And neither should the CTer's

Certainly not the author of the piece in the OP. The first sentence of the article:

(emphasis added)

...but he does serve as a convenient figure for the media to smear anybody who dares to speak out.

Jared Williams was a poster to the Alex Jones site.

Are you suggesting that Alex Jones is somehow being used to besmirch the reputation of this dearly departed out-speaker?

You said ..... "a convenient figure for the media to smear anybody who dares to speak out" ....

JONES IS ~~NOT SPEAKING OUT ~~ he is lying and making stuff up. He HATES President Obama and Democrats. What kind of comment are you making and WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS??

He is getting smeared because of his agenda and hummmmmmm what is yours?

duly noted.

re-read the comment

...for our media to smear those (with legitimate beefs) who speak out against Corporate America.

He's convenient precisely because he's a CARTOONISH LOON. Trying to portray him as representative of all activists paints those activists to look as cartoonish as he is.

I've said in previous posts that I don't believe he represents the mainstream, and that the majority sees him for who he is - otherwise he would be far bigger than he is now, and would be doing far more time on the "mainstream" outlets.

He's had his rope, and he's hung himself. He'll be a non-discussion point in a few years.

I apologize for my previous post. leaving it up for continuity.

that you believe the shootings in Vegas were a false flag operation perpetrated by the US govt?

...the threat Alex Jones poses is that he takes (or used to take) legitimate concerns that people might have about government overreach, loss of constitutional rights, etc., and twists them and turns them so hard that they lose credibility in the eyes of most sane people - but in this case, what happens when the receiver of said information is lacking a few french fries in their happy meal to begin with?

I never said, or intended to imply, that there way anything "false flag" about those shootings. They were perpetrated by murderers, pure and simple, and those murderers should go through the system like every other murderer, regardless of who or what "inspired' them.

I am saying, however, that this shining of spotlights on the likes of Alex Jones gives them exactly what they want. They don't care if the publicity is good or bad - they just want it. It sells books and videos, and diverts attention from matters we should be dealing with.

by giving him so much publicity the media succeeds in marginalizing others who may have legitimate concerns about shit that goes on. to put it less elegantly.

This I believe.

That can't have been anything like a Big Bang, and frankly vaping would produce a bigger puff of smoke.

This was news to me!

is dosing Alex Jones' coffee with LSD.

That guy has been way lost for decades already.

It would be funny, if so many people weren't so susceptible to it. Americans seem especially seduced by the ability to invert, disbelieve, or invent any fact to suit any narrative.

People are angry, isolated, suspicious. And people like Jones hand them a narrative which, if true, would seem to require some kind of extreme reponse. Then act surprised when someone responds as though it was the truth.

Mainstream Republicans are splashing around in the same crazy water now. How many referred to "death panels" under the ACA? I remember Chuck Grassley talking about the government "killing grandma" if it passed, with a strange half-smile on his face.

Glenn Beck had a guy on once, immediately after Obama's first election, talking about the great likelihood of people shooting federal agents over taxes.

These guys all know they're speaking to two audiences -- politically sympathetic people who enjoy hyperbole, AND vulnerable, unstable people who will take them literally and act accordingly.

If Jone's "false flag" murders or Beck's "FEMA deathcamps" were real, widespread violence would ensue. But when a few unhappy people take their nutty fairytale seriously, we don't hold them accountable for it.

Why is that?

Stochastic terrorism. See esp. the Daily Kos article on it.

And a few Fox News personalities as well

the term/concept is important enough, in light of recent and recurring events, to make more widely known.

the idea a bit. Sometimes a pat term, however, accurate, doesn't convey enough.

But of course it's worth doing both.

Here's the Daily Kos post you referenced, or a similar one:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism-160-Triggering-the-shooters

Glad you're here! Good stuff to know, and I'm picking up part of DirkGently's post here. I had not heard of "stochastic terrorism" before, but the definition certainly makes sense and has relevance to now.

Here's the Daily Kos post you referenced, or a similar one:

Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to stir up random lone wolves to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.

This is what occurs when Bin Laden releases a video that stirs random extremists halfway around the globe to commit a bombing or shooting.

This is also the term for what Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity, and others do. And this is what led directly and predictably to a number of cases of ideologically-motivated murder similar to the Tucson shootings.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism-160-Triggering-the-shooters

It does make me wonder about the downside of the First Amendment. It's already been tweaked and reevaluated in light of the new definition of corporations as people and money as free speech. Should it be further tweaked to refine against inflammatory talk like this, that I'm firmly convinced only fires up nutcases to kill at will? LET ME SAY UP FRONT HERE - YEEEEESSSSSSSSS I realize the definition of same is in the eye of the beholder. YES I GET THAT. It's the Constitutional equivalent of "the cost of doing business." YES I GET THAT. One invites the whole "well, who gets to define it then?" argument. YES I GET IT!!! But at some point, WHEN is enough too much? Should we not reevaluate it again along these lines? Can we not even consider such a thing? Could we not codify the whole "you can't shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theater" thing? Because this is the EXTREME extrapolation of that very convention. Assholes like alex jones are shouting "Fire!" in the crowded theater of the full, coast-to-coast-and-all-the-ships-at-sea America mindset, forcryingoutloud! These deaths and mass murders are ON HIS CONSCIENCE, and made far more likely by vicious hatespeak LIKE HIS. At some point I just don't think it should be allowed. Besides, we have indeed already seen that kind of reevaluation in favor of corporations and big-spender types. Why not for the rest of us as well?

Just a thought. I suppose the next thing I should say at this point is - "flame away..."

If we try to silence the purveyors of this kind of nuttery, they'll say people fear them because they're revealing the truth. Nothing these guys love more than claiming to be censored.

But why don't we see more mainstream reporting on this stuff?

"ABC News here: Today two people who took Cliven Bundy and the Tea Party seriously carried out a suicidal terror attack and killed three people. Alex Jones says 'the government' somehow faked it all, based on his 'neurons. An ABC investigation shows they're all spouting vile nonsense."

We give this stuff some kind of pass based on the idea it's political speech, but really it's just lying, mostly to generate money. We ought to call it what it is, publicly and frequently, and point to the tragic results.

Russia, China, Uganda, Canada,

large portions of people who believe stupid shit...

are particularly susceptible to believe stupid stuff. The hatred of our own government is especially weird.

We would be saying the same thing

developed countries. Check the statistics on how many people in other developed countries doubt evolution or climate change. We're way up there. Or down there, as the case may be.

Edit: Here's one. In 2006, we were second to worst in terms of doubting evolution. Just above Turkey.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/14/science/sciencespecial2/20050815_EVO_GRAPHIC.html

I bet we haven't improved since then.

Other countries have hateful rhetoric, racism; religious bigotry. General ignorance and tribalism are pretty universal.

But I don't see people in France or Denmark gaining nationwide constituencies based on the idea that scientists are lying to us about the age of the Earth or evolution.

It's a useful political tool -- holding the idea of hewing to completely irrational beliefs as a right. I think we're seeing it more and more because the things American conservatives want are harder and harder to justify.

If you can just throw out the entire notion of reason, you can justify anything you want. Like murdering cops in a pizza joint because government itself is some kind of evil conspiracy. It's not that big a leap from claiming tax cuts for the rich "pay for themselves" or that healthcare reform is a conspiracy to "kill Grandma."

Others do irrational, sure. But we're better at it than most.

Too bad that shit doesn't work outside FANTASYLAND

He's looking at "insane" in his rear-view mirror.

Talking about the government coming for you and all of this paranoid shit, feeding people who are already paranoid with guns.

Those are misfiring synapses.

I don't even know what that means but it can't be good.

have done everything possible to encourage this kind of behavior. Small wonder that when it happens they try to blame it on someone else. No personal responsibility.

anything in this world is as it appears. Extremely paranoid and delusional he is.

mental disorder profile. Law enforcement really needs to keep an eye on him.

basically just, tell it to the families of the dead, and one person responded. i blocked him so i can't give the verbatim message but he did call me an idiot and advise me to "do my research."

they're everywhere.

I have no proof, but please do spread the word.

This is yer brain after an X-Files marathon.

http://wonkette.com/551142/vegas-cop-killer-jerad-miller-was-an-alex-jones-fan-you-know-what-that-means-false-flag

is this seditious personage still allowed on the airwaves? He is coming pretty close to shouting "fire" in a crowded theater lately.

I expected at least one of the right-wing radio hosts to call this a "false flag operation" ..

In my mind it was a toss-up between Alex Jones and Glen Beck...

Jones won the toss..

Earth humans are crazy!

(Please note I did leave room for hope that humans living beyond the Earth might achieve mental health.)

(Also I apologize to anyone undergoing treatment for mental health problems. I did not mean to hurt your feelings. You are actually the saner ones, because all the other undiagnosed people aren't even trying to get better.)

Perhaps he thinks Superman, Batman and Captain America will save the nation from Barack Obama and Harry Reed.

Doesn't make Alex Jones any less full of shit, though.

I guess I spent too much time reading Shakespeare when I should have reading Stan Lee.

There are quite a number of illustrated works that stand up well against the literary greats. And not all comics are superheroes either.

Fifty years ago, I had the largest collection of Classics Illustrated comic books in Stockton, California.

Sounds like something Shakespeare would have said.

Which makes a lot of people believe the opposite - that is that there is no conspiracies with the elites and corrupted politicians and the MIC ...ever. He rightly raises the unanswered questions about 9/11, but in doing so he taints that discussion, just because of all of his other whacked out extremist fantasies.

The man is not right in the head.

When did he ever have it?

How could the born-in-1987 James Eagan Holmes, or the born-in-1983 Jerad Miller, have been part of the ended-in-1973 MKULTRA program?