Bitcoin Forum
May 06, 2024, 01:47:39 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ... 606 »
401  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Riots after Death of Man in Minneapolis Police Custody on: June 01, 2020, 06:54:52 PM
"Rioter Sets Himself On Fire Trying To Torch Building"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-rioter-sets-himself-fire-trying-torch-building



"Armed Leftists Shoot At Conservative Journalists House, Nat Guard And Police Shoot And Kill Rioter"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpLTe5MgFE
402  Other / Politics & Society / Re: If you don't like something the solution is more regulation on: June 01, 2020, 06:54:26 PM
"How Twitter Is Making The Case Against Itself and Free Speech"

https://jonathanturley.org/2020/05/31/get-the-facts-how-twitter-is-making-the-case-against-itself-and-free-speech/
403  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Coronavirus Outbreak on: June 01, 2020, 06:53:42 PM
"Two 'Unusual' COVID-19 Features Convincing Scientists It Was Man-Made"

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/two-unusual-covid-19-features-convincing-scientists-it-was-man-made


"Pew: Democrats Represent 41 Of 44 Districts With Highest COVID-19 Death Tolls"

https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/05/pew-democrats-represent-41-of-44-districts-with-highest-covid-19-death-tolls/


"Malaria drug and zinc, the missing link"

https://conservativewoman.co.uk/malaria-drug-and-zinc-the-missing-link/
404  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Cop broke the windows at Autozone which sparked riots across America on: June 01, 2020, 06:47:27 PM
"More Bricks Appear In Advance Of Monday Demonstrations"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/its-setup-mysteriously-staged-bricks-appear-throughout-major-protest-cities
405  Other / Politics & Society / Re: 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: June 01, 2020, 06:45:35 PM
ANTIFA is not an organization. 

It is most certainly organized. It has a regional cellular structure with high level organization and funding not only from actors like George Soros, but also the CCP via "Confucius Institute" fronts operating out of colleges all over the nation.



"China Encouraging BLM ANTIFA Rioters Across U.S. Cities" https://www.dailysquib.co.uk/world/37236-intelligence-china-encouraging-blm-antifa-rioters-across-u-s-cities.html



"Pentagon to End Language Funding for Universities That Host Chinese Communist Party–Funded Confucius Institutes"

https://www.newsweek.com/confucius-institute-pentagon-communist-chinese-1406772



"Universities report $1 billion in previously hidden foreign funding after feds threaten investigations"

https://www.thecollegefix.com/universities-report-1-billion-in-previously-hidden-foreign-funding-after-feds-threaten-investigations/



"Donors of Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Group Revealed (Center for Community Change -- 2015)"

https://www.scribd.com/document/360602355/Donors-of-Anti-Trump-Resistance-Group-Revealed-Center-for-Community-Change-2015



"China's Foreign Ministry Tweets "I Can't Breathe!"

As America's Rivals Troll US Over Unrest" https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/chinas-foreign-ministry-tweets-i-cant-breath-us-rivals-troll-us-over-unrest



"America is Under Attack by 187 Groups Funded by George Soros"

https://humansarefree.com/2017/04/america-is-under-attack-by-187-groups-funded-by-george-soros.html



"Greta’s Parents Pictured in Antifa Gear & She Raised Funds for Antifa-supporting Organisation in Europe"

https://humansarefree.com/2019/09/gretas-parents-pictured-in-antifa-gear-she-raised-funds-for-antifa-supporting-organisation-in-europe.html



"Billionaire George Soros spent $33MILLION bankrolling Ferguson demonstrators to create 'echo chamber' and drive national protests"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2913625/Billionaire-George-Soros-spent-33MILLION-bankrolling-Ferguson-demonstrators-create-echo-chamber-drive-national-protests.html



"Liberal Money’s Longterm Strategy To Control Public Opinion And Secure ‘Advantageous’ Demographics"

https://dailycaller.com/2016/11/02/revealed-liberal-moneys-longterm-strategy-to-control-public-opinion-and-secure-advantageous-demographics/



"Soros-Funded Militant Group Claims ‘German Contingent’ At G20 Protests"

https://dailycaller.com/2017/07/07/soros-funded-militant-group-claims-german-contingent-at-g20-protests/



There is no member list.

Of course they don't publish member lists, they are a criminal organization. There are however member lists.



"LIST OF ALL CONFIRMED ANTIFA MEMBERS!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RehiI0BwV88




"Antifa sets up recruitment shop at University of Florida"

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13767



"Antifa Is Arming Itself Against a Trump Crackdown"

https://newrepublic.com/article/154110/antifa-arming-trump-crackdown



"Socialist Rifle Association – DC Metro"

https://sra-dc.org



"'Antifa' movement in Phoenix: What it is, and why officials fear it"

https://eu.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/10/09/antifa-movement-phoenix-what-you-need-to-know/700415001/



"Rose City Antifa"

https://www.rosecityantifa.org



"By Any Means Necessary"

http://www.bamn.com



"George Soros funds Ferguson protests, hopes to spur civil action" https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/



"Donors of Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Group Revealed"

https://freebeacon.com/politics/donors-anti-trump-resistance-group-revealed/



"Black Lives Matter: Produced by George Soros"

https://humansarefree.com/2016/07/black-lives-matter-produced-by-george-soros.html



http://www.disruptj20.org/



No training or practices.

They certainly do have training and a very clear modus operandi.



https://www.redneckrevolt.org/



"Forming An Antifa Group: A Manual"

https://itsgoingdown.org/forming-an-antifa-group-a-manual/



it simply means- "Anti Fascist" so now anyone who opposes fascism can be labeled as a terrorist, stripped of all rights and held without trial.

This is the classic PR response that people enabling these terrorists seek to parrot. This is little more than a marketing slogan to cover for their international terrorist and criminal activities. ANTIFA itself fits the profile of a fascist organization itself all the while constantly acting as if they are against it.



"Liberals cheer as antifa violence escalates"

https://nypost.com/2019/07/17/liberals-cheer-as-antifa-violence-escalates/



"Armed 'anarchist and anti-fascist' attempted to firebomb ICE facility in Tacoma, killed in confrontation with police"

https://www.theblaze.com/news/terror-armed-antifa-member-attempts-to-firebomb-ice-facility-in-washington-is-killed-in-confrontation-with-police



"Watch as Antifa Member Shot To Death After Drawing on Police"

https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/watch-antifa-member-shot-death-drawing-police



"A Communist & Anarchist Movement That Explicitly Endorses Violence"

https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/organizations/antifa/



""Far-Left Or Anarchists" - Intelligence Reports ID Rioting Protesters; Mostly Locals Arrested"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/they-are-outsiders-minneapolis-officials-blame-white-supremacist-terror-cells-rioting



"Look Who Funds The Group Behind The Call To Arms At Milo’s Berkeley Event"

https://dailycaller.com/2017/02/03/look-who-funds-the-group-behind-the-call-to-arms-at-milos-berkeley-event/



"Anarchist Extremists: Antifa"

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54d79f88e4b0db3478a04405/t/591b46fad1758ef3d2ed8d2f/1494959867234/Anarchist+Extremists+-+Antifa.pdf



"Why I Joined Antifa, and Why I Left—Gabriel Nadales [CPAC 2020] | American Thought Leaders"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yga9cwCImXc



"Andy Ngo: Breaking Down Antifa Violence & Extremism [TPUSA Special] | American Thought Leaders"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGTliKNQ2g8



"Antifa Origins & Tactics Exposed, After Andy Ngo’s Assault At Portland Protest—Jack Posobiec"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN0YWWiSicw



Here is the statutory definition of the types of support that would be prohibited if anifta was designed a terrorist organization. The punishment for providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization faces 20 years in prison, or a life sentence if their support can be attributed to the death of someone.

I don't think wearing an antifa tea shirt would qualify, however, I also don't think antifa has tea shirts, as from what I have heard on news reports, and read on news reports, they like to keep their identities secret, and use violence to prevent anyone from filing them. My understanding is they primarily engage in violence and intimidation of citizens. I also understand they have operated in Washington state for quite some time with impunity, in broad daylight. This implies they have some politicians in their pockets who are preventing them from being prosecuted.

You are not able to have riots in many cities across the US all starting on the same day (Friday) without funding. Airline prices (and hotel) are low right now, so the cost of getting professional protestors into place may be cheaper than it would normally be. I have heard on the news that police have found numerous cars with "stashes" of rioting supplies that rioters were going to in order to cause damage in multiple cities. This implies they are fairly well funded.

I also know there are some "freedom funds" that are being used to bail out people who are arrested. This may also fall under the above-referenced definition of "support".

They are in fact an international organization, and they have been in Europe since the 20's. They also have a presence in South America, and probably a few other regions. They fit well within the FTO designation.

ANTIFA Merchandise:

https://www.redbubble.com/shop/antifa+t-shirts

https://www.etsy.com/market/antifa_tshirt

https://www.teepublic.com/gifts-and-merchandise/antifa

https://www.punx.uk/product/antifa-t-shirt/

https://society6.com/tshirts/antifa
406  Other / Politics & Society / Re: 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: June 01, 2020, 01:32:56 AM
If he was actually threatening to shoot people with an arrow then he needed to be restrained. Or would you prefer that someone shot him with a handgun instead?

It seemed pretty clear to me he was attempting to defend himself

That's why I said "depending on the circumstances" and "how real his threat was or what provoked it" but you chose to read only 3 cherrypicked words from my post. It's not at all clear that he was defending from anything. And just as torching a car is not an adequate reaction to someone pointing a bow and arrow, pointing a bow and arrow is not an adequate reaction to people passing by, which is what the videos appear to show.

but you are right, maybe a mob really did need to beat the shit out of him and burn his car for their own protection.

I didn't say that. Quite the opposite.

Again, you don't know what happened before the camera started rolling. The rioters are blocking traffic, trapping him there, and you can clearly see his bumper is smashed in from the video. There are tons of videos of people attacking passing vehicles doing nothing but trying to get to their destination, but yeah, it is actually a wild conspiracy theory to say he was attacked first.
407  Other / Politics & Society / Re: 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: June 01, 2020, 01:08:24 AM
If he was actually threatening to shoot people with an arrow then he needed to be restrained. Or would you prefer that someone shot him with a handgun instead?

It seemed pretty clear to me he was attempting to defend himself, but you are right, maybe a mob really did need to beat the shit out of him and burn his car for their own protection.
408  Other / Politics & Society / Re: If you don't like something the solution is more regulation on: June 01, 2020, 01:07:08 AM
eliminating federal debt

That's probably not the case anymore. I don't recall any significant conservative backlash against the tax cut a couple of years ago that is ballooning the deficit.

The EO suggest a method for citizens to complain to the FCC, and for the FCC to start tracking these allegations.  True, that may eventually result in regulations or changes to section 230, or it may fizzle out into nothing.  Surely you're not opposed to accumulating data.

That's one small part of it. I'm not necessarily opposed to tracking complaints but people can already file complaints with the FCC, and the FTC, etc. To ask the FTC to give him a report he doesn't need an EO.

However he's also directly asking to come up with regulations:

Quote
within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), in consultation with the Attorney General, and acting through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), shall file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requesting that the FCC expeditiously propose regulations to clarify [some section 230 stuff]

As well as telling state Attorneys General (which he has zero jurisdiction over) to do something, and asking for federal legislation, etc. Just a bizarre wish list.

Do you really have such little faith in the system?  POTUS has no authority to create laws, and certainly none to circumvent the courts.  

Then... why?

I mean one of the right-wing complaints I'm hearing against Twitter is that they're putting their thumb on the scales ahead of the election. Trump is throwing a bag of cement on the scales, given that he's a candidate and is trying to create a more favorable media landscape for himself (or an illusion thereof) with an ill-conceived EO.

Reducing taxation has almost nothing to do with eliminating the debt. If you think taxes are what fuels spending you have a childlike understanding of economics. Letting people keep more of their money is not the same thing. If you are going to make an argument, at least make a valid one like his spending is excessive.

Attorney Generals are under the rule of The Department of Justice which is under the jurisdiction of the executive branch of government, making them EXPLICITLY within the president's jurisdiction regardless of it being a state office. Furthermore he is not crafting a new law, but asking for revision of enforcement of an existing law, which is exactly the authority the executive branch has.

409  Other / Politics & Society / Re: 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: June 01, 2020, 12:48:54 AM
After ~20 seconds he got tackled by a bunch of people.  They beat the shit out him, flipped his car and set it on fire.

He may have deserved some beating (or rather restraining) depending on the circumstances - it's hard to tell from the choppy videos how real his threat was or what provoked it. Certainly didn't deserve a skateboard to the head though. Certainly didn't deserve his car torched even if it's a Dodge Caliber. It looks like people lose all sense of perspective or restraint when there's more that a few in one place. Knock him out, take away his bow, anything beyond that is just savagery.

Fuck you. He didn't deserve ANY of that, and you even insinuating he did makes you a total piece of shit.
410  Other / Politics & Society / Re: 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: June 01, 2020, 12:43:47 AM
From what I understand, he yelled "all lives matter" out his car window, he was surrounded, beaten, then he took out the bow and aimed it at people but did not shoot it. His car was then flipped over and burned. There is a ton of misinformation floating around, don't fall for the rage bait.


Here are 2 videos from different angles (graphic):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yImHy8-pkns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM46N1sbyF4

He said in an interview ‘First, I got beat up when I yelled “All Lives Matter”', "Then I pulled out weapons and I got beat up some more." But it seems like he didn't get beat up until about 20 sec after he pulled out his hunting bow and aimed it a bunch of people while yelling 'all lives matter'.

I'm not sure what provoked him to get out of his car - my best guess is his car got hit by bottle or rock or something.
He seemed fine when he got out of his car and started aiming at several different people.  It looked like he was about to shoot each time - but he didn't:

After ~20 seconds he got tackled by a bunch of people.  They beat the shit out him, flipped his car and set it on fire.


First the story was he was indiscriminately shooting protestors with a bow and arrow, then it was he was aiming at protestors, now it is he got out of his car so it is his fault a mob beat the shit out of him? Are you even looking at what you are justifying right now? Don't try to tell me you aren't because that is exactly what you are doing.

I also like how some how magically you know for sure what happened before the camera started rolling too as if it is TOTALLY UNTHINKABLE his car was being vandalized while he was trapped while they block traffic, and he was being threatened well before any of this happened. Of course any time shit like this happens the story just quietly gets rolled back, no one apologizes, and everyone just quietly pretends it happened like they were told. Then the rage bait that resulted from it remains, and he remains bloody and bruised while demonized by millions of retards looking for any excuse to unleash their cognitive dissonance. Such big tough guys mobbing up on a scared old man and beating the shit out of him. Clearly this is to be defended.
411  Other / Politics & Society / Re: 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: May 31, 2020, 11:41:05 PM
So called Antifa people robs shops while MAGA people shoot people with bows.
Your bolded statement is missing a reference.

Antifa is doing more than robbing shops, they are terrorizing citizens, killing innocent people, and causing property damage to innocent people.

Bow guy:
https://twitter.com/Gingersonfire/status/1266884385854255104

Sword guy:
https://twitter.com/oracularrevenge/status/1266961337336414209

The bow guy didn't shoot anyone, that information is false. From what I understand, he yelled "all lives matter" out his car window, he was surrounded, beaten, then he took out the bow and aimed it at people but did not shoot it. His car was then flipped over and burned. There is a ton of misinformation floating around, don't fall for the rage bait.

In both of these cases these men were attacked. For fuck sake there was a group of about 10 people stomping his face into the cement while he was passed out, there is absolutely no excuse for that, and you can't pretend that was just an attempt at disarming him. Furthermore you found two examples of questionable behavior to create a false equivalence. Enjoy sifting through the endless hours of footage of ANTIFA engaging in terrorism over the past several years here. These two things are not at all equal.



What exactly does this do, other than allow people to say 'they are terrorists, the president made it official'?
Will members of Antifa all still have the same constitutional rights as everyone else?  Will the FBI be able to investigate them in a way they couldn't previously?

"Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO)"

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/IF10613.pdf



"8 USC 1189: Designation of foreign terrorist organizations"

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1189&num=0&edition=prelim
412  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Cop broke the windows at Autozone which sparked riots across America on: May 31, 2020, 11:33:27 PM
I think it is more than likely a lot of these riots have been fueled by provocateurs, and there is a well documented history of this, including by police and other 3rd party groups (The "Black Bloc" in Seattle during the WTO protests comes to mind), but in this instance I don't think there is any evidence he is a cop. His face is obscured and the only thing linking him to a police identity is his ex-wife which is clearly suspicious on its face.

I think more than likely he is affiliated with some ANTIFA type organization, as these kind of provocateur operations are standard operating procedure for them. It would also make sense they would then try to blame it on police as it fits their MO. There is other clear evidence that there are organized groups fueling these riots. Here are some other examples:

https://imgur.com/gallery/Kh8ETIh

I find it highly suspicious that not only does this start happening immediately after people start realizing the COVID lock downs were an over reaction, and they start getting lifted, but also coincide with China starting to seriously lock down on Hong Kong. Chinese state mouthpieces are even directly and openly leveraging the situation as propaganda. I expect these kind of events to escalate continuously for the foreseeable future, especially up to elections, and probably escalate seriously after.

At this point I would advise everyone to be suspicious of everything as I have seen TONS of misinformation floating around fueling rage bait. This is clearly hybrid warfare, psychological warfare combined with coordinated civil unrest. This is an attack on our nation, probably by multiple organizations, and probably some state actors. We need to find a way to deescalate this quickly because it is being used as a form of war against the people of the USA.
413  Other / Politics & Society / 'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"' on: May 31, 2020, 08:28:44 PM
About fucking time...


https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/trump-designates-antifa-terrorist-organization
414  Other / Meta / Re: Suggestion: allow on-forum altcoin giveaways for established altcoins on: May 31, 2020, 08:16:54 PM
I think a good way to solve this issue with maximal positive effect is to either establish some kind of protocol that must be followed, or perhaps some kind of script to automate things. This would enable giveaways while also keeping it from shitting up the forum with useless posts.
415  Other / Meta / Re: Post Reporting Being Used As A Form Of Censorship on: May 31, 2020, 08:10:30 PM
Just open another REEEE thread about it -- problem solved.

Why would I do that when it would just give you something else to complain about?



[...]TECSHARE and [...] are not allowed to post here!

Local rules are only valid when posed in an unedited OP. I know having people disagreeing with you and ruining your illusion that everyone agrees with you is annoying, but I suppose you will have to deal with it.
416  Other / Meta / Re: Is excluding people just because some one you don't like includes them valid on: May 31, 2020, 08:07:09 PM
That would make sense if they had any information whatsoever to judge them upon, other than the fact that I included them.
That's the whole point. If someone's ratings start showing up as "trusted" in default trust or my own trust list, and I have no information whatsoever to judge them upon, then I can place exactly zero trust in those ratings. Therefore, I don't want to see them.

They have earned my trust and I have had long standing interactions with them outside of the forum, but I guess unless I get Suchmoon's approval first, I don't get to vote on people I trust.
They haven't earned anyone else's trust and they have had no interaction with anyone else on the forum, so why shouldn't other people be allowed to distrust them without you opening a thread complaining about it?

If you are free to add users who have left no ratings whatsoever except a single positive rating to you to default trust, then other users are equally free to exclude such users.

That might make sense if they had actually left any ratings, but they haven't (except for one, which Suchmoon removed the exclusion for anyway). Again, I never claimed anyone had to trust them because I do, but distrusting them simply because I trust them is not only petty but counterproductive, and is a form of guilt via association and collective punishment. I also never said it wasn't allowed, simply that it demonstrates the petty vindictive motives of Suchmoon.



If you are free to add users who have left no ratings whatsoever except a single positive rating to you to default trust, then other users are equally free to exclude such users.

Quite honestly I was trying to avoid mixing myself up in another TS thread, but after he stated this:

That would make sense if they had any information whatsoever to judge them upon, other than the fact that I included them. You call me obsessive but Suchmoon is literally picking through my trust list canceling out additions for no other reason than the fact that I added them as if any inclusion needs Suchmoon's approval otherwise they get an exclusion automatically.

I couldn't help but think of this:

Even if it didn't benefit me personally, I would still be happy including them simply based on the fact that the resident clown car passengers excluded them. Given their history of abuse I would say anyone they are targeting is worth considering for inclusion.

He's doing the exact same thing with his inclusions that he is accusing suchmoon of doing with exclusions. The main difference is including people to the trust system out of spite is potentially much more damaging than excluding them.

They have earned my trust and I have had long standing interactions with them outside of the forum

That's fine -- then you should leave them a positive trust. AFAICT nobody disagrees with the ratings you left for them (well, except for leaving a trust for someone based on your assessment of their ability to "preserve Americas Constitutional rights"  Cheesy )

Including them in your trust list means you trust not only their ability to leave correct trust ratings but that you trust their ability to use the trust system as well. You've added 2 of the 3 to your trust list for no discernible reason when a simple positive trust would suffice.

I put the operative term "considering for inclusion" in bold. Considering is not the same thing as automatically doing it. Furthermore trusting people is not the same as distrusting people. Inclusions are for people you trust. Trust ratings are for positive exchanges. Funny how you all consistently claim you are all to include and exclude whoever you like, but when I do it it is always evidence of malfeasance and I am required to account for it or be called a liar/ trust abuser.



I thought TECSHARE achieved his goal with this thread - presumably proving some sort of criminal clown cartel corruption (I just realized there is a "car" in "cartel" so that's solid proof right there) - so why is this still going on.

I don't know, ask your clown friends.



--snip--
I couldn't help but think of this:

Even if it didn't benefit me personally, I would still be happy including them simply based on the fact that the resident clown car passengers excluded them. Given their history of abuse I would say anyone they are targeting is worth considering for inclusion.

He's doing the exact same thing with his inclusions that he is accusing suchmoon of doing with exclusions. The main difference is including people to the trust system out of spite is potentially much more damaging than excluding them.
He is actually so full of shit. Look at him turning into the ethical preacher at his convenience.
The point of the trust system is to serve the community,
Such a glaring hypocrite. LOL@ attempt to show ethics. Stuff like "Trust system is to serve the community" doesn't suit him after abusing it to no end with his mutual inclusions AND being a tool in perpetuating conspiracy theories about everything from DT, this forum and to even bitcoin.

Again, you ignore the operative term "considering for inclusion". Furthermore, again, inclusions are not the same as exclusions. One more time, you all consistently claim you are all to include and exclude whoever you like, but when I do it it is always evidence of malfeasance and I am required to account for it or be called a liar/ trust abuser. This is the clown clan way.
417  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Wanted - 'old-normal' nation on: May 31, 2020, 07:52:17 PM
I haven't looked at specifically how they have responded to COVID, but Uruguay was on the top of my short list if I were to leave.
418  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Riots after Death of Man in Minneapolis Police Custody on: May 31, 2020, 06:36:28 PM
There is a lot of pent up frustration with the naiton's history of police brutality and recent events that were never addressed.  Occupy, 2008, healthcare, mass shootings, and now a lack of readiness for COVID and a pathetic economic response to the depression where people got 1200 dollars and thats it.  We have 40 million unemployed and they didn't even increase food stamps.  People are hungry and upset.  

None of that justifies burning buildings and cars, let alone killing people. Stop justifying pointless violence, it will not solve anything and will just make matters worse.

Unemployed get $600+ a week with no strings attached, that buys a lot of food.

Be careful, you might get accused of being a conservative.
419  Other / Politics & Society / Re: If you don't like something the solution is more regulation on: May 31, 2020, 01:44:03 AM
As I said I barely use Twitter and most of that use is reading Trump's rants so I'm still suspecting that you don't know what "literally" means.

And assuming that what you're saying is true, shouldn't Trump stop using the platform run by criminals. That's not a good look. He could pick a smaller platform that doesn't discriminate against conservatives, his loyal base would surely follow, media would surely follow, sounds like a win for everybody. And he can still prosecute the criminals without letting them monetize his presence on their platform.

It doesn't matter what you use, you advocate for this one sided policy, thus you are literally part of the problem. Yeah, why doesn't he just mute his voice and use a smaller platform! That will show those people trying to mute his voice!




Honestly I couldn't agree more with ya here SuchMoon. I'd still consider myself someone who agrees with the ideals of a Republican and a Conservative, but watching supporters of the party and the party itself attempt to bend over backwards to find some logic to support this EO is insane.

This is an attack on the rights of companies here, and in the past Republicans would've been appalled to hear the government is getting involved in capitalism and business. But no -- they're all just sitting around and complaining.

I'm against Twitter / Facebook / Instagram (etc) censoring, but they do have a right to do as it is their platform. If you don't like it - MAKE A NEW PLATFORM - DON'T GET BIG GOVERNMENT INVOLVED.

You are such a poser. You don't agree with conservative/republican ideas at all. You are constantly agreeing with all the most extremist leftist opinions here. No one needs to bend over backward to justify the logic of this executive order, it makes perfect sense and it is something the people have been screaming for him to do since 2016, the first time they tried and failed to silence his constituency.

I see, so companies have human rights, and humans, well fuck their rights, letting them speak and treating these companies like all other publishers when they function as publishers hurts their feelings and violates the rights of that incorporation! You are such a tool and a poser.

Conservatives have tried to make their own platforms. You know what happens? They start attacking their hosting servers until they get dropped, they get demonized in the media as "supporting hate speech", they get their Cloudflare account shut down, they get their bank accounts closed, they get their emails shut down, and so on. This is nothing but fascism, but you keep telling me about your brilliant solutions Mr. "conservative" who is little more than a mouthpiece for liberal ideals with a red tie on.




I never suggested any regulation, I would be opposed to any, and I fear that specifically conservative notion could be the end of conservatives in this nation.  Conservatives are more likely to support the very freedoms that are currently being used and abused to paint them as evil racists.  That's a risk I'm willing to accept, however.

Trump is now demanding that FCC and other agencies come up with regulations. It's not a done deal that they will (FCC is supposed to be independent) but do you support what he's trying to do here?

I am more likely to support an effort by our government to educate the public, but that begs the question of where and how?  Schools?  Colleges?  Can we really expect some of the most liberal organizations in this country to support such a conservative notion as freedom of speech?  Many of these organizations are directly responsible for political correctness, which is a form of suppression of speech. 

The government can surely support certain education standards but conservatives tend to be against education spending.

Imagine if Jack Dorsey was a bible thumping homophobe, shadow banning Planned Parenthood, and transgender-rights groups.  We'd have riots in the streets. 

I doubt that. Most social media users (trigger warning - blatant stereotyping follows) don't really give a shit. Might explain why there's no right-wing social media (assuming the existing social media is leftist).

Conservatives tend to be against CENTRALIZED education spending, you know the kind used as a tool to indoctrinate children into leftist ideals, huge costs with increasingly poor results, one size fits all, centrally managed, from the top down, federal dictate level using the Soviet model of education kind of policies. This is of course opposed to the more efficient, more culturally and ideologically diverse, less costly and better results that come from state managed systems. No, but because we oppose you milking the nation dry with a failing system designed to indoctrinate children to your ideals, we are "against education."

Give me a break, you "wouldn't give a shit" my ass. You people form fucking mobs to swarm anyone who strays from your strict leftist indoctrination, and do everything in your power to not only silence them, but destroy their lives using any means necessary if they dare violate the ethos of the hive mind in any way whatsoever. You do it using classic media. You do it using social media. You do it using every level of the educational system. You do it by using people's livelihoods against them. In every case the ends justify the means, all the while shrieking "NAZI!" as you spread your totalitarian ideals by any means available. You keep pretending like you don't care though.




I think some sort of regulations are inevitable.  I'm not sure what it will look like, but I think it would have to be a long process and include some sort of agreement with many other countries. 

This EO is a political stunt, but say Trump gets re elected and finds a way to navigate or circumvent the courts and gain the power to actually control social media sites on his own without any actual legislation, why wouldn't they just relocate to another country?  If that happened, then what?  I guess they could sanction them?  The great MAGA firewall?



Actual Conservatives^^

Either the US regulates social media, or through the lack of regulation, foreign countries will regulate it anyway. This is something that needed to happen a LONG time ago, even if it is regulation to preempt foreign regulation. We shouldn't let American institutions, and systems created and funded by Americans be hijacked by foreign entities and be used to violate American freedoms and ideals. They can relocate all they like, this is still their primary market, that means they play by American rules.

Actual conservatives my ass. You want to define what facts are, now you want to define what conservatives are too eh? Why not just get it over with and define yourself as the richest king in the world and retire to enjoy your vast wealth?




Totally a political event, he's trying to convince his supporters that the media is against him again and they're trying to censor him. I know this will go well with his base - most things do - but I'm unsure on how moderates are going to feel about this.

I highly doubt that the coal miners in WV, the former factory workers in the rust belt, or the people that are suffering from the Coronavirus really care about his spat on Twitter. They'd much rather that Trump focus his resources and time on things that will help them.

Hoping for no new regulations. Last thing gov needs is more regulations.

He doesn't need to convince his supporters, his ACTUAL supporters have been screaming for him to take action against social media bias since 2016, and he has done virtually nothing. They also experience the censorship, they don't need convincing, he is lagging behind what they want. Of course as an "actual conservative" you have experienced this yourself right? I doubt a West Virginian coal miner much enjoys being stripped of having the ability to have their own voice while anyone to the left of Mao gets to. As a "real" fake conservative, you underestimate how much actual conservatives value free speech.
420  Other / Politics & Society / Re: If you don't like something the solution is more regulation on: May 30, 2020, 01:05:50 PM
I just explained why, but you enjoy being full of shit and pretending like I didn't anyway.

I'm just asking since you seem to have... uhm... unique knowledge on the subject so you should know the answers, like who the criminals are, what crimes they've committed, why haven't they been prosecuted, how is Trump going to avoid legal challenges to his EO, etc.

burn everything down and pretend you are freedom fighters while you literally destroy freedoms in the name of corporate behemoths trying to interfere in our elections.

I doubt anyone here is a big fan of Twitface. Personally for all I care the big social media sites could disappear tomorrow and I would hardly notice. They also have resources to fight the government's overreach or to comply with ludicrous bureaucracy. This attempt to overturn Section 230 is more likely to have a devastating effect on smaller sites and potential competition. But why should we care as long as Trump can tweet.

Also look up "literally". You literally don't know what it means.

Of course it is going to be challenged, but he has a solid legal basis to stand on. Holding them to the same standards all other publishers are held to is not "over reach". Section 230 was created when the internet was a new thing, and it was an industry in its infancy. Now these corporate behemoths abuse this overly broad grey area carved out for them with rights granted, but no matching responsibilities enforced. There is a simple solution to the smaller sites problem, simply define these new restrictions as only applying to operations which pass a certain user base threshold. This approach is used in other legislation. Of course you don't care about any of this as long as only the people you agree with can tweet, or have any access whatsoever to the necessities of communicating in the modern world. Literally, yes, literally.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ... 606 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!