• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Question

jackchit said:
Agreed but i would still like to see Alex Jones debating roberts, I'm no fan of jones I recently listened to his 9/11/01 show and was appalled by his insinuation that the EU was behind the attacks (amongst others) his net of liability was cast over a very wide area and his rantings, well quite frankly absurd.
I just wondered why everyone avoids him even though he should be easy to de-bunk.
Click to expand...
EU? thats a new one, i know jones was blaming the US government for "the next big terror attack" in june of 2001 though

and thats my biggest problem with him, even today he says the next big attack will be false flag, he decides guilt before the crime is even committed
 
jackchit said:
So if I could arrange it do you think Mark would be up for a debate with Alex? I will contact Jones people and document their responses for the benefit of clarity.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Alex Jones would never dream of engaging in a Hardfire-style debate. Without the ability to cut his opponent's mike, he's just another intellectually bankrupt conspiracy liar--you know, like you.
 
pomeroo said:
Alex Jones would never dream of engaging in a Hardfire-style debate. Without the ability to cut his opponent's mike, he's just another intellectually bankrupt conspiracy liar--you know, like you.
Click to expand...
listen to the ferret...he is telling you the truth Jason.
 
Mark Roberts could easily defeat the not so mighty alex jones, if the issues were stuck to, and no yelling allowed.

TAM;);)
 
pomeroo said:
Alex Jones would never dream of engaging in a Hardfire-style debate. Without the ability to cut his opponent's mike, he's just another intellectually bankrupt conspiracy liar--you know, like you.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

It wouldn't even be fair...
 
Here ya go Jack:
http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/11/35190_comment.php

I spent less than ten seconds on Google and found this.

I suppose your question was directed more towards regular posters here, but why would anyone bother trying to debate or debunk a man like A. Jones?

He has a fact-proof head. Nothing is getting in there unless it already supports his ludicrous opinions.
 
Jackchit:

It is worth noting that Gravy has not responded to this thread, and as such you don't actually have his answer as to whether he would debate Alex Jones in a Hardfire Debate.

This does not mean that he is ignoring the issue. It may very well be that he can't even see this thread - if he has you on ignore that is by no means a stretch to imagine (and it may well be that he has you on ignore).

We cannot speak for Gravy - this is not some sort of organisations with Mark as CEO, Ron as Head of Publicity and Enigma as head of our Crotch-grabbing department. If you want an answer, the only one who can provide it is Mark.

Incidentally, Mark has confronted Alex before - the video should be up on Google video, if someone here can provide the link?
 
I was invited to the Alex Jones show several months ago, because "Alex Jones was interested in why a Canadian would be defending the US President", according to the words of the email. The reason why I refused to join is because I know Alex Jones' style and simply put, he isn't a debater. He refuses to allow the other side speak (he even admits that this is a "debate tactic" to Jason Bermas/Dylan Avery in one of the LC's vanity videos).

Why would I waste my time to someone who is fixed on the idea that the government must be behind any attacks to the United States and has been known to lie and manipulate his "sources" ?

Consider this, on Mother's day in 2001, Alex Jones was bullhorning mothers who were marching for stricter gun control, calling them "Nazis" and telling the kids there that their mothers are lying to them. Let's not forget Alex Jones immediately stated on the first day of the attack that this was an inside job, so he is working backwards of a true scientific invesitgation. Last but not least, he did use holocaust deniers like Chris Bollyn and Eric Hufschmid as his sources during the early years of 9/11 denial.

Sorry, I refuse to debate with a madman.
 
Mobyseven said:
Jackchit:

It is worth noting that Gravy has not responded to this thread, and as such you don't actually have his answer as to whether he would debate Alex Jones in a Hardfire Debate.

This does not mean that he is ignoring the issue. It may very well be that he can't even see this thread - if he has you on ignore that is by no means a stretch to imagine (and it may well be that he has you on ignore).

We cannot speak for Gravy - this is not some sort of organisations with Mark as CEO, Ron as Head of Publicity and Enigma as head of our Crotch-grabbing department. If you want an answer, the only one who can provide it is Mark.

Incidentally, Mark has confronted Alex before - the video should be up on Google video, if someone here can provide the link?
Click to expand...
On second thought, I decided not to post...
 
jackchit said:
Ok why the apparent lack of de-bunking of his work?
Click to expand...

i and others have debunked a few of his claims from a few of his movies. the reason there's not been a completed, organized debunking of even just one of his videos, is, well, simply: time and effort.

when i watch a 911 CT video, or even an alex jones video, it takes over a week, unless i'm already familiar with all the evidence. everytime a new claim is made, i have to pause the video and apply scrutiny.

i was actually working on a debunking of terrorstorm, and nothing would make me happier than finishing... except for getting my BS in geology. and having money.

the problem, jack, is that this debunking takes time and effort.

seriously, i think you should try to debunk an alex jones video, or any other 911 CT video. i can tell you that if you are interested, there are a number of factual innacuraies in terrorstorm. some are quite disgusting, really. you should watch it through, and attempt to debunk it yourself. this would help you to exercise your own abilities to fact check, and to grow an appreciation for the time and effort that others put into attempting to protect innocent folk from being lied to.
 
OMGturt1es said:
i and others have debunked a few of his claims from a few of his movies. the reason there's not been a completed, organized debunking of even just one of his videos, is, well, simply: time and effort.

when i watch a 911 CT video, or even an alex jones video, it takes over a week, unless i'm already familiar with all the evidence. everytime a new claim is made, i have to pause the video and apply scrutiny.

i was actually working on a debunking of terrorstorm, and nothing would make me happier than finishing... except for getting my BS in geology. and having money.

the problem, jack, is that this debunking takes time and effort.

seriously, i think you should try to debunk an alex jones video, or any other 911 CT video. i can tell you that if you are interested, there are a number of factual innacuraies in terrorstorm. some are quite disgusting, really. you should watch it through, and attempt to debunk it yourself. this would help you to exercise your own abilities to fact check, and to grow an appreciation for the time and effort that others put into attempting to protect innocent folk from being lied to.
Click to expand...
But check out the credentials Alex boasts of in the video I posted. That really is some scary stuff...we are doomed :)
 
jackchit said:
Why do you never debate Alex Jones? I've always wondered.
There is no screw terrorstorm and he gets far less attention from de-bunkers than the soft targets like Avery and fetzer.
Just asking.:confused:
Click to expand...
Alex Jones?

When you say Alex Jones you are saying, already debunked. I have yet to find one thing Alex Jones says that is based in reality. Have you?

When someone posts something from PrisonPlanet it is the mark of bogus junk.

I am afraid the crazy junk on his web sites will kill all the bits in my computer with ignorance.
 
Last edited:
I had a brief look at terrorstorm. The reason there is no "Screw Terrorstorm" is due to the lack of specific claims made by Jones throughout the movie. He also gets off to a very slow start, and fails to make a claim regarding 9/11 for a good while. And if I remember correctly, the whole movie isn't even about 9/11.

As for debating Jones, I can see why people wouldn't want to. Not wanting to debate someone because they honestly consider yelling at people and shutting their mic off a "debate tactic" is understandable. It's the people who say "I won't debate you because I am too good" that the people around here have a problem with.
 
jackchit said:
Ok why the apparent lack of de-bunking of his work?
Click to expand...

Heheh. I'll take on Jones with one condition; that he gets us on a reasonably mainstream show with both of us as guests--Mancow, for example?
 
Last edited:
i think a debate with jones would require:

1. a preplanned schedule of topics.
2. a required format; jones makes his case, the opponent can respond. jones can contest the response. a thrid party fact checker could be present to confirm truth claims. that way, when jones, say, claims that the jews were warned of 911, the fact checker could confirm that jones' sources ACTUALLY confirm that the jews were sent anti semetic threats.

without some sort of structure, we all know-- including the CTers-- exactly what would happen. jones would spit out 10 crazy truth claims in 10 seconds, and then yell "911 was an inside" job as the opponent attempted to address him.

and that's how all 911 CT debates should go, i think. after my experiences of dealing with these guys in the last couple weeks, i understand that you need to hold them to a schedule. you need to have a list of arguments that they are allowed to argue. it's useless otherwise, because as you explain to them why their claim is incorrect, they throw out 10 more. "what about wtc 7?", "what about the fbi admitting that it has no evidence that osama was behind the attacks?", "what about..."

useless, useless, useless...

out talking another doesn't actually help your case. it just shows that you have no grasp of how to obtain an accurate position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom