Facebook, apple purge infowars for hate speech

[Wyatt earp]

The Alex Jones and Trump Highlight interview is still up.
Full one was removed
and
Today's Infowars is tomorrows Fox News and Trump Tweet.
Enjoy Half Hour's worth


`
`

We know pinko commie

We know ...

 

[OldLady]

I see a fat pig who made millions peddling conspiracy theories on the backs of 3,000 murder victims after 9/11. Like I said, when some one who matters gets “censored” I’ll worry. Alex Jones has made millions peddling crazy lies. Fuck him, fuck his family I hope they all go broke and starve. As for stupid people, it’s you morons who believe his bullshit about chem trails being geoengeneering to make the climate better for the Alejandro when they come and needle AJ’s line about the government slowly killing is all off by poisoning our food with preservatives. Sing called stupid and ignorant by your type is an honerable thing.

it's the fact they can get away with it when it happens to people most people detest that gives them the balls to go after more people, more mainstream people.

Jones is a nutter, but the best way to expose nutters is to let them keep talking, not by making virtual martyrs out of them.

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

Who would you rather decide what is on their platforms?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

About damn time.

Really? Are you certain you want to go down that path?

What path are you referring to?

The path that will lead directly to hate speech laws.

How so? FB and Apple are private companies. They have every right to moderate their content. This has nothing to do with government stifling the First Amendment.

Hate speech laws exist even under so called democratic societies. As to Facebook and others having the "right" to moderate content, of course they do but at their own peril.

BOOM! Rep. Darrell Issa: If Twitter, Facebook Are Going to Politic Through Algorithm – They May Start Getting Regulated by FEC

BOOM! Rep. Darrell Issa: If Twitter, Facebook Are Going to Politic Through Algorithm - They May Start Getting Regulated by FEC (VIDEO)

Conservatives can boycott these platforms and if they start to lose money as a result they'll likely be forced to change, right? Isn't that how Capitalism and the free market is supposed to work?

 

[OldLady]

I see a fat pig who made millions peddling conspiracy theories on the backs of 3,000 murder victims after 9/11. Like I said, when some one who matters gets “censored” I’ll worry. Alex Jones has made millions peddling crazy lies. Fuck him, fuck his family I hope they all go broke and starve. As for stupid people, it’s you morons who believe his bullshit about chem trails being geoengeneering to make the climate better for the Alejandro when they come and needle AJ’s line about the government slowly killing is all off by poisoning our food with preservatives. Sing called stupid and ignorant by your type is an honerable thing.

it's the fact they can get away with it when it happens to people most people detest that gives them the balls to go after more people, more mainstream people.

Jones is a nutter, but the best way to expose nutters is to let them keep talking, not by making virtual martyrs out of them.

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?
I remember when CBS cancelled the Smothers Brothers. It sucked. I survived and the counter movement did not die.

 

[martybegan]

it's the fact they can get away with it when it happens to people most people detest that gives them the balls to go after more people, more mainstream people.

Jones is a nutter, but the best way to expose nutters is to let them keep talking, not by making virtual martyrs out of them.

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

Who would you rather decide what is on their platforms?

if they call themselves an open forum, let people watch what they want to watch.

 

[OldLady]

I see a fat pig who made millions peddling conspiracy theories on the backs of 3,000 murder victims after 9/11. Like I said, when some one who matters gets “censored” I’ll worry. Alex Jones has made millions peddling crazy lies. Fuck him, fuck his family I hope they all go broke and starve. As for stupid people, it’s you morons who believe his bullshit about chem trails being geoengeneering to make the climate better for the Alejandro when they come and needle AJ’s line about the government slowly killing is all off by poisoning our food with preservatives. Sing called stupid and ignorant by your type is an honerable thing.

it's the fact they can get away with it when it happens to people most people detest that gives them the balls to go after more people, more mainstream people.

Jones is a nutter, but the best way to expose nutters is to let them keep talking, not by making virtual martyrs out of them.

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

Thats what people said generations ago when they were burning books!
SMH

No one is burning anyone's book. InfoWars is still there. Storm Front is still there.
I don't get it.
Can you no longer get to InfoWars from an Apple phone? You can't go to it with the IP address?

Its the EQUIVALENT of burning books.
Who cares if he says crazy shit? There are MILLIONS of people on youtube saying crazy shit.
Its just more of that double standard partisan BULLSHIT.
Like people defending that racist asian chick. Did you know a black woman did the same tweet as that girl and replaced white with black and another with jews? Wanna know what happened? They deleted them.
But since she is a leftist, they dont give a shit.
Its not about content. Its not about racism. ITS ABOUT POLITICS
Book Burning.

You didn't answer my question. CAN you still access InfoWars from an Apple phone? Or don't you know?

 

[martybegan]

it's the fact they can get away with it when it happens to people most people detest that gives them the balls to go after more people, more mainstream people.

Jones is a nutter, but the best way to expose nutters is to let them keep talking, not by making virtual martyrs out of them.

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?
I remember when CBS cancelled the Smothers Brothers. It sucked. I survived and the counter movement did not die.

Were they cancelled for political reasons?

 

[kiwiman127]

Damn!!! There goes the Conspiracy forums on USMB!!!!
What are the Little Trumpsters going to use for a resource for their threads and posts?

 

[OldLady]

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

Who would you rather decide what is on their platforms?

if they call themselves an open forum, let people watch what they want to watch.

I believe they still can. Still waiting to hear why this is a book burning, and not just reshelving it.

 

[OldLady]

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?
I remember when CBS cancelled the Smothers Brothers. It sucked. I survived and the counter movement did not die.

Were they cancelled for political reasons?

Oh, yeah. Big time.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Tough day for all the Infowars morons. Tough day.

 

[martybegan]

While i do support youtubes right to do this, i do not agree. No one should.

Social media sites are an interesting question regarding this. Since they claim protection from prosecution or libel accusations by saying the content is not theirs but that of the person using their platform, and they bill themselves as open arena's for discussion, doesn't that make them an effective form of a digital commons?

 

[martybegan]

So bascially you want media giants to decide who gets to say things to large audiences....

If it is untestamented garbage, why should it be given a large audience?
Since when is that what we want to see? listen to? Oh, I get it, the National Enquirer thing. Well, folks can still go to InfoWars.com and enjoy him. I'm sure after all these years of being front and center on all those giant sites, Jones has quite a large following. They can still follow him. I am apparently missing the problem here.

The problem is what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?

Why do you feel comfortable with giant corporations deciding who gets to see what?

what would you feel if the media giants decided to suppress something or someone you supported?
I remember when CBS cancelled the Smothers Brothers. It sucked. I survived and the counter movement did not die.

Were they cancelled for political reasons?

Oh, yeah. Big time.

You got proof of that?

 

[TNHarley]

it's the fact they can get away with it when it happens to people most people detest that gives them the balls to go after more people, more mainstream people.

Jones is a nutter, but the best way to expose nutters is to let them keep talking, not by making virtual martyrs out of them.

No, I don't think it works that way. Exposing nutters by letting them keep talking just gives them the chance to grow their audience and their following. Best they don't have such a large soap box to lie from, from the start.

Thats what people said generations ago when they were burning books!
SMH

No one is burning anyone's book. InfoWars is still there. Storm Front is still there.
I don't get it.
Can you no longer get to InfoWars from an Apple phone? You can't go to it with the IP address?

Its the EQUIVALENT of burning books.
Who cares if he says crazy shit? There are MILLIONS of people on youtube saying crazy shit.
Its just more of that double standard partisan BULLSHIT.
Like people defending that racist asian chick. Did you know a black woman did the same tweet as that girl and replaced white with black and another with jews? Wanna know what happened? They deleted them.
But since she is a leftist, they dont give a shit.
Its not about content. Its not about racism. ITS ABOUT POLITICS
Book Burning.

You didn't answer my question. CAN you still access InfoWars from an Apple phone? Or don't you know?

This isnt about his website, its about social media. Who would shut down his website? Al Gore?
Your question is completely irrelevant.

 

[MarcATL]

The point is one person's hate group is another's darling. Let the markets decide.

The market has decided. They got shutdown for breaking the market's rules.

 

[TNHarley]

While i do support youtubes right to do this, i do not agree. No one should.

Social media sites are an interesting question regarding this. Since they claim protection from prosecution or libel accusations by saying the content is not theirs but that of the person using their platform, and they bill themselves as open arena's for discussion, doesn't that make them an effective form of a digital commons?

That is an interesting question, marty!

 

[skookerasbil]

Ghey

 

[martybegan]

While i do support youtubes right to do this, i do not agree. No one should.

Social media sites are an interesting question regarding this. Since they claim protection from prosecution or libel accusations by saying the content is not theirs but that of the person using their platform, and they bill themselves as open arena's for discussion, doesn't that make them an effective form of a digital commons?

That is an interesting question, marty!

I've had this debate before in other threads. I do get a bunch of pushback from open commerce/civil libertarian types as much as i get from lefties who only like censorship when it is applied to their opponents.

 

[MarcATL]

For conservative media outlets who don’t speak out because they don’t like Infowars, we have a message for you – you’re next.

Facebook banned Infowars after lobbying by both CNN and Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL). This isn’t “just a private company,” this is brazen political censorship.

This is the outcome of the left refusing to debate their ideas and simply no platforming their adversaries instead.

This is the modern day electronic equivalent of book burning.

This is throwing dissidents in the Big Tech gulag because their voices were becoming too loud and having too much influence.

This is the purge.

It will only intensify unless lawmakers act now to introduce a Digital Bill of Rights and treat social media giants as telecommunications companies who are forbidden by law from discriminating against people and media outlets based on their political opinions.

So you want to ban lobbyists/lobbying from the political process then?

 

[boedicca]

Speech Codes are not a good look for Apple. We expect such totalitarian thuggery from FB, but shame on Apple.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength