Alex Jones, false prophet


Backroads
 Share

Recommended Posts

I can’t decide if Jones is an innocent dupe who honestly believes this garbage or if he is laughing all the way to the bank because he makes money off stupid people who believe him. I think it’s a bit of both?
 

I wish I had even less morals than I have. I should seriously consider starting a podcast promoting conspiracy theories and picking on parents who just lost kids in school shootings. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LDSGator said:

I can’t decide if Jones is an innocent dupe who honestly believes this garbage or if he is laughing all the way to the bank because he makes money off stupid people who believe him. I think it’s a bit of both?
 

I wish I had even less morals than I have. I should seriously consider starting a podcast promoting conspiracy theories and picking on parents who just lost kids in school shootings. 

I was a *massive* political firebrand in the mid 1990s through to the late 2000s. I've since found myself involved with more than a few consumer revolts and other such movements. 

Believe me when I say that there is *so much* going on in the world which is just *that* astounding and confounding that it can potentially make a person question the very nature of the world we live in. 

For example, what would you do if I told you that during the 2004 elections the brand of ketchup a person bought was taken as an indicator of one's political views? 

That's right. John Kerry's wife was a widow, her previous husband having been a member of the Heinz family, the same family known for producing condiments. 

During the latter part of the 2004 elections, she allegedly declared that if her husband didn't win the election then she would personally ensure that America's supply of ketchup was cut off. 

Even if we assume she did indeed make such a foolish statement, she had no power to actually make it happen and Heinz likely wouldn't have complied anyway because of how disastrous it would be financially for them to do so. 

Despite this, Dubya's supporters boycotted Heinz-brand condiments in retaliation, and several opportunists successfully launched "boutique" brands of ketchup with various political themes and product names. 

So yeah... in 2004, the brand of ketchup a person bought was indeed often used as an indicator of a person's political views. 

Now imagine someone like Alex Jones who deals with this kind of insanity 24/7/365 because it's his stock in trade. Shocking & controversial news. Purported information leaks about various government and political entities. Conspiracy theories of a wide variety. Some are true. Some aren't. But most, if not all, are incredible in nature. Past a certain point, one has to wonder if the constant exposure did indeed cause truth and fiction to start blurring for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

Believe me when I say

With all due respect, no. I don’t believe you. Though it’s an oversimplification to say that of course. 
 

I could be here for hours poking holes in conspiracy theories, but, I learned decades ago that trying to reason with the true believers is like trying to get Gollum to part with the ring. All I can say is you have free speech*, as do I, and we can both believe what we wish. 

*free speech obviously doesn't mean I can yell Fire, blah blah or slander someone. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ironhold-it’s not personal, but let me try and explain why I’m highly skeptical of 99% of conspiracy theories. Here are a few of my reasons. 

They (adherents to conspiracy theories) don’t understand what happened. Ie-they don’t understand the temple so they’ll create some whacky anti-Lds conspiracy because helps then “understand” what they don’t comprehend. So it feeds their ego because they think they have the answers

It’s how they view the world. If THEY had the power they’d want to hide “secrets” from the poor, deluded masses, so they assume everyone else feels the same way, and accuse others of hiding things because they’d do the same. 

They want to view themselves as “enlightened” or “smarter than everyone else” or “informed” so they believe whacky conspiracies that the majority of us dismiss, just so they can feel “special” and more righteous than the sinful and blind sheep.

Stupidity/ignorance. A certain amount of people still think Elvis is alive and that the world is flat. If you think that way, it’s based in a low intelligence, and like all people with a low intelligence, they think they are geniuses. 

Raw hate. If you hate a certain group of people (Jews, LDS, Homosexuals) you are far more likely to believe whacky conspiracies about them.

They lack critical thinking skills. No one taught them to be skeptical. Oh sure, they’ll say they are “skeptical” but 100% of time they lack the self awareness/critical thinking skills to be critical of their grand conspiracy claims. 
 

Now, I didn’t even mention the theories themselves. Again, it’s fruitless to discuss individual ones. These are just aspects of all conspiracy theorists. A generality? You bet. But it’s also true. Every single conspiracy guy falls into one of these categories. Maybe more. 
 

Finally, you have the inherent silliness of conspiracies. If these grand organizations exist, are controlling everything and covering it up…why does everyone know about it? If I was that powerful I’d do a much better job hiding my grand plans. 

 

hope this helps. Again, it’s not personal. 
 

Sorry @JohnsonJones, I think I beat your record for longest post possible! 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LDSGator said:

@Ironhold

 

hope this helps. Again, it’s not personal. 
 

Sorry @JohnsonJones, I think I beat your record for longest post possible! 

Think for a moment.

You read what... two paragraphs of my post? 

The thesis was at the very end of it with the conclusion. 

I say this because "reading the first two paragraphs and just moving on" is how a lot of misinformation keeps getting circulated: people just skim what's put in front of them rather than attempting to study it out for themselves. 

That's a big part of how conspiracy theories continue to circulate. 

Not only that, you can have situations where a person's sense of reality does in fact become impaired in some fashion. They might not be able to tell truth from fiction anymore, or have the cognitive ability to question if something they're being told is real. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ironhold said:

Now imagine someone like Alex Jones who deals with this kind of insanity 24/7/365 because it's his stock in trade. Shocking & controversial news. Purported information leaks about various government and political entities. Conspiracy theories of a wide variety. Some are true. Some aren't. But most, if not all, are incredible in nature. Past a certain point, one has to wonder if the constant exposure did indeed cause truth and fiction to start blurring for him. 

I suppose it's not inconceivable. It's very easy to get caught up in different views.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

You read what... two paragraphs of my post? 

 

Wrong again. Your part about W and ketchup I found particularly invigorating. I’m having Sonic for dinner tonight. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I suppose it's not inconceivable. It's very easy to get caught up in different views.

You are, of course, kinder than I am.
 

He’s part of a conspiracy all right. One to take away the money of good people who mean well but are deeply misguided. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious here. Does anyone actually watch Alex Jones' show? Or are the opinions here based on what the news media, etc., report of him? (Just to be clear, I don't watch his show...but I've watched him a few times in long-form conversations on Tim Pool's show.)

Like I said, just curious. I'm not a fan of his. Have no interest in defending him or anything. But I certainly haven't concluded he's a "false prophet". Seems a bit extreme. My take on him is he's got some communication styles that put people off and can easily miscommunicates what he's trying to say to a lot of people. And he makes some presumptions that are off based sometimes, because he's, you know...a human. But a false prophet just trying to con people out of money seems a bit extreme to my thinking.

As I said, I'm not a fan of his. And I can certainly understand many people disliking him as a personality. But he has also been, to my thinking, demonized WAY beyond reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm just curious here. Does anyone actually watch Alex Jones' show? Or are the opinions here based on what the news media, etc., report of him? (Just to be clear, I don't watch his show...but I've watched him a few times in long-form conversations on Tim Pool's show.)

Like I said, just curious. I'm not a fan of his. Have no interest in defending him or anything. But I certainly haven't concluded he's a "false prophet". Seems a bit extreme. My take on him is he's got some communication styles that put people off and can easily miscommunicates what he's trying to say to a lot of people. And he makes some presumptions that are off based sometimes, because he's, you know...a human. But a false prophet just trying to con people out of money seems a bit extreme to my thinking.

As I said, I'm not a fan of his. And I can certainly understand many people disliking him as a personality. But he has also been, to my thinking, demonized WAY beyond reality.

Fair question. Yes, I watched his show before. I also heard him on the Joe Rogan show. Twice was enough. 
 

Having said that, you don’t need to watch/hear his show regularly to know his views. I’ve only heard “Mormon Stories” a few times to know that the host is an anti Mormon. I don’t need to hear any more of either show, frankly! 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm just curious here. Does anyone actually watch Alex Jones' show? Or are the opinions here based on what the news media, etc., report of him? (Just to be clear, I don't watch his show...but I've watched him a few times in long-form conversations on Tim Pool's show.)

Like I said, just curious. I'm not a fan of his. Have no interest in defending him or anything. But I certainly haven't concluded he's a "false prophet". Seems a bit extreme. My take on him is he's got some communication styles that put people off and can easily miscommunicates what he's trying to say to a lot of people. And he makes some presumptions that are off based sometimes, because he's, you know...a human. But a false prophet just trying to con people out of money seems a bit extreme to my thinking.

As I said, I'm not a fan of his. And I can certainly understand many people disliking him as a personality. But he has also been, to my thinking, demonized WAY beyond reality.

I used to, maybe 5-10 years ago. I call him a false prophet because it quickly became clear he was in it for the money and fame and was able to get a devoted following. Could this be his own blindness to his innate human weakness? Sure, but his actions and words led to followers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I used to, maybe 5-10 years ago. I call him a false prophet because it quickly became clear he was in it for the money and fame and was able to get a devoted following. Could this be his own blindness to his innate human weakness? Sure, but his actions and words led to followers.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp-video/mmvo145428037989
 

He just did the impossible. He finally admitted the shooting was 100% real. Sure, he’s only doing it now for jury appeal and PR, but it’s still a step forward I guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Backroads said:

it quickly became clear he was in it for the money and fame

Are you saying it was your perception that he was ONLY in it for the money and fame? Because I would expect that anyone who's building that kind of thing is in it for money and fame...but if it's ONLY money and fame, then that implies dishonest intent. I've never felt Alex Jones had dishonest intent, overall. He has messed up. Yes. But he said what he thought and believed at any given time, I think.

That's as compared to, say, Milo Yiannopoulos, who I believe is in it ONLY for the money and the fame and to be a provocateur because it makes him the popular "bad boy" of "conservativism" (quotes added here because...come on.) I think there are many out there who are provocateurs on the right because it's cool to do so and they were in it for only money and fame, particularly in the previous slate of right-wingers who have fallen a bit out of fashion now (many because they got banned from everywhere). But my sense of Jones was that he was/is sincere. He's a provocateur because he has a brazen personality, but I feel like he believes what he says.

But the primary reason I wouldn't call him a "false" prophet (prophet's a weird word to use here, I think..but....)... is because of how often he's been right.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Are you saying it was your perception that he was ONLY in it for the money and fame? Because I would expect that anyone who's building that kind of thing is in it for money and fame...but if it's ONLY money and fame, then that implies dishonest intent. I've never felt Alex Jones had dishonest intent, overall. He's messed up. Yes. But he said what he thought and believed at any given time, I think.

That's as compared to, say, Milo Yiannopoulos, who I believe is in it ONLY for the money and the fame and to be a provocateur because it makes him the popular "bad boy" of "conservativism" (quotes added here because...come on.) I think there are many out there who are provocateurs on the right because it's cool to do so and they were in it for only money and fame, particularly in the previous slate of right-wingers who have fallen a bit out of fashion now (many because they got banned from everywhere). But my sense of Jones was that he was/is sincere. He's a provocateur because he has a brazen personality, but I feel like he believes what he says.

But the primary reason I wouldn't call him a "false" prophet (prophet's a weird word to use here, I think..but....)... is because of how often he's been right.

When Warhol said every man gets his 15 minutes of fame, he was thinking exactly of Milo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Are you saying it was your perception that he was ONLY in it for the money and fame? Because I would expect that anyone who's building that kind of thing is in it for money and fame...but if it's ONLY money and fame, then that implies dishonest intent. I've never felt Alex Jones had dishonest intent, overall. He has messed up. Yes. But he said what he thought and believed at any given time, I think.

That's as compared to, say, Milo Yiannopoulos, who I believe is in it ONLY for the money and the fame and to be a provocateur because it makes him the popular "bad boy" of "conservativism" (quotes added here because...come on.) I think there are many out there who are provocateurs on the right because it's cool to do so and they were in it for only money and fame, particularly in the previous slate of right-wingers who have fallen a bit out of fashion now (many because they got banned from everywhere). But my sense of Jones was that he was/is sincere. He's a provocateur because he has a brazen personality, but I feel like he believes what he says.

But the primary reason I wouldn't call him a "false" prophet (prophet's a weird word to use here, I think..but....)... is because of how often he's been right.

Remember, though, that Milo was the one who broke the infamous "gamejournalpros" mailing list, where writers at several video game websites & publications had a mailing list going which they used to unethically coordinate coverage of various events so as to establish and enforce a party line. 

In the wake of his breaking this, someone purportedly mailed him an unmarked syringe filled with liquid. 

The mailing list was determined to have been very much real, and played a big part in retroactively justifying the Gamergate movement's demands for investigations into the behavior of various entertainment writers (et al). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Are you saying it was your perception that he was ONLY in it for the money and fame? Because I would expect that anyone who's building that kind of thing is in it for money and fame...but if it's ONLY money and fame, then that implies dishonest intent. I've never felt Alex Jones had dishonest intent, overall. He has messed up. Yes. But he said what he thought and believed at any given time, I think.

That's as compared to, say, Milo Yiannopoulos, who I believe is in it ONLY for the money and the fame and to be a provocateur because it makes him the popular "bad boy" of "conservativism" (quotes added here because...come on.) I think there are many out there who are provocateurs on the right because it's cool to do so and they were in it for only money and fame, particularly in the previous slate of right-wingers who have fallen a bit out of fashion now (many because they got banned from everywhere). But my sense of Jones was that he was/is sincere. He's a provocateur because he has a brazen personality, but I feel like he believes what he says.

But the primary reason I wouldn't call him a "false" prophet (prophet's a weird word to use here, I think..but....)... is because of how often he's been right.

I just don't think he has to be intentionally deceiving to be a deceiver. From my understanding, when his listeners were shooting at and threatening the Sandy Hook parents, he didn't step in or tell them to stop. 

Perhaps false prophet is extreme, but his influence went very badly and he chose to present his thoughts without sufficient evidence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that intent or no, Jones is a problem who probably deserves some kind of punishment if he's damaging people's lives in provable ways.

 

Speaking generally about "intent":

God judges intent, we know that.  But humans can't reliably judge intent, nor should we ALWAYS stay our hand based on our best guess of intent.

 Here is a contrived scenario: 
If we find someone who kills repeatedly with apparent hate and evil, that person should certainly be stopped one way or another.

But what if you could find a person who kills repeatedly because he poisonous?  (just go with it)  He has no intention of killing people but in the end it doesn't matter to the people killed and the rest of the people who aren't safe.  They are fully justified in finding a way of dealing with him, even if the only options they can find are death or extreme exile.

Maybe more realisitically, what if someone kills because they are stark raving mad?  Do we care?  Maybe if we can cure them.  But if not, we are justified (and even morally obligated) to find some final solution for this murderer.

 

In a less extreme, real-life example:

My oldest kid is somewhat accident prone.  Yet it is not in my best interests OR EVEN HIS to let him off scott-free for all innocent evils he brings into the world.  At a minimum he needs to work to clean up his messes; and my consequences ramp up if I cannot detect he is taking responsibility to heart.

People need to feel incentives to not only mean well, but to actually do well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Backroads said:

I just don't think he has to be intentionally deceiving to be a deceiver. From my understanding, when his listeners were shooting at and threatening the Sandy Hook parents, he didn't step in or tell them to stop. 

Perhaps false prophet is extreme, but his influence went very badly and he chose to present his thoughts without sufficient evidence.

 

I have a hard time commenting on this because the information in the media is all SO biased. I don't trust it. I know that what I typically see is that the media and everyone makes the terrible claims about him and they typically turn out to be inaccurate, twisted, or outright lies. So is there truth in some of the claims related to what happened with the Sandy Hook stuff....??? Could be. Probably is. But it's a cry wolf situation and so I don't trust much. And having not followed Alex Jones back then at all...well I just don't know.

I'm not sure how to think on the idea of "followers" of any given person doing something that the person didn't tell them to and then blaming said person. We see the same thing with the Trump/Jan 6 narrative going on.

As a general rule I don't buy that sort of thinking.

Should Alex have said, "stop this" to them, in that case? Well, yeah. Of course. But I'm not sure we can really know the full story, what he was thinking, and why he might have said or not said what he did related to that. So I can get on board that there may have been mistakes made by him. From what I know of him though, he'd probably admit the same. In fact I've heard him say he made mistakes on certain things. Because he isn't some prophet leader of some cult. He's a radio show personality who talks about stuff.

I mean we see the same thing with like Joe Rogan and the medicine he talked about taking on his show for Covid. Joe's not responsible if someone takes him as the authority on the matter. Anyone who takes Joe Rogan as an authority on anything besides, perhaps, MMA stuff is being dumb. Joe Rogan isn't an authority. If he said, "This is what you should do!" then, sure...he becomes somewhat culpable (though those believing him would still be dumb to do it on his word alone... Do your own research people!). But does every person with any sort of a following on any given platform need to automatically presume their listeners are nut-jobs who will do something stupid based on their opinions.

Well...probably. Yeah. But... did Alex Jones presume that? Should he have?

I dunno.

Anyhow, I'm not really defending Alex Jones here. I just...I dunno... There's a problem in the world. (That's putting it lightly. I mean there are many problems. But....) Speech is under attack. Big time! It's a serious problem. Political correctness is out of control. People can't talk about so many things. Opinions can't be shared. Debates can hardly be had. It's bad. And it's getting worse. I'm not defending Jones...but his ability to share his opinions on things openly even if they're off based.... That I would defend.

Of course that doesn't have anything to do with whether he's a good or bad person. Who knows. It doesn't strike me he's bad. Just flawed. But that's everyone. Right?

Anyhow...just chatting. Don't take my thoughts too seriously on the matter. It's more a matter of curiosity than having any sort of real stance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ironhold said:

Remember, though, that Milo was the one who broke the infamous "gamejournalpros" mailing list, where writers at several video game websites & publications had a mailing list going which they used to unethically coordinate coverage of various events so as to establish and enforce a party line. 

In the wake of his breaking this, someone purportedly mailed him an unmarked syringe filled with liquid. 

The mailing list was determined to have been very much real, and played a big part in retroactively justifying the Gamergate movement's demands for investigations into the behavior of various entertainment writers (et al). 

I'm not sure what your point is or how this is a response (Counter? Agreement?) to what I said. Could you clarify?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2022 at 12:39 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

I have a hard time commenting on this because the information in the media is all SO biased. I don't trust it. I know that what I typically see is that the media and everyone makes the terrible claims about him and they typically turn out to be inaccurate, twisted, or outright lies. So is there truth in some of the claims related to what happened with the Sandy Hook stuff....??? Could be. Probably is. But it's a cry wolf situation and so I don't trust much. And having not followed Alex Jones back then at all...well I just don't know.

 [...]

I agree with this. As far as I can tell, Alex Jones is a liar who traffics in people's naivete and ignorance. But that view is fueled by media reports. I have never listened to the man, so I can't say with any confidence what the man believes or preaches. I'm not going to take the word of the likes of CNN.

As mirkwood pointed out, no believing Latter-day Saint can deny the existence of conspiracies. For that matter, no reasonably intelligent human being with any amount of exposure to human society can deny it. But believing in the general existence of harmful, evil conspiracies and believing in some particular claim of conspiracy are entirely different matters.

By its nature, a conspiracy is secret. That's pretty much baked into the definition of the word. Successful conspiracies generally do not become known. If they do, it's because they're old and defunct  (e.g. the Great Light Bulb Conspiracy, aka the Phoebus Cartel) or they're so powerful that they don't care about being known (e.g. OPEC). You may have noticed the overlap between conspiracies and cartels. This is not coincidental.

Consider this hypothetical: A group of Illuminati-minded people with the money, ambition, connections, and raw power to attempt an invasion of governments worldwide form a conspiracy, what the Book of Mormon calls a "secret combination". If their conspiracy involves too many people, it risks becoming known; everyone who knows about it is a potential liability. So they play their cards close to the vest, with only a few people at the top of the pyramid really knowing what's up. They use puppet actors and corporations to set up their conditions so that it becomes exceedingly difficult to trace their activities back to them. As they grow in power, they gain control of the media and other means of information dissemination, such that they can more directly control what information gets out.

How would such a conspiracy ever be discovered? Only one way: A member of the conspiracy would have to betray the secret and make it public knowledge. But such a person would not be believed without evidence, and of course that evidence would be quickly covered up by the conspiracy members. Any information that made it out would be dealt with by the media and governmental elements controlled by the conspiracy. The only other way such a conspiracy could be uncovered is by a mole making his way in, collecting information, and then exposing the conspiracy. This becomes more and more unlikely the longer the conspiracy remains and continues consolidating its power. Such a mole would never make it to the courts. He would be dealt with, by which I mean he would be disposed of.

Sound familiar? Of course it does. It's mobocracy. It's the Cosa Nostra. It's evil people with wicked intent to gain power and money. Such has it always been.

Given the secretive nature of such conspiracies, is it any wonder that Jeffrey Epstein's supposed (and very convenient) suicide is greeted with rolled eyes and doubt? If it looks, acts, and smells like conspiracy, isn't that evidence? But of course, without truly damning evidence, the majority won't believe such a thing. It's far too easy to make up some conspiratorial explanation. In any case, such evidence is unlikely to be found. Why do you suppose that Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and other men (including men not named Bill, e.g. the UK's Prince Andrew) involved with Epstein have not been connected to him in more than a cursory manner? Are we to believe that all of these rich and powerful men with known attachments to illicit sex were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time and are innocent bystanders?

I believe few of the conspiracy allegations I hear, but I absolutely believe that such conspiracies exist, even deeper and more evil than the Illuminati conspiracy theorists would have us believe. There are one or two members of this forum who disbelieve that people are ever bad, but I am among those who disagree. People have a deep capacity for evil if they choose to exercise it. Many have no qualms whatsoever about selling their fellow men into slavery, destroying liberty, and so forth, as long as they get the power and/or money and/or sex they crave. In such a world, conspiracies are a sure thing.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm not sure what your point is or how this is a response (Counter? Agreement?) to what I said. Could you clarify?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Vort said:

[There] are one or two members of this forum who disbelieve that people are ever bad

I am convinced more and more as I age that the evil in the world is almost beyond comprehension to those who are not engaged in it.

Most people do what they can get away with. Period. That's it. If they can, they do drugs and alcohol. If they can, they lie. If they can, they steal. If they can, the cheat. If they can, they murder. Powerful people can get away with a LOT. So they do.

We're in a time where a lot of this evil is being exposed. I don't think a lot of it is new...but as things have become more socially acceptable, the evil peeks it's ugly head out from the crevices, believing it safe in the sunlight. In cases, they've shown more of their hand than they meant to. (For example, the leaked "gay agenda" videos by Disney execs.) But most of the true evil is still hidden. We're starting to see, for example...the "minor attracted" crowd beginning to show their cards. Ever so slightly. Testing the waters. Pushing the acceptance. Etc.

Underneath what's seen, there's an entire unfathomably deep pit of filth. And some, as you point out, seem to disbelieve this to be true. I'm not sure why.

Most of this corruption remains hidden. So we don't know the explicit details. But the fact that it exists seems so obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share