Reply With Quote
lol demanding I prove a negative.
If you can't actually say what political message is being censored, your claim that it's a political censorship fails pretty hard.
I'll ask again, what political message is being censored?
How about you explain how it was not political censorship, sociopath chump.
lol demanding I prove a negative.
If you can't actually say what political message is being censored, your claim that it's a political censorship fails pretty hard.
I'll ask again, what political message is being censored?
Political pages across various mediums were taken down in an effort to politically censor Info Wars. This isn't hard stuff, sociopath chump. Now stop pretending you don't get the crux of the matter and make a case as to how it is not political censorship; that or you can rely on fallback cop-outs like 'proving a negative'.
So you can't even name one political message that was censored.
Wow.
Not even one.
Political pages were censored. The precise or exact political message has no bearing on whether it's political censorship or not.
"Wow. Not even one."
Actually it does matter.Political pages were censored. The precise or exact political message has no bearing on whether it's political censorship or not.
No. It's either political censorship or not.
Now, you're playing your games and not just putting your cards on the table; but I'm guessing you're getting at there was some sort of 'justification'. That doesn't mean political censorship hasn't occurred.
You haven't proved your claim.
Too bad for you.
You can read the articles that detail the political censorship.
Sociopath chump desperately wishing I came here to "prove" the plain and simple to him.
Sociopath Pavlov
Put your cards on the table. Tell us what the justification was for these companies to take their actions.
(
Do the articles say which political messages were censored?You can read the articles that detail the political censorship.
Quote them.
So, your under the impression that Info Wars has pages that aren't politically oriented
Straw man.
I asked which political message was censored.
You can't come up with any.
And there you sit.
Your argument is clearly disingenuous. I'm not going to go searching on the extremely unlikely chance to the nth power that the content censored isn't political.
I'm not asking that.
Fallback terms.
I qualify this as find-out question and not argumentation (so stuff the strawman up your ass). Are you under the impression that the content removed wasn't political?
Nope. I'm sure most if it was.
Then, what's your problem? Given what you're "sure" of, this is an open and shut case of political censorship.
Too bad for you it's not.
I mean if you want to call hate speech and bullying political that's fair. You probably want to say those stories and videos can't possibly be hate speech or bullying.
Too bad.
It's not your company.
And there's the nut graph that I was telling you to put forth umpteen posts ago; but you predictably had to waste an hour plus of our time.
Yes, it is political censorship regardless of your buzz word classifications.
I didn't censor anyone.And there's the nut graph that I was telling you to put forth umpteen posts ago; but you predictably had to waste an hour plus of our time.
Yes, it is political censorship regardless your snowflake classifications.
Save your rage
Okay. Your random declarative statement is noted.
Is this an attempt to distract from the fact that you're saying classifying speech into certain designations and then removing it is not political censorship?
Testing the limits of the first amendment via mass communication to zombies.
The things this guy has done to specific families is criminal and he gonna “pay” in court.
However, it does bring up questions. So do we have an example of a liberal group pushing a conspiracy theory targeting and naming specific families not even associated with politics basically suggesting violence?
If you want to describe hate speech and bullying bans that broadly, I suppose that helps you avoid addressing what actually going to be them banned.
I will agree that stories and videos that companies will consider hate speech and bullying can be political.
Well, in the first place, I don't think the exact reasons for all the censorship on all the mediums was explicitly given IIRC.
But yea, "hate speech" and "bullying" is a cop-out. And regardless of the designation, it's political censorship by definition (which is why you're stupid to deny it
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions