Social Media deletes InfoWars pages

[Dontrike]

Well twitter certainly has a past of targeting "wrong think". Yet leaving shit like #killallwhites up. If that's because of a huge user base and not enough resources....who knows. I still think alex started to get o'reily syndrom and started to think he was more than an entertainer.

He's always thought he was more than what he is. Deep down he wishes he was Hannity and that close to Trump where they sleep in bed wearing the same onesies as they spoon, but unfortunately he's crazier than Glenn Beck ever was, and sells shit that even he wouldn't peddle.

If you see something on Twitter or facebook that clearly should be taken down, like your example above, then report it and that's it.

- - - Updated - - -

It didn't take long for the market of fake pills to be taken by another conservative

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dk4XYfjVsAId6XL.jpg

What the hell does "clean energy" mean? Are they selling solar/wind power in pill form?

[Dontrike]

I hardly use twitter. I've seen what it does to people like Andrew dobson (a lolcow artist) and a few others. As for the bolded part. They're just buzzwords. Like Superfood, gluten free, etc. When you see gluten free labeled on meat. Known to contain ludicrous amounts of flour in the wild. You know it's just a buzzword.

I wouldn't call this a buzzword as I've never heard of it up until that. Gluten free is an actual thing, but it's used as a buzzword for things that we know gluten isn't in normally (although processed meat might have that in there), but "clean energy" is some weird hippy terms that even buzzwords don't want to get near.

[Dontrike]

Gluten turns into celiac. But very few people have celiac disease. I have no idea if flour is the only thing that turns into celiac. If I see gluten free on premade chicken fried steaks. I'll understand. But on a package of t-bones or a chub of hamburger?

I actually was just diagnosed with celiac, about a week ago, and I dread being one of those whiny hippies in a grocery store or restaurant going "Do you have gluten free <food>?" Fucking dumb it'll cost me $3 more to buy bread and get 20%-50% less doing it. My health doesn't seem worth the extra money to do so.

On the other hand, I do agree that seeing it on butchered beef, pork, or chicken is stupid, but that's also what they do to make sure they sell things. Technically they are not wrong in that those products are gluten free, but I do agree it should be obvious.

[Endus]

Gluten turns into celiac. But very few people have celiac disease. I have no idea if flour is the only thing that turns into celiac. If I see gluten free on premade chicken fried steaks. I'll understand. But on a package of t-bones or a chub of hamburger?

On the other hand, I do agree that seeing it on butchered beef, pork, or chicken is stupid, but that's also what they do to make sure they sell things. Technically they are not wrong in that those products are gluten free, but I do agree it should be obvious.

With celiac disease and severe gluten allergies, any trace amount of wheat can cause damage or trigger a reaction. For celiac, it may be unsymptomatic, even, but it still causes internal damage. "Trace amount" means that if you're prepping a schnitzel or putting wheat crumbs into your sausage or hamburgers (fairly common practice), and you then use the same board to prepare T-bone steaks or don't wash your hands thoroughly or just crack enough wheat dust off while shaking things out to aerate through the air, you'll get enough gluten on those steaks to cause issues.

So if, instead, you take steps to ensure there's no possibility of cross-contamination, you slap the "gluten free" label on so that people with that kind of sensitivity know it's safe.

It isn't about whether wheat's an intended ingredient. It's about whether there's any possibility there's any trace of wheat on it at all.

[Dontrike]

With celiac disease and severe gluten allergies, any trace amount of wheat can cause damage or trigger a reaction. For celiac, it may be unsymptomatic, even, but it still causes internal damage. "Trace amount" means that if you're prepping a schnitzel or putting wheat crumbs into your sausage or hamburgers (fairly common practice), and you then use the same board to prepare T-bone steaks or don't wash your hands thoroughly or just crack enough wheat dust off while shaking things out to aerate through the air, you'll get enough gluten on those steaks to cause issues.

So if, instead, you take steps to ensure there's no possibility of cross-contamination, you slap the "gluten free" label on so that people with that kind of sensitivity know it's safe.

It isn't about whether wheat's an intended ingredient. It's about whether there's any possibility there's any trace of wheat on it at all.

That's a good point, same reason why they mention "made in a place with nuts" on some foods.

[Endus]

So pretty much treated like a nut allergy. Since going into full on anaphylactic shock ain't high on the priority list.

Pretty much. The biggest difference is that a peanut allergy can kill you in a few minutes. Celiac involves small amounts of auto-immune damage that add up over years. And gluten sensitivity isn't dangerous, but a severe reaction can still mean a day or two of pretty serious discomfort, akin to mild food poisoning. The latter might not be a major risk, but it's definitely something you want to avoid.

[Dontrike]

Poor education.

He loves the poorly educated. Stupid people love stupid, it reaffirms their own stupidity.

[smityx]

My favorate is still his weight loss supplements that let him undergo this transformation!

Looks like he found Trumps sun tan spray supplier.

[Mormolyce]

It's a sign of how batshit crazy a time we live in that shutting down a disingenuous crackpot like Alex Jones is remotely controversial.

[Felya]

It's a sign of how batshit crazy a time we live in that shutting down a disingenuous crackpot like Alex Jones is remotely controversial.

It’s more absurd if consider things like YouTube, pretty much being magazines from before the internet. Can you imagine this reaction, to someone not getting their article about how magazines are controlled by raptors, not being printed in a magazine? Poor Valerie Solanace actually needed to kill Andi Warhol to get her manifesto published.

[Breccia]

So those people trying to defend Infowars -- not a ton of them on these forums, but in general -- as people just expressing their opinion, good luck with this one.

Infowars claims Hurricane Lane was split in half.

"That doesn't sound very -- "

By an energy beam.

"...um..."

From the South Pole.

"Okay, this is getting rid--"

Fired by John Kerry.

"Fucking hell, that's stupid. I can't imagine Kerry will take that lying down."

Oh he totally trolled Infowars.

But yes: any attempt to claim Infowars is about free speech expressing an opinion, the only response such a lame-ass limp-dick IMPOTUS attempt will get is *ahem* John Kerry kamehameha from the South Pole.

[Dontrike]

So those people trying to defend Infowars -- not a ton of them on these forums, but in general -- as people just expressing their opinion, good luck with this one.

Infowars claims Hurricane Lane was split in half.

"That doesn't sound very -- "

By an energy beam.

"...um..."

From the South Pole.

"Okay, this is getting rid--"

Fired by John Kerry.

"Fucking hell, that's stupid. I can't imagine Kerry will take that lying down."

Oh he totally trolled Infowars.

But yes: any attempt to claim Infowars is about free speech expressing an opinion, the only response such a lame-ass limp-dick IMPOTUS attempt will get is *ahem* John Kerry kamehameha from the South Pole.

These people have somehow reached a level of stupid that even if a normal person drank bleach they would still be dumber than the bleach drinker.

[Moralgy]

So those people trying to defend Infowars -- not a ton of them on these forums, but in general -- as people just expressing their opinion, good luck with this one.

Infowars claims Hurricane Lane was split in half.

"That doesn't sound very -- "

By an energy beam.

"...um..."

From the South Pole.

"Okay, this is getting rid--"

Fired by John Kerry.

"Fucking hell, that's stupid. I can't imagine Kerry will take that lying down."

Oh he totally trolled Infowars.

But yes: any attempt to claim Infowars is about free speech expressing an opinion, the only response such a lame-ass limp-dick IMPOTUS attempt will get is *ahem* John Kerry kamehameha from the South Pole.

I wonder what level Kerry has acceded to? 2 if I had to guess, he isn't dead so 3 is a little harder to achieve.

[Poopymonster]

It didn't take long for the market of fake pills to be taken by another conservative

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dk4XYfjVsAId6XL.jpg

Have they tried "Chemtrails are lines of coke for Jesus in Heaven" yet?

[RobertoCarlos]

So those people trying to defend Infowars -- not a ton of them on these forums, but in general -- as people just expressing their opinion, good luck with this one.

Infowars claims Hurricane Lane was split in half.

"That doesn't sound very -- "

By an energy beam.

"...um..."

From the South Pole.

"Okay, this is getting rid--"

Fired by John Kerry.

"Fucking hell, that's stupid. I can't imagine Kerry will take that lying down."

Oh he totally trolled Infowars.

But yes: any attempt to claim Infowars is about free speech expressing an opinion, the only response such a lame-ass limp-dick IMPOTUS attempt will get is *ahem* John Kerry kamehameha from the South Pole.

Problem with peddling in crazy is that you have to commit to everything and look for the conspiracy angle in everything even if you probably dont believe it yourself.

The way Jones still summons up his maniac energy over these kind of issues to sell chicken broth protein shake and brainforce vitamin pills is truely impressive.

[Breccia]

Just going to add this to this thread as well, because it might come up:

Trump's economic advisor went on the record.

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Tuesday that President Donald Trump is considering new regulations on Google's search engine to address his concern that it turns up too many stories that are critical of him.

Pressed by reporters at the White House on Tuesday about a tweet the president wrote criticizing Google's search engine as "rigged," the director of Trump’s National Economic Council said the administration is “taking a look” at federal regulations for the company.

“We’ll let you know,” he said.

Of course, this follows a 5AM tweet.

As before, I'm going to quote that bolded part again.

President Donald Trump is considering new regulations on Google's search engine to address his concern that it turns up too many stories that are critical of him

From now on, any Trump supporter must, when talking about free speech or censorship, start with the above quoted line to put their own comments into context.

"I know President Donald Trump is considering new regulations on Google's search engine to address his concern that it turns up too many stories that are critical of him, but..."

Failure to do so will cause their argument to immediately be invalid.

[Edge-]

"I googled myself and it made me sad"

So much for small government and slashing regulations, eh?

[Shadowferal]

Complains of censorship..but wants regulation...*sigh*

[Lenonis]

Soooo...small government free speech supporting conservatives will totally be opposed to Trump regulating Google to force more positive results...right?

Right?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight?

[Breccia]

So much for small government and slashing regulations, eh?

This story is drowning in stupidity.

1) What you just said.

2) Trump was almost certainly quoting Lou Dobbs. Dobbs is not center by any measure, including his own.

3) Dobbs, in turn, was quoting PJ Media. PJ Media is also on the right, and is a questionable source for factual claims.

4) PJ Media, in turn, published an article in which she did one Google search one time, and recorded the results. That's not science, even if she's right.

5) Now, to be clear, she was rating the story on its source, not its positive view of Trump or anything else. Just the source. That's ad hominem.

6) And she did so with this chart:


"Wait, is that InfoWars in center right?"

On that chart? Yes. Yes it is. So the chart's balance is highly suspect.

7) Adding to that, the number of sources isn't equal on each side. Now, that's with good reason: the free market. News organizations are businesses, and businesses make money. In this case, by selling advertising and tactical taint wipes. The free market has chosen more media outlets on the left side of that line, than the right side. If more stories are showing up on the left, that's actually a result of the free market. Not censorship.

Basically, if I said "Hey, 96% of all Nobel Prize winners aren't from the University of Chicago! Clearly the U of C is being blacklisted!" even the U of C should point at me and laugh, because that's stupid.

8) Also also, the sources are ranked without any mention of hits -- the thing that drives Google more than anything else. Fringe sites (cough Infowars cough) get fewer hits, therefore, don't get pushed up.

9) Also also also, conservatives, well, tend to be old. And older people, well, tend to be less tech-savvy. FOX News is has the plurality in cable viewing, but they ain't got shit for online hits.

10) My favorite: even the author of the article, while defending it to Dobbs, questioned it personally.

"Other left-leaning sites that appeared on the first page were CBS, The Atlantic, CNBC, The New Yorker, Politico, Reuters, and USA Today (the last two outlets on this list could arguably be considered more centrist than the others)."

She just called into question the rating system used in her own article.

Nothing. Nothing about this is even remotely intelligent -- which, of course, is why Trump tweeted and directed the WH to make it so.