Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by doodle » Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:23 am

From my understanding Parler had service contracts....I'm sure there is some remedy for severance. I'm just confused because I don't understand what solution Libertarians would like to implement that wouldn't involve government intervention. Am I happy with the power that these tech corporations and our media wield? Absolutely not. Would I like to see regulation? Probably, but that is immediately dismissed here as communistic overreach and a limitation on free speech and private action...so I'm not sure how to react. What do Libertarians suggest other than to abandon the platforms and establish new ones?


lCxkB7fBamkheBk6_-pcpCc8JD-d5clYurklUR6Bw30.jpg
lCxkB7fBamkheBk6_-pcpCc8JD-d5clYurklUR6Bw30.jpg (20.93 KiB) Viewed 5305 times

I think Trump brings up a good point...what's the difference between a patriot and a terrorist?

r1oelhdzvla61.png
r1oelhdzvla61.png (949.08 KiB) Viewed 5305 times
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by vnatale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am

I Shrugged wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:16 am

Did you read the article, Vinny?

The answers to your questions are laid out there.


I had initially made my comments based upon the long excerpt provided here from the article.

I have now read the article.

I've several times complained here about what an extreme avaricious company Apple is with the way they have planned obsolescence built into their products in the way they handle existing apps no being able to work on devices with "outdated" operating systems. I've not received any sympathy from anyone here. How do I interpret that in any other way than tacit approval of Apple's practices?

If you have made the choice to make the Apple world your only method of connecting to the internet then you have bought into and support this behavior on their part. And, probably, their other behaviors.

They do make wonderful products. But if they behave in such a way antithetical to how you say you believe but you still shovel them tons of $$$$$ for their products....then, in the end. you support their behavior with your $$$$.

I still have to come down on Parler being guilty of gross negligence of duty of the highest order.

The overriding need of any individual or entity is survival. They should have had plans in place to survive under the worst conditions. It appears that they had none.

That the major corporations may now be doing things to cater to a full Democratic government (aside from the Supreme Court -- still fully controlled by the Republicans)....cannot be denied.

But it also cannot be denied that they were doing the same -- catering to a Republican government -- at a time when the Republicans controlled all four branches of government (and, until just recently, still controlled three of them) plus had a President who exhibited unprecedented control over the Justice side of the government. That explains why they let Trump get away for so long with what he did. They were plan afraid of retaliation from a Trump controlled government...from top to bottom. Their was no one of integrity in this top to bottom controlled government.

I am not in favor of Parler.com being banned in any way. I wasted too much time a few days ago trying to log into my account with them. But I do not see them taking any responsibility for the position they currently find themselves in. Again...another familiar conservative / Republican / Trumpist response. Accept no responsibility.

Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
pp4me
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1190
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:12 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by pp4me » Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:39 am

vnatale wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:53 pm
At the time I wrote what I wrote I had clearly stated that my assumption was that libertarians would not be advocating for any government involvement. But after I wrote that I did get a response from MangoMan stating his believe that the government should get involved.
Depends on what is meant by getting involved.

I don't know too much about it but I understand that the big tech companies were given some special exemptions in regards to legal liability. If the rationale for doing that was because it was in the public interest to create platforms allowing the free exchange of ideas and information then it appears to me that this rationale no longer exists so those exemptions should be repealed.

If they want to practice censorship and turn their platforms into safe spaces for liberals then I think that is a very bad business decision but it's their company and they can do what they want with it, as most people here seem to agree. If they are going to actively work to thwart the development of an un-censored internet then it sure looks to me like this is moving into anti-trust territory.
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by I Shrugged » Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:55 am

doodle, you've got your own anti-libertarian trolling agenda that just won't let you talk about anything without trying to argue those points. If you think these corporations all did this independent of each other and of communication with government people, you're blind.

Apart from any government influence, the hypocrisies in the case of the enforcement of terms of service of the various companies are enormous. Further, I haven't promoted any government solution, and I'm not sure anyone here has. That's not to say I do or don't. It hasn't come up and I haven't even thought about it. I'm just asking if the situation worries you and how much? Or does it sit well with you because the the right people have been affected?

Vinny, let's stipulate that Parler could have done things better, and they naively left themselves somewhat defenseless. Is anyone who leaves themselves defenseless to blame for whatever happens to them? No sympathy from you, huh? I don't want to live in that kind of society. Do the actions taken against them worry you, or not? Do you support those actions, or not? Those are the simple questions that define this.

Regardless of what libertarians think, these issues are going to shape 21st century America. I think there is some serious big picture blindness going on right now.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by vnatale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:10 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:55 am

doodle, you've got your own anti-libertarian trolling agenda that just won't let you talk about anything without trying to argue those points. If you think these corporations all did this independent of each other and of communication with government people, you're blind.

Apart from any government influence, the hypocrisies in the case of the enforcement of terms of service of the various companies are enormous. Further, I haven't promoted any government solution, and I'm not sure anyone here has. That's not to say I do or don't. It hasn't come up and I haven't even thought about it. I'm just asking if the situation worries you and how much? Or does it sit well with you because the the right people have been affected?

Vinny, let's stipulate that Parler could have done things better, and they naively left themselves somewhat defenseless. Is anyone who leaves themselves defenseless to blame for whatever happens to them? No sympathy from you, huh? I don't want to live in that kind of society. Do the actions taken against them worry you, or not? Do you support those actions, or not? Those are the simple questions that define this.

Regardless of what libertarians think, these issues are going to shape 21st century America. I think there is some serious big picture blindness going on right now.


I have already stated the actions of Facebook and Twitter when they've each suspended me repeatedly directly affected me. I was not defenseless. I was to blame. I broke their rules.

I get my TV through DirecTV and internet / phone through a cable company. How much control do I have over their rules they impose upon me?

I learn to adapt to each of their rules to get as much as I can from all mega-corporations without risking losing their services.

Yes, I have no sympathy for profit making corporations that do not take proper measures to protect their corporations from any kind of threats to their survival, whether it be what we are currently witnessing or some form of cyber warfare. They are not defenseless. It is again playing the victim to call them defenseless.

Finally, if this has been some grand collusion / conspiracy among all the giants - Apple / Twitter / Facebook / Amazon / Google ....why have I not yet read from anyone why somehow Microsoft is seemingly missing in action in this conspiracy? What is their reason for being asked to join it but declining to do so? They are truly one of the giants with their installed operating system base and their browser Edge. Have they done anything to control the conservatives? If not, why not?

I have not kept track of where your Trump sympathies have been. But if you have been a Trump supporter then I have to direct your own questions back to you: "Is anyone who leaves themselves defenseless to blame for whatever happens to them? No sympathy from you, huh? I don't want to live in that kind of society."

The Trump society was clearly not one to look out for the common person or the downtrodden.

Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by doodle » Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:55 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:41 pm
a3187dac155f.jpg
What about Big Ag, Big Oil, Big Media? Do they exhibit negative influence on society as well through lobbying efforts or squashing competition? What's to be done?
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by vnatale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:16 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:41 pm

a3187dac155f.jpg


1) Again..it's not a 1st Amendment, Free Speech issue. That refers to government restriction of speech

2) Can you go into a restaurant (one of your favorite Chicago ones, MangoMan) and shout whatever you want and expect them not to ask you to leave?

3) These are private companies able to do whatever they want (within the law). There are no laws preventing what each of them individually decided to do. Some of us believe they were probably years past doing what they did. Especially in regards to Trump and his Twitter account.

4) Why is Microsoft missing? How did they not become part of this conspiracy / collusion?

5) It's as simple as last Wednesday was a catalytic event which caused all of these giants to finally come to their senses. The same way in Watergate when enough of a tipping point was reached so Nixon even lost his until then Republican supporters.

Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by SomeDude » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:29 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:26 am
Indeed, a Parler executive told me that of the thirteen people arrested as of Monday for the breach at the Capitol, none appear to be active users of Parler. The Capitol breach was planned far more on Facebook and YouTube.
No authoritarians believe they are authoritarians. No matter how repressive are the measures they support — censorship, monopoly power, no-fly lists for American citizens without due process — they tell themselves that those they are silencing and attacking are so evil, are terrorists, that anything done against them is noble and benevolent, not despotic and repressive. That is how American liberals currently think, as they fortify the control of Silicon Valley monopolies over our political lives, exemplified by the overnight destruction of a new and popular competitor.
Skimmed the article, very good, love the conclusion.

I do have an issue with the first paragraph above. The idea that there was some "Breach" at the Capital is a debunked conspiracy theory. It's not even that they didn't lock the doors, they opened them and escorted people in. The videos are out there. Security on walkie talkies getting radioed to let people in.

A bunch of middle-aged un-armed people, some in silly costumes CANT just walk through the capitol building while the entire Congress is in session. One armed guard firing a rifle in the air or even locked doors would keep all but the window-breaking ANTIFA out.

Calling it a breach or insurrection or riot is stupid. I don't even care if there were some ANTIFA acting badly. They didn't even lock the doors. Cops are resigning and "committing suicide" over it (yeah ok). I know I know, everything is a conspiracy right? It's either that or the most bonkers insane coincidence.

The "breach" was an orchestrated event to provide cover for censorship, crackdowns on people, impeachment, removal of the prez, new anti-protest powers for Biden etc.

I know I know guys, it was a horrible violent mob that broke down the doors lol. un-armed everyday Americans WALKED in while the ENTIRE Congress was in Session. Do you really think that's physically possible if they weren't let in?
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by Cortopassi » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:45 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:41 pm
a3187dac155f.jpg
(Sorry I am still getting email notified on this thread so I am answering because I like sparring with pug!)

You are free to conduct your life without those companies that are supposedly choking off free speech.

Put the iPhone down, pug. Drop your Prime subscription. Got an old Blackberry? ;)

There have been no companies, in my estimation, that have promoted so much free ranging speech in the history of the world than those that are being castigated right now. Boo hoo, Trump got banned, throw the whole industry under the bus.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by vnatale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:12 pm

Listened to all 34 minutes of it while reading the transcript!

The interview was done with the Parler CEO while last Wednesday's events were going on.

Vinny


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/07/opin ... ogin=email


Capture.JPG
Capture.JPG (62.18 KiB) Viewed 5436 times
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by Maddy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:16 pm

. . .
User avatar
GT
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by GT » Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:12 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:45 pm
MangoMan wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:41 pm
a3187dac155f.jpg
(Sorry I am still getting email notified on this thread so I am answering because I like sparring with pug!)

You are free to conduct your life without those companies that are supposedly choking off free speech.

Put the iPhone down, pug. Drop your Prime subscription. Got an old Blackberry? ;)

There have been no companies, in my estimation, that have promoted so much free ranging speech in the history of the world than those that are being castigated right now. Boo hoo, Trump got banned, throw the whole industry under the bus.
George "Cortopassi" Costanza? :) - Every time I think I'm out...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-QYRITpXrY

I do agree that companies should set their own standards.
- if they want to be political that is their risk

Customers should have a right to vote with their feet.

The joke you made is correct - where do you go to get away from the tech giants - Blackberry?

Wasn't Verizon forced to share cell tower coverage with Sprint. via lease, to get away from the image of having a monopoly? that rings a bell but I could be wrong.
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by flyingpylon » Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:39 pm

Parler definitely made a major strategic error in depending on Google, Facebook, and Amazon. If they were truly serious about their mission, they didn't have to look any further than Gab.com for an example of what could happen to them. There are some that say Parler's real mission was to build a database of users and data. Even if not used in the same manner as other social media networks, that's a valuable thing. That might explain the less than rigorous approach to their project. I don't claim to know any of that for a fact, it's just speculation.

One of the problems with these tech giants is the extent to which they are now interwoven with our government. Has anyone looked at how many people have job-hopped between government and tech? Has anyone seen a list of incoming Biden staffers and looked at their connections to big tech? Anyone think the Biden administration is going to do anything to protect people from these behemoths?

I don't have the answers. If action will not be taken at the national level, perhaps it will be up to state governments to impose some kind of control. Get enough of them together and maybe they could force certain changes.

Maybe certain types of companies need to be regulated as utilities. At what point did electricity providers or telephone companies become regulated?

Speaking of telephone companies, antitrust is another issue. Anyone remember AT&T before 1982 (I know you do)? My grandfather worked for Bell Telephone for 42 years and I'll never forget him explaining that breaking up the Bell System was the stupidest thing the government ever could have done. Obviously he had a biased opinion, but I remember him being pretty hot about it and I didn't know much about it, I was only in high school at the time.

It's a complicated issue with no easy answers. You can say "go build your own ______" but the problem is that these big tech companies have so much market share and so much power that not only does it make it extremely difficult to create an application that can compete, it's extremely difficult for others to create businesses that can provide the technical and financial infrastructure to help you run it at scale. By simply saying "oh well, that's business" we all miss out on a lot of potential innovation and advances.

I generally think the government should leave businesses alone and let the market sort it out. But there have to be limits to that at some point and the country will have to decide. It will be messy getting there.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by glennds » Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:34 pm

SomeDude wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:16 pm
glennds wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:54 pm
Add Angela Merkel to the list of those concerned with Twitter's censoring:

https://www.thelocal.de/20210111/merkel ... roblematic

or

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/0 ... oblematic/
Lol

She just thinks she should get to decide who gets to speak, not a company.

Germany does not have freedom of speech. You can get arrested for certain beliefs there if you express them.
Really? Where did you hear this SomeDude?

From Wikipedia (among other sources)
The Federal Republic of Germany guarantees freedom of speech, expression, and opinion to its citizens as per Article 5 of the constitution....
Since the publication of the German Grundgesetz, there have been two kinds of censored media in Germany. The first is material that is considered offensive or indecent; such media are placed on the "Index" and restricted in their publication, and distribution to minors is illegal. The second is material that is considered anti-constitutional, dangerous to the state.


And for the more visual, here is some representative German opinion about Trump from a parade (annual Carnaval):

Image
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by SomeDude » Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:03 pm

glennds wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:34 pm
SomeDude wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:16 pm
glennds wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:54 pm
Add Angela Merkel to the list of those concerned with Twitter's censoring:

https://www.thelocal.de/20210111/merkel ... roblematic

or

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/0 ... oblematic/
Lol

She just thinks she should get to decide who gets to speak, not a company.

Germany does not have freedom of speech. You can get arrested for certain beliefs there if you express them.
Really? Where did you hear this SomeDude?

From Wikipedia (among other sources)
The Federal Republic of Germany guarantees freedom of speech, expression, and opinion to its citizens as per Article 5 of the constitution....
Since the publication of the German Grundgesetz, there have been two kinds of censored media in Germany. The first is material that is considered offensive or indecent; such media are placed on the "Index" and restricted in their publication, and distribution to minors is illegal. The second is material that is considered anti-constitutional, dangerous to the state.
From the same Wikipedia, I'm amazed you missed it:


Holocaust denial is a crime in Germany. § 130(3) of the StGB (German penal code) reads:

He who, publicly or in assembly, approves, denies, or trivializes genocide committed under the regime of National Socialism in a way that is suitable to disturb the public peace, is subject to imprisonment up to 5 years or a monetary fine.[20]
Perpetrators of Holocaust denial can be tried in absentia and declared persona non grata, thus being barred from entering the country. Extradition treaties as relate to Holocaust denial are subject to political asylum pleas, but a persona non grata who enters Germany can be immediately arrested. Furthermore, a German arrest warrant based on the offense of Holocaust denial is deemed executable in many EU states, thus, a Holocaust denier's entry into any EU state could lead to arrest and extradition to Germany (or any other state where such denial is an offense, such as Austria, and which has issued an arrest warrant).

Among those who have been charged with Holocaust denial in Germany are the following:

David Irving, who was declared persona non grata and has not returned to Germany;
Germar Rudolf, who was sentenced to prison but fled jurisdiction; he was deported from the United States in 2005;
Ernst Zündel, received a five-year prison sentence on February 15, 2007 in Germany,
Fredrick Töben, an Australian citizen, who had an appointment with a German public prosecutor in Mannheim with whom he wanted to discuss Holocaust denial; at the end of the conversation with the prosecutor, Toben was presented an arrest warrant which the prosecutor had already obtained beforehand. A German court sentenced him to a prison sentence of ten months.
Simonjester wrote: also try being pro christian home school in Germany.. they will come take your kids...
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by SomeDude » Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:01 pm

Lol. Glends this is literally the second paragraph from the article you linked to:

"The fundamental right to freedom of opinion is a fundamental right of elementary importance, and this fundamental right can be interfered with, but through the law and within the framework defined by the legislature, not according to the decision of the management of social media platforms," said Merkel's spokesman, Steffen Seibert."

As I said, Germany doesn't have freedom of speech and merkle certainly doesnt support it.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by glennds » Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:12 pm

SomeDude wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:01 pm
Lol. Glends this is literally the second paragraph from the article you linked to:

"The fundamental right to freedom of opinion is a fundamental right of elementary importance, and this fundamental right can be interfered with, but through the law and within the framework defined by the legislature, not according to the decision of the management of social media platforms," said Merkel's spokesman, Steffen Seibert."

As I said, Germany doesn't have freedom of speech and merkle certainly doesnt support it.
I have no horse in the race, but somehow find myself here defending Germany! In terms of overall scoring of human rights, Germany looks better than the US. Lol.
Does any country in the world meet your standard of freedom of speech? Obviously not the US and not Germany. If there is a country that makes the grade in your mind, I'd be interested to know whom.


Image
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by vnatale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:41 pm

SomeDude wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:03 pm

From the same Wikipedia, I'm amazed you missed it:


Holocaust denial is a crime in Germany. § 130(3) of the StGB (German penal code) reads:

He who, publicly or in assembly, approves, denies, or trivializes genocide committed under the regime of National Socialism in a way that is suitable to disturb the public peace, is subject to imprisonment up to 5 years or a monetary fine.[20]
Perpetrators of Holocaust denial can be tried in absentia and declared persona non grata, thus being barred from entering the country. Extradition treaties as relate to Holocaust denial are subject to political asylum pleas, but a persona non grata who enters Germany can be immediately arrested. Furthermore, a German arrest warrant based on the offense of Holocaust denial is deemed executable in many EU states, thus, a Holocaust denier's entry into any EU state could lead to arrest and extradition to Germany (or any other state where such denial is an offense, such as Austria, and which has issued an arrest warrant).

Among those who have been charged with Holocaust denial in Germany are the following:

David Irving, who was declared persona non grata and has not returned to Germany;
Germar Rudolf, who was sentenced to prison but fled jurisdiction; he was deported from the United States in 2005;
Ernst Zündel, received a five-year prison sentence on February 15, 2007 in Germany,
Fredrick Töben, an Australian citizen, who had an appointment with a German public prosecutor in Mannheim with whom he wanted to discuss Holocaust denial; at the end of the conversation with the prosecutor, Toben was presented an arrest warrant which the prosecutor had already obtained beforehand. A German court sentenced him to a prison sentence of ten months.


This is completely appropriate in a country like Germany wherein they owned up to their responsibility to the world for letting Nazism reign for 12 years and all the misery it brought to both its own country and so many other countries of the world.

This is showing that they serious about the matter.

Unlike our country and its Civil War cause deniers.

The same penalties above should apply to anyone in our country who denies that the cause of the Civil War was anything but the South's desire to not only continue the institution of slavery in the existing states but to be extended to additional states.

If that had been done then we would not have seen that offensive flag of United States black oppression being waved around the Capitol building last week.

Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by Mark Leavy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:58 pm

vnatale wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:41 pm

This is showing that they serious about the matter.

Unlike our country and its Civil War cause deniers.

The same penalties above should apply to anyone in our country who denies that the cause of the Civil War was anything but the South's desire to not only continue the institution of slavery in the existing states but to be extended to additional states.

If that had been done then we would not have seen that offensive flag of United States black oppression being waved around the Capitol building last week.
You really don’t understand what free speech means.

The 1st amendment is about protecting speech that most people find repugnant. It is about defending insulting, offensive, idiotic and inflammatory speech.

‘Approved’ speech needs no protection.

This doesn’t apply to Germany, of course, as they have neither the first amendment nor free speech.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by vnatale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:52 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:58 pm

vnatale wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:41 pm


This is showing that they serious about the matter.

Unlike our country and its Civil War cause deniers.

The same penalties above should apply to anyone in our country who denies that the cause of the Civil War was anything but the South's desire to not only continue the institution of slavery in the existing states but to be extended to additional states.

If that had been done then we would not have seen that offensive flag of United States black oppression being waved around the Capitol building last week.


You really don’t understand what free speech means.

The 1st amendment is about protecting speech that most people find repugnant. It is about defending insulting, offensive, idiotic and inflammatory speech.

‘Approved’ speech needs no protection.

This doesn’t apply to Germany, of course, as they have neither the first amendment nor free speech.


Of course I really understand what free speech means.

What you really missed was that I was writing the ideal, as if I had full power to mandate all. But it's understandable you missed that because my writing is generally written in such a serious and literal vein.

However, you are not acknowledging that there is not complete free speech in our country. I challenge you to go anywhere public within ear shot of others or on the radio and continually repeat George Carlin's famous seven words.

Ask Howard Stern about the realities of free speech in our country.

Clear Channel nixes Howard Stern
Faced with a $495,000 FCC fine, the radio chain drops Stern show from six stations.
April 8, 2004: 5:48 PM EDT

https://money.cnn.com/2004/04/08/news/f ... 20stations.

You can say, "Well that is different." Maybe so. But if there can be laws against seven words then there can also be laws against speech attempting to either minimize or perpetuate crimes against humanity.

Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
InsuranceGuy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:44 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by InsuranceGuy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:03 pm

[deleted]
Last edited by InsuranceGuy on Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by glennds » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:13 pm

InsuranceGuy wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:03 pm
vnatale wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:52 pm
Of course I really understand what free speech means.

What you really missed was that I was writing the ideal, as if I had full power to mandate all. But it's understandable you missed that because my writing is generally written in such a serious and literal vein.

However, you are not acknowledging that there is not complete free speech in our country. I challenge you to go anywhere public within ear shot of others or on the radio and continually repeat George Carlin's famous seven words.

Ask Howard Stern about the realities of free speech in our country.

Clear Channel nixes Howard Stern
Faced with a $495,000 FCC fine, the radio chain drops Stern show from six stations.
April 8, 2004: 5:48 PM EDT

https://money.cnn.com/2004/04/08/news/f ... 20stations.

You can say, "Well that is different." Maybe so. But if there can be laws against seven words then there can also be laws against speech attempting to either minimize or perpetuate crimes against humanity.
None of our liberties are without some limits thanks to politicians and judges.
Also thanks to reason and common sense. An example being limitation of speech that calls for immediate violence.
Last edited by glennds on Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by Mark Leavy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:19 pm

vnatale wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:52 pm

Of course I really understand what free speech means.

What you really missed was that I was writing the ideal, as if I had full power to mandate all. But it's understandable you missed that because my writing is generally written in such a serious and literal vein.
My mistake. I acknowledge that you are not in favor of free speech.
User avatar
InsuranceGuy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:44 pm

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by InsuranceGuy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:33 pm

[deleted]
Last edited by InsuranceGuy on Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

Post by glennds » Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:32 pm

InsuranceGuy wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:33 pm
glennds wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:13 pm
InsuranceGuy wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:03 pm
None of our liberties are without some limits thanks to politicians and judges.
Also thanks to reason and common sense. An example being limitation of speech that calls for immediate violence.
I don't disagree there shouldn't be speech limits to protect other's liberty such as calling for violence or defamation.

I should have been more clear that these liberties including speech continue to be eroded by politicians and judges to "protect" us from ourselves.
I think we're in agreement. Rights should not be unlimited, but eroding them should not happen lightly either. It's a balancing act to be sure.

Honestly, I often think if more of us (all of us?) conducted ourselves more responsibly and did not abuse our rights, they might not be as vulnerable to erosion. However I also recognize that promoting accountability of self is not a popular idea in our age of entitlement.
Post Reply