Have we crossed the line yet?

[edwardmurphy]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Sorry, what I meant to say was...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Seriously, though, I love it when right wingers get all crossed up about government intervention.

If the government says a Christian guy can't fire an employee for being gay it's communist, fascist, anti-Christian tyranny.

If a private company decides that being associated with some alt-right hate monger is bad for business suddenly the right is all about government intervention. Suddenly Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and now the financial services sector, are public property and have to work with anyone who wants to use their services, regardless of their own best interests. That's all it takes for you guys to jettison the First Amendment and the free market - one setback and you're ready to embrace authoritarian communism. Way to be consistent.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Quit whining and let the free market solve the problem. Boycott Facebook and Mastercard. Start financial service and social media companies for right-wing, polemicist ********. Put on your big boy pants and figure it out, you socialist crybabies.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Stu]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Sorry, what I meant to say was...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Seriously, though, I love it when right wingers get all crossed up about government intervention.

If the government says a Christian guy can't fire an employee for being gay it's communist, fascist, anti-Christian tyranny.

If a private company decides that being associated with some alt-right hate monger is bad for business suddenly the right is all about government intervention. Suddenly Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and now the financial services sector, are public property and have to work with anyone who wants to use their services, regardless of their own best interests. That's all it takes for you guys to jettison the First Amendment and the free market - one setback and you're ready to embrace authoritarian communism. Way to be consistent.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Quit whining and let the free market solve the problem. Boycott Facebook and Mastercard. Start financial service and social media companies for right-wing, polemicist ********. Put on your big boy pants and figure it out, you socialist crybabies.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You sound a little unhinged.... sounds like total glee and happiness in your post. Disgusting.

So when you take away conservatives social platforms (speech) and monetary platforms what happens? They are unable to function (pay bills, buy food, etc.) in society, you effectively cut them off.

These payment services are no longer optional in life today (almost everything is done using credit and debit cards, cash is on the way out), if you don't have access to them your life will fall apart.

Is that what you are suggesting should be allowed to happen to millions of people?

So freedom of speech is no longer guaranteed because if you step out of line in terms of ideology, then financial institutions can just cut you off because they don't like what you are saying. Interesting stance you have there Ed. Sounds almost like... fascism, like a dictator would do. Sounds like what China is doing - yeah you would fit right in in China with their social credit system. Do what the government/financial institutions likes and you can live a good life, but have an opinion that they disagree with and live a life of hardship.

The fact that you find this funny and something to gloat over, that conservatives should now be subject to effectively be ostracised and singled-out like this is highly disturbing. You have zero empathy, zero common sense and zero respect for people's rights.

Imagine the tables were turned and you were the who's opinion people didn't like I'm sure you wouldn't be so eager to laugh uncontrollably at essentially ending a persons life as they know it.

So should ANTIFA members also have their bank accounts cancelled, seeing as they are deemed terrorists by the government or is it only conservatives that deserve that honour... no no I'm sure all radical anti-conservative, anti-Christian left-wing opinions won't be subject to the same treatment.

But you carry on laughing hysterically, one day it will come to your door and then I hope you can laugh just as loud then.

[edwardmurphy]

You sound a little unhinged.... sounds like total glee and happiness in your post. Disgusting.

You're projecting. I wasn't actually laughing when I typed that laughter, and I only typed it once. For the other 3 I just used ctrl-v. It was probably overkill, but I really wanted you to understand how stupid that article was. It seemed like the right time to go above and beyond, y'know?

InfoWars is garbage, Ben Swann is another online conspiracy theorist, and the story is probably [nonsense]. I can't find any mention of it anywhere outside of the fever swamp, and Swann doesn't cite any sources, give a date for the meeting between MC and the SEC, or mention the names of any sources with either the SEC or Mastercard. In short, it looks like misinformation.

And even if it's true, so what? You may have the right to stand on the corner and yell divisive lies, but there's no law saying that I have to loan you my megaphone or my tip jar. In fact, the law explicitly says that I don't.

I'm not worried about freedom of speech because it's not being threatened. I'm not worried about millions of conservatives losing their rights because that's not going to happen - that's just a stupid slippery slope argument. Censorship doesn't concern me because nobody is being censored. My heart doesn't bleed for all of the poor conspiracy theorists, propagandists, polemicists who will have to pay for their own websites and servers and figure out how cryptocurrency works.

The world will keep turning.

Also, it's still hysterical that you guys are closet communists.

[Stu]

You sound a little unhinged.... sounds like total glee and happiness in your post. Disgusting.

You're projecting. I wasn't actually laughing when I typed that laughter, and I only typed it once. For the other 3 I just used ctrl-v. It was probably overkill, but I really wanted you to understand how stupid that article was. It seemed like the right time to go above and beyond, y'know?

InfoWars is garbage, Ben Swann is another online conspiracy theorist, and the story is probably [nonsense]. I can't find any mention of it anywhere outside of the fever swamp, and Swann doesn't cite any sources, give a date for the meeting between MC and the SEC, or mention the names of any sources with either the SEC or Mastercard. In short, it looks like misinformation.

And even if it's true, so what? You may have the right to stand on the corner and yell divisive lies, but there's no law saying that I have to loan you my megaphone or my tip jar. In fact, the law explicitly says that I don't.

I'm not worried about freedom of speech because it's not being threatened. I'm not worried about millions of conservatives losing their rights because that's not going to happen - that's just a stupid slippery slope argument. Censorship doesn't concern me because nobody is being censored. My heart doesn't bleed for all of the poor conspiracy theorists, propagandists, polemicists who will have to pay for their own websites and servers and figure out how cryptocurrency works.

The world will keep turning.

Also, it's still hysterical that you guys are closet communists.

LOL you really have no clue what you are talking about or what is going on in social media. Conservatives are being outright banned and shadow-banned en masse on many of the major platforms. This is a reality. These social media companies are the new public square.

Let me quote one them that was banned:

Russians buy a few Facebook ads.

Leftists: This is horrendous! This is election meddling! Democracy is at stake!

Facebook bans most of the people who helped get Trump elected.

Leftists (and boomers): Hur dur muh private company can do what it likes.

This is you:

[edwardmurphy]

Social media companies created and maintain the "new public square," and therefore they have an obligation to let anyone and everyone hang out there, saying anything they want about anyone else, no matter what.

[nonsense].

You're literally saying that the companies that invented and built the new public square have no right to police behavior there, even if some of the people using their services are behaving in ways that are detrimental to the companies hosting those people.

[nonsense].

You know that there "conservative"* alternatives, right? They get less traffic, in large part because they're toxic cesspools full of hateful ********, but they exist. They also pull in a lot less advertising revenue, again because they're toxic cesspools full of hateful ********, but they're still a safe place for propagandizing, conspiracy peddling, alt-right ******. Also, the internet still exists, so Alex, Milo, and all the rest can just make their own sites and pay for their own advertising. They still have plenty of ways to get their lies to the masses; it's just harder now that they have to do the work themselves.

The thing is, companies like Facebook know that if they permit themselves to be dominated by toxic, alt-right [nonsense] it will turn off the people who aren't into that, meaning most of us. That will hurt their brand and cost them money. You're literally arguing that social media companies have to allow ******** to use their services because that's the easiest way for the ******** to get their messages out and make money doing so, and that if the content produced by said ******** hurts the social media companies' brands, toxifies their products, and costs them money then that's just too bad.

Sorry, Stu, that's not an argument, it's whining.

Boo hoo, I'm trying to monetize conspiracy theories and propaganda and Facebook won't give me a free platform on which to do it! Creating my own website is hard, and paying for upkeep, security, and bandwidth will cut into my profits! It's all so unfair! Whaaaa! Rip up the Constitution so I can get my way! Whaaaaa! They're persecuting me by not letting me violate their ToS agreements in order to enrich myself at their expense! Whaaaa! Now I have to use Gab instead of Twitter, and and nobody uses Gab because it's full of ******** like me! Whaaaaaa!

[nonsense].





* I'm using quotes because the sites aren't actually conservative so much as alt-right, anti-semitic, and racist. The fact that they're described as "conservative" is the result of people like Sideshow Don stealing the word for himself and using it to describe his own authoritarian nationalist platform.

[Stu]

Social media companies created and maintain the "new public square," and therefore they have an obligation to let anyone and everyone hang out there, saying anything they want about anyone else, no matter what.

[nonsense].

You're literally saying that the companies that invented and built the new public square have no right to police behavior there, even if some of the people using their services are behaving in ways that are detrimental to the companies hosting those people.

[nonsense].

You know that there "conservative"* alternatives, right? They get less traffic, in large part because they're toxic cesspools full of hateful ********, but they exist. They also pull in a lot less advertising revenue, again because they're toxic cesspools full of hateful ********, but they're still a safe place for propagandizing, conspiracy peddling, alt-right ******. Also, the internet still exists, so Alex, Milo, and all the rest can just make their own sites and pay for their own advertising. They still have plenty of ways to get their lies to the masses; it's just harder now that they have to do the work themselves.

The thing is, companies like Facebook know that if they permit themselves to be dominated by toxic, alt-right [nonsense] it will turn off the people who aren't into that, meaning most of us. That will hurt their brand and cost them money. You're literally arguing that social media companies have to allow ******** to use their services because that's the easiest way for the ******** to get their messages out and make money doing so, and that if the content produced by said ******** hurts the social media companies' brands, toxifies their products, and costs them money then that's just too bad.

Sorry, Stu, that's not an argument, it's whining.

Boo hoo, I'm trying to monetize conspiracy theories and propaganda and Facebook won't give me a free platform on which to do it! Creating my own website is hard, and paying for upkeep, security, and bandwidth will cut into my profits! It's all so unfair! Whaaaa! Rip up the Constitution so I can get my way! Whaaaaa! They're persecuting me by not letting me violate their ToS agreements in order to enrich myself at their expense! Whaaaa! Now I have to use Gab instead of Twitter, and and nobody uses Gab because it's full of ******** like me! Whaaaaaa!

[nonsense].





* I'm using quotes because the sites aren't actually conservative so much as alt-right, anti-semitic, and racist. The fact that they're described as "conservative" is the result of people like Sideshow Don stealing the word for himself and using it to describe his own authoritarian nationalist platform.

You sound just like a left-wing dictator. Do as I say or else.

I'll leave you with this little saying, it applies perfectly to you, and coming to America soon.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

[RickD]

They're talking about Tommy Robinson for instance.

SEC ENDORSES MASTERCARD’S IDEA OF CUTTING OFF ‘RIGHT-WINGERS’ – REPORT

Leftists pushing to financially suffocate opposition

Blocking payments to individuals or groups by financial service firms impedes freedom of speech in a free society, journalist Ben Swann has told RT, following reports that MasterCard is allegedly on course to censor the ‘far-right.’

The New York-based firm is reportedly being forced by left-leaning liberal activists to set up an internal “human rights committee” that would monitor payments to “white supremacist groups and anti-Islam activists.”

“The problem is that everyone has their own views and, in a free society, the idea of a free society is that you are free to have your belief systems, as long as you’re not harming anyone else physically,” Swann told RT America. “But your belief system belongs to you and you have the right be wrong. White supremacists have the right to be wrong.”

More

1) I'm confused. Is it the govt who is trying to shut down certain groups, or is it private groups trying to shut down other groups?

2) the lady is an idiot. Tommy Robinson is not a white supremacist, as she stated.

[edwardmurphy]

1) I'm confused. Is it the govt who is trying to shut down certain groups, or is it private groups trying to shut down other groups?

Nobody's trying to shut down anybody. MasterCard is allegedly thinking of ending its business relationship with a few alt-right polemicists and the SEC supposedly "endorsed" the idea, whatever that means. The only source for the story is some alt-right YouTube conspiracy theorist and he doesn't provide any sort of corroborating evidence that any of it even happened, but Stu knows it's real.

Companies like Patreon, PayPal, Facebook, and Twitter actually have decided that doing business with people like Alex Jones is bad for their brand, so they really are stepping back. Stu thinks that social media companies and the finance industry are basically public property and should be required to work with toxic ********, even if doing so hurts their image and costs them business. He thinks it's appropriate to compare stuff like Facebook banning Alex Jones to the Holocaust.

So yeah, just another day of rational discourse...

[edwardmurphy]

By the way, RT America is a Russian, state-funded TV network. American intelligence services describe it as "the Kremlin's principal international propaganda outlet." So why do you suppose that the Kremlin's principal international propaganda outlet would be interviewing an alt-right conspiracy theorist who's pushing this story...?

This is all pretty transparent.

[Kurieuo]

Does that need stating Ed? I'm not sure what that has to do with much. RT don't try to hide it's Russian -- I mean what does the 'R' stand for? They admit it:

RT creates news with an edge for viewers who want to Question More. RT covers stories overlooked by the mainstream media, provides alternative perspectives on current affairs, and acquaints international audiences with a Russian viewpoint on major global events. (https://www.rt.com/about-us/)

On the otherhand US mainstream news are often also in the pocket of US intelligence/Whitehouse, but there's no such obvious branding or announcement of such. I note there is often a blackout of international news -- 95%+ always seems about US political games and divisions.

I'm actually finding it quite annoying the reach of the US around the world with the late night shows and news, TV series, Hollywood, tech monopolies and just about anything US -- most being used for social activism. It is largely anti-Christian and there is I think within it all a large-scale brainwashing that happens/has happened which many people are unaware to. Propaganda wouldn't be propaganda without the narratives and (mis)information being pushed seeping through subconsciously.

To think the US and organisational conglomerates doesn't run their own propaganda (as well as other western countries including Australia, New Zealand, UK, etc) is just laughable.

[Stu]

Can't wait for Ed's spin on this one

FACEBOOK DEFENDS CALLS FOR TRUMP ASSASSINATION

Platform suspends woman bringing attention to violent leftists calling for president’s murder

A woman’s account has been suspended by Facebook for demanding the platform ban users calling for President Trump’s assassination.

“Do any of you remember a day when talking about assassinating the President resulted in getting arrested?” Marjorie Greene wrote Sunday, who included a screenshot of users calling for Trump’s murder.

Rather than delete or address the individuals inciting violence against the president, Facebook issued a 3-day suspension notice to Greene after she brought attention to the left’s incitements of violence.

Without elaborating, Facebook’s notice said Greene violated its community standards and therefore will be blocked for 3 days, and that she’d be locked out for a week if she continued.

No action has been taken against these individuals who actually have violated Facebook’s community guidelines.

“They say impeach Trump, I say assassinate Trump,” said one user.

“Someone please assassinate Trump I promise you won’t get in as much trouble as you think [poop] you might even get away with it,” wrote another user.

More

[RickD]

Can't wait for Ed's spin on this one

FACEBOOK DEFENDS CALLS FOR TRUMP ASSASSINATION

Platform suspends woman bringing attention to violent leftists calling for president’s murder

A woman’s account has been suspended by Facebook for demanding the platform ban users calling for President Trump’s assassination.

“Do any of you remember a day when talking about assassinating the President resulted in getting arrested?” Marjorie Greene wrote Sunday, who included a screenshot of users calling for Trump’s murder.

Rather than delete or address the individuals inciting violence against the president, Facebook issued a 3-day suspension notice to Greene after she brought attention to the left’s incitements of violence.

Without elaborating, Facebook’s notice said Greene violated its community standards and therefore will be blocked for 3 days, and that she’d be locked out for a week if she continued.

No action has been taken against these individuals who actually have violated Facebook’s community guidelines.

“They say impeach Trump, I say assassinate Trump,” said one user.

“Someone please assassinate Trump I promise you won’t get in as much trouble as you think [poop] you might even get away with it,” wrote another user.

More

Ah, infowars. I don't think there's a more trusted source of news, in all of the conspiracy news sources.

Any real news sources reporting on this?

[Stu]

Can't wait for Ed's spin on this one

FACEBOOK DEFENDS CALLS FOR TRUMP ASSASSINATION

Platform suspends woman bringing attention to violent leftists calling for president’s murder

A woman’s account has been suspended by Facebook for demanding the platform ban users calling for President Trump’s assassination.

“Do any of you remember a day when talking about assassinating the President resulted in getting arrested?” Marjorie Greene wrote Sunday, who included a screenshot of users calling for Trump’s murder.

Rather than delete or address the individuals inciting violence against the president, Facebook issued a 3-day suspension notice to Greene after she brought attention to the left’s incitements of violence.

Without elaborating, Facebook’s notice said Greene violated its community standards and therefore will be blocked for 3 days, and that she’d be locked out for a week if she continued.

No action has been taken against these individuals who actually have violated Facebook’s community guidelines.

“They say impeach Trump, I say assassinate Trump,” said one user.

“Someone please assassinate Trump I promise you won’t get in as much trouble as you think [poop] you might even get away with it,” wrote another user.

More

Ah, infowars. I don't think there's a more trusted source of news, in all of the conspiracy news sources.

Any real news sources reporting on this?

They have screenshots Rick Do you really think they faked Facebook profiles; avatar pictures, comments and all, do you?
That's quite the little conspiracy you are weaving there....

[edwardmurphy]

If Facebook is allowing people to call for Trump's assassination then that's a problem that they need to correct. I imagine the Secret Service would have something to say about that, too.

However...

1) Infowars is not a trustworthy source. They lie all the time, so they might just be lying this time, too.

2) Those screenshots don't actually prove anything. Maybe she was temporarily banned for something else entirely. Maybe she faked the ban. All I can say for sure is that her page is still up and it doesn't say anything about a suspension.

3) The comment for which she was supposedly banned is still there and 280 people have commented on it. If FB is censoring people who post comments that are critical of their platform then why is the comment still there, getting views and being shared? Don't tell me that they both banned her for saying it and overlooked it still being there.

4) There's no way of knowing whether any of the people whose comments she listed were disciplined by FB or visited by the FBI. Neither of those things would be publicly announced. Maybe they were banned, too. The claim that FB did nothing is completely unsubstantiated.

So to sum it up, Marjorie Taylor Greene is using Facebook as a platform make money and gain influence while simultaneously pushing the narrative that Facebook is persecuting and censoring her and should be disciplined for that, and all available evidence shows that Facebook is allowing that to continue.

Hmmm...

Way to think critically, Stu.

[Stu]