Revision as of 11:15, 30 September 2017 editAnarcho-authoritarian (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,577 edits →RussiaTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 08:52, 21 December 2024 edit undoAoi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers25,923 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 12334l519 (talk) to last revision by FlightTimeTags: Twinkle Removed redirect Undo |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Ct/tn|ap}} |
|
|
{{Ct/tn|blp|brief}} |
|
|
{{Ct/tn|covid|brief}} |
|
|
{{FAQ|page=Talk:Alex Jones/FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
{{Round in circles|search=no}} |
|
{{Round in circles|search=no}} |
|
|
{{Calm|#FFCCCC}} |
|
|
{{Canvass warning|short=yes}} |
|
|
{{US English}} |
|
{{Old AfD multi|date=10 March 2009 (UTC)|result='''keep'''|page=Alex Jones (radio host)}} |
|
{{Old AfD multi|date=10 March 2009 (UTC)|result='''keep'''|page=Alex Jones (radio host)}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|blp=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=C|vital=yes|listas=Jones, Alex|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=top}} |
|
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=C|a&e-work-group=yes|a&e-priority=low|needs-photo=no|listas=Jones, Alex}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|class=C|importance=top}} |
|
{{WikiProject United States|importance=mid|TX=yes|TX-importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes|a&e-priority=low |politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=low|needs-photo=no}} |
|
{{WikiProject Radio|class=C|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|class=C|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=low|American=y|American-importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|class=C|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Media|class=C|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Dallas-Fort Worth|importance=Top}} |
|
|
| blp=yes |
|
{{WikiProject United States|class=C|importance=Low|September 11, 2001=yes|September 11, 2001-importance=Mid|TX=yes|TX-importance=Low|Austin=yes|Austin-importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Libertarianism|class=c|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=C|importance=mid}} |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Annual readership|days=120}} |
|
|
{{top 25 report|Jul 31 2022}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 70K |
|
|
|counter = 11 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|archive = Talk:Alex Jones (radio host)/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Alex Jones/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|counter = 18 |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
__TOC__ |
|
{{September 11 arbcom}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Let's review, shall we? == |
|
|
|
|
|
<!-- ] 08:59, 23 October 3239 (UTC) --> |
|
|
Let's review for our newly-arrived Infowars/Newswars/Prison Planet minions, shall we? Alex Jones claims that the US government kidnaps children and makes them slaves at our martian colony, that kids are only pretending to get shot at school and their parents are only pretending to grieve, that Michelle Obama is really a man, that Carrie Fisher of Star Wars fame was killed to boost DVD sales, that the coming New World Order is a demonic high-tech tyranny formed by satanist elites who are using selective breeding to create a supreme race, that tap water is turning frogs gay, that Coronavirus is a hoax, that 5G networks create Coronavirus within human cells (no explanation about the conflict between those last two), that Temple of Baal arches will be erected in multiple cities around the world Real Soon Now, that the Democratic party runs a pedophile ring through pizza shops, that the US government commits acts of terrorism against its own citizens, that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are ''literally'' demons from hell, that the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami were a government plot, that Obama wanted to detonate a nuclear bomb in Charleston, South Carolina, that FEMA runs concentration camps, that the US is being invaded by South American walruses... Sounds legit to me! --] (]) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:To be entirely correct, the frogs turning gay is (how funny it is) true. |
|
|
:But not tap water, a type of water with a specific chemical in it. |
|
|
:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/ |
|
|
:https://niche-canada.org/2020/06/09/chemical-castration-white-genocide-and-male-extinction-in-rhetoric-of-endocrine-disruption/ |
|
|
:https://muse.jhu.edu/article/885705 |
|
|
:https://news.berkeley.edu/2010/03/01/frogs |
|
|
:Frogs turning gay with a special type of water isn't as far out as you say it to be. (If there is any mention of this in the article I encourage an editor to edit this for '''misinformation'''.) ] (]) 06:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
::You have not read the article then? ] (]) 12:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
::I’m sorry, are you implying that “feminization of frogs” is the same as “turning frogs gay”? ] (]) 06:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
===Comments / questions=== |
|
|
*'''Q: Isn't Jones just an actor playing a role without actually believing all of that?''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:A: It doesn't matter. Millions of people read his webpage, some believe it, and a tiny percentage go to Misplaced Pages to set us straight. --] (]) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
*'''Q: Why doesn't this page cover the bit about gay frogs?''' |
|
== "Fake news website"? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:A: We only cover those things Alex Jones says that have significant coverage in reliable sources. --] (]) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
|
What manner of business does Misplaced Pages have in asserting an opinionated statement in the opening paragraph? You don't see the articles on Hitler saying "he is reported to be a bad guy" with 15 different citations, or Bush saying "is considered one of the worst presidents in history". This is clearly intentional and designed distort the rest of the article to the author of this claim's perspective. Allow the merits of what this man does to stand on its own. --] (]) 02:19, 19 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::Which has significant, reliable sources. More like youre cherry picking data to form a narrative. ] (]) 09:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Well, as you pointed out yourself, there are 15 reliable sources calling Infowars a fake news site. So find 15 reliable sources saying it's ''not'' a fake news site, and we have something to discuss. Oh, and cross your fingers that no other editors find even more RSes claiming it's a fake news site, because I guarantee you that there are dozens more. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">] ]</span> 02:54, 19 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:Right, we have had to do this because (as with the above thread about Jones not being far right) someone will fetch up and go "But you only have 2 RS saying this". So we end up with a long list of RS saying it.] (]) 07:30, 19 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
:::OK, so find some significant, reliable sources that cover this story. ] (]) 11:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Q: OK, all that other stuff is just silly, but the bit about South American walruses is real!''' |
|
:: You two clowns are doing a great job making sure that nobody with half-a-brain believes anything on Misplaced Pages. Keep up the good work!!! ] (]) 08:01, 22 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::That is a PA, please strike it.] (]) 08:33, 22 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
I know that this claim is based on there being reliable sources describing info wars as such, but it doesn't strike me as right. If you actually follow the link for "fakes news websites", it describes them as "Internet websites that deliberately publish fake news—hoaxes, propaganda, and disinformation purporting to be real news". Perhaps I'm taking "deliberately" too narrowly, but doesn't that imply an awareness that Alex Jones doesn't have? I don't think he's trying to mislead anyone. Infowars publishes news that is false, but I think Alex Jones believes it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then again, I'm pretty sure Misplaced Pages places reliable sources above internal consistency. ] (]) 09:49, 29 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
:A: No it isn't. --] (]) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
|
:Shame then about what his lawyer said in the court case about it being an act.] (]) 09:56, 29 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::It's a little ridiculous to pretend lawyers not wanting a shock jock's radio show to be admitted as evidence in a custody trial = "fake news website".] (]) 01:31, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{re|WilliamLehnsherr}}Erm didn't Jones' own lawyer admit that "He’s playing a character" and "He is a performance artist"? ] (]) 09:57, 29 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::Possibly. I always figured he was exaggerating or playing up some of his views, but I never thought he wasn't a genuine conspiracy theorist. He may not act or talk in real life the way he does on his show, but I doubt he's playing a character the way, say, Stephen Colbert did. ] (]) 10:13, 29 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::You're entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is. I'll rather trust what the reliable sources and Jones' own lawyer say than a random person on the internet. ] (]) 10:22, 29 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::If he plays up some of his views (I.E. exaggerates) then he is knowingly being untruthful.] (]) 10:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Jones presented the argument his bombastic character on the program was an act because he was in a custody battle. It was a credible legal defense to help him retain rights to his children. This can be presented in the article but to sum up his message as being entirely fictitious and knowingly so is disingenuous. |
|
|
:::It is obvious to me the powers that be wish to maintain a certain visage with this article and my input is not appreciated. I will not press the matter. -- ] (]) 06:47, 7 August 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Actually he did not, his lawyers did (he then contradicted them). It was another users who suggested he played a character. Either way his legal team said it was an act. If this was a lie to win a custody battle that means...he lies in order the create an impression. Also no one said we can use this in the article to prove he is a liar. What we have said is that RS say infowars is fake new, so do we. Appeals to Jones's integrity however fall due to the fact he is a proven liar.] (]) 09:04, 7 August 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::I don't see how that's a lie. Alex Jones is basically a pundit. All pundits are "actors" in a sense. The idea that you can take someone's punditry and use it as a character smear in a court case is obviously, palpably absurd and this motive adequately explains the lawyer's actions and statements + is backed up by the RS's. ] (]) 01:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::HIS lawyers swear trying to smear him?] (]) 07:38, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But the gay frogs is pretty funny, you have to admit. ''']''' <small>(] - ])</small> 20:55, 10 October 2020 (UTC) |
|
== Add in label of "anti semite" to Alex Jones? == |
|
|
Alex Jones recently claimed that Charlottesville protesters were really “just Jewish actors”, I was wondering whether new label of |
|
|
anti semite should be added into the article heading to describe Alex Jones. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
: Here it is for anyone who has not experienced this special moment: |
|
Alex Jones: Charlottesville protesters are really “just Jewish actors” |
|
|
|
: It's like a turd sandwich with Misplaced Pages's ] page at the start, ''The Daily Mail'' at the end, and ] in the middle! --] (]) 21:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC) |
|
http://www.salon.com/2017/08/14/alex-jones-charlottesville-protesters-are-really-just-jewish-actors/ ] (]) 02:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::{{u|Guy Macon}}, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvf6gz58xnI ''']''' <small>(] - ])</small> 21:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC) |
|
:WE are disusing this above.] (]) 11:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::{{reply|JzG|Guy Macon}} On the subject of YouTube, we have a small bit about John Oliver's take on him with regard to his product shilling on-air, we do have some secondary sources, but would we want to have the primary source as well? —] • ] • ] 16:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
:That's not even remotely quoted in context. He was referring to actual plants or hoaxes committed by Jewish people, such as the recent JCC bomb threats where the suspect turned out to be a Jew.] (]) 01:35, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not possible to argue that the article is written from a neutral point of view. ] (]) 09:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC) |
|
==Fake News?== |
|
|
|
:We go by what RS say. ] (]) 11:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Alex Jones Page == |
|
The opening paragraph contains a statement with sources that Info Wars is a "fake news site". However, CNN and Buzzfeed are two other news sources that have been caught (with undoubtable evidence) creating fake stories and news scenarios, yet their articles and their reporters articles do not state in such a bold manner that they are "fake news sources". This makes wikipedia look biased. Shouldn't this be altered? ] (]) 01:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It says that Gary Allen wrote "None Dare Call it Treason." I believe this is incorrect. ] (]) 04:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
:If ] called ] and ] "fake news" as a defining trait, you could, hypothetically, propose that be added to those articles. Those sources, as far as I know, do not exist, while they do for InfoWars. Misplaced Pages covers things in proportion to ], not through balance (which inevitably degrades into false balance). In this regard, Misplaced Pages definitely has a bias towards mainstream scholarship. I don't really see the problem with that, but regardless, this talk page isn't the place to challenge it. ] (]) 02:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
: Huh? "Treason" isn't used anywhere in the article, but ''None Dare Call it Conspiracy'' is, and that book is definitely written by Allen. ] (]) 09:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
::Fair enough point, although there is evidence of both CNN <ref name=unreliable>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4573882/Fake-news-row-Muslim-protesters-TV-crews.html</ref> and Buzzfeed faking news. ] (]) 04:16, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{ec}}No. There's a world of difference between a major industry player like CNN publishing a story with falsehoods in it (and then issuing a retraction) once in a blue moon and a minor website run by a noted conspiracy theorists that regularly publishes almost entirely fictional stories on an daily basis and repeatedly doubling down on it when called out. This is an extraordinarily uninformed comparison. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">] ]</span> 02:11, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::Yeah, that too. ] (]) 02:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::There is evidence of them faking news. CNN has been caught staging what they attempted to report on <ref name=unreliable/> and Buzzfeed has so many news articles that defy basic science you could easily describe them the way you have described Info Wars, as the ratio of real to fake news they publish is so overwhelmingly weighted towards fake I don't even need to provide examples, as a simple glance at a majority of their top articles does more damage to their credibility than I ever could. It's quite obvious who truly is uninformed here, CNN could be argued as reliable, sure, but for Buzzfeed to be listed as reliable is laughable at best. I stand by my original proposal to remove the "fake news" remark from the opening paragraph. Misplaced Pages can not call itself an educational website with such blatant bias and lack of attention to detail displayed in a situation where Buzzfeed is considered more reliable than Info Wars, when both sites are equally "fake" and report from behind the most extreme values of the left and right political wings respectively. ] (]) 04:06, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Again, if ''reliable'' sources call either of these fake news as a defining characteristic, bring them forth. A pearl-clutching article in a tabloid about a single overblown incident doesn't cut it. ] calls for "a reputation for accuracy and fact checking". Daily Mail doesn't have that reputation. |
|
|
::::Oh, and yes, Buzzfeed publishes a lot of pure garbage, but they also differentiate between journalism (for which they have a good reputation) and entertainment content (or clicklbait, which is indeed unreliable). This is something that InfoWars doesn't, while Daily Mail merely does poorly. In this regard, Buzzfeed News is dramatically more reliable as an outlet than either. ] (]) 08:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::I see. Personally I still don't agree that the "fake news" statement should be there but I understand you and the sites position on it. Thanks for your time. ] (]) 15:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
*I'm going to create a drinking game where I take a shot every time some IP, new user, or account who has less than 50 edits despite being registered for more than 5 years accuses WP of having a " bias" based on some extraordinarily uninformed claims and even more extraordinarily poor logic. I'm going to get '''''SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO''''' drunk... <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;">] ]</span> 12:36, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:: Might I just add, MPants, that your maturity level is astoundingly high. You really are making this site a better place with that attitude, and acting like this will definitely attract new contributors. :) ] (]) 14:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Well, at least I'm mature enough to see through the bullshit in "CNN is fake news!!1!1" ;) But seriously; if you can't even be bothered to acknowledge where I and Greyfell have pointed out a number of fatal flaws in your argument, you really don't have any business here. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;">] ]</span> 15:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
::::It's like they're reading from a script. First accuse Misplaced Pages of bias. Then complain about what reliable sources say. Then try to pretend that an established source is really just as bad as some shitty ass garbage source. Then pontificate about how Misplaced Pages has gone down hill and how by not letting them stock the article full of their bullshit the editors here are "driving away contributors". Every. Single. Of. These. Accounts. Does that. And yes, it's always "IP, new user, or account who has less than 50 edits despite being registered for more than 5 years".<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 15:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::You forgot "and finally start attacking those who disagree with them". <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;">] ]</span> 15:17, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
{{ref talk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Ambiguity == |
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2017 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it just me or is this sentence confusingly ambiguous? "In January 2013, Jones was invited to speak on Piers Morgan's CNN show after promoting an online petition to deport Morgan because of his support of gun control." I presume it's Jones' support of gun control, not Morgan's? |
|
{{edit semi-protected|Alex Jones (radio host)|answered=yes}} |
|
|
Add descriptor "political commentator" ahead of "radio host" and potential change page name as such. ] (]) 04:24, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Please get consensus before asking to change the lead. ] ] 04:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming I'm correct, I suggest "In January 2013, because of his support of gun control, Jones was invited to speak on Piers Morgan's CNN show after promoting an online petition to deport Morgan." --] (]) 02:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Alex Jones Political Party == |
|
|
I removed republican from Alex Jones political party. I put libertarian and got several reverts on it and was going to push to have a dispute resolution. However, after reviewing archived discussions, it had been agreed to with review from 'admins' that Alex Jones's Political party can't be decided. As he has political document showing different parties by different legitimate sources including records for past times he ran for office. After reviewing this information from the archives I decided to go with their original decision to leave it out and note it here. |
|
|
] (]) 07:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:What "review from 'admins'", can you link to the discussion?] (]) 07:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:{{fixed}} in ]. I've changed it to {{xt|"In January 2013, Jones was invited to speak on ]'s CNN show after promoting an online petition to deport him for supporting ]."}} The states: {{xt|"Jones is a main supporter of a petition on the White House citizen input website that calls for the deportation of British citizen Morgan because of his continued calls for gun-control legislation."}} In contrast, the ] describes Jones as a {{xt|"vocal ] advocate"}}, which places Jones in opposition to gun control. — ''''']''' <small>]</small>'' 05:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Russia == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I removed the description of being an alleged pro-Russia propagandist from the lead. It was cited from ], which as you can read is basically a carbon copy of Infowars itself: anti-UN, climate change denialist and believing in a liberal conspiracy. You shouldn't include the allegations of a group like this in any biography of a living person. I have no qualms for allegations of being a propagandist being re-inserted if the sources are stronger ] (]) 02:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:{{U|MjolnirPants}} do you even know who AIM are when you reverted me? They more frequently make these allegations against liberals, who they believe control the media. If someone put one of their allegations on an article about a liberal, you would, like your profile says, rightly call them a POV pushing charlatan. Why is it acceptable here? ] (]) 11:02, 30 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YOUR ARTICLE ABOUT ALEX JONES IS CRASSLY BIASED AGAINST THAT PERSON AND VERY OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN FROM THE EXTREME-LEFT POLITICAL VIEWPOINT. EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS THE TRUTH ABOUT LEFT-WING FAKE NEWS AND THE CONSTANT ATTEMPTS BY EXTREME-LEFT POLITICAL GROUPS TO MISLABEL ANYONE WHO OPPOSES THEM. THE SIGHT OF SUCH FALSEHOODS HERE TELLS US THAT WIKIPEDIA IS AN EXTREME-LEFT-WING POLITICAL ORGANIZATION. I KNOW YOU ARE BASED IN EXTREME-FAR-OUT-LUNATIC-LEFT SAN FRANCISCO -- BUT THAT IS NO EXCUSE FOR ALLOWING A POLITICAL SMEAR CAMPAIGN ON YOUR PAGES. |
|
:Read the article on them, look at their website. Maybe you had a case of mistaken identity but if you still think they're reliable or non partisan I will be amazed ] (]) 11:05, 30 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PLEASE EDIT THE ARTICLE ABOUT ALEX JONES UNTIL IT IS NEUTRAL AND NON-POLITICAL. YES YOU CAN REPORT ABOUT POLITICS WITHOUT BEING POLITICAL. ] (]) 06:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
: it's an organisation which thinks Fox News swung to the left because they aired a piece reiterating the scientific consensus that global warming is real and man-made. So was my edit summary correct or incorrect? You can't just answer like a six year old and say "no it's not" ] (]) 11:15, 30 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:{{Not done}} Shouting nonsense, no implementable changes suggested. ] (]) 06:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::lol ] (]) 02:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::You actually have to tell us what to change, as in "!C Hange chees to milk", not make vague assertions. ] (]) 10:08, 31 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:The main problem with this page is that Alex Jone's criticisms are simplified and dumbed down. Robbie Parker was not mentioned at all, even though Alex Jones mentioned he was laughing before and was clearly reciting a script. ] (]) 07:01, 12 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:He's not wrong though, wikipedia kind of has a monopoly over cheap information. ] (]) 07:07, 12 August 2024 (UTC) |
Let's review for our newly-arrived Infowars/Newswars/Prison Planet minions, shall we? Alex Jones claims that the US government kidnaps children and makes them slaves at our martian colony, that kids are only pretending to get shot at school and their parents are only pretending to grieve, that Michelle Obama is really a man, that Carrie Fisher of Star Wars fame was killed to boost DVD sales, that the coming New World Order is a demonic high-tech tyranny formed by satanist elites who are using selective breeding to create a supreme race, that tap water is turning frogs gay, that Coronavirus is a hoax, that 5G networks create Coronavirus within human cells (no explanation about the conflict between those last two), that Temple of Baal arches will be erected in multiple cities around the world Real Soon Now, that the Democratic party runs a pedophile ring through pizza shops, that the US government commits acts of terrorism against its own citizens, that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are literally demons from hell, that the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami were a government plot, that Obama wanted to detonate a nuclear bomb in Charleston, South Carolina, that FEMA runs concentration camps, that the US is being invaded by South American walruses... Sounds legit to me! --Guy Macon (talk) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Is it just me or is this sentence confusingly ambiguous? "In January 2013, Jones was invited to speak on Piers Morgan's CNN show after promoting an online petition to deport Morgan because of his support of gun control." I presume it's Jones' support of gun control, not Morgan's?
Assuming I'm correct, I suggest "In January 2013, because of his support of gun control, Jones was invited to speak on Piers Morgan's CNN show after promoting an online petition to deport Morgan." --Annihilannic (talk) 02:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
YOUR ARTICLE ABOUT ALEX JONES IS CRASSLY BIASED AGAINST THAT PERSON AND VERY OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN FROM THE EXTREME-LEFT POLITICAL VIEWPOINT. EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS THE TRUTH ABOUT LEFT-WING FAKE NEWS AND THE CONSTANT ATTEMPTS BY EXTREME-LEFT POLITICAL GROUPS TO MISLABEL ANYONE WHO OPPOSES THEM. THE SIGHT OF SUCH FALSEHOODS HERE TELLS US THAT WIKIPEDIA IS AN EXTREME-LEFT-WING POLITICAL ORGANIZATION. I KNOW YOU ARE BASED IN EXTREME-FAR-OUT-LUNATIC-LEFT SAN FRANCISCO -- BUT THAT IS NO EXCUSE FOR ALLOWING A POLITICAL SMEAR CAMPAIGN ON YOUR PAGES.
PLEASE EDIT THE ARTICLE ABOUT ALEX JONES UNTIL IT IS NEUTRAL AND NON-POLITICAL. YES YOU CAN REPORT ABOUT POLITICS WITHOUT BEING POLITICAL. T1R2U3T4H (talk) 06:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)