InfoWars Ban: CNN, Democrats Successfully Lobby Big Tech To Censor Their Critics...

[sartre play]

some things are tough to decide, if a business decides to open a public business how much of that business needs to be public, should a business place a sign out side that states no shoes no shirt no service, how about no gays or Democrats, or no Republicans or guns, no blacks allowed. where is the line? is that why the government stepped in? that the Declaration of Independence from the beginning said all men are created equal. but then not really, humans are not perfect, you can never expect them all to follow like blind sheep any one set of rules. if we don't learn to work together what will America become?

 

[deanrd]

Dozens of little children were horribly murdered at Sandyhook.

Republicans think that never happened.

Republicans said Hillary ran a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor.

Something that happened they don't believe.

Something so bizarre it's unbelievable, Republicans believe.

And they feel they are the only option for running the country?

OMG.

 

[Pogo]

So your computer is incapable of surfing to InfoBoors.com? What, did CNN send a tech to break into your house under cover of darkness to hack your browser?

As I noted before, and there's no way to wiggle out of this --- your quest has nothing to do with the content; you're just butthurt over the idea that not as many other people will see it.

That's THEIR business. Not yours.

While I agree with you on a philosophical level, I don't really think you have been paying attention completely with what has been going on.

Platforms such as Facebook, Apple iTunes, and YouTube own such a large part of market share, they have a real ability to influence the public opinion.

As such, they aren't merely just, "businesses" anymore, they have become de facto public utilities.

I have watched over the past decade many of my formerly independent minded friends become more radically left minded due to social media because they refuse to go outside of these platforms.

I am not one of these folks. I always go outside of the box because I know how these platforms work and I know how the major media companies and major tech companies work. I know how essential it is to find information from all sources. It shocks me to find that you believe that this is a beneficial development.

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.

Alex Jones is not, and has not been the only victim of this blacklisting and shadow banning. If they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone, at anytime in the future. Now it is Alex Jones, and they use it for his unpopular speech, what happens when they start to use it against those who protest against a war against Iran? Will you be so happy to have those voices marginalized so they don't come up in searches in Google, or in videos on FB, iTunes, or YouTube?

The great thing about the internet was the unpopular POV made it to the masses, but now, only the corporate CFR, MSM establishment POV will be allowed. That is what is coming. And if you disagree with neoliberalism at home, or neoconservatism abroad? Your voice will once again be silenced.

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

". . . Right now, the global elite do not have control of the White House, but they have discovered a powerful new weapon in the tech companies. They are trying to use this new weapon to smash Alex Jones and other top conservative voices, and they are doing it with a tyrannical flair that is absolutely frightening. I think that it was quite appropriate that the official WikiLeaks Twitter account made a parallel between this purge and an old Star Wars movie…

The empire strikes back: Apple, Spotify, Facebook and Google/Youtube all purge Infowars/Alex Jones. Yes, Infowars has frequent nonsense, but also a state power critique. Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?

And it is quite noteworthy that this comes almost exactly three months before the mid-term elections.

Do you think that is just a coincidence?

After all of the uproar about “election interference”, now the big tech companies are overtly doing it very publicly and in a way that nobody can misunderstand.

The biggest reason why they are lashing out at Alex Jones, Mike Adams and a whole host of other top conservative voices is because Donald Trump never would have gotten elected without them. I guess they figure that if they can start silencing some of those voices that they can turn future elections in their favor.

If it was just a few conservative voices that were being censored, that would be one thing. But the truth is that hundreds and hundreds of conservatives have had Facebook pages taken down, YouTube accounts terminated and Twitter accounts shadowbanned. I won’t repeat all of the information that I have previously published on this topic in this article. Instead, if you would like to learn more I would recommend checking out some of my previous articles…

• “This Is The Worst Purge Of Conservative Voices In The History Of The Internet”
• “Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives”
• “The Big Social Media Companies Are Being Used As A Weapon To Advance The Agenda Of The New World Order”
• “The Censorship Is Real – EndOfTheAmericanDream.com Is Being Completely Blocked By Library Internet Filters”

In the end, this is not about Alex Jones.

This is about a once free society that is becoming more Orwellian with each passing day.

Now that they have come for Alex Jones, they aren’t going to stop.

It might not be tomorrow, but eventually they are going to come for you.

I would like to end this article with a few words from Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article about all of this censorship…"

WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Translation: Pogo has TDS so bad, bad enough to become a fascist faggot.

Funny how all your posts invariably lead to faggotry. Like roads leading to Rome.

uh, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Boring though. But I guess that's life when you have no salient thoughts and your only goal is to come out on top in the monthly post count.

Yeah, I guess you got tired of sucking dick years ago.

My point is that you are slyly supporting censorship. This is one of the worst days on the internet.

That RIPA/HIPA shit has nothing on this.

I've been asking this all day and have yet to get an affirmative answer ---

--- Is Alex Jones' website unreachable? Is his broadcast/podcast inaudible?

No?

Then how is it "censorship"? Do you believe YouTube, or Google, or USMB, *OWES* you a platform?
(Does the world OWE you a living?)

Do they not all employ a Terms of Service gate?

Has no one ever been banned from, or had a post deleted or edited by, this site? Or sites like it? And when they were, was that not the site exercising its authority to do so seeing as how they own it?

What are you, some kinda socialist?

 

[Muhammed]

He then asked Google’s representative if they thought conspiracy theories were a “problem,” and asked her to explain the company’s planned solutions. It seems that YouTube has now come up with a solution: ban the channels that Rep. Deutch objects to.

At a previous hearing on social media censorship, Deutch, who represents Parkland, Florida, attacked tech companies for allowing “vile and outrageous and offensive garbage” on their platforms...

InfoWars Ban - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

They obviously colluded with each other. Seems like a violation of anti-trust law to me.

 

[iceberg]

Interesting, this is exactly why InfoWars was created in the first place. There is an Information War on, for your mind. I try to tell folks, no Communist/Democrat will ever stand for the Constitution. In fact, they despise it. This is just one more example of that. Don't like what they're saying? Have them banned. Hopefully this won't be allowed to stand. Gotta keep on fighting the bastards.


Big tech’s coordinated purge of InfoWars — which was hit by bans from Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube in rapid succession — did not occur in a vacuum. On this issue, Silicon Valley bowed to CNN journalists and Democrat politicians who ceaselessly lobbied for the site to be censored.

It’s a sign of how the concentration of power in America has shifted from big government to big tech that politicians are now lobbying tech companies rather than the other way round, but that’s exactly what happened over the course of the past few months, as Democrats applied relentless pressure on Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants to censor InfoWars.

Chief among them was Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who demanded that a Facebook representative “explain” their decision not to ban InfoWars at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on social media censorship last month. Calling Jones as “well-known conspiracy theorist” whose “brand is bullying,” Deutch also demanded Google’s representative explain how many strikes it would take for a channel on Google-owned YouTube to be deleted...

Read More:
InfoWars Ban - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

You don't know much about 'Big tech'...do you?

Spotify is NOT based in Silicone Valley. It's not even based in America. It's a Swedish corporation.

Spotify - Wikipedia


And so what if these corporations listened to their customers and gave whacko dude the boot? That is free enterprise.

They did not do this because of what politician's said. They did this to placate their customers. Guaranteed.

And again, that is free enterprise and I see nothing wrong with it.

Companies/corporations should be able include or exclude any video content they wish inside their corporations.

Or are you now saying that corporations should not be allowed to control the video content they project/post? Yes or no, please?

You’re missing the point, the hypocrisy of the left is on full display here

I got the point...I reject it.

This is free enterprise...period.

You just don't like whom they banned.

YouTube has banned LOTS of far lefties from it's site...TONS of them.

And again...Spotify has NOTHING to do with American politicians...it is based in Sweden.

Name a few lefties banned.

 

[Marion Morrison]

While I agree with you on a philosophical level, I don't really think you have been paying attention completely with what has been going on.

Platforms such as Facebook, Apple iTunes, and YouTube own such a large part of market share, they have a real ability to influence the public opinion.

As such, they aren't merely just, "businesses" anymore, they have become de facto public utilities.

I have watched over the past decade many of my formerly independent minded friends become more radically left minded due to social media because they refuse to go outside of these platforms.

I am not one of these folks. I always go outside of the box because I know how these platforms work and I know how the major media companies and major tech companies work. I know how essential it is to find information from all sources. It shocks me to find that you believe that this is a beneficial development.

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.

Alex Jones is not, and has not been the only victim of this blacklisting and shadow banning. If they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone, at anytime in the future. Now it is Alex Jones, and they use it for his unpopular speech, what happens when they start to use it against those who protest against a war against Iran? Will you be so happy to have those voices marginalized so they don't come up in searches in Google, or in videos on FB, iTunes, or YouTube?

The great thing about the internet was the unpopular POV made it to the masses, but now, only the corporate CFR, MSM establishment POV will be allowed. That is what is coming. And if you disagree with neoliberalism at home, or neoconservatism abroad? Your voice will once again be silenced.

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

". . . Right now, the global elite do not have control of the White House, but they have discovered a powerful new weapon in the tech companies. They are trying to use this new weapon to smash Alex Jones and other top conservative voices, and they are doing it with a tyrannical flair that is absolutely frightening. I think that it was quite appropriate that the official WikiLeaks Twitter account made a parallel between this purge and an old Star Wars movie…

The empire strikes back: Apple, Spotify, Facebook and Google/Youtube all purge Infowars/Alex Jones. Yes, Infowars has frequent nonsense, but also a state power critique. Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?

And it is quite noteworthy that this comes almost exactly three months before the mid-term elections.

Do you think that is just a coincidence?

After all of the uproar about “election interference”, now the big tech companies are overtly doing it very publicly and in a way that nobody can misunderstand.

The biggest reason why they are lashing out at Alex Jones, Mike Adams and a whole host of other top conservative voices is because Donald Trump never would have gotten elected without them. I guess they figure that if they can start silencing some of those voices that they can turn future elections in their favor.

If it was just a few conservative voices that were being censored, that would be one thing. But the truth is that hundreds and hundreds of conservatives have had Facebook pages taken down, YouTube accounts terminated and Twitter accounts shadowbanned. I won’t repeat all of the information that I have previously published on this topic in this article. Instead, if you would like to learn more I would recommend checking out some of my previous articles…

• “This Is The Worst Purge Of Conservative Voices In The History Of The Internet”
• “Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives”
• “The Big Social Media Companies Are Being Used As A Weapon To Advance The Agenda Of The New World Order”
• “The Censorship Is Real – EndOfTheAmericanDream.com Is Being Completely Blocked By Library Internet Filters”

In the end, this is not about Alex Jones.

This is about a once free society that is becoming more Orwellian with each passing day.

Now that they have come for Alex Jones, they aren’t going to stop.

It might not be tomorrow, but eventually they are going to come for you.

I would like to end this article with a few words from Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article about all of this censorship…"

WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Translation: Pogo has TDS so bad, bad enough to become a fascist faggot.

Funny how all your posts invariably lead to faggotry. Like roads leading to Rome.

uh, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Boring though. But I guess that's life when you have no salient thoughts and your only goal is to come out on top in the monthly post count.

Yeah, I guess you got tired of sucking dick years ago.

My point is that you are slyly supporting censorship. This is one of the worst days on the internet.

That RIPA/HIPA shit has nothing on this.

I've been asking this all day and have yet to get an affirmative answer ---

--- Is Alex Jones' website unreachable?

No?

Then how is it "censorship"? Do you believe YouTube, or Google, or USMB, *OWES* you a platform?
(Does the world OWE you a living?)

Do they not all employ a Terms of Service gate?

Has no one ever been banned from this site? Or sites like it? And when they were, was that not the site exercising its authority to do so seeing as how they own it?

Did Alex Jones not spend years posting on that site?

Look here you fuck.

It's more like a corkboard at the grocery store full of business cards, and yours has been up there forever, and you've been getting business from it. But then a new Assistant

Manager sees yours, and pulls it down, because back in the day you slapped him down for slapping his girl in front of you.

 

[Political Junky]

Interesting, this is exactly why InfoWars was created in the first place. There is an Information War on, for your mind. I try to tell folks, no Communist/Democrat will ever stand for the Constitution. In fact, they despise it. This is just one more example of that. Don't like what they're saying? Have them banned. Hopefully this won't be allowed to stand. Gotta keep on fighting the bastards.


Big tech’s coordinated purge of InfoWars — which was hit by bans from Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube in rapid succession — did not occur in a vacuum. On this issue, Silicon Valley bowed to CNN journalists and Democrat politicians who ceaselessly lobbied for the site to be censored.

It’s a sign of how the concentration of power in America has shifted from big government to big tech that politicians are now lobbying tech companies rather than the other way round, but that’s exactly what happened over the course of the past few months, as Democrats applied relentless pressure on Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants to censor InfoWars.

Chief among them was Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who demanded that a Facebook representative “explain” their decision not to ban InfoWars at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on social media censorship last month. Calling Jones as “well-known conspiracy theorist” whose “brand is bullying,” Deutch also demanded Google’s representative explain how many strikes it would take for a channel on Google-owned YouTube to be deleted...

Read More:
InfoWars Ban - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Bullshit

 

[MisterBeale]

There's a good analogy. There's some wackball here who buys (and sells) that whole Sandy Hook Hoax song and dance. I put him on Ignore for that reason, because an asshat who would spit in the face of grieving parents disgusts me.

That doesn't mean I'm "censoring" the asshat selling the hoax. He still posts whatever diarrhea he posts; I just don't have to wade through it.

Jones is like Trump - First and foremost a snake oil salesman.
He worked overtime to get the boot - with increasingly hateful and violent rhetoric.
Now he will cash in - just like he does with everything else.
Apparently his fans love to be picked up by the feet and have the change shaken out of their pockets.

We need full access to even the information we don't like. It gives us a much better chance of achieving informed opinions and beliefs. These types of bannings are Un-American, and bad for all of us in the end.

So your computer is incapable of surfing to InfoBoors.com? What, did CNN send a tech to break into your house under cover of darkness to hack your browser?

As I noted before, and there's no way to wiggle out of this --- your quest has nothing to do with the content; you're just butthurt over the idea that not as many other people will see it.

That's THEIR business. Not yours.

While I agree with you on a philosophical level, I don't really think you have been paying attention completely with what has been going on.

Platforms such as Facebook, Apple iTunes, and YouTube own such a large part of market share, they have a real ability to influence the public opinion.

As such, they aren't merely just, "businesses" anymore, they have become de facto public utilities.

I have watched over the past decade many of my formerly independent minded friends become more radically left minded due to social media because they refuse to go outside of these platforms.

I am not one of these folks. I always go outside of the box because I know how these platforms work and I know how the major media companies and major tech companies work. I know how essential it is to find information from all sources. It shocks me to find that you believe that this is a beneficial development.

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it. In neither case is it about the content; it's all about control of what gets disseminated, by control freaks who simply do not have that privilege -- trying to dictate what may be released to, or suppressed from, the masses.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.

Alex Jones is not, and has not been the only victim of this blacklisting and shadow banning. If they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone, at anytime in the future. Now it is Alex Jones, and they use it for his unpopular speech, what happens when they start to use it against those who protest against a war against Iran? Will you be so happy to have those voices marginalized so they don't come up in searches in Google, or in videos on FB, iTunes, or YouTube?

The great thing about the internet was the unpopular POV made it to the masses, but now, only the corporate CFR, MSM establishment POV will be allowed. That is what is coming. And if you disagree with neoliberalism at home, or neoconservatism abroad? Your voice will once again be silenced.

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

". . . Right now, the global elite do not have control of the White House, but they have discovered a powerful new weapon in the tech companies. They are trying to use this new weapon to smash Alex Jones and other top conservative voices, and they are doing it with a tyrannical flair that is absolutely frightening. I think that it was quite appropriate that the official WikiLeaks Twitter account made a parallel between this purge and an old Star Wars movie…

The empire strikes back: Apple, Spotify, Facebook and Google/Youtube all purge Infowars/Alex Jones. Yes, Infowars has frequent nonsense, but also a state power critique. Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?

And it is quite noteworthy that this comes almost exactly three months before the mid-term elections.

Do you think that is just a coincidence?

After all of the uproar about “election interference”, now the big tech companies are overtly doing it very publicly and in a way that nobody can misunderstand.

The biggest reason why they are lashing out at Alex Jones, Mike Adams and a whole host of other top conservative voices is because Donald Trump never would have gotten elected without them. I guess they figure that if they can start silencing some of those voices that they can turn future elections in their favor.

If it was just a few conservative voices that were being censored, that would be one thing. But the truth is that hundreds and hundreds of conservatives have had Facebook pages taken down, YouTube accounts terminated and Twitter accounts shadowbanned. I won’t repeat all of the information that I have previously published on this topic in this article. Instead, if you would like to learn more I would recommend checking out some of my previous articles…

• “This Is The Worst Purge Of Conservative Voices In The History Of The Internet”
• “Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives”
• “The Big Social Media Companies Are Being Used As A Weapon To Advance The Agenda Of The New World Order”
• “The Censorship Is Real – EndOfTheAmericanDream.com Is Being Completely Blocked By Library Internet Filters”

In the end, this is not about Alex Jones.

This is about a once free society that is becoming more Orwellian with each passing day.

Now that they have come for Alex Jones, they aren’t going to stop.

It might not be tomorrow, but eventually they are going to come for you.

I would like to end this article with a few words from Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article about all of this censorship…"

WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Wow, you think it is partisan, or just about politics.

It's not.

Do you really want corporations controlling the information that Americans have access to?

Did you watch the "We Are Change" video I posted in post # 213

Corporations already control politics in America, and you want to give them MORE power, really?

Seems very regressive of you . . . .

 

[Rustic]

The Clinton news network Is really an opinion network...
Quit falling down the well

100% incorrect. But thanks for showing us who you are by not having the balls to call out Infowars for what it is.

Info wars/Alex Jones is absolutely harmless, just another opinion site. But then again progressives can’t tolerate anyone that disagrees with them, so what happened was not unexpected...

Infowars is a conduit for alt-right hate speech. He is not entitled to a platform to spew his hate.

Lol
The most hate filled are the progressives, second only to Muslims... He is harmless. Now run along back to your safe space

He is not harmless. He is a member of the alt-right.

He’s harmless

 

[Pogo]

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.




WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Translation: Pogo has TDS so bad, bad enough to become a fascist faggot.

Funny how all your posts invariably lead to faggotry. Like roads leading to Rome.

uh, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Boring though. But I guess that's life when you have no salient thoughts and your only goal is to come out on top in the monthly post count.

Yeah, I guess you got tired of sucking dick years ago.

My point is that you are slyly supporting censorship. This is one of the worst days on the internet.

That RIPA/HIPA shit has nothing on this.

I've been asking this all day and have yet to get an affirmative answer ---

--- Is Alex Jones' website unreachable?

No?

Then how is it "censorship"? Do you believe YouTube, or Google, or USMB, *OWES* you a platform?
(Does the world OWE you a living?)

Do they not all employ a Terms of Service gate?

Has no one ever been banned from this site? Or sites like it? And when they were, was that not the site exercising its authority to do so seeing as how they own it?

What are you, some kinda socialist?

Did Alex Jones not spend years posting on that site?

Look here you fuck.

It's more like a corkboard at the grocery full of business cards, and yours has been up there forever, and you've been getting business from it. But then a new Assistant

Manager sees yours, and pulls it down, because back in the day you slapped him down for slapping his girl in front of you.

I've certainly had my stuff taken down from the proverbial corkboard, though not for that reason.

What did I do? I got the fuck over it and reposted. I didn't start stomping my feet about how the corkboard "owed" me permanent residence.

 

[Marion Morrison]

You don't know much about 'Big tech'...do you?

Spotify is NOT based in Silicone Valley. It's not even based in America. It's a Swedish corporation.

Spotify - Wikipedia


And so what if these corporations listened to their customers and gave whacko dude the boot? That is free enterprise.

They did not do this because of what politician's said. They did this to placate their customers. Guaranteed.

And again, that is free enterprise and I see nothing wrong with it.

Companies/corporations should be able include or exclude any video content they wish inside their corporations.

Or are you now saying that corporations should not be allowed to control the video content they project/post? Yes or no, please?

You’re missing the point, the hypocrisy of the left is on full display here

I got the point...I reject it.

This is free enterprise...period.

You just don't like whom they banned.

YouTube has banned LOTS of far lefties from it's site...TONS of them.

They banned him because Alex Jones disagrees with them, They will never tolerate anyone that disagrees with them. There’s nothing more cowardly than a progressive

You clearly do not watch YouTube much.

LOTS of people on YouTube post videos that knock/insult YouTube.


And, again, YouTube (which is owned by Google) can ban ANYONE THEY WANT. IT'S THEIR CORPORATION.

That is free enterprise.

You don't like it - don't use Google/YouTube.

That is your right as a consumer.

Folks, I'm not sure what to say here. There must be something going on in the democratic party, a revolution perhaps? So many are coming out in support of businesses exercising their rights to conduct operations as they see fit, as a private business.

Now we can move forward with a free market, that allows citizens to choose what they want, and private businesses to conduct business as they want, and the citizens can dictate which businesses thrive or fall, with their wallet.

You're a right fucking sly Marxist midterm shill huh? I don't like it when people try to manipulate the narrative like that.

One thing I know is that you're not Russian.

 

[Pogo]

Jones is like Trump - First and foremost a snake oil salesman.
He worked overtime to get the boot - with increasingly hateful and violent rhetoric.
Now he will cash in - just like he does with everything else.
Apparently his fans love to be picked up by the feet and have the change shaken out of their pockets.

We need full access to even the information we don't like. It gives us a much better chance of achieving informed opinions and beliefs. These types of bannings are Un-American, and bad for all of us in the end.

So your computer is incapable of surfing to InfoBoors.com? What, did CNN send a tech to break into your house under cover of darkness to hack your browser?

As I noted before, and there's no way to wiggle out of this --- your quest has nothing to do with the content; you're just butthurt over the idea that not as many other people will see it.

That's THEIR business. Not yours.

While I agree with you on a philosophical level, I don't really think you have been paying attention completely with what has been going on.

Platforms such as Facebook, Apple iTunes, and YouTube own such a large part of market share, they have a real ability to influence the public opinion.

As such, they aren't merely just, "businesses" anymore, they have become de facto public utilities.

I have watched over the past decade many of my formerly independent minded friends become more radically left minded due to social media because they refuse to go outside of these platforms.

I am not one of these folks. I always go outside of the box because I know how these platforms work and I know how the major media companies and major tech companies work. I know how essential it is to find information from all sources. It shocks me to find that you believe that this is a beneficial development.

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it. In neither case is it about the content; it's all about control of what gets disseminated, by control freaks who simply do not have that privilege -- trying to dictate what may be released to, or suppressed from, the masses.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.

Alex Jones is not, and has not been the only victim of this blacklisting and shadow banning. If they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone, at anytime in the future. Now it is Alex Jones, and they use it for his unpopular speech, what happens when they start to use it against those who protest against a war against Iran? Will you be so happy to have those voices marginalized so they don't come up in searches in Google, or in videos on FB, iTunes, or YouTube?

The great thing about the internet was the unpopular POV made it to the masses, but now, only the corporate CFR, MSM establishment POV will be allowed. That is what is coming. And if you disagree with neoliberalism at home, or neoconservatism abroad? Your voice will once again be silenced.

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

". . . Right now, the global elite do not have control of the White House, but they have discovered a powerful new weapon in the tech companies. They are trying to use this new weapon to smash Alex Jones and other top conservative voices, and they are doing it with a tyrannical flair that is absolutely frightening. I think that it was quite appropriate that the official WikiLeaks Twitter account made a parallel between this purge and an old Star Wars movie…

The empire strikes back: Apple, Spotify, Facebook and Google/Youtube all purge Infowars/Alex Jones. Yes, Infowars has frequent nonsense, but also a state power critique. Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?

And it is quite noteworthy that this comes almost exactly three months before the mid-term elections.

Do you think that is just a coincidence?

After all of the uproar about “election interference”, now the big tech companies are overtly doing it very publicly and in a way that nobody can misunderstand.

The biggest reason why they are lashing out at Alex Jones, Mike Adams and a whole host of other top conservative voices is because Donald Trump never would have gotten elected without them. I guess they figure that if they can start silencing some of those voices that they can turn future elections in their favor.

If it was just a few conservative voices that were being censored, that would be one thing. But the truth is that hundreds and hundreds of conservatives have had Facebook pages taken down, YouTube accounts terminated and Twitter accounts shadowbanned. I won’t repeat all of the information that I have previously published on this topic in this article. Instead, if you would like to learn more I would recommend checking out some of my previous articles…

• “This Is The Worst Purge Of Conservative Voices In The History Of The Internet”
• “Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives”
• “The Big Social Media Companies Are Being Used As A Weapon To Advance The Agenda Of The New World Order”
• “The Censorship Is Real – EndOfTheAmericanDream.com Is Being Completely Blocked By Library Internet Filters”

In the end, this is not about Alex Jones.

This is about a once free society that is becoming more Orwellian with each passing day.

Now that they have come for Alex Jones, they aren’t going to stop.

It might not be tomorrow, but eventually they are going to come for you.

I would like to end this article with a few words from Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article about all of this censorship…"

WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Wow, you think it is partisan, or just about politics.

I didn't even MENTION "partisan" OR "politics". Sorry, no rooms available here for Strawmen.

 

[Rustic]

Dozens of little children were horribly murdered at Sandyhook.

Republicans think that never happened.

Republicans said Hillary ran a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor.

Something that happened they don't believe.

Something so bizarre it's unbelievable, Republicans believe.

And they feel they are the only option for running the country?

OMG.

LOL keep your collective to yourself and shut the fuck up

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I know Democrats are applauding this, but this is very bad for everyone. Democrats are also currently preparing legislation which will result in a complete Government-takeover of the Internet. If they do win Congress back, we're all doomed.

Are you somehow forgetting that Alpha Trump has veto power?

 

[Marion Morrison]

I got something for "The Hive" It's called duct tape, night time, and RAID.

 

[John Shaw]

Democrats are so powerful that they get to boss around the tech giants. Facebook and Google cower before the mighty democrats! Yet ... they hold no political power and obviously struggle to win elections.

Yep, totally adds up. You guys figured it out! You're so smart.

 

[Marion Morrison]

You don't know much about 'Big tech'...do you?

Spotify is NOT based in Silicone Valley. It's not even based in America. It's a Swedish corporation.

Spotify - Wikipedia


And so what if these corporations listened to their customers and gave whacko dude the boot? That is free enterprise.

They did not do this because of what politician's said. They did this to placate their customers. Guaranteed.

And again, that is free enterprise and I see nothing wrong with it.

Companies/corporations should be able include or exclude any video content they wish inside their corporations.

Or are you now saying that corporations should not be allowed to control the video content they project/post? Yes or no, please?

You’re missing the point, the hypocrisy of the left is on full display here

I got the point...I reject it.

This is free enterprise...period.

You just don't like whom they banned.

YouTube has banned LOTS of far lefties from it's site...TONS of them.

They banned him because Alex Jones disagrees with them, They will never tolerate anyone that disagrees with them. There’s nothing more cowardly than a progressive

You clearly do not watch YouTube much.

LOTS of people on YouTube post videos that knock/insult YouTube.


And, again, YouTube (which is owned by Google) can ban ANYONE THEY WANT. IT'S THEIR CORPORATION.

That is free enterprise.

You don't like it - don't use Google/YouTube.

That is your right as a consumer.

Folks, I'm not sure what to say here. There must be something going on in the democratic party, a revolution perhaps? So many are coming out in support of businesses exercising their rights to conduct operations as they see fit, as a private business.

Now we can move forward with a free market, that allows citizens to choose what they want, and private businesses to conduct business as they want, and the citizens can dictate which businesses thrive or fall, with their wallet.

While I agree with you on a philosophical level, I don't really think you have been paying attention completely with what has been going on.

Platforms such as Facebook, Apple iTunes, and YouTube own such a large part of market share, they have a real ability to influence the public opinion.

As such, they aren't merely just, "businesses" anymore, they have become de facto public utilities.

I have watched over the past decade many of my formerly independent minded friends become more radically left minded due to social media because they refuse to go outside of these platforms.

I am not one of these folks. I always go outside of the box because I know how these platforms work and I know how the major media companies and major tech companies work. I know how essential it is to find information from all sources. It shocks me to find that you believe that this is a beneficial development.

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.

Alex Jones is not, and has not been the only victim of this blacklisting and shadow banning. If they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone, at anytime in the future. Now it is Alex Jones, and they use it for his unpopular speech, what happens when they start to use it against those who protest against a war against Iran? Will you be so happy to have those voices marginalized so they don't come up in searches in Google, or in videos on FB, iTunes, or YouTube?

The great thing about the internet was the unpopular POV made it to the masses, but now, only the corporate CFR, MSM establishment POV will be allowed. That is what is coming. And if you disagree with neoliberalism at home, or neoconservatism abroad? Your voice will once again be silenced.

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

". . . Right now, the global elite do not have control of the White House, but they have discovered a powerful new weapon in the tech companies. They are trying to use this new weapon to smash Alex Jones and other top conservative voices, and they are doing it with a tyrannical flair that is absolutely frightening. I think that it was quite appropriate that the official WikiLeaks Twitter account made a parallel between this purge and an old Star Wars movie…

The empire strikes back: Apple, Spotify, Facebook and Google/Youtube all purge Infowars/Alex Jones. Yes, Infowars has frequent nonsense, but also a state power critique. Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?

And it is quite noteworthy that this comes almost exactly three months before the mid-term elections.

Do you think that is just a coincidence?

After all of the uproar about “election interference”, now the big tech companies are overtly doing it very publicly and in a way that nobody can misunderstand.

The biggest reason why they are lashing out at Alex Jones, Mike Adams and a whole host of other top conservative voices is because Donald Trump never would have gotten elected without them. I guess they figure that if they can start silencing some of those voices that they can turn future elections in their favor.

If it was just a few conservative voices that were being censored, that would be one thing. But the truth is that hundreds and hundreds of conservatives have had Facebook pages taken down, YouTube accounts terminated and Twitter accounts shadowbanned. I won’t repeat all of the information that I have previously published on this topic in this article. Instead, if you would like to learn more I would recommend checking out some of my previous articles…

• “This Is The Worst Purge Of Conservative Voices In The History Of The Internet”
• “Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives”
• “The Big Social Media Companies Are Being Used As A Weapon To Advance The Agenda Of The New World Order”
• “The Censorship Is Real – EndOfTheAmericanDream.com Is Being Completely Blocked By Library Internet Filters”

In the end, this is not about Alex Jones.

This is about a once free society that is becoming more Orwellian with each passing day.

Now that they have come for Alex Jones, they aren’t going to stop.

It might not be tomorrow, but eventually they are going to come for you.

I would like to end this article with a few words from Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article about all of this censorship…"

WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Translation: Pogo has TDS so bad, bad enough to become a fascist faggot.

Funny how all your posts invariably lead to faggotry. Like roads leading to Rome.

uh, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Boring though. But I guess that's life when you have no salient thoughts and your only goal is to come out on top in the monthly post count.

Yeah, I guess you got tired of sucking dick years ago.

My point is that you are slyly supporting censorship. This is one of the worst days on the internet.

That RIPA/HIPA shit has nothing on this.

I've been asking this all day and have yet to get an affirmative answer ---

--- Is Alex Jones' website unreachable? Is his broadcast/podcast inaudible?

No?

Then how is it "censorship"? Do you believe YouTube, or Google, or USMB, *OWES* you a platform?
(Does the world OWE you a living?)

Do they not all employ a Terms of Service gate?

Has no one ever been banned from, or had a post deleted or edited by, this site? Or sites like it? And when they were, was that not the site exercising its authority to do so seeing as how they own it?

What are you, some kinda socialist?

^2 different posters, same bullshit message. Both members of The Hive.

Unfortunately, both fairly intelligent.

That's OK, the Hiveness will trip them up.

 

[MisterBeale]

While I agree with you on a philosophical level, I don't really think you have been paying attention completely with what has been going on.

Platforms such as Facebook, Apple iTunes, and YouTube own such a large part of market share, they have a real ability to influence the public opinion.

As such, they aren't merely just, "businesses" anymore, they have become de facto public utilities.

I have watched over the past decade many of my formerly independent minded friends become more radically left minded due to social media because they refuse to go outside of these platforms.

I am not one of these folks. I always go outside of the box because I know how these platforms work and I know how the major media companies and major tech companies work. I know how essential it is to find information from all sources. It shocks me to find that you believe that this is a beneficial development.

Hardly. I've never implied any such thing and I use zero of those toys myself, having considered them an abject waste of time from the beginning. But since you draw the comparison, television as propaganda tool should certainly receive the same criticism, shouldn't it?

But ultimately that's up to the viewer, the Nosebooker, the Twit, to winnow his/her info from the chaff. I don't hold an opinion on whether Alex John Brinkley Jones should be on YouTube or not. It's not my site. That's up to YouTube, simple as that. Or Fecesbook or television, whatever the medium.

I've been pointing out all day that this butthurt whining is not about Jones' content at all, but rather about controlling how many people might see it. Their diapers are chafed because without YouTube (apparently) nobody will know the wondrous insight of a grown man who sells grunting noises and primal screams so he can set up his John Brinkley routine (which doesn't say a lot for the strength of Brinkl... uh, Jones' argument, does it). So ultimately it's not about Alex Jones' voice; it's about their control freak designs on somebody else's platform; dictating how they (YouTube et al) may be allowed to use their own site.

It's the flip side of the coin of the Sean Spicer kerfuffle last week, where Spicer threatened to sue the Associated Press for passing on --- not originating but passing on -- an existing story of an incident where Spicey got accused. In that case Spicey wanted to control how much of the public would NOT get to read the story; in this case Jones' sycophants want to control how much of the public DOES. And in each case the info is already readily available for anyone who seeks it.

If some clown joined this site and started posting paeans to necrophilia, the site could and probably would ban him, and it would be within its rights to do so. Just because they provide a platform for discussion doesn't mean they have to tolerate literally anything on it; it's their site. Same thing with YouTube.

Alex Jones is not, and has not been the only victim of this blacklisting and shadow banning. If they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone, at anytime in the future. Now it is Alex Jones, and they use it for his unpopular speech, what happens when they start to use it against those who protest against a war against Iran? Will you be so happy to have those voices marginalized so they don't come up in searches in Google, or in videos on FB, iTunes, or YouTube?

The great thing about the internet was the unpopular POV made it to the masses, but now, only the corporate CFR, MSM establishment POV will be allowed. That is what is coming. And if you disagree with neoliberalism at home, or neoconservatism abroad? Your voice will once again be silenced.

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

Now That Facebook, YouTube And Apple Have Come For Alex Jones, They Will Start Coming After The Rest Of Us

". . . Right now, the global elite do not have control of the White House, but they have discovered a powerful new weapon in the tech companies. They are trying to use this new weapon to smash Alex Jones and other top conservative voices, and they are doing it with a tyrannical flair that is absolutely frightening. I think that it was quite appropriate that the official WikiLeaks Twitter account made a parallel between this purge and an old Star Wars movie…

The empire strikes back: Apple, Spotify, Facebook and Google/Youtube all purge Infowars/Alex Jones. Yes, Infowars has frequent nonsense, but also a state power critique. Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?

And it is quite noteworthy that this comes almost exactly three months before the mid-term elections.

Do you think that is just a coincidence?

After all of the uproar about “election interference”, now the big tech companies are overtly doing it very publicly and in a way that nobody can misunderstand.

The biggest reason why they are lashing out at Alex Jones, Mike Adams and a whole host of other top conservative voices is because Donald Trump never would have gotten elected without them. I guess they figure that if they can start silencing some of those voices that they can turn future elections in their favor.

If it was just a few conservative voices that were being censored, that would be one thing. But the truth is that hundreds and hundreds of conservatives have had Facebook pages taken down, YouTube accounts terminated and Twitter accounts shadowbanned. I won’t repeat all of the information that I have previously published on this topic in this article. Instead, if you would like to learn more I would recommend checking out some of my previous articles…

• “This Is The Worst Purge Of Conservative Voices In The History Of The Internet”
• “Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives”
• “The Big Social Media Companies Are Being Used As A Weapon To Advance The Agenda Of The New World Order”
• “The Censorship Is Real – EndOfTheAmericanDream.com Is Being Completely Blocked By Library Internet Filters”

In the end, this is not about Alex Jones.

This is about a once free society that is becoming more Orwellian with each passing day.

Now that they have come for Alex Jones, they aren’t going to stop.

It might not be tomorrow, but eventually they are going to come for you.

I would like to end this article with a few words from Dr. Michael Brown’s excellent article about all of this censorship…"

WAY too long; didn't read, sorry. Even I don't get that longwinded....

But as far as 'they're coming for (whoever)" --- how come the same wags are on the exact opposite side with the NFL kneelers? Irony, that....

Translation: Pogo has TDS so bad, bad enough to become a fascist faggot.

Funny how all your posts invariably lead to faggotry. Like roads leading to Rome.

uh, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Boring though. But I guess that's life when you have no salient thoughts and your only goal is to come out on top in the monthly post count.

Yeah, I guess you got tired of sucking dick years ago.

My point is that you are slyly supporting censorship. This is one of the worst days on the internet.

That RIPA/HIPA shit has nothing on this.

I've been asking this all day and have yet to get an affirmative answer ---

--- Is Alex Jones' website unreachable? Is his broadcast/podcast inaudible?

No?

Then how is it "censorship"? Do you believe YouTube, or Google, or USMB, *OWES* you a platform?
(Does the world OWE you a living?)

Do they not all employ a Terms of Service gate?

Has no one ever been banned from, or had a post deleted or edited by, this site? Or sites like it? And when they were, was that not the site exercising its authority to do so seeing as how they own it?

What are you, some kinda socialist?

I'm aware of the incestuous marriage between the corporate and government silicon valley marriage.

Are you?

If they got money, resources and personel from the government, they should be held responsible.

Google’s true origin partly lies in CIA and NSA research grants for mass surveillance
Google’s true origin partly lies in CIA and NSA research grants for mass surveillance

Facebook - the CIA conspiracy

Facebook Hires Former DARPA Head To Lead New Research Lab

How the CIA made Google – INSURGE intelligence – Medium

 

[Borillar]

Interesting, this is exactly why InfoWars was created in the first place. There is an Information War on, for your mind. I try to tell folks, no Communist/Democrat will ever stand for the Constitution. In fact, they despise it. This is just one more example of that. Don't like what they're saying? Have them banned. Hopefully this won't be allowed to stand. Gotta keep on fighting the bastards.


Big tech’s coordinated purge of InfoWars — which was hit by bans from Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube in rapid succession — did not occur in a vacuum. On this issue, Silicon Valley bowed to CNN journalists and Democrat politicians who ceaselessly lobbied for the site to be censored.

It’s a sign of how the concentration of power in America has shifted from big government to big tech that politicians are now lobbying tech companies rather than the other way round, but that’s exactly what happened over the course of the past few months, as Democrats applied relentless pressure on Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants to censor InfoWars.

Chief among them was Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who demanded that a Facebook representative “explain” their decision not to ban InfoWars at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on social media censorship last month. Calling Jones as “well-known conspiracy theorist” whose “brand is bullying,” Deutch also demanded Google’s representative explain how many strikes it would take for a channel on Google-owned YouTube to be deleted...

Read More:
InfoWars Ban - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Well, at least you still have AM radio locked down. They throw out far right propaganda like a firehose 24/7, 365 a year.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Interesting, this is exactly why InfoWars was created in the first place. There is an Information War on, for your mind. I try to tell folks, no Communist/Democrat will ever stand for the Constitution. In fact, they despise it. This is just one more example of that. Don't like what they're saying? Have them banned. Hopefully this won't be allowed to stand. Gotta keep on fighting the bastards.


Big tech’s coordinated purge of InfoWars — which was hit by bans from Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube in rapid succession — did not occur in a vacuum. On this issue, Silicon Valley bowed to CNN journalists and Democrat politicians who ceaselessly lobbied for the site to be censored.

It’s a sign of how the concentration of power in America has shifted from big government to big tech that politicians are now lobbying tech companies rather than the other way round, but that’s exactly what happened over the course of the past few months, as Democrats applied relentless pressure on Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants to censor InfoWars.

Chief among them was Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who demanded that a Facebook representative “explain” their decision not to ban InfoWars at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on social media censorship last month. Calling Jones as “well-known conspiracy theorist” whose “brand is bullying,” Deutch also demanded Google’s representative explain how many strikes it would take for a channel on Google-owned YouTube to be deleted...

Read More:
InfoWars Ban - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Well, at least you still have AM radio locked down. They throw out far right propaganda like a firehose 24/7, 365 a year.

Tell ya wut, I have no plans to vote for a Democrat ever again with this fuckery going on.


They can kiss the midterms goodbye.


I'm certain I'm not alone in seeing what's going on here.