True fascism in America.

Discussion in 'Civil Liberties' started by Starcastle, Apr 10, 2021.

  1. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  2. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Maxine Watters ignores the long standing tradition of due process and jury trials to pronounce Derek Chauvin guilty and demands violence and rioting if the verdict is not to her liking. This is a form of jury intimidation and the judge in the case scolded her rhetoric.

    This is a sitting US congresswoman!

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/judge-derek-chauvin-maxine-waters-mistrial-appeal/index.html

     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2021
  3. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Here is a piece on democrats wanting a federal commission to censor "misinformation" in speech and media. A congresswoman named Jacobs wants a "truth commission" to censor speech based on racial political correctness. Brian Stelter of CNN(Pravda) agreed with this. Of course

    https://www.gopusa.com/end-of-free-speech-aoc-wants-commission-to-rein-in-media-over-disinformation/

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...on-narrative-e2-80-99-in-politics/ar-BB1dHyDO

    2 California democrats slammed by FCC chairman for pressuring cable providers to eliminate Foxnews and other right wing news from their programming.

    https://nypost.com/2021/02/22/fcc-head-blasts-house-dems-suggestion-that-providers-drop-fox-news/
     
  4. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    1. Try looking up the legal definition of "hate speech". Cuomo was NOT advocating violence, name calling with ethnic/racial slurs or accusing any one group of inciting or instigating or causing violence. Cuomo gives an "opinion"....which reminds me of when folk like you scanned the internet to prove liberal media bias regarding innocents being killed by cops or cops using excessive & deadly force. What you came up with was a black cop having to shoot a young white man...his body cam proved justifiable shooting (locals called the cops as the guy was armed and causing trouble at a convenience shop) when the suspect was repeatedly warned to put down his weapon etc. Despite that, folk like you said it was the same as every other white cop/black man shooting....which it wasn't. Things like that give Cuomo the backdrop for his commentary. Just saying.

    2. neo-conservative

    : a former liberal espousing political conservatism
    : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and U.S. national interest in international affairs including through military means

    3. A dubious claim at best....means nothing with regards to the ideological bilge you've posted on this particular thread. The articles I posted fit you perfectly.

    4. Dubious claims at best in light of the ideological nonsense you've posted on this particular thread. The articles I posted fit you perfectly.

    5. For your education: Donald Trump’s Contradictory Iraq War Position Implodes | Vanity Fair

    6. Dems & GOP majority went in for that....What you leave out is that the Dem party pushed for JUSTIFICATION before Congress before troop mobilization....the same with an agreement with the UN....It all hinged on the WMD inspectors reports....Bush threw that out the window, exercising executive priviledge as being the commander in chief and claiming (falsely) intel pointed that time was up.

    Like I previously said....you keep making claims and statements that you can't support with valid, documented facts. You keep trying to pass off your opinion, supposition and conjecture as facts and logic. you fool no one, and only the guy in your mirror is buying it.
     
    Indlib likes this.
  5. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,244
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fired for donating to Kyle Rittenhouse? “In other words, Lt. William Kelly was fired for having an opinion. Again… where is it written in the Norfolk PD rules that officers can’t have opinions?”
    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/445528/
     
  6. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,244
    Trophy Points:
    113
  7. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    3,616
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Pay attention. From your link;
     
    Indlib likes this.
  8. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Where is your evidence that AOC was lying?
     
  9. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Jack Dorsey lied.
     
  10. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And where is your evidence for that?
     
  11. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Evidence? So you believe that Twitter banned a person with 80 million followers who just happened to be the president of our country and the CEO had nothing to do with it?

    Dorsey called it "dangerous". I agree, it is. So why did he agree to it?

    Of course people with no medical or scientific background at all ban people and tweets for "scientific misinformation".

    It's time for these companies to lose their protection and it's time to break up the monopolies like Google.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2021
  12. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Twitter worked directly with democrats in the California government to censor opposition speech. This is a blatant violation of the first amendment. Fascism.

    https://reclaimthenet.org/twitter-california-democrats-sued-cenorship-election-conversations/

     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2021
  13. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And it's time for conservatives to understand that property rights applies to other things but gun collections. Good God man, should I be able to force your private web page to carry my essay on "Fetus or Wart, Abortion As A Skin Therapy" whether you want to or not?

    Zuckerberg quite clearly doesn't LIKE conservatives. Why should he have to explain why he doesn't want to carry them on his service even though he has the greatest American reason for doing anything totally on his side. Running ultra-conservatives will COST HIM MONEY. Why should he be coerced to carrying people 18 degrees past Genghis Khan if he doesn't want to and it WILL cost millions if Facebook gets "canceled"?
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2021
  14. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Then we can end 230 and look into anti trust against these people.

    By the way none of the nonsense you just spouted is admitted by Zuckerberg or Dorsey. They have never admitted they ban conservatives just because they disagree with them and don't like them. Dorsey tried to pretend he had nothing to do with banning Trump.

    They are businesses and conservatives are customers. They are trying to have it all ways. Government protections, operate like a monopoly and have conservatives as customers.

    Find me the quote where they admit they do not want conservatives on their sites.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2021
  15. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As for "running conservatives" cost them money? How? Nobody has to read another's tweets or facebook page. While Trump was tweeting nobody was forced or obligated to read them.

    How does having 80 million followers cost twitter money?
     
  16. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why should they admit anything, why should you and why should anyone? Zuckerberg is entitled to his own taste, is he not?

    It's THEIR site, not yours, not mine, and certainly not any of the conservatives who want to use them to promulgate their views.

    This is the part where I usually point out that it's excessively easy to start up a competitive site to Facebook and that if there really are all these conservatives wanting to see viewpoints like yours then someone who constantly goes on about how everyone here not conservative is so much less intelligent than conservatives are should see a golden opportunity to bring the True Word to their millions of conservative-information hungry friends.

    The problem there is that I've heard of Parler (sp)

    Could it be that the REAL reason Zuckerberg doesn't want conservatives is that they are about as popular as skunks in a perfume convention?

    Facebook is first, last, and always an ADVERTISER. Advertisers like to put out content that is POPULAR, that is content which people LIKE, that way they can charge exorbitant rates for ads and send their daughters to the Sorbonne to study medieval literature. They don't like to post stuff that makes people smash their computers with a baseball bat, there's not really lots of money in that.

    Of course, I'm not surprised that this wisdom may be somewhat lost on people who continuously support the party which takes things away from us and tries to make all our lives harder vs the party that gives us benefits and tries to help us out.
     
  17. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The party that takes things away from us? You mean the one run by these mega rich elites? You make no damn sense.

    So let's stop protecting them with 230 and let's take anti trust action against them.

    How did Trump get 74 million votes? 10 million more than in 2016 and more votes than any republican has ever gotten if those views are so unpopular?

    Of course you don't like conservatives because you are a communist.
     
  18. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not going to argue with a total authoritarian. We will never agree. If Zuckerberg or Dorsey were conservatives and banning democrats he would want a total government takeover of their business.
     
  19. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have no problem with bringing back 230. If we took seriously the idea that you shouldn't libel people we'd have a much more polite type of politics in this country. We'd also not have the Republican Party since they'd have been sued into bankruptcy in 2016 alone.

    Seems to me that if your response to being unpopular in the media is to have the government take over the media and force them to run your unpopular content rather than what people want to see that makes you the authoritarian.

    Trump's getting more votes in 2020 than he had in 2016 was a matter of turnout rather than any real ideological strength. Yes he got more votes but that was because every authoritarian in the USA came out and voted for him and he still lost anyway

    You're right that we'll never agree. I try not to substitute name-calling for reasoned argument
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2021
  20. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So now everyone who dares defend themselves against false accusations is a liar? It was probably conservatives who called the police to discredit AOC
     
  21. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There isn't any, These are, as you say, businessmen, and not stupid ones.
    Though I truly believe that Zuckerberg wishes mightily he had banned the first person to make a political post along with a strict prohibition on same. He made billions on people posting their lunch, why didn't he just keep on doing that?
     

Share This Page