say much that isn't backed-up by evidence. People just don't like where the evidence leads, so they deny it as wild speculation.

#165 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

Hart: While this may surprise you, I've actually changed my own viewpoints a lot over the last 10-15 years. I used to be a Republican and my family used to tease me by calling me Alex Keaton when I was younger. I consider myself pretty open minded and I'll say this...even if you think that most people are unlikely to come over to your point of view unless they have some sort of "enlightenment" moment where they experience an eye opening awakening, Alex was an AWFUL messenger in that interview. The very last thing you want a gun freedom advocate to come across as is an angry, unhinged lunatic. You want to DESTROY the stereotype of "gun nuts" by showing counterpoints of someone who is easy going, everyday sort of guy who people wouldn't necessarily cross the street to try and avoid if they saw them coming. Alex came across as completely unhinged. He was yelling, talking over, interrupting constantly, throwing dictator names from everywhere. To you, who have a lot of the context of where he was coming from, you could fill in the logical steps that he was just rushing through. You heard the "full" message since you've probably heard and/or read the entire script a hundred times or so. You probably also know that Piers has a history of being a dick to people who he interviews. But anyone who doesn't have all that extra detail? Anyone who is surfing through You Tube or watching any of their own normal sources of news? Dear. Sweet. Jesus. Alex came across as a POSTER CHILD for the sort of person who looks utterly divorced from any sort of control over his emotions and as a tinfoil hat type who probably things "they" are out to get him. He was the WORST sort of spokesman imaginable because he came across as the living embodiment of EVERYTHING people think of when they think "gun nut'. nocoolnamejim

A person who would take that away from watching that interview is pretty much hopeless, IMO. I know that I had a lot more context to work with, and knew that Alex would have to stay on the offensive the whole show to get a word in edgewise. It was a strategic move so that he could spew as much information as possible in a short period of time, and not let Piers voice his well-known, poorly-supported stances.

I think that anyone who watched that and didn't get at least curious about what Alex was ranting about is a zombie. A passive, soulless, programmed zombie. Yes, I know that accounts for the majority. It makes me sad.

#166 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]Hart: While this may surprise you, I've actually changed my own viewpoints a lot over the last 10-15 years. I used to be a Republican and my family used to tease me by calling me Alex Keaton when I was younger. I consider myself pretty open minded and I'll say this...even if you think that most people are unlikely to come over to your point of view unless they have some sort of "enlightenment" moment where they experience an eye opening awakening, Alex was an AWFUL messenger in that interview. The very last thing you want a gun freedom advocate to come across as is an angry, unhinged lunatic. You want to DESTROY the stereotype of "gun nuts" by showing counterpoints of someone who is easy going, everyday sort of guy who people wouldn't necessarily cross the street to try and avoid if they saw them coming. Alex came across as completely unhinged. He was yelling, talking over, interrupting constantly, throwing dictator names from everywhere. To you, who have a lot of the context of where he was coming from, you could fill in the logical steps that he was just rushing through. You heard the "full" message since you've probably heard and/or read the entire script a hundred times or so. You probably also know that Piers has a history of being a dick to people who he interviews. But anyone who doesn't have all that extra detail? Anyone who is surfing through You Tube or watching any of their own normal sources of news? Dear. Sweet. Jesus. Alex came across as a POSTER CHILD for the sort of person who looks utterly divorced from any sort of control over his emotions and as a tinfoil hat type who probably things "they" are out to get him. He was the WORST sort of spokesman imaginable because he came across as the living embodiment of EVERYTHING people think of when they think "gun nut'. hartsickdiscipl

A person who would take that away from watching that interview is pretty much hopeless, IMO. I know that I had a lot more context to work with, and knew that Alex would have to stay on the offensive the whole show to get a word in edgewise. It was a strategic move so that he could spew as much information as possible in a short period of time, and not let Piers voice his well-known, poorly-supported stances.

I think that anyone who watched that and didn't get at least curious about what Alex was ranting about is a zombie. A passive, soulless, programmed zombie. Yes, I know that accounts for the majority. It makes me sad.

And my point of view is that your takeaway isn't dissimilar to what I see a lot of folks of your political persuasion coming to. You basically said that the issue isn't the message, or even how the message is being presented, but that it isn't being presented LOUD ENOUGH. If only you could get past the mainstream media filter and take your message directly to the people, it would get traction. Which, and I'm being completely honest here, makes folks on my side of the fence pretty happy when you get right down to it. Days after one of the biggest mass shootings in history, at a school full of young kids no less, you really are actually happy that Alex was your spokesman and he went on national television and, for fifteen minutes straight, completely lost his sh1t and don't care that it would come across that way to most people. Right after a mass shooting, you have someone advocating gun rights go on TV and honestly look like someone who is about to go on a mass shooting himself. Gun rights advocates talk frequently about responsible gun owners and how it's only the nuts and lunatics who do mass shootings. I can't put this strongly enough: Alex looked like one of those people. I imagine most people stopped paying attention to anything he was saying sometime in the second minute because 90% of communication is not WHAT you say but HOW YOU SAY IT. It's body language, tone of voice, expressions, etc.

All that great information you're talking about wanting to get out there? Nobody heard it. They were just listening to the angry, out of control freak who might be the next person to go to an elementary school with an assault rifle.
#167 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]Hart: While this may surprise you, I've actually changed my own viewpoints a lot over the last 10-15 years. I used to be a Republican and my family used to tease me by calling me Alex Keaton when I was younger. I consider myself pretty open minded and I'll say this...even if you think that most people are unlikely to come over to your point of view unless they have some sort of "enlightenment" moment where they experience an eye opening awakening, Alex was an AWFUL messenger in that interview. The very last thing you want a gun freedom advocate to come across as is an angry, unhinged lunatic. You want to DESTROY the stereotype of "gun nuts" by showing counterpoints of someone who is easy going, everyday sort of guy who people wouldn't necessarily cross the street to try and avoid if they saw them coming. Alex came across as completely unhinged. He was yelling, talking over, interrupting constantly, throwing dictator names from everywhere. To you, who have a lot of the context of where he was coming from, you could fill in the logical steps that he was just rushing through. You heard the "full" message since you've probably heard and/or read the entire script a hundred times or so. You probably also know that Piers has a history of being a dick to people who he interviews. But anyone who doesn't have all that extra detail? Anyone who is surfing through You Tube or watching any of their own normal sources of news? Dear. Sweet. Jesus. Alex came across as a POSTER CHILD for the sort of person who looks utterly divorced from any sort of control over his emotions and as a tinfoil hat type who probably things "they" are out to get him. He was the WORST sort of spokesman imaginable because he came across as the living embodiment of EVERYTHING people think of when they think "gun nut'. nocoolnamejim

A person who would take that away from watching that interview is pretty much hopeless, IMO. I know that I had a lot more context to work with, and knew that Alex would have to stay on the offensive the whole show to get a word in edgewise. It was a strategic move so that he could spew as much information as possible in a short period of time, and not let Piers voice his well-known, poorly-supported stances.

I think that anyone who watched that and didn't get at least curious about what Alex was ranting about is a zombie. A passive, soulless, programmed zombie. Yes, I know that accounts for the majority. It makes me sad.

And my point of view is that your takeaway isn't dissimilar to what I see a lot of folks of your political persuasion coming to. You basically said that the issue isn't the message, or even how the message is being presented, but that it isn't being presented LOUD ENOUGH. If only you could get past the mainstream media filter and take your message directly to the people, it would get traction. Which, and I'm being completely honest here, makes folks on my side of the fence pretty happy when you get right down to it. Days after one of the biggest mass shootings in history, at a school full of young kids no less, you really are actually happy that Alex was your spokesman and he went on national television and, for fifteen minutes straight, completely lost his sh1t and don't care that it would come across that way to most people. Right after a mass shooting, you have someone advocating gun rights go on TV and honestly look like someone who is about to go on a mass shooting himself. Gun rights advocates talk frequently about responsible gun owners and how it's only the nuts and lunatics who do mass shootings. I can't put this strongly enough: Alex looked like one of those people. I imagine most people stopped paying attention to anything he was saying sometime in the second minute because 90% of communication is not WHAT you say but HOW YOU SAY IT. It's body language, tone of voice, expressions, etc.

All that great information you're talking about wanting to get out there? Nobody heard it. They were just listening to the angry, out of control freak who might be the next person to go to an elementary school with an assault rifle.

Alex Jones is not the type of person who commits a mass shooting. You have been programmed to think that someone like him would do it, but it's just not the case. It's a misidentification of traits. I can't help it if people have the wrong idea about this. Neither can Alex. He is who he is. People have no idea what a truly dangerous nutjob looks and acts like, but it certainly isn't a radio show host with millions of listeners. If people in general won't even go through the trouble of educating themselves on the true nature of such crimes, they will continue this misidentification. Your idea of "one of those people" is false to begin with. Does Adam Lanza fit the archetype that you just set for someone who would shoot up an elementary school? Hell no. So exactly what type of lunatic does things like this?

#168 Posted by Person0 (2944 posts) -

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

A person who would take that away from watching that interview is pretty much hopeless, IMO. I know that I had a lot more context to work with, and knew that Alex would have to stay on the offensive the whole show to get a word in edgewise. It was a strategic move so that he could spew as much information as possible in a short period of time, and not let Piers voice his well-known, poorly-supported stances.

I think that anyone who watched that and didn't get at least curious about what Alex was ranting about is a zombie. A passive, soulless, programmed zombie. Yes, I know that accounts for the majority. It makes me sad.

hartsickdiscipl

And my point of view is that your takeaway isn't dissimilar to what I see a lot of folks of your political persuasion coming to. You basically said that the issue isn't the message, or even how the message is being presented, but that it isn't being presented LOUD ENOUGH. If only you could get past the mainstream media filter and take your message directly to the people, it would get traction. Which, and I'm being completely honest here, makes folks on my side of the fence pretty happy when you get right down to it. Days after one of the biggest mass shootings in history, at a school full of young kids no less, you really are actually happy that Alex was your spokesman and he went on national television and, for fifteen minutes straight, completely lost his sh1t and don't care that it would come across that way to most people. Right after a mass shooting, you have someone advocating gun rights go on TV and honestly look like someone who is about to go on a mass shooting himself. Gun rights advocates talk frequently about responsible gun owners and how it's only the nuts and lunatics who do mass shootings. I can't put this strongly enough: Alex looked like one of those people. I imagine most people stopped paying attention to anything he was saying sometime in the second minute because 90% of communication is not WHAT you say but HOW YOU SAY IT. It's body language, tone of voice, expressions, etc.

All that great information you're talking about wanting to get out there? Nobody heard it. They were just listening to the angry, out of control freak who might be the next person to go to an elementary school with an assault rifle.

Alex Jones is not the type of person who commits a mass shooting. You have been programmed to think that someone like him would do it, but it's just not the case. It's a misidentification of traits. I can't help it if people have the wrong idea about this. Neither can Alex. He is who he is. People have no idea what a truly dangerous nutjob looks and acts like, but it certainly isn't a radio show host with millions of listeners. If people in general won't even go through the trouble of educating themselves on the true nature of such crimes, they will continue this misidentification. Your idea of "one of those people" is false to begin with.

A paranoid, easily angered man that has easy access to many types of fire arms and has openly called for armed revolutions. Seems safe.
#169 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

Alex Jones is not the type of person who commits a mass shooting. You have been programmed to think that someone like him would do it, but it's just not the case. It's a misidentification of traits. I can't help it if people have the wrong idea about this. Neither can Alex. He is who he is. People have no idea what a truly dangerous nutjob looks and acts like, but it certainly isn't a radio show host with millions of listeners. If people in general won't even go through the trouble of educating themselves on the true nature of such crimes, they will continue this misidentification. Your idea of "one of those people" is false to begin with. Does Adam Lanza fit the archetype that you just set for someone who would shoot up an elementary school? Hell no. So exactly what type of lunatic does things like this?

hartsickdiscipl
Please do me a favor and stop making statements that assume I have no ability to think for myself just because I'm not agreeing with you? I'm not "programmed". He looked like someone who could do it because he was literally screaming for 15 straight minutes on national television with what, if you view that video in isolation, is no rational reason. If you view JUST THAT VIDEO, then Piers didn't have any opportunity whatsoever to actually do anything to cause Alex to go off like that. When I say he looked like someone who could go on a mass shooting it's because: A. He apparently completely lost his temper and started screaming at a CNN interviewer for 15 minutes straight with no apparent provocation B. He's a gun rights advocate who apparently has no emotional self-control C. At the end Piers cleverly got him to admit that he thinks that the U.S. government perpetrated 9/11 If you can't connect those dots and figure out why someone might come to the conclusion, "Holy...that dude's about to climb a clocktower somewhere" then really, you won't ever be able to convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you. To be able to actually persuade anyone you need to have the ability to understand where they're coming from. To just about everyone watching that show, Alex seemed to just completely lose it for no reason, scream about how cool guns were for 15 minutes, and then close by blaming the government for 9/11.
#170 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Alex Jones is not the type of person who commits a mass shooting. You have been programmed to think that someone like him would do it, but it's just not the case. It's a misidentification of traits. I can't help it if people have the wrong idea about this. Neither can Alex. He is who he is. People have no idea what a truly dangerous nutjob looks and acts like, but it certainly isn't a radio show host with millions of listeners. If people in general won't even go through the trouble of educating themselves on the true nature of such crimes, they will continue this misidentification. Your idea of "one of those people" is false to begin with. Does Adam Lanza fit the archetype that you just set for someone who would shoot up an elementary school? Hell no. So exactly what type of lunatic does things like this?

nocoolnamejim

Please do me a favor and stop making statements that assume I have no ability to think for myself just because I'm not agreeing with you? I'm not "programmed". He looked like someone who could do it because he was literally screaming for 15 straight minutes on national television with what, if you view that video in isolation, is no rational reason. If you view JUST THAT VIDEO, then Piers didn't have any opportunity whatsoever to actually do anything to cause Alex to go off like that. When I say he looked like someone who could go on a mass shooting it's because: A. He apparently completely lost his temper and started screaming at a CNN interviewer for 15 minutes straight with no apparent provocation B. He's a gun rights advocate who apparently has no emotional self-control C. At the end Piers cleverly got him to admit that he thinks that the U.S. government perpetrated 9/11 If you can't connect those dots and figure out why someone might come to the conclusion, "Holy...that dude's about to climb a clocktower somewhere" then really, you won't ever be able to convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you. To be able to actually persuade anyone you need to have the ability to understand where they're coming from. To just about everyone watching that show, Alex seemed to just completely lose it for no reason, scream about how cool guns were for 15 minutes, and then close by blaming the government for 9/11.

There was nothing clever about anything that Piers did. Alex has been on national shows before, and is well-known as a 9/11 truther. He is the guy who started the movement if I'm not mistaken. That wasn't news.

Like I said before, the public at large doesn't feel the urgency of our times. The fact that Alex was angered, passionate, and even belligerent on TV does nothing to make him seem like a true psycho to anyone with intelligence and perspective, context or not. Piers presented him at the start of the interview/debate, and described who he is. The majority of people that I talk to know who Alex Jones is anyways at this point. That isn't the type of person who goes off shooting people. He's worth close to 5 million dollars and has a massive audience that makes him feel loved. How hard a concept is that? Or is everyone a "psycho" bound to commit a mass shooting now? Let's see..

-Adam Lanza- Autistic kid who had apparently little or no experience with guns, aside from living in a house where they were present- Psycho killer

-James Holmes- Drop-out medical student, generally well-liked, recently unemployed- Psycho killer

-Wade Page- Former military and supposed "skinhead" who decided to gun-down a bunch of people at a Sikh Temple- Psycho killer

Wow.. we really narrowed down what a dangerous psycho looks like, haven't we? :roll:

#171 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] And my point of view is that your takeaway isn't dissimilar to what I see a lot of folks of your political persuasion coming to. You basically said that the issue isn't the message, or even how the message is being presented, but that it isn't being presented LOUD ENOUGH. If only you could get past the mainstream media filter and take your message directly to the people, it would get traction. Which, and I'm being completely honest here, makes folks on my side of the fence pretty happy when you get right down to it. Days after one of the biggest mass shootings in history, at a school full of young kids no less, you really are actually happy that Alex was your spokesman and he went on national television and, for fifteen minutes straight, completely lost his sh1t and don't care that it would come across that way to most people. Right after a mass shooting, you have someone advocating gun rights go on TV and honestly look like someone who is about to go on a mass shooting himself. Gun rights advocates talk frequently about responsible gun owners and how it's only the nuts and lunatics who do mass shootings. I can't put this strongly enough: Alex looked like one of those people. I imagine most people stopped paying attention to anything he was saying sometime in the second minute because 90% of communication is not WHAT you say but HOW YOU SAY IT. It's body language, tone of voice, expressions, etc.

All that great information you're talking about wanting to get out there? Nobody heard it. They were just listening to the angry, out of control freak who might be the next person to go to an elementary school with an assault rifle. Person0

Alex Jones is not the type of person who commits a mass shooting. You have been programmed to think that someone like him would do it, but it's just not the case. It's a misidentification of traits. I can't help it if people have the wrong idea about this. Neither can Alex. He is who he is. People have no idea what a truly dangerous nutjob looks and acts like, but it certainly isn't a radio show host with millions of listeners. If people in general won't even go through the trouble of educating themselves on the true nature of such crimes, they will continue this misidentification. Your idea of "one of those people" is false to begin with.

A paranoid, easily angered man that has easy access to many types of fire arms and has openly called for armed revolutions. Seems safe.

You think he's paranoid, but many don't agree with that. Easily-angered? Yeah, when it comes to infringing on the rights of Americans and the expansion of the police state, of course. You should be too. Easy access to firearms? Yep. He's had them for many years and hasn't shot anyone yet. He doesn't fit the bill of a shooter, sorry.

#172 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
Meh. I think we've exhausted the possibilities of conversation here. I'll go play one of those violent shooter games that Alex blamed for causing people to shoot people long after most people stopped listening to the specifics of what he was saying and instead was focused on the bordeline maniacal way he was saying it. If you think that interview helped your cause, then I hope you keep Alex as the face of your movement for many years to come.
#173 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

Meh. I think we've exhausted the possibilities of conversation here. I'll go play one of those violent shooter games that Alex blamed for causing people to shoot people long after most people stopped listening to the specifics of what he was saying and instead was focused on the bordeline maniacal way he was saying it. If you think that interview helped your cause, then I hope you keep Alex as the face of your movement for many years to come.nocoolnamejim

Lol... I doubt Piers Morgan will be inviting him back. Apparently Alex made a CNN staffer cry.

#174 Posted by Person0 (2944 posts) -

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Alex Jones is not the type of person who commits a mass shooting. You have been programmed to think that someone like him would do it, but it's just not the case. It's a misidentification of traits. I can't help it if people have the wrong idea about this. Neither can Alex. He is who he is. People have no idea what a truly dangerous nutjob looks and acts like, but it certainly isn't a radio show host with millions of listeners. If people in general won't even go through the trouble of educating themselves on the true nature of such crimes, they will continue this misidentification. Your idea of "one of those people" is false to begin with.

hartsickdiscipl

A paranoid, easily angered man that has easy access to many types of fire arms and has openly called for armed revolutions. Seems safe.

You think he's paranoid, but many don't agree with that. Easily-angered? Yeah, when it comes to infringing on the rights of Americans and the expansion of the police state, of course. You should be too. Easy access to firearms? Yep. He's had them for many years and hasn't shot anyone yet. He doesn't fit the bill of a shooter, sorry.

When Glen Beck calls somebody out for being crazy i think that person is pretty crazy. No easily angered at everything. If this guy (or people like him)being able to go buy a gun any day doesn't scare you thats pretty sad. Hasn't happened yet =/= can't happen, especially as he seems to be getting crazier.
#175 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Person0"] A paranoid, easily angered man that has easy access to many types of fire arms and has openly called for armed revolutions. Seems safe.Person0

You think he's paranoid, but many don't agree with that. Easily-angered? Yeah, when it comes to infringing on the rights of Americans and the expansion of the police state, of course. You should be too. Easy access to firearms? Yep. He's had them for many years and hasn't shot anyone yet. He doesn't fit the bill of a shooter, sorry.

When Glen Beck calls somebody out for being crazy i think that person is pretty crazy. No easily angered at everything. If this guy (or people like him)being able to go buy a gun any day doesn't scare you thats pretty sad. Hasn't happened yet =/= can't happen, especially as he seems to be getting crazier.

I've listened to Alex Jones for years. He isn't easily angered at everything. Stop that.

Alex Jones does not fit the mold of any shooter that I've ever heard of. He hasn't been diagnosed with any mental illnesses. I suspect that you mistake passion for insanity, as many people do nowadays.

#176 Posted by ChiliDragon (8444 posts) -

You think he's paranoid, but many don't agree with that. Easily-angered? Yeah, when it comes to infringing on the rights of Americans and the expansion of the police state, of course. You should be too. Easy access to firearms? Yep. He's had them for many years and hasn't shot anyone yet. He doesn't fit the bill of a shooter, sorry.

hartsickdiscipl
The point you're completely missing is that none of that matters. What matters is that to someone who has never been exposed to Alex Jones before, the man came across as paranoid and unstable, which means that to that person, nothing he said was worth listening to. Anyone who knows anything about how PR and marketing works would understand that, but obviously Alex Jones doesn't, and needs to either get himself a new image/PR consultant, or better yet, he needs to shut up. I watched the entire interview and I have no idea why he thinks he's right and Pier Morgan is wrong. Why does he believe the government was behind 9/11? Why would other governments of the world conspire to help the "police state" take away the rights of US citizens? How would less gun regulation prevent school shootings in the future? There was a complete lack of facts and logic in what he said and a complete lack of restraint and composure in how he said it, which means that the only ones who will agree with his message are those who already do. Or to summarize, someone who disagrees with Alex Jones' viewpoint was not given any reason at all to take him seriously and to listen to him, and that's how he failed, which means he completely wasted his CNN air time. In order to convince your opponent, you have to talk to them on their wavelength. Alex Jones didn't., and based on his behavior towards Morgan, I find myself wondering if he's able to.
#177 Posted by Person0 (2944 posts) -

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I've listened to Alex Jones for years. He isn't easily angered at everything. Stop that.

Alex Jones does not fit the mold of any shooter that I've ever heard of. He hasn't been diagnosed with any mental illnesses. I suspect that you mistake passion for insanity, as many people do nowadays.

hartsickdiscipl

Not diagnosed with something does not mean he does not have any mental problems.

Jones said his visit to CNN and his entire trip to New York provided abundant proof of his suspicion that Morgan is working in cahoots with the New World Order. Let me tell you something, folks: New York City is a giant tomb, he said. Anywhere he went in the city, he said, he was followed by undercover police posing as fans. They knew where we were. They were obviously tracking us by our cell phones, he said. It was all just pure intimidation out of a movie.

He said Morgans past admissions that he knew about the technique of cell phone hacking while editing British tabloids is proof that he is only posing as a journalist. If you think a reporter knows how to phone-hack people, Ive got a bridge to sell you, he said. These are government operatives All these guys are CIA.

The consensus is in. I would say 95% of people thought I just told it like it was, slammed him in the face.Im proud of the job I did.Forbes

Completely sane....

#178 Posted by WSGRandomPerson (13693 posts) -
Who are these two persons?
#179 Posted by surrealnumber5 (23044 posts) -

jessy and prat destroyed piers, that is why piers had to have the only person who interrupts more than he does on his show. both alex and piers use the same fallacies and neither actually likes discourse.

#180 Posted by Saturos3091 (14938 posts) -

Meh. I think we've exhausted the possibilities of conversation here. I'll go play one of those violent shooter games that Alex blamed for causing people to shoot people long after most people stopped listening to the specifics of what he was saying and instead was focused on the bordeline maniacal way he was saying it.nocoolnamejim
Yeah that was pretty dumb of him to say. One of the dumbest in recent memory, and he says a lot of dumb things.

I don't entirely agree with you that it's all about "how you say it" though. That part completely depends on the gameplan of the debater. It was televised and I know they generally tend to appeal to the viewers on such shows, but I don't think that was Jones' gameplan at all. From how he tackled the debate it seems like he was just there to beat Morgan recklessly and with a lot of extraneous information that some viewers may or may not find interesting. He didn't seem to care about his audience's perception of him as a person, which is completely fine I would say. Some audiences see arguments (or in this case, statistics/points), and others see people making the argument, and likewise for debaters' self-perceptions. Some don't see themselves making the argument, they just see the "facts" and the points that they're trying to make. That's the kind of person Jones strikes me as, and although it might upset some people, it's completely understandable in a debate setting. The best way to win a debate though is to speak eloquently and with a bit of integrity as well as have the facts to back up your point, which obviously Jones did not do as he isn't exactly a top-tier debater.

It further goes to show Alex Jones is a douche who doesn't always think before he speaks, but in a debate setting I wouldn't say he came off as a "psychopath." --Although he may be one. :P

#181 Posted by toast_burner (22200 posts) -

I think Alex Jones is an asshat and Piers Morgan is essentially a less intelligent version of that same hat. I didn't find what Jones was saying to be "frightening" or anything though. You have to remember it is a debate - there's strategy and quite a bit of tactics involved. It's like a football game where the score was zero for Morgan and fifty-two for Jones. Morgan essentially went back to the locker room and cried.

Once again though, statistics are not facts regardless of how Alex Jones was spinning them. He tends to do that.

Saturos3091

He said that the government are intentionally killing people by making drugs disguised as anti-depressants that make them either kill themselves or other people.

I wonder how many people siding with him actually listened to what he said or if they just assumed he is correct because he could shout the loudest.

#182 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="Saturos3091"]

I think Alex Jones is an asshat and Piers Morgan is essentially a less intelligent version of that same hat. I didn't find what Jones was saying to be "frightening" or anything though. You have to remember it is a debate - there's strategy and quite a bit of tactics involved. It's like a football game where the score was zero for Morgan and fifty-two for Jones. Morgan essentially went back to the locker room and cried.

Once again though, statistics are not facts regardless of how Alex Jones was spinning them. He tends to do that.

toast_burner

He said that the government are intentionally killing people by making drugs disguised as anti-depressants that make them either kill themselves or other people.

I wonder how many people siding with him actually listened to what he said or if they just assumed he is correct because he could shout the loudest.

Did he say that they are intetionally doing it, as in that's the plan? Or did he say that they are doing it, as in they know the side-effects and yet continue to proliferate and/or approve the drugs? That's what I heard.

#183 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

You think he's paranoid, but many don't agree with that. Easily-angered? Yeah, when it comes to infringing on the rights of Americans and the expansion of the police state, of course. You should be too. Easy access to firearms? Yep. He's had them for many years and hasn't shot anyone yet. He doesn't fit the bill of a shooter, sorry.

ChiliDragon

The point you're completely missing is that none of that matters. What matters is that to someone who has never been exposed to Alex Jones before, the man came across as paranoid and unstable, which means that to that person, nothing he said was worth listening to. Anyone who knows anything about how PR and marketing works would understand that, but obviously Alex Jones doesn't, and needs to either get himself a new image/PR consultant, or better yet, he needs to shut up. I watched the entire interview and I have no idea why he thinks he's right and Pier Morgan is wrong. Why does he believe the government was behind 9/11? Why would other governments of the world conspire to help the "police state" take away the rights of US citizens? How would less gun regulation prevent school shootings in the future? There was a complete lack of facts and logic in what he said and a complete lack of restraint and composure in how he said it, which means that the only ones who will agree with his message are those who already do. Or to summarize, someone who disagrees with Alex Jones' viewpoint was not given any reason at all to take him seriously and to listen to him, and that's how he failed, which means he completely wasted his CNN air time. In order to convince your opponent, you have to talk to them on their wavelength. Alex Jones didn't., and based on his behavior towards Morgan, I find myself wondering if he's able to.

I didn't miss the point at all. My response is that most people are idiots. I said that in an earlier post, in so many words.

#184 Posted by Yusuke420 (2793 posts) -

So what's your solution to the massive conspriacy hart? If you honestly believe that the american people are prepared to sit back and watch as all hell breaks loose, shouldn't you be heading for the hills? If you are aware that the majority will NEVER take you or your leaders seriously, why even bother living in this country?

#185 Posted by Saturos3091 (14938 posts) -

[QUOTE="Saturos3091"]

I think Alex Jones is an asshat and Piers Morgan is essentially a less intelligent version of that same hat. I didn't find what Jones was saying to be "frightening" or anything though. You have to remember it is a debate - there's strategy and quite a bit of tactics involved. It's like a football game where the score was zero for Morgan and fifty-two for Jones. Morgan essentially went back to the locker room and cried.

Once again though, statistics are not facts regardless of how Alex Jones was spinning them. He tends to do that.

toast_burner

He said that the government are intentionally killing people by making drugs disguised as anti-depressants that make them either kill themselves or other people.

I wonder how many people siding with him actually listened to what he said or if they just assumed he is correct because he could shout the loudest.

No idea, and that sounds pretty silly but is completely unsurprising coming from Jones as a massive conspiracy theorist. I only skimmed it to see the technical parts of the debate since that's what people were arguing over (their opinions and points are virtually meaningless to me - I wouldn't trust either to give me legitimate information) and Morgan didn't really do any debating at all, not that Jones' gave him much of a chance to do so.

#186 Posted by toast_burner (22200 posts) -

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="Saturos3091"]

I think Alex Jones is an asshat and Piers Morgan is essentially a less intelligent version of that same hat. I didn't find what Jones was saying to be "frightening" or anything though. You have to remember it is a debate - there's strategy and quite a bit of tactics involved. It's like a football game where the score was zero for Morgan and fifty-two for Jones. Morgan essentially went back to the locker room and cried.

Once again though, statistics are not facts regardless of how Alex Jones was spinning them. He tends to do that.

hartsickdiscipl

He said that the government are intentionally killing people by making drugs disguised as anti-depressants that make them either kill themselves or other people.

I wonder how many people siding with him actually listened to what he said or if they just assumed he is correct because he could shout the loudest.

Did he say that they are intetionally doing it, as in that's the plan? Or did he say that they are doing it, as in they know the side-effects and yet continue to proliferate and/or approve the drugs? That's what I heard.

Here's a link to his website where he claims the American government are killing it's citizens (he mentioned this in that video)

Here's a video of him saying homosexuality is created by the government as a form of chemical warfare

He's an idiot and he's insane. His debating skills are that of a monkey throwing it's feces in your face.

#187 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

So what's your solution to the massive conspriacy hart? If you honestly believe that the american people are prepared to sit back and watch as all hell breaks loose, shouldn't you be heading for the hills? If you are aware that the majority will NEVER take you or your leaders seriously, why even bother living in this country?

Yusuke420

It's not just this country. It's a global problem. I do have some preparedness items and bug-out plans. I don't spend every second of every day thinking about what's coming, but I try to keep abreast of new developments and stay as ready as I can with limited resources.

#188 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]He said that the government are intentionally killing people by making drugs disguised as anti-depressants that make them either kill themselves or other people.

I wonder how many people siding with him actually listened to what he said or if they just assumed he is correct because he could shout the loudest.

toast_burner

Did he say that they are intetionally doing it, as in that's the plan? Or did he say that they are doing it, as in they know the side-effects and yet continue to proliferate and/or approve the drugs? That's what I heard.

Here's a link to his website where he claims the American government are killing it's citizens (he mentioned this in that video)

Here's a video of him saying homosexuality is created by the government as a form of chemical warfare

He's an idiot and he's insane. His debating skills are that of a monkey throwing it's feces in your face.

And you dismissed all of that as false why? Because most people say it's crazy out of hand. Not because you can prove otherwise.

#189 Posted by toast_burner (22200 posts) -

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Did he say that they are intetionally doing it, as in that's the plan? Or did he say that they are doing it, as in they know the side-effects and yet continue to proliferate and/or approve the drugs? That's what I heard.

hartsickdiscipl

Here's a link to his website where he claims the American government are killing it's citizens (he mentioned this in that video)

Here's a video of him saying homosexuality is created by the government as a form of chemical warfare

He's an idiot and he's insane. His debating skills are that of a monkey throwing it's feces in your face.

And you dismissed all of that as false why? Because most people say it's crazy out of hand. Not because you can prove otherwise.

Because he can't prove it to be real. He just shouts like a lunatic (which he is) and people like you assume he's correct simply because he shouts louder than anyone else.

#190 Posted by poptart (6863 posts) -

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]Hart: While this may surprise you, I've actually changed my own viewpoints a lot over the last 10-15 years. I used to be a Republican and my family used to tease me by calling me Alex Keaton when I was younger. I consider myself pretty open minded and I'll say this...even if you think that most people are unlikely to come over to your point of view unless they have some sort of "enlightenment" moment where they experience an eye opening awakening, Alex was an AWFUL messenger in that interview. The very last thing you want a gun freedom advocate to come across as is an angry, unhinged lunatic. You want to DESTROY the stereotype of "gun nuts" by showing counterpoints of someone who is easy going, everyday sort of guy who people wouldn't necessarily cross the street to try and avoid if they saw them coming. Alex came across as completely unhinged. He was yelling, talking over, interrupting constantly, throwing dictator names from everywhere. To you, who have a lot of the context of where he was coming from, you could fill in the logical steps that he was just rushing through. You heard the "full" message since you've probably heard and/or read the entire script a hundred times or so. You probably also know that Piers has a history of being a dick to people who he interviews. But anyone who doesn't have all that extra detail? Anyone who is surfing through You Tube or watching any of their own normal sources of news? Dear. Sweet. Jesus. Alex came across as a POSTER CHILD for the sort of person who looks utterly divorced from any sort of control over his emotions and as a tinfoil hat type who probably things "they" are out to get him. He was the WORST sort of spokesman imaginable because he came across as the living embodiment of EVERYTHING people think of when they think "gun nut'. hartsickdiscipl

A person who would take that away from watching that interview is pretty much hopeless, IMO. I know that I had a lot more context to work with, and knew that Alex would have to stay on the offensive the whole show to get a word in edgewise. It was a strategic move so that he could spew as much information as possible in a short period of time, and not let Piers voice his well-known, poorly-supported stances.

I think that anyone who watched that and didn't get at least curious about what Alex was ranting about is a zombie. A passive, soulless, programmed zombie. Yes, I know that accounts for the majority. It makes me sad.

Unfortunately curiousity is peeked by the perceived crediibility of the person delivering the sermon. Having an angry rant with aggressive posturing kind of ruins it. The congregation were not amused.

#191 Posted by ChiliDragon (8444 posts) -
And you dismissed all of that as false why? Because most people say it's crazy out of hand. Not because you can prove otherwise.hartsickdiscipl
Because homosexuality is as old as human civilization, while modern chemical warfare is not, probably. At least that's why I dismissed it.
#192 Posted by ShadowMoses900 (17081 posts) -

As a gun owner myself I don't like the way Alex Jones behaved, he should have been more respectful and some of his arguments were just straight out of loony conspiracey land. But he did argue good points and Piers Morgan should not be taken seriously as he is far too biased and spreads misinformation, the people that watch him are severely mislead on issues, especially gun rights.

But I will defend the right to bear arms to my grave. I support some gun control but I will never give up my guns.

#193 Posted by mingmao3046 (2497 posts) -
alex jones is awesome
#194 Posted by surrealnumber5 (23044 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]Hart: While this may surprise you, I've actually changed my own viewpoints a lot over the last 10-15 years. I used to be a Republican and my family used to tease me by calling me Alex Keaton when I was younger. I consider myself pretty open minded and I'll say this...even if you think that most people are unlikely to come over to your point of view unless they have some sort of "enlightenment" moment where they experience an eye opening awakening, Alex was an AWFUL messenger in that interview. The very last thing you want a gun freedom advocate to come across as is an angry, unhinged lunatic. You want to DESTROY the stereotype of "gun nuts" by showing counterpoints of someone who is easy going, everyday sort of guy who people wouldn't necessarily cross the street to try and avoid if they saw them coming. Alex came across as completely unhinged. He was yelling, talking over, interrupting constantly, throwing dictator names from everywhere. To you, who have a lot of the context of where he was coming from, you could fill in the logical steps that he was just rushing through. You heard the "full" message since you've probably heard and/or read the entire script a hundred times or so. You probably also know that Piers has a history of being a dick to people who he interviews. But anyone who doesn't have all that extra detail? Anyone who is surfing through You Tube or watching any of their own normal sources of news? Dear. Sweet. Jesus. Alex came across as a POSTER CHILD for the sort of person who looks utterly divorced from any sort of control over his emotions and as a tinfoil hat type who probably things "they" are out to get him. He was the WORST sort of spokesman imaginable because he came across as the living embodiment of EVERYTHING people think of when they think "gun nut'. poptart

A person who would take that away from watching that interview is pretty much hopeless, IMO. I know that I had a lot more context to work with, and knew that Alex would have to stay on the offensive the whole show to get a word in edgewise. It was a strategic move so that he could spew as much information as possible in a short period of time, and not let Piers voice his well-known, poorly-supported stances.

I think that anyone who watched that and didn't get at least curious about what Alex was ranting about is a zombie. A passive, soulless, programmed zombie. Yes, I know that accounts for the majority. It makes me sad.

Unfortunately curiousity is peeked by the perceived crediibility of the person delivering the sermon. Having an angry rant with aggressive posturing kind of ruins it. The congregation were not amused.

you should check out piers morgan lary prat interview or the jessey ventura interview, piers acting just like alex did here and that is why i think piers had alex jones on, so he could show his base that he is not the only loud abusive one out there.

#195 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -
What I find funny is that the people b*tching about increased gun control/gun bans are often the same people who don't care about certain other freedoms getting infringed and.or actually support those freedoms getting suppressed. Time to be consistent, guys.
#196 Posted by Saturos3091 (14938 posts) -

And you dismissed all of that as false why? Because most people say it's crazy out of hand. Not because you can prove otherwise.

hartsickdiscipl
Homosexuality has been linked to genetics on multiple accounts by research teams all over the world.
#197 Posted by Yusuke420 (2793 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]And you dismissed all of that as false why? Because most people say it's crazy out of hand. Not because you can prove otherwise.ChiliDragon
Because homosexuality is as old as human civilization, while modern chemical warfare is not, probably. At least that's why I dismissed it.

Let's also point to the fact that other animals have participated in homosexuality since they evolved as well. I agree on the psycoactive drugs (not saying they are ment to produce killers, but big pharma has an obvious agenda to push pills for profit and I find that abbhorent), but this guys takes it to the next level.

#198 Posted by surrealnumber5 (23044 posts) -

What I find funny is that the people b*tching about increased gun control/gun bans are often the same people who don't care about certain other freedoms getting infringed. Rich3232
generalities like this tends to speak volumes about that person more so than the idea they wish to convey

#199 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -

[QUOTE="Rich3232"]What I find funny is that the people b*tching about increased gun control/gun bans are often the same people who don't care about certain other freedoms getting infringed. surrealnumber5

generalities like this tends to speak volumes about that person more so than the idea they wish to convey

I didn't say all did, just that, from my experience, many. Honestly, I don't care. Guns shouldn't be banned, but the gun culture here is fvcking stupid and hypocritical.
#200 Posted by surrealnumber5 (23044 posts) -

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Rich3232"]What I find funny is that the people b*tching about increased gun control/gun bans are often the same people who don't care about certain other freedoms getting infringed. Rich3232

generalities like this tends to speak volumes about that person more so than the idea they wish to convey

I didn't say all did, just that, from my experience, many. Honestly, I don't care. Guns shouldn't be banned, but the gun culture here is fvcking stupid and hypocritical.

how is standing by "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" hypocritical? however drawing causation between those who stand up for their natural rights and do not stand up for natural rights is on its face a false one. if you could provide data to support this view i would appreciate it.