I have been featured
on the Andy Peacher Show on Horizon Talk Radio, see: https://www.spreaker.com/user/hori/ben-emlyn-jones-conspiracy-theorist-and-.
And: https://www.bitchute.com/video/di5wABFiSlPk/.
Subjects discussed include: Pubs reopen after the lockdown, Prince Philip dies, sacred geometry in our cities and much much more.
And: https://www.bitchute.com/video/di5wABFiSlPk/.
Subjects discussed include: Pubs reopen after the lockdown, Prince Philip dies, sacred geometry in our cities and much much more.
27 comments:
Ben, you are billed as a (ahem!) "free speech extremist". How come then you've blocked lots of people on Facebook, your HPANWO forum and other platforms who you disagree with? Including me BTW.
Is it a case of - free speech for me but not thee?
Nonsense, "Seb" or whatever your real name is! I block people for one reason alone: antisocial conduct.
Not true Ben. Anyway I'm sure the left and other censors use that excuse as well. How do you define "antisocial conduct"?
No, let's be more precise. What did you actually say to me just before I blocked you?...
Few years ago Ben but I'm asking the questions. You don't like skeps challenging you so you block em
When I have I ever blocked a person for calmly and politely and challenging me? Example please!
You admit that block people then? How is this congruent with your claim to be a "free speech extremist"?
I admit I block people who are rude to me. Is that unreasonable? But what you said was: "You don't like skeps challenging you so you block em". I'd like you to provide me with an example of THAT, not me blocking somebody who is rude, but somebody who just challenges me, okay?
You are a hypocrite my dear
I'm waiting for you to produce just one piece of evidence, just one example, MY dear. If you can either post it now or apologize.
Lots of evidence Ben and you know you've blocked people ONLY because you disagree and moreover when people make you look like a silly-billy. I dismissed UFOs few years ago and gave a long list of highly scientific reasons and you promptly blocked me. I know you blocked someone when they scoffed at your 'child slaves on mars' theory.
You have a track record of this, do you not?
Let me get this straight: You contacted me with your disagreements about UFO's and I blocked you BECAUSE you disagreed? For NO OTHER REASON? Is that right?
As for the child slaves of Mars article and video, could you give me more details of the situation?
It's always the same old broken record with the Sebs of this world: non sequiturs mashed in with a helping of cognitive dissonance and a sprinkling of scientism. Me, I'd rather a bowl of HPANWO yoghurt :).
I'll make you some with extra grapes, Lenny! I'm still waiting for "Seb" to provide evidence back up his accusaytion.
Ben, I see your little attack dog with the hilarious nom de guerre is now having a go. Suggest he looks up what 'non sequitor' means as this does not apply to my comments. I have been consistent with my original point and I have provided evidence.
Ben, you are far more polite than your followers, I will say that old chum.
You claim to be a "free speech extremist" Ben but surely you can see that blocking people even if they insult you is hardly consistent with "free speech extremism"
Really? So if somebody pursues you all over the Net calling you endless rude names, it's actually an infringement of their free speech to block them??? Okay, in your view, what WOULD constitute a justifiable reason for using the block functions?...
Also, I'm still waiting for you to produce actual evidence of me blocking a person just for disagreeing with them. Unless you've decided to skip over that point and fall back to this new position of yours: that even blocking people who are insulting is taking away their right to free speech.
Not a "new position" at all Ben, but I have merely developed the polite discussion we are having. That is how discourse works Ben.
I can see that despite my being polite you are acting in a bellicose manner and playing the victim somewhat. Wouldn't be surprised if you now block me.
As for your comments about your being abused, then yes if people are harassing you all over the Internet well that is different. I'm not talking about that though. You are polarising everything, taking things to extremes. I'm talking about a harmless ribbing or banter that you have used as an excuse to censor people. That's what I'm talking about Ben
No, I'm not being bellicose. And you've done nothing so far that warrants a blocking. I'm simply asking for you to be more specific. Surely you have examples of me engaging in this "harmless ribbing or banter" after which I blocked people. If I've really done what you say then I'll apologize. Are you Chris Reinart by any chance?
Seb said: " Suggest he looks up what 'non sequitor' means". LOL.
At least get the spelling right :), otherwise you may end up sounding stupid. Although, in fairness, it is a bit late for that.
Oh how we laughed - to Ben's little attack dog with the side splitting humorous name, well please make the
most of my typo. Rather make a typo than use a word out of context like you. For your information I have degrees coming out of my ears and almost certainly educated to a higher standards than you.
Ben you once, said I think "no one has the right not be offended" apropos of free speech so please live by your noble words
Of course I stand by that. However, you said earlier that I was blocking people for disagreeing with me. So that is a different point. I have no memory of doing such a thing. I regularly interact with people who disagree with me. Show me where I wavered in that respect.
Ben, if I am incorrect I apologise. I perceived though that disagreement/robust challenging of your contentious opinions in the past and concomitant mick taking, led to censorship by you of which you used the excuse of "abusive behaviour" which seemed to be a smokescreen to block when you had been boxed into a corner so to speak.
Now you're admitting that you block people who offend you which has made me think about this position and to challenge it. We have to stand by our principles even we are on the receiving end
no problem :-) I can't think of a time I have blocked somebody for saying: "Ben, you're wrong about this because..." I even don't mind somebody teasing me a bit, like Steve Mumbling does. I do block people who call me insulting names etc though. I don't see that as relating to their free speech.
Not sure if my last comment got through but I said I am sorry if my perceptions not correct. I always felt you blocked people who got the better of you in debates when they took the mick. The smokescreen being the insulting comments.
As I say, if this isn't true I am sorry I got the wrong end of the stick. Being a "free speech extremist" though should mean that with the exception of very extreme circumstances, you censor/block no one
No problem :-) The circumstances when I block people are always extreme I believe. Literally when somebody is saying hateful things to me personally. Abuse in other words. I don't believe I have ever blocked somebody just for getting the better of me in debates. If you can find such an occasion then I will owe you an apology. But I doubt you will find one.
OK Ben, you win, I can't locate a case but only because I forget the details as a while back now as I have already said, and obviously a difficult task.
I take your points and hopefully we can part as friends. Cheers. Seb
No problem :-) Of course.
Thanks for your honesty.
All the best.
Ben
Post a Comment