Facebook bans a slew of high profile extremists

[HomerJS]

The orwellian left are rapidly proving they are not to be trusted with power.

The left now looks at chinese censorship and simply drools.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertain...n-valleys-conservative-blacklisting-campaign/
A quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson is enough to merit a ban if you are on the "wrong side".

These are the people who want to disarm the population as it imposes a police state.

Welcome to clown world, and as I've said before, the left have proven they are unfit to rule.

You did this to yourselves.

You know what is really terrible? Those poor parents who lost their kids in the Sandy Hook massacre and on top of that had to move 7 times because of trolling by Alex Jones causing death threats

Don't care about them do you?

You Trump supporters and the idiot himself caused this giving the likes of Alex Jones credibility

 

[fskimospy]

The delusion of these right wing extremists is just unhinged. Your right to free speech is not being infringed upon when other people choose not to listen to you. Your right to free speech is not being infringed upon when another private party chooses not to provide you with a soapbox to speak from.

If your notion of freedom requires that others be subjugated to you against their will, then you're the authoritarian. Like, by actual definition.

Apparently the modern American conservative idea of freedom is now not just simply being able to act as terribly as they want without consequences, now if companies don’t actively expend resources to promote their speech they are being oppressed.

 

[Commodus]

What are going to do about it? It sounds pretty serious, this 'the left' planning to turn the whole world into police state.. how do you intend to stop them?
I ask because, from the tone your posts, it sounds like we're going to be seeing you in the news soon.

That's the worrisome part. There are sadly numerous forums where far-right people wildly exaggerate the 'threat' of the left, but 0roo is one of those people who sounds like he's about five minutes from perpetrating real violence in response to his fantasies.

Hell, I'm still worried about Blue, who was so virulently islamophobic (and in a country that's more accepting of Muslims, no less) that you wondered if he wouldn't make the headlines for a shooting or bombing.

 

[Jhhnn]

What are going to do about it? It sounds pretty serious, this 'the left' planning to turn the whole world into police state.. how do you intend to stop them?
I ask because, from the tone your posts, it sounds like we're going to be seeing you in the news soon.

Well, all the Alt-right haters & trolls can boycott facebook & instagram, post exclusively on Gab. Boycott youtube, too. It wouldn't be as much fun for them, however, because they'd only be trolling each other. Maybe somebody can create an AI to run bots to convince them that they really are trolling the libruhls to give them the total illusion.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

What are going to do about it? It sounds pretty serious, this 'the left' planning to turn the whole world into police state.. how do you intend to stop them?
I ask because, from the tone your posts, it sounds like we're going to be seeing you in the news soon.

He won’t be able to get a travel visa to enter the Country

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So Trump is going to "monitor" the situation. If he bitches that's his right as a citizen. If he acts as President or causes others to act on his orders in that role, then he has violated the 1st and those complaining about social media can GTFO.

 

[zinfamous]

The orwellian left are rapidly proving they are not to be trusted with power.

The left now looks at chinese censorship and simply drools.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertain...n-valleys-conservative-blacklisting-campaign/
A quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson is enough to merit a ban if you are on the "wrong side".

These are the people who want to disarm the population as it imposes a police state.

Welcome to clown world, and as I've said before, the left have proven they are unfit to rule.

You did this to yourselves.

all of your sources have been banned from social media because they are Russian bots and trolls.

So are you.

Fuck off, shitstain.

 

[woolfe9998]

Oh lookie, the Douchebag-in-Chief tweets in support of the scumbags banned from Facebook.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/04/tech/trump-social-media-twitter-facebook/index.html

Gotta rally the troops, right?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Oh lookie, the Douchebag-in-Chief tweets in support of the scumbags banned from Facebook.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/04/tech/trump-social-media-twitter-facebook/index.html

Gotta rally the troops, right?

I especially liked the part when white power Stephen king inadvertently self owns, probably still oblivious.

 

[UglyCasanova]

I enjoy this is happening because it’s sparking a much needed debate on what exactly these platforms are and their responsibilities or lack thereof to society. One of the many debates to have in the digital age.

 

[brycejones]

I enjoy this is happening because it’s sparking a much needed debate on what exactly these platforms are and their responsibilities or lack thereof to society. One of the many debates to have in the digital age.

Property rights don't magically change "because internet".

 

[ch33zw1z]

Property rights don't magically change "because internet".

That's conservative slang for forcing others to hear what you want them to regardless of it's factual status, spreading FUD and lies on a private platform is their God given right! Burn it down! Lock her up! God bless 'Murica!

 

[UglyCasanova]

Property rights don't magically change "because internet".

The digital age has brought on all sorts of questions. I remember the debate about copying your cd’sto your computer being one for instance. Net neutrality is a big one, should private companies be able to discriminate packets. The role of social media platforms is yet another.

 

[ch33zw1z]

The digital age has brought on all sorts of questions. I remember the debate about copying your cd’sto your computer being one for instance. Net neutrality is a big one, should private companies be able to discriminate packets. The role of social media platforms is yet another.

The comical part is that the GOP FCC rolled back net neutrality, so their answer is clear, private companies can "discriminate packets". Aw shucks, guess stable genius' want it both ways. Conservatives just want others to be forced to hear what they have to say. Just because you scream it at someone doesnt mean it's true or that anyone has to stand around and listen.

Personal responsibility, when social media let's you down, grow up.

maybe Sinclair broadcasting will bankroll another conservative safe space in the social media area.

Until then, your dear leaders outrage is pathetic pandering, which you seem to chastise others for.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The comical part is that the GOP FCC rolled back net neutrality, so their answer is clear, private companies can "discriminate packets". Aw shucks, guess stable genius' want it both ways. Conservatives just want others to be forced to hear what they have to say. Just because you scream it at someone doesnt mean it's true or that anyone has to stand around and listen.

Personal responsibility, when social media let's you down, grow up.

maybe Sinclair broadcasting will bankroll another conservative safe space in the social media area.

Until then, your dear leaders outrage is pathetic pandering, which you seem to chastise others for.

Was coming here to post something similar about the FCC

 

[ch33zw1z]

Was coming here to post something similar about the FCC

It's even worse because idiots like Mr. Concern conflate ISP's and services on a regular basis, even after the topic is explained at length, ad nauseum. I can't tell if they're willfully stupid or really unable to comprehend the different pieces of what users call "the internet".

 

[Fanatical Meat]

It's even worse because idiots like Mr. Concern conflate ISP's and services on a regular basis, even after the topic is explained at length, ad nauseum. I can't tell if they're willfully stupid or really unable to comprehend the different pieces of what users call "the internet".

I’m looking at it more like why doesn’t Fox News allow a Rachael Maddow segment.
Fox is a business, it is Fox’s choice whom will be on.
I’d never say for should be required to have a Rachael Maddow segment.
Same with Facebook, if a small percentage of users are continually shitting on the platform to encourage arguments it’s fine to ban them.
As of today most under 25 don’t & wont use Facebook number one reason cited is too much politics.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I’m looking at it more like why doesn’t Fox News allow a Rachael Maddow segment.
Fox is a business, it is Fox’s choice whom will be on.
I’d never say for should be required to have a Rachael Maddow segment.
Same with Facebook, if a small percentage of users are continually shitting on the platform to encourage arguments it’s fine to ban them.
As of today most under 25 don’t & wont use Facebook number one reason cited is too much politics.

Yea, conservatives in our world have had the luxury of using FUD + violence to control others for so long, they simply dont know what to do when people give them the boot or dont take their usual BS seriously.

The wholly projectionist complaints from them either means they lack the sense to reason this out logically, or they choose not to cuz feels.

Edit: bear in mind, I was raised in a conservative safe space, bubble style. That's their thing. They try extremely hard to keep you under the same influences all the time. I find the entire premise of their argument flawed, disingenuous, and outright laughable.

 

[brycejones]

The digital age has brought on all sorts of questions. I remember the debate about copying your cd’sto your computer being one for instance. Net neutrality is a big one, should private companies be able to discriminate packets. The role of social media platforms is yet another.

This particular issue is only a question to those who for some reason believe they can force other people to give them a platform on their property.

 

[zinfamous]

I enjoy this is happening because it’s sparking a much needed debate on what exactly these platforms are and their responsibilities or lack thereof to society. One of the many debates to have in the digital age.

divorced from the context of the immediate issue, I do agree with you.

And it could have been a more enlightening debate at one time, if Charlottseville didn't happen...but it did. So we know without any uncertainty what it means to empower right-wing extremists of the day. Give them enough rope, and they will fucking murder you and your family.

 

[bshole]

divorced from the context of the immediate issue, I do agree with you.

And it could have been a more enlightening debate at one time, if Charlottseville didn't happen...but it did. So we know without any uncertainty what it means to empower right-wing extremists of the day. Give them enough rope, and they will fucking murder you and your family.

Well it promises to get much more interesting. Snoop Dogg is absolutely livid and is calling on his more than 30+ million followers to post their favorite Farrakan videos and then dared Facebook to ban him.

Not sure the look of an entitled WHITE billionaire banning an apparently popular black leader is going to go over real well. If Facebook bans Snoop, it will look even worse.

"How the f--- y'all gonna ban Minister Louis Farrakhan for putting the truth out there? I stand with him. I'm with him. Ban me, motherf---er."

 

[ch33zw1z]

Well it promises to get much more interesting. Snoop Dogg is absolutely livid and is calling on his more than 30+ million followers to post their favorite Farrakan videos and then dared Facebook to ban him.

Not sure the look of an entitled WHITE billionaire banning an apparently popular black leader is going to go over real well. If Facebook bans Snoop, it will look even worse.

If Snoop posts videos of Farrakhan that are ban worthy, why the f not.

 

[bshole]

If Snoop posts videos of Farrakhan that are ban worthy, why the f not.

Given that 50% of black voters have a favorable impression of Farrakhan, this could have a negative impact on any Democratic presidential candidate. Ban Snoop and that effect could be even greater. Trump could easily use this to court black voters by condemning Farrakhan's banning.

“Fifty percent (50%) of black voters have a favorable opinion of Farrakhan, while 42% view him unfavorably. Among white voters, 12% have a favorable impression of Farrakhan, while 57% have an unfavorable view of him. Thirty-one percent (31%) of white voters don’t know enough about him to offer an opinion,” Rasmussen noted.

https://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_104097.shtml
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ike_louis_farrakhan_everyone_else_not_so_much

 

[Fanatical Meat]

^^^^Oh Noes!!!!

 

[Greenman]

Given that 50% of black voters have a favorable impression of Farrakhan, this could have a negative impact on any Democratic presidential candidate. Ban Snoop and that effect could be even greater. Trump could easily use this to court black voters by condemning Farrakhan's banning.




https://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_104097.shtml
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ike_louis_farrakhan_everyone_else_not_so_much

And down the rabbit hole we go.