Walkaway Banned from Facebook As Apple Threatens Parler

Why is there a need to police those forums for such plots when that is the job of the intelligence community?

That is nothing but a pretext for political silencing.

I have NEVER advocated for the silencing of commies. I am a TRUE liberal.

Can you say the same about any group or type you oppose?
You aren’t a true liberal. You don’t want to silence commies, you just want to execute them.

So you want intelligence to actively surveil the private sector rather than allow private entities to control their own property?
 
The Stalinist far left march continues. As president Trump stated, they weren't after him - they are after you and your freedoms. He is standing in the way.
FACEBOOK has removed the #WalkAway Campaign and has BANNED ME and EVERY MEMBER of my team!!! Over half a million people in #WalkAway with hundreds of thousands of testimonial videos and stories is GONE. Facebook has banned everything related to #WalkAway.

Twitter has also banned president Trump. Meanwhile, apple is trying to shut down the free speech alternative Parler unless they implement draconian anti-speech measures.


The founders would have stormed the capitol a long time ago. Trees of liberty need watering.
You speak for the founders? The guys who set up the very system you are trying to destroy?

Hate to break it to you, Coyote, the system has long since been destroyed. Neither party has shown any reverence to the system. By altering and interpreting it, they turned it into something the founders never intended it to be.

One must learn to place blame equally in this context.

See...I disagree...I think the system itself, still works. We pretend to know what the founders intended, but most of the time it’s just our own spin. Culture changes, and nothing can stay static in time foe 250 years. What we are facing is change occurring at exponential rate, with out the necessary cultural tools to deal with it. We were given a Constitution that has endured longer than that of any other nation. There should be a lesson in that. IMO.

Something is broken though...I am just not sure what :(
some of us don't want to be told how to think.

it ain't rocket science.
Of course. Not sure how that relates though.
because that is what the left is doing now. got rid of the boogie man they created and now it's time to tell you what you can and should think. PARLER - YOU SILENCE USERS OR WE SILENCE YOU.

but hey - private business, right? all that shit. now lets go force a baker to make some cakes.

I am not totally “hard” on my stance here. But you can’t tell private companies they must allow unrestricted free speech or activities on their property.

I am not entirely clear on this either.

For example, it has been found that a number of those involved in assaulting the capital had been planning violence over social media, in particular (I think) Parker, MeWe, and a couple others I can’t recall. There is no question, imo, that is planning a criminal if not terrorist act and these sites are doing nothing about it.

So should Apple and Google be forced to accept them in their “playstores”?

There have been some serious consequences from this as we saw Tuesday.

The reason I brought up ISIS is that is an example of a group that is definitely barred from “free speech”, and there are others as well.

What is the responsibility of a group like Parler in allowing the plotting of an insurrection on it’s platforms and should companies be forced to associated with it if that group refuses to rein it in?

Serious question.
serious question -
wimkin - a not going anywhere social networking site - was just banned by their host godaddy.

tell me, were mass insurrections being planned by a guy who could barely keep his code up 24 hours at a time and was plauged by a partner who hates him and kept deleting user profiles?

serious question - when do you stop thinking everyone not thinking like you is out to get you? saying PARLER IS GROUND ZERO FOR INSURRECTION - bullshit but ok.

now wimkin?

that excuse just ate a giant turd.

WTF does that have to do with anything? I did not say it was ground zero...why the hyperbole?

Did or did not the instigators of this insurrection discuss their plans on sites such as Parler?
dunno. link me up and prove it. so far the people shutting them down say THEY ARE BAD and here we go.

and if you want to use that criteria - great. but you know damn good and well i will hold that critera back to those using it. that never seems to go well, asking people to follow their own rules.
 
Orwell was so right. It's amazing how he could anticipate so perfectly, what would happen so many decades later.

No more First Amendment.

America becoming like Bolshevik Russia 1917. Sad.

View attachment 439707


Walkaway Banned from Facebook As Apple Threatens Parler
The first amendment only applies to government’s actions, Skye, not private entities.
I don’t know why you disagree Skye. It is what is.

I don't agree with you Coyote. Period.
 
The Stalinist far left march continues. As president Trump stated, they weren't after him - they are after you and your freedoms. He is standing in the way.
FACEBOOK has removed the #WalkAway Campaign and has BANNED ME and EVERY MEMBER of my team!!! Over half a million people in #WalkAway with hundreds of thousands of testimonial videos and stories is GONE. Facebook has banned everything related to #WalkAway.

Twitter has also banned president Trump. Meanwhile, apple is trying to shut down the free speech alternative Parler unless they implement draconian anti-speech measures.


The founders would have stormed the capitol a long time ago. Trees of liberty need watering.
You speak for the founders? The guys who set up the very system you are trying to destroy?

Hate to break it to you, Coyote, the system has long since been destroyed. Neither party has shown any reverence to the system. By altering and interpreting it, they turned it into something the founders never intended it to be.

One must learn to place blame equally in this context.

See...I disagree...I think the system itself, still works. We pretend to know what the founders intended, but most of the time it’s just our own spin. Culture changes, and nothing can stay static in time foe 250 years. What we are facing is change occurring at exponential rate, with out the necessary cultural tools to deal with it. We were given a Constitution that has endured longer than that of any other nation. There should be a lesson in that. IMO.

Something is broken though...I am just not sure what :(
some of us don't want to be told how to think.

it ain't rocket science.
Of course. Not sure how that relates though.
because that is what the left is doing now. got rid of the boogie man they created and now it's time to tell you what you can and should think. PARLER - YOU SILENCE USERS OR WE SILENCE YOU.

but hey - private business, right? all that shit. now lets go force a baker to make some cakes.

I am not totally “hard” on my stance here. But you can’t tell private companies they must allow unrestricted free speech or activities on their property.

I am not entirely clear on this either.

For example, it has been found that a number of those involved in assaulting the capital had been planning violence over social media, in particular (I think) Parker, MeWe, and a couple others I can’t recall. There is no question, imo, that is planning a criminal if not terrorist act and these sites are doing nothing about it.

So should Apple and Google be forced to accept them in their “playstores”?

There have been some serious consequences from this as we saw Tuesday.

The reason I brought up ISIS is that is an example of a group that is definitely barred from “free speech”, and there are others as well.

What is the responsibility of a group like Parler in allowing the plotting of an insurrection on it’s platforms and should companies be forced to associated with it if that group refuses to rein it in?

Serious question.
Why is there a need to police those forums for such plots when that is the job of the intelligence community?

That is nothing but a pretext for political silencing.

I have NEVER advocated for the silencing of commies. I am a TRUE liberal.

Can you say the same about any group or type you oppose?

I think liberalism says that it is fine to hold people to their own standards, so I recommend abandoning that standard. Stalinists are the enemy anyway. You don't want these people in your life anyway, they spread misery twice as fast as personally as they do politically.

Stalinist are about advocating private property?

As we're arguing Twitter gets to set its own TOS because it owns its platform.

What about that do you disagree with?
 
The Stalinist far left march continues. As president Trump stated, they weren't after him - they are after you and your freedoms. He is standing in the way.
FACEBOOK has removed the #WalkAway Campaign and has BANNED ME and EVERY MEMBER of my team!!! Over half a million people in #WalkAway with hundreds of thousands of testimonial videos and stories is GONE. Facebook has banned everything related to #WalkAway.

Twitter has also banned president Trump. Meanwhile, apple is trying to shut down the free speech alternative Parler unless they implement draconian anti-speech measures.


The founders would have stormed the capitol a long time ago. Trees of liberty need watering.
You speak for the founders? The guys who set up the very system you are trying to destroy?

Hate to break it to you, Coyote, the system has long since been destroyed. Neither party has shown any reverence to the system. By altering and interpreting it, they turned it into something the founders never intended it to be.

One must learn to place blame equally in this context.

See...I disagree...I think the system itself, still works. We pretend to know what the founders intended, but most of the time it’s just our own spin. Culture changes, and nothing can stay static in time foe 250 years. What we are facing is change occurring at exponential rate, with out the necessary cultural tools to deal with it. We were given a Constitution that has endured longer than that of any other nation. There should be a lesson in that. IMO.

Something is broken though...I am just not sure what :(
some of us don't want to be told how to think.

it ain't rocket science.
Of course. Not sure how that relates though.
because that is what the left is doing now. got rid of the boogie man they created and now it's time to tell you what you can and should think. PARLER - YOU SILENCE USERS OR WE SILENCE YOU.

but hey - private business, right? all that shit. now lets go force a baker to make some cakes.

I am not totally “hard” on my stance here. But you can’t tell private companies they must allow unrestricted free speech or activities on their property.

I am not entirely clear on this either.

For example, it has been found that a number of those involved in assaulting the capital had been planning violence over social media, in particular (I think) Parker, MeWe, and a couple others I can’t recall. There is no question, imo, that is planning a criminal if not terrorist act and these sites are doing nothing about it.

So should Apple and Google be forced to accept them in their “playstores”?

There have been some serious consequences from this as we saw Tuesday.

The reason I brought up ISIS is that is an example of a group that is definitely barred from “free speech”, and there are others as well.

What is the responsibility of a group like Parler in allowing the plotting of an insurrection on it’s platforms and should companies be forced to associated with it if that group refuses to rein it in?

Serious question.
Why is there a need to police those forums for such plots when that is the job of the intelligence community?

That is nothing but a pretext for political silencing.

I have NEVER advocated for the silencing of commies. I am a TRUE liberal.

Can you say the same about any group or type you oppose?

I think liberalism says that it is fine to hold people to their own standards, so I recommend abandoning that standard. Stalinists are the enemy anyway. You don't want these people in your life anyway, they spread misery twice as fast as personally as they do politically.

Stalinist are about advocating private property?

As we're arguing Twitter gets to set its own TOS because it owns its platform.

What about that do you disagree with?

You are not about advancing private property.

And you are not making that dumbfuckery of an argument that doesn't even address the point in good faith. No one is fooled.

Stalinists do anything for power - that includes making fake arguments they claim to believe in, in a community where people care about good arguments. This is quite difficult task for Stalinists though, if they could make good arguments and be productive - they would not need to be Stalinists. So not the most workable of tactics.
 
Then explain how 'free speech' grants you unlimited and unrestricted access to and use of someone else's private property against their will?

You know, it's not really a matter of free speech anymore. It's about the double standard being practiced on the platforms. Allowing one view while limiting another. Claiming one form of speech to be undesirable while allowing speech you agree with to proliferate, ignoring the possibility it may incite the same violence as the speech you are censoring. If you advertise yourself as a platform that allows the free exchange of speech, actively censoring users of your platform flies against that assertion. It is bad business, it is also false advertising.

Free speech? According to you, there is no such thing.
 
The Stalinist far left march continues. As president Trump stated, they weren't after him - they are after you and your freedoms. He is standing in the way.
FACEBOOK has removed the #WalkAway Campaign and has BANNED ME and EVERY MEMBER of my team!!! Over half a million people in #WalkAway with hundreds of thousands of testimonial videos and stories is GONE. Facebook has banned everything related to #WalkAway.

Twitter has also banned president Trump. Meanwhile, apple is trying to shut down the free speech alternative Parler unless they implement draconian anti-speech measures.


The founders would have stormed the capitol a long time ago. Trees of liberty need watering.
You speak for the founders? The guys who set up the very system you are trying to destroy?

Hate to break it to you, Coyote, the system has long since been destroyed. Neither party has shown any reverence to the system. By altering and interpreting it, they turned it into something the founders never intended it to be.

One must learn to place blame equally in this context.

See...I disagree...I think the system itself, still works. We pretend to know what the founders intended, but most of the time it’s just our own spin. Culture changes, and nothing can stay static in time foe 250 years. What we are facing is change occurring at exponential rate, with out the necessary cultural tools to deal with it. We were given a Constitution that has endured longer than that of any other nation. There should be a lesson in that. IMO.

Something is broken though...I am just not sure what :(
some of us don't want to be told how to think.

it ain't rocket science.
Of course. Not sure how that relates though.
because that is what the left is doing now. got rid of the boogie man they created and now it's time to tell you what you can and should think. PARLER - YOU SILENCE USERS OR WE SILENCE YOU.

but hey - private business, right? all that shit. now lets go force a baker to make some cakes.

I am not totally “hard” on my stance here. But you can’t tell private companies they must allow unrestricted free speech or activities on their property.

I am not entirely clear on this either.

For example, it has been found that a number of those involved in assaulting the capital had been planning violence over social media, in particular (I think) Parker, MeWe, and a couple others I can’t recall. There is no question, imo, that is planning a criminal if not terrorist act and these sites are doing nothing about it.

So should Apple and Google be forced to accept them in their “playstores”?

There have been some serious consequences from this as we saw Tuesday.

The reason I brought up ISIS is that is an example of a group that is definitely barred from “free speech”, and there are others as well.

What is the responsibility of a group like Parler in allowing the plotting of an insurrection on it’s platforms and should companies be forced to associated with it if that group refuses to rein it in?

Serious question.
serious question -
wimkin - a not going anywhere social networking site - was just banned by their host godaddy.

tell me, were mass insurrections being planned by a guy who could barely keep his code up 24 hours at a time and was plauged by a partner who hates him and kept deleting user profiles?

serious question - when do you stop thinking everyone not thinking like you is out to get you? saying PARLER IS GROUND ZERO FOR INSURRECTION - bullshit but ok.

now wimkin?

that excuse just ate a giant turd.
On Wimkin...I can’t anything on GoDaddy banning them.
 
The Stalinist far left march continues. As president Trump stated, they weren't after him - they are after you and your freedoms. He is standing in the way.
FACEBOOK has removed the #WalkAway Campaign and has BANNED ME and EVERY MEMBER of my team!!! Over half a million people in #WalkAway with hundreds of thousands of testimonial videos and stories is GONE. Facebook has banned everything related to #WalkAway.

Twitter has also banned president Trump. Meanwhile, apple is trying to shut down the free speech alternative Parler unless they implement draconian anti-speech measures.


The founders would have stormed the capitol a long time ago. Trees of liberty need watering.
You speak for the founders? The guys who set up the very system you are trying to destroy?

Hate to break it to you, Coyote, the system has long since been destroyed. Neither party has shown any reverence to the system. By altering and interpreting it, they turned it into something the founders never intended it to be.

One must learn to place blame equally in this context.

See...I disagree...I think the system itself, still works. We pretend to know what the founders intended, but most of the time it’s just our own spin. Culture changes, and nothing can stay static in time foe 250 years. What we are facing is change occurring at exponential rate, with out the necessary cultural tools to deal with it. We were given a Constitution that has endured longer than that of any other nation. There should be a lesson in that. IMO.

Something is broken though...I am just not sure what :(
some of us don't want to be told how to think.

it ain't rocket science.
Of course. Not sure how that relates though.
because that is what the left is doing now. got rid of the boogie man they created and now it's time to tell you what you can and should think. PARLER - YOU SILENCE USERS OR WE SILENCE YOU.

but hey - private business, right? all that shit. now lets go force a baker to make some cakes.

I am not totally “hard” on my stance here. But you can’t tell private companies they must allow unrestricted free speech or activities on their property.

I am not entirely clear on this either.

For example, it has been found that a number of those involved in assaulting the capital had been planning violence over social media, in particular (I think) Parker, MeWe, and a couple others I can’t recall. There is no question, imo, that is planning a criminal if not terrorist act and these sites are doing nothing about it.

So should Apple and Google be forced to accept them in their “playstores”?

There have been some serious consequences from this as we saw Tuesday.

The reason I brought up ISIS is that is an example of a group that is definitely barred from “free speech”, and there are others as well.

What is the responsibility of a group like Parler in allowing the plotting of an insurrection on it’s platforms and should companies be forced to associated with it if that group refuses to rein it in?

Serious question.
serious question -
wimkin - a not going anywhere social networking site - was just banned by their host godaddy.

tell me, were mass insurrections being planned by a guy who could barely keep his code up 24 hours at a time and was plauged by a partner who hates him and kept deleting user profiles?

serious question - when do you stop thinking everyone not thinking like you is out to get you? saying PARLER IS GROUND ZERO FOR INSURRECTION - bullshit but ok.

now wimkin?

that excuse just ate a giant turd.
On Wimkin...I can’t anything on GoDaddy banning them.
they're banning anything they can't control.

as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
 
Orwell was so right. It's amazing how he could anticipate so perfectly, what would happen so many decades later.

No more First Amendment.

America becoming like Bolshevik Russia 1917. Sad.

View attachment 439707


Walkaway Banned from Facebook As Apple Threatens Parler
The first amendment only applies to government’s actions, Skye, not private entities.
I don’t know why you disagree Skye. It is what is.

I don't agree with you Coyote. Period.

That's gotta' be a relief for coyote.
 
Orwell was so right. It's amazing how he could anticipate so perfectly, what would happen so many decades later.

No more First Amendment.

America becoming like Bolshevik Russia 1917. Sad.

View attachment 439707


Walkaway Banned from Facebook As Apple Threatens Parler
The first amendment only applies to government’s actions, Skye, not private entities.
I don’t know why you disagree Skye. It is what is.

I don't agree with you Coyote. Period.
Total lie by Skye. If I yell fire in a crowded cinema that is punishable. If I tweet death threats punishable.
 
Then explain how 'free speech' grants you unlimited and unrestricted access to and use of someone else's private property against their will?

You know, it's not really a matter of free speech anymore. It's about the double standard being practiced on the platforms. Allowing one view while limiting another. Claiming one form of speech to be undesirable while allowing speech you agree with to proliferate, ignoring the possibility it may incite the same violence as the speech you are censoring. If you advertise yourself as a platform that allows the free exchange of speech, actively censoring users of your platform flies against that assertion. It is bad business, it is also false advertising.

Free speech? According to you, there is no such thing.
So no explanation on how 'free speech' grants you unlimited and unrestricted access to and use of someone else's private property against their will?

Well that was easy. Now to your next claim:

Double standard.....according to who?

Certainly not Twitter, who is the sole arbiter of its own TOS. Which Trump and everyone who has ever posted there has agreed to.
 
Then explain how 'free speech' grants you unlimited and unrestricted access to and use of someone else's private property against their will?

You know, it's not really a matter of free speech anymore. It's about the double standard being practiced on the platforms. Allowing one view while limiting another. Claiming one form of speech to be undesirable while allowing speech you agree with to proliferate, ignoring the possibility it may incite the same violence as the speech you are censoring. If you advertise yourself as a platform that allows the free exchange of speech, actively censoring users of your platform flies against that assertion. It is bad business, it is also false advertising.

Free speech? According to you, there is no such thing.
But what views are they banning? Conservatives dominate liberals on social media, so they can’t be banning conservatives simply because they are conservative.
 
The funny thing is....the globalists will come for their useful idiot enables first because they don't complain, they comply.
 
Then explain how 'free speech' grants you unlimited and unrestricted access to and use of someone else's private property against their will?

You know, it's not really a matter of free speech anymore. It's about the double standard being practiced on the platforms. Allowing one view while limiting another. Claiming one form of speech to be undesirable while allowing speech you agree with to proliferate, ignoring the possibility it may incite the same violence as the speech you are censoring. If you advertise yourself as a platform that allows the free exchange of speech, actively censoring users of your platform flies against that assertion. It is bad business, it is also false advertising.

Free speech? According to you, there is no such thing.
But what views are they banning? Conservatives dominate liberals on social media, so they can’t be banning conservatives simply because they are conservative.
they're pretty much going after anyone telling them to stop going after them.

i had many friends have twitter ban their accounts. one hadn't posted in 3 weeks. man, wonder what 3rd world country she was after. oregon?

tell them to stop - they come after you.

try it.
 
The funny thing is....the globalists will come for their useful idiot enables first because they don't complain, they comply.
the globalists are simply later in line for the feeding.
 
..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.

as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.

Ya...they did..



Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?

If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
 
Then explain how 'free speech' grants you unlimited and unrestricted access to and use of someone else's private property against their will?

You know, it's not really a matter of free speech anymore. It's about the double standard being practiced on the platforms. Allowing one view while limiting another. Claiming one form of speech to be undesirable while allowing speech you agree with to proliferate, ignoring the possibility it may incite the same violence as the speech you are censoring. If you advertise yourself as a platform that allows the free exchange of speech, actively censoring users of your platform flies against that assertion. It is bad business, it is also false advertising.

Free speech? According to you, there is no such thing.
But what views are they banning? Conservatives dominate liberals on social media, so they can’t be banning conservatives simply because they are conservative.
they're pretty much going after anyone telling them to stop going after them.

i had many friends have twitter ban their accounts. one hadn't posted in 3 weeks. man, wonder what 3rd world country she was after. oregon?

tell them to stop - they come after you.

try it.
I do not and won’t have Twitter (waste of time), but my friend does. I asked her post something decrying censorship 10 minutes ago. She is yet to be banned and it is still up.
 
But what views are they banning? Conservatives dominate liberals on social media, so they can’t be banning conservatives simply because they are conservative.

That's a baldfaced lie.

You cannot in good faith tell me that conservatives dominate anything on social media or media in general. If true, Twitter and Facebook would not have just banned Trump from using their platforms. They would be censoring liberal speech instead. Over a billion people use these platforms, and you're telling me conservatism is a popular and dominant viewpoint?

I am not a tutor or a handholder, you can easily look for examples of this behavior on Google.
 

Forum List

Back
Top