Silencing Opposing Speech

JimmyV

unsung said:

Twitter is also silencing speech.

Facebook has done it.

If it isn't inciting violence, threatening someone, outright racism, or blatant hate should it be censored?  Even by a private compnay.  Why the fear in the opposing viewpoint?

Who decides when racism is outright or when hate is blatant? Is racism only wrong when it is outright? Is hate only dangerous when it is blatant?

Big Bank Hank

This website sucks, is there another Pearl Jam website w/o all this subjective moderating?

oftenreading

Big Bank Hank said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

oftenreading said:

Big Bank Hank said:

oftenreading said:

brianlux said:

Unless he says something false about an individual or makes threats on YouTube, I'd have to say a ban is not a good idea.  But who watches that creep anyway?  If he were ignored, he would go away.  Just don't  watch dumb shit. 

Have you watched Alex Jones? It’s rare that he actually says anything true about anyone.  He probably hits a few dozen falsehoods each episode. 

LOL, we always bashed Russia for not allowing their citizens to make conflicting statements to the Government, now we are doing the same thing in the United States, you are attempting the limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, because most of us aren't actually there, and we have to accept others accounts, they could be completely full of shit and we'd never know, unless we have them on video tape or something. Otherwise you are accepting the words of people you never met on a willingness to believe, a leap of, dare I say it, faith.

No, I’m fairly certain the child sex rings on Mars don’t exist and I’m comfortable believing that even if I haven’t been there to check. You can choose to do otherwise if you wish. You can, in fact, start your own media channel, but you can’t insist that other people facilitate  it, just like Jones can’t. 

Have you ever been to Mars? Witnessed it?

Exactly, ironically It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia nails it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJDgVlv55Uw

There’s irony here, but that isn’t it. 

Halifax2TheMax

Big Bank Hank said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

unsung said:

Twitter is also silencing speech.

Facebook has done it.

If it isn't inciting violence, threatening someone, outright racism, or blatant hate should it be censored?  Even by a private compnay.  Why the fear in the opposing viewpoint?

Because their not obligated to share the "opposing" viewpoint from their own, whatever it may be. Would the Pro-Life Movement allow a pro-Planned Parenthood message? Why fear the opposing viewpoint?

Bezos is getting a lot of money from US Intelligence, so you really think that doesn't effect what is their papers? Like they are going to publish anything that the people who are paying them wouldn't like? If you answered no, then you just don't understand how for profit corporations work. Apple is getting a sweetheart deal from Chinese government & what's to stop them from giving all our information to them? You get into a slippery slope when you start doing things subjectively instead of objectively which most people are incapable of once they get to a certain point in life.

How much money is Bezos getting from US intelligence? Effect what is in who's newspapers? The Washington Post? Free speech isn't free if you're relying on someone else to broadcast your speech. Does Syung Yung Moon print articles, letters to the editor regarding positive reporting on democrats? Or publish exposes on republicans? What is all this information that Apple might give to China? Where I had lunch yesterday? I don't understand how for-profit corporations work? Please explain it to me, enlighten me with your words and not a meme or a youtube post or a link to some website. Show me what you know so I can witness it. Otherwise, I'm taking a leap of faith.

mickeyrat

please tell me exactly how is he silenced? or any one from that any end of the political spectrum?

cuz from my cheap seats,  having one less privately owned platform  to "share" doesnt equate to silencing.

maybe those on the fringe right should pony up some cash and build their own platform.

my2hands

People get banned here all the time, myself included lol... what's the difference? 

rgambs

Big Bank Hank said:

rgambs said:

@Big Bank Hank
What do you think about the point I made, that he knowingly incites threats of violence with personal defamations based on ZERO credibli evidence?

when has he incited any violence? please give me examples, or is that just some made up thing you pulled out of the air, because anyone promoting violence should be dealt with accordingly and that goes for both sides

I don't have enough data allowance to find links to prove it, but it's common knowledge that Sandy Hook survivors have been harassed continually since Jones raised the false flag conspiracy, and David Hogg (the vocal Parkland survivor) has been getting death threats on Twitter.
Alex Jones can't be held legally responsible for that, and he doesnt bear direct moral responsibility, but he is culpable enough that silencing him is for the good of society, for sure.
He is a rally point for some of the most demented and dangerous people in our society.
The ironic thing is that these false flag believers (and I'm not saying there's never been a legit one, there have been) are exactly the same segment of society that are most likely to perpetrate these attacks!

NewJPage

unsung said:

Tell you what, wipe the slate clean, no more taxpayer subsidies for anything.  Let's start with an even playing field.

But the US has never had an even playing field. Even playing fields don't exist except in certain novels. Subsidies built the nation

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

It would be HUGE.

I'd start with the energy industry and the dairy industry.

Then I'd go after Elon Musk's subsidies.

Then anyone that supported GMO's.  

That would be the first day.

All Defense contractors and gun manufacturers.

unsung

Gun manufacturers as in defense contracts?

Because I'd like to know if there were subsidies for general public use.

Halifax2TheMax

Gun manufacturers.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/01/02/11989/gun-manufacturers-got-more-19-million-state-subsidies

Halifax2TheMax

Defense contractors are a separate category.

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

Gun manufacturers as in defense contracts?

Because I'd like to know if there were subsidies for general public use.

Are you putting conditions on the subsidies now, moving the goal posts? I thought you wanted to start all over, eliminate all subsidies? “Level the playing field?”

unsung

Jesus, why do you always jump to extreme and accusing conclusions?  I was asking an honest question.  Go take a chill pill.

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

Jesus, why do you always jump to extreme and accusing conclusions?  I was asking an honest question.  Go take a chill pill.

If that’s directed at me, it’s because you never say what you intend the first time. You started by saying ban all subsidies and when I mentioned guns, you qualified subsidies. Christ, stick to your position. Just today you admitted to not be a “true” libertarian, whatever that means. Grow a spine, dude. Was my response that confusing for you?

unsung

There is no need to be an ass.

I actually didn't qualify anything, I did ask for clarification.

No private company should be subsidized by taxpayers.

Clear enough?

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

There is no need to be an ass.

I actually didn't qualify anything, I did ask for clarification.

No private company should be subsidized by taxpayers.

Clear enough?

I wasn’t the one not understanding you but whatever. So you’re back to your original position of no subsidies. Does that include Israel?

And yes, I realize Israel is not a private company but since you’ve eliminated every private business, I figured we’d move on to foreign assistance. So?

brianlux

oftenreading said:

brianlux said:

Unless he says something false about an individual or makes threats on YouTube, I'd have to say a ban is not a good idea.  But who watches that creep anyway?  If he were ignored, he would go away.  Just don't  watch dumb shit. 

Have you watched Alex Jones? It’s rare that he actually says anything true about anyone.  He probably hits a few dozen falsehoods each episode. 

I have, but just enough to  know he's not worthy of my time.

jeffbr

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

brianlux said:

Unless he says something false about an individual or makes threats on YouTube, I'd have to say a ban is not a good idea.  But who watches that creep anyway?  If he were ignored, he would go away.  Just don't  watch dumb shit. 

Have you watched Alex Jones? It’s rare that he actually says anything true about anyone.  He probably hits a few dozen falsehoods each episode. 

I have, but just enough to  know he's not worthy of my time.

I've listened a couple of times as well. i can't make it very far into any of his shows. He's a complete nutter.

oftenreading

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

brianlux said:

Unless he says something false about an individual or makes threats on YouTube, I'd have to say a ban is not a good idea.  But who watches that creep anyway?  If he were ignored, he would go away.  Just don't  watch dumb shit. 

Have you watched Alex Jones? It’s rare that he actually says anything true about anyone.  He probably hits a few dozen falsehoods each episode. 

I have, but just enough to  know he's not worthy of my time.

I don’t make a habit of it, but every once in a while I see a transcript of some of his stuff and I can’t resist reading it. It would be funny if it didn’t cause harm.