Almost 140 serious injuries to Capitol Cops

[martybegan]

Twitter is one of the new digital commons.

So you took a private company and now made it a public resource.

Thanks comrade.

So public utilities are communism?

 

[martybegan]

It matters because you have to use an extreme example to justify your bullshit commie cuck position.

It doesn't. Those extreme people need "equal access and fair treatment" too, don't they?

Or are you going to be a hypocrite about it?

you use the extreme to justify censoring the non extreme.

Just like your SJW butt buddies tell you to do.

 

[martybegan]

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.

The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.

She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.

One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.

The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.

One woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.

Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.

How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?

What I find strange is the same people who said Colin kappernick was unpatriotic for kneeling during the national anthem are the same unpatriotic Treasonist insurrectionists who murdered a cop in an attempted failed coup

Colin Kapernick and this are two different things.

And the case involving the cop actually being killed by a protester is getting weaker and weaker by the day.

No it’s not. He got hit in the head and later died of a heart attack. If you hit someone in the head and later in the hospital they died of a hear5 attack guess what? You’d be charged.

You guys believe trumps very expensive lawyers?

There is zero evidence so far he was hit in the head, even the NY Times is saying they can't find any evidence of this.

 

[colfax_m]

So public utilities are communism?

Twitter is not a public utility. It's a website.

 

[martybegan]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

 

[colfax_m]

you use the extreme to justify censoring the non extreme.

So you're okay with censoring some people as long as you're consider them extreme?

 

[martybegan]

So public utilities are communism?

Twitter is not a public utility. It's a website.

Social media can be considered a utility if warranted.

Hell utilities are regulated far more with regards to how profitable they can be, and is that communistic?

 

[martybegan]

you use the extreme to justify censoring the non extreme.

So you're okay with censoring some people as long as you're consider them extreme?

If they aren't directly threatening anyone or breaking any laws, then let them post.

That goes for the nuts on the left and the right, sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.

 

[colfax_m]

Social media can be considered a utility if warranted.

Great. Let's declare your front lawn a utility too then. I want my sign up.

 

[colfax_m]

If they aren't directly threatening anyone or breaking any laws, then let them post.

That goes for the nuts on the left and the right, sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.

Then there's nothing wrong with me using an "extreme" example.

I think people should be allowed to speak. I don't think they should expect people to propagate that speech for them. That's what you're demanding. You want to post dumb shit, buy a server and put it online. Don't demand other people do it for you because you're too stupid and lazy.

 

[Faun]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.

The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.

She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.

One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.

The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.

One woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.

Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.

How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?

What I find strange is the same people who said Colin kappernick was unpatriotic for kneeling during the national anthem are the same unpatriotic Treasonist insurrectionists who murdered a cop in an attempted failed coup

Colin Kapernick and this are two different things.

And the case involving the cop actually being killed by a protester is getting weaker and weaker by the day.

No it’s not. He got hit in the head and later died of a heart attack. If you hit someone in the head and later in the hospital they died of a hear5 attack guess what? You’d be charged.

You guys believe trumps very expensive lawyers?

There is zero evidence so far he was hit in the head, even the NY Times is saying they can't find any evidence of this.

Is that really what they’re saying? I don’t think so. They’re saying he didn’t die from blunt trauma to the head. That turns out isn’t what killed him. He survived the blow to the head. Had a heart attack in the hospital. That’s murder. Sorry.

 

[martybegan]

Social media can be considered a utility if warranted.

Great. Let's declare your front lawn a utility too then. I want my sign up.

All you got is argumentum ad absurdum. Give it up.

 

[martybegan]

If they aren't directly threatening anyone or breaking any laws, then let them post.

That goes for the nuts on the left and the right, sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.

Then there's nothing wrong with me using an "extreme" example.

I think people should be allowed to speak. I don't think they should expect people to propagate that speech for them. That's what you're demanding. You want to post dumb shit, buy a server and put it online. Don't demand other people do it for you because you're too stupid and lazy.

I demanding at a minimum they follow their own words about being open platforms, if they can't do that then the government shouldn't protect them from being responsible for what they "publish"

 

[colfax_m]

Social media can be considered a utility if warranted.

Great. Let's declare your front lawn a utility too then. I want my sign up.

All you got is argumentum ad absurdum. Give it up.

It’s an analogy. Someone capable of abstract thought can see this.

You can’t declare something a utility just because you want unless you want to go commie.

 

[martybegan]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

 

[martybegan]

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.

The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.

She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.

One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.

The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.

One woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.

Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.

How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?

What I find strange is the same people who said Colin kappernick was unpatriotic for kneeling during the national anthem are the same unpatriotic Treasonist insurrectionists who murdered a cop in an attempted failed coup

Colin Kapernick and this are two different things.

And the case involving the cop actually being killed by a protester is getting weaker and weaker by the day.

No it’s not. He got hit in the head and later died of a heart attack. If you hit someone in the head and later in the hospital they died of a hear5 attack guess what? You’d be charged.

You guys believe trumps very expensive lawyers?

There is zero evidence so far he was hit in the head, even the NY Times is saying they can't find any evidence of this.

Is that really what they’re saying? I don’t think so. They’re saying he didn’t die from blunt trauma to the head. That turns out isn’t what killed him. He survived the blow to the head. Had a heart attack in the hospital. That’s murder. Sorry.

They are saying there is zero proof anything hit him.

 

[colfax_m]

If they aren't directly threatening anyone or breaking any laws, then let them post.

That goes for the nuts on the left and the right, sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.

Then there's nothing wrong with me using an "extreme" example.

I think people should be allowed to speak. I don't think they should expect people to propagate that speech for them. That's what you're demanding. You want to post dumb shit, buy a server and put it online. Don't demand other people do it for you because you're too stupid and lazy.

I demanding at a minimum they follow their own words about being open platforms, if they can't do that then the government shouldn't protect them from being responsible for what they "publish"

Ah, the old use the government to enforce your demands on private enterprise. Thanks for your input thug.

 

[martybegan]

Social media can be considered a utility if warranted.

Great. Let's declare your front lawn a utility too then. I want my sign up.

All you got is argumentum ad absurdum. Give it up.

It’s an analogy. Someone capable of abstract thought can see this.

You can’t declare something a utility just because you want unless you want to go commie.

No, its lazy arguing from a person who will make the world a better place when they are 6 feet under it.

The FCC laws in place disagree with you. and its not like you would be regulating their fee structure.

That would be far more socialist than just telling them they can't play political favorites.

 

[martybegan]

If they aren't directly threatening anyone or breaking any laws, then let them post.

That goes for the nuts on the left and the right, sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.

Then there's nothing wrong with me using an "extreme" example.

I think people should be allowed to speak. I don't think they should expect people to propagate that speech for them. That's what you're demanding. You want to post dumb shit, buy a server and put it online. Don't demand other people do it for you because you're too stupid and lazy.

I demanding at a minimum they follow their own words about being open platforms, if they can't do that then the government shouldn't protect them from being responsible for what they "publish"

Ah, the old use the government to enforce your demands on private enterprise. Thanks for your input thug.

So you are against all regulation? Or only when it fucks over your political opponents?