SOCIAL MEDIA GIANTS OPPRESSING THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF AMERICANS

[rickyb]

I agree @Operational needs ... I find it disturbing that Democrats, the traditional protectors of citizens rights, have acquiesced to huge, powerful oligopolies and monopolies for their hatred of Trump for short-term wants.
The European Union (EU) has already expressed concerns at the power of Big Tech and this will only strengthen those concerns.
Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot!

World leaders are coming forward to blast Twitter’s suspension of President Trump’s account, with many of them calling it outright censorship and a decision that should be left up to the citizens and not a private tech company.
Germany's Merkel has condemned the action.
French Minister for EU Affairs 'Clement Beaune' said he was “shocked” to see the social media platform pull Trump’s account.
Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said it was a “bad sign” that social media has the power to censor Trump.
Australian Prime Minister Michael McCormack said blocking Trump amounts to censorship.
Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo raised similar concerns about Twitter’s treatment of Venezuela’s authoritarian leader Nicolas Maduro. “A world where Maduro is on social media, but Trump is suspended cannot be normal,”

View attachment 324536

Democrats have really warmed up to the Deep state and red scare hysteria last 4 years

 

[rickyb]

tell me mr. Anderson what good is a phone call if you can't speak

 

[Method Mensch]

I WONDER HOW MANY OF THESE OPPRESSIVE CORPORATIONS WILL EXPERIENCE MILITANT ATTACKS IN 2021?

Can right-wing populist sentiment be banished from American life by the brute force of social-media censorship? We’re about to find out. After Wednesday’s mob invasion of the Capitol that disrupted the counting of electoral votes, big tech firms have moved, aggressively and in unison, against Donald Trump and his supporters. The companies say they want to marginalize the violent fringe, but their censorship will grow it instead.

On Thursday and Friday came the Facebook and Twitter bans of Mr. Trump.
Given the extraordinary circumstances, some commentators who normally oppose web censorship were untroubled.

An exception who deserves to be listened to is Alexei Navalny, the Russian democracy advocate and scourge of Vladimir Putin who was poisoned last year. He pointed out that, unlike the open election process that ousted Mr. Trump, social-media decisions to de-platform elected officials are unaccountable and arbitrary.
“Don’t tell me he was banned for violating Twitter rules. I get death threats here every day for many years, and Twitter doesn’t ban anyone,” Mr. Navalny tweeted.

He added that while Twitter is a private company, “we have seen many examples in Russian and China of such private companies becoming the state’s best friends and enablers when it comes to censorship.”


WHAT CAUSED THE APPLE FIRE?
View attachment 324472

Our freedom of speech is protected by the 1st amendment. If either The Flat Earth Society wants to pass literature out on the sidewalk or the Church of Satan wants to recruit people to their faith at the town park, the 1st amendment protects them. This is different. If Twitter or Facebook shut you off, you can either create your own social media website or find some other website to migrate to.

There is also a difference between how traditional news organizations operate and how social media sites operate. A traditional news operation has fact checkers, editors, and others that work to put out a story. There is no similar process in social media. People can post what they want to, without any checks and balances, without regard to either the intent or veracity behind it. After the fact, a social media site can cut you off, or slap a notice on your post that flags it as possibly counterfactual or some similar warning.

 

[rickyb]

Our freedom of speech is protected by the 1st amendment. If either The Flat Earth Society wants to pass literature out on the sidewalk or the Church of Satan wants to recruit people to their faith at the town park, the 1st amendment protects them. This is different. If Twitter or Facebook shut you off, you can either create your own social media website or find some other website to migrate to.

There is also a difference between how traditional news organizations operate and how social media sites operate. A traditional news operation has fact checkers, editors, and others that work to put out a story. There is no similar process in social media. People can post what they want to, without any checks and balances, without regard to either the intent or veracity behind it. After the fact, a social media site can cut you off, or slap a notice on your post that flags it as possibly counterfactual or some similar warning.

They are monopolies

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Our freedom of speech is protected by the 1st amendment. If either The Flat Earth Society wants to pass literature out on the sidewalk or the Church of Satan wants to recruit people to their faith at the town park, the 1st amendment protects them. This is different. If Twitter or Facebook shut you off, you can either create your own social media website or find some other website to migrate to.

There is also a difference between how traditional news organizations operate and how social media sites operate. A traditional news operation has fact checkers, editors, and others that work to put out a story. There is no similar process in social media. People can post what they want to, without any checks and balances, without regard to either the intent or veracity behind it. After the fact, a social media site can cut you off, or slap a notice on your post that flags it as possibly counterfactual or some similar warning.

So you're saying social clubs can exclude women and people of color. Interesting, terrible, but interesting.

 

[vantexan]

Our freedom of speech is protected by the 1st amendment. If either The Flat Earth Society wants to pass literature out on the sidewalk or the Church of Satan wants to recruit people to their faith at the town park, the 1st amendment protects them. This is different. If Twitter or Facebook shut you off, you can either create your own social media website or find some other website to migrate to.

There is also a difference between how traditional news organizations operate and how social media sites operate. A traditional news operation has fact checkers, editors, and others that work to put out a story. There is no similar process in social media. People can post what they want to, without any checks and balances, without regard to either the intent or veracity behind it. After the fact, a social media site can cut you off, or slap a notice on your post that flags it as possibly counterfactual or some similar warning.

Fair enough. But going after a competitor outside of what happens on your own platform is just wrong. Not out competing them, but getting the plug pulled on them.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!​

Our freedom of speech is protected by the 1st amendment. If either The Flat Earth Society wants to pass literature out on the sidewalk or the Church of Satan wants to recruit people to their faith at the town park, the 1st amendment protects them. This is different.
If Twitter or Facebook shut you off, you can either create your own social media website or find some other website to migrate to.

No Leroy!
I learned all that in the 8th grade.

That means that citizens have to take action.
So far I've canceled Twitter, Apple, American Express accounts, Marriott Awards Credit Card account, and working to disengage from all my entangled Google accounts (I've been using DuckDuckGo for a couple of years).
Amazon will be the toughest!
I don't watch news that much but I'm sure there are other Big Corporations that jumped on the CENSOR WAGON.
As I learn of them, I will sever my relationship with them as well ... if I have one.

There are other Freedom Oriented people out there that may take actions I would never take ... such as trying to assault the Capitol building.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

No Leroy!​

I learned all that in the 8th grade.

That means that citizens have to take action.
So far I've canceled Twitter, Apple, American Express accounts, Marriott Awards Credit Card account, and working to disengage from all my entangled Google accounts (I've been using DuckDuckGo for a couple of years).
Amazon will be the toughest!
I don't watch news that much but I'm sure there are other Big Corporations that jumped on the CENSOR WAGON.
As I learn of them, I will sever my relationship with them as well ... if I have one.

There are other Freedom Oriented people out there that may take actions I would never take ... such as trying to assault the Capitol building.

More info on companies I will boycott not using them ... directly, anyway!

Republicans face growing corporate backlash after Capitol assault​

The announcements by Amazon.com Inc, General Electric Co, Dow Inc, AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp, Verizon Communications Inc, American Express Co, Airbnb Inc, Cisco Systems Inc, Best Buy Co Inc and Mastercard Inc, among others, threaten to throttle fundraising resources for Republicans who will soon be out of power in the White House and both chambers of Congress.

AT&T and Comcast, for example, are among the biggest corporate donors in Washington.

Greeting-card giant Hallmark Company Ltd said it had asked senators Josh Hawley and Roger Marshall to return its contributions. Representatives for the two Republicans, who both objected to Biden’s certification, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

 

[Method Mensch]

DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!
DUMMY!DUMMY!​

No Leroy!
I learned all that in the 8th grade.

That means that citizens have to take action.
So far I've canceled Twitter, Apple, American Express accounts, Marriott Awards Credit Card account, and working to disengage from all my entangled Google accounts (I've been using DuckDuckGo for a couple of years).
Amazon will be the toughest!
I don't watch news that much but I'm sure there are other Big Corporations that jumped on the CENSOR WAGON.
As I learn of them, I will sever my relationship with them as well ... if I have one.

There are other Freedom Oriented people out there that may take actions I would never take ... such as trying to assault the Capitol building.

I guess I just don't see what the big deal is. Oh well.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

I guess I just don't see what the bug deal is. Oh well.

Roaches scurrying the night ... Politician!

 

[Old Man Jingles]

I guess I just don't see what the big deal is. Oh well.

You have to be a Democrat!!!

 

[Method Mensch]

Fair enough. But going after a competitor outside of what happens on your own platform is just wrong. Not out competing them, but getting the plug pulled on them.

I'm not picking up what you're laying down. What competitor are you talking about?

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Opinion | The Progressive Purge Begins

Tech’s stampede against the right will lead to more populist anger.

www.wsj.com

And your top link was edited in later by a mod.

No it wasn't!
WTFing drugs are you on?!?!?!

 

[Method Mensch]

You have to be a Democrat!!!

You have to be a Tory. No, wait- a Whig.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

TWITTER being a Huge Hypocrite

 

[Old Man Jingles]

You have to be a Tory. No, wait- a Whig.

Tory - Loyal to ENGLAND Definitely not me.

Whig - Almost 200 years ago so they were good in their times ...
The Whigs were an opposition party formed to challenge Jacksonian Democrats, thereby launching the ‘second party system’ in America, but they were far from a single-issue party. Their ranks included members of the Anti-Masonic Party and democrats who were disenchanted with the leadership of seventh President Andrew Jackson. Their base combined unusual bedfellows: Evangelical Protestants interested in moral reform, abolitionists and those against the harsh treatment of Native Americans such as “The Trail of Tears” under Andrew Jackson in his rush to expand the country’s borders. Their diverse base meant the Whigs had to be many things to many voters—a delicate balancing act.

Whigs were united in their support of the Second Bank of the United States (an institution Andrew Jackson deplored) and vocal opponents of Democrats' propensity for ignoring Supreme Court decisions and challenging the Constitution.
They were not formally an anti-slavery party, but abolitionists had more in common with the Whigs than the pro-slavery Democrats (Jackson was a vocal proponent of slavery and personally owned as many as 161 slaves).

Libertarian - Fiscal Conservative/ Social Liberal - Yep, that's me!

 

[Method Mensch]

So you're saying social clubs can exclude women and people of color. Interesting, terrible, but interesting.

I'm a Freemason. We do not allow women into our fraternity.

 

[Method Mensch]

Tory - Loyal to ENGLAND Definitely not me.

Whig - Almost 200 years ago so they were good in their times ...
The Whigs were an opposition party formed to challenge Jacksonian Democrats, thereby launching the ‘second party system’ in America, but they were far from a single-issue party. Their ranks included members of the Anti-Masonic Party and democrats who were disenchanted with the leadership of seventh President Andrew Jackson. Their base combined unusual bedfellows: Evangelical Protestants interested in moral reform, abolitionists and those against the harsh treatment of Native Americans such as “The Trail of Tears” under Andrew Jackson in his rush to expand the country’s borders. Their diverse base meant the Whigs had to be many things to many voters—a delicate balancing act.

Whigs were united in their support of the Second Bank of the United States (an institution Andrew Jackson deplored) and vocal opponents of Democrats' propensity for ignoring Supreme Court decisions and challenging the Constitution.
They were not formally an anti-slavery party, but abolitionists had more in common with the Whigs than the pro-slavery Democrats (Jackson was a vocal proponent of slavery and personally owned as many as 161 slaves).

Libertarian - Fiscal Conservative/ Social Liberal - Yep, that's me!

I don't adhere 100% to any single party. I like different elements of different parties.

Impressive dive into Whigs and Tories. Their history is interesting.

 

[The big package]

View attachment 324474

Patriots !!! These are the nut bags !!!

 

[Box Ox]

Patriots !!! These are the nut bags !!!View attachment 324603

Let me know when their followers have attacked a joint session of Congress.