I must purchase an American made car after being screwed over time after time after time over the decades. And then have the dealers laugh at you. Commie capitalism merged with Capitalist totalitarianism. Like China now. Only they are sweat shop level.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Kicking Trump off Twitter is 'problematic' and infringes on free speech, Germany and France say
- Thread starter shockedcanadian
- Start date
You are what is written in the bible. Buy and Sell. You own it.This is an idiotic lie.Ok, fine. But it's not government's concern. I have no problem with pointing out that some of these company's policies are biased and, arguably, unfair. But when Trumpsters start talking about nationalizing them, declaring them public utilities, or otherwise using government to "go after" the companies who don't cater to the President - that's an abuse of government.Dblack you make an excellent point that Big Tech has no power to govern, yet that exact intent is there without question based upon banning certain users but not others for the same action. Gagging a specific action should mean that all people doing same/similar thing should be gagged/banned as well, that is if the corporation professes to be apolitical, but that has not been the case (Madonna’s political call for violence passed their standards for unknown reasons if truly apolitical in nature while banning Trump).Big tech has no power to "govern". That's a conceit propagated by socialists who want government to take over social media.Free is the opposite of governed, by lawmakers or big tech...
An abuse of government? You mean the democrats who are calling for the companies to ban people.
Insanely disgusting... the people who always take issues with loopholes have created an enormous first amendment loop hole and dancing around as if this is some type of moral victory. Or if you want to hear more accurate assessment, Satanists are being Satanic.
Democrats are not telling social media to 'ban' people.
An abuse of government? You mean the democrats who are calling for the companies to ban people.
No, not that. That's not an abuse of government. It has nothing to do with government. It's social censure - shunning. It carries no force of law.
Insanely disgusting... the people who always take issues with loopholes have created an enormous first amendment loop hole and dancing around as if this is some type of moral victory. Or if you want to hear more accurate assessment, Satanists are being Satanic.
It's not a loophole. The First Amendment is meant to limit state power. It's not there to force people to accommodate you, or your views. If society doesn't like what you have to say, they don't have to play along. They don't have to listen to you, they don't have to publish your views, they don't have to associate with you at all. That's what's happening now. Many people in our society have decided they've had enough of Trump and they're refusing to accommodate him. It's their right to make that call.
Nonsense.Big monopolized tech crushing any competition like Parler..completely anti American....
It's very American; good old-fashioned hardcore free market competition, something conservatives once supported.
You and others on the right are whining about this only because conservative social media are having a bad time .
The only thing nauseating is this ridiculous pack of lies.you know I'm a liberal been ... one all as long as I can remember or I could understand what government is about ... all my life I've been called a commie because I felt that people should have some government protection ... and some health care where we don't lose everything we own I was call a commie all my life ... thats all I ever heard from you right wing but jobs is I'm a commie and now you are saying the republicans should become commies ... priceless ...personally I don't think they will let you into the club...Maybe Putin can form a kind of NATO to protect them from the Left wing US now.
Frankly a Vlad Putin is exactly the kind of man we need right now, here in America, to reign in blood.
Envision the sound of the loudest, most annoying game show buzzer imaginable. It just went off. Vlad Putin is not a communist, for several self-serving reasons we won't entertain at this moment. What Putin is, is a pure nationalist; a man who loves his nation so deeply he would do anything to preserve it. Anything. Sure, he's an oligarchical dictator and former KGB killer, but the total "good guy" package always comes with a caveat or two.
Where you most misunderstand our current American crisis, apparently, is in the total effort by our elected officials, corporate giants and media to outright hand over our nation to foreign powers. See, we love America unconditionally. We want our America to be preserved and survive at all costs; to protect her sovereignty by any means necessary. Your "side", however, was and remains willing to sell America out to China and others all for the "prize" of bringing down one man: Donald J. Trump. Your "side" holds no allegiance to our Flag, our history, our Constitution, our values or our God. Your side are godless anti-Americans who believe the fulfillment of your own lives to be worth more than the preservation of our country.
You nauseate us.
- Jul 28, 2009
- 802
- 431
- 908
Yeah, and we’ve got a big stockpile of nerve gas for him to use to poison his rivals. I’ll bet Trump wishes he’d thought of that.Maybe Putin can form a kind of NATO to protect them from the Left wing US now.
Frankly a Vlad Putin is exactly the kind of man we need right now, here in America, to reign in blood.
billyerock123
Gold Member
- Jan 9, 2021
- 2,087
- 706
- 208
Facebook, Twitter, the other social media platforms are not the government. They are private sector entities, and therefore, they have no First Amendment obligation to protect your freedom of speech. To the contrary, they have their own First Amendment rights ... in their regulations they say that hate speech isn't allowed ... untruthful statements are not allowed .... I realize you get your information from a blogger ... everything I post doesn't come from a left wing site left wing bloggers I check as man as 4 fact checkers to see what they say ...my information comes from fact checkers ... not the local right wing conspiracy site ...Facebook and Twitter claim they are platforms for free speech if that is the case all speech is allowed. If you are banning and censoring people based on arbitrary standards you are a publisher and no longer entitled to the protection of section 230. I suspect the left will finally understand this when they express a view or opinion Zuckerberg or Dorsey don’t approve of and get censored or banned sadly by then it will be to late as they will have let them gain to much power and control.heres what Germany said: German chancellor Angela Merkel regards Donald Trump's permanent ban from Twitter as 'problematic' because it gives too much power to social media … she didn't say it was wrong violating his rights they were concerned about the media being to strong ... so nice spin ...Do you understand what the constitution says ??? free speech is only for the government ...you can say what you want about the government ... you don't get this right when it comes to a corporation ... no corporations in this country or any country will allow anyone the benefit of free speech ... you republican seem to say well, its my constitution right... so why don't you read the damn constitution... tell us all where it says corporations has to accept what the constitution free speech ... I'll wait ...
ClaireH
Diamond Member
I support businesses so this is a tough one for me, because when I see a business operating with solid biases in my opinion what is the choice for me as a consumer? Find an alternative. What if there are no alternatives comparable in breadth? Somebody posted a link yesterday and I didn’t write it down but I’ll have to go back and look for it with a new alternative. Anything is better than the Lame Stream Media. I use alJazeera a lot but they have biased reporting as well, just not so in your face with it.Facebook, Twitter, the other social media platforms are not the government. They are private sector entities, and therefore, they have no First Amendment obligation to protect your freedom of speech. To the contrary, they have their own First Amendment rights ... in their regulations they say that hate speech isn't allowed ... untruthful statements are not allowed .... I realize you get your information from a blogger ... everything I post doesn't come from a left wing site left wing bloggers I check as man as 4 fact checkers to see what they say ...my information comes from fact checkers ... not the local right wing conspiracy site ...Facebook and Twitter claim they are platforms for free speech if that is the case all speech is allowed. If you are banning and censoring people based on arbitrary standards you are a publisher and no longer entitled to the protection of section 230. I suspect the left will finally understand this when they express a view or opinion Zuckerberg or Dorsey don’t approve of and get censored or banned sadly by then it will be to late as they will have let them gain to much power and control.heres what Germany said: German chancellor Angela Merkel regards Donald Trump's permanent ban from Twitter as 'problematic' because it gives too much power to social media … she didn't say it was wrong violating his rights they were concerned about the media being to strong ... so nice spin ...Do you understand what the constitution says ??? free speech is only for the government ...you can say what you want about the government ... you don't get this right when it comes to a corporation ... no corporations in this country or any country will allow anyone the benefit of free speech ... you republican seem to say well, its my constitution right... so why don't you read the damn constitution... tell us all where it says corporations has to accept what the constitution free speech ... I'll wait ...
Rigby5
Diamond Member
Lots of countries are going to have look at creating a communication app/website for their top elected officials. Big Tech can silence anyone.
If Twitter and Trump only knew the law they would realize Trump has the authority to shut down Twitter off the Internet.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
Our constitution protect us from government censorship.
Tweeter is not the Government.
There is no constitutional protection for us from Tweeter.
I believe Germany censors certain topic and jails people for publicly airing certain points of view, So fuck um.
France? Hands up, I'm French?
Wrong.
Twitter does not own or maintain the internet, and when Twitter applied to use the Internet, they agreed to the FCC rules that apply constitutional protections for EVERYONE who uses their services.
What Twitter did was totally and completely illegal, as well as in violation of their contracts.
Trump simply was never told he could have shut down Twitter any time he wanted to.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
The government did not boot him the free market did. Lie all day long and try and over throw the government you lose your platform. People don't want to do business with scum bags. The free market found Trump soon it will find you. Fuck with peoples wallet that is what happens.
The free market did not create, run, or own the Internet.
It is owned by the feds because they created it and maintain it.
To be allowed to use it, Twitter agreed to FCC regulations which make censorship illegal.
Twitter is just lucky Trump never was told he could have shut down Twitter any time he wanted to.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
apparently socialist france and germany need to learn what a market economy is...
Sorry, but the internet is NOT at all market created, run, or owned.
It was created by DARPA, and the government still maintains most of it.
Anyone using it, like Twitter has to play by FCC rules entirely.
There is nothing remotely free market about the internet.
Rigby5
Diamond Member
I support businesses so this is a tough one for me, because when I see a business operating with solid biases in my opinion what is the choice for me as a consumer? Find an alternative. What if there are no alternatives comparable in breadth? Somebody posted a link yesterday and I didn’t write it down but I’ll have to go back and look for it with a new alternative. Anything is better than the Lame Stream Media. I use alJazeera a lot but they have biased reporting as well, just not so in your face with it.
Twitter created, owns, and maintains nothing.
It is all the government created, owned and maintained.
The FCC can simply pull the plug on Twitter for violating its contract.
- Sep 28, 2010
- 56,128
- 16,311
- 2,180
Wrong.
Twitter does not own or maintain the internet, and when Twitter applied to use the Internet, they agreed to the FCC rules that apply constitutional protections for EVERYONE who uses their services.
What Twitter did was totally and completely illegal, as well as in violation of their contracts.
Trump simply was never told he could have shut down Twitter any time he wanted to.
Twitter’s terms of services allow the platform to pull content that violates its rules and it’s the same with most other major platforms, although the decision-making process isn’t available to public scrutiny like it would be in a court of law.
Twitter’s statement on Friday said “after close review of recent tweets from the @realdonaldtrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”
Does a Twitter ban violate First Amendment rights? A legal expert weighs in
The suspension of President Donald Trump’s social media accounts has prompted some to call the move a “violation of the president’s first amendment right to free speech.”
www.news4jax.com
“The bigger question that might raise is is should we start to treat these larger social media platforms, which do have vast power like Facebook? And we’ve seen now with Parlor being essentially as it were right? Should we treat them differently and regulate them more closely? Have we reached that stage where we need to antitrust litigation, perhaps, and say they have such powerful platforms, they’re like near-monopolies that we should do some trust-busting and break them up,” Calvert said.
That discussion has actually been going on for a while.
LOL - It ain't free speech unless it's controlled by government. Orwell would be proud.Angela Merkel said the free speech should be governed by lawmakers, not private technology companies
Rigby5
Diamond Member
Twitter’s terms of services allow the platform to pull content that violates its rules and it’s the same with most other major platforms, although the decision-making process isn’t available to public scrutiny like it would be in a court of law.
Twitter’s statement on Friday said “after close review of recent tweets from the @realdonaldtrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”
Does a Twitter ban violate First Amendment rights? A legal expert weighs in
The suspension of President Donald Trump’s social media accounts has prompted some to call the move a “violation of the president’s first amendment right to free speech.”
“The bigger question that might raise is is should we start to treat these larger social media platforms, which do have vast power like Facebook? And we’ve seen now with Parlor being essentially as it were right? Should we treat them differently and regulate them more closely? Have we reached that stage where we need to antitrust litigation, perhaps, and say they have such powerful platforms, they’re like near-monopolies that we should do some trust-busting and break them up,” Calvert said.
That discussion has actually been going on for a while.
Twitter did not create, maintain, or own ANY part of the Internet, so then can't change or violate any of the rules set down by those who did create, maintain, and own the internet.
The only time a company like Twitter that simply rents out internet access can violate the fair use FCC regulations is when it would otherwise be harmful to the rights of others. But that decision can not be arbitrary and always has to be possible to be reviews by a judge, in court.
Since Trump's beliefs are not inciting violence against innocents, then Twitter has no leg to stand on.
Especially since Twitter does not interfere with far more illegal and violent content.
A double standard is illegal.
It is not supporting Trump to recognize that half the country voted for him and they have a right to share their ideas on the publicly financed internet.
LOL France and Germany and free speech. LOLThe alt-left bastards have pushed your allies into Chinas arms and they have single handedly allowed America to lose their influence. These moron CEOs have now cut off their noses to spite their faces. Stupid, son of b____s. Now Europe has the perfect excuse they need to regulate, punish and control these networks. Good job political party boot lickers. You did well. Dumb asses.
Since about year 3 of Trumps admin, I never believed that allies hated him as much as the media tried to present. Canada and England might have felt they lost out, that's because they were all in for Hillary. The rest, probably understood the message Trump and U.S intel were giving them. Notice silence from Canada and England on the issue of censorship. That's because THEY want to do the same here in Canada, as an example.
Now, what do they think? How will they react? I give Germany and France some credit. The French have a history of liberty, the Germans have been slower adopters, but it's good to see them all speak out.
Kicking Trump off Twitter is 'problematic' and infringes on free speech, Germany and France say
Angela Merkel said the free speech should be governed by lawmakers, not private technology companies
Kicking Trump off Twitter is 'problematic' and infringes on free speech, Germany and France say
Angela Merkel said the free speech should be governed by lawmakers, not private technology companiesnationalpost.com
Germany and France attacked Twitter Inc. and Facebook Inc. after U.S. President Donald Trump was shut off from the social media platforms, in an extension of Europe’s battle with big tech.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel objected to the decisions, saying on Monday that lawmakers should set the rules governing free speech and not private technology companies.
“The chancellor sees the complete closing down of the account of an elected president as problematic,” Steffen Seibert, her chief spokesman, said at a regular news conference in Berlin. Rights like the freedom of speech “can be interfered with, but by law and within the framework defined by the legislature — not according to a corporate decision.”
The German leader’s stance is echoed by the French government. Junior Minister for European Union Affairs Clement Beaune said he was “shocked” to see a private company make such an important decision. “This should be decided by citizens, not by a CEO,” he told Bloomberg TV on Monday. “There needs to be public regulation of big online platforms.” Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire earlier said that the state should be responsible for regulations, rather than “the digital oligarchy,” and called big tech “one of the threats” to democracy.
Europe is increasingly pushing back against the growing influence of big technology companies. The EU is currently in the process of setting up regulation that could give the bloc power to split up platforms if they don’t comply with rules.
Twitter permanently banned Trump last week after it decided the outgoing president’s tweets breached its rules against glorifying violence. It cited his posts on the riots in the U.S. capital.
Heh... my thoughts approximately.LOL France and Germany and free speech. LOL
Similar threads
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 81
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 156
- Replies
- 32
- Views
- 694
- Replies
- 152
- Views
- 924
- Replies
- 90
- Views
- 639
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 46
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 6
- Replies
- 115
- Views
- 386
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8110
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-