By James F. Tracy
Probing Alt Media’s Most Prominent Limited Hangout
On February 12 2015 alternative media personality Alex Jones mused how Lenny Pozner might have been behind an elaborate plan to “shut down” his alternative news outlet’s YouTube channels. Jones vigorously advocated for free speech, arguing that Pozner was using copyright as a means to undermine his organization’s (overall tentative) journalistic
inquiries on how the image of Sandy Hook victim Noah Pozner appeared in mass mediated photos of public mournings following the December 2014 mass shooting in Peshawar Pakistan.
This is “a reign of terror on free speech,” Jones fumed.
If they can do this to us they can do it to anybody. This copyright notification, if successful, will take down the [Alex Jones Youtube] channel, and already we’re unable to upload over 15 minute videos and are in what they call probation–guilty until proven innocent right now … And, again, if they can do this to us they can do this to anybody … The H-O-N-R or “honor” Network, Lenny Pozner, who reportedly lost his son there, came in and filed a copyright claim for us showing a BBC news article. You can’t do that. For those who don’t know how copyright works …
Hot n’heavy Jones characteristically proceeded to lecture the audience on the intricacies of copyright law, offering various examples from his alleged experiences fighting against such censorship. Yet as YouTube researcher MattyD4Truth observes in the video below, Jones never revisited the attack in subsequent programs.
Below is a sound file of Jones’ February 12, 2015 rant.
Alex Jones Show Excerpt 2/12/15
A few months later the HONR Network, which research suggests operate unlawfully as a non-profit organization in Florida and Connecticut, filed a similar copyright claim against memoryholeblog.com. When James Tracy sought to obtain documentation from Pozner and his HONR Network to corroborate the claim, it was suggested in mainstream press accounts that Tracy was “harassing” the (Jewish) parents of Noah Pozner.
Pozner’s harassment of Jones came just two months after the Pozner clan’s intense attack upon the December 2014 release of Independent Media Solidarity’s blockbuster documentary, We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook, a tour-de-force produced on a shoestring budget. At that time Infowars’ Rob Dew even provided a platform for IMS to contest the censorship.
[The post below originally appeared at memoryholeblog.com on February 13, 2015]
Lenny Pozner’s HONR organization has filed a copyright claim against Alex Jones’ Infowars that jeopardizes the alternative news outlet’s YouTube access.
Pozner allegedly lost his son Noah Pozner in the December 14, 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown Connecticut.
In early January 2015 Infowars–among the most popular alternative news sites in the world–displayed a BBC article on one of its main YouTube channels during one of its reports. The story included exact photos of the same Noah Pozner being displayed in the aftermath of the December 16, 2014 school shooting in Peshawar Pakistan. BBC later admitted the photo in its Peshawar massacre coverage was of Pozner yet refused to investigate the incongruity.
In December 2014 Pozner’s HONR group filed numerous copyright claims with YouTube in an effort to censor the We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook documentary produced by Peter Klein and Independent Media Solidarity. Despite Pozner’s efforts Mr. Klein estimates that We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook has been viewed more than three million times as other YouTube channels carried the documentary in defiance of Pozner’s bogus claims of copyright infringement.
On his February 12 broadcast Jones vowed to fight Pozner’s claims, asserting that such efforts are not legally sound and constitute an attack against everyone’s free speech.
The post of the February 12, 2015 edition uploaded to The Alex Jones Channel has since been removed by the channel’s owner.
Nevertheless, the February 12, 2015 broadcast was posted on the YouTube Channel of a Jones devotee.
Along these lines, YouTube researcher MattyD4Truth questioned Infowars’ curious self-censorship of the Pozner episode. This further suggests how the entire Infowars “operation” is a limited hangout.
In late 2015 Infowars was again caught censoring news of Amazon.com’s ban of the Jim Fetzer-edited volume, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook. As Fellowship of the Minds pointed out:
After 1 month of strong sales, Amazon suddenly banned the new book, Nobody Died At Sandy Hook. The book was pulled from Amazon.com, then deleted from customers’ Kindles.
After Amazon pulled the book, Alex Jones’ InfoWars noticed – and published this article exposing Amazon’s book ban. Here’s a screenshot of the article:
To draw attention to their article, InfoWars tweeted a link:
But within hours after that article was published, InfoWars suddenly deleted it from the Web. The InfoWars article simply vanished – without explanation.
This left onlookers wondering who removed the InfoWars article – and why.
Fortunately, some web services save copies of material. Thus, the deleted InfoWars article was recovered – in its entirety – from a copy stored by Google Cache:
As folks reacted to this curious censorship (by Amazon; then by InfoWars), the Google Cache copy of the InfoWars article was suddenly deleted as well – replaced with this “404 Error” message.
Here is a screenshot of the deleted InfoWars article, “Sandy Hook Truth Book Banned By Amazon,” at Google Cache prior to deletion (Meme text added):
So, we have:
1. Amazon banning Nobody Died at Sandy Hook while continuing to sell 19 other Sandy Hook books.
2. InfoWars writing and publishing an article about Amazon’s banning of that book.
3. InfoWars suddenly deleting their own article the same day it was published.
4. InfoWars (or some other party) asking Google Cache to remove all traces of the deleted InfoWars article by scrubbing the cached version from Google servers.
All that effort makes no sense – unless the government is hiding something. Why ban the book to begin with? Why delete the InfoWar’s article about the book ban? Further, why scrub the article from even the cache, so that there is no longer even a trace of the article on the Web?
Jones has fallen completely silent on both the copyright run-in with Pozner and the retracted reportage of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook‘s Amazon ban. Why is this? Moreover, why does one of the most successful so-called “alternative media” venues pull its punches and misinform audiences on incidents including the Sandy Hook massacre, the Boston Marathon bombing, or the Orlando nightclub shooting? Why did he send personnel to 2015 Roanoke Virginia hoax shooting to “prove” the event took place? Why, after all, doesn’t Infowars return Wolfgang Halbig’s calls?
Here’s what conservative commentator Reverend Ted Pike observed about the radio host’s motivations back in 2009 when Pike was campaigning against hate crimes legislation intended to undermine major US constitutional provisions.
Last year, prior to passage of the federal hate crimes bill, Alex Jones, after years of ignoring my requests to allow me to warn his huge audience of the hate bill threat, finally put me on his June 8th program.
As I was waiting to begin the broadcast, Jones told me off the air that he had heard me the previous morning on Joyce Riley’s program criticizing Jewish supremacists as authors of the hate bill. He said what he was about to tell me was “off the record.” He said his broadcasting empire has “gotten so big” with many mainline affiliates that he cannot afford to lose those stations by criticizing Jews. “But I’ve got to mention ADL behind the hate bill!” I objected. “ADL is okay,” he said. “Talk about ADL all you want, but we can’t talk about Jews specifically.” He then told me that, with this understanding, there would be many opportunities for me to be on his program, especially as new legislative threats emerged. Having said that, we were on the air. I did go after ADL and, fortunately, did not encounter any time in which I would have been morally bound to become more specific.
Yet I felt violated. I had experienced raw censorship in action, by a national talk show host who touts himself (and is believed by millions) as delivering only the truth — whatever the cost or controversy.
Jones put me on again Oct 14th for fifteen minutes. Yet, he was not true to his promise of future interviews, even as I repeatedly left him messages warning of more ADL legislation, such as ENDA and the cyber-bullying bill. Evidently, Jones was as uneasy about having me on as I was about operating under his gag order.
This is what limited hangouts are all about. Lenny and Veronique Pozner have been vigorously promoted in Jewish and mainstream media alike (e.g. here, here, here, here, and here) as “the parents of the little Jewish boy Noah Pozner” who perished at Sandy Hook. Even though there are numerous “families” involved in the Sandy Hook event who are ostensibly Jewish, this family has without question been promoted as the event’s token Hebrews.*
The by now all-too-familiar message is that anyone who questions the veracity of their identity, claims, and overall story exposes her or himself to severe character assassination via one or more epithets–“hateful,” “racist,” “anti-semitic,” or the most severe discursive dagger, “Holocaust denier.” No one recognizes this better than “Lonesome Jones” and his handlers. And few dare call him on such censorship given the power of his platform and ability to provide authors and alt media figures much-sought-after exposure. It’s the perfect cover.
“The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the media,” CIA Director William Colby once noted. And such “alt media” personalities are highly significant, perhaps even manufactured whole cloth by the intelligence community, as some observers (e.g. here and here). Pike’s remarks alongside the Pozner episode outline a pattern of behavior that might help to explain why, despite all the bluster about “defeating the new world order” and “defending the republic” Jones simply won’t embrace the truth, why he vigorously defends and promotes corporate media narratives of bogus events, and overall why his operation might be appropriately deemed today’s most prominent and far-reaching “limited hangout.”
*While Dr. Kahleel’s NoDisinfo has been rightly criticized for seeing Zionist conspirators around almost every corner, his analysis of this important geo-ethnic angle of Newtown event is novel and worthy of consideration.