Infowars.com being taken down

I'm guessing their host dropped them, and they've switched to some less capable provider with a leaner site. Apparently his site was down for several hours earlier in the day.

he says they are being DDOS'd

Anyway which jew did he pissed off that cause all this, I haven't been paying attention to infowars.

his ex wife was a jew

Which is exactly why you don't marry a jewess. Jones married two so just imagine the hell he's been through, poor guy.

Attached: bean itch.jpg (466x310, 31.79K)

IT'S BACK!
CUCKFLARE BTFO!
NAZI CHICOMS ON SUICIDE WATCH!
infowars.com/

Attached: blackadder.jpeg (1200x630, 40.51K)

...

Zig Forums is a bunch of cringey retards now but I think you're pulling shit out of your ass with that one

...

...

#bornthisway

Attached: gay_trans_programmer_mug-rd7f10a11c2c54fb582e331abaa4c91d5_x7jg5_8byvr_307.jpg (920x720 9.32 KB, 106.9K)

Clearly that's why and not because he's a beacon for the alt-right. Unlike PETA and Greenpeace who mix in their slanderous lies with actual terrorist acts.

Attached: im here for my twitter verification.jpg (480x360, 14.97K)

...

Are we talking about Alex Jones here or your average tabloid rag that's on every newstand throughout the western world?

They're censoring Alex Jones because it's obvious he had a huge impact on the past election and is effectively countering their propaganda. During his presidential campaign Trump was a guest on his network.
haaretz.com/us-news/remember-when-donald-trump-appeared-on-alex-jones-infowars-1.5443723

And an interesting extra tidbit from that article

>A 19-year-old Jewish Israeli-American named as Michael Ron David Kadar, was arrested in March in Ashkelon, Israel and charged with responsibility for "dozens" of the threats. He was suspected of threatening over 2,000 different institutions in the US, Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia including the Israeli Embassy in Washington, the Israeli consulate in Miami, schools, malls, police stations, hospitals and airlines.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Jewish_Community_Center_bomb_threats

Attached: National_Enquirer_(cover).jpg (262x300, 38.63K)

You obviously misunderstand the issue, their contention is that discrimination towards certain classes is a "hate crime."

You misspelled joos, trannynigger.

He's not a fascist, you're unironically brainwashed. Sad.

what if i want neither? fascists and commies are both cancer, so are all other authoritarians. i want freedom of speech and more of it

There's no place for a middle ground in current year. Wars tend to end badly for nonaligned people, doubly so for civil wars.

Freedom of speech is an underdog thing so you have to keep switching sides if you want it.

Endorsing someone's right to speak is not the same thing as endorsing what they speak.

dig NS infowars.com +shortrobin.ns.cloudflare.commerlin.ns.cloudflare.com

gee whiz

That's nice, but any group with massive power isn't going to let you speak freely, it doesn't matter who they are or what they stand for. That is the nature of power and how power is maintained. You have to side with the underdog if you want to speak your mind.

Maybe you are now aware that the promotion of free speech in the '60s by the same people who now say freeze peach and 'deplatform' was just to undermine power? Or maybe not. But it's again time to undermine power and promote free speech.

It's because his rhetoric becomes somewhat relevant if you substitute the word 'jew' for the word 'globalist'. (Which many people are starting to do.)

Anyway, why contain it. The more unfairly he is persecuted the more people will push back against it. Let their anger spill out into the real world. Let the sound they make rattling their cage serve as a warning to the jew that we are a mere word away from making their perverted holocaust fantasy a reality. Aquinas spoke of the "city on the hill" but we will not build a city, we shall erect a temple and ascend its' steps to become gods!

Attached: 7ff.jpg (288x499, 71.22K)

pic related
If a PoC, LGBTQ+, or female reacts negatively to something you say it is his/her/xir RIGHT to beat the shit out of you and/or get you fired from your job.

Attached: free_speech.png (566x577, 52.13K)

There is no law that gives people the right to violence for dissenting speech. Boycotting a business for dissenting speech is legally allowed.

For a moment there I thought you were seriously making that retarded "not freedom from consequences" argument.

Attached: too-smart-for-faceberg.png (600x772, 578.52K)

Free speech doesn't imply freedom from consequences.

Not if they're based in Israel.

Attached: Escudo_inquisicion.gif (402x493, 169.13K)

...

Real hot take maybe you should have posted it on Zig Forums

The fact that the church was the state in historical contexts doesn't have any meaning for today's free society. In a free society, people are welcome to speak their mind and people are welcome to feel offended from that speech. People are free to boycott businesses and call for firings of people with dissenting speech. A business who capitulates to the demands of a mob deserves to have a boycott as well.

What people aren't allowed to do is to commit acts of violence as a consequence of being offended.

Zig Forums would just delete it for being clueless.
Leftists have this idea that the right wing is being hypocritical with support for discrimination and that if they point that out minds_blown.jpg. But what's actually happening is they support discrimination and are mad that they aren't the ones discriminating. It's a consistent position, the same one that the commies held before they had the power to discriminate, and minds will remain intact.
Meanwhile, captain fedora will mumble "checkmate" to himself and waddle off for some pocky, never realizing that the nazis and commies both think he's a moron for not understanding the game.
Also, the game.

It's some top shelf horseshit they've fed you as they've ensured unequal protection in law. Minorities, women, hate speech, etc.. They talk as they do now because they feel confident that consequences can only be felt by their enemies.

I don't believe this is true. It is a fact that there is no law that supports unequal protection for speech.

Oy, vey! The goyim are realizing that the alt-right are a bunch of kike lovers that never named the (((✡))), (((we))) must do something!

Attached: oy vey, oy gevalt, mishigene mentshn.webm (320x240, 10.77M)

So I guess you won't mind if a website bans you for expressing an opinion they don't like.

I think it says a lot about you that you need to resort to a ridiculous euphemism like "deplatforming" for censorship to try to justify your support for it. You know why this is bad. That's why you're resorting to a word game to avoid admitting it.

SJWs are really big on that kind of hypocrisy.

Fuck off with the revisionist history. Just because there are crazy SJWs on the rise now doesn't mean the whole left was SJWs back then. The Free Speech Movement struggles of yore believed very strongly in "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." To quote Noam Chomsky, "If we do not believe in freedom of speech for those we despise, we do not believe in it at all." The whole idea was that people should be allowed to share objectionable and disagreeable ideas with one another. There's a reason why back in the day organizations like the ACLU defended the free speech rights of Nazis.

...

The core part of the right ideology is there is a "them" and an "us". It's not hypocritical for someone who values white people to want to discriminate against non-whites. It's completely within their ethics system and not a problem. The problem leftists see is they cannot view the world outside of their own ethical system. They cannot understand why someone on the right will defend whites while telling everyone else to fuck off in the same situation. They don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment for their ethnic group.

Are you seriously quoting Noam Chomsky at people you little kike? The left never cared and never will care for free speech. It's a universal policy where as the loser you appeal to fair play but as the winner you don't need to appeal to it. This is how politics always works, it always has and always will work that way because it's the way human minds work.

I don't mind that at all. I do not support websites to being forced to hold speech that they disagree. They can choose to hold that dissenting speech or not, it is not my responsibility to run those websites. What I support is that people taking responsibility and starting their own space to discuss ideas. What I don't support is people who maintain their own space being forced out of their speech because it isn't politically correct. If someone's speech is outright libel and slander, it is the responsibility of the rest of society to argue with speech about what's so wrong about it.

The problem is these websites are not private companies working on their own. They're often intertwined with the government to the point where it's hard to tell where one begins and the other ends. If you believe in free speech then you need to define what free speech is in this grey area of industry.

Is Facebook a public space now that so many services use it or require it? If I have to fill out google captchas to get to a government contact form is google now part of the government or not?

The issue you have when you claim it's a private company is that it's clearly not a private company. It's in a blurry area between public square, government sponsored soap box and private data mining company. Until you can split this to be a 100% private company you can't simply say it's a private platform who can ban any one they want.

A good example of this is the local police use of Twitter. If I wish to stay informed on local traffic problems or warnings in my area I need to use Twitter to do it. If I get banned from Twitter because I say fuck niggers what happens then? I just got cut off from a government service I cannot get in any other way. Is that acceptable because it's a private website or is it an official government website which I should be able to access?

Really now?

Have you ever even read Chomsky?

I'll take Blatant Lies for 1000, Alex.

The world is a big place. Any time some idiot claims to have figured human nature out he is just projecting massively onto society at large.

Not a public space no matter how many public services make use of it. If your government service only accepts contact through Facebook, then I would question the government about why this is the case. If Facebook is one avenue of contact out of a range of avenues, then there is no problem.

This is not a public forum where speech is held. Only robots are prevented from passing the captcha lock.

Not a public space. Nobody is required to have a Twitter account to see public Twitter feeds.

Not that there have been kings..

GODS!

Great answers. Just deny everything and avoid the points being made of the government and private social media companies being a grey area.

Have I read the jew who claims he's anti establishment while being funded by the establishment? Why yes, yes I have.

The people you claim cared for free speech are now the people in power. It's those people who are denying the right free speech. It's a constant cycle you can see all throughout history. The weaker calls for fairness because it has no other way to attack a stronger opponent. If fairness is given then they switch sides and the people who claimed to want fairness continue to power grab and shut down the losers. But you wouldn't know this because you can't even see through Chomsky's bullshit.

I don't see any grey areas. I only see black and white in this instance.

Then you're an idiot. There's no way around that fact.

On the first image we have Juan Requesens. He publicly opposed the government of Nicolás Maduro.
Consequences of exerting his free speech rights:

On the second picture we have Alex Jones. He said the parents of murdered kids are trans-dimensional actor Jews attempting to take away all the American guns to rape children; causing a bunch of said parents to be harassed by nut-jobs.
He also said the basement of a pizzeria was a satanic, cannibal tunnel/sex dungeon that connects with the Democrat party headquarters and some random comedian’s house. The owner and employees of said pizzeria where harassed and the pizzeria itself was attacked by a crazed gunman who believed this bullshit. The pizzeria doesn’t even have a basement, which makes the entire thing a straight-up lie.
“Consequences” of his free speech rights:

You’re a bunch of whining little bitches. Alex is not being persecuted by his lies nor is he being imprisoned or harassed. Youtube and Facebook don’t want to host his content and Twitter suspended his account for a week. That’s it. His freeze peach hasn’t been violated.

Attached: jones.jpg (1068x925 2.17 MB, 83.4K)

Incorrect. That's the entire point of free speech.

You know what to do Americans...

Attached: the-boston-tea-party-english-school[1].jpg (900x900, 223.94K)

No it's not. There is no law forcing people to be happy with other people's dissent, that people are required by law to not be offended by speech. That's the meaning when you define free speech to mean "free speech has zero consequence".

It's funny how lefties completely lie about what Alex Jones said.

Shall we discuss the people the US government has kidnapped and tortured or do we just ignore those because they're not some brown mud person? Would you like to discuss MK ultra or is that off limits?

Which one? Google, Facebook or Twitter? In what way are those "monopolizing public discourse"? Alex can publish shit on his website, on Voat, on Pawoo, Neocities, 4chan, Zig Forums, SMS, Telegram, or even yell into a megaphone (not that he would even need to.)
Those websites are popular, but they're not "monopolizing public discourse." Holy shit the amount of mental gimnastics you do.
They hold the authority to host or not to host content submitted to their websites. The same way a random restaurant holds the authority to attend or not a guy without shoes and shirt.
Yes, or you do not believe in private property? Are you implying Facebook, Google and Twitter should be nationalized? How socialist of you.
Furthermore, if americans cannot distinguish between companies, the government, free speech and laws; there's something fucked with your society and education system and you've got far more to worry about than the Youtube videos of some schizo.

When 99% of the public discourse happens on social media it's monpolizing it. Do you ignore how many news stories come out of social media now? Is the president using it as his primary communicate platform now public enough for you?

Nobody is forcing anybody to use the big social media places. If I don't like those platforms, I will start my little newsletter and distribute them in my neighborhood to spread my message. If the president is saying something that affects me, my acquaintances are most likely to tell me.

Ummm sorry but no sweetie.

Attached: disagree.png (846x1024, 461.95K)

Someone else being required to use it to inform you by proxy is still someone else using it.

It's funny how obvious you people are. It's not even the terrible memes you post but your entire speech patterns show your true colours.

You're clearly from /intl/

I don't even know what that board is. I only frequent Zig Forums and /hisparefugio/.
But hey, nice to see your only retort is "you're a le ebil jew cummunist!"

What does this have to do with Zig Forums?

Nothing. This is a political thread about infowars and censorship.

I agree fellow Zig Forums poster.

What other people choose to do with their time is not my problem. If I know that they choose to subscribe to the president with Twitter, then I'm sure that his crazy antics will pop up in our interactions.

Please define this group.

Kill yourself. That is simply not how free speech works.

Anyone that thinks the democratic party is center rightwing.

The gay community.

And Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.

>Because a lot of restaurants will open a can and put it on. Like our sauce — we harvest a whole crop of organic tomatoes — 10 tons of tomatoes every year. Can them all, store them in the basement, have like a harvest party when it gets loaded in.

metroweekly.com/2015/04/from-scratch-james-alefantis/

The Democratic party is center right. Your "left" politicians would be persecuted if they were in a left country.

On the first photo there is a guy whose free speech right was attacked. On the second photo we have a guy whose videos are no longer hosted by YouTube. That's the point, what happened to Alex Jones is not censorship.
Hell, Alex Jones was suspended 7 days by Twitter, yet the Infowars account is still functioning. You guys are a just whining.

...

Almost but not quite.
That's the main idea.

But what we have right now:
That's a crime.

The soy way.

You've convinced me. What does Bill Gates eat for breakfast? What's Torvalds's favourite sex position? Those are tech related too.
In fact, television is digital now and that's tech, so let's make a thread about Game of Thrones.
Moron.

Exactly. Now write algorithm to determine Torvalds' favorite sex position from data available on LKML/other sources and post results here.
Good idea. Post some screenshots and make thread about recreating VFX from scratch using OpenGL.

Yeah, you'll notice those things have their own avenues to publish. Alex Jones can do the same. You are not entitled to service from YT, spotify, or any other online service.

Because I have to compensate for pindick brainlets like you.

If you haven't figured out the collusion between these platforms to promote a common agenda and the simple fact that, between them, they have monopolised their own domain of what comprises "discourse" social media then you might be better off finding some windows to lick clean rather than posting here.

go back to /g/ you fucking faggot

Politics are just methods to manage the society in the best way possible (assuming you defined “best”). Both “right”, “left”, “center”, “25%” or whatever want you to think that there are “sides” to take but that's because they’re political ideologies: their solution to everything is to rewire the human brain to fit their morals. All ideologies are just (((their))) psyops.

There is no point in arguing with the left about free speech. They will ether invent new language or alter definitions to fit their actions or they will tell you outright they just don't give a fuck. Besides, it doesn't really matter if they agree or not, because even if they were onboard with passing some laws or trust busting, it wouldn't have a lasting effect. You can't solve a technical problem with a political solution, at least not in the long term. These tech giants are snakes with more money than god, no matter what the law says they will find a way to do what ever they want. The only solution is to create decentralized platforms which are resistant to censorship and manipulation. Unfortunatly that is the easy part. The hard part is popularizing them among normies so they aren't occupied solely by conservatives concerned about getting the alex treatment, violent extremists, pedophiles and the occasional schizophrenic.

Ah yes because right wing means whatever the left thought 20 years ago. You know how fucking left wing republicans are?

Attached: 3f58facda8c432a0ef9fdd3a6c63b598f04335c413a3590973cf61b946f0950c.png (1386x699 640.58 KB, 143.99K)

I admit this thread is turning into Zig Forums trash with some idiot SJWs whinging about "denying people speech isn't censorship" (it takes a special kind of orwellian doublethink to achieve this mindset), nu/pol/tards whinging about jews and leftists (fuck off, retards), and other shitposting morons who think they are on >>>/g/ or shit (go to >>>/g/ already and stop shitting up Zig Forums), but digital free speech is a time-honored Zig Forums concern. If you think the EFF and EPIC, for instance, are not Zig Forums-related either then you have a poor understanding of the interplay between politics and technology.

They never claimed infowars.com was being taken down, you false flagging, scarecrow-constructing kike.

gets my noggin' joggin'

I don't agree with what you have to say about freedom of speech and would like to shoot you for it. You should find this acceptable, as it is a consequence of your speech.

did you reply to the wrong post or something?

Attached: wtfamireading.jpg (297x169, 11.57K)