NY Congressman is opposed to Freedom of Speech.

[RetiredGySgt]

Ho

A backwards NY Congressman is opposed to Freedom of Speech.
Congressman Jerald Nadler support's Facebooks censorship of President Trump.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Friday praised Facebook for its decision to suspend Trump until at least Jan. 7, 2023.
"I think Facebook was right. I think that they have an absolute right to ban liars and the president - the former president - is an absolute liar. It's not a question of free speech, because free speech is a question of the government limiting free speech, and there's no question of that here," Nadler said Friday.

Comment:
OK, Jerry, you lied to the American people for 5 years about the corrupt Democratic Party's faux Russian Collusion propaganda.
You should be censored, and so should everyone else who were involved in the Russian Collusion lie.
We should not have an idiotic lying crackpot such as Nader who doesn't accept the basic constitutional right to Freedom of Speech being the chairman of the "judiciary committee".
Progressives have to censor the truth because the truth will destroy them.

Nadler on Facebook's Trump move: 'They have an absolute right to ban liars'

Book Burner Jerry Nadler
View attachment 497364

You stupid fuck, Facebook is not part of federal, state or municipal government. It is not public property.
It's a company, a business, that can tell you stupid fucks to wear a mask, a shirt and shoes before entering.
It can refuse you service if they deem you have had too much stupidity pumped into your tiny cranium.
It can ban you from their site because they are a corporation, not a public park.
Damn, you Republicans sure are stupid.

how ever it is protected by Government and as such is not supposed to censor content.

 

[Leo123]

I never ever see you bitch about my freedom of speech when I get a vacation from USMB....

Trump is no more special than I am....

When did you 'get a vacation' from USMB? You seem to troll about every thread here 24/7, 365 days a year.

 

[Moonglow]

I never ever see you bitch about my freedom of speech when I get a vacation from USMB....

Trump is no more special than I am....

When did you 'get a vacation' from USMB? You seem to troll about every thread here 24/7, 365 days a year.

Ask a mod they keep a record.

 

[daveman]

Did I call it, or what?

Yeah but that’s a pretty easy call Oddball , given that Facebook IS a private corporation and NOT a government entity.

A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.

Sure it is, it’s regulated but it’s still free. Government isn’t inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they don’t have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.

Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. it’s PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.

By censoring ideas they do not agree with, they are a publisher, not a platform, and should not be granted the protections platforms enjoy.

Publishers censor content they don’t agree with, always have,.

Indeed. Yet the socials insist they're platforms and are not responsible for their content.

 

[mdk]

No, Section 230 doesn't mean you get to talk about anyone's mother here.

 

[mdk]

Sorry, no one has a right to social media account. Not you, not me, not anyone. I know this hits some people in their feels, but that's just tough shit.

 

[NightFox]

Did I call it, or what?

Yeah but that’s a pretty easy call Oddball , given that Facebook IS a private corporation and NOT a government entity.

A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.

Sure it is, it’s regulated but it’s still free. Government isn’t inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they don’t have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.

Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. it’s PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.

By censoring ideas they do not agree with, they are a publisher, not a platform, and should not be granted the protections platforms enjoy.

Publishers censor content they don’t agree with, always have,.

Then Fascistbook is a publisher, not a platform.

As such, they waive their privileges and immunities under 230.

No, it doesn't work that way, what Facebook (and every other site on the Internet including THIS ONE) is immune to is lawsuits stemming from content posted by it's USERS. If Facebook, it's employees or designated representatives libel you on Facebook, then you can sue Facebook for it.

If we want to remove that protection then might as well shut down every site on the Internet that allows its users to post on it because who in there right mind is going to open themselves up to liability for what every Joe User happens to post, it's not feasible nor DESIRABLE.

As a platform not as a publisher, which is the road that Fascistbook and Twaffler have chosen to walk.

How is Facebook and its business model any different than USMB? Do you want to classify USMB as a “publisher” and remove its liability protections as well? If you do, why would Facebook or any other site that hosts user posted content stay in business, Can you imagine the volume of frivolous lawsuits that would follow if they did?

 

[Wyatt earp]

A backwards NY Congressman is opposed to Freedom of Speech.
Congressman Jerald Nadler support's Facebooks censorship of President Trump.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Friday praised Facebook for its decision to suspend Trump until at least Jan. 7, 2023.
"I think Facebook was right. I think that they have an absolute right to ban liars and the president - the former president - is an absolute liar. It's not a question of free speech, because free speech is a question of the government limiting free speech, and there's no question of that here," Nadler said Friday.

Comment:
OK, Jerry, you lied to the American people for 5 years about the corrupt Democratic Party's faux Russian Collusion propaganda.
You should be censored, and so should everyone else who were involved in the Russian Collusion lie.
We should not have an idiotic lying crackpot such as Nader who doesn't accept the basic constitutional right to Freedom of Speech being the chairman of the "judiciary committee".
Progressives have to censor the truth because the truth will destroy them.

Nadler on Facebook's Trump move: 'They have an absolute right to ban liars'

Book Burner Jerry Nadler
View attachment 497364

You stupid fuck, Facebook is not part of federal, state or municipal government. It is not public property.
It's a company, a business, that can tell you stupid fucks to wear a mask, a shirt and shoes before entering.
It can refuse you service if they deem you have had too much stupidity pumped into your tiny cranium.
It can ban you from their site because they are a corporation, not a public park.
Damn, you Republicans sure are stupid.

Oh look another who hates free speech

 

[Hellbilly]

A backwards NY Congressman is opposed to Freedom of Speech.
Congressman Jerald Nadler support's Facebooks censorship of President Trump.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Friday praised Facebook for its decision to suspend Trump until at least Jan. 7, 2023.
"I think Facebook was right. I think that they have an absolute right to ban liars and the president - the former president - is an absolute liar. It's not a question of free speech, because free speech is a question of the government limiting free speech, and there's no question of that here," Nadler said Friday.

Comment:
OK, Jerry, you lied to the American people for 5 years about the corrupt Democratic Party's faux Russian Collusion propaganda.
You should be censored, and so should everyone else who were involved in the Russian Collusion lie.
We should not have an idiotic lying crackpot such as Nader who doesn't accept the basic constitutional right to Freedom of Speech being the chairman of the "judiciary committee".
Progressives have to censor the truth because the truth will destroy them.

Nadler on Facebook's Trump move: 'They have an absolute right to ban liars'

Book Burner Jerry Nadler

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Got it?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Sorry, no one has a right to social media account. Not you, not me, not anyone. I know this hits some people in their feels, but that's just tough shit.

It's a monopoly

 

[bripat9643]

A backwards NY Congressman is opposed to Freedom of Speech.
Congressman Jerald Nadler support's Facebooks censorship of President Trump.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Friday praised Facebook for its decision to suspend Trump until at least Jan. 7, 2023.
"I think Facebook was right. I think that they have an absolute right to ban liars and the president - the former president - is an absolute liar. It's not a question of free speech, because free speech is a question of the government limiting free speech, and there's no question of that here," Nadler said Friday.

Comment:
OK, Jerry, you lied to the American people for 5 years about the corrupt Democratic Party's faux Russian Collusion propaganda.
You should be censored, and so should everyone else who were involved in the Russian Collusion lie.
We should not have an idiotic lying crackpot such as Nader who doesn't accept the basic constitutional right to Freedom of Speech being the chairman of the "judiciary committee".
Progressives have to censor the truth because the truth will destroy them.

Nadler on Facebook's Trump move: 'They have an absolute right to ban liars'

Book Burner Jerry Nadler
View attachment 497364

You stupid fuck, Facebook is not part of federal, state or municipal government. It is not public property.
It's a company, a business, that can tell you stupid fucks to wear a mask, a shirt and shoes before entering.
It can refuse you service if they deem you have had too much stupidity pumped into your tiny cranium.
It can ban you from their site because they are a corporation, not a public park.
Damn, you Republicans sure are stupid.

It's a goverment protected monopoly, dumb fuck. That protection is contingent on following certain policies, like not engaging in biased enforcement of their rules.

 

[bripat9643]

Did I call it, or what?

Yeah but that’s a pretty easy call Oddball , given that Facebook IS a private corporation and NOT a government entity.

A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.

Sure it is, it’s regulated but it’s still free. Government isn’t inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they don’t have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.

Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. it’s PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.

Of course it is. It prevents Facebook's customers from suing it.

 

[Leo123]

I never ever see you bitch about my freedom of speech when I get a vacation from USMB....

Trump is no more special than I am....

When did you 'get a vacation' from USMB? You seem to troll about every thread here 24/7, 365 days a year.

Ask a mod they keep a record.

Must not be very often then if you can’t remember.

 

[NightFox]

Did I call it, or what?

Yeah but that’s a pretty easy call Oddball , given that Facebook IS a private corporation and NOT a government entity.

A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.

Sure it is, it’s regulated but it’s still free. Government isn’t inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they don’t have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.

Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. it’s PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.

By censoring ideas they do not agree with, they are a publisher, not a platform, and should not be granted the protections platforms enjoy.

Publishers censor content they don’t agree with, always have,.

Indeed. Yet the socials insist they're platforms and are not responsible for their content.

Every company is responsible for the content that the company’s directors, it’s employees or designated representatives publish acting on the companies behalf. What Facebook isn’t responsible for is the content its USERS “publish” on it’s platform, same reason USMB isn’t responsible for USER generated content on its platform. However they are still required to remove ILLEGAL content (such IP theft, child porn, etc..,) posted by their users and can be held liable for not doing it.

IMHO it’s a good system that promotes free expression while protecting the private entities that facilitate it.

 

[mdk]

Sorry, no one has a right to social media account. Not you, not me, not anyone. I know this hits some people in their feels, but that's just tough shit.

It's a monopoly

No, it isn’t. It’s just wildly popular and widely used, but that doesn’t make it a monopoly.

 

[NightFox]

Sorry, no one has a right to social media account. Not you, not me, not anyone. I know this hits some people in their feels, but that's just tough shit.

It's a monopoly

Facebook isn’t a monopoly, they have plenty of competition, Google, Microsoft, Twitter, Yahoo, just to name a few, all of them operate successfully in the same market space.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Sorry, no one has a right to social media account. Not you, not me, not anyone. I know this hits some people in their feels, but that's just tough shit.

It's a monopoly

Facebook isn’t a monopoly, they have plenty of competition, Google, Microsoft, Twitter, Yahoo, just to name a few, all of them operate successfully in the same market space.

What the fuck? Ok I will upload my dinner picture to Microsoft?

 

[NightFox]

Sorry, no one has a right to social media account. Not you, not me, not anyone. I know this hits some people in their feels, but that's just tough shit.

It's a monopoly

Facebook isn’t a monopoly, they have plenty of competition, Google, Microsoft, Twitter, Yahoo, just to name a few, all of them operate successfully in the same market space.

What the fuck? Ok I will upload my dinner picture to Microsoft?

Good ahead, they’ll happily host your content on their community sites, they won’t even charge you for it because what they’re selling isn’t the service, it’s your EYEBALLS and your PERSONAL DATA to advertisers, just like Facebook, just like USMB.

 

[daveman]

Did I call it, or what?

Yeah but that’s a pretty easy call Oddball , given that Facebook IS a private corporation and NOT a government entity.

A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.

Sure it is, it’s regulated but it’s still free. Government isn’t inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they don’t have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.

Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. it’s PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.

By censoring ideas they do not agree with, they are a publisher, not a platform, and should not be granted the protections platforms enjoy.

Publishers censor content they don’t agree with, always have,.

Indeed. Yet the socials insist they're platforms and are not responsible for their content.

Every company is responsible for the content that the company’s directors, it’s employees or designated representatives publish acting on the companies behalf. What Facebook isn’t responsible for is the content its USERS “publish” on it’s platform, same reason USMB isn’t responsible for USER generated content on its platform. However they are still required to remove ILLEGAL content (such IP theft, child porn, etc..,) posted by their users and can be held liable for not doing it.

IMHO it’s a good system that promotes free expression while protecting the private entities that facilitate it.

When Facebook curates the non-illegal content its members post, it's acting as a publisher.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They all collude against certain groups.