The Great Fakebook Purge of 2018

[dblack]

When we need the opinions of fifth columnist fascist we'll ask you, C_Foghorn_Leghorn.

Agreed.

Today, where the corporate sector ends, and the government begins, is nebulous at best.

What's "nebulous" about it? Unless and until it is socialized by the government (which seems like what many Trump supporters want), it's a privately held corporation.

It sounds to me like FB is being bullied by government too much at it is. I don't think this crackdown was their idea. They have no interest in alienating customers. It's a response to threats from Congress and the President.

 

[Oddball]

What's "nebulous" about it? Unless and until it is socialized by the government (which seems like what many Trump supporters want), it's a privately held corporation.

It sounds to me like FB is being bullied by government too much at it is. I don't think this crackdown was their idea. They have no interest in alienating customers. It's a response to threats from Congress and the President.

It wasn't Cheeto that dragged Stalinburg before an hours-long congressional mau-mau session.

 

[dblack]

What's "nebulous" about it? Unless and until it is socialized by the government (which seems like what many Trump supporters want), it's a privately held corporation.

It sounds to me like FB is being bullied by government too much at it is. I don't think this crackdown was their idea. They have no interest in alienating customers. It's a response to threats from Congress and the President.

It wasn't Cheeto that dragged Stalinburg before an hours-long congressional mau-mau session.

Yep. It was Congress. Trump's just been standing on the sideline making threats and catcalls.

 

[Toronado3800]

THIS is an exciting topic for me. Sometimes I'll argue each side just to see what new points I can get out of people. I'm somewhat undecided.

Should big government be able to tell private property Facebook they have to let me post? Does a bar have to let me stand in there and chant about the virtues of the Union Pacific Railroad or whatever?

Does this site have to let me post? Perhaps a site with over xxx,xxx clicks an hour does?

I'm a staunch supporter of private business and their right to operate as they please. However the argument can, and probably should be made in the proper legal venues, that Facebook, Google, etc have risen to the level of public utilities/common carriers. AT&T can't cut your phone service simply because they don't like what you say on their privately owned lines. Moreover, I think we need to redefine what really constitutes a "private business". Facebook is a PUBLICLY traded company.

I think that is the best argument I've seen on this issue to date.

Its going to seem like I'm arguing both sides of the issue and in some ways I am because I'm not very decided.

I can see Big Government declaring Facebook a monopoly and I LOVE Big Government regulating the corporations it gives birth to.

The problem is going to be finding the cut off. If you own the only concert venue in town do you need to let a loud mouth like me put on a show? How about a bakery, gotta bake a cake for everyone?

 

[dblack]

Its going to seem like I'm arguing both sides of the issue and in some ways I am because I'm not very decided.

Good for you. The "sides" in any political argument are usually fake and designed push you into someone else's pen.

The problem is going to be finding the cut off. If you own the only concert venue in town do you need to let a loud mouth like me put on a show? How about a bakery, gotta bake a cake for everyone?

Yup. I propose, for a 'cutoff', we use private property and individual rights.

 

[dblack]

THIS is an exciting topic for me. Sometimes I'll argue each side just to see what new points I can get out of people. I'm somewhat undecided.

Should big government be able to tell private property Facebook they have to let me post? Does a bar have to let me stand in there and chant about the virtues of the Union Pacific Railroad or whatever?

Does this site have to let me post? Perhaps a site with over xxx,xxx clicks an hour does?

I'm a staunch supporter of private business and their right to operate as they please. However the argument can, and probably should be made in the proper legal venues, that Facebook, Google, etc have risen to the level of public utilities/common carriers. AT&T can't cut your phone service simply because they don't like what you say on their privately owned lines. Moreover, I think we need to redefine what really constitutes a "private business". Facebook is a PUBLICLY traded company.

Businesses don't "rise to the level" of a public utility. Public utilities can be any size, large or small. What makes them public utilities is government declaring them to be so and dictating the terms.

 

[MisterBeale]

When we need the opinions of fifth columnist fascist we'll ask you, C_Foghorn_Leghorn.

Agreed.

Today, where the corporate sector ends, and the government begins, is nebulous at best.

What's "nebulous" about it? Unless and until it is socialized by the government (which seems like what many Trump supporters want), it's a privately held corporation.

It sounds to me like FB is being bullied by government too much at it is. I don't think this crackdown was their idea. They have no interest in alienating customers. It's a response to threats from Congress and the President.

The thing about FB and all of these silicon valley start ups, is they would never have happened w/o tax payer supported money.

Research their connection to DARPA and the CIA front company In-Q-Tel.

You can say you support the free market and government non-interference, but silicon valley is the new nexus of the Deep State on their manipulation of the public's mind.

You are being obtuse like an ostrich with their head in the sand and sticking strictly to economic dogma not understanding nuances of economic fascism going on here. Just the revolving door of who is employed in these government agencies, and then goes to jobs in the private sector of these companies should concern us.

Silicon Valley IS the new part of the Deep State. To believe it is just another part of the economy is to deny reality.

Facebook - the CIA conspiracy
Facebook - the CIA conspiracy

Facebook And It's Connections To The C.I.A. And D.A.A.R.P.A.
Facebook And It's Connections To The C.I.A. And D.A.A.R.P.A. by Brian S Staveley

 

[dblack]

The thing about FB and all of these silicon valley start ups, is they would never have happened w/o tax payer supported money.

Yes. This is the standard playbook for socialists. And by this logic, government owns all of us.

You can say you support the free market and government non-interference, but silicon valley is the new nexus of the Deep State on their manipulation of the public's mind.

I don't follow Alex Jones.

 

[MisterBeale]

The thing about FB and all of these silicon valley start ups, is they would never have happened w/o tax payer supported money.

Yes. This is the standard playbook for socialists. And by this logic, government owns all of us.

You can say you support the free market and government non-interference, but silicon valley is the new nexus of the Deep State on their manipulation of the public's mind.

I don't follow Alex Jones.

You don't have to be A.J. to know what the hell is going on.

Lot's of journalists, professors and politicians have written about this. Whether you care to read about it is up to you.

 

[Correll]

THIS is an exciting topic for me. Sometimes I'll argue each side just to see what new points I can get out of people. I'm somewhat undecided.

Should big government be able to tell private property Facebook they have to let me post? Does a bar have to let me stand in there and chant about the virtues of the Union Pacific Railroad or whatever?

Does this site have to let me post? Perhaps a site with over xxx,xxx clicks an hour does?

I'm a staunch supporter of private business and their right to operate as they please. However the argument can, and probably should be made in the proper legal venues, that Facebook, Google, etc have risen to the level of public utilities/common carriers. AT&T can't cut your phone service simply because they don't like what you say on their privately owned lines. Moreover, I think we need to redefine what really constitutes a "private business". Facebook is a PUBLICLY traded company.

I think that is the best argument I've seen on this issue to date.

Its going to seem like I'm arguing both sides of the issue and in some ways I am because I'm not very decided.

I can see Big Government declaring Facebook a monopoly and I LOVE Big Government regulating the corporations it gives birth to.

The problem is going to be finding the cut off. If you own the only concert venue in town do you need to let a loud mouth like me put on a show? How about a bakery, gotta bake a cake for everyone?

The line is a tough one, but Facebook and Google, ect are certainly on the side of needing to be regulated for their bullshit.

 

[MisterBeale]

What's "nebulous" about it? Unless and until it is socialized by the government (which seems like what many Trump supporters want), it's a privately held corporation.

It sounds to me like FB is being bullied by government too much at it is. I don't think this crackdown was their idea. They have no interest in alienating customers. It's a response to threats from Congress and the President.

It wasn't Cheeto that dragged Stalinburg before an hours-long congressional mau-mau session.

Pretty sure that shit was staged for consumers, just to make them feel safe to continue using fakebook.

 

[MisterBeale]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

 

[dblack]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

Ahh yes. Kiss the First Amendment goodbye.

 

[Correll]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

Ahh yes. Kiss the First Amendment goodbye.

Not so fun when your enemies use the courts to advance their agenda, is it?


Who is laughing now, monkey boy?

 

[frigidweirdo]

InfoWars was only the beginning...

Now, anyone who has followed these pages for awhile and who doesn't have a pro-government, pro-corporation chip on their shoulder would be more than willing to say that these libertarian and anarchist pages were CENSORED, not removed for spam. These pages violated NO existing policies, and Facebook is LYING in order to claim otherwise.

Liberty Dissident: Facebook Bans The Free Thought Project, Press for Truth, Anti-Media and 248 Other Alternative Media Pages

Boohoo

Boohoo boohoo

Boohoo boohoo booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooothefuckhoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[dblack]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

Ahh yes. Kiss the First Amendment goodbye.

Not so fun when your enemies use the courts to advance their agenda, is it?


Who is laughing now, monkey boy?

Monkey boy? Is this just a random childish insult? Or is it supposed to mean something?

Are you happy to see the First Amendment dismissed?

 

[Correll]

InfoWars was only the beginning...

Now, anyone who has followed these pages for awhile and who doesn't have a pro-government, pro-corporation chip on their shoulder would be more than willing to say that these libertarian and anarchist pages were CENSORED, not removed for spam. These pages violated NO existing policies, and Facebook is LYING in order to claim otherwise.

Liberty Dissident: Facebook Bans The Free Thought Project, Press for Truth, Anti-Media and 248 Other Alternative Media Pages

Boohoo

Boohoo boohoo

Boohoo boohoo booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooothefuckhoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Thanks for being you.


So many republicans think we can still work with you people.


Behavior likes yours, does more than I ever could, to convince them they are fools, and need to instead fight back.



Don't ever change.

 

[Correll]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

Ahh yes. Kiss the First Amendment goodbye.

Not so fun when your enemies use the courts to advance their agenda, is it?


Who is laughing now, monkey boy?

Monkey boy? Is this just a random childish insult? Or is it supposed to mean something?

Are you happy to see the First Amendment dismissed?

Old movie reference. You're not cool enough to get it. Pretty random, yes.



And I don't consider this move, if it happens, to be restricting speech.


But PREVENTING restrictions on speech.

 

[dblack]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

Ahh yes. Kiss the First Amendment goodbye.

Not so fun when your enemies use the courts to advance their agenda, is it?


Who is laughing now, monkey boy?

Monkey boy? Is this just a random childish insult? Or is it supposed to mean something?

Are you happy to see the First Amendment dismissed?

Old movie reference. You're not cool enough to get it. Pretty random, yes.



And I don't consider this move, if it happens, to be restricting speech.


But PREVENTING restrictions on speech.

Ahh.. so you're in favor of completely inverting freedom of speech. Kinda like we've done with freedom of religion. Freedom means freedom from government interference. It doesn't mean that the government forces other people to do what you want.

 

[Correll]

Supreme Court agrees to hear a case that could determine whether Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies can censor their users
The Supreme Court will hear a case that could decide whether Facebook, Twitter can censor users

Ahh yes. Kiss the First Amendment goodbye.

Not so fun when your enemies use the courts to advance their agenda, is it?


Who is laughing now, monkey boy?

Monkey boy? Is this just a random childish insult? Or is it supposed to mean something?

Are you happy to see the First Amendment dismissed?

Old movie reference. You're not cool enough to get it. Pretty random, yes.



And I don't consider this move, if it happens, to be restricting speech.


But PREVENTING restrictions on speech.

Ahh.. so you're in favor of completely inverting freedom of speech. Kinda like we've done with freedom of religion. Freedom means freedom from government interference. It doesn't mean that the government forces other people to do what you want.

The various social media and internet services have grown to the point that they have become, imo, a form of public utility, such as transportation or telephones.


The telephone company doesn't monitor your phone calls and cut off your service if it does not like what you are saying.



And neither should facebook and the like.