Infowars fighting attempted shutdown

a reply to: JinMI

Hmm... I Wonder if Alex got up that 2.1 Trillion Dollars he was Sued for ? A bit much wouldn't you say ?

originally posted by: RussianTroll
a reply to: kwaka

One thing that strikes me about this story is that no one is surprised anymore when the American Republic is called a dictatorship.

In the book of Revelation the Anglo-American world power is called the "False Prophet." It is the wild beast with two horns like a lamb (depicting the duality of Great Britain and the United States of America and its supposed docile nature of democracy) but speaks like a dragon that breaths life into the scarlet colored image of the 7-headed wild beast known today as the United Nations. It is a "false prophet" because it performs many powerful signs such as calling fire down from heaven (this was when it dropped the two atomic bombs on Japan at Nagasaki and Hiroshima):

"Then I saw another wild beast ascending out of the earth, and it had two horns like a lamb, but it began speaking like a dragon. It exercises all the authority of the first wild beast in its sight. And it makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first wild beast, whose mortal wound was healed. And it performs great signs, even making fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the sight of mankind."

The Bible says that this last world power before Armageddon, the Anglo-American duel world power is misleading those who dwell on earth:

"It misleads those who dwell on the earth, because of the signs that it was permitted to perform in the sight of the wild beast, while it tells those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the wild beast that had the sword-stroke and yet revived."-Revelation 13:14.

It falsely claims to be the bastion of freedom and peace, when only God's kingdom government in Jesus' hands, the Prince of Peace is the true hope of peace and security for the human race.

How many "Christians" who claim to serve the God of the Bible in the USA involve themselves in the politics of the land, and look to political rulers for solutions to mankind's problems, turning their back on Jesus Christ, and his heavenly kingdom, for which they themselves emptily pray for when they utter the Lord's prayer asking for God's kingdom to come and for His will to be done on earth as it has been established in the heavens?

originally posted by: 0bserver1
a reply to: kwaka
I'm always surprised how close this guy comes to the truth, a modern era prophet or just good at reading between the lines?

I’m gonna miss Bill Hicks 2.0 also.

He found a way to navigate entertainment and information the way Garth Brooks became another act too.

a reply to: kwaka

You seem confused as to what Jones was sued for. It had nothing to do with censoring speech. Did you watch the whole trial?

He lied about Sandy Hook for profit and got caught up in his own lies. The accusations he made against the families and loved ones of the victims were about as sick as a human being can be and he did it knowing he was lying. I know he's good at tricking people into believing lies, but that has not a damn thing to do with anyone's Right to Free Speech.

Those parents were already suffering and along came a carnival barker hawking his mostly worthless snake oil products by lying about people who were mourning their children, slaughtered by a monster. I equate Jones with the shooter. Two sides of the same coin.

I'm a huge supporter of Free Speech, but what exactly does that have to do with knowingly telling lies for money while at the same time doing great harm to those already in pain?

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: kwaka

You seem confused as to what Jones was sued for. It had nothing to do with censoring speech. Did you watch the whole trial?

He lied about Sandy Hook for profit and got caught up in his own lies. The accusations he made against the families and loved ones of the victims were about as sick as a human being can be and he did it knowing he was lying. I know he's good at tricking people into believing lies, but that has not a damn thing to do with anyone's Right to Free Speech.

Those parents were already suffering and along came a carnival barker hawking his mostly worthless snake oil products by lying about people who were mourning their children, slaughtered by a monster. I equate Jones with the shooter. Two sides of the same coin.

I'm a huge supporter of Free Speech, but what exactly does that have to do with knowingly telling lies for money while at the same time doing great harm to those already in pain?

They actually couldn't prove that he made profit off of Sandy Hook because his side of Google analytics showed that it was neutral or negative retention and Google didn't provide their side claiming it was proprietary information. Which is why he was found in default and wasn't allowed to put up a defense.

a reply to: Blaine91555

I'm a huge supporter of Free Speech, but what exactly does that have to do with knowingly telling lies for money while at the same time doing great harm to those already in pain?

It's a shame that we couldn't get to the particular facts of the matter on how Jones accosted those families.

Could you even begin to defend how an FBI agent on the SH case that was unnamed could Garner 90 million dollars from Jones?

a reply to: Blaine91555

What he was officially sued for and what the primary motivations were behind the lawsuit are not necessarily the same thing.

Keep in mind that James Fetzer actually wrote a book entitled 'Nobody died at Sandy Hook'. In the book it went as far as saying the death certificates were fabricated.
Any outrage over Fetzer? Does anyone even know about him?
He was sued and had to pay $450,000 in damages.
This was in 2019, AFTER the Jones lawsuit was filed.

Remington who marketed the AR-15 that was used were also sued and settled for $73m which the families accepted.
That was in 2021.

Jones was ordered to pay $1bn.
ONE BILLION for on air statements that had since been walked back.

The families refused any out of court settlement and as of today are petitioning to have all Infowars media companies liquidated - instead of settling for nearly $10m a year they are happy to receive less by liquidation.

The guy who actually wrote and published a book had to pay $450k.
A huge business like Remington, a $bn company, and the families settled for $73m

It's not reasonable to suggest that the Jones legal case was not political and in play primarily to shut him down.

As for the outrage, I would believe it was genuine if the same outrage existed for James Fetzer.

The case against Jones is a sham.
Fair enough if he was ordered to pay something like $5m - or even $10m. But $1bn?
No chance this was a legitimate and fair process - rather yet another political abuse of the justice system.

If this was not all about censorship through a corrupt legal system, it would be a walk in the park to get the ruling overturned via the 8th Amendment.
Unfortunately, this ALL about censoring Jones through any means possible.

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

This Amendment to the Constitution ensures you will not be unjustly imprisoned, fined or sentenced to excessive or unusual penalties that are disproportionately severe given the nature of the crimes you have committed.

The Amendment protects against unfair or inhumane treatment, ensuring that penalties imposed are proportionate to the crime and reasonable in light of society’s standards. Most states have similar protections against cruel and unusual punishment within their own constitutions.

The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to criminal sentencing, as well as to the conditions of a jail or prison. Additionally, the Eighth Amendment prohibition against excessive fines can apply to both criminal fines as well as civil fines or civil forfeiture where property is seized by the government.

This is a classic example of hatred for a man - largely stimulated by mainstream media - clouding peoples judgement and leading them to forget any idea of fairness and to ignore the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

We are seeing exactly the same thing in effect with the Trump case, just as we have with the J6 defendants and people like Bannon, Stone, Flynn etc.

Your country will be gone for good if people do not start standing up and demanding adherence to the Constitution, Bill of Rights and ensuring that all judicial abuse, criminal and civil, are not allowed to stand.

UPDATE:

The families had petitioned the judge to immediately liquidate Infowars and Free Speech Systems - with a hearing taking place today.
The judge rejected the petition and Infowars will remain for another 2 weeks at least - when a hearing on the 14th June will determine if liquidation should happen.


Keep in mind that the hearing for the 14th June about this was already scheduled, but for some reason a request went in to liquidate immediately instead of just waiting for the June 14th hearing.

One has to wonder why these 2 weeks mattered.
Hmmm.

originally posted by: UKTruth
UPDATE:

The families had petitioned the judge to immediately liquidate Infowars and Free Speech Systems - with a hearing taking place today.
The judge rejected the petition and Infowars will remain for another 2 weeks at least - when a hearing on the 14th June will determine if liquidation should happen.


Keep in mind that the hearing for the 14th June about this was already scheduled, but for some reason a request went in to liquidate immediately instead of just waiting for the June 14th hearing.

One has to wonder why these 2 weeks mattered.
Hmmm.

His Lawyer Robert Barnes found an " Out " ?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: kwaka

Looks like a blog kwaka.

And who's Health Ranger?

You also notice the at the person who replied to "Health Ranger" is attempting to promote "locally made herbal medicine" and
recommending his products.

It's a fecking sales pitch by my guess.

Which is quite in line with exactly the same thing Jones does aka pick an inflammatory controversial subject, talk crap, act all mad and hard done by regarding the topic and then interject with some Bonner pill and energy supplement adverts for good measure.

It's almost a formula, in fact no almost about it, it is a formula to make money from the gullible and easily led.

Proof that the poster who called you a low info idiot was on the money.
Try reading up on a thing called the Internet before embarrassing yourself....again.

a reply to: Blaine91555

Did you watch the whole trial?

No. Just some of the highlights over the years.

I equate Jones with the shooter.

Wow. I don't see anything Jones has done being the same as walking into a school and shooting it up.

I'm a huge supporter of Free Speech, but what exactly does that have to do with knowingly telling lies for money while at the same time doing great harm to those already in pain?

It does become a tricky one as congress has legalized bribery as lobbying by defining the cash payments as free speech. Some of it has been going on for a long time. Do you like the 'pay to play' style of politics people like Hillary do? Politics is a tough job with many competing interests going on, just listen to the money does make their job easier.

'Safe and effective' brought to you by Pfizer while trying to seal the list of side effects for 75 years and suppressing really safe and effective treatments. It is a big issue dealing with misinformation and people getting the wrong ideas. How popular is the flat earth these days?

To get back to Alex, even if he wins on June 14th he knows it is not over as Biden wants it shut down. To put a $1 Billion fine against an organization like Inforwars is not about any realistic compensation, it is an order to kill it. If Infowars does sink, Alex Jones will be in the same boat as Tucker Carlson.

a reply to: kwaka

I'm amazed by how much interest "Infowars" and "Alex Jones" threads generate on ATS over the years. I've always viewed them as so far out fringe, as to not be taken seriously. But apparently the government takes them seriously?

a reply to: WeMustCare

But apparently the government takes them seriously?

Dictatorships don't have what it take to debate the issues, instead more sneaky and forceful tricks are used to hold control over public opinion and maintain power. Journalism is a dangerous job in a conflict zone. Alex is just one small part with the election interference program in operation.

a reply to: glen200376

Your silly personal attacks and batcrap claims aside I've always thought the vaccine should be a personal choice as opposed to mandated.

And i challenge you to find anywhere i have suggested otherwise.

As to your daft needle comment, ive never mainlined any sort of illicit drugs you fool.

And again i challenge to show anywhere i have suggested otherwise.

Ile wait.

And let's see if you are man enough to apologize when you realise the error of your claims.

a reply to: glen200376

And what is it you would like us to read up on "the Internet"?

Whilst you are embarrassing yourself, as always.

And please be specific.

a reply to: Blaine91555

I equate Jones with the shooter.

Really??

Your bias is showing (again).

I'm a huge supporter of Free Speech,

HA! No you're not!

And how do we know this? Well, by the statement which immediately follows your assertion...

I'm a huge supporter of Free Speech, but what exactly does that have to do with knowingly telling lies for money while at the same time doing great harm to those already in pain?

Answer - It has everything to do with freedom of speech and expression. Freedom of speech doesn't, absolutely DOES NOT, have anything to do with whether you, or anyone else, "likes" what someone has to say! In fact, what you suggest is the exact opposite of free speech. Freedom of speech is completely independent of people's feelings / emotions about what you say. You don't want free speech; what you want is speech that's okay with your feelings, and/or someone else's feelings. Big difference!

edit - Oh, and just in case you decide to take your rejoinder down the 'for profit' path as an exception; profits from a statement are irrelevant. Just because someone 'else' chose to support those statements with their wallet has exactly zero to do with the rights of the person making those statements to make them.

A jury found that his lies about Sandy Hook caused families to receive death threats, threats of rape, photos of dead children, harassment at school and work, coming in waves every time he used his free speech to claim more falsehoods. Some had to move out of state as the harassment was so bad. Families who had children killed in a horrific event.

You are free to say what you want, however you are not free from the consequences of what you say.

a reply to: frogs453

And I would have no trouble believing a jury could find for families who received similar alleged hardships from a ham sandwich.

You are free to say what you want, however you are not free from the consequences of what you say.

The case against Jones is just another extrapolation of the yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater theory.

Contrary to most people's assertions, yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater is not illegal. It is not illegal because (among other things), you have the right to say it, and you may actually believe the theater is in fact on fire.

Further to the point, Alex Jones was not convicted of a criminal violation, he was convicted as a result of a civil court jury finding.

Lastly, as I have noted very clearly above, I am not a fan of Alex Jones, nor do I listen to any of his programming, BUT I will defend to the death his right to free speech.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Again, he has a right to say what he likes. However the families had a right to sue him in a civil case. The jury made a determination in the case and imposed a money judgement.

This is not new:

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 

A significant number of states recognize and allow lawsuits based on intentional infliction of emotional distress even when the plaintiff has not suffered physical harm. To establish a successful claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, a plaintiff must prove the following elements:

The defendant engaged in conduct that was “extreme and outrageous” and directed at the plaintiff

The defendant acted intentionally or recklessly

The plaintiff suffered serious emotional distress as a result

Link

He owes the monetary compensation. The court will make sure the victims get the money if it can be obtained by him however necessary.