YouTube will ban videos disputing the 2020 U.S. presidential election

Status
Not open for further replies.
You first need to understand how leftists think. They can not tolerate that other people could have a different point of view from theirs. In addition, most of them lack a very integral part of the brain where common sense and logic reside.
Point of view? Sure go ahead. Different facts? Sorry. Trump lost bigly and that is a FACT just like gravity is a FACT and global warming is a FACT and trump had declared bankruptcy after bankruptcy due to his incompetence is a FACT
 
I'm not a USA citizen, but the stench of your last election has even reached up into where I am in Canada and I've seen American elections going back a fair while.
Don't know who did what to whom, nor do I really care who wins (I can't vote so there is nothing I can do about it) but IMHO it made elections run by despots in banana republics and their like look very good. The scariest thing is that this is the USA we are talking about here not some third world failed nation state attempting a first vote.
Were previous presidencies tainted? Absolutely, but it seemed the issues were with gov't policy, foreign policy and not with the actual voting process itself.
 
First, we (The U.S.) is not a democracy, we are a Democratic Republic, which means that laws are what controls the U.S. not mobs. A real democracy is akin to mob rule. I am glad we are not a democracy, yes we have elections and the people vote for what they feel is the right choice for them, however; there is a complete switch from free thought and free will to a control of thoughts and control of will. Media in the U.S. is strongly pushing thought and feeling to a culture that is already undecided to where it truly stands, this is what is the real issue. Some people here are still of the belief that there should be small government, lower taxes, and more personal responsibility! It is not the governments responsibility to take care of people, it is to protect the laws, protect the country, and allow its citizens to be free to pursue happiness. Not to give it to them! Thanks for your thoughts though.

Cheers - points taken - if only it was done in good spirit - Idealistically I would like to be an anarchist too - with just govt overseeing core infrastructure and support.
Communism does not work over 150 people - and small govt in a large country is a no go as well - that's not too say - we can't drain the swamp - ie all the snouts in the trough .
However again - small govt is abused to allow Corps get huge social welfare , poor environmental and human care - plus avoiding all clean up costs .
The Senators - the Lobbyists is blatant corruption.
Again I will say most saying this view are hypocrites - the Red states are sucking the Federal teats like real troopers .
They are happy for Trump to interfere with NY and California . The Texas lawsuit is a complete NO NO then - telling other states how to run their lives .
I'm an employer - I can't just sack people because I feel like it - I can't have them work in an unsafe environment . Democracy and Regulation are necessary evils and the best we got . It does not mean we can't do it better with more nuance.
Was it good that Trump tried to castrate the Center for Disease control?
Would you have landed on the moon in 1969 - Would big Pharma do basic research etc etc ? Should you stop subsidizing Boeing to the tune of trillions of dollars - AirBus would love that . I would be concern that bail out of banks that the USA govt was not ruthless enough - it should of been for equity and sacking all the board and Upper management. Little Govt is unfortunately a front for corporate greed and irresponsibility - and those swampers sure get great medical - on the other side China can build the largest irrigation projects in the world . Pharaohs can build pyramids . Thanks
 
"Conservatives" are not the ones trying to block free speech at universities or censoring anything from opposing views in social media.
I would love to see anything about anyone "trying to block free speech at universities". And keep in mind I'm being serious. I even watch fox "news" and this honestly is a new one to me. Just do not waste my time.
Russia collusion bulls**t hoax and now election fraud.
Collusion bullshit? What a joke. A few million witnesses and every American law enforcement agency says otherwise. And the election fraud is what the GOP is all about. When one state demands 4 others to toss the election results is a well-known fact you blaming the Dems is as hollow and worthless as your CONServative "values".
 
Last edited:
Free speeches is not about truth. it is about be able to say what you want without consequences. If people are not allow to be wrong then everyone has been guilty. the peoples in power in your country are trying manipulate opinions instead of let people decide for selves after considering all sides.
 
I would love to see anything about anyone "trying to block free speech at universities".
Anyone who's missed this trend over the last 5-10 years has been living under a rock. Let's start with the disturbing common trend of conservative speakers being literally violently attacked by liberal students -- and sometimes faculty members -- after being invited to an on-campus event:

Gay conservative pundit Milo Yiannopoulos’s speech on the University of California Berkeley campus Wednesday night was cancelled after violent rioters shut down the university, setting fires that turned the campus into what CNN anchor Jake Tapper described as “an inferno.”

Video shows rioters violently attacking Milo supporters and people wearing Trump apparel, mercilessly spraying them with pepper spray. The rioters claimed in a press release that Milo is a “tool of Trump’s fascist government” and “has no right to speak at Cal or anywhere else!”

Here's an example, common among Universities now, of allowing free speech only within certain designated "free speech zones". This one led to a lawsuit:

"The student, Mr. Uzuegbunam had tried to comply with the rules at his school, Georgia Gwinnett College, [a campus] that sprawls over 260 acres. The college had designated two small patches of concrete as “free speech expression areas.”

By the calculations of Mr. Uzuegbunam’s lawyers, the areas in which free speech was permitted — a patio and a sidewalk — amounted to .0015 percent of the campus.

The free speech zones were available only for four hours on most days and two on Fridays. Students could reserve them once every 30 days.

When Mr. Uzuegbunam [began to speak] in August 2016, he was in one of the free speech zones. Indeed, he had reserved the space, submitting a free speech area request form three business days before, as required by the college’s elaborate freedom of expression policy.

“All I wanted to do,” Mr. Uzuegbunam said at a news briefing, “was to share with other students the faith that has changed my life.”

A campus police officer [told him that] public speaking in a free speech zone amounted to disorderly conduct. Mr. Uzuegbunam sued..."

There are countless other cases, such as students being expelled or professors being fired for making politcially conservative remarks on social media and/or joining conservative political organizations. Berkeley settled a suit over its policy of charging the campus group Young Republicans several hundred thousand dollars to allow a speaker to visit the campus, whereas their Democratic counterparts were charged nothing.

Three more out of several hundred:

"At UC Berkeley, a conservative activist was attacked by two men while recruiting students for Turning Point USA..."

----

"A student group threatened incoming freshmen at the University of Texas that it would post their public information if they joined any conservative club on campus...."

---

"Three individuals were arrested for aggravated arson after setting a dorm room door on fire in March at Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana. The student living in the dorm room was the president of Tulane’s Turning Point USA chapter, and had recently been “doxed” by other students seeking to expose members of the group..."
 
Free speeches is not about truth. it is about be able to say what you want without consequences. If people are not allow to be wrong then everyone has been guilty. the peoples in power in your country are trying manipulate opinions instead of let people decide for selves after considering all sides.
That's not free speech. I can't yell fire in a crowded room for my amusement and not get in trouble when people get hurt. I can't post pictures of you around your neighborhood stating you have sex with toddlers (assuming it's false) and not get in trouble. You can't say whatever you want whenever you want it and hide behind "free speech" with no consequences.
 
Maybe you would be violate laws in this case by violate rights of other peoples. this is not same as posting thoughts on social media in internet.

That's not free speech. I can't yell fire in a crowded room for my amusement and not get in trouble when people get hurt. I can't post pictures of you around your neighborhood stating you have sex with toddlers (assuming it's false) and not get in trouble. You can't say whatever you want whenever you want it and hide behind "free speech" with no consequences.
 
Anyone who's missed this trend over the last 5-10 years has been living under a rock. Let's start with the disturbing common trend of conservative speakers being literally violently attacked by liberal students -- and sometimes faculty members -- after being invited to an on-campus event:

Gay conservative pundit Milo Yiannopoulos’s speech on the University of California Berkeley campus Wednesday night was cancelled after violent rioters shut down the university, setting fires that turned the campus into what CNN anchor Jake Tapper described as “an inferno.”

Video shows rioters violently attacking Milo supporters and people wearing Trump apparel, mercilessly spraying them with pepper spray. The rioters claimed in a press release that Milo is a “tool of Trump’s fascist government” and “has no right to speak at Cal or anywhere else!”


Here's an example, common among Universities now, of allowing free speech only within certain designated "free speech zones". This one led to a lawsuit:

"The student, Mr. Uzuegbunam had tried to comply with the rules at his school, Georgia Gwinnett College, [a campus] that sprawls over 260 acres. The college had designated two small patches of concrete as “free speech expression areas.”

By the calculations of Mr. Uzuegbunam’s lawyers, the areas in which free speech was permitted — a patio and a sidewalk — amounted to .0015 percent of the campus.

The free speech zones were available only for four hours on most days and two on Fridays. Students could reserve them once every 30 days.

When Mr. Uzuegbunam [began to speak] in August 2016, he was in one of the free speech zones. Indeed, he had reserved the space, submitting a free speech area request form three business days before, as required by the college’s elaborate freedom of expression policy.

“All I wanted to do,” Mr. Uzuegbunam said at a news briefing, “was to share with other students the faith that has changed my life.”


A campus police officer [told him that] public speaking in a free speech zone amounted to disorderly conduct. Mr. Uzuegbunam sued..."

There are countless other cases, such as students being expelled or professors being fired for making politcially conservative remarks on social media and/or joining conservative political organizations. Berkeley settled a suit over its policy of charging the campus group Young Republicans several hundred thousand dollars to allow a speaker to visit the campus, whereas their Democratic counterparts were charged nothing.

Three more out of several hundred:

"At UC Berkeley, a conservative activist was attacked by two men while recruiting students for Turning Point USA..."

----

"A student group threatened incoming freshmen at the University of Texas that it would post their public information if they joined any conservative club on campus...."

---

"Three individuals were arrested for aggravated arson after setting a dorm room door on fire in March at Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana. The student living in the dorm room was the president of Tulane’s Turning Point USA chapter, and had recently been “doxed” by other students seeking to expose members of the group..."
Oh my God you did it again. Every damn one of those you listed has a much deeper story and in fact was in retaliation to bad treatment AGAINST them by the very poor people you claim as victims (Except Milo. Nothing that happens to him is bad enough. He invites it, and got it).

Here is your problem. You post headlines knowing there is much more to a story, and not assume, but hope they have "been living under a rock" and wont fact check you.

You wasted my time.
 
Ok people, this is how the democratic/socialism starts. They start banning and censoring public opinion on social media services. Then the middle-class citizen starts paying dearly for those, in the 1% and the people that don't want to work. Then they control what you buy and who you buy it from. Good luck with that. China said many times, they would cripple the USA without firing a single missile. Think about it! Many countries are changing to socialism without considering the consequences of a nation that failed from the adaptation of socialism. examples: China, Russia, India, Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba. Many prayers that the US has not been lost forever. Not until another Trump or Trump himself, returns in two years. If it lasts that long.

Before you start a hot air tirade, I strongly suggest you (and about 99% of your fellow Trumpists) look up the difference between Socialism and Communism and then try to post something that makes sense without embarrassing yourself.

And "Trump" returning in 2 years?? LOL!! From, where, prison??
 
If someone wants to watch something why are you against their freedom? You don't have to watch it. I totally understand they can do what they want. But I'm just pointing out its not good. When you have a platform they have rules but the fact police are wrong 50%of the Time. The who changed their stance 14.times. And Facebook uses them for fact checking.

Where did I say I am against them watching whatever they want??

I was just pointing to their whining when a private company doesn't want lies to be spread on its website because it's against their policy.

if you and they don't agree, watch elsewhere and stop the bellyaching!
 
Every damn one of those you listed has a much deeper story and in fact was in retaliation to bad treatment AGAINST them.

False, of course. What did the student at Tulane do to deserve having his dorm room set on fire? What did the students in Texas do to deserve being terrorized? What did the student in Georgia do to deserve being arrested-- besides state his religious beliefs?

(Except Milo. Nothing that happens to him is bad enough. He invites it, and got it).
I'd reply to this, but the sheer fact you're advocating felonious violence against an individual for his political beliefs is response enough. Would you like some black leather knee boots to go with your brown shirt, Herr Scavenger?
 
when a private company doesn't want lies to be spread on its website
Many individuals here have posted some of the countless false and fraudulent clips that these sites allowed for years and continue to allow today -- and in some cases actively promoted. Meanwhile, other content -- sometimes verifiably true content -- is censored under the guise of being "misleading".

These clips aren't being censored because they're false, but because Youtube doesn't like their political slant. Show a little honesty, and admit that much.
 
Collusion bullshit? What a joke. A few million witnesses and every American law enforcement agency says otherwise. And the election fraud is what the GOP is all about. When one state demands 4 others to toss the election results is a well-known fact you blaming the Dems is as hollow and worthless as your CONServative "values".

"A few million witnesses" to WHAT? What and where is the evidence that Trump colluded with Russia? The $50 million dollar bullshit tax funded Muller investigation certainly didn't find it! In fact, what is FACTUALLY known is that the Clinton campaign paid for a laughable made up "dossier" FROM RUSSIA that was used by the Obama admin and FBI (via FISA court) to illegally spy on the Trump campaign.

Only fools who get their news from the corrupt mainstream media fell for the whole collusion bullshit. Just like the bullshit impeachment circus they wasted months on. Many call these fools "low information voters". I call them gullible sheep.
 
Censorship creates the aura of truth of that being censored. Nothing piques the interest in material more than censorship.
 
What and where is the evidence that Trump colluded with Russia?

I will list more if you want me to but I have to go potty.
 
The link claiming Trump colluded with Russia isn't a news story, but an editorial written by a Boston attorney. It also doesn't list any collusion either. Just the usual vague statements about "ties" to Russia. The collusion that was actually proven existed between Russia and then-candidate Clinton, through her purchase of a dossier of Russian disinformation. We knew this back in 2017 -- but recently it has been confirmed by the parties most actively involved in the scheme:

"Oct 6, 2020: Recently declassified documents revealed that former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election...."

Personally, I had thought that there couldn't be any voters in the US chuckle-headed enough to not see straight through Clinton's plan, but your posts have convinced me otherwise.
 
And where do you get yours? I don't get news from the MSM, I get it from the MSM with quoted sources.
Quoted sources like Peter Strzok, whose own text messages admit his plan to stop Trump from being elected in 2016? Did you even read past the headline of that story? Quoting from it:

"Despite the cinematic title [of his book], Strzok reveals no new evidence that the president acted as a tool of Russia..."

By the way, the person who has a son under criminal investigation for secretly taking millions of dollars from Russia is Joe Biden. His son is named Hunter, btw.
Hunter Biden Admits To Being Target of Criminal Investigation:

"When it comes to the Biden family’s business associations with Communist Party entities in China, it doesn’t get any more serious.

Damning evidence about the Bidens’ lucrative influence-peddling schemes overseas is on the laptop Hunter fecklessly abandoned at a Delaware Mac repair shop, which was handed to the FBI last December.

Further damning evidence emerged during the election campaign from Hunter’s former business partner Tony Bobulinski, who was interviewed by the FBI on Oct. 23...."
 
The link claiming Trump colluded with Russia isn't a news story, but an editorial written by a Boston attorney.
Yeah pretty much. It was just such a fact-filled, well-informed opinion I decided to put it up. Now here are a few things that will help you in your future endeavors:

 
Quoted sources like Peter Strzok, whose own text messages admit his plan to stop Trump from being elected in 2016? Did you even read past the headline of that story? Quoting from it:

"Despite the cinematic title [of his book], Strzok reveals no new evidence that the president acted as a tool of Russia..."

By the way, the person who has a son under criminal investigation for secretly taking millions of dollars from Russia is Joe Biden. His son is named Hunter, btw.
Hunter Biden Admits To Being Target of Criminal Investigation:

"When it comes to the Biden family’s business associations with Communist Party entities in China, it doesn’t get any more serious.

Damning evidence about the Bidens’ lucrative influence-peddling schemes overseas is on the laptop Hunter fecklessly abandoned at a Delaware Mac repair shop, which was handed to the FBI last December.

Further damning evidence emerged during the election campaign from Hunter’s former business partner Tony Bobulinski, who was interviewed by the FBI on Oct. 23...."
1. Oh my God! Do you and, you go to sleep with Bidens son on your head?
It's 2 years old and NOTHING IS DEFINATE!!
People like you thrive on maybe. People like me thrive on facts. For example, I never commented on trump as far as Russia collusion until it had been proven.
2. Anyone is allowed to have a plan to stop the election of another. Its called strategy and has been going on for a few hundred years.
3. A lot of investigations launch and go nowhere. Learn to wait for the end.
 
Last edited:
1. Oh my God! Do you and, you go to sleep with Bidens son on your head?
It's 2 years old and NOTHING IS DEFINATE!!
Biden's associate was interviewed by the FBI just last month. Not two years ago.

And these three things are definite:

1. Hunter Biden took tens of millions of dollars from sources in Russia and China
2. Hunter's emails say he passed portions of that money to his father
3. Hunter is currently under criminal investigation for same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back