Free speech suit aims to end twitters political censorship

[CarlinAnnArbor]

You’ve completely lost your mind.

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

The ones whose voices have been silenced.

Mili is the most famous

 

[Faun]

You’ve completely lost your mind.

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

The ones whose voices have been silenced.

Mili is the most famous

Oh? What is Mili not allowed to say?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I'd say if Twitter wants to limit what people can say they have every right to do so and I have every right to tell them to f- off.

Yea ! well they censor the far right, and ban people for criticising Islam, and they allow Muslims to prattle on praising their false prophet unhindered. I criticise the Quran on twitter and so far I have got away with it, but others have been banned, and even threatened with prosecution for hate speech.
We need a platform where freedom of speech is a given right with minimum censorship.

You are perfectly free to set one up.

Thanks for admitting free speech is suppressed nearly everywhere. Come back tomorrow when the zoloft wears off.

Stop whining.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Taylor is an extremist not a conservative.

Extremists should have a voice here in America too.. I'm sure there are liberals who think preaching the Gospel is extreme and should be banned.

Extremists have a voice.Nobody is required to give them a platform to promote violence.

It will be incumbent upon Twitter to demonstrate the claim That AmericanRenaissance promoted violence. And that applies to you as well, now that you’ve made the claim yourself. Links, and quotes will suffice. Thanks in advance...

I have read some of his shit and could make a case that he is promoting hate and violence. On what I have read I think it is borderline whether to ban him or not. But Twitter will have spent more time looking at his shite than you or I and the Judge will decide.

That’s as close as we’re likely to get, to you admitting that you’ve got nothing... I guess we’ll have to take it...

My opinion is not relevant to the case. Neither is yours.

 

[miketx]

I'd say if Twitter wants to limit what people can say they have every right to do so and I have every right to tell them to f- off.

Yea ! well they censor the far right, and ban people for criticising Islam, and they allow Muslims to prattle on praising their false prophet unhindered. I criticise the Quran on twitter and so far I have got away with it, but others have been banned, and even threatened with prosecution for hate speech.
We need a platform where freedom of speech is a given right with minimum censorship.

You are perfectly free to set one up.

Thanks for admitting free speech is suppressed nearly everywhere. Come back tomorrow when the zoloft wears off.

Stop whining.

Whining? I'm simply pointing out that once again that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[dblack]

Seems to me the answer is simple. Make politically active companies nonprofit and I mean nonprofit. Government will decide corporate salaries and employee benefits, no bonuses.

What question does this answer?

It allows Twitter to decide if it wants to be political or a public/private company.

Yes, but what problem do you think this would solve? Are you saying that anyone who is politically active forfeits their individual rights? Or just those associated with a 'business'?

I think the impulse to control media outlets with government is far more dangerous than any bias those media outlets might exhibit.

 

[saveliberty]

Yes, but what problem do you think this would solve? Are you saying that anyone who is politically active forfeits their individual rights? Or just those associated with a 'business'?

I think the impulse to control media outlets with government is far more dangerous than any bias those media outlets might exhibit.

I don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own. If it does, then it should have to follow specific corporate laws, one of which is you are a nonprofit.

 

[Dajjal]

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

Jayda Fransen, ( whose anti Islamic tweets were re tweeted by president trump), and Paul Golding
Both have been banned from twitter and prosecuted for their views on Islam.

 

[miketx]

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

Jayda Fransen, ( whose anti Islamic tweets were re tweeted by president trump), and Paul Golding
Both have been banned from twitter and prosecuted for their views on Islam.

In what country?

 

[Dajjal]

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

Jayda Fransen, ( whose anti Islamic tweets were re tweeted by president trump), and Paul Golding
Both have been banned from twitter and prosecuted for their views on Islam.

In what country?

Britain

 

[mdk]

Well, I am sure, since this is the route these companies are choosing to take, many other options will be making them obsolete soon enough.

Precisely. People will abjure their accounts and another platform will take its place.

 

[miketx]

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

Jayda Fransen, ( whose anti Islamic tweets were re tweeted by president trump), and Paul Golding
Both have been banned from twitter and prosecuted for their views on Islam.

In what country?

Britain

They deserve what they get. The politicians have destroyed Britain and we will not let the happen here.

 

[dblack]

Yes, but what problem do you think this would solve? Are you saying that anyone who is politically active forfeits their individual rights? Or just those associated with a 'business'?

I think the impulse to control media outlets with government is far more dangerous than any bias those media outlets might exhibit.

I don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own. If it does, then it should have to follow specific corporate laws, one of which is you are a nonprofit.

I don't understand. You "don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own". But , "if it does, then ..." Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

 

[saveliberty]

Yes, but what problem do you think this would solve? Are you saying that anyone who is politically active forfeits their individual rights? Or just those associated with a 'business'?

I think the impulse to control media outlets with government is far more dangerous than any bias those media outlets might exhibit.

I don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own. If it does, then it should have to follow specific corporate laws, one of which is you are a nonprofit.

I don't understand. You "don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own". But , "if it does, then ..." Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

A corporation normally would be made up of a diverse population, unlikely to have one voice on political issues. If it does, then the political element should be identified and being a C corporation removed.

 

[Vastator]

Extremists should have a voice here in America too.. I'm sure there are liberals who think preaching the Gospel is extreme and should be banned.

Extremists have a voice.Nobody is required to give them a platform to promote violence.

It will be incumbent upon Twitter to demonstrate the claim That AmericanRenaissance promoted violence. And that applies to you as well, now that you’ve made the claim yourself. Links, and quotes will suffice. Thanks in advance...

I have read some of his shit and could make a case that he is promoting hate and violence. On what I have read I think it is borderline whether to ban him or not. But Twitter will have spent more time looking at his shite than you or I and the Judge will decide.

That’s as close as we’re likely to get, to you admitting that you’ve got nothing... I guess we’ll have to take it...

My opinion is not relevant to the case. Neither is yours.

You’re finally starting to catch on. Prior case law is relevant. And it’s this very precedent which will be used to determine the outcome of this case. Don’t say I never taught you nothin’. This first lesson was free. After this I’m gonna start charging...

 

[Dajjal]

Well, I am sure, since this is the route these companies are choosing to take, many other options will be making them obsolete soon enough.

Precisely. People will abjure their accounts and another platform will take its place.

I was a member of a now defunct forum called its happening and there was almost no censorship. with the result I received direct death threats from Muslims. I was quite proud of receiving them, and would like another uncensored forum so I could get down to it with Muslims, and reveal what some of them are really like.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

What Twitter users have lost their right to free speech...?

Jayda Fransen, ( whose anti Islamic tweets were re tweeted by president trump), and Paul Golding
Both have been banned from twitter and prosecuted for their views on Islam.

Both of whom promote violence.

 

[dblack]

Yes, but what problem do you think this would solve? Are you saying that anyone who is politically active forfeits their individual rights? Or just those associated with a 'business'?

I think the impulse to control media outlets with government is far more dangerous than any bias those media outlets might exhibit.

I don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own. If it does, then it should have to follow specific corporate laws, one of which is you are a nonprofit.

I don't understand. You "don't think a corporation has a political identity on its own". But , "if it does, then ..." Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

A corporation normally would be made up of a diverse population, unlikely to have one voice on political issues. If it does, then the political element should be identified and being a C corporation removed.

Ok, so your view is predicated on the various privileges afforded by the corporate charter. I get that, and tend to agree - although I'd prefer to fix the problem - the corporate charter - rather than the symptom.

What about privately owned businesses? Do you think they should be allowed to engage in political activity?

 

[toobfreak]

Twitters policy is fair to everyone apart from those who promote violence.

That's why they are getting sued for violation of free speech. Derp.

 

[saveliberty]

Ok, so your view is predicated on the various privileges afforded by the corporate charter. I get that, and tend to agree - although I'd prefer to fix the problem - the corporate charter - rather than the symptom.

What about privately owned businesses? Do you think they should be allowed to engage in political activity?

We keep churches out of politics, I fail to see how this is different.