How Alex Jones and Mike Cernovich (and their listeners) became "Useful Idiot" apologists for Assad

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,487
20,023
146
In my ongoing exposure of the right-wing propaganda cult, I bring you this:

Before you scream BIAS! understand that the Economist is center right.

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21720627-trail-damascus-alex-jones-and-mike-cernovich-how-pair-self-publicists?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/usefulidiotsupdatedhowapairofselfpublicistswoundupasapologistsforassad

How a pair of self-publicists wound up as apologists for Assad
The trail from Damascus to Alex Jones and Mike Cernovich

20170415_USP005_0.jpg


Apr 15th 2017
A COUPLE of days after the chemical weapons attack in Syria, some Twitter users in America began sharing a theory: the pictures had been concocted as a pretext for launching a missile attack. The notion was endorsed by Alex Jones, who runs a website called Infowars, which has successfully spread the idea that the Sandy Hook school shooting in Connecticut was a hoax and that Hillary Clinton was involved in a paedophile ring run from a pizzeria in Washington, DC. Mr Jones was until recently a fervent supporter of Donald Trump. Campaigning last year, candidate Trump returned the favour: “Your reputation is amazing, I will not let you down,” Mr Trump said. Now, it seems, he has.

The story of how Mr Jones fastened onto his Syria conspiracy has been pieced together by Ben Nimmo and Donara Barojan of the Atlantic Council, a think-tank. It begins in Syria, where a pro-Assad website published an article claiming that those who came to the aid of the attack’s victims were not wearing protective gloves, and therefore it must be a hoax. It also claimed that a TV station had inadvertently announced plans to cover the strike before it had taken place. This idea was then picked up by several websites, including the Centre for Research on Globalisation, a hub for conspiracy theories and fake stories.

From there it was a short hop to American conspiracy sites, such as Mr Jones’s Infowars, which claimed the whole thing was a “false-flag” operation funded by George Soros. Mike Cernovich, another conspiracy theorist, took a similar line and spread the phrase #SyriaHoax. It was given a bump by computer programs used to boost stories on social media (one Twitter account used #SyriaHoax 155 times). A foreign government might have had a hand in this: the Senate has heard testimony that Russia used this technique to spread fake news stories during last year’s election. Since April 6th, #SyriaHoax has been used in 192,000 tweets—85% of which originated in the United States. The hashtag reached 13.6m Twitter users in a single hour according to Keyhole, a social-media analytics firm. And that is how some self-publicists, posing as American patriots, became apologists for the Assad regime, which drops poison gas on children.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Im trying to figure out why I care who an apologist is for Assad? Is this supposed to motivate me to get ready for our 4th failed war since 9-11?

The United States has killed roughly 1000 civilians in airstrikes over the past month. But I am supposed to get outraged over unsubstantiated claims of a Chemical attack by the Assad regime?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,487
20,023
146
Im trying to figure out why I care who an apologist is for Assad? Is this supposed to motivate me to get ready for our 4th failed war since 9-11?

The United States has killed roughly 1000 civilians in airstrikes over the past month. But I am supposed to get outraged over unsubstantiated claims of a Chemical attack by the Assad regime?

May I ask, by what standard are you making the claim they are "unsubstantiated?"

Because objectively, multiple world governments have overwhelming evidence it was his he and planes who delivered them.

Anyone can say "nuh uh!." But at some point, that just devolves into nothing is verifiable fact anymore and only what you claim is real, is real.

So what standard are we using for fact?
 

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,390
469
126
Alex Jones certainly advances stories without evidence all the time, but saying it follows that he's an apologist for Assad is your narrative, which means you've fallen into the trap of projecting.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,487
20,023
146
Alex Jones certainly advances stories without evidence all the time, but saying it follows that he's an apologist for Assad is your narrative, which means you've fallen into the trap of projecting.

Being fooled or voluntarily going along with the false flag story makes him either a willful, or unwitting apologist by the very act of spreading the story.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Being fooled or voluntarily going along with the false flag story makes him either a willful, or unwitting apologist by the very act of spreading the story.

Apologist- I don't believe that word means what you think it does.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,487
20,023
146
Apologist- I don't believe that word means what you think it does.

Definition of apologist
  1. : one who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something
Now, tell me how spreading the "Assad is innocent" fake story is not being either a willing or unwitting apologist?
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
30,137
31,132
136
Definition of apologist
  1. : one who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something
Now, tell me how spreading the "Assad is innocent" fake story is not being either a willing or unwitting apologist?

I would go with unwitting stooge.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
May I ask, by what standard are you making the claim they are "unsubstantiated?"

Because objectively, multiple world governments have overwhelming evidence it was his he and planes who delivered them.

Anyone can say "nuh uh!." But at some point, that just devolves into nothing is verifiable fact anymore and only what you claim is real, is real.

So what standard are we using for fact?

Eh because warmongering govts around the world and Drumpf make a claim we jump on board? Outside of relying on innuendo and that Assad is a dictator what proof have they provided? We bombed the base days after this event. Nowhere near time to conduct any meaningful investigation.

Meanwhile we bomb schools and hospitals and drop a MOAB to kill 35 ISIS members. Our credibility in this is low.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,242
14,244
136
Out of curiosity, why does Jones endorse Trump's wanting to ban/limit Muslim immigration? Jones apparently doesn't believe that Muslims have ever conducted terrorist attacks. I'm pretty sure he's called every major attack a false flag operation. So he must think Muslims are harmless. Yet he supports a ban of Muslim immigration. I guess it doesn't matter to him that his conspiracy theories contradict his ideological views. Then again, contradictions have never been much of a concern for him either way.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,156
55,707
136
Eh because warmongering govts around the world and Drumpf make a claim we jump on board? Outside of relying on innuendo and that Assad is a dictator what proof have they provided? We bombed the base days after this event. Nowhere near time to conduct any meaningful investigation.

Meanwhile we bomb schools and hospitals and drop a MOAB to kill 35 ISIS members. Our credibility in this is low.

What standard of evidence would make you think these claims are substantiated and how would this evidence be obtained?