by Shelly Tumbleson |
 Below is one of the most damning articles ever written about Alex Jones. Not only does it reveal in great detail how he snitched to the FBI one night after getting his ass kicked in a parking lot, but it also shows his rampant paranoia, delusions, lies, insatiable desire for publicity, long-standing censorship practices, and how he's historically ran a Zionist protection racket. If anyone wants to see the real Alex Jones, this is the perfect place to start, along with the WING TV Hall of Shame. The article(s) are somewhat lengthy, but well worth reading, especially the section where Alex gets whooped, then declares that he has relatives in the FBI. Don't be fooled any longer; this guy's been pulling the same stunts for years now.Alex Jones: Another Paranoid, Uneducated, Unemployeed White Male with an Inferiority Complex. Oh Joy! By Shelly Tumbleson Introduction Alex Jones is the name of a guy who for lack of a better description, is a personality at ACTV (now known as ACAC). He spends each and every possible moment on TV going on about this New World Order, about his super-patriotism and about how everyone except the most devoutly hyper paranoid right wing lemmings is trying to persecute him. he generally does this by equivocating anyone not conforming to HIS views as goosestepping nazis. The first part of this page is devoted to revealing some things about Mr. Jones that he will vehemently attempt to deny. In the civilized world, we call these things, "facts". The second part of my comments will be wholly and totally biased. Jones is a bully. Part of being a bully is being a coward at heart. I will spend my time proving that not so deep down that Alex Jones is an attention craving,delusional, disgruntled uneducated white male who ultimately believes in nothing. My introduction to Alex Jones came from surfing through channels 10, 11 and 16. For those of you who are not subscribers to Austin Cablevision, these are the Austin Community Access Centers channels. Anyone who cares to take the time to become a producer of a live or dead (eg: recorded), show can do so by taking the classes and reserving a series time. I did such a thing many years ago and encourage as many people as i can to do the same. Or you can be like Alex Jones. He simply asks various producers if he can show some tapes and/ or be a talking head for their shows. This is good for the producers because many producers have an idea of what their show should be like, but aren't really cut out for being on television. It is possible that Jones is now a producer; I do not know. So there I was one night, flipping through the channels and there's this guy on TV who is taking calls (this was a live show). I honestly thought the guy was funny, not because of his sense of humor, but because a caller might say, "Hey Alex, there are too many damned Asians at UT". (sadly enough, there are enough lazy white boys at the University of Texas who are too chickenshit to compete against Asians in the race for a good grade in the academic arena. They would much rather piss and -bee yatch- and moan about it instead of studying). So this guy, Alex, would then start up with something like, "You are so right. These Communists are trying to subvert this country by coming here, squeezing students out of universities and distributing their propaganda." Note that this is not an actual quote, but rather is indicative of the type of rhetoric that Alex Jones gives. But later, he became much more incoherent. He started putting organizations and names to the forces that were persecuting him, though he never had any proof. One such story came from an event that he fabricated that will be explained in a bit. So as far as i was concerned, this guy went the wayside of all other crackpot conspiracy theory nuts and religious zealots. And he faded into the background noise until he became a mere buzz of incoherentness. Then... then he had to introduce himself to me. One night, before it was time to make the set of my show, Alex starts hoopin and hollerin about some ratings he received as a result of this little hour or so of ranting he was able to do on KLBJ am. Apparently no one bothered to tell him what sort of people tend to listen to am radio, let alone what kind of people listen to am radio at night. Well, ratings are ratings and he was happy and proud that he had done so darn well. Okay, he's entitled to that. If you need ratings to have some sense of approval, and you need that approval to justify your esteem, then go for it. So as he's about to leave the building, he sees me working on a computer. He SCREAMS at me, "HI! I'M ALEX JONES!" Now, being a Texan of a much higher caliber than the likes of Clayton Williams (who steadfastly refused to shake the offered hand of Ann Richards when she offered it to him before a debate for the governorship of Texas), I went to shake the hand. Handshakes are important. You can tell a lot about a persons handshake, the way they use their eyes when they speak and on a more intimate level, the way someone uses their hands. Well, no sooner than had my hand joined with his when he withdrew it. "My name is She..." "I KNOW WHO YOU ARE. I'VE SEEN YOUR SHOW!" I honestly don't remember anymore than that. He stormed out of the door before any conversation could happen. Once again, he faded into the background; a noise much less significant than any gnat. Like i said, "Handshakes are important". Some weeks later i put a tagline on my show. It was custom to create and put some text on the screen (i worked with a static shot) that changed from week to week. This one week, i had gotten sick and tired of the irrelevant diatribes of the radical paranoid white trash hicks that now permeate the live shows of ACAC. So on my screen was the following tagline: The access show without a delusional conspiracy theory. So the show ended. Some people got a chuckle out of my tagline, but no one really remembered it. Heck, we never even once talked about the paranoid angry white male shows except to have an ocassional chuckle at their expense. And again... weeks later after I'd all but forgotten about this tagline, Alex approaches a young man named Sean who was at the studio to take my show over (something i enjoyed doing; being in front of the camera all of the time can become very boring). Sean was about 14 years old. Jones gets into his face when i'm in the restroom. I walked out to see Jones grilling Sean. "DID YOU CONSPIRE TO BUY THAT SHIRT OR DID YOUR MOTHER BUY IT FOR YOU?!?" (verbatim) Sean had become an unwitting victim of the one i would come to call, "Jarhead Jones". Sean, to his credit, shrugged him off by saying, "My mother bought it for me." Jarhead was momentarily stumped. "DID SOMEONE CONSPIRE TO MAKE HER BUY IT?!?" (again, verbatim), he cleverly responded . So there he was, this towering mass of anti-intellectualism steadfastly pointed at a 14 year old. And that was when he and i had words. I won't even bother to describe his attempt at rationale discussion. But to be fair, it was pretty sad of me to think that he'd listen to anything i said to him. For a sample of this person's incoherent ramblings and social retardation, listen to the first 3 or so minutes of this Real Audio clip of him (note: this link appears to be dead. If I can find it again, I will change it). More specifically, listen to the first caller trying to give Jarhead Jones some support. If you feel the need, please listen to more. If you decide that this is the kind of reactionist, white trash plebian rhetoric that appeals to you, more power to you. But that wasn't what really pissed me off about Jarhead. Sure, it takes an utter and complete coward to antagonize a 14 year old but what really set me off was this... So one night, i'm flipping through the channels. I see a segment of a 60 Minutes show on one of the access channels. Here's the setup: a SWAT team working with University Police somewhere in Florida, I believe. there was a voiceover of this particular clip. The voices of the original interviewees were replaced with Jarhead Jones saying things like, "...AND SO WE'RE DOING ALL OF THIS TO FUND THE POLICE STATE AS MANDATED BY THE UNITED NATIONS TO HELP IMPLEMENT THE NEW WORLD ORDER!" (note: this quote is of my own creation. Alex Jones is incapable of stringing together such a coherent thought... ask anyone who's listened to him) This bothered me. It really bothered me. I have been a producer at ACTV for most of this decade and a fan of it for longer. Most of that time, I've been witness to ACTV being under attack by the right wing... People like Jones who love to cry, "I've got rights!", but when questioned or they cross a line, then all of a sudden they're helpless persecuted victims. The concept of, "If you don't like what you see, exercise your right to change the channel!" has eluded these people. There's something about free speech being used by someone who is not subservient to the Radical Right that really pisses these people off. But i'm getting ahead of myself. It may not be readily clear why this pissed me off, but that should be explained at length shortly. I posted the following letter at the ACTV studio. The letter was torn down by Alex Jones within the hour. An Open Letter to ACAC Producers Dear Friends, Some weeks ago, I watched part of a program on either channel 10 or 16. Someone had recorded a segment of a 60 minutes episode about a SWAT team that was part of a University campus in Florida (I believe it was Florida). This segment had been altered by a narrator speaking over the voices of those who were being interviewed. Whatever their original opinions and comments were, were lost to the voice of the narrator. What bothered me about this show was not so much the fact that someone had shown someone else's work; in this case 60 Minutes. However, it is not unreasonable to think that CBS might find a legal reason to sue ACAC and the producers of the show that showed their for plagiarism and slander. This alteration was not satirical nor humorous and thus would not receive protection as such. Perhaps "Fair Use" would fall into this category, but given the fact that CBS' work had been altered by the narrator, I cannot help but to feel that the producer of the show put the institution of ACAC and thus, the community of other producers at serious risk of a lawsuit. For those of you who were part of ACTV/ ACAC a couple of years ago should remember the chilling effects that a lawsuit (the Infosex debacle), can have upon this establishment. What I found so disturbing about this program was the fact that the person "narrating" this story appeared to be interested only in convoluting and distorting the journalism of 60 Minutes to fit his own theories. For those of you who did not see this show, the narrator spoke over the voices of those in the story, filling their dialog with his own ideas which were incoherent at best. On a personal level, none of this disturbed me nearly as much as the fact that the narrator saw the 60 Minutes segment and those who were part of the story, as mere objects to be treated as puppets. He filled their mouths with words that weren't theirs, making human beings into inanimate objects that existed only for the sake of having them serve his own incoherent delusions. By writing this letter, I hope to raise awareness that there are some among us (Producers), who are jeopardizing the foundation that we all work so hard to maintain. That is, the personification of Free Speech, the ability to bring contemporary issues to the community of Austin (especially live television), the coverage of local artists/ musicians and the opportunity to create content for visual media. As a collective of Producers, we have worked far too hard to let anyone jeopardize the freedom that we (still) enjoy. Thank you for your time, Shelly Tumbleson Producer #1830 from 1992 to present When I wrote this letter, my goal was not to do any name calling. It was to raise awareness that there are factions of producers down here (at ACAC) who see Free Speech as an excuse to say anything they wish to, regardless of it's factual basis and regardless of the legal implications. By not pointing finger and naming names, I allowed those responseible for this "piece" to save face. The narrator was Jarhead, though to this day, I do not know who the producer was, nor the name of the show. I posted my letter on the producers board here at the studio. This board is a place for us to communicate to one another; whether it be a call for talent or an announcement or a statement; this board is a sanctuary for us to post our thoughts. However, in true paranoid fascist behavior, Jarhead removes my posts as soon as he can; provided that I'm out of sight. In true paranoid fascist behavior, free speech is good and well as long as no one stands up to challenge his delusions. Then again, he berates me (behind my back, of course), as untalented because i've only done 6 years of live television instead of of being a shock jock on the local white trash ranting radio station [which, as of the summer of 2000, went out of business]. Because of this behavior, I decided to spend some time on my last show talking about the mental deficiency and cowardice of these people. Such as, has anyone ever wondered why only uneducated to semi-educated white males call these shows? Perhaps they're not capable fo taking charge of their lives and thus need to blame someone else for their failures? They have a victims mentality. That is, everything that happens to them is the fault of someone else. It reveals their level of immaturity. I have heard this tripe before. Historically they have used words like, "degenerate", "subversive" and "immoral". They call themselves patriots, freedom fighters, avatars and all too often, they proclaim their actions, regardless of the cost or outcome, as the will of God. But there's more, so much more... A fellow producer related the following story to me. The names have been changed, except for a couple. The following is an excerpt of that letter. Bracketed "[ ]" areas are my own clarifications. His incessant pestering of me was completely centered around "what an asshole you [in reference to me] are." At least 4 times during this mono-syllabic diatribe, he asked me not to tell you that he said this. OK Jarfuck. He challenged a man to "step outside"... the man (Steve) took him up on it, and whipped him like the little -bee yatch- that he is. Not being able to accept defeat... he claimed that 4 men with knives attacked him to stifle his free speech. OK... maybe many of us have been that humiliated in our lifetimes... But THEN he got Daddy to call in a favor, and he actually got the FBI to go to Fringeware to find Clayton's address. (Clayton is the first guy that he first tried to lure outside) He did this by concocting a story of him being one of the leaders of a "terrorist" organization called Anathema, which is affiliated with Fringeware." As the months went on, my source was harassed by [Alex Jones], who tried to coerce him into believing that he had indeed been attacked by these guys with knives. Finally he [the source], explained that he knew the real story of what happened and that if Jarhead didn't shut up about the incident, he would call every radio and television show in town and explain what really occurred. After this letter, I received a more detailed account of what happened: "This is a long story, but the details make it so much more enjoyable! I'll be as brief as possible. This guy Clayton, a.k.a. SpaceHitler, had been pranking everybody at access for 7 years. (the "die-die-die guy"), including you. His favorite target was Jarhead. One Monday night Jeff Davis had his "Patriot Fun Show" Jeff dressed as Elvis, Jarhead dressed as a Booger Elf. Jeff's daughter/call screener, Crystal loved his pranks... and put one through on this night. After Jarhead was freaking out at the call, Clayton (henceforth referred to as C) called back. Crystal invited him to the show, saying that if Jarhead started anything... there were people there to stop it. C called me for a ride. As hard as it was, I declined. No way was I gonna put C and Jarhead together in one building. He found another ride, and brought along a crazy skater friend of his. (C is legally blind, so he doesn't drive) Upon arriving, C and co.(a total of 3 guys)were talking to whoever was at the desk, and Sir Jarhead the Booger Elf, a.k.a. Jarhead, recognized his voice... and began to berate him as best his little mind could manage. C is actually very smart, and was calmly pointing out Jarhead's swelling example of fascism. Jarhead became louder, and louder begging C to step outside. That is when Steve, said, and I quote: "I can't believe you're acting like this because he called you a Jarhead." He spun around and focused his fury on Mystery S. When he said "step outside, and I'll whip you like my -bee yatch-." Mystery S said OK, let's go... and led the way. Jarhead hesitated, then followed. As did Charlie (of The Show with No Name) and Kanya (no name co-host, & play toy) with C, and the driver. Jarhead's next brave move was to announce that he had a gun, and began foraging around in his truck. Steve said, oh, now your gonna shoot me you pussy. Jarhead came from the truck with his hand in his pocket, and slowly advanced towards Steve. Steve retreated 2 or 3 steps, then said, "Then shoot me" and promptly nailed Jarhead with a right hook. They both just stood there for what seemed like a long time, then Steve let many more fly. Jarhead tried to throw one... that's right, one punch which grazed Steve's nose... like flicking at a booger. At this point Iggy came out of the studio. Jarhead saw him, and screamed for him to go get Bob. Iggy ran in to do his masters bidding. Steve hit him a few more times. By now Charlie had convinced C and his friend to get out of there. They got in the car, and split. (with Steve) Bob came running out, to see Jarhead bleeding profusely, and shouting "they jumped me with knives!" Charlie disputed this, so Jarhead spit blood on him...So Charlie, bless him, punched him right in that mason jar of a head. When the cops came, Jarhead was ranting and changing his story with each breath... began to talk of his importance... and his families wealth... and his relatives in the FBI!!! Nearly getting himself arrested, Herman saw the security tape of the incident, and related it, blow by blow, to (name deleted) and I the next night. The next day the Idiot Cause Jumpers Brigade took over the airwaves. Greg Ericson...Jeff Davis etc. Most notably, Terry Liberty Parker. He called every show claiming Jarhead had been attacked in the parking lot by 4 guys with knives... held his own, breaking the biggest guy's nose. (Jarhead's version, of course.) And crying out about what a "Chilling Effect" this will have on free speech in Austin. Several of us called around to these same shows, telling the real story. We were cut off almost immediately on most shows. Terry began to call this a blame the victim campaign... and likened it to blaming a rape victim for the assault due to the length of her skirt. About a week after this began, I called Terry Liberty Parker at his home and let him have it. He would not hear anything I had to say. So I told him that if it took me the rest of my days, I would rub his nose in the "chilling effect" I (we) did. At one point TLP stopped hosting his 30 min Libertarian insert before Smash the State, thinking it would stop. It never has. Jarhead tells a whopper when he recounts this story... It seems to grow exponentially each time I hear it. What a pussy. He created Social security fraud, child pornography, and terrorism charges so he could bring in the Feds. The guys at Fringeware told the Feds, -flick- you... bring a warrant. To the bureaus credit, they let it drop. To this day, these delusional buffoons still reference this "event" as proof that what they do is gravely dangerous. I have 6+ hours of footage of all of the flap on access that I have titled Jar Wars. So you see... lots of people do know the truth. That is why Jarhead freaks out so bad when somebody throws it in his face. The scary thing is that I believe Jarhead truly thinks his version IS the truth! For many weeks we lampooned these idiots on Night Talk. Clayton would call in as Jarhead, recounting how Ninjas with light sabers descended upon him to stamp out his free speech. You gotta hear some of these calls." I also found out that Jarhead left the studio with a lot of his blood decorating the lobby. He didn't even have the courtesy to clean his own mess up. Are you suprised at any of this? Neither is anyone else. Before i go any further with letting Alex Jones make even more of an -arse- of himself than he has already, i wanted to present a couple of items for your consideration. The DSM-IV, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, is the benchmark for helping mental health experts determine the nature of a persons sickness. This book is readily availible at any decent bookstore. I found this passage last year and i thought it had Alex Jones written all over it. It describes the features of a manic episode. Now i'm not an expert at diagnosing these sorts of things but you may be (or you may just think you are). Read the following excerpts and decide for yourself if they resemble our favourite dunderpate or not. Inflated self esteem is typically present, ranging from uncritical self-confidence to marked grandiosity, and may reach delusional proportions (Criterion B1). Individuals may give advice on matters about which they have no special knowledge (e.g., how to run the United Nations). Despite lack of any particular experience or talent, the individual may embark on writing a novel or composing a symphony or seek publicity for some impractical invention. Grandiose delusions are common (e.g., having a special relationship to God or to some public figure from the political,religious, or entertainment world). Manic speech is typically pressured, loud, rapid and difficult to interrupt (Criterion B3). Individuals may talk nonstop, sometimes for hours on end and without regard for others wishes to communicate. Speech is sometimes characterized by joking, punning and amusing irrelevancies. The individual may become theatrical, with dramatic mannerisms and singing. Sounds rather than meaningful conceptual relations may govern word choice (i.e. clanging). If the persons mood is more irritable than expansive, speech may be marked by complaints, hostile comments or angry tirades. Now, i'm not saying that Jones *IS* a manic depressive or that he is constantly having manic depressive episodes, but i do think that there are grounds for suspecting him of being afflicted with manic depression and/or other psychosis. But there's much more, both before and after the above quoted paragraphs. For a fair estimation of how accurate a Manic Episode is to the behaviour of Alex Jones, please read up and make your own decision. Judging from his behavior, i suspect Jones of being afflicted with one or a variety of mental ailments, but a cocaine habit might induce the same type of behavior. Should people take pity on Alex Jones? That's a tough one. Whatever afflictions he has, he appears to do nothing to try to overcome them. So while i have a tough time finding any pity for him, I think it's appropriate for people to find him pitiful. It's almost 2000. Where are the bombs and martial law and all that Armegeddon stuff that these assholes promised ? It's November of 1999. The doomsday cults, New World Order Conspiracy Theorists, knee jerk uber-conservative hate groups and other fundamentalist terrorist organizations have long since gone underground. But Alex Jones remains. I moved back to Austin about half a year ago for reasons i do not care to discuss. And though nothing would bring me more pleasure than to tear down his theories with nothing more than logic, observation, rationale and reason (the antithesis of all that he is), the reality is that i simply do not care enough. He is incapable of reason, he cannot engage in dialog and anyone who challenges his "wisdom" is a subersive, working for the Illuminati, New World Order (whatever the group du jour is). This behavior is well documented in American History, by the way. It was called "Mc Carthyism". So as you probably know by looking around this site, i'm going back on the air with my new show, Box of Bugs. I might take potshots at the paranoid lunatic fringe, but why bother? i mean, their followers have "Gawd on their side.", so what's the chances of my persuading them to look at their conspiracy or their cult leader "jarhead jones" with unveiled eyes? i might as well go toss rocks at the moon. By the way, has it ever occured to anyone to sample the kind of people attracted to Jarhead Jones and his bunch? I've yet to find anyone other than semi educated white males with middle of the road kind of jobs following him. Coincidence? Maybe. But i think it merits remembering what other kind of groups in this country have attracted homogenous anglo/norman/saxon groups of men. As a side note, i thought i would add something to the story of my first meeting of Jarhead. I thought he was in his mid 40's. he looks tired, worn, stretched. The saying of "ridden hard and put away wet" comes to mind. Up close, he looks like someone who's done a few too many yards of cocaine in his life (which would nicely explain the behavior, btw). Then someone told me he's in his 20's. Draw your own conclusions. Check back here now and then. If i see something too precious to pass up, i'll be more than glad to post it. arigatoo goziamasu! shelly. N O T I C E ! I have finally gotten around to the 2nd part of my comments on Jones and the whole "Lunatic Fringe" of uneducated, angry white males that comprise so much of the ACAC culture these days. Be sure to read on here. Alex Jones, Part Two: The Jarheadian Escapades Continue. Many years ago I saw Alex Jones on Tee Vee for the first time. At first I thought he was just a big lug who liked to rant and scream for the sake of laughs. Like a daytime drama that takes itself too seriously, he was melodramatic, over the top and he was so full of himself that it was funny. Then he started imagining organizations, using only heresy and his own conjecture as proof. He started adopting a Mc Carthyist attitude towards anyone who questioned him, he started using Austin Access as his favorite venue for propagating his own mythologies, conjectures and half baked theories for the sake of promoting his website, infowars. Oh... did I mention that he sells videotapes on his site? They're pretty funny actually, even though he does manage to describe some serious issues in the process. For those of you who don't know, Jones is an ultra right wing Uber-Patriot who preys upon the feeble minded by instilling half truths, lies and paranoia into them. He then tells them that if they don't believe in HIS and ONLY his way, then they are leftist puppets being used by the United Nations, Secularists, Liberals, the "Elite Bankers" (be careful not to say "Jewish" there!), the "Hollywood Elite" (whatever that's supposed to mean), even Satanists (uh, free clue: there is no such thing as "Satan" except for number 18, Miroslav Satan, who plays for the Buffalo Sabres), and anyone else who's not a fantical right wing conspiracy nut. To get his maximum bandwidth, Jones has befriended many people who have become producers, most of whom allow him to show videotapes of him on their time. It is commonly believed that Jones takes it upon himself to monitor us "Leftist" producers and press charges on them for the most minor and trivial infraction. See the The Show With No Name debacle. Hopefully you've already read the first part of the Jarheadian Escapades. If not, take the time to do so. You won't be disappointed (unless you hate to read). Jones is a tireless self promoting popular personality here in Austin. But just because he's popular, that's not to say that he has any endearing qualities such as likeability, intelligence or leadership ability. Popularity just means you're known. Heck, David Duke is popular, Lyndon la Rouche is popular, that child loving pop star, Michael Jackson, is popular. Even the suspected cross dressing J. Edgar Hoover was popular. So yes, even I have to concede that Jones is popular. His tactics remind me of the Mc Carthyist witch hunts of the 50's, or of the Red Guard in China during their revolution or more presently, of the Taliban of Afghanistan. And as he's gotten older, he's become more outrageous, incomprehensible, fantical and frankly, I think he's become dangerous. No... I do not believe he has the courage nor ability to plan an attack like someone like Eric Robert Rudolph, but I believe he is capable of influencing a feeble minded individual into doing so. But all of this aside, the reason I'm writing this is to let everyone know what's happened as of late. Some months ago, the Austin Chronicle ran an in depth article on the affairs of Austin Community Television . The opening editorial was in regard to Alex Jones. Of the many outstanding points that were made, Jones is a "tarbaby". No, that's not a racist comment for those of you who think like that. A "Tarbaby" is a journalistic and political term used to describe a scenario where the subject at hand is more likely to stick with you regardless of what you do to shake it. Typical tarbaby topics are generally abortion, gun control, etc... July 14, 2000: The time has come to talk of Alex Jones. When the Chronicle editorial staff first considered how to cover the ongoing controversy at Austin Community Access Center (ACAC) regarding Jones, there was almost a consensus not to do it. The feeling was that regardless of what we said about Jones it would empower him, helping to further define him as a spokesperson in our community. There was also the tar baby concern -- once you got into it with Jones, you could never get out. The feeling was that despite his beliefs, his overriding goal was self-promotion. It was solely to his advantage to extend any interaction. The staff did not want to participate in any support, promotion, or ongoing dialogue with Jones, but the ACAC story is important to our community. Jones is an articulate, sometimes hypnotic, often just annoying conspiracy theorist -- black helicopters over our cities, Clinton's storm troopers rampaging through our streets, the Y2K computer crash used as an excuse for martial law (oh wait, that didn't happen, but the rest will). Through his ACAC show Info Wars, his canceled KJFK radio show, and such stunts as building a chapel at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Jones has gained notoriety. Unlike a journalist or historian, a conspiracy theorist starts out with an assumption, garners all information that supports their theory, and ignores or discredits information that disagrees with it. Jones seems driven more by getting media attention than any ideology. There are conspiracies everywhere and the forces of evil are sweeping our country: Smart Growth, free trade, light rail, Social Security, world government. Nefarious, usually unnamed, international conspiracies are busy controlling our lives. Jones does not offer specific political solutions (Jones' only solution actually is to encourage an ever-increasing paranoia about everything). I used to listen to Jones on the radio but eventually stopped because any participation -- even just listening -- supported the show. Jones loves to rant. Jones is the hero of most of his rants. There has never been anything he supported except freedom and the Constitution. I can imagine him roaring, "That is exactly the point!" -- except Jones uses them as straw men, props against which to place all the conspiracies invading our daily life. Still, I was sorry when KJFK took him off the air. I really think the society is richer for having many different voices. I thought it was a cowardly decision. Unfortunately, a number of ACAC producers think that Jones' respect and support for freedom of speech ends with those voices with which he personally agrees. The most recent controversy concerns Charlie Sotelo's The Show With No Name, which has been suspended by ACAC. At least partially at issue is Jones' role in The Show being taken off the air. Jones denies he had anything to do with it, and ACAC Board President John Villareal backs him up. There is also the concern, however, about how active Jones has been in monitoring other shows, especially those he doesn't like. Read Lee Nichols' piece on Jones and ACAC ("Mad TV," p. 34) and Marc Savlov's piece on Charlie Sotelo ("Access Denied," p. 36) and decide for yourself. On behalf of the staff, I ask that this not become a catalyst for becoming part of Jones' audience. Charlie Sotelo works for us at SXSW (us being managing director Roland Swenson, Nick Barbaro, and myself). Specifically Sotelo works on the film conference and festival. On Austin cable access, he has hosted The Show With No Name. Currently he is facing a 90-day suspension for showing a Nike commercial directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, The Game). Complaints were filed against Sotelo because access shows can't show commercials. Even though this Nike commercial was old and for a product no longer manufactured and clearly shown as an early work of an interesting director, it was decided that The Show violated this rule and should be suspended. Sotelo hosted this show long before he came to SXSW. In fact, one of the reasons he came to our attention is because he hosts the show. I've never seen it. At home we don't have cable. This is from no high moral anti-TV stance but because I'm a hopeless addict. Give me a remote control, and I'll go all night, never watching more than a minute of anything. So I haven't seen the show. Most everyone I know raves about it. Obscure beginning works by now-established talents are treasures to the film enthusiast. Sotelo has given me many tapes, and I get a special thrill from bits like Andy Kaufman's appearance as a contestant on The Dating Game for reasons that have nothing to do with The Dating Game. One can respect the ACAC board on this. It seems absurd to acknowledge this as a commercial rather than a rare work in a director's filmography, but if they make an exception this time, what happens when some group shoots some "arty commercial" for a local event and wants to run it on access because of their enthusiasm for it? The Sotelo exception could wreak havoc. Still, the shoes are not even on the market any more, and shouldn't ACAC be a place to showcase obscure but interesting works? The board is trying to reach some compromise with Sotelo on The Show and establish greater clarity regarding their policies. We'll see what happens. But what is shocking is that Alex Jones, the anti-authoritarian guerrilla freedom fighter, a champion of liberty, isn't leading the charge to reinstate Sotelo. What is more shocking is the notion that he freely admits to filing complaints against other broadcasters over the years. Vigilance and freedom, he reminds us on his shows, are the main defenses of liberty, but he doesn't seem to respect his own opinion, or anyone else's. For the most part, i have nothing to add to this. I felt that it was a well placed, thoughtful and accurate essay that should be heeded by all who are intelligent enough to listen... and ponder. In terms of ACAC policy, i do disagree that we, as producers, should be unable to give critical review for works of people, even if those people produced commercials, but that's an esoteric discussion not meant for these pages. That was just the editorial. Then came the article... In the 14 July 2000 issue of the Austin Chronicle, Austin Access (ACAC) was covered at great length. Not just Jones and his brigand of rag tag conspiracy nuts with guns and more biblical scripture than you can shake a stick at, but Austin Access as the dysfunctional community that is usually is. But not all is wrong at ACAC. As is the case in most instances, a handful of radicals manage to steal the recognition and merits from others by tainting the entire organization. I have to give special recognition to The Reel Deal for not just an outstanding show, not just for being a shining example of diversity and tolerance, not just for being good enough to go pro (at least two of their crew do movie reviews for a local affiliate), but for showing that a group of people with a common goal can produce a really outstanding show and raise the bar of excellence for others to emulate. The article can be found here. It is kind of long, but worth the time to read. Here is an excerpt regarding what has become known as "The Parking Lot Incident", which is covered at length in the first part of my comments on Jones. In addition to creating tension between Sotelo and Jones, Thumbleson's Web site alleges the fight exacerbated a feud between Jones and "Steve's" friend, Clayton Counts. Counts is notorious, for lack of a better word, for making prank calls to ACAC call-in shows, especially Jones' show. Counts, who still maintains an Internet account on the server of the now-defunct bookstore Fringeware, said he suspects that Jones then called in the FBI and made bogus claims that Counts was a terrorist and possessed child pornography and got the bureau to raid Fringeware to get Counts' address. According to the Web page, the bureau later dropped the investigation. Just so it's clear, my last name is not "Thumbleson", though the story is in reference to my website. In reference to my conjecture that the Jones camp is obsessed with what other producers say and do ( for the sake of finding a reason to "bust" others for any infraction). The article goes on to say: The anti-Jones camp claims that if a fellow producer crosses Jones, he will watch their program obsessively until he finds a violation and turn that person in. Seeming to support that contention, Jones' producer Mike Hanson turned over dozens of hours of videotape of Side's show to the Chronicle, and said he had more. Now, these are just two minor excerpts that i'm using to draw a point. I really cannot urge you enough to take the time to read the entire article and draw your own conclusions. Unlike Jones, i cannot... will not say that i am somehow divine enough to know the categorical and unquestionable truth in things. I offer my thoughts, some resources and expect you, as adults, to decide for yourself. In closing this section of my thoughts, i offer the following comment on all radicals, be they left or right. It has been my experience that anyone who is so polar, so fanatical that they believe they are divine recipients of knowledge and truth, are also the first to proclaim that they are victims. The best example i can give of this in recent times is how anytime someone wants to maintain the separation of church and state, or insists that secular, scientific, plausible theories be taught in the classroom (as opposed to mythical parables that were designed for humanity when it was in its infancy), it is the extremist religious types who take it as an affront to their beliefs and consider sharing such thoughts (and subsequently dismissing the mythologies of their religion), who cry and bemoan at how they have become victims and are being oppressed. Without getting too sidetracked, it reminds me of a spokesman for the Catholic League who said Catholics were being opressed by Kevin Smith's Dogma. Yea, right. In that spirit, Jones makes the following comment in the article: "I am the abused one here," Jones responds. "I am not part of any rivalry. I'm just attempting to do my show. I just want to be left alone." Let me be very clear... Jones is as much as a victim as someone who wears a KKK outfit, stands in a ghetto and screams racial slurs. This comment (above) is wrong on three accounts. One: he is not simply interested in doing his show. He is interested in promoting his website and encouraging people to buy his "crockumentaries". Two: he does NOT want to be left alone. He craves any and all attention and will use any attention to draw more people to his website (again, see: "Buy my Crockumentary!"). Three: Jones' saying that he's not part of any rivalry is just plain laughable, silly and frankly... it's disturbing. Ask Christian Side (read the article for about Jones' lawsuit against Christian Side). Fanatics need to think they are being persecuted and opressed to reinforce their belief that their self righteousness is ordained by God Himself. (See also: Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, Fred Phelps, Donald Wildimon, etc...). As a side note, i can't help but to notice it's only been as of recent times that somehow the act of discovery and invention has become parallel to "satanism". Indeed, some of the most brilliant scientific minds, including but certainly not limited to the German engineers who built the American space program and Albert Einstein himself were scientists who saw their secular careers as extensions of their faith. But this too, is a discussion for another time. Please, take the time to read the article and Louis Black's Page Two editorial. When you're done with all of this (whew!), come back and check out the fallout. The Austin Chronicle Article: Alex Jones: Conspiracy Victim or Evil Mastermind? Media Clips BY LEE NICHOLS July 14, 2000: Alex Jones is no stranger to conspiracy theories. As watchers of his access television shows and listeners to radio shows are well aware, he is devoted to exposing the many conspiracies he believes are threatening our freedom. But to listen to some of Jones' critics, there is a new conspiracy afoot -- and Alex Jones is behind it. Jones' rants -- formerly heard on KJFK radio and still aired on the Austin Community Access Center's (ACAC, formerly ACTV) television stations, the Internet (www.infowars.com), and his syndicated radio programs -- have become a regular fixture in our town's cultural landscape. Jones rails against what he sees as government and corporate threats to our individual liberties, with predictions that the jackboots will be kicking in our doors and hauling us into internment camps any day now -- in fact, he alleges that this is already going on. He points to the deaths of the 80 Branch Davidians in Waco in 1993 as an example of federal police run amok. Jones recently led the effort to build a chapel on the grounds at Mount Carmel. But a group of current and former ACAC programmers contend that their freedom -- specifically, their right to free speech and to disagree with Jones -- is what is really being threatened, thanks to what they call Jones' heavy-handed tactics. The programmers' allegations -- which they have made very public by both broadcasting them on ACAC shows and posting them on Web pages -- are that Jones has used both ACAC policy and legal maneuvers to intimidate them or get them thrown off the air. Jones and his supporters counter that Jones is the real victim. They claim that his critics are harassing, threatening, and even physically assaulting him. These allegations go back pretty far -- more than four years -- but recently resurfaced when ACAC programmer Charlie Sotelo received a 90-day suspension from station airwaves when his The Show With No Name was found to be in violation of station policies regarding commercialism. (Sotelo is an employee of the SXSW Film Festival & Conference, which is partially owned by Austin Chronicle publisher Nick Barbaro and editor Louis Black.) Jones and Sotelo both admit to a great dislike for one another, and at least one fan of the show says that Jones admitted to filing the complaint which led to Sotelo's suspension. But both Jones and ACAC executive director John Villareal deny that charge. Asked what role Jones had in Sotelo's suspension, Villareal replies, "None whatsoever. The guy [Jones] gets too much credit. There were two phone calls [filing complaints], and neither of them were from Alex." Villareal won't disclose who the two callers were, saying that ACAC policy allows complainants to be anonymous. At press time, The Austin Chronicle was trying to obtain the names under the Texas Open Records Act, but the city maintains that ACAC is an outside contractor hired to run access television on the city's behalf, and thus is not subject to Open Records laws. Villareal's statement appears to be at odds with a conversation that Jones had with Casey Monahan, a fan of The Show With No Name, at Eastside Tex-Mex restaurant El Azteca. As Monahan, the director of the Texas Music Office, tells it: "I saw [Jones] at El Azteca, I asked him what the deal was with it, and he told me he filed a complaint, and that somebody else did too." Jones believes that Monahan may have misunderstood him. "I did file a complaint on him for busting into my studio," Jones says, referring to an incident in May when Sotelo accused Jones of doing studio recording that was so loud that the noise was bleeding over into Sotelo's live broadcast of The Show With No Name (which Jones denies). "The guy [Monahan] stopped me ... and asked me, 'What happened to Charlie Sotelo?' And I said 'The guy's crazy, he busted into my studio, and I filed a complaint on him.'" But Jones says that complaint, which he says he later withdrew, was unrelated to the one that got Sotelo suspended. The Parking Lot Incident The bad blood between Sotelo and Jones goes back about four years, to a fight that occurred in the ACAC parking lot. Jones' detractors cite the incident as an example of his inability to tell the truth. There are two different versions of the incident -- Jones claims that a group of four thugs, one wielding a knife, accosted him outside the studios and physically attacked him because of his beliefs. Sotelo and others tell another story, saying that Jones challenged a man who was ridiculing him, whom witnesses will only identify as "Steve" or "Mystery S." They claim that Steve accepted Jones' invitation to fight, and then thrashed Jones handily. The account, as related by ACAC producer Max Kane, can be read on a Web page maintained by another producer, Shelly Thumbleson (www.synaesthetic.com/jarhead.html). According to Sotelo and the Web page account, after "Steve" left, Jones told police he had been attacked with a knife. Sotelo refuted this, and says that Jones then spit blood on him in retaliation, for which Sotelo allegedly punched Jones. Jones describes it differently: "The police showed up. They started listening to these people's propaganda. The other people fled. They went and watched the [security] tape, and then they went and wrote the report and then the investigation was pursued on the attackers." Jones said the investigation was never resolved. Both sides claim that security videos at ACAC support their version of the fight, but ACAC said the tape is no longer available. In addition to creating tension between Sotelo and Jones, Thumbleson's Web site alleges the fight exacerbated a feud between Jones and "Steve's" friend, Clayton Counts. Counts is notorious, for lack of a better word, for making prank calls to ACAC call-in shows, especially Jones' show. Counts, who still maintains an Internet account on the server of the now-defunct bookstore Fringeware, said he suspects that Jones then called in the FBI and made bogus claims that Counts was a terrorist and possessed child pornography and got the bureau to raid Fringeware to get Counts' address. According to the Web page, the bureau later dropped the investigation. As in the Sotelo case, Jones' accusers have failed to produce any hard evidence of his connection to the raid. The most solid link is Jones' claim, made on one of his ACAC shows, that "I've got the FBI and the Austin Police Department" investigating the fight. And again, Jones again denies any connection to the raid, pointing out that Fringeware was an advertiser on his KJFK radio show. Also on the Web site, Thumbleson recounts an incident from early in Jones' tenure at ACAC, when a Jones show featured a clip from 60 Minutes, but with a voiceover replacing the show's original dialogue. Thumbleson says he posted a letter at the studio scolding Jones and warning his fellow producers that such a stunt might expose ACAC to legal liabilities. According to Thumbleson's site, "The letter was torn down by Alex Jones within the hour" -- a claim Jones dismisses as "pure propaganda." Another who feels he took abuse from Jones is Christian Side Hanke, who broadcasts under the name Christian Side, and has belittled Jones' opinions on his show The Response. In retaliation, Hanke says, Jones has targeted him with legal maneuvers. One concerned what Hanke says was a false police report for stalking. Jones also explored the possibility of a wrongful termination lawsuit when he was canned by KJFK, and had Hanke deposed to see if he might have contributed to the firing. Hanke says the "stalking" occurred when he went to a protest Jones attended for the purpose of contesting Jones' rhetoric. "After the first protest I attended, I received a call" from a police detective, Hanke says. "The detective was laughing about it." Hanke says Jones came close to filing a lawsuit against him after he read, on-air, an e-mail which he says originated as an Internet newsgroup posting from an insider at KJFK and which was subsequently forwarded to him. The e-mail says Jones "was fired because he is an immature little punk who cries until he gets his way." During the deposition, Jones' lawyer Steve Gibbens tried to link Hanke to the firing, asking him repeatedly if he had any sort of communication with staffers at KJFK, and questioning him about a statement he had allegedly made that "It's my mission to get [Jones] off the air." Hanke replied that any such statement would have been merely an attempt to challenge the truth of Jones' on-air claims, and not a specific plot to get him fired. "The guy is kind of weird," Hanke says. "The fact is that everyone has to be a scapegoat for something. This guy's sitting here saying on the air that I've hung a cat on his door or something. Whenever he was trying to sue me, I've always sort of let things go. But I have a tape of all the times he said 'this guy's a stalker' ... calling me a stalker in public. And I was like, okay, I'm going to take all these tapes and sue him for defamation right back. ... [It's] nothing more than a pure, unadulterated false charge, and it escalated." Jones says Hanke has it backward: He claims he is Hanke's victim, and that Hanke has threatened him via television and phone messages. "We filed an exploratory motion in court to let him know we were serious," Jones says. But Jones' suit never happened; Hanke says Jones simply couldn't afford to pursue it any further and begged to be left alone, but Gibbens claims that the suit remains "in a holding pattern." The anti-Jones camp claims that if a fellow producer crosses Jones, he will watch their program obsessively until he finds a violation and turn that person in. Seeming to support that contention, Jones' producer Mike Hanson turned over dozens of hours of videotape of Side's show to the Chronicle, and said he had more. On the other hand, Jones' detractors could be accused of obsessively watching Jones as well -- Side and Kane gave me their own tapes, and another producer named Beau Henry, who once considered himself a Jones ally, actually produced a "documentary" detailing Jones' activities. The documentary focuses on a 1997 conflict between Jones and producer Chris Ramirez in which Ramirez aggressively challenged Jones at the ACAC offices regarding the veracity of claims Jones made on his show. Shortly after the argument, complaints were filed against Ramirez for alleged commercialism on his show; Ramirez was subsequently banned from telecasting on ACAC twice, the second time permanently. The documentary suggests there was a link between the argument and the suspension. The Chronicle was unable to contact Ramirez for comment. "There was a purge of everybody [at ACAC], that had nothing to do with me," says Jones. "The complaint was filed by somebody about him ... He was suspended for talking about Taco Bell prices. I just love these people -- they get on, they break the rules, I don't complain on them, and they accuse me of it. "And then the guy did some things on the air that were so horrible about me you couldn't imagine, and we started monitoring. He was saying that if I was out in the crowd to shoot me or throw gasoline on me at a rally. Boom, he got suspended for that. Yes, being here six years, I have filed two or three complaints." Kane, who formerly directed Ramirez's show, says that Jones and other ideologically similar programmers, such as Terry "Liberty" Parker and Jeff Davis, "are more or less a plague on free speech. ... If you watch any show, you can find technical violations." "I am the abused one here," Jones responds. "I am not part of any rivalry. I'm just attempting to do my show. I just want to be left alone." end story Editorial From the Austin Chronicle Page Two BY LOUIS BLACK July 14, 2000: The time has come to talk of Alex Jones. When the Chronicle editorial staff first considered how to cover the ongoing controversy at Austin Community Access Center (ACAC) regarding Jones, there was almost a consensus not to do it. The feeling was that regardless of what we said about Jones it would empower him, helping to further define him as a spokesperson in our community. There was also the tar baby concern -- once you got into it with Jones, you could never get out. The feeling was that despite his beliefs, his overriding goal was self-promotion. It was solely to his advantage to extend any interaction. The staff did not want to participate in any support, promotion, or ongoing dialogue with Jones, but the ACAC story is important to our community. Jones is an articulate, sometimes hypnotic, often just annoying conspiracy theorist -- black helicopters over our cities, Clinton's storm troopers rampaging through our streets, the Y2K computer crash used as an excuse for martial law (oh wait, that didn't happen, but the rest will). Through his ACAC show Info Wars, his canceled KJFK radio show, and such stunts as building a chapel at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Jones has gained notoriety. Unlike a journalist or historian, a conspiracy theorist starts out with an assumption, garners all information that supports their theory, and ignores or discredits information that disagrees with it. Jones seems driven more by getting media attention than any ideology. There are conspiracies everywhere and the forces of evil are sweeping our country: Smart Growth, free trade, light rail, Social Security, world government. Nefarious, usually unnamed, international conspiracies are busy controlling our lives. Jones does not offer specific political solutions (Jones' only solution actually is to encourage an ever-increasing paranoia about everything). I used to listen to Jones on the radio but eventually stopped because any participation -- even just listening -- supported the show. Jones loves to rant. Jones is the hero of most of his rants. There has never been anything he supported except freedom and the Constitution. I can imagine him roaring, "That is exactly the point!" -- except Jones uses them as straw men, props against which to place all the conspiracies invading our daily life. Still, I was sorry when KJFK took him off the air. I really think the society is richer for having many different voices. I thought it was a cowardly decision. Unfortunately, a number of ACAC producers think that Jones' respect and support for freedom of speech ends with those voices with which he personally agrees. The most recent controversy concerns Charlie Sotelo's The Show With No Name, which has been suspended by ACAC. At least partially at issue is Jones' role in The Show being taken off the air. Jones denies he had anything to do with it, and ACAC Board President John Villareal backs him up. There is also the concern, however, about how active Jones has been in monitoring other shows, especially those he doesn't like. Read Lee Nichols' piece on Jones and ACAC ("Mad TV," p. 34) and Marc Savlov's piece on Charlie Sotelo ("Access Denied," p. 36) and decide for yourself. On behalf of the staff, I ask that this not become a catalyst for becoming part of Jones' audience. Charlie Sotelo works for us at SXSW (us being managing director Roland Swenson, Nick Barbaro, and myself). Specifically Sotelo works on the film conference and festival. On Austin cable access, he has hosted The Show With No Name. Currently he is facing a 90-day suspension for showing a Nike commercial directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, The Game). Complaints were filed against Sotelo because access shows can't show commercials. Even though this Nike commercial was old and for a product no longer manufactured and clearly shown as an early work of an interesting director, it was decided that The Show violated this rule and should be suspended. Sotelo hosted this show long before he came to SXSW. In fact, one of the reasons he came to our attention is because he hosts the show. I've never seen it. At home we don't have cable. This is from no high moral anti-TV stance but because I'm a hopeless addict. Give me a remote control, and I'll go all night, never watching more than a minute of anything. So I haven't seen the show. Most everyone I know raves about it. Obscure beginning works by now-established talents are treasures to the film enthusiast. Sotelo has given me many tapes, and I get a special thrill from bits like Andy Kaufman's appearance as a contestant on The Dating Game for reasons that have nothing to do with The Dating Game. One can respect the ACAC board on this. It seems absurd to acknowledge this as a commercial rather than a rare work in a director's filmography, but if they make an exception this time, what happens when some group shoots some "arty commercial" for a local event and wants to run it on access because of their enthusiasm for it? The Sotelo exception could wreak havoc. Still, the shoes are not even on the market any more, and shouldn't ACAC be a place to showcase obscure but interesting works? The board is trying to reach some compromise with Sotelo on The Show and establish greater clarity regarding their policies. We'll see what happens. But what is shocking is that Alex Jones, the anti-authoritarian guerrilla freedom fighter, a champion of liberty, isn't leading the charge to reinstate Sotelo. What is more shocking is the notion that he freely admits to filing complaints against other broadcasters over the years. Vigilance and freedom, he reminds us on his shows, are the main defenses of liberty, but he doesn't seem to respect his own opinion, or anyone else's. end story So, the Chronicle ran the articles and as expected, the feedback the next week was pretty much 50/50. But for me there was a nagging problem. See... once upon a time, i watched an interview that Charlie Rose gave to Christine Amonpour. When he asked her about the journalists obligation to maintain neutrality in the events going on in Yugoslavia, her answer was profound. She said that there arises certain situations where neutrality towards the activities of a person or a group is basically the same as endorsing that behavior. In that regard, i wrote the following response to the Chronicle: Radical Misinformation To the Editor, I was very impressed with your coverage of Alex Jones ["Media Clips," July 14]. It was extremely unbiased and I suspect it might have taken a considerable amount of restraint to write this article. But in hindsight I have to wonder: Is being unbiased when covering Alex Jones tantamount to endorsing him? Simply put, he is a source of misinformation that many people listen to and believe without question. In the early 90s we called them Dittoheads. Whether it be Jones' claims that the Marines have some town in North Carolina under Martial Law (no proof has been given of course), whether it be Jones decrying "We are at war here, folks! Your government has declared war on you!" or be it Jones inability to correctly recall how and why he got into (and lost) a fight in the ACAC parking lot, the reality is that Alex Jones is incapable of distinguishing facts from fantasy (if he indeed was jumped by four men, one with a knife, how is it that he walked away alive and uncut?). It is my belief that in being unbiased toward Jones, it is way of giving him tacit credibility. Nonetheless, I commend the Chronicle on an outstanding editorial (Mr. Black's "Page 2" comments) and especially Mr. Nichols' journalism. But ultimately Alex Jones is to patriotism what Matt Drudge is to journalism and what hot dogs are to meat. He is a lightening rod for radicals and he must be questioned and discredited for each one of his unfounded claims. Shelly (last name withheld) ACTV/ACAC producer since 1992 If you'd rather see the letter in it's original context, including other letters that both support and rally against Jones, feel free to have a look. To his credit, i will admit that Jones HAS figured out some things. Namely that a market based conciousness is a path to ruin. What he HASN'T figured out is: journalism, accountability, credibility, social skills, production values, and in my opinion, he still doesn't grasp the finer points of integrity nor honor (or the rougher points for that matter). He also knows that when a people do not excersise their right to free speech, that governments will take those rights away. He's also got a clue that corporations will sacrifice individual rights both here and abroad for the sake of quarterly profits. So, kudos to him for those things. The main point of my letter to the Chronicle is pretty much the same point as the first part of my comments on him. That is, he is incapable of distinguishing facts from fantasy. The reality is that he did get into a fight that he started. He did get his -arse- whipped like a schoolyard -bee yatch-. He did get punched in the nose by Charlie Sotelo because he (Jones) wanted Sotelo to lie for him and when he (Sotelo) would not, Jones spit on him. If anyone doubts me, call his show and ask about "The Parking Lot Incident". Then watch his reaction. If nothing else, you'll find it a source of great amusement. Oh... I'd like to add something here. It seems that Jones has recently found that people have been reading the story about "The Parking Lot Incident". He's asked an associate of mine to tell me to tell me to remove it, or so I've heard. I guess if what i wrote wasn't factual, he would have filed suit by now; a common tactic of his. Speaking of removing things, there's a board at ACAC where any articles or letters that are published by the Chronicle or Austin American Statesman. The letters supporting Jones are still there as is the article regarding him and the editorial as well. There are a few pieces of mail that are posted from people who wrote in to rally to his defense as well. My letter, the one above, was there for a few days. It is gone now. I have taken the time to print up a few nice copies of it, and I repost it every week. Needless to say, it is taken down every week as well. I do not know who is doing it, but I know they are a very petty minded, insecure coward. So if you happen to be one of the lemmings who follow Jones around without an iota of integrity (which is what it would take to follow someone like that), then how can you justify putting any faith or stock in someone who CANNOT distinguish fantasy from reality? Oh... nevermind. If you follow Jones, chances are that you can't either. Original Article: Jarhead Jones |
