• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Joe Rogan Talks to Edward Snowden

Have you actually read the link you posted above?
Your cherrypicking out of context quotes to prove your point, don't.

Of course I read the link in context, and I cherrypicked nothing. Claiming Alex Jones is the most misunderstood man on the planet is a statement of the highest level of imbecility, and supports my point very well.
 
Of course I read the link in context, and I cherrypicked nothing. Claiming Alex Jones is the most misunderstood man on the planet is a statement of the highest level of imbecility, and supports my point very well.
You literally quoted part of a quote and didn't quote all of it?
here's the full quote

I know Alex so well. I’ve known Alex for like more than 20 years,” Mr. Rogan said Tuesday. “We’ve been hammered together so many times. That is the most misunderstood guy on the planet. … He needs somebody to go, ‘Alex, slow down. You had a real good point there.’ He even agreed with me. We talked about it. I said, ‘you just need like a rational journalist who’s next to you to, like, study.’ He’s like, ‘You’re right. You’re right. I do need that.’ I go, you need someone who just balances it out. Look, he was right about all this Jeffery Epstein s–. That is a f–ing fact. Alex Jones called this years ago. Years ago.

The context is right in your link,

Joe Rogan says Alex Jones of Infowars is the “most misunderstood guy on the planet” despite being right about financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Seems like you are guilty of both, to me.
 
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity, what made you think I was female?

Fair question, I had that impression from previous posts but I haven't read your posts in years (I think we tend to post in different sections of the forum). I thought you'd said so, but I honestly don't actually recall and if I misremembered I apologise.

ETA: I have actually been trying not to use gendered pronouns when I don't know the gender of the poster lately (for those who I'm already clear on I'll use them), but I should try to be more aware. My bad.
 
Last edited:
I believe Rogan is stupid because he says alot of stupid things like, for example, this: .

He's certainly wrong about a great many things. But, while I think he's wrong about Alex Jones, he's still quite critical of him on many issues.

You don't have to be stupid to be wrong some of the time. I disagree about Rogan's stance on many issues. Gun control, for instance. I've also heard him say a few ridiculous things, for instance, he once claimed that kangaroos are a kind of deer. The conversation he had with Nick Bostrom showcased the limits of his intellect (as I said, he's not a genius, and in that case he really wasn't able to follow the argument Bostrom put forth).

But none of this makes him stupid, and he does often ask insightful questions of his guests.

It's interesting to contrast Richard Dawkins' recent appearance on JRE with his conversation with Sam Harris on Making Sense. The latter was a much more interesting conversation and Harris' questions to Dawkins (particularly on evolutionary biology) brought out a deeper look at his work. But while Rogan's conversation with Dawkins didn't reach the same levels of depth, he still asked some interesting questions and gave Dawkins the time to express his views (particularly related to his new book).


There is no objective standard for listenability... at least the way I'm using the term. It's purely subjective.
Okay, then I apologise for the misunderstanding. If you are only claiming that you find him unlistenable and not making any objective claims about his podcast then, well, that's totally reasonable. Like I said, different people have different tastes.


Maybe what can be learned from them is that people frequently laugh at amazingly unfunny things.

Sure, if by funny you mean things that you find funny.
 
You literally quoted part of a quote and didn't quote all of it?
here's the full quote

The context is right in your link,

Seems like you are guilty of both, to me.

I don't need to rationalize my hatred for Joe Rogan to others, but there's nothing added by that "context" that makes the quote better. He's known the man for 20 years and Epstein being a pedo\assaulter wasn't exactly well hidden news, yet the only thing he claimed as Alex being right on. It was well known and pretty ******* blatant enough to be talked about for years.

Alex doesn't broadcast factual news. He isn't one "rational journalist" away from being legit. He's **** on dead children with outrageous lies that have caused their family years of hardship, including harassment from Alex Jones's ******** fans. Adding that context makes Joe Rogan look like more of a dumb ass mouth breather than it did before. He's a dude bro of the absolute middle caliber.
 
Last edited:
Alex doesn't broadcast factual news. He isn't one "rational journalist" away from being legit. He's **** on dead children with outrageous lies that have caused their family years of hardship, including harassment from Alex Jones's ******** fans. Adding that context makes Joe Rogan look like more of a dumb ass mouth breather than it did before. He's a dude bro of the absolute middle caliber.

He has many times called out Alex Jones for his crazy conspiracy theory about the Sandyhook thing. And he talked specifically about how ****** up the things Alex Jones said about the families of dead children are.

On the other hand he also had him back on his show again after that. I didn't watch or listen to that episode (really not interested) so I can't comment beyond just saying that I tend to be very loyal to my friends and I think I probably would be even if they did something I didn't approve of.
 
He has many times called out Alex Jones for his crazy conspiracy theory about the Sandyhook thing. And he talked specifically about how ****** up the things Alex Jones said about the families of dead children are.

On the other hand he also had him back on his show again after that. I didn't watch or listen to that episode (really not interested) so I can't comment beyond just saying that I tend to be very loyal to my friends and I think I probably would be even if they did something I didn't approve of.

The moment my friends start harassing and ******** on the parents of dead children so that Alex Jones can line his pockets with cash is where I end it. I have principles, and **** people that do stuff like that. I wouldn't piss in their mouth if their teeth were on fire.

As I said, adding stuff like this certainly doesn't make Rogan look any better in my eyes. It's just weak rationalization.

You like Rogan, neat. That doesn't mean other people can't find him to be a ranting, rambling jackass that gives a platform\enables miserable ******** that have no issues profiting off of dead children. **** 'em both.
 
The moment my friends start harassing and ******** on the parents of dead children so that Alex Jones can line his pockets with cash is where I end it. I have principles, and **** people that do stuff like that. I wouldn't piss in their mouth if their teeth were on fire.

As I said, adding stuff like this certainly doesn't make Rogan look any better in my eyes. It's just weak rationalization.

You like Rogan, neat. That doesn't mean other people can't find him to be a ranting, rambling jackass that gives a platform\enables miserable ******** that have no issues profiting off of dead children. **** 'em both.

I understand and to some extent agree with the issue that you take with him having Alex Jones on his podcast after the things Jones said about Sandyhook. While it's true that Rogan has been very critical (many times) of Jones for those statements, it's also true that he did bring him back on.

I am however, less critical of those actions than you because I don't think talking to someone constitutes endorsing their views.
 
What's truly important is that someone can still profit off those views.

One reason I find Jones even more abhorrent than I otherwise would is that I think he doesn't actually believe many of the things he says and really is trying to profit from saying outrageous things.

Rogan, on the other hand, seems (to me) to just enjoy talking to people who he finds interesting. Evidence of this is the fact that he did his podcast for years before making any money from it. He was just doing it for fun. That may have changed, but my probably rather subjective judgement is that it hasn't.

I think he had Alex Jones on his podcast because they are friends, not because he would make money from his appearance. He certainly did make money from it, and I could be wrong in this judgement. Perhaps, as Plague311 says we should fault him for being friends with Jones. I think I'm just less willing to judge people for the friends they keep than Plague311 is. However, if you and others do fault him for that, well, that's reasonable.

I should mention that I actually don't know much about Alex Jones. He may be even worse than I think.

None of this has much to do with the Snowden episode.
 
One reason I find Jones even more abhorrent than I otherwise would is that I think he doesn't actually believe many of the things he says and really is trying to profit from saying outrageous things.


The problem is, and this is at the root of everything I would object to in this post, is that it just doesn't -ing matter if he believes it or not. Jones isn't your half-senile grandfather ranting about darkies and the international Jewish conspiracy over the dinner table. He's not a social or political figure with a controversial-but-debatable worldview. He's not even the neighborhood nutter ranting about alien lizardmen running the government.

Jones has spent his entire career not only profiting from human misery; but actively seeking to create and prolong human misery. His shows aren't the usual Illuminati-spreading-mind-control-drug-via-chemtrails nutjobbery, they are vile lies targeted at the marginalized and bereaved. Vicious, mean-spirited, libelous assaults on minorities and victims of horrific violence. Lies in support of fascism, misogyny, and white-supremacism. And his lies have resulted in numerous people being harassed, threatened, assaulted, and very nearly murdered.

The sort of person who can be friends with a person like that is... well, sadly lacking in moral fiber is the best that can be said about that person. I've cut off people for less egregious behaviour than that; because that sort of person is simply not someone a decent, empathetic, rational person would want to be associated with.

The fact that Rogan will make a token effort at criticizing Jones, while still providing him a platform, tells me that Rogan is himself profoundly hypocritical, if not an outright piece of garbage himself. The fact that his show is generally an idiotic bro-fest, and he has expressed some highly problematic views of his own, is reason enough for me to avoid it. As far as I can tell, the only thing Rogan is interested in is getting attention and making money by generating controversy.
 
The problem is, and this is at the root of everything I would object to in this post, is that it just doesn't -ing matter if he believes it or not.

I was saying that it's worse that he doesn't believe it, because not only is he saying vile things, but he knows that they aren't true, are damaging, and yet continues to say them, presumably for his own profit. That seems worse to me than someone who actually believes those things are true. So it bothers me a little that this is the thing that is at the root of your problems with my post. It was basically my agreement with you (and others) about Alex Jones.

I don't think Rogan has the same view of Jones as you (and I) have, and while I think we should fault him for that, I don't think we should fault him as seriously as if he did see Jones in the same light that you express in your post.

The rest of your post raises some valid points, which I will try to respond to later.
 
Last edited:
Jones used to be genuine, even though he was never even a mediocre journalist, or even a good conspiracy theorist, for that matter.
Whatever slivers of "journalistic integrity" he might have once had went out the window by 2006 or so, though.

I watched part of the interview with Jones on the JRE after the boot from youtube, etc. Jow got Alex intoxicated on something (I think whiskey) and Alex talked about his purported belief in inter-dimensional space pedophiles. It was weird. Entertaining, I must admit. lol

I don't think Joe having Jones on "legitimizes" Jones in any way. I'm glad I got to see it.
 
Jones has spent his entire career not only profiting from human misery; but actively seeking to create and prolong human misery. His shows aren't the usual Illuminati-spreading-mind-control-drug-via-chemtrails nutjobbery, they are vile lies targeted at the marginalized and bereaved. Vicious, mean-spirited, libelous assaults on minorities and victims of horrific violence. Lies in support of fascism, misogyny, and white-supremacism. And his lies have resulted in numerous people being harassed, threatened, assaulted, and very nearly murdered.

He really didn't take the rightwing turn until around 2010, iirc. It actually was more "Illuminati-spreading-mind-control-drug-via-chemtrails nutjobbery" before then.
This was pretty standard Jones before then:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obOAv4bV36M
 
Yeah, I refused to watch the Alex Jones episode. My SO was all hyped to watch it back when it came out (the newer Jones episode, I mean), thinking it would be really funny. I just refused. I've since heard that the episode did indeed have some funny bits, but the comedy is just tainted for me. Jones is such an inconceivably terrible person. I can't even listen to his stupid voice.
 
My advice is to cut out on the MMA fighters and stand-up comedians.
I agree about the fighters, and this is coming from a big MMA fan. They just aren't very interesting. But some of the comedians he has on are great. I loved the Artie Lange episode he just had. But then again Artie is a bit of a freak show, and has a ton of stories. And I've heard pieces of the Fitzsimmons episode he just had and it's pretty intersting, too.
 
I thought I remembered that Jones was more of a liberal at one point, but I wasn't sure.

He really hated Bush, and was SUPER into the whole "Bush is a Skull and Bones member, and thus a leader of the NWO/Illuminati" theory of global power.

He was always a right-libertarian, but he didn't focus on democrats much compared to Bush before Obama.
 
He really didn't take the rightwing turn until around 2010, iirc. It actually was more "Illuminati-spreading-mind-control-drug-via-chemtrails nutjobbery" before then.
This was pretty standard Jones before then:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obOAv4bV36M


Jones started out, I think, wanting to be the new Art Bell, but wasn't particularly good at it. I don't think he ever had much in the way of journalistic integrity. I remember him just pushing whatever was controversial enough to get attention. Really jumping on both the Truther and Birther bandwagons, because of the rabid and reliable bases for those.

He really hated Bush, and was SUPER into the whole "Bush is a Skull and Bones member, and thus a leader of the NWO/Illuminati" theory of global power.

He was always a right-libertarian, but he didn't focus on democrats much compared to Bush before Obama.


I'm not even sure that is accurate. His supposed anti-Bush attitude was very much tied into the secret-society and Truther conspiracy-theory rhetoric. It was very much aimed at the far-right, John Birch Society crowd who ate up that Illuminati BS. He was never speaking to leftists except accidentally.

I think his public politics have always been like his show, whatever would cause the most controversy. But I also think, down inside, he was always sympathetic to the far-right. If you look at the arc of most right-libertarians right now, they've largely gone pretty hard to the right on most issues. Especially economics and race. Which is not at all surprising, given that the bulk of the right-libertarian crowd was dominated by proto-fascist Randroids.

I think what happened to him, as with so many others, is the rise of racism and the hard-right spurred by racist anti-Obama sentiment, and the growth of the power of the Tea Party faction, enabled and ecouraged a lot of people to start letting more of their true sentiments show through. And Trump's Birtherism and electioneering rhetoric enabled and galvanized the conspiracy-theory-heavy far-right to crawl out from under their rocks, politically speaking, and Jones was very much in that crowd.
 
AJ is younger than he looks. If you want you can watch one of his early movies Police State 2000 which is about exactly that and was published in 1999 when he was 25. You can then take it to one of the countless threads about him to discuss it. Of course he could not envision the sophisticated surveillance state Snowden exposed 15 years later.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom