Twitter Suspends Alex Jones for One Week

[s0me0nesmind1]

Only those times when the First Amendment is inconveniently arrayed against their desire to only ever be fed fact-free, feels-based information of a blatantly propagandistic nature, to the very direct detriment of protections for the actual free press.

Questioning the free press and calling it fake news - regardless of how stupid it is... is still not calling for - and is not actively trying to prohibit the media from saying their message.

Correlating those 2 things is going full retard. Don't go full retard.

 

[zinfamous]

Questioning the free press and calling it fake news - regardless of how stupid it is... is still not calling for - and is not actively trying to prohibit the media from saying their message.

Correlating those 2 things is going full retard. Don't go full retard.

"The Free press is the Enemy of the people."

Defend that, sockpuppet.

 

[JSt0rm]

the guy spreads speech that incites violence. nobody cares about his dumb dont drink the water stuff. Its all the other seditious shit he spews.

 

[Vic]

We absolutely must work as hard as possible to get any speech that we don't agree with squashed and hopefully outlawed. If we can't win elections and do it through legislation then we'll pressure the content providers until they do it for us.

Can we assume that your position on free speech here would be the same if some far-leftist leader were inciting his/her followers to violence on Twitter?

 

[Vic]

When do conservatives try to silence people's opinions of the opposing views?

"Liberalism is a mental disorder."

 

[Vic]

Questioning the free press and calling it fake news - regardless of how stupid it is... is still not calling for - and is not actively trying to prohibit the media from saying their message.

Correlating those 2 things is going full retard. Don't go full retard.

Full retard is ignoring that those words came from the President of the United States.

 

[Vic]

It's just so awesome that the same political ideology that gave us McCarthyism (and continues to defend McCarthy to this day) pretends that they care about free speech.
And I'm sure they do too, as long as it's their speech.

 

[JSt0rm]

its just the conservative victim mentality. Its why they project it on everyone else while actually feeling it the most.

 

[Vic]

The really sick part is that they believe their own countrymen are the enemy, and defend incitement of violence against their fellow Americans as free speech, while they wave the flag and claim to be patriotic Americans.

Absolutely appalling hypocrisy.

 

[Vic]

When do conservatives try to silence people's opinions of the opposing views?

BTW, what is the reason that Jones says that some people are the "enemy" that need to acted upon if not that their opinions are an opposing view from Jones?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

When do conservatives try to silence people's opinions of the opposing views?

You don’t spend much time on conservative news sites or forums do you?

It’s a non stop parade of banning anyone with contrary thoughts. Entire topics are banned at the whim of one particular forum owner. Breitbart users flag just about any contrary comment and pile on.

 

[darkswordsman17]

You don’t spend much time on conservative news sites or forums do you?

It’s a non stop parade of banning anyone with contrary thoughts. Entire topics are banned at the whim of one particular forum owner. Breitbart users flag just about any contrary comment and pile on.

Well, I certainly don't, but I absolutely am aware of the blatant hypocrisy that these poor pathetic whiny crybaby bitch conservatives operate on. As usual the little chickenshits can't handle 1/100th of what they dish out before bawling their goddamn heads off. Their brains really are stuck in like infantile level emotional development level.

 

[IJTSSG]

Can we assume that your position on free speech here would be the same if some far-leftist leader were inciting his/her followers to violence on Twitter?

Yes, you can because unlike the left I hold people accountable for their actions. I don't blame guns for murders and I don't blame the Pied Piper for people following him around. I blame the people who are stupid enough to do it.

 

[BoomerD]

When do conservatives try to silence people's opinions of the opposing views?

Remember George W. Bush’s “free speech zones”?

 

[Amused]

Yes, you can because unlike the left I hold people accountable for their actions. I don't blame guns for murders and I don't blame the Pied Piper for people following him around. I blame the people who are stupid enough to do it.

Except when you don't want to believe it, and then you blame the nebulous "derp state" or some other lame conspiracy.

The irony of this statement after months of defending the indefensible Trump campaign and admin is funny as hell, and shows just how deluded you truly are.

 

[Vic]

Yes, you can because unlike the left I hold people accountable for their actions. I don't blame guns for murders and I don't blame the Pied Piper for people following him around. I blame the people who are stupid enough to do it.

This logic doesn't hold up. If you hold people accountable, then why are you giving Jones a pass, if not because of partisanship?
Incitement is not generally considered to be protected free speech, Jones himself must have no respect for free speech because he is inciting against people because of their speech, and finally, no one has any actual free speech rights on private social media platforms like Twitter (or ATPN for that matter).

I'm pro-2a BTW, so you can stop clutching those particular pearls.

 

[Vic]

Except when you don't want to believe it, and then you blame the nebulous "derp state" or some other lame conspiracy.

The irony of this statement after months of defending the indefensible Trump campaign and admin is funny as hell, and shows just how deluded you truly are.

It makes sense if you see it as IJTSSG believes that free speech and other rights are tribally limited, rather than universal. So it applies to him and everyone he identifies with (Jones and other Republican-voting 'conservatives'), but not to anyone he doesn't identify with (liberals and Democratic voters). In that light, Jones has unlimited free speech to threaten and incite violence against liberals, and Dorsey & co can and should be forced to publish Jones' speech against their will.
IOW, typical projection.

But on that note, this is where you and a number of others really miss the mark on Trump. They're not really racists per se, their hatred of minorities is as tribally based as their hatred of liberals and of anyone else who doesn't vote Trump. At the same time, the intention of the 'deep state' propaganda is really to purge the civil service ranks of anyone who don't give patronage to Trump. Remember, Trump's political hero is Andrew Jackson, and this is exactly how Jackson operated in office.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Newspapers and broadcasters routinely decide what reports to publish and which not. If any social media outlet applies any sort of moderation or rules of conduct they are a publisher and no longer a neutral platform like a phone system, and are therefore entitled to apply their own editorial criteria for publishing and not publishing. There's nothing that says any medium has to publish whatever anyone else wants to use them to publish. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you're entitled to require someone else to give you a megaphone.

Facebook banning Infowars for example, was a business decision. They simply decided that whatever financial benefit they were gaining from carrying Infowars' content wasn't worth the potential revenue losses from the negative blowback.

Todays right wing love to talk about keeping government out of business until a business does something they don't like

 

[Commodus]

Yes, you can because unlike the left I hold people accountable for their actions. I don't blame guns for murders and I don't blame the Pied Piper for people following him around. I blame the people who are stupid enough to do it.

You spend most of your time here covering for confirmed liars.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Remember George W. Bush’s “free speech zones”?

'Free speech zones' go back to the 1980s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone#History

 

[IJTSSG]

Except when you don't want to believe it, and then you blame the nebulous "derp state" or some other lame conspiracy.

The irony of this statement after months of defending the indefensible Trump campaign and admin is funny as hell, and shows just how deluded you truly are.

Please point out where I've done either one of those things. Here's a reminder --- 1+2 != 47.

This logic doesn't hold up. If you hold people accountable, then why are you giving Jones a pass, if not because of partisanship?
Incitement is not generally considered to be protected free speech, Jones himself must have no respect for free speech because he is inciting against people because of their speech, and finally, no one has any actual free speech rights on private social media platforms like Twitter (or ATPN for that matter).

I'm pro-2a BTW, so you can stop clutching those particular pearls.

How am I giving Jones a pass? I've never read or heard a word from him. Ever. Pro Tip: Defending someone's right to say something doesn't mean you agree with it. Saying you don't agree with a certain course of action doesn't mean you don't recognize their right to do so. I understand the content providers have every right to govern what is posted on their forums. I think whenever any entity starts limiting speech there's a slippery slope. One of you idiots mentioned earlier in the thread that these social media outlets are probably doing this to prevent government intervention. Really? The .gov is going to intervene? On what basis? If for some reason they think they should, everyone, EVERYONE, should be in full throated opposition against it.

 

[Amused]

'Free speech zones' go back to the 1980s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone#History

Yep, the first one was the 88 DNC in Atlanta. GWB was hardly the inventor of these. Though, they have their place as a way to stop protesters from shutting everything down.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz]

One of you idiots mentioned earlier in the thread that these social media outlets are probably doing this to prevent government intervention. Really? The .gov is going to intervene? On what basis? If for some reason they think they should, everyone, EVERYONE, should be in full throated opposition against it.

I was that idiot. For the record, I am against government regulation of speech on the internet but I believe the private sector has a responsibility to not be a knowing facilitator of behavior that’s obviously a serious risk to public health.

If YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter let ISIS propaganda videos run wild on their platforms without regard for the consequences, I’d expect the government to step in and hold the platforms accountable and perhaps legislation.

It’s like a chemical plant that chooses to clandestinely dump its toxic waste in the local drinking water because it’s more cost effective. In an unregulated world, the government wouldn’t step in until people started dropping dead. No one forced those people to drink the poisoned water, why should the government punish the chemical plant with laws that protect people from harm?

The shit that Alex Jones and other bad actors push on the internet have real world consequences and people will get hurt.

The “Holy Fire” in California that’s already killed people was a QAnon conspiracy nut. He wanted to own the libs.

 

[IJTSSG]

I was that idiot. For the record, I am against government regulation of speech on the internet but I believe the private sector has a responsibility to not be a knowing facilitator of behavior that’s obviously a serious risk to public health.

If YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter let ISIS propaganda videos run wild on their platforms without regard for the consequences, I’d expect the government to step in and hold the platforms accountable and perhaps legislation.

It’s like a chemical plant that chooses to clandestinely dump its toxic waste in the local drinking water because it’s more cost effective. In an unregulated world, the government wouldn’t step in until people started dropping dead. No one forced those people to drink the poisoned water, why should the government punish the chemical plant with laws that protect people from harm?

The shit that Alex Jones and other bad actors push on the internet have real world consequences and people will get hurt.

The “Holy Fire” in California that’s already killed people was a QAnon conspiracy nut. He wanted to own the libs.

You're clueless about what free speech really is. Your comparison of free speech to dumping chemicals is apples to VW's. You want limits on what you deem serious risk to public health. What's that list look like? Fast food commercials? Beer ads? Maxine Waters calling for the harassment of people? Gun ads? Which of these make your fascist little list of "serious risk to public health"?

At least you owned the idiot part.

Good job!

 

[BUTCH1]

Please point out where I've done either one of those things. Here's a reminder --- 1+2 != 47.



How am I giving Jones a pass? I've never read or heard a word from him. Ever. Pro Tip: Defending someone's right to say something doesn't mean you agree with it. Saying you don't agree with a certain course of action doesn't mean you don't recognize their right to do so. I understand the content providers have every right to govern what is posted on their forums. I think whenever any entity starts limiting speech there's a slippery slope. One of you idiots mentioned earlier in the thread that these social media outlets are probably doing this to prevent government intervention. Really? The .gov is going to intervene? On what basis? If for some reason they think they should, everyone, EVERYONE, should be in full throated opposition against it.

No one is stopping anyone with a -legit- political opinion on Twitter, Facebook, You-tube, ect. but is claiming the Sandy hook tragedy as "fake" really count as an "opinion" or Jones simply placating his retarded followers so they stat tuned and buy more of his stuff. You're aware Jones makes most of his $$ selling overpriced vitamins and other assorted sundries to his "doomsday prepper " audience, correct?. Don't think for a second Jones is that crazy, this is all a show for his profit at the expense of those he choose's to vilify. Jones can continue to spew his crap from his own website, no one is taking his 1st amendment right's away, these Co's wisely, do not want to expose themselves to lawsuits from people possibly harmed or even killed by a whack-job follower of infowars.