Bostonian confronts InfoWars reporter in public

[dlevere]

A reporter from Alex Jones' InfoWars get ripped to shreds by an angry Bostonian for trying to spread the rumor that the FBI was responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing.

Edit

[OldSchoolGamer]

In my opinion, InfoWars and Alex Jones really doesn't truly believe all those crazy conspiracies. They found a small niche of nut jobs that buy into those conspiracies and that's how they make a living. Because there is no way any sane person can believe all those insane conspiracy theories... conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory.

As for the guy in this video who was ripping into the Alex Jone's guy, it was good that he called him out, exposed, and embarrassed him in front of all the Bostonians. But all the cursing was unneeded and immature. He would have embarrassed the guy more/better if he had loudly yelled "Everyone can I have your attention for a second... This guy right over here believes the FBI was the one who committed the bombing"... or something similar to that message. This way, more people would hear and be aware of what was happening and then more people would start ripping into the guy.

[BigBossman]

There are some things that Alex Jones mentions on his show, that make sense. However, there are other things he says that are just way out there. There are quite a few conspiracy theories that I can't argue with & that I'd have to say that I agree with. But, when it comes to Alex Jones, I have to agree with Old School, conspiracy theories are nothing more than a business model for him.

I don't believe that the FBI bombed Boston. I don't believe that it was staged or an act. I will blame both the FBI & the ATF for the way they handled the incidents at Ruby Ridge & Branch Davidian siege. Both incidents resulted in unnecessary bloodshed.

I don't believe that 9-11 was an inside job. I don't believe that America deserved to get attacked (like some would suggest).

[dlevere]

Some things Alex Jones says make sense, like storing food and supplies for emergencies and natural disasters...everything else that he says is bullshit.

[olala]

Another comic article?
That dood is BULLSHIT!

[BigBossman]

Some things Alex Jones says make sense, like storing food and supplies for emergencies and natural disasters...everything else that he says is bullshit.

I don't know if you've heard him talk about NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) of 2012. There was language that was put in that bill that allowed the president to use the military to indefinitely detain American Citizens. I have no problem with ensuring our military is properly funded. The indefinite detention clause circumvents The Constitution by allowing the president to declare someone as being a "threat". This means that he can direct the military to detain a citizen, without any form of due process or a trial. The R.I.N.O.s John McCain & Linsey Graham, attached the indefinite detention clause.

The language in that bill doesn't go into any detail as to what defines a threat. When President Obama signed it into law, he stated that he wouldn't use this power against against citizens. Did he ever think about someone else who wants to take advantage of that? NO. What if citizens start speaking out against what the president is doing? What if what that person says catches on & that president loses so much popularity that his chances of re-election are jeopardized? Wouldn't that be considered a threat? What if a congressman or senator is on the floor, doing their job by representing the people, & are attempting to derail a bill that the president is trying to cram down our throats? That could very easily be perceived as a threat. The government is known for taking something that sounds good & twist it around.

What made this even worse is when Mitt Romney was running for president, he was asked if he was in favor it & he said YES. Our nation got ripped off yet again. Instead of getting to choose between two people for president who were vastly different, we got to choose between two people who were very similar. One was a left of center Republican & the other was a far left socialist Democrat.

The only time that 2 lefts make a right is in boxing, not in politics.

Not everything that Alex Jones says is garbage, you just have to judge for yourself based on the sources & the reputation the federal government has established.

[Pyriel]

Alex Jones is a stopped clock. He's not always wrong, but you should never rely on him to tell you the time.

I don't know where the "center" even is any more. Most analyses I've seen or heard place Obama right of center, and Romney only slightly further right (so they agree with you that there wasn't much difference). Some used an international standard of political leanings, and others tried to set a baseline with US politics only, however that works. I've heard a lot of people call Obama a far-left socialist, but this is honestly the first time I've heard Romney called "left of center". Although, maybe I should count shouts of, "RINO!", in that category. I find the whole spectrum idea sort of dodgy to begin with, but if the axes vary from person to person, it really seems like there's no point at all.

[olala]

This comic not belong on vg forums!
Those dood are BULLSHIT!

[OldSchoolGamer]

I forgot to add that the guy's political philosophical description of Alex Jones in this video is inaccurate. He called Alex Jones a "right-wing conspiracy theorist". A more accurate description would be a "libertarian conspiracy theorist". Mainstream media often misrepresents his political philosophy because he rants and criticizes Obama a lot. But Alex Jones did the same with George W. Bush too... possibly even more.

[Pyriel]

He even rehashes the same old theories for new presidents. For example, prior to the election, he lost his mind about a bust of Obama being put up somewhere, and a placard that left the end-date of his presidency a mystery. Therefore, he plans to repeal the 22nd amendment, and rule forever. Somebody repeated it to me, and added the extra detail that the bust itself was somehow shameful because it was the first time a sitting president had been honored with one. I remembered the same hay being made from a bust of Bush around 2007, so I looked it up to show to him. Sure enough, both theories got a lot of their hype from Alex Jones. I guess Jones doesn't realize that you can't just erase part of an engraving, if it turns out to be optimistic for some reason. He was a little closer with Bush. At least Bush was in his second term, but something unfortunate still could have happened.

Calling him a Libertarian might even be unfair. He just seems like a contrarian wanker.

[BigBossman]

Alex Jones is a stopped clock. He's not always wrong, but you should never rely on him to tell you the time.

I don't know where the "center" even is any more. Most analyses I've seen or heard place Obama right of center, and Romney only slightly further right (so they agree with you that there wasn't much difference). Some used an international standard of political leanings, and others tried to set a baseline with US politics only, however that works. I've heard a lot of people call Obama a far-left socialist, but this is honestly the first time I've heard Romney called "left of center". Although, maybe I should count shouts of, "RINO!", in that category. I find the whole spectrum idea sort of dodgy to begin with, but if the axes vary from person to person, it really seems like there's no point at all.

I agree with you about Alex Jones.

The reason I call Romney being left of center is the fact that he's supported liberal (leftist) positions on certain issues. For example: He instituted a state-wide version of Obamacare in the state he governed, he took steps to restrict Second Amendment rights in his state, not to mention he supported abortion. To counter that, he flip-flopped his position on abortion, he joined the NRA to boost his image, & tried to say that "Romneycare" was right for his state, even though it was a disastrous failure.

If people would look at the overall position of the Republican Party over the course of the last 20 - 30 years, their views have shifted. Twenty to thirty years ago they were overwhelmingly anti-abortion. Twenty years ago, they were opposed to homosexuals joining the military. Now it's a non-issue to them. That's not a slam against homosexuals. The fact is it looks like as time goes on the GOP is more concerned about being more popular by changing their position, rather than taking a stand.

All that being said, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. I'm a constitutional conservative. When people flash the picture of former president George W. Bush that says "Miss me yet?" my typical response to that is "I don't miss Bush, I miss Reagan."

[OldSchoolGamer]

@BigBossman, I understand where you are coming from... but you have to understand this one thing... Because our society is the way it is, sometimes a politician has to say certain things just so he can get nominated within his own party. Then after he gets nominated, he has to say certain things to get elected president. After he gets elected president, then finally he can follow what he truly believes in. So it's not really flip flopping. But on the other-hand, people do change their minds. But I just wanted to try to make you, atleast, understand why sometimes these things happen with candidates... that it's not always flip flopping.

There were a lot of people who felt the same way you did... and Romney really missed and needed your votes. Sometimes you have to vote for the candidate that has the most similar views/beliefs as you do AND has one of the best chances of winning.

I wish some of these things weren't so, but it is the way it is.

[Pyriel]

Yeah, Romney was one of the most flagrant examples of saying anything for political points that I've ever seen. There were a couple of times where he "held" three positions on something in two days. I think most of his brain was just playing video poker throughout the campaign, so it wouldn't have to burn itself out trying to process or account for the things he was doing.

I see where the disconnect on the "center" is now. The only analyses I recall took a lot more into account than a few of the so-called wedge issues. If you're vetting someone for greater than 75% right-leaning purity, or total purity on certain issues, or whatever before you move them out of the "leftist" column, your standards are a fair bit more demanding.