Alex Jones content removed from Facebook, Youtube, Apple

is_that_so

stefanovich wrote: »

RTE is unbelievably biased in both their Brexit coverage and also coverage of Donald Trump.

How can anyone be biased about the Brexit mess?

Patty Hearst

mcmoustache wrote: »

When did they say that? They reported that he was being investigated for it, which he was, but I don't recall RTÉ taking the position that Trump colluded with Russia.

Yes they did, they inferred it every single day.

is_that_so

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Yes they did, they inferred it every single day.

So they didn't actually say it, merely inferred it by your reckoning.

Cienciano

Paul Joseph Watson has said on twitter in the last few hours that he wants the Trump administration to step in and take action on his ban. I'm not sure if this is a big joke, or as PJW would say, "honk honk"

mcmoustache

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Yes they did, they inferred it every single day.

Any evidence of this or are you just making up your own facts?

I only ask because it sure looks like you're just making stuff up now. Not unlike Alex Jones, strangely enough.

stefanovich

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's because it's genuinely difficult to polish turds. Even Brexit and Trump friendly media find it very hard to spin those shítshows as something positive.

is_that_so wrote: »

How can anyone be biased about the Brexit mess?

Theresa May is doing a bad job, as a remainer PM why wouldn't she. They never consider the idea that Brexit could be positive for the UK.

They never consider the possibility that the EU as an institution might be doing some harm.

They never cover the positive things Trump has done for the USA.

Ipso

Cienciano wrote: »

Paul Joseph Watson has said on twitter in the last few hours that he wants the Trump administration to step in and take action on his ban. I'm not sure if this is a big joke, or as PJW would say, "honk honk"

Government intervention in how a private company operates. Slippery slope, next stop North Korea. WAKE UP SHEEPLE.

Patty Hearst

Perhaps one of the European Right wing Govts will ban any mention of Transgenderism on social media.

I'm sure all those who support PJW, Jones etc bans will have no problem with that.

turbbo

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Yes they did, they inferred it every single day.

Sure did - they nearly always have interviews with Democrats asking them about their views on Trump - I don't think it's because they are cynical though they just have a lot of low quality journalists working for them. BBC they ain't. :rolleyes:

Patty Hearst

mcmoustache wrote: »

Any evidence of this or are you just making up your own facts?

I only ask because it sure looks like you're just making stuff up now. Not unlike Alex Jones, strangely enough.

Google is your friend as they say. I'm not going back over two years of reports for you.

The truth is though that you are not interested in discussion but rather to deny, obsfucate etc

Making stuff up? have you been in a cave for the last two years?

is_that_so

stefanovich wrote: »

Theresa May is doing a bad job, as a remainer PM why wouldn't she. They never consider the idea that Brexit could be positive for the UK.

They never consider the possibility that the EU as an institution might be doing some harm.

They never cover the positive things Trump has done for the USA.

Oh, she's doing a shockingly bad job and we all wish that Brexit would actually happen.
As for Trump, well mostly he doesn't do positive things for anyone except himself.

Ipso

stefanovich wrote: »

Theresa May is doing a bad job, as a remainer PM why wouldn't she. They never consider the idea that Brexit could be positive for the UK.

They never consider the possibility that the EU as an institution might be doing some harm.

They never cover the positive things Trump has done for the USA.

Hilarious when Jones fans support Trump, supporting Muslim bans due to terrorism fears when they believe 911 was a false flag.

mcmoustache

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Perhaps one of the European Right wing Govts will ban any mention of Transgenderism on social media.

I'm sure all those who support PJW, Jones etc bans will have no problem with that.

How is that remotely similar to kicking someone off a private platform for harassing the parents of victims of a school shooting?

batgoat

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Google is your friend as they say. I'm not going back over two years of reports for you.

The truth is though that you are not interested in discussion but rather to deny, obsfucate etc

Making stuff up? have you been in a cave for the last two years?

Got some proof of RTE News taking a position on Trump and collusion? Also worth noting that the report is incredibly damaging to the president and has left him wide open for impeachment.

Meanwhile Alex Jones smeared the families of a massacre. One family has had to move multiple times because of Jones fans harassing them. Jones is currently facing legal action because of it. Infowars is not a news outlet and was only viewed as such only in recent years by people who are effectively extremists lacking in brain cells.

stefanovich

is_that_so wrote: »

Oh, she's doing a shockingly bad job and we all wish that Brexit would actually happen.
As for Trump, well mostly he doesn't do positive things for anyone except himself.

Look at the jobless figures, look at the economy.

Patty Hearst

mcmoustache wrote: »

How is that remotely similar to kicking someone off a private platform for harassing the parents of victims of a school shooting?

Thats just Jones, I don't recall Milo, PJW, Laura Loomer etc harassing any parents of school shooting victims

Cienciano

mcmoustache wrote: »

How is that remotely similar to kicking someone off a private platform for harassing the parents of victims of a school shooting?

The slippery slope fallacy. Otherwise known as "bullshít".

Ipso

stefanovich wrote: »

Look at the jobless figures, look at the economy.

Funny when numbers were good in the Obama era, they were fake.
Thing is, if he takes credit for the good he must take responsibility for any bad. Does he strike you as that type of person?

stefanovich

Ipso wrote: »

Funny when numbers were good in the Obama era, they were fake.
Thing is, if he takes credit for the good he must take responsibility for any bad. Does he strike you as that type of person?

So your main problem is his personality, not his results? Curious attitude.

Ipso

stefanovich wrote: »

So your main problem is his personality, not his results? Curious attitude.

His character; pathological liar, ignorant, think skinned, vindictive, egotistical, panders to the tin foil brigade etc
Anyway presidents don’t have that much sway over the economy.

is_that_so

stefanovich wrote: »

Look at the jobless figures, look at the economy.

None of which he has had any great influence on but he gets to claim it. The debit column runs to hundreds of entries!

stefanovich

Ipso wrote: »

His character; pathological liar, ignorant, think skinned, vindictive, egotistical, panders to the tin foul brigade etc

I'd prefer an asshole who does a good job to a useless nice guy like Obama.

is_that_so

Cienciano wrote: »

The slippery slope fallacy. Otherwise known as "bullshít".

What's that fallacy, precious?

Seanachai

is_that_so wrote: »

Most of us are harmless, despite how edgy we think ourselves, so little danger of that unless you're into tinfoil hats!

With all due respect you don't know how quickly the political situation of a country\society can change. The freedom of expression that you take for granted may not always be there, even in the near future. That's not tinfoil hat stuff, it's everyday reality for a lot of people.

turbbo

Team Obama Team Trump unite - it's all BS. Facebook are slowly realising they are not the telephone company that provides the product to communicate - they are indeed the content provider like the Irish Times/BBC/RTE/NBC etc. This will not end well for them in the long run - they are on dodgy ground as it is and could be sued out of existence in the next few years - if you have shares in them sell sell sell!!!

Cienciano

stefanovich wrote: »

Look at the jobless figures, look at the economy.

Here's the unemployment graph. Obama got in 2008 to 2016. Received the economy in the worse recession since the great depression.



It's now currently at 4%. So you're saying Trump deserves the credit for this?

is_that_so

Seanachai wrote: »

With all due respect you don't know how quickly the political situation of a country\society can change. The freedom of expression that you take for granted may not always be there, even in the near future. That's not tinfoil hat stuff, it's everyday reality for a lot of people.

You do realise you are berating companies that cater to self-indulgence and self-delusion and makes lots of money off it.

Yeah I kind of do as do you. It's generally glacially slow. I really don't see it and don't indulge in that end of times nonsense some people see as the future. So put the tin foil away and get out in the sun!

Patty Hearst

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdaUDeAGIck

Ipso

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Thats just Jones, I don't recall Milo, PJW, Laura Loomer etc harassing any parents of school shooting victims

Isn’t Loomer a qanon believer? That cult won't end well.

Patty Hearst

Sometimes I despair at how utterly weak and pathetic many of the Millennial generation are.

But seeing how different a lot of the younger generation seem to be, it gives me hope.

The 14 year old girl in the video above sums it up quite well.

ohnonotgmail

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Sometimes I despair at how utterly weak and pathetic many of the Millennial generation are.

But seeing how different a lot of the younger generation seem to be, it gives me hope.

The 14 year old girl in the video above sums it up quite well.

I'm far too old to be a millenial and i have no issue with a private company deciding who should and should not be allowed use their platforms. You are woefully misinformed if you think it is only millenials that support this.

ogsjw

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Not only in Jones banned, but anyone who shares anything by him will be banned too..

very very worrying. China/North Korea level stuff.

Can I get some receipts here please...

Patty Hearst

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'm far too old to be a millenial and i have no issue with a private company deciding who should and should not be allowed use their platforms. You are woefully misinformed if you think it is only millenials that support this.

Whatever you are, she describes you too a tee.

stefanovich

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Whatever you are, she describes you too a tee.

Best solution is to not use facebook.

is_that_so

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Sometimes I despair at how utterly weak and pathetic many of the Millennial generation are.

But seeing how different a lot of the younger generation seem to be, it gives me hope.

The 14 year old girl in the video above sums it up quite well.

Reddit homos? Yeah, she's got it all worked out! :rolleyes:

Patty Hearst

stefanovich wrote: »

Best solution is to not use facebook.

I don't actually use Facebook, haven't even looked at it for a long time.

Something like this might hasten its demise which I would love but its the principle of the banning that pisses me off.

Former Observer

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's all this is. It's a gobshíte being banned off a social media platform for being a díck.

Nobody should be banned simply for being a "dick", as you put it.

If somebody thinks there is something fishy about the Sandy Hook murders (for example) they should surely be able to express those opinions on social media, including but not limited to the hypothesis that the children and parents involved were crisis actors. I understand that this may be upsetting to parents etc. but that's just the way it is.


For Alex Jones to be banned from social media he'd surely have to have done something more than perpetuate an unpopular line or reasoning/opinion. I haven't spent any time reading about this, but I'd be surprised if he was literally and directly sending baying mobs to people's homes, was he?

ohnonotgmail

Former Observer wrote: »

Nobody should be banned simply for being a "dick", as you put it.

If somebody thinks there is something fishy about the Sandy Hook murders (for example) they should surely be able to express those opinions on social media, including but not limited to the hypothesis that the children and parents involved were crisis actors. I understand that this may be upsetting to parents etc. but that's just the way it is.


For Alex Jones to be banned from social media he'd surely have to have done something more than perpetuate an unpopular line or reasoning/opinion. I haven't spent any time reading about this, but I'd be surprised if he was literally and directly sending baying mobs to people's homes, was he?

Upsetting? they had to move house several times because of harrassment. that is a little more than upsetting. and alex jones is responsible for all of that. Hence why the parents are suing him.

Former Observer

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Upsetting? they had to move house several times because of harrassment. that is a little more than upsetting. and alex jones is responsible for all of that. Hence why the parents are suing him.

Yes, my point, or rather my question, is how can Alex Jones be held responsible for what other people do on the back of his right to express his opinion that Sandy Hook was a hoax. I haven't heard anyone suggest that he was literally handing out road maps and sending columns of drivers that way. A bunch of people on the spectrum listened to his radio station and took their own initiative.

Billy86

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Ipso wrote: »

But you’re ok with Infowars terms of service that has the same thing? Or are you one of those people who take him seriously?

Infowars is not a social media company, in the same way that RTE isn't.

Yeah, it is social media. It's their forums that they ban you off of,and forums (including this one we are posting on right now) are social media.

20Cent

Good day for Antifa yesterday. Those nutjobs deplatformed, and Tommy + milkshake. Maybe the tide is turning people getting tired of these right wingers stirring up hatred.

Ipso

Former Observer wrote: »

Yes, my point, or rather my question, is how can Alex Jones be held responsible for what other people do on the back of his right to express his opinion that Sandy Hook was a hoax. I haven't heard anyone suggest that he was handing out road maps and sending columns of drivers that way.

He accused parents of the murdered children of being crisis actors etc so there are libel issues that companies may not want to be part of and notvwanting to be associated with the worse the internet can offer. Good news is he’s being sued, so hopefully he ends up living in a dumpster.

Patty Hearst

20Cent wrote: »

Good day for Antifa yesterday. Those nutjobs deplatformed, and Tommy + milkshake. Maybe the tide is turning people getting tired of these right wingers stirring up hatred.

You still support Antifa even though they're associated with the killers of Lyra McKeee?

turbbo

Billy86 wrote: »

Yeah, it is social media. It's their forums that they ban you off of,and forums (including this one we are posting on right now) are social media.

Yes it's a fine line for Social Media and I predict a legal backlash for any of the big ones for suddenly wanting to control their content. Afaik boards has always controlled the content through it's mediators - which gives them a free pass - they always considered themselves as content providers. FB on the other hand never claimed to be content providers. Where will this lead? Imagine trying to regulate FB. Must be close to impossible.

Former Observer

Ipso wrote: »

He accused parents of the murdered children of being crisis actors etc

Surely a person should be able to publicly express the opinion or otherwise speculate as to whether the parents of the children are crisis actors?

Interesting question as to when/if that becomes libel though.

Il Fascista

20Cent wrote: »

Good day for Antifa yesterday. Those nutjobs deplatformed, and Tommy + milkshake. Maybe the tide is turning people getting tired of these right wingers stirring up hatred.

I thought that they were anti fascists? Why would they be happy about people who aren't fascists getting banned? Or are you indirectly admitting that it has nothing to do with being against fascism and everything to do with getting rid of their political foes?

20Cent

Patty Hearst wrote: »

You still support Antifa even though they're associated with the killers of Lyra McKeee?

Stretch there dude.

Billy86

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Perhaps one of the European Right wing Govts will ban any mention of Transgenderism on social media.

I'm sure all those who support PJW, Jones etc bans will have no problem with that.

Hold on... which country was it that forced Facebook to ban Paul Joseph Watson, again?

Ipso

Billy86 wrote: »

Hold on... which country was it that forced Facebook to ban Paul Joseph Watson, again?

Deepstatistan?

Patty Hearst

20Cent wrote: »

Stretch there dude.

Not a stretch at all...







But this is off topic anyway