Sunday, September 27, 2009

After nearly 2 whole days, Prison Planet removes threatening cop-killing comments


Why did it take 2 days? Why was the person who posted the comments allowed to post multiple posts? Were they banned?

by Larry Simons
September 27, 2009

Well, I have no idea who tipped off Prison Planet that I ran a story exposing their blatant hypocrisy of denying that their own website does not allow hateful rhetoric to be posted in their comment threads.

This would be the very same type of hateful rhetoric they denied allowing on their site in April, which many websites and news outlets claimed influenced white supremacist Richard Poplawski to gun down 3 and injure 2 Pittsburgh Police officers.

Apparently Prison Planet has been to my website [well I actually know they have] and have only removed the recent comments left by a person named “deathbyrevolt” [who threatened to kill police officers] because I captured screen shots of the threatening comments.

The three comments by “deathbyrevolt” were all posted on September 25 between 8:30am and 11:35am. Keep in mind, these were the only three I found before writing my story. I simply just stopped at three. There may have been more, but three is all I needed.

I checked many times yesterday to see if the comments were still there. They were. I went to my site today and noticed that Prison Planet webmaster Paul Watson had been to my site at 8:12 am and spent 6 minutes there. I went to Prison Planet to see if the threatening cop killing comments were still there. Presto! They were gone. Shocker.

So you can see, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Prison Planet really did delete the comments. Here are the before-and-after screen shots of all 3 posts. Like I said, the threatening comments had been on the Prison Planet site for nearly a full two days, plenty of time to inspire and influence any number of nutballs.

*Notice the before-and-after entries [above and below the threatening comments] in both the "original" and "after deletion" posts are the same

The first of the 3 comments, posted at 8:30am on 9-25-09, under the story, “Military Attacks American Citizens With Sound Weapons & Tear Gas At G20”:

Original


After deletion

(click to enlarge)

The second comment, posted at 10:22am on 9-25-09, under the story, “Watch the First Amendment Die On YouTube”:

Original


After deletion

(click to enlarge)

The third comment, posted at 11:35am on 9-25-09, under the story, “WeAreChange Schools Pittsburgh Police On Constitution”:

Original


After deletion

(click to enlarge)

Big deal. They deleted the comments, but not right away. These comments should have been removed instantly and “deathbyrevolt” banned immediately, but it is obvious that the only motivating factor in Prison Planet removing the comments was being exposed by a website that they have already banned, but yet have not refuted: Real Truth Online.

The removal of the comments will do little to extinguish responsibility from Prison Planet should another nutball shoot and kill more Pittsburgh cops. I have the screen shots. If more cops get gunned down in Pittsburgh, a simple email to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette or any national news outlet with the original screen shots attached will be more than enough evidence to deem Prison Planet guilty as charged.

19 comments:

mr truth said...

prison planet should be outraged over this. alex should hold those who have allowed this to go on responsible and fire them imediately. alex you may not run your sites but you are responsible. get some one with integrity to run them. RTO is always the truth. get with the program.

the_last_name_left said...

Well.........no..........an inciter doesn't pull the trigger.

So there is a difference.

But........what is that difference?

What if someone wouldn't pull the trigger without the incitement?

The census bureau dude was lynched the other day - and had FED written on his corpse by the killer/s.

Who is responsible for that?

How "anti-federal" do you have to be before you're responsible for that murder?

Larry said...

"Well.........no..........an inciter doesn't pull the trigger.

So there is a difference."

Another case of "foot-in-mouth-itis". You blamed Alex Jones for the Pittsburgh cop shooting---although HE did not pull the trigger. NOW you say there's a difference! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Do you hae multi-personalities?? Or just retarded??

the_last_name_left said...

There IS a difference between incitement and committing a murder........

Neither are guilt-free. But they are not perfectly equivalent things.

It's a matter of degree.

Larry said...

I will REPEAT "YOU SAID Jones was RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PITTSBURGH COP SHOOTING---------NOW you say there's a difference between inticing and pulling the trigger??? I tell ya--you really DO have reading comprehension problems. How did your response (above) address my comment? IT DIDNT. The comment was completely IGNORED.

the_last_name_left said...

L: YOU SAID Jones was RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PITTSBURGH COP SHOOTING

Wrong. Poplawski did the killing.

I pointed out that Poplawski's views were very similar to those of Alex Jones. As Jones and Prisonplanet and all the rest spend their professional lives filling peoples' minds with the stuff Poplawski believed in, then yes, there's some issues of Jones (and conspiracism) being responsible (to a degree).

My concern was less to do with the extent of Jones' responsibility and more to do with confirming how similar Poplawski's views were to those of Alex Jones.

It is the VIEWS that Poplawski held that are important - and they are very similar to the views of Alex Jones and his followers (and ex-followers). The degree of responsibility is debatable......but there is no doubt Poplawski and Jones share a lot of BELIEFS. That's the important and incriminating point.

You had suggested Poplawski opposed the views of Alex Jones. He didn't.

As I said here before:

TLNL: The important point is that Perlstein's article is still essentially correct and apposite because it draws the definite connections between poplawski and Alex Jones' beliefs which were very similar. near identical, in fact.

Does that make Alex Jones responsible? Hmmm. Hardly exonerates him........

Regardless - the point is, Poplawski did *not* oppose Alex Jones' views.


http://realtruthonline.blogspot.com/2009/07/liberal-journalist-continues-parroting.html

You still haven't proven Poplawski held "opposing views" to Alex Jones, BTW.

So.....my position has not changed. There IS a difference between incitement and pulling the trigger.

Fact remains that Poplawski cop-killer held very similar views to those of Alex Jones.....and was obviously prepared to ACT in accordance with those views.

Not unlike the perps who recently killed the Census Bureau dude - and wrote FED on his chest.

Right?

Hardly a surprise to see such events happening when you look at the views presented at Prisonplanet......and look at your recent videos of the attitude such views generate in the host Alex Jones? Look at Jones' reaction to all his "NWO" garbage in your videos? What is that supposed to communicate to his audience.....? What will it do to his more feverish and unhinged fellow-travellers?

Kill cops - kill FED agents - Kill the government! Kill the NWO! Kill bankers!! Buy ammo! Over my dead body! FEMA camps! Population control! Human CULL!! Manufactured disease!! Bloodless coup!! Satanic EVIL!! MONSTERS!! BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Watch Jones assault Malkin?

You know........it's all pretty despicable, and dangerous.

Larry said...

So, if me and Poplawski are Steelers fans---does that make ME responsible? If me and Poplawski both believed in UFO's, does that make ME responsible?

the_last_name_left said...

Did Poplawski kill cops because of his support for the Steelers? Because he believed in UFO's?

Silly.

Larry said...

So, your saying that if Poplawski supported Ron Paul, was a Costitutionalist, wanted to end the Fed, believed 9/11 was an inside job and believed Lincoln was one of our worst Presidents ever, that means I influenced him because I believe those things?

Insane

What if Poplawski also shared beliefs with George Bush, McCain, Limbaugh and O' Reilly? Are they to blame too?

the_last_name_left said...

Are you saying you hold the same beliefs as Poplawski?

Your original article claimed Poplawski held "OPPOSING VIEWS" to those of Alex Jones.

Now you are giving a list of things which you claim you and Poplawski share belief in.

Funny - but they look like views Alex Jones would support.

That directly contradicts your claim that Poplawski held "opposing views" to Alex Jones.

Obviously he didn't - as your little list now proves.

Anonymous said...

wow larry hes ignored you again. hes a idiot. as usual 0 refutes 0 debunks. i now know why you call him a tird. larry you own him and his blog. hes your bitch. he should be since hes a queenie.

Larry said...

“Are you saying you hold the same beliefs as Poplawski?”

SOME same beliefs or ALL same beliefs? I have no way of knowing that, for I don’t know EVERYTHING he believes. What a stupid and vague question.

“Your original article claimed Poplawski held "OPPOSING VIEWS" to those of Alex Jones.

Now you are giving a list of things which you claim you and Poplawski share belief in.

Funny - but they look like views Alex Jones would support.”

LOL----but did that article say that EVERY VIEW was opposing? Me and YOU hold a similar view that Bush’s wars are criminal. Are you saying that if I go out and gun down 100 people tomorrow at some mall, that I can blame YOU because we hold similar views about Bush? Of course not, that’s silly. As silly as saying it’s Jones fault for Poplawski’s crimes. YOURE the one that changed what you said about this, not ME. You originally said it was Jones’ fault---NOW you say Jones didn’t pull the trigger and that incitement and pulling the trigger are 2 different things! Flip-flopping fraud.

“That directly contradicts your claim that Poplawski held "opposing views" to Alex Jones.

Obviously he didn't - as your little list now proves.”

HUH??? That list was things I BELIEVE---it had nothing to do with Jones. Again, your poor reading skills are showing. Since you IGNORED these 2 questions, Ill ask AGAIN:

“So, your saying that if Poplawski supported Ron Paul, was a Costitutionalist, wanted to end the Fed, believed 9/11 was an inside job and believed Lincoln was one of our worst Presidents ever, that means I influenced him because I believe those things?”

“What if Poplawski also shared beliefs with George Bush, McCain, Limbaugh and O' Reilly? Are they to blame too?”

BOTH yes/no questions----pretty easy to answer, yet you fail to—why?

the_last_name_left said...

L: LOL----but did that article say that EVERY VIEW was opposing?

It was not specific. Your article never made any distinction - it just claimed Poplawski held "opposing views" to Alex Jones.

That the article fails to make any distinction between what Poplawski opposed about Alex Jones views and what Poplawski shared of Jones' views.....is a weakness of your article......and one that undermines the thrust of your article.

When I first came here, that was exactly my point to you - that Poplawski DID NOT "oppose the views" of Alex Jones.

The only difference between them appears to be some sympathy by Poplawski to the view at Stormfront that Jones fails to clearly and persistently denounce "the jew".

That contradicts your earlier claim in your article.

Now, if Jones' use of "NWO" is merely a euphemism for "the jew".......then there we have absolutely nothing whatsoever separating Jones' views from those of Poplawski.

How do we know Jones isn't using "NWO" and whatever else as euphemism/placeholder for "the jew"?

Many of the people he has on his show, and whom write articles at Prisonplanet, and comment on his website ARE ANTI-SEMITIC members of the american far-right.

There are a mass of people whom Alex is close to, and whom have close and varied connections with the far-right.......all the way to genuine Nazism.

And that includes Poplawski.

The question is glaring ---- why does Jones attract such people as Poplawski? Why does Jones support and publicise so many far-right figures AND THEIR IDEAS?

Alex is not publicising Willis Carto's AFP because he disagrees with it. Neither is Stormfront.

There's an overlap there. It is NOT because Jones and Stormfront "oppose the views" of Willis Carto.

Larry said...

“It was not specific. Your article never made any distinction - it just claimed Poplawski held "opposing views" to Alex Jones.”

Yeah, “OPPOSING VIEWS”-----meaning: If ANY views are opposing, you can STILL say just “opposing views” and still be accurate.

For example: If I agreed with Jones on points A, B, D and E but DISAGREED on points C, F and G---an article written about me could STILL be accurate in saying “Larry held opposing views to Jones”. It could ALSO say “Larry was in agreement with Jones”. BOTH statements would be true.

Why do I have to spell out everything like youre 4 years old??

Get off your Willis Carto bullshit. Im sick and tired of hearing it. Im starting to think he’s your ex-gay lover and didn’t include you in his will when he moved out of your place or that he didn’t let you fuck him in the ass as often as you wanted.

Find me ONE article or ONE piece of SOLID evidence that Jones is associated with Carto—just ONE. A picture of Jim Tucker standing beside Carto is NOT SOLID evidence. Linking to a site is NOT SOLID evidence. I link to sites where I don’t agree with EVERY WORD they say, that’s because NO ONE is 100% right 100% of the time and no one is 100% wrong 100% of the time. I saw pictures of white supremacists in pictures with Ron Paul during his campaign-----did that make Ron Paul a white supremacist too---despite the fact that Ron Paul had no idea who they were and they just wanted a photo taken with him?

the_last_name_left said...

L: For example: If I agreed with Jones on points A, B, D and E but DISAGREED on points C, F and G---an article written about me could STILL be accurate in saying

YOU NEVER MADE ANY SUCH DISTINCTION!!!!!!!!

That's the entire point.

FORGET IT, LARRY. I AM SICK AND TIRED OF YOUR CHEATING. YOU ARE SIMPLY DISHONEST.

Larry said...

LOL. FINALLY tired of getting crushed with facts? So soon? LOL

Who said there NEEDED to be a distinction in the article? All I said was: BOTH statements would be true!

Larry said...

I LOVE how you ignored this:

"Find me ONE article or ONE piece of SOLID evidence that Jones is associated with Carto—just ONE. A picture of Jim Tucker standing beside Carto is NOT SOLID evidence. Linking to a site is NOT SOLID evidence. I link to sites where I don’t agree with EVERY WORD they say, that’s because NO ONE is 100% right 100% of the time and no one is 100% wrong 100% of the time. I saw pictures of white supremacists in pictures with Ron Paul during his campaign-----did that make Ron Paul a white supremacist too---despite the fact that Ron Paul had no idea who they were and they just wanted a photo taken with him?"

the_last_name_left said...

Alex doesn't post anything he disagrees with. He even deleted your stuff because you said some (true) nasty things about him.

Willis Carto's stuff is all over PrisonPlanet. Jones agrees with it.

More though - Jones employs Jim Tucker - and Rivero, who never saw a Willis Carto article he wouldn't publish.

Trace their ideas as best as is possible and find any difference? There's none so far as I can see.

Anonymous said...

hes ignored you again larry. one day hell come up with the info.