CDZ Article about the Alex Jones censorship from Britain truth

[Skull Pilot]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

 

[koshergrl]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

 

[Toronado3800]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

 

[koshergrl]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

But facebook, twitter and google are entities that have become a part of the fabric of global society..and American society...and so when they come together to limit the reach of certain people or groups it restricts people from being able to reach each other...and there are no worthy alternatives.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

There is no monopoly

 

[Skull Pilot]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

Facebook does not have a monopoly because anyone can buy a domain and put whatever drivel they want on the internet.

Alex Jones already has his own website to publish his wacky ideas why does he need to use Facebook as well?

I do not have a Facebook account and I have no problem finding news on the web
I don't have a Twitter account etc

If these were monopolies as you say then I would have no choice but to use them

 

[Skull Pilot]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

But facebook, twitter and google are entities that have become a part of the fabric of global society..and American society...and so when they come together to limit the reach of certain people or groups it restricts people from being able to reach each other...and there are no worthy alternatives.

Anyone can publish their own website
Anyone can reach anyone else they want without Facebook

Alex Jones can easily add a forum to his website for all the wackos to talk about their paranoid delusions

 

[koshergrl]

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

But facebook, twitter and google are entities that have become a part of the fabric of global society..and American society...and so when they come together to limit the reach of certain people or groups it restricts people from being able to reach each other...and there are no worthy alternatives.

Anyone can publish their own website
Anyone can reach anyone else they want without Facebook

Alex Jones can easily add a forum to his website for all the wackos to talk about their paranoid delusions

Nope. There's only one platform anything like facebook.
There's only one youtube.
And there's only one twitter.

And there's only one google...if they are limiting the searches, that's all she wrote. No free speech.

 

[koshergrl]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

Facebook does not have a monopoly because anyone can buy a domain and put whatever drivel they want on the internet.

Alex Jones already has his own website to publish his wacky ideas why does he need to use Facebook as well?

I do not have a Facebook account and I have no problem finding news on the web
I don't have a Twitter account etc

If these were monopolies as you say then I would have no choice but to use them

We've been over this enough. Adios.

 

[koshergrl]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

There is no monopoly

Yup, there is.
See ya.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

But facebook, twitter and google are entities that have become a part of the fabric of global society..and American society...and so when they come together to limit the reach of certain people or groups it restricts people from being able to reach each other...and there are no worthy alternatives.

Anyone can publish their own website
Anyone can reach anyone else they want without Facebook

Alex Jones can easily add a forum to his website for all the wackos to talk about their paranoid delusions

Nope. There's only one platform anything like facebook.
There's only one youtube.
And there's only one twitter.

And there's only one google...if they are limiting the searches, that's all she wrote. No free speech.

SO what

YOU can still post whatever you want without those websites

there is no censorship

The First amendment does not apply here at all as I have told you since it does not apply to private entities and it also does not guarantee you an audience.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

There is no monopoly

Yup, there is.
See ya.

If there was I would be forced to use those websites

 

[Skull Pilot]

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.

Sorry but you're wrong.

The private sector is in no way bound by the first amendment

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

Facebook does not have a monopoly because anyone can buy a domain and put whatever drivel they want on the internet.

Alex Jones already has his own website to publish his wacky ideas why does he need to use Facebook as well?

I do not have a Facebook account and I have no problem finding news on the web
I don't have a Twitter account etc

If these were monopolies as you say then I would have no choice but to use them

We've been over this enough. Adios.

And you're still wrong

 

[koshergrl]

They are when they form a monopoly and use their ownership to destroy free speech across the board.

Sorry.

I think I agree with the monopoly statement.

Does Facebook have a monopoly? I think so.

Should they be punished for it? I dunno, but its just the situation.

Can we all go start a website called "conspiracy book" and post what we want? Heck yeah, websites are cheap and easy to make.

But facebook, twitter and google are entities that have become a part of the fabric of global society..and American society...and so when they come together to limit the reach of certain people or groups it restricts people from being able to reach each other...and there are no worthy alternatives.

Anyone can publish their own website
Anyone can reach anyone else they want without Facebook

Alex Jones can easily add a forum to his website for all the wackos to talk about their paranoid delusions

Nope. There's only one platform anything like facebook.
There's only one youtube.
And there's only one twitter.

And there's only one google...if they are limiting the searches, that's all she wrote. No free speech.

SO what

YOU can still post whatever you want without those websites

there is no censorship

The First amendment does not apply here at all as I have told you since it does not apply to private entities and it also does not guarantee you an audience.

whatever. You are being willfully obtuse.
Private entities aren't allowed to stifle free speech any more than public ones are. The fact that they are the owners means nothing. The fact that they are working together specifically to stifle free speech and overthrow the government makes it a crime.

Bye.

 

[blackhawk]

I have never listened to Alex Jones doubt I ever will but as I have said before on these boards the 1st Amendement was put in place to protect all speech not just that we like and agree with. When you start trying to silence people just because you find what they are saying offensive remember there are people out there who might find what you have to say offensive and try and do the same to you.

 

[koshergrl]

The best and only way to defeat evil ideology is via free speech. Because when evil is given the opportunity to put all their shit out there, they are exposed.

Which is why leftists hate free speech.