Alex Jones and Social Media Censorship

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Saint Cy of JFC, Aug 8, 2018.

  1. babe

    babe Well-Known Member

    10,615
    858
    203
    Dec 7, 2010
    the first sentence and the last put it concisely enough for a four-year old. you're deliberately blind.

    how you can work through all the tedious offerings on your blog is beyond me. Here. I will pull out the point. All the other stuff is filling..... some might consider it to be an attempt to offer support for the claimed point....

    you're lost. You can't see the damage done by fake manipulators especially with lots of money to pay for stuff, to the valid ideals ascribed within you system of belief.

    Unless you are willing to cull the fakes out of your cause, you will fail.
     
  2. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    Still not sure what "ditching Hillary" has to do with criticizing Soros for legitimate reasons instead of conspiracy theories.
     
  3. babe

    babe Well-Known Member

    10,615
    858
    203
    Dec 7, 2010
    OK. So for some folks, the common thread is loosely the objectionable methods, or the personal ambition evident.

    I look at abstract issues like, in philosophical jargon, the "arrogance of power". In pure philosophy, that term refers to someone exerting power beyond any contestable scope. It is the person who can defy law and get away with it. It is the gang leader on the street who can kill anyone in his gang he wants to, without anyone in the gang being willing to be the next obvious victim.

    Hillary is well-proven to be operating on that principle. Dems need to throw her out and in fact to make it a point to prosecute her for her crimes, or they will continue to lose respect from even their own base. As it is right now, the extremist on the left are going for broke just trying to force their obvious lack of good sense, lack of respect for law, and a whole boatload of other unbalanced mentalities, on the public. No way. It's a fail. A big FAIL.

    Dems should join Americans as a whole, in absolutely rejecting Soro's methods and aims. Pretty sure he's gone over the line of our law. He is the prime example of why we need a government that can't be jacked by anyone.

    Not to say there are not some others.
     
  4. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    List of crimes with actual evidence, please.

    Well, as long as you're sure, who needs evidence?
     
  5. babe

    babe Well-Known Member

    10,615
    858
    203
    Dec 7, 2010
    If you didn't see Hillary Clinton answering questions on TV about her official use of her private equipment located in her private property, you are beyond hope for having any reasonable discussion. Pres. Obama has the temerity to send official messaging there as well, and then denied it publicly. Hillary was silly enough to ask for clarification about whether she wiped her server before delivering it per the legal warrant during the "investigation". Silly Hilly laughed and said "What do you mean.... did I wipe it with a cloth?"

    The crime involved several felonies under National Security laws, and impudent defiance of the FOIA requirements for public documents. She meant to run a lot of stuff under the radar where our public could find out about it. The Red Chinese Army had a little outfit that got in it, and bugged it so everything was forwarded to their office. As a result, 19 US intelligence operatives within China were arrested and executed.

    And Silly Hilly is still laughing. She is so beyond respect, you nor anyone else can or should even try to defend her.

    You are yourself evidencing the mental impairment I described above, which is quite common to sociopaths as defined by people who in some sense consider themselves above the law. "Arrogance of power" is the impudent disregard for the feelings or interests of others less powerful. Impudent retorts mocking a simple reference to the need for care are of that kind.

    Of course I can't track Soros nor do I think we have legal resources even with the FBI or CIA tracking him and all of his activities, but neither have I seen any sort of claim advanced that he is simply a public spirited benefactor obdurately concerned about being fair and honorable. He is a dedicated ideologue perhaps, but even if he doesn't believe in his own rhethoric or stated purposes, he is certainly trying to exert disproportionate power in this world.

    There is no reason to believe he is concerned about obeying any laws. Like many progressives influenced by the philosophical foundatioins of secularism and globalism, he simply is likely to believe his cause justifies his means or methods, so long as he can assert he's doing "good".
     
  6. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    Were you to prosecute Hillary for this crime, you would need to prosecute every member of Congress who sent a sensitive email to her at the domain @clintonemail.com. They don't want to open that can of worms.

    You think there was list of CIA assets on an email server used by the State department?

    Well, aren't you the charmer? Regarding mental impairment, I'm not the one claiming there are lists of CIA intelligence assets on State department computers.

    I have noticed no differential in the willingness to use ends to justify means between progressive and regressive politicians. Just today, we had ample proof in the attempt to discredit Mueller with false sexual harassment charges.
     
  7. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/25/alleged-google-email-compares-ben-shapiro-jordan-p/

    What's your guy's thoughts on this?

    Google, Facebook, Twitter all have political bias and go about exactly how Thriller would. There's clearly a political censorship going on and there's clearly scare tactics and sensationalism being used.



    I should mention Crowder getting the hammer too. (Watch his hate speech isn't a real video lol)



    Instead of discussing things, people just want to shut things down, especially if it's not what they believe in. To me, this type of mentality is very dangerous.

    Check out this clip from Joe Rogan's podcast.

     
  8. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    People have hurt feelings because their more dangerous lies are not profitable.

    Google, Facebook, and Twitter don't want to be sued or lose members, because that affects their revenue stream.

    Yes, the people using sensationalism and scare tactics, as well as many promoting the spread of disease, are being shut down. You object?
     
  9. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
    So, basically, you're not OK with Shapiro's "lies" but you're OK with him being labeled a Nazi?

    Mmmkay. Voice of reason right here.

    Do you see the problem here? (No, of course you don't.)
     
  10. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    I disagree that Shapiro is a Nazi, and it's wrong to refer to him as such. Since that was the opinion of some random Google employee, and likely hyperbole, I'm not sure why I would be up in arms about it. I don't recall you complaining much about Obama being labeled a Muslim.

    Shapiro supports many positions that are supported by modern-day Nazis, but no doubt also disagrees with many.

    I don't think we would agree on what "the" problem is. I just checked, and Shapiro is still on Twitter, Facebook, and easily found on Google. what's your complaint here?
     
  11. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
    Considering I'm an Obama supporter and I thought that was the dumbest thing ever to label him a Muslim, considering how publicly Christian he is.

    That's cute you bring something completely irrelevant up while brushing this under the table the with comments like, "just a Google employee's opinion."

    My complaint is the media's clear liberal bias and implications. You may not realize this, but Shapiro can still be on Google while they could clearly change their search engine to support their political bias.

    It's like I could keep pointing out everything that is and could be potentially harmful, but I'm sure you'll look the other way. That's cool.

    I'm just not one to support censorship.
     
  12. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
  13. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    I think it is carefully considered and mostly reasonable. I agree that the tech giants need to be cautious about whom to de-platform, and that it is really about the money for them.
     
    Archie Moses likes this.
  14. One Brow

    One Brow Well-Known Member

    12,746
    1,748
    228
    May 26, 2010
    Dumb, but not worth complaining about.

    Is there some Google policy about Shapiro/Peterson you are complaining about?

    Evidence? All I have seen is de-platforming of people who say the Sandy Hook families are actors and downplaying those who preach anti-vax nonsense. What actual person has had their profile/views altered for strictly political reasons?

    You mean, totally unlike how trying to convince people that the families of the victims of a shooting is not harmful, or the pushing of anti-vax nonsense is not harmful?

    Since there is no censorship here, that's not particularly relevant.
     
  15. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
    Is there a Peterson/Shapiro policy? I don't know. If they're calling them Nazis behind closed doors, who knows what else they're doing.

    Yes, there's lots of evidence. We can start with this.


    Lastly, I want to make it clear that I think Alex Jones has a literal mental illness problem. Like, he's 100% KooKoo. If you haven't listened to Joe Rogan's podcast with him, if 4 hours of pure gold. For me, at least, it made me less angry at him because the dude has literally lost his mind. He's like a big kid that believes in interdimensional aliens and the government working on programs to explore interdimensions using the drug DMT to talk to machine elves.

    He talks about Sandy Hook too. Basically, he says he's sorry for what he said and he was given bad information (no ****, Sherlock.) I don't care he was kicked off social media. I do care about the slippery slope of enforcing censorship though.

    Enter Steven Crowder. I encourage you to read into that whole situation and get a clear perspective of how silly it is. #gaywonk, Carlos Maza, was baiting and playing a serious victim. He's like, the Milo of the left. He's a provocateur.
    https://www.businessinsider.com/steven-crowder-youtube-speech-carlos-maza-explained-youtube-2019-6

    #VoxAdpocalypse is garbage.

    https://www.rt.com/usa/462679-google-shapiro-prager-peterson-nazis/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    I still think it's hard for me to believe you don't get the problem with this. I know you don't like Shapiro, Peterson (I don't know much about) and Prager (I know they make super conservative and corny YouTube videos) but come on, bro.
     
  16. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
    There is, and you're burying your head in the sand to think this is the case.
     
  17. Stoked

    Stoked Well-Known Member Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    38,983
    5,572
    388
    Dec 13, 2011
    There is but since it’s not a public entity they can censor people.

    But yes, there is a growing trend to silence dissent and disagreement. To label things sexist, racist, bigoted...

    Hell some radio personality even went after Toy Story 4.
     
    Archie Moses likes this.
  18. Harambe

    Harambe Well-Known Member Contributor

    6,448
    869
    198
    May 26, 2010
    If Amazon sells fleshlights at $42.50 each, and a private seller sells the same product with serial numbers sequential to those sold from Amazon for $12.50, do you think Amazon has the right to deny the private seller auction space? How about slapping an "Amazon Choice" tag at the top of your search for unmarital aid?

    It doesn't matter what you think. Amazon does what the **** they want
     
    One Brow and Rubashov like this.
  19. Rubashov

    Rubashov Well-Known Member 2019 Award Winner

    6,626
    3,198
    248
    Dec 24, 2016
    Are you actively monitoring the Fleshlight market? Would trade on that market be considered fleshlight futures? I think that would be a sticky situation.
     
    Stoked likes this.
  20. Archie Moses

    Archie Moses Well-Known Member

    12,259
    2,849
    268
    May 25, 2010
    What if Amazon makes decisions like this based on skin color, religion, sexuality, political affiliation?

    Business can do what they want, but again, it becomes a slippery slope and is censorship
     

Share This Page