The Truth vs. Alex Jones

I tried to stay away from political discussions and concepts because I am not comfortable with being in that environment but Alex Jones really is one absolute egocentric and self-centered a person. The Truth vs. Alex Jones is a pretty good documentary about how Jones misinformation about the Sandy Hook shootings have damaged the victim's families and the insanity and craziness of Jones himself.

With interesting discussions explored, the documentary offers interesting and sometimes, frustrating discussions and scenarios that helped bring forth the information and the situations to light. Including some good uses of music and emotional atmospheres throughout. Filmmaker Dan Reed, previously made Leaving Neverland which I didn't like due to it's poor structure and annoying pacing, improves his direction with how he handles the materials and the standards of not being too exploitative nor offensive to it's subject and victims.

There are some moments that are pretty terrifying regarding some subjects, certain individuals and Jones himself as they perfectly capture how America has become fundamentally broken and damaged. While the structure is the typical HBO style of documentaries and there are some topics I kinda of wish they would explore a little more, I think this documentary does a good job on exploring it's subject.

Not easy to watch for some but I recommend it.

Alex Jones has asserted that the lawsuits against him concerning his bogus claims that the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Dec, 2012 was a massive hoax violate his Free Speech rights. He has also claimed that the removal of his videos which made the same claims on Youtube or Facebook also violated his First Amendment Rights. Or if someone challenges his views, that's also a violation of his First Amendment rights. Wrong.

Here's what the First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;

So freedom of speech is about prohibiting any government of the US, from a city council to the US Congress, passing a law to prohibit freedom of speech and/or press. This does not mean that a private company such as Youtube or Facebook are somehow prohibited from denying someone their point of view on anything at anytime. In the case of Alex Jones, if individuals find his views objectionable and/or are harmed by them, that somehow they are violating his rights to speech if they protest or file a lawsuit. Yes, most free speech is protected from government intervention but they may be subject to defamation lawsuits if proved to be false and/or harmful.

This documentary is about the defamation lawsuits and trials against Alex Jones and InfoWars who repeatedly for now going on 10+ years claimed that the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary was somehow a hoax and the grieving parents were actors, and the city of Sandy Hook staged the event. And if anyone was harmed by his assertions, they have no case because Jones is protected by the First Amendment. Again wrong.

Yes, an individual does have the right to propagate just about anything they desire without government hindrance, more or less, but there are limitations including injunctions as a result of due process of law. For example, yelling "Fire" in a packed movie theater when there is no fire is not protected under the First Amendment. Also, anyone making false claims can be subject to a civil lawsuit and/or trial if they propagate falsehoods and people are harmed by such propagation. There are yet others such as leaking classified government documents. Daniel Ellsberg who leaked the Pentagon Papers was going to be tried for the leak in a criminal case which was eventually dismissed. (I'm sounding like someone with a law degree!)

The parents of the slain children at Sandy Hook Elementary filed two defamation lawsuits against Alex Jones when for 10 years he claimed that no child actually died at SH Elem late 2012, the parents were actors, and the activities of law enforcement and EMT's were all staged. Why? Because, according to Jones, it was a left-wing hoax designed to motivate the US Government to pass laws to take away people's guns.

In fact, in the wake of the shooting, a loophole in the law about gun control was put up for a vote by the US Congress, insisted upon by then President Barack Obama. Five Republican Senators who were pressured by the NRA and other pro-gun groups voted against it, fearing retaliation in a primary. So, even if Jones was correct about the shooting being a hoax to promote the ultimate prohibition of guns, which of course it wasn't, the "hoax" failed miserably.

These parents for over 10 years have been harassed, being accused of being liars and at worst experiencing death threats. I know one parent continually moved under false names and was still "found" by conspiracy fantasists. One of the most poignant moments of the doc is when one of the parents talked to someone who noticed her pendant as a memorial to her child. She was asked about it and the mother explained it was for her child who died at Sandy Hook. To which this person said "They said it was a hoax" (I'm paraphrasing). I would be really curious who this "they" that were referring to. Obviously most likely Alex Jones on his InfoWars.

One item which should be noted but hasn't actually been addressed: it is a serious crime, a felony no less, to impersonate a police officer or a government official. So Jones was also alleging that the police officers and government officials who arrived on the scene are all actors. If so, Jones should have pressed that these people also be arrested.

I think the term "conspiracy theory" should be substituted with a new term: "Conspiracy Fantasy". There are conspiracy theories which have proved to be true, such as the Watergate scandal which began as a theory based on the reporting of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. A real theory is based on concrete evidence, only the "theory" designation means that there is no means to prove something to be absolutely true or could be refuted with new evidence. When government officials under then President Nixon admitted to the Watergate break-in and the ensuing cover-up, the "theory' became fact. The Watergate Scandal is no longer regarded as a conspiracy theory but a fact.

Jones did not create a theory about the Sandy Hook shooting based on hardcore investigation and evidence. He didn't interview the parents, he didn't interview the police officers and government officials who arrived on the scene. So far as I know he never even visited Sandy Hook in Connecticut. He concocted a "fantasy conspiracy" and then found tiny bits and pieces to somehow prove that Sandy Hook never happened.

One of the saddest moments of the incident was Robbie Parker's speech a day after the shooting. His daughter Emilie was one of the slain children. But it ended up being one of the nuttiest pieces of "evidence" offered by Jones. When Parker went up to the microphone he was shocked to see all the reporters and onlookers. He had never been in such a spotlight before. He then made a brief chuckle out of embarrassment. (I have been a performing musician for several decades and I know what he was going through. I still get nervous when I get out on stage.)

But Jones propagated on InfoWars that Parker's "chuckle" proved he was in fact an actor who never had a daughter. One question I've always had for Jones: if these people were all trained actors as he claimed, where did they get their training? What degrees had they earned? AFI in Los Angeles? Juilliard? Yale School of Drama? Had they appeared in theater, commercials, TV shows or even movies?

If Jones was really a diligent reporter and journalist, wouldn't he feel obligated to find which acting schools and work these people had on their resumes since he claimed there were "trained actors". Parker in particular claimed he had never been in front of an audience before his speech. He was just a grief-stricken father trying to cope with the loss of his daughter. Even though it goes without saying: he is not an actor. And Jones is not a journalist but a political entertainer. Period.

Within the first 6 minutes of the documentary that point is made clear when Alex Jones is trying to force another group not to expose the facts behind lies he extolls so he can sell a product.

There has been a long history of profiteers but with the speed of communications we have now, it can be more far-reaching. My biggest hope, is when these fraudsters are exposed not just they but they people that helped support their lies also have to pay or go to jail.

Hiding behind the First Amendment when you know you are lying does not give you freedom of speech.

The documentary is worth watching though to see all the details of the lunacy that was exposed.

One of the biggest ironies in this whole tragedy is Alex Jones claiming the Sandy Hook families faked and acted the whole thing - when Jones himself is just an actor. And not a very good one.

He is a charlatan who preys on a vulnerable audience to make money.

This is a great documentary which shows the rise of fringe groups that have sucked in a group of people who doesn't even believe in basic science. A decent percentage of the population really needs to grow up and learn from this whole situation.

Grifters will always grift but they can't if they don't have a market.

I just feel so sorry for all the families and victims who lost everything and those poor children who were robbed of their future while a redneck continues to con people without any remorse or guilt for what he is doing or what he has done.

It's one thing to question authority and official explanations of highly public events; it's something else entirely to portray them in a wholly falsified light, especially when done so in a ridiculing manner that causes tremendous personal pain. Such is what happened when conspiracy theorist broadcaster Alex Jones fanatically contended that the December 2012 mass shooting at Connecticut's Sandy Hook Elementary School was a staged false flag event aimed at prompting the seizure of the private citizens' firearms, essentially gutting the guarantees of the Second Amendment. Jones vociferously claimed that the event didn't happen as reported in the mainstream media, that it was all pulled off with actors and that no one was killed. He openly mocked the public grieving of devastated parents through a relentless campaign of blatant disinformation, effectively enabling him to convince nearly a quarter of the nation's population into believing his story. Finally, after many anguishing years (including unbridled derision, public ridicule and death threats from disbelieving fanatics and hecklers), those who lost loved ones fought back, filing defamation suits in Jones's home state of Texas and in Connecticut, site of the tragedy. Documentarian Dan Reed's latest feature chronicles the events of this troubling story with no-holds-barred candor, capturing the searing pain of the Sandy Hook families, Jones's cartoonish out-of-control bluster and extensive courtroom footage of the two trials. Shot over four years, the filmmaker effectively captures the crazed ravings of a two-faced, delirious conman whose self-serving self-promotion efforts made P. T. Barnum look like a rank amateur by comparison. But what's perhaps most unsettling here is the film's uncompromising depiction of someone who honestly believed he could publicly say whatever he wanted through today's powerful, far-reaching communications technology - regardless of its truthfulness - and get away with it, a truly potent cautionary tale for our times. "The Truth vs. Alex Jones" poignantly reminds us of the precious nature of freedom of speech and the need to protect it, especially where matters of responsibility are concerned. Indeed, the First Amendment may allow us to express ourselves, but it doesn't give us license to lie.