Liberal Forum

Beekeeper » 26 Apr 2022, 8:18 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 8:18 am

Did he CENSOR THE POST?? or the POSTER??

Nope!!! So there as no CENSORSHIP, TWINKY!!

^^^gloryholing makes you stupid, case one point. 

you mean like Trump was censored and then banned. 

No difference, twinkle-toes. 

Cannonpointer » 25 Apr 2022, 10:24 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Apr 2022, 10:24 pm

No, it isn't.

Prohibiting censorship is neither censorship nor content control. It is merely making the game rules of PUBLIC corporations conform to PUBLIC policy. 

It is against public policy for banks - even private ones - to discriminate based on race. Is that government control of a bank's lending scheme? Or is it creating public policy to which that bank and all of its competitors must adhere?
 
People have rights - but so do societies as such. When we take a man's property through eminent domain, a crime has been committed agaist him - for the public good. So it is legal. A legal crime. Because the public - as such, as the public - has interests which will sometimes override private interests.

I'm aware that there are cases where the government can act somewhat unlawfully. However, and this is to the best of my knowledge from author Alec Ross, the internet companies themselves decide what or what not the content they will allow or will ban from their platforms. At least that is what is true in the United States as common internet practice and custom.

Could the government intervene? Probably. Laws could be passed to regulate social media to allow free speech, ect. There would be questions of legality that would tie up the courts and some of those cases probably would reach the Supreme Court docket.

Internet speech legislation has not been tried on the federal level since the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The laws are old and the amount of lobbying in Washington by internet companies is fierce. These are just my observations. Free speech is an inherent right but the government can curtail rights sometimes. 

roadkill » 26 Apr 2022, 9:51 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:51 am

Then we can post that on Twitter.   

You assume. 

If he refused to sell a car to a fellow who disagreed with him, it is conceivable that he won't allow people to **** on him on his own platform.

Monderegal » 26 Apr 2022, 9:59 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:59 am

I'm aware that there are cases where the government can act somewhat unlawfully. However, and this is to the best of my knowledge from author Alec Ross, the internet companies themselves decide what or what not the content they will allow or will ban from their platforms. At least that is what is true in the United States as common internet practice and custom.

The American public created the internet - paid for it. It should be a public utility, not a private playground for multinationals who did not build that.

Monderegal » 26 Apr 2022, 9:59 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:59 am

Could the government intervene? Probably. Laws could be passed to regulate social media to allow free speech, ect. There would be questions of legality that would tie up the courts and some of those cases probably would reach the Supreme Court docket.

Internet speech legislation has not been tried on the federal level since the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The laws are old and the amount of lobbying in Washington by internet companies is fierce. These are just my observations. Free speech is an inherent right but the government can curtail rights sometimes.

Public companies can be helf to public policy.

Cannonpointer » 26 Apr 2022, 10:01 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:01 am

The American public created the internet - paid for it. It should be a public utility, not a private playground for multinationals who did not build that.


Public companies can be helf to public policy.

it is, but access to it isn't. Like all realities pay to stay in character assumed after birth, sacrifice biological time to be somebody of character in alternate realities selling parallel universe exists.

Cannonpointer » 26 Apr 2022, 9:59 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:59 am

You assume. 

If he refused to sell a car to a fellow who disagreed with him, it is conceivable that he won't allow people to **** on him on his own platform.

It's possible.  It's OK if Twitter bans me again...it didn't bother me the first time.    

 

Pastafarian » 26 Apr 2022, 9:55 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:55 am

^^^gloryholing makes you stupid, case one point. 

you mean like Trump was censored and then banned. 

No difference, twinkle-toes.

Hate to tell you TWINKY negro, but it's NO WHERE close to "the same thing".

Musk didn't BAN or CENSOR ANYONE!! Cancel an order?? SO WHAT?? He made a BUSINESS decision based on STUPIDITY on the part of someone but they STILL got to voice their OPINION and Musk voiced his with the order being SHUT DOWN, MORON!!

Is the POSTER still on?? Are they still posting stupidity?? Then it's NOT the same thing!!!

Please, TWINKY, run along before you get it SHOVED UP YOUR ARSE AGAIN!!!

Beekeeper » 26 Apr 2022, 10:03 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:03 am

Hate to tell you TWINKY negro, but it's NO WHERE close to "the same thing".

Musk didn't BAN or CENSOR ANYONE!! Cancel an order?? SO WHAT?? He made a BUSINESS decision based on STUPIDITY on the part of someone but they STILL got to voice their OPINION and Musk voiced his with the order being SHUT DOWN, MORON!!

Is the POSTER still on?? Are they still posting stupidity?? Then it's NOT the same thing!!!

Please, TWINKY, run along before you get it SHOVED UP YOUR ARSE AGAIN!!!

bcuz Musk had no power but where he did have power, he used it and acted on it. 

See, Musk now has that power and your stupid enough to think he won’t use it when he’s already shown how vindictive he can be. 

Try again, *** tickler. 

You squeal like a little *** as soon as someone get near your stupid ***. 

Pastafarian » 26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am

bcuz Musk had no power but where he did have power, he used it and acted on it. 

See, Musk now has that power and your stupid enough to think he won’t use it when he’s already shown how vindictive he can be. 

Try again, *** tickler. 

You squeal like a little *** as soon as someone get near your stupid ***.

Liberals heads are exploding all over

Pastafarian » 26 Apr 2022, 9:55 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:55 am

^^^gloryholing makes you stupid, case one point. 

you mean like Trump was censored and then banned. 

No difference, twinkle-toes.

But you ****, liberal idiots agreed with censoring and banning Trump!!!  **** hypocrites!!!
 
 

Pastafarian » 26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am

bcuz Musk had no power but where he did have power, he used it and acted on it. 

See, Musk now has that power and your stupid enough to think he won’t use it when he’s already shown how vindictive he can be. 

Try again, *** tickler. 

You squeal like a little *** as soon as someone get near your stupid ***.

Oh wait!!! You mean now that MUSK has POWER to CANCEL YOU LEFTRETARDS, you are "upset"???

So you weren't so "upset" when YOUR SIDE over at TWITTER USED THEIR POWER TO CANCEL MOST ANY RIGHT LEANING VOICE!!!

So now that the SHOE is on the OTHER FOOT, you're pissy and whiny there TWINKY????

 Now how HYPOCRITICAL IS THAT, pray tell???

Pastafarian » 26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am

bcuz Musk had no power but where he did have power, he used it and acted on it. 

See, Musk now has that power and your stupid enough to think he won’t use it when he’s already shown how vindictive he can be. 

Try again, *** tickler. 

You squeal like a little *** as soon as someone get near your stupid ***.

And THIS sums up your MORONIC STUPID to the tee.....


https://twitter.com/willcain/status/151 ... n-n2606355

Cannonpointer » 26 Apr 2022, 9:05 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 9:05 am

It's highly suggestive.

Where do you stand on the covid vax? With Musk, or against him?

Where do you stand on a carbon tax? With Musk, or against him?

If he sides with Soros on these CRUCIAL issues, how comfortable should you be in lauding his accomplishments and defending his present and future intentions?

Let the war games begin...

"A spokesman for UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has demanded that Elon Musk keeps Twitter “responsible” through content censorship."


https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/0 ... g-content/

Pastafarian » 26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:10 am

bcuz Musk had no power but where he did have power, he used it and acted on it. 

See, Musk now has that power and your stupid enough to think he won’t use it when he’s already shown how vindictive he can be. 

Try again, *** tickler. 

You squeal like a little *** as soon as someone get near your stupid ***.

You are the one squealing like a little *** ***!!!

What did leftist jackoff dorkey and his apparatchiks do when they "had the power"?
 

TB7 » 25 Apr 2022, 2:23 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Apr 2022, 2:23 pm

Elon Musk is eclectic in everything he does, but this is among the most awesome of moves. He says he isn't doing it for his own benefits, other than freedom of speech. He said that democracy cannot exist without free speech. He is right. Now that he has bought it, time to clean the house. I think the real reason liberals are so worked up over Elon Musk gaining control of Twitter is that once he is in charge, he will be able to expose for public review, the algorithms that they have been using to censor, any coordination between Twitter, Facebook and Google, and especially what was in place before the 2020 election.WE WIN..NEXT UP......FACEBOOK!

He will definitely be exposing the algorithms. I am looking forward to that.

Facebook will be much more difficult to obtain. It's worth a lot more than what Twitter was worth. Even Elon doesn't have that kind of cash, he will need to raise quite a bit of money.

Actually, in behind the scenes news... Google's stranglehold on the server infrastructure that underlies the internet is weakening slightly. That increases the probability of competitors and therefore makes Twitter and Facebook slightly less valuable. Being the only game in town is profitable. When the number of players goes up... the slice of pie shrinks.

Musk is not a leftist nor a rightist. He has his own agenda, and I seriously doubt that he favors Trump.

FJB » 26 Apr 2022, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:11 am

Liberals heads are exploding all over

hey, I’m not even on Twitter or care one way or the other. 

Im just saying Musk ain’t your friend. 

Musk’s bottom line is money and China’s a big market for Tesla.

How fast will Musk cave to Chinese censors?

https://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/why-bez ... 09580.html

Beekeeper » 26 Apr 2022, 10:18 am » wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2022, 10:18 am

Oh wait!!! You mean now that MUSK has POWER to CANCEL YOU LEFTRETARDS, you are "upset"???

So you weren't so "upset" when YOUR SIDE over at TWITTER USED THEIR POWER TO CANCEL MOST ANY RIGHT LEANING VOICE!!!

So now that the SHOE is on the OTHER FOOT, you're pissy and whiny there TWINKY????

 Now how HYPOCRITICAL IS THAT, pray tell???

I’m not upset. I’m not on Twitter. 

But you will probably be upset someday soon….again. 

Just saying.