3 ms·
Defense of Alex Jones here, generally in the form of "it was just speech, it was just one falsehood, goodbye free speech, if I say just one wrong thing..." etc.
by Zigurd 4y ago
Defense of Alex Jones here, generally in the form of "it was just speech, it was just one falsehood, goodbye free speech, if I say just one wrong thing..." etc. speaks of a particular trait: Context-free pedantry.
These people imagine themselves practicing their context-free pedantry in the workplace and saying something like "Go to Massachusetts for your abortion" or something analogous regarding race, disability, sexual identity, etc. and getting crushed for their speech.
It's not the speech. In Alex Jones's case, the speech led directly to violence against the families of the dead kids. For the people who imagine themselves to be future victims of speech restrictions, it's not their speech, either. It's their lack of understanding that speech has consequences, like an inherent inability to work alongside others who cannot then trust them. What woman in Texas, for example, can trust a man who believes she has no right to control her own body when he could snitch on her?
- zaebal 4y agoI've never heard of anyone who went on trial because of the violence against the families. All I hear is people keep making those allegations. Nothing more than that.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- toss1 4y agoRight. So: - these people had their children murdered. - jurors have now spent weeks hearing more direct evidence than any of us - even Alex Jones admitted multiple times that he is a liar, and spreads these lies for money - the jurors determined that 1) there was harm and 2) the COMPENSATORY damages [0] for only part of the victims is $965 million - the police are neither motivated, capable, nor often successful at gathering enough evidence to prosecute anonymous telephone or public threats made by cowards who try to make threats anonymously. YET, with all those facts, you think it is appropriate to FURTHER question the integrity of the victims. You make very clear that you have no idea what you are talking about, and are likely one of the idiots who laps up the lies from the likes of the defendant. Rethink your life, and at least stop posting idiocy dressed up as "oh, just asking questions". You are only displaying your inability to think or even to get a clue, not persuading anyone. Yikes. [0] compensatory damages are damages to compensate for the harm itself, as opposed to punitive damages, which have not yet been determined in this trial.