rallies. wrote:
Ciro wrote:
A visionary, ahead of your time.
No, that accolade goes to George Orwell ?
Well played, a bit like Trumps recent lies to our vets.
rallies. wrote:
Ciro wrote:
A visionary, ahead of your time.
No, that accolade goes to George Orwell ?
Well played, a bit like Trumps recent lies to our vets.
Freemarket wrote:
rallies. wrote:
Exactly, what they want. So whose to say the people at the top making the rules have not got an agenda? Are they not too big and influential? I wish people would wake up to the reality of the data they are freely passing over.
Well If you let monopolies form. Havent heard a single american concerned about that. All fines towards them come from europe
Well in that case America needs to take a long bath with itself.
Ciro wrote:
rallies. wrote:
No, that accolade goes to George Orwell ?
Well played, a bit like Trumps recent lies to our vets.
Love it, bundles in with the Trump garbage hoping I will tie my mast to that twato.
rallies. wrote:
Ciro wrote:
Well played, a bit like Trumps recent lies to our vets.
Love it, bundles in with the Trump garbage hoping I will tie my mast to that twato.
Not suggesting that at all :)
Big win for President Trump and Republicans. This only motivates and makes the base stronger.
Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:
Big win for President Trump and Republicans. This only motivates and makes the base stronger.
This was not forced by the government. He can say what he wants if it's covered by free speech (e.g., not calling for riots or engendering mass panic), just not on their platform. So if you and the base want to get even then boycott Facebook, Twitter, etc. Jeezes kripes it's not that hard to understand!
how many times wrote:
Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:
Big win for President Trump and Republicans. This only motivates and makes the base stronger.
This was not forced by the government. He can say what he wants if it's covered by free speech (e.g., not calling for riots or engendering mass panic), just not on their platform. So if you and the base want to get even then boycott Facebook, Twitter, etc. Jeezes kripes it's not that hard to understand!
Right. And all those Hollywood actors who were blacklisted for suspected Communist ties had nothing to gripe about? It's all just private business and government has absolutely no say in what a private business does ... unless there aren't enough minorities working there, or woman think there's a glass ceiling, or if unions want a closed shop, or if ...
How about NO government contracts for any company discriminating based on political affiliation? Sounds fair. That's how Liberals do most of their social engineering via Federal funding.
Oh, and BTW, it's actually illegal to discriminate based on political affiliation in CA where many of these companies are based, so this may be a violation of CA law already.
False Flag
iejzriej wrote:
Disgusting how they are trying to silence him.
https://www.infowars.com/patriots-rally-behind-infowars-amid-techs-total-communist-censorship/
DiscoGary wrote:
How about NO government contracts for any company discriminating based on political affiliation? Sounds fair. That's how Liberals do most of their social engineering via Federal funding.
Oh, and BTW, it's actually illegal to discriminate based on political affiliation in CA where many of these companies are based, so this may be a violation of CA law already.
Aren't the red states getting more federal funding than the blue?
Ciro wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
How about NO government contracts for any company discriminating based on political affiliation? Sounds fair. That's how Liberals do most of their social engineering via Federal funding.
Oh, and BTW, it's actually illegal to discriminate based on political affiliation in CA where many of these companies are based, so this may be a violation of CA law already.
Aren't the red states getting more federal funding than the blue?
Sadly yes. Red states are the lazies, crazies, fatties
DiscoGary wrote:
how many times wrote:
This was not forced by the government. He can say what he wants if it's covered by free speech (e.g., not calling for riots or engendering mass panic), just not on their platform. So if you and the base want to get even then boycott Facebook, Twitter, etc. Jeezes kripes it's not that hard to understand!
Right. And all those Hollywood actors who were blacklisted for suspected Communist ties had nothing to gripe about? It's all just private business and government has absolutely no say in what a private business does ... unless there aren't enough minorities working there, or woman think there's a glass ceiling, or if unions want a closed shop, or if ...
Whataboutism and false equivalence. Try again. Or better yet, probably not. You're just not too bright are you?
So conservatives are okay with hates group being banned (Islamists) as long as it’s not their hate group. Lol
Not a Fan of this Guy wrote:
I am totally not a fan of this guy and I am about an anti hate speech as anyone out there, but I do have an honest question.
How can these arguments be made in this case, but not in the case of the Colorado baker? They seem like the same arguments, but now each side of the aisle has swapped talking points, you know?
Again, I am glad this guy is outta here, but I also can't help but feel a tinge of "the rules seem to be subjective."
Which of the protected classes do you feel that Jones falls under?
This is big tech positioning themselves for the post-trump era. Banning info wars is a proxy test and if that goes smoothly, they will probably sharpen their collective political stance.
DiscoGary wrote:
How about NO government contracts for any company discriminating based on political affiliation? Sounds fair. That's how Liberals do most of their social engineering via Federal funding.
Oh, and BTW, it's actually illegal to discriminate based on political affiliation in CA where many of these companies are based, so this may be a violation of CA law already.
This thread isn't about discrimination based on political affiliation - it's about discrimination of InfoWars for policy violations (and no, that policy is not that users need to be liberal sympathizers, despite how you may try to spin it).
Ace of clubs wrote:
So conservatives are okay with hates group being banned (Islamists) as long as it’s not their hate group. Lol
I mean, isn’t that how liberals are? They hate Alex Jones but they love antifa. The difference is antifa actually attacks people. Alex jones just pesters, annoys, and makes up random stories.
Yeah, those ultra-capitalistic tech titans are all commies.
LOL
sbeefyk2 wrote:
Ace of clubs wrote:
So conservatives are okay with hates group being banned (Islamists) as long as it’s not their hate group. Lol
I mean, isn’t that how liberals are? They hate Alex Jones but they love antifa. The difference is antifa actually attacks people. Alex jones just pesters, annoys, and makes up random stories.
No, I don't love antifa.
sbeefyk2 wrote:
Ace of clubs wrote:
So conservatives are okay with hates group being banned (Islamists) as long as it’s not their hate group. Lol
I mean, isn’t that how liberals are? They hate Alex Jones but they love antifa. The difference is antifa actually attacks people. Alex jones just pesters, annoys, and makes up random stories.
Nope.
Most of the folks I know are liberal. And everyone I know despises antifa.