Google bans 'free speech' app Parler, Apple and Amazon have followed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
Don't bother even trying to go down that rabbit hole.


Facts are not something Leftists or Democrats want to here...I've provided video proof and if you are to lazy to read the entire thread not my problem. Go away instigator. And LOL someone has a problem with actually saying the riots happened...what cities???????

Please tell me which Tweets did Trump post that incited violence on Jan. 6th? I'll be waiting.

Feel free to read... and I didn't see any video feeds that proved I burnt down cities... hence my reply...
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
Guns don't kill people. People kill people
But if they didn't HAVE guns, they'd have a much tougher time doing the killing....

Unless you need it for hunting animals (a SMALL minority of gun owners), the only purpose of a gun is to shoot someone... I don't see a problem in not wanting that....
 

fps4ever

Posts: 680   +899

Feel free to read... and I didn't see any video feeds that proved I burnt down cities... hence my reply...

His words do not imply actual violence. Walk down to the capitol is every Americans right to protest. That is left hyperbole thinking. And he's right we will not take back our nation with weakness...still waiting for some actual tweets. And its semantics when you know exactly what that poster meant by the riots in certain cities and are just being obtuse. You are just a late to the party instigator that is OK when one side gets away with it and not the other. Classic...

 
Last edited:

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
His words do not imply actual violence. Walk down to the capitol is every Americans right to protest. That is left hyperbole thinking. And he's right we will not take back our nation with weakness...still waiting for some actual tweets. And its semantics when you know exactly what that poster meant by the riots in certain cities and are just being obtuse. You are just a late to the party instigator that is OK when one side gets away with it and not the other. Classic...

So you didn't read the article... fair enough... I have not argued anywhere on this thread that the "Lefts" are in the right... I have continued to argue that TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT!!

Trump has IMPLIED violence in his tweets - he simply hasn't outright said "commit violence"....

When one's argument is "well, the other side is doing it too", it kind of reminds me of the kindergarten kid who I discipline because "he hit me first"...
 

fps4ever

Posts: 680   +899
So you didn't read the article... fair enough... I have not argued anywhere on this thread that the "Lefts" are in the right... I have continued to argue that TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT!!

Trump has IMPLIED violence in his tweets - he simply hasn't outright said "commit violence"....

When one's argument is "well, the other side is doing it too", it kind of reminds me of the kindergarten kid who I discipline because "he hit me first"...

We interpret it differently and there is the rub of "welI we know what he was thinking but didn't say it" bullcrap. And that the other side is doing it too argument is the democrats war cry...not sure where you are getting that confused? My video had nothing to do with whataboutism, I was pointing that out to someone on YOUR side when they asked what has our side done to incite violence. 😒
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
We interpret it differently and there is the rub of "welI we know what he was thinking but didn't say it" bullcrap. And that the other side is doing it too argument is the democrats war cry...not sure where you are getting that confused? My video had nothing to do with whataboutism, I was pointing that out to someone on YOUR side when they asked what has our side done to incite violence. 😒
It's not about how WE interpret it... it's how the people who VIOLENTLY stormed the Capitol Building interpreted it... that's the "proof in the pudding" as it were...

And again, YOUR argument has consistently pointed to stuff the Democrats have done or condoned in the past... none of which is relevant to what is happening NOW.
 

fps4ever

Posts: 680   +899
It's not about how WE interpret it... it's how the people who VIOLENTLY stormed the Capitol Building interpreted it... that's the "proof in the pudding" as it were...

And again, YOUR argument has consistently pointed to stuff the Democrats have done or condoned in the past... none of which is relevant to what is happening NOW.

You have to look at the recent past to understand why this violence happened. It can't be ignored as "oh well". This is not about Trump, these issues are bigger than him. If you are too narrow minded to understand that I don't know what to say. There is a difference between mobs carrying weapons and bricks vs an unarmed angry mob crossing a velvet rope and getting into some rooms. Who a few are then gunned down.
 

harm9963

Posts: 107   +60
I grew up being taught that different opinions are to be respected even if you disagree. Nowadays either you believe what the Democrats say or else! We, the people, give these companies too much power. Our rights are fragile and can be lost if we are dumb enough. These companies are acting as publishers and should be held accountable as such.
Do as I say not as I do = Dictatorship
 

m3tavision

Posts: 651   +403
Oh course it's political. However, the people who operate Google, Apple, Facebook, and Twitter are fully within their Right to ban anyone from their platform on any pretext at all. They are private companies. BTW, the Parler app can still be downloaded, just not from the usual places.

No, they dont have the right, unless they apply their censorship evenly... to all. And sin e Twitter, Facebook dont.... then they are just being bias pigs and authoritarians.

Twitter CEO should also be banned from his own platform, for inciting Congress and Americans when his Company lied. When he started breaking laws... then lied about them, inciting Americans.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
Doubt this will get much visibility since it's buried, but this is a Reddit post full of threats of violence and overthrowing the government, coming from the left, that have not been completely moderated. Yet for some reason, Reddit is not being punished. I'll give you one guess as to why.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/kr8qcx
Didn't see anyone inciting violence there.... it was basically people saying how come Republicans are such jerks... don't think that's really the same thing...
You have to look at the recent past to understand why this violence happened. It can't be ignored as "oh well". This is not about Trump, these issues are bigger than him. If you are too narrow minded to understand that I don't know what to say. There is a difference between mobs carrying weapons and bricks vs an unarmed angry mob crossing a velvet rope and getting into some rooms. Who a few are then gunned down.
This thread is about Parlor being banned... so.... it has EVERYTHING to do with Trump - and his supporters - who basically got it banned by abusing it...

Whether or not the Democrats do "bad stuff" as well is irrelevant.
 

fps4ever

Posts: 680   +899
Didn't see anyone inciting violence there.... it was basically people saying how come Republicans are such jerks... don't think that's really the same thing...

This thread is about Parlor being banned... so.... it has EVERYTHING to do with Trump - and his supporters - who basically got it banned by abusing it...

Whether or not the Democrats do "bad stuff" as well is irrelevant.

Wow, its all relevant...this is why your side scares the hell out of most normal conservative people. And that "not inciting or condoning violence" is about as ridiculous as I've ever heard. Still waiting on proof of Trump actually suggesting violence. How is a normal person supposed to debate when the blue side makes up their own version of facts while ignoring others?
 

Bullwinkle M

Posts: 519   +421
Seeing as how the posts are going a bit off topic (or sideways)

Cleanup, security, medical bills etc. and replacing every computer, cable, mouse, thumb drive, wall wart etc (EVERYTHING computer related) at the Capitol is now estimated in the $Billions$

Since there were no antifa members identified in the mob (only Trump Supporters).....


Should we send the bill to Donald Trump or the Republican Party ?
 
Last edited:

m3tavision

Posts: 651   +403
Didn't see anyone inciting violence there.... it was basically people saying how come Republicans are such jerks... don't think that's really the same thing...

This thread is about Parlor being banned... so.... it has EVERYTHING to do with Trump - and his supporters - who basically got it banned by abusing it...

Whether or not the Democrats do "bad stuff" as well is irrelevant.


I think that is the point everyone is trying to make... YOU dont get to decide what is relevant. And it doesnt matter you PERSONAL opinion...

It has to be the same for everyone. If not, its just personal bias... and gaslighting.


Nancy Pelosi incited that crown of 700k Citizen in DC... during Trump's rally, she called half of Americans fraudsters....

 

fps4ever

Posts: 680   +899
I think that is the point everyone is trying to make... YOU dont get to decide what is relevant. And it doesnt matter you PERSONAL opinion...

It has to be the same for everyone. If not, its just personal bias... and gaslighting.


Nancy Pelosi incited that crown of 700k Citizen in DC... during Trump's rally, she called half of Americans fraudsters....

Bingo, nobody should get a pass. If I have not made that clear that is mybad. Nobody should get to pick and choose who to prosecute or who to censorship based off of different political beliefs. Yes its only (constitution) for government now but what happens when the voices of social media are bigger than government and have far more influence and choose to censor one side just to win at all costs. There is the catch 22. What if they were all conservative companies and censored the blue side. I would not be OK with that at all. and What kind of precedence does that set going forward?
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,791   +6,142
Innocent people always get killed.
That is a fact regardless of the tool. Don't forget about innocent people getting killed by law enforcement. As long as law enforcement are equipping themselves, they have no moral grounds to ask for disarmament.

Gun laws are a ridiculous excuse to violence prevention. Gun laws are a flat out attack on our constitutional right. Each and every one of them violate our right to own a gun.

But that is not the topic here today. The topic in this thread is how one political party is being held to a double standard.

There should NOT be free speech without consequences when you are up to illegal activity. PERIOD.

Parler has a simple path forward. This is not some mystical unreasonable change. Stop terrorists doing terrorism. Simple.
If that is the stand point you want to take. Then there is no freedom for BLM activist either. Those violent videos should never have seen the light of day either. The fact that BLM viotence hasn't been taken down. That is where this political censorship get its potential power to prosecute. And don't even come back with a comment like it was only a few BLM activist. Because if treated fairly like this banning of Parler, all BLM conversations are guilty.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
I think that is the point everyone is trying to make... YOU dont get to decide what is relevant. And it doesnt matter you PERSONAL opinion...

It has to be the same for everyone. If not, its just personal bias... and gaslighting.


Nancy Pelosi incited that crown of 700k Citizen in DC... during Trump's rally, she called half of Americans fraudsters....
I'm talking about THIS THREAD.... the article - which we are all supposed to be stating our opinions on - is about Parler being banned.

Personal opinion is clearly all we can use - the FACTS are that it was legally banned, tough cookies to those who disagree...

Again, the only argument I'm hearing from the Republican posters in here is "the Democrats are worse".... SO WHAT!?!?!?

Does that mean Parler should be unbanned? please explain...
 

terzaerian

Posts: 960   +1,398
I'm talking about THIS THREAD.... the article - which we are all supposed to be stating our opinions on - is about Parler being banned.

Personal opinion is clearly all we can use - the FACTS are that it was legally banned, tough cookies to those who disagree...

Again, the only argument I'm hearing from the Republican posters in here is "the Democrats are worse".... SO WHAT!?!?!?

Does that mean Parler should be unbanned? please explain...
Because societies only function when the members obey the law.

Laws are established by precedents.

A precedent was set last summer during the BLM riots whether you want to acknowledge this fact or not. It doesn't vanish just because someone with a D or an R next to their names won American Idol: Constitutional Edition or because a bunch of puppets on network TV froth selective outrage.

The alternative is the breakdown of that society. Hope y'all are ready.
 

fps4ever

Posts: 680   +899
I'm talking about THIS THREAD.... the article - which we are all supposed to be stating our opinions on - is about Parler being banned.

Personal opinion is clearly all we can use - the FACTS are that it was legally banned, tough cookies to those who disagree...

Again, the only argument I'm hearing from the Republican posters in here is "the Democrats are worse".... SO WHAT!?!?!?

Does that mean Parler should be unbanned? please explain...

Last week, Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, both announced on Twitter that they were moving to a new social media platform.

"I'm proud to join @parler_app -- a platform gets what free speech is all about -- and I'm excited to be a part of it," Cruz tweeted.


Many others followed suit. Parler, founded in August 2018, touts itself as an "unbiased" social media platform focused on "real user experiences and engagement." In recent weeks, it has become a destination for conservatives who have voiced their disapproval of how mainstream platforms such as Facebook and Twitter moderate content.

But as with every other platform on the internet, Parler's free speech stance goes only so far. The platform has been banning many people who joined and trolled conservatives.

"Pretty much all of my leftist friends joined Parler to screw with MAGA folks, and every last one of them was banned in less than 24 hours because conservatives truly love free speech," a user wrote on Twitter.

Writer and comedian Tony Posnanski also received a ban from the app. "Free speech my a--! I literally said less than here and I got banned," he tweeted.

John Matze, the founder and CEO of Parler, said Thursday in an interview with CNBC that the company remains firm in its promise that it supports free speech.

"Our general premise is that we believe in the good of the American people as a whole and that people should be able to have these discussions," he said. "People don't want to be told what to think. People don't want to be told what to say anymore."

Banning trolls, oh my lets take down the app.......legitimately banned my arse.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,094   +3,249
Because societies only function when the members obey the law.

Laws are established by precedents.

A precedent was set last summer during the BLM riots whether you want to acknowledge this fact or not. It doesn't vanish just because someone with a D or an R next to their names won American Idol: Constitutional Edition or because a bunch of puppets on network TV froth selective outrage.

The alternative is the breakdown of that society. Hope y'all are ready.
What precedent? To use an unmoderated social media platform to incite violence?

And I don’t condone any violent protesting... whether it’s BLM, Antifa, or the r3tards storming Capitol Hill
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,080   +4,313
If the creators of the app had no means to police it, IMO, they should not b!tch when it gets policed by others. Again, per past SCOTUS cases, the first amendment does not guarantee that you can say anything you damn well please anytime you damn well want.

And if there are blm posts that appear to incite violence, and you fail to report it, then that's on you. I am willing to bet that more often than not, posts that are taken down are taken down because someone complained about them.

And those claiming that democrats supported blm violence, have a look at this https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ondemned-violence-linked-protests/3317862001/ (sorry, its not a right-wing rag, and I would not have expected it to be on a right-wing rag since it does not fit their narrative). IMO, claiming that democrats support blm violence is an extremely weak excuse used in an attempt to justify what happened at the Capitol.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.