What's new
By:
Filters

Alex Jones and Social Media Censorship

babe said:
That is how the "Bake My Cake" case was settled recently by the Supreme Court, even though the plaintiffs were asking for
something that was not advertised as the product for sale. Just the fact that they would take special orders from other folks meant they had to take special orders from the plaintiffs, regardless of their beliefs.

@Jason. @colton
Click to expand...

Not to comment on the rest of what you wrote, but I think you have your facts wrong here. The Supreme Court found for the defense in the cake case, not the plaintiffs. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html

Or are you referring to a different case?
 
Siro said:
so the only explanation for my opinions is that I'm a filthy foreigner.

I only read the first paragraph. I assume the rest is irrelevant **** about the UN wanting to enslave us all.
Click to expand...

Well at least you know it and since when is it news to anyone that the UN supports slavery? Why do you think I donate money to UNICEF?
 
the left thinks it is good to cnesor and shut up someone.


the right even people who have been offended by alex jones. like ted cruz, and ben shapiro still defend the principle.


it is clear who here acts like national socialist and having book burnings
 
this is timed election medling. alex jones in a way helped trump win with his endorsment.


now suddenly on the same day all big companies ban Jones. about 2 months before midterms.

i thought the left was gun ho on election medling. well here you have it/


ps i reported gandalf because he assumed my gender. and as a pansexual gendersquarequeer it is HIGHLY offensive. dont question my gender and sexualtiy. mods give him a warning!
 
*Image removed due to profanity. Interestingly enough the image said something about not having the right to host it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Siro said:
*image removed
Click to expand...
number 1 the right to a gay wedding cake doesnt exist. so are you for or against forcing people to bake cakes

well if facebook goes out and with google and spotify and apple and do a coordinated attack. and block 1 side of political spectrum. they are in effect stealing an election! that is real election medling.

ps h3h3 podcast live stream got taken down for talking about alex jones situation
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DutchJazzer said:
number 1 the right to a gay wedding cake doesnt exist. so are you for or against forcing people to bake cakes

well if facebook goes out and with google and spotify and apple and do a coordinated attack. and block 1 side of political spectrum. they are in effect stealing an election! that is real election medling.

ps h3h3 podcast live stream got taken down for talking about alex jones situation
Click to expand...

I am against forcing people to bake cakes. As for Alex Jones, he has no right whatsoever to spout his trash on any specific platform. I wouldn't want my business forced to host his ***.
 
It’s too easy an answer to say Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter are private platforms and can set their own standards and leave it at that. These giant corporations (Apple now has a trillion dollar valuation) are starting to monopolize the public sphere and that’s something free speech advocates should be concerned about. Cheering on our powerful corporate overlords as they decide what political speech to silence is a mistake. This may not be a First Amendment issue but it is a huge civic issue that needs to be more deeply thought about and discussed.
 
Siro said:
*Image removed due to profanity. Interestingly enough the image said something about not having the right to host it.
Click to expand...

That one word of profanity wasn't censored until very recently. I didn't know it was added to list of censored words.
 
Douchebag K said:
he sounds like a tool .. but who ultimately decides what's acceptable or not if you block certain people ?? And are these private companies allowed free reign to decide or being a monopoly should they be subject to state run guidelines ? Tricky but it's a slipperly slope blocking whoever unless they're advocating violence.
Click to expand...

Yes they are because they are private companies. People forget that the 1st amendment doesn't include private organizations and there can be consequences to "free speech" when you are in the public world.

Alex Jones has his own rules on his website and even says he has a right to kick people off if they violate his rules. He even says it isn't censorship. So really Alex Jones is just playing the victim card and being a hypocrite when he cries about being booted off Facebook, Apple etc. His complaining about it isn't surprising considering his past behavior. Dude has no morals at all. I hope he loses his lawsuit so I can hear him cry more about how mistreated he is. On a side note, Twitter said he did violate their rules but decided to keep him on. Why have the rules if you are not going to enforce them could be another discussion.
 
colton said:
Not to comment on the rest of what you wrote, but I think you have your facts wrong here. The Supreme Court found for the defense in the cake case, not the plaintiffs. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...do-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html

Or are you referring to a different case?
Click to expand...

I am, of course, referring to the future case, where the volumes of legalese will match my hearing while jostling the antelope trying to cut in front of me on the open desert "flats".

Thank you for correcting me. I see where we need new judges who will see things as I do. In this case I'm on the side of Sotomayor and the old Ginza girl If someone wants to build a church and bake cakes and define morals and norms for members, they should build a church, not set up a store with unadvertised prejudices.

On conservative talk radio, with folks like Jones and whatshisname with Caravan to Midnight, it can get dicey trying to sort things out, especially in my mind.

The case I was actually thinking about was the Oregon case, which was being considered for advancement on appeal to the Supreme Court. I think the Oregon case still stands, because of the material bias asserted by the proprietors against the gay couple. And a specific Oregon statute relating to discrimination. And, of course, I support the State's authority over the federal authority in all matters not specifically granted to the Federal government by the US Constitution.

https://www.statesmanjournal.com/st...akery-owners-gay-wedding-cake-case/985096001/

I am not actually a lawyer. My brother who was a lawyer, when I was needing work, settled me down in the law library and had me research his cases. Amazing stuff. There are almost always a lot of cases relevant to any point of law you care to make, and lots of arguments and ruling supporting or undercutting your case.

Ambrose Bierce famously said, in his Devil's Dictionary, that litigation was.....

Litigation, n. A machine which you enter into as a pig, and come out of as a sausage.
 
also dont know about apple and facebook but google/youtube, received a ungodly amount of government subsidies. so give it back or be open to the WHOLE PUBLIC!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top