January 26, 2022
14 Guests and 1 Member Online

Please consider Sign Uping
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Sign Up

Sign Up | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_TopicIcon
Alex Jones situation...
August 25, 2018
2:54 pm
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

"...YouTube has to stop these faggoty ways.

Even Elton John is callin u gay...

YouTube, they got that superAIDS..."

https://youtu.be/PRpw_fylkG0?t=49s

YouTube Video Rucka Rucka Ali Super Aids 

Whoop Whoop, krunk :

Radam
V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

August 26, 2018
4:08 am
Noah Fence
Noah Fence
Member
Forum Posts: 3110
Member Since:
July 28, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Psyral Infection said

Colin can do what he wishes anytime. Once at work, like all employees, he is subject to follow the rules of the company. He is still free to not follow those rules and is free to get fired or his contract not renewed for not following the rules. His protest is protected by free speech. He will not be held criminally responsible for his protest. But his employer is free to terminate his contract for breaking actual written rules that were in place when he was hired.  
I am fine with Colin's protests. He is exercising his freedom but it does not prevent his boss from taking action due to Colin's actions while "on-the-clock" during work.

With anti-gay bakers. They reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. They are not bound by the same laws as government service providers.  They can say whatever hateful things they wish. AND I can choose to go to a baker who isn't bigoted.  (And why would I want to eat anything made by someone who dislikes or hates me) 

I think first amendment applies to Colin and the "bigot bakers".  I will support their right to do what they have done but I don't like what either has done. ... Actually with Colin, I could care less since I never watch any sports. With the bakers, I support their right to refuse service as they see fit, but I will not patronize an establishment that actively refuses service to gays. I'll take my business elsewhere. 

We have laws that protect certain groups of people from discrimination. Fair housing, fair employment,  fair access. The current argument isn't about do I have the right to refuse service to individuals but rather who counts as protected status and does something like religion justify bigotry. 

As for Alex Jones, he has the right to say what he wants. I defend that right. The government will not stop him. I will not stop him. The private sector, though, may do so and seems to be doing so.  While I don't know all the facts in his particular instance, I have heard arguments that because federal judges have ruled in several cases that certain social media is to be considered public forum and the company running the social platform service can not restrict content but the patrons of such platform can individually restrict (block/mute) a particular persons content. There have been other federal judges who have ruled exactly opposite.  

He is not the first person to have this happen to them, but with the recent allegations of social media companies "shadow-banning" or "QFD-banning" primarily conservative accounts as we approach mid-term elections, it is sparking conversations up and down all levels of government about coordinated suppression of the speaking of particular political ideas.  

I have been subject to shadow-banning and am now currently under a QFD ban. It sucks. I can say anything I want on Twitter and no one will see it. I just tweet into the void.  The issue is that the algorithm has ensnared conservative politicians and a handful of libertarian politicians who are now in the same boat. It is even hitting conservative and libertarian media personalities but surprisingly not any liberal media personalities. Because it has affected politicians, laws are being scrutinized.   

There is no supreme court justice ruling, or any court ruling that a website is the new public square. They are not public. If you want them to be public it would need to be publicly owned. The government can not tell businesses who they must provide an audience. 

No one is shadow banning conservatives. This is white nationalist propaganda.

But even if they were, why not just use other websites? Go make your white nationalist dream website.

Twitter and Facebook are using you to make money. That's why they are free. They don't owe you anything outside of non discriminatory access just like the bakers. That they are alleged to discriminate against conservatives only goes to show that the current voice in conservatism is bigotry. It's open harassment against people that think differently (where different includes racism is bad and leave gay people alone).

 

Karacalla said

This.

I think more juggalos are really starting to wake up due to the "Gang" assessment thing, and have become advocates for the first amendment based off of the experiences others, and themselves, had to endure. I hate to say it, but if we get more people to take off the peaky blinders because of it, than it was all for something in the end.

Psyral Infection said
Colin can do what he wishes anytime. Once at work, like all employees, he is subject to follow the rules of the company. He is still free to not follow those rules and is free to get fired or his contract not renewed for not following the rules. His protest is protected by free speech. He will not be held criminally responsible for his protest. But his employer is free to terminate his contract for breaking actual written rules that were in place when he was hired.  
I am fine with Colin's protests. He is exercising his freedom but it does not prevent his boss from taking action due to Colin's actions while "on-the-clock" during work.

Boom....Head Shot.

A few years back, Rite around the time E-Ciggs became super popular, people at my job got around the, "Smoke Free Work Place" policy by doing the vape thing. They got bitched at, but the company had no biases for any kind of reprimand due to it clearly stating in that years employee handbook, No TOBACCO products are permitted for use on company grounds.

So for an entire year the company could not do a thing about it, Next year comes around with an updated handbook and, in print, included E-Cigarettes, Vape pens..ect..ect.. to the ban list. We all had sign it.

Just like the Kapernick situation, Yes you have the right to protest, but while on your job you must adhere to the rules and regulations set forth by the company you work for. We had some religious freaks at my former job try to cause a stir, but they signed the employee handbook, like the rest of us, stating you are not to discuss religious or political views with other employees at any time. You would have thought the company made a threat on their lives the way they reacted, but Once again, a persons personal time and work time have a different set of rules. If you are in a union of any kind, you sort of have a little more protection and freedom, but where I'm at, in Louisiana, it is a "Right to work" state, meaning, you can be fired at anytime, for any reason for nothing at all and its legit. Companies down here legitimately FEAR people getting together and talking about Unionizing. 

Right. The thing is that (most people who talk about colin's situation) we aren't saying the NFL is breaking the law for their censorship of kaep, but rather that they are displaying racism in their decision to punish him. The nuances here are that there is evidence of bias in the decision making that are motivated.

  • The president specifically requesting harsher punishments and discourse because it motivated his base
  • The attempted reframing of context
  • The fact that the players union was excluded from discussions about appropriate punishments
  • The fact that white owners who are technically competing businesses are cooperating to black ball kaep
  • The fact that white conservative players previously kneeled to protest abortion and nobody cared

These things suggest that they aren't making a rule about politics but about black people's behaviors.  That's the problem. Not that they were saying oh don't protest at work but because they said "you can't protest racially motivated police brutality at work".

And even still other people would point out that all of the demands against the NFL aren't to throw the owners in prison but rather to simply allow the players to do their jobs. 

Noah Fence said
Oh also if you think Google etc owe Jones a platform but bakers can refuse clients for being gay,  you're guilty of what you just accused me of.   

I thought that's what the Supreme Court concluded, That if YOU own a PRIVATE business, you reserve the right to refuse any one for any reason. It does not make it right, but the laws the law. How you think black folks or gays in the Rural south feel about that? You got some places down here where Affirmative action apparently never took place and Jim Crow is still the standard, Most in Mississippi and Alabama, but La and FL are not to far ahead of them. That's why I love New Orleans, Its a blue city in a red state and more progressive and in tuned with modern times. Oh, Thank you Californians by the way, Now we can't smoke in bars either. Assholes. lol...really...not...really....  

No, they didn't. The courts concluded that the lawyers in the bakers case showed prejudice to christianity and said that because of that prejudice the arguement that Christians are justifying their bigotry through their religion is inherently prejudicial. Basically, they didn't say the bakers can choose to not accept gay clients, rather that the argument puts two social groups against each other so find more persuasive legal argument. 

They specifically said that the case can't be used as precedent in similar cases.

My question to the local nazi fuck faces is why should Alex Jones get protected status as an individual but gay people as a social minority don't. 

I've yet to see that answered except by psyral who tried to reframe one of the businesses as public. 

King Lucem Ferre said
I think it's dumb that they are trying to censor Alex Jones off of all the platforms. 

Not providing him with an audience is not censorship. He is still free to say what he wants he just can't use their product to do it. 

 The new political war seems to be over who can censor the other's first and it's stupid as hell.

It seems rather to be the right claiming they are being censored because of prevailing myth being believed as absolute truth.  That myth?

Freedom of speech means you have to hear things you don't want to hear. 

No,  it doesn't. It fundamentally from the ground up means the exact opposite. It means I can say it whether people listen or not. I can use my technical skills to create a work of art that speaks to something I believe to be true but you will never - have- to look at it. 

All freedom of speech describes is that you can't be punished by the government for what you choose to say; within certain conditions. We can punish you for libel and slander, for using your speech to endanger people, or what have you. But the government can't punish you for things like spreading pamphlets about your religion, or unionizing, or being offensive. Burning a flag is legal. Saying that we should make it illegal; is legal. Telling people hey yo lucien burned a flag so you should kill him isn't and neither is arresting you for burning the flag. 

You don't even have to hear that blithering idiot, either. It's a choice. If they're worried about him having too much of an influence then perhaps they should look to our education system to teach people how to think rather than how to follow.  

He has exactly the same amount of influence. He has the same audience. Now they have to seek him out instead of being fed to him. 

Think of it this way. As an activist for LGBT rights, and other social causes, I want to share information. I can choose to use a private business such as a restaurant and offer free food to people to come hear my spiel.

Facebook is a restaurant that lets people eat for free so long as the people agree to be studied while they eat and they have to hear commercials that are purchased by other companies. 

If I decided to go into the Facebook restaurant, manipulate their research and shout over the paid ads, they have every right to kick me out. 

That's what they did to Jones. That's it. They didn't say "this speech is unsavory you can't say it" they said "this speech is disruptive to our business so go say that shit somewhere else. "

And don't get anything twisted here but giant tech corporations like Facebook aren't the left.  They are right wing corporate entities that are trying to make money. They don't care about social justice, they care about getting paid. 

No leftist organizations have tried to censor Jones. No leftist government bodies have interfered with his legal ability to spread his racist propaganda. None. And some (the aclu) have offered him legal counsel.

The ruling that psyral is talking about with the president blocking people has nothing to do with it being a digital town square and everything to do with him being a public figure.  Trump closed down lines of communication and the only place to reach him was twitter. His blocking individuals was ruled an act of censoring someone's free speech because the constitution that these assholes pretend to love gives us the right to petition the government. If there are no means of communication that are equal to everybody then some people are being denied their free speech. 

Because he very publicly took off the phone lines and discontinued the mail boxes, and even eliminated one petitions, the only other Avenue for petitioning was twitter. By prioritizing specific voices he broke the law. That's why he can't block people but twitter can. 

If you really believed that all lives matter we wouldn't need to say black lives matter

August 26, 2018
4:16 am
Noah Fence
Noah Fence
Member
Forum Posts: 3110
Member Since:
July 28, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It's also important to realize that things can be morally right while legally wrong or vice versa.

I don't know if there is a legal justification for the bakers being allowed to discriminate against gay people or not. Morally tho? I definitely think there isn't. 

I do believe Facebook etc are legally within their bounds to remove Alex Jones. Morally? I think it's muddy and can lead to bad things. 

Morally and legally, I think players unions should be consulted in creating new language restricting behaviors and targeting specifically racial protest is unjust if others are allowed to protest on the job. Also the president had no right to interfere. 

That's how I separate the question that we will call the racist, the homophobes, and the athlete

If you really believed that all lives matter we wouldn't need to say black lives matter

August 26, 2018
9:25 am
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

FUCK UR RAGE VIRUS.

Kanye.jpgImage Enlarger

V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

August 29, 2018
10:42 am
Stalkz
Stalkz
Member
Forum Posts: 191
Member Since:
May 28, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

     

September 6, 2018
10:06 pm
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Twitter just permanently suspended Alex Jones.

"This is a war on honesty."  Styxhexenhammer666

YouTube Video The War on Honesty: Twitter Bans Alex Jones and Infowars for Conducting Actual Journalism 

Whoop Whoop, krunk :

sflm
V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

September 7, 2018
11:41 am
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Get it while it's hot:

YouTube Video 🤫(((CENSORED)))🤫

V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

April 17, 2020
10:12 am
Q
Q
Member
Forum Posts: 264
Member Since:
April 7, 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

nE107Uf.gifImage Enlarger

https://youtu.be/j-arCfjGdCE

YouTube Video The Alex Jones Show Thu 04/16/20 2nd Hour  

u5SGpMP.gif
April 19, 2020
12:54 pm
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

fyzr8nd.gifImage Enlarger

YouTube Video Hell Yeah

V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

May 1, 2020
3:53 pm
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

c3aAPMV.jpg

Alex is the king. He's banned from Twitter, but was just trending #1 for this rant:

YouTube Video Alex Jones Is Very Very Hungry Supercut

Whoop Whoop, krunk :

sflm
V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

May 29, 2020
2:29 pm
sflm
sflm
Member
Forum Posts: 4
Member Since:
July 23, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Alex Jones will still be around long after social media fades out. He's still relatively young.

May 29, 2020
8:39 pm
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Hail to the king, baby:

YouTube Video Eat Your @** (And My Neighbor) - Songify Alex Jones

V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

March 8, 2021
10:52 pm
krunk
krunk
Dirtball
Member
Forum Posts: 7158
Member Since:
May 4, 2014
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

YouTube Video Alex Jones Becomes A Serial Killing Cannibal

V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif V23W2ws.gif RAFtn26.gif 3hm5B2c.gif VFyFLdU.gif V23W2ws.gif

                              

No permission to create posts
Forum Timezone: America/Chicago

Most Users Ever Online: 591

Currently Online: krunk
68 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

The Warlock: 11518

King Lucem Ferre: 9099

Old Mr Dangerous: 8661

krunk: 7157

OCJ_Brendan: 6148

patjoyce: 4891

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 754

Members: 167917

Moderators: 6

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 6

Forums: 28

Topics: 11993

Posts: 239389

Newest Members:

rudemark2, SamsonCullou, Lil Dead 520, LotusFlower, dibmahj7, abendd

Moderators: GanjaGoblin: 2775, Psyral Infection: 4215, bozodklown: 322, scruffy: 11447, PunkRockJuggalo: 6559, Pigg: 6487

Administrators: admin: 0, ScottieD: 845