Slashdot Mirror
Twitters Says It Will Ban Trump If He Breaks Hate-Speech Rules (qz.com)
Twitter has made a serious effort as of late to limit hate speech on its social media site, especially after Election Day where "biased graffiti, assaults and other incidents have been reported in the news." The company now faces President-elect Donald Trump, who has used Twitter for the past 18 months as a megaphone for his views and rants, which many would consider as "hate speech." According to the American Bar Association, hate speech is "speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or other traits." Quartz reports: While Trump's deceptive tweets may not violate Twitter's rules against harassment, threats and "hateful conduct," Twitter is still keeping an eye on his account for more egregious offenses. This week, the company told Slate it would consider banning key government officials, even the president, if its rules against hate speech or other language were violated. "The Twitter Rules prohibit violent threats, harassment, hateful conduct, and multiple account abuse, and we will take action on accounts violating those policies," a spokesperson wrote. Twitter confirmed with Quartz that everyone, including government officials, were subject to the policy: "The Twitter Rules apply to all accounts," a spokesman wrote. Trump may not have crossed that line yet, but he hasn't exactly refrained from making incendiary claims. Most recently, he claimed that Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who allegedly carried out an attack injuring 11 students at Ohio State University, "should not have been in our country." Artan was a legal permanent U.S. resident, whose family had fled Somalia for Pakistan in 2007. He arrived in the States in 2014.
Not hate
SJWs versus the US government. I wonder who will win?
Actually I agree with Trump with this one. This guy should not be in our country. He obviously hated it. So he should go live in a Muslim country, like Somalia or Pakistan. Love it or leave it. And stand the fuck up for the anthem too, you aren't being oppressed.
He's already broken hate speech rules repeatedly for basically his entire campaign. What alternate world are we living in here, where we're now pretending he did otherwise?
if it's hate speech that @jack agrees with. @jack is a hypocritical asshole and everyone knows it.
twitters says does theys?
Bans solves everything!
And they wonder why Trump won?
Twitter facing an IRS audit and SEC scrutiny in 3... 2... 1...
twitter can ban whoever is wants its a company that sells a proprietary service.
Being welcomed to a country you are not citizen of is not a human right. We can consider pros and cons to ourselves vs humanitarian benefits of admitting a particular immigrant of from a particular country where terrorism and other crime is more common than in US.
Refusing to have a rational discussion on this subject without accusations of hate and racism is how we got Trump.
There's no such thing as hate speech if you have free speech. STFU and do something useful.
after they silenced us for four hundred years. We also need to do it for hundreds of years to make-up for how they be.
How refreshing!
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Time to short the stock, picking up a political fight with POTUS is extremely unwise.
Wouldn't Trump just start his own Twitter?
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Ah, yes. Let's ban, ban, ban on our way to obscurity.
The next thing to remember is to put next things next.
On the one hand, hate speech, censorship, and the limits of Presidential power are all very serious topics.
On the other hand, President Trump getting banned from Twitter and watching the resulting tantrum would be beyond hilarious.
I stole this Sig
He's already broken hate speech rules repeatedly for basically his entire campaign. What alternate world are we living in here, where we're now pretending he did otherwise?
I'm anxious to hear the left's comprehensive rules that identify hate speech in a non-partisan way. Rules that clearly delineate unbridled hatred (to be banned) from opposing political views (to be discussed).
You guys keep pounding on how every slight and subtle thing Trump does is wrong, how about showing us your vision of how things should be?
Note that illegal speech has a fairly clear and specific definition, along with examples, and has been vetted through the court system. Saying "all abortionists should be killed" is not illegal, but saying "abortionist John Doe should be killed on Tuesday outside his house in Durham" constitutes a threat.
Go ahead, shoot holes in the first amendment and get the big companies to enforce your safe spaces. Your ends always justify your means.
All you leftists have is anger and hate.
Use it to take out the first amendment.
hate speech is "speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or other traits.
Everything is hate speech? Awesome.
It occurs to me that, while a company shouldn't necessarily advocate for open harassment of its users, it needs to apply the policy equally if it is to be taken seriously.
Take, for example, the radical feminist Clementine Ford. She has repeatedly engaged in blatant anti-male harassment and is known to then cry wolf when a man responds with anti-female harassment and had a man fired from his job for his comment. Yet, for some reason, Clementine Ford's account is still miraculously active. No matter what Trump said he did or didn't grab, this woman should be off Twitter permanently by that same policy.
This is a pattern that repeats over and over. As it is obvious that Twitter is engaging in selective enforcement, they are not only slowly alienating a substantial portion of their user base for the minority of vocal SJWs, they are threatening their own safe harbor provisions for anything else that goes on Twitter such as terrorist communication or other criminal activity. That translates to fewer users and significant financial risk for operating as they currently do.
The real question is: why are the shareholders not demanding Dorsey's resignation for these policies? Mentioning Trump is a complete non-sequitur and clickbait for Salon's liberal slant. More importantly, it indicates that they are defocused from the real goal of shareholder returns and preserving shareholder value. The tail can't wag the dog any more, and it has to belong to the same animal in any case. Either Twitter curates content consistently or they get out of that business and respond only to complaints of criminal and terrorist activity; otherwise, this half-way house will fall on itself.
Not like he needs another box of ammo but what the hell; they're free!
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
I can't find confirmation about his citizenship status, just a comment from a 'U.S. official who was not supposed to talk about the case, but did so anonymously'.
Why is this so hard to confirm/release? We used to fear creating a "national citizen database", but lo and behold, we now have one without our permission or oversight.
This is how you marginalize yourself into oblivion. Progressive echo chambers like Twitter are why Trump won and why the Democrat party continues to circle the drain. As for Twitter - the sooner they run themselves out of business, the better. Maybe they'll take their idiotic hashtags with them. Here's a couple:
#Trump2020 #Trump2024
Trump is making Obama look like a very good statesman.
This is getting good!
Huh. I though Clinton said ~1/4 actual voters were deplorable. At least one reasonable interpretation of that is "deserving contempt, wretched". That's hate speech directed at a significant minority. I will notify Twitter and expect they will do the needful shortly.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure SJW's will still be free to call every Trump support a racist, sexist, homphobe. And Black Lives Matter supporters will still be able to post whatever vile shit they please about those evil white people. But the second someone dares post "#alllivesmatter" or uses the term "illegal immigrants" it's HATE SPEECH!!!!!!!!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
18 months ago when he started his candidacy?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This all reminds me of junior high school playground issues.
Trump is doing a fine example of leading the nation by slap fights and hissy fits. Name calling, slander & innuendos.
Everything America stands for. Nutless cocksuckers!
Isn't he great?
He's going to make everything just SOOO great!
I support Twitter having the choice to make any rules they want within the law.
And all of its users are free to stop using their service once they have so many rules that it becomes a stifling echo chamber of oppression 'for your own good of course because everyone needs protection'.
And lastly i'm thankful for a free market where all kinds of competing services can take up the slack when Twitter engineers their own failure.
So, Twitter, by threating these users based on their traits, is itself engaging in politically incorrect "hate speech." They'd better just shutter the windows.
What ever happened to "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?" All you SJWs, here's a fact - you have no right to not be offended. Learn to live with it.
(oops, I guess that's "hate speech," since I just insulted those who would claim offense)
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The courts (a branch of government) enforces contracts. A contract that makes someone a slave is unenforceable. Likewise, a contract that tries to block hate speech should be unenforceable. (I do support filters and block lists so that users can choose not to see certain content, of course.)
If a site wants to protect SJW, faiths, cults, theocracies, monarchies, celebrities and their staff thats fine.
Anyone who enjoys freedom after speech will just move to really great sites that fully support freedom of speech.
Freedom is a brand that sells globally and attracts the best users.
Moving from freedom to ever more control, more SJW, more bans will just result in less users. Word will spread about better sites without bans and more much fun.
Freedom supporting sites will trend.
Becoming a site to post if your a SJW, faith or someones "staff" pushing a brand, cult or name might seem like a nice policy. Its also very boring.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Hate speech seems to be relative to whom you're speaking.
Ban him now. Get it over with.
If I know Trump, he may very well purposefully get himself banned into order to push some sort of policy on social media (I hope for the better). I can see him doing this with his flag burning comment, I'm like 80% gut-feeling sure he is trying to get leftists to re-believe in free-speech. I say this because I use this tactic to change the opinions of my friends all the time. You have to let them create the arguments and come to conclusions themselves - it's the only way to 'deprogram'. I just love going on FB and seeing my SJW friends defending free speech and posting articles with in-depth analysis of why it exists and why it is important. It's beautiful, trust me.
Twitter says it doesn't tolerate "hateful conduct". That's pretty vague.
I think US borders should be guarded so that people can only come here legally. Does Twitter consider that statement hateful?
Does Twitter consider showing pictures of the US flag on Cinco de Mayo hateful? These Americans were called "Racist a–holes” for flying the American flag in the US on Cinco de Mayo at a school. At the school,
officials had banned the practice to avoid violence threatened by Hispanic students celebrating Cinco de Mayo. The controversy developed in 2010, when school officials ordered students not to wear U.S. flag-themed shirts on the Mexican holiday. The ban has been upheld by a federal appeals court.
Does a picture of someone wearing a Trump hat "interrupt ... operations"?
If you say the words "he", "she", "him" and "her", are you being hateful because those words make gay people feel "marginalized"?
The last three examples are extreme, but they illustrate my point. Twitter has to be careful not to ban political statements because they don't agree with the statements. They should ban statements only if the author is trying to incite violence.
Please be aware the following groups are exempt from this:
* Men
* Straight People
* White people
* Conservatives
Seriously, why is this news?
Kind of like Hillary calling a whole bunch of people a "basket of deplorables" based on who they vote for? Or Hillary accusing all white people of being racist?
If Twitter wants to reduce hate speech, they can start by kicking of Hillary Clinton and Anita Sarkeesian off the platform.
I refuse to call them liberals because there's nothing liberal about the left anymore. What the fuck even happened? It's like every single leftist in the country became a petty wanna-be tyrant looking to censor any and every opinion that triggers them, which is basically anything that they disagree with. Now this would be amusing if it was just limited to wide eyed college aged jerkoffs, but it seems that recently the majority what used to be the free web has gone this way. What the fuck is the matter with all these dipshits coming out of the silicon valley these days?
If you give them room it will never stop. "Hate speech" is a scam, behind every proponent of censoring "hate speech" or "fake news" is someone wanting to control what political opinions people are allowed to voice, and what narratives are allowed on the news.
Twitter is controlled by NAZI snowflakes and other sore losers with a serious case of butt-hurt.
GOP has been playing a clever mind-game with voters that's mostly worked. One of GOP's most important constituents, business, want to keep the status quo of cheap workers who have no practical legal protection. Therefore companies pay (legally bribe) GOP to look the other way.
Further, one of the best ways to discourage illegal immigration is to audit businesses and their workers. However, business bribes politicians to avoid that solution also. Just focusing on the borders doesn't address the incentive problem. Trump has also barely mentioned business auditing.
However, GOP blames the problem on Democrats instead of themselves by emphasizing so-called sanctuary cities and O's refusal to summarily boot undocumented children and teens out. GOP gives the problem lip-service but not law-making service. (Sanctuary cities are a complicated issue; it's not just a matter of simply "enforcing" the law, as GOP implies.)
GOP had the ideal opportunity under W to pass comprehensive immigration legislation because they controlled both houses. But, they punted.
Even Ann Coulter called out the GOP on these behaviors, in addition to Democrats. I will agree, however, that both parties are at fault for sitting on the issue and making excuses. Trump may better address the border issue, but still seems to ignore the biz auditing side.
Table-ized A.I.
It's really simple. You can say Trump's a piece of shit because he's a grifter who doesn't pay his contractors for honest work done. You can't say it's because his Bavarian heritage makes him prone to deceit because they share a border with the Dutch (naturally, Bavaria isn't anywhere near the Netherlands).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
...and tell Twitter to eat shit. All of his followers would follow him to Gab.
by encouraging them to patrol their neighborhoods looking for Muslims _is_. Trump did that, among other things, during the campaign.
And there was a rational discussion. Several folks (notably Jon Oliver) pointed out very rationally that immigrants from terrorists nations are incredibly well vetted. You'd be more likely to see Dutch terrorists sneaking in with wooden shoe bombs than an actual terrorists sneaking through. But all that was lost on the Fox news crowd.
And we got Trump because the Blacks and Latinos couldn't be assed to come out and vote for Hilary. Trump got the 60 million Romney voters from 2012. 5 million of the 65 that showed up for Obama stayed home. For fucks sake people, you don't have to like it but when the consequences are that obvious get the hell out and _vote_. You've got 2 years. Assuming Trump's justice department hasn't locked you all up to fill their private prisons then don't screw it up again.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Twitter is for sale for what is chump change for Trump. They are forcing him to buy them
Twitter is just mad because despite their best efforts Hillary still lost.
Twitter would totally buy his base to vote for him again in doing that. They would be the evil conspiracy out to get the reformer.
I'm sure that the "old white people" who voted Trump into office will believe such an assertion.
Yes, making a target of the President might be good for publicity among millenials who already use the service, but it might not be as good for the baby-boomers who own the stock.
1st amendment issue
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Twitter has a vested interest in Network Neutrality. How about No Network Neutrality, no twitter for Trump. Or, it could be easy enough for them to setup trump slow lane until he gets why its important. Maybe like, only 10 chars/sec when reading his tweets. Help us twitter, your our only hope!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And for those of you who guess it, isn't it funny that you're able to predict this outcome?
Does that feel right to you? Do you think that decent people ever feel good about seeing someone pre-judged based on the color of their skin?
Is a perfectly acceptable example of free speech used to expose the struggle of poor african americans against the white oppressors.
On the other hand saying 'I hate black people' is hate speech and has no place in today's world.
I'm sick of the virtue signalling from Twitter and the SJWs running the show now. The best way to deal with anyone throwing a temper tantrum is to ignore them. What better way than to just delete the app altogether? My life will probably thank me for it anyway.
Gab and other free speech alternatives will be the real beneficiaries.
Twitter's stock already is in the toilet so this latest dummy spit is just the final flush.
Oh man this is going to be great. They ban Trump and he is going to fuck them up good. Can't wait until the IRS and SEC suddenly find all kinds of violations.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Trump did say he wanted to open libel laws for a reconsideration. If they call his speech bigoted, he might have a test libel case. Oh, and he is the one who gets to nominate the next justice of SCOTUS.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
According to the American Bar Association, hate speech is "speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or other traits."
Hah! Even the American Bar Association agrees that speech calling for a ban on certain types of speech, is hate speech! Because as a firm supporter of the concept of Free Speech, calling for a ban on any speech is an insult to me, it offends me, and frankly, I feel threatened by anyone proposing such bans.
Check and mother-fucking mate, ya goits.
Nice strawman: Nobody ever claimed #alllivesmatter or "illegal immigrants" was hate speech. The hate speech was in claiming people to be inferior and not entitled to the same rights as the rest of us because of their skin color or gender.
I don't agree with "hate speech" at all, zero percent support for that bullshit.....
BUT, we have a first amendment. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws.
So screw TWITTER, If I was Trump I would not only abandon TWITTER, but I would rule my cabinet is banned from using it. TWITTER wants to make a CENSORED platform? Fine, go f$%^ yourself.
What happened to the ability for use to IGNORE hate speech?
The guys running gab are cackling with glee at the prospect of becoming the sole provider for the President's micro-updates.
See that "Preview" button?
Facebook is for old people, Twitter for a certain segment of the left. Both groups will let it go with their cold, dead hands. The platforms could literally translate each of their posts into Urdu shit porn and they'd still keep logging in.
I honestly only had a Twitter account (aside from tweeting my shits for a time in 2009) for about 3 months this year watching Milo Yiannopoulos troll the shit out of people. After he got banned, there was no point in even going on that cesspool. But the stupid family still uses FB so...
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Yeah, this asshole should have left instead, but to consider that basis for that asinine "love it or leave it" line is just so wrong. You're using those lost lives for your own pathetic agenda.
He hasn't done that already, numerous times? And you're only just now saying 'cut it out'?
Better be careful Twitter, you take away his favorite soap box, he'll take away your citizenship!
Thank you for sharing the information very useful. It is very pleasant to read this article from your website. Obat Ambeien Tradisional Herbal Pengobatan Cara Alami http://obatambeien.agaricpro.w...
If Twitter banned Trump, he'll move to a service that everyone that wants to report on what he says and does will need to use. If that happens, it's goodbye Twitter.
Is it just me, or is it starting to feel like we have an internet troll for a President-elect?
A clean home invites immunodeficiency.
Perhaps we should focus on thickening our collective skins, rather than muting a few folks who make us momentarily uncomfortable?
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
A significant portion of twitter said, says and will say that #alllivesmatter is racist / hate speech.
Fuck off, SJW.
Why are all the Trump posts anonymous cowards? Is that you Donald. Looking for a new outlet? (Trust me, try Facebook)
The ban on Nazi symbology in Germany will cause the rise of a Fourth Reich almost surely. The memory just has to get a little further distant, and the right mix of economic distress and/or military threat, some demagogue will use its taboo status to his advantage. It's a natural reaction to an unnatural ban. Banning names and symbols doesn't make their impact or ideas go away - if anything it keeps them more in memory.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Trump is not. He grabs pussies.
More seriously, he has tools to deploy to make a company's life miserable.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
The GOP wants bakeries to be able to reject potential customers based on their religious beliefs, yet they want twitter to be forced to broadcast the angry ramblings of Trump just because he's Trump? The double standard is staggering. I haven't seen anyone preventing Trump from hiring someone two come up with their own site similar to Twitter; if he's as wealthy as he wants everyone to believe he should have no difficulty hiring brilliant programmers to write something that people would want to use even more than Twitter.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Trump says he will nationalize Twitter if they ban him.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Ok...
Dude, you are confused. It is neither Trump nor "trumpers", who threaten your right to freely show disrespect. It is Twitter!
It is Twitter, who'll shut you up, should you, in their opinion, engage in "speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or other traits."
Unless, of course, the "race" is White, "religion" — Christianity (or, better yet, Scientology), and "sexual orientation" — "straight male"...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Violent attacks on border patrol agents up 200% from last year.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
If any of you are working there, hurry the hell up.
"Censorship is the tool of those who have the need to hide actualities from themselves and from others."
Charles Bukowski
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
You might as well say "according to the Powerpuff Girls, donuts are...".
"Hate speech" is not an actual legal concept, and the ABA is not an actual bar association.
vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
How many more can we expect?
Same for that guy in Colorado who attacked Planned Parenthood, right? Oh wait, he's white.
Maybe it's time to classify Twitter as Common Carrier and stop them from their politically biased manipulation of the communication stream.
All he has to do is tweet out something that is just enough to get twitter to ban him, but that 90% of Americans think is not offensive. Twitter will take the bait, ban Trump, and then look like idiots doing it.
Hate me ? Mebby my repulsion from you is perfectly rational ... mebby part emotional. At any rate it's my business ... my thoughts and only neo-Stalinist jewboi agitprops oppose my acting on any of them. Protected groups = jewboi vote-herding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
Trump is switching to Gab anyway so no big deal for the twatter.
EAT MY ASS!
Simple solution: Free passports for citizens. Cost: About 300,000,000 x $140 42 billion (thousand million) at no discount and assuming 300 million citizens, (who being Americans haven't left the country...joke). ref: https://travel.state.gov/conte...
You're confusing the price of a passport with the cost of making one. And making a national ID program would have its own problems and conflicts.
Use for voting and getting a job. Permanent residents use green cards for jobs. Complicated remains complicated.
We already require documentation for employment, hasn't made that much of a dent, sorry.
Rural electrification program? Hasn't electrified anybody in 50 years IIRC $800 million/year. Rural power install is full price...10k$/pole (more years ago than I want to think about).
It's the Rural Utilities Service, providing support for electric, sewer, water, phone, and it is still providing grants and loans to keep those systems working, reduce costs, and improve service levels, so don't assume the job is done.
https://www.rd.usda.gov/about-rd
Learn more.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What about @RealDonaldTrump and @POTUS, for the next four years at least Donald Trump will control both accounts. Future Presidents will probably be in a similar position. Is Twitter making an exception for @POTUS and the personal account of the current and future US Presidents?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There's a type of speech that's allegedly "hate speech" that is probably better known as "rude speech". Sure, someone who says it is an ass. Banning it in the alleged land of free speech seems a bit too draconian. Better to let someone say their rude thing, and then tell them they're an ass (with reasons why). That seems more in line with the philosophy of the land of free speech.
Is it really a mere threat when he's the President of the United States and he actually goes and carries it out?
Fu# twitter and this post...
CNN, ABC, NBC, the AP, and the NYT all block the words "illegal immigrant" from their news. It's in their style guides now. The reasoning I read from their ombudsman is "they don't like to be called that." It's like Orwell in real time.
...have ALLLLLLL their taxes and things right up to date and beyond reproach !
Seriously, how fucking stupid ARE these guys ?
The sooner they throw a "MySpace", the better !
He should have them jailed on tax evasion if they ban him.
Or just have some friendly Russians fix the situation.
Because that's how you get audited. Just think about how many people were mysteriously audited under the Clinton administration. Do you not think that Trump would pull the same stunt?
Not a good look for a company that's looking to be acquired by a bigger fish.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Remember folks, twitter has the right to ban whomever they want, it's a private business not a government run service. That said, this will drive people away in droves and hopefully to other and better competitors. This in turn will make it's hyper-impossibly-inflated-multi-billion-dollar value plummet and, if we're lucky, close it's doors forever. In a short time twitter will be just a memory of a website full of asinine banter and insufferable idiots.
I welcome Twitter killing Twitter. I would say "I'm closing my account" but fortunately I never saw the value in creating one in the first place.
Some people aren't even that subtle. For example, take Manveer Heir the openly racist developer at Bioware who makes no secret how much he hates all white people by broadcasting it all over Twitter. This is really the problem, they only consider it racism if it's hate speech directed at certain select groups.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
"If you don't agree you can go fuck yourself you stupid cunt." fuck off twitter private property if you don't want to respect their rules. Personally I see nothing lost, but I support 100& their right to censor everything they want. For years I have stated the danger of censorship was not anymore government in the west, but private company which overtake all communication channel and thus can censor far more effectively, without repercussion. I was pretty much ignored by everybody I know because their media cherie could do no wrong. Now I get to tell you all fuck off , and I told you so.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
These feminists and SJWs are offended by everything. You cannot speak your mind any more, neither can you say the truth, because you will always find someone who is offended by your mere presence.
Replace Twitter with something that enables free speach!
#freemilo
> free to call every Trump support a racist, sexist, homphobe.
Just because he is one. He has demonstrated that to us with his acts and speech.
It's like calling Abdul Razak Ali Artan a murderer. Well, he is.
This just shows how deluded some Trumpites are.
Unless he says "fuck white people" or "kill all white people". You can do that with impunity on Twitter. Their hypocrisy knows no boundries.
Yes they will be free to post that, just like all the alt-rights, white supremacists, free speech warriors, pickup artists, neomasculinists, anti-feminists, neo-Nazis and other will be able to post their hateful shit too. Twitter doesn't care about hate speech, it only cares about harassment, incitement and threats. Like the law in the US does.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The hate speech was in claiming people to be inferior ...
What does that have to do with hate? Most people don't hate their inferiors.
not entitled to the same rights as the rest of us because of their skin color or gender.
Whats the point of having the right to have babies if you don't have a womb?
If you are a racist, calling you what you are isn't hate speech. If you don't want to be called racist, don't be a racist.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure SJW's will still be free to call every Trump support a racist, sexist, homphobe. And Black Lives Matter supporters will still be able to post whatever vile shit they please about those evil white people. But the second someone dares post "#alllivesmatter" or uses the term "illegal immigrants" it's HATE SPEECH!!!!!!!!
Um no, but you keep believing the hype...
Love it or leave it. And stand the fuck up for the anthem too, you aren't being oppressed.
"Love it or leave it" is what privileged fools say when they are actively sticking their fingers in their ears so they don't have to hear the truth from people who are being abused by our government. There are plenty of people who genuinely ARE being oppressed in this country. Sometimes in subtle ways, sometimes in very blatant ones. Ask any black person if they feel oppressed by the police. Ask a person with brown skin how easy it is to get a bank loan. Compare the number of unarmed minorities who get shot by police to the number of white people. Ask women how things are going with that equal pay for equal work.
I am a US Citizen because I was born here. I didn't ask to be born nor did I ask to be a citizen. Love isn't unconditional. The notion that I should automatically love the country if it is doing things to actively harm me or things I care about is just nonsense. There are lots of people who are oppressed. Just because YOU aren't being oppressed doesn't mean shit to someone who is. If they want to sit down to make a statement during the playing of the national anthem then they are doing EXACTLY what the first amendment is for. So is burning a flag. Free speech isn't about what is comfortable for you to hear. It is making a statement that tells what they think without harming anyone.
Bann the communists from twitter and go to https://gab.ai which has free speech!!!
F twitter fn pieces of shit they are, 1984 police .
Lets hope they bann trump so we can all go to https://gab.ai or another alternative which has free speech
Yeah, I'm pretty sure SJW's will still be free to call every Trump support a racist, sexist, homphobe.
If you supported Trump then you supported his position on those issues whether or not you care about them yourself. You don't get a free pass to endorse him only for the non-bigoted portions of what he stands for. It's a package deal. The same would be true for any other candidate you vote for and their respective positions. Hillary Clinton stood for a different package deal, some of it unpleasant in a different way. Own what you did. So if you voted for Trump you voted in favor of racism, sexism, and the rest of the his hateful positions. If you think those things don't matter then that says something rather unpleasant about you.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Being welcomed to a country you are not citizen of is not a human right.
True but let's not pretend that there isn't a HUGE component of racism driving the discussion. Let's not pretend that uninformed religious tribalism plays no role.
Refusing to have a rational discussion on this subject without accusations of hate and racism is how we got Trump.
You have that backwards. Pretending that there isn't hate and racism and failing to point it out is why we can't get a rational discussion. There IS racism and hate from those who oppose immigration. If someone is bigoted and you say nothing about it then you are effectively endorsing their ideas. You don't have to be an ass about pointing it out but remaining silent about the mistreatment of others is to condone that mistreatment. The people who are freaking out most (white conservatives primarily) about immigrants aren't interested in having a calm rational informed discussion about the topic and never have been.
If we really wanted to do something to reduce illegal immigration from Mexico and central America then the best solution would be to help those countries improve their lot in life. People come here for jobs and opportunity. That is why you don't see a lot of illegal Canadian immigrants - they have jobs. Fix Mexico's economy and the problem will go away. But instead we have a bunch of scared white people talking nonsense about building thousand mile long walls to keep out the people who are just coming here to earn an honest living. If we helped our neighbors instead of trying to keep them away we could actually solve some of these problems without wasting money on border security that won't secure our border.
Well I just removed all my accounts and relatives are ditching them as well. I have no time for any company that supports this political correct bullshit. In fact I would go so far as wanting to support any company that takes a stand against these fucktards.
Track your fitness and strength gains with www.trackmytraining.net
A 2009 study of Wikipedia found that most weasel words in it could be divided into three categories:[14]
Numerically vague expressions (for example, "some people", "experts", "many")
Use of the passive voice to avoid specifying an authority (for example, "it is said")
Adverbs that weaken (for example, "often", "probably")
Yeah, I'm pretty sure SJW's will still be free to call every Trump support a racist, sexist, homphobe
SJW? You say it as if it is an insult; I think having the courage and decency to stand up for what you know is right, being willing to put yourself on the line to speak out for the weakest and working towards a fairer and better society, are things to be proud of.
It would be easy for me to just go "Well, if you don't want to be called racist, don't be one"; but if you feel that your views are always being rejected, despite being well thought out, perhaps it is something in the way you present them? Fire and brimstone doesn't persuade - it just alienates. That is why I try to stick to measured arguments and facts; not that I always succeed, but when I do, people quite often listen and sometimes even agree. And sometimes I have to change my mind too, if I realise that my views are wrong.
He already has violated. Multiple times.
Because there's this tremendous innovation that you've probably not heard of, it's so gosh-danged new. Called adoption. (Not that there aren't also lots of other options, too)
His club, his rules. I thought you right-wing folks were in favour of property rights?
Everyone knows that it HATES conservatives, and violates its own rules giving Liberals much more lee-way to attack and spam hate-speech against Conservatives. As such it could be considered as a political organization, and I'm sure that a motivated DOJ could go after them like an attack dog. I would LOVE to see that happen to the point that they are stiffled with reams of bureaucracy when they ban someone needing to justify it, and allowing the person banned to file law-suits against them. (Just like law-suits are filed against bakeries for NOT baking a cake... If you go against Liberal-speak.)
It was. It is the past now.
I think having the courage and decency to stand up for what you know is right, being willing to put yourself on the line to speak out for the weakest and working towards a fairer and better society, are things to be proud of.
It would be something to be proud of, if working towards a fairer and better society were actually what SJW's were doing. But most people's idea of a fairer and better society isn't one in which the fix for discrimination is more discrimination.
A better society would be one in which everybody were united together, not one in which we continue to hate each other but just get to trade-out periodically on who gets to shit on whom.
but if you feel that your views are always being rejected, despite being well thought out, perhaps it is something in the way you present them?
No, they're not always being rejected. A majority of people in pretty much every state between California and New York seems to agree with them just fine. It's really only a problem when Silicon Valley and mainstream media become oblivious to the fact that these states exist (and aren't drinking the Koolaid, apparently).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Something tells me that a lying whiner like yourself has been called out on your own racist, sexist and homophobic behaviour too many times.
Alllivesmatter IS racist, and was created when inbreds like yourself didn't want to hear about actual complaints BLM was addressing. You'd rather lie about them and blame them for your own racist actions.
Just like the term SJW was created by hypocrites like yourself that don't want to deal with those that call you out and maske you face the negative consequences of your shitty actions/speech.
And yes, depending on the context 'illegal immigrants' is used...it CAN be hate speech.
Now you have something else to whine about, hypocrite.
Why hate "inferiors"? As a citizen of the European Union I don't hate non-Europeans. I pity them for not being real humans. Yes, I believe they would be better off dead, but I will follow the instructions of the European Commission, as I always did and will always do.
Adoption is almost extinct around here, aside from relatives of orphans, partly because of legal abortion, and partly because of birth-parents rights (so a chain of foster homes instead - "rights" can be bad for others. )
By that logic, all racial epithets should be allowed, and anyone who complains about it should be told to just hide their race while they are online.
So Trump with his "hate speech" will be out, but ISIS will be still allowed to recruit... get your $hit together Twitter...
I could maybe accept that argument if Trump were saying things that were truly racist, sexist, etc
If you don't understand that Trump has said and done HUGELY racist and sexist things then you don't understand what the words mean.
I'm pretty sure you don't appreciate people on the right labeling all Clinton supporters as "baby murderers" because Hillary Clinton said she supports abortion, do you?
If you'll notice I mentioned that you have to own ALL of the positions of the person you vote for. That applies to anyone.
That said your example is utter nonsense and it certainly isn't an equivalent argument. If the fetuses and embryos were actually babies they might have a point. They aren't. They are a fetus or an embryo and they don't become a baby until they are actually born. Until the fetus is sufficiently developed to survive outside the mother there is no credible argument that they are a baby. Until then they are nothing more than a mass of growing cells little different from a cancer biologically speaking. Arguing against abortion and/or contraception is to argue that women have no right to control their reproductive system which is to argue that they are not allowed to control what happens to their body. It's an absurd infringement on a person's rights that we do not condone in almost any other circumstance. We can't even harvest organs from a dead person without their prior consent and yet we don't consider that murder despite the fact that there is a shortage of donor organs and the fact that people WILL die because of it. You can't have it both ways.
Twitter? That's still a thing?
Can we stop talking about 'hate speech'? This concept is so slippery it is close to meaningless. We have laws on freedom of speech, if you do not break those, carry on as normal. If you break them, then prosecution. If you do not like them, petition for changes. Otherwise, Twitter included, just be quite and let the world get on with business as usual.
...we can use 'social justice bullies' or 'cry-bullies', they're more accurate anyway.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Well, here it is. A man seeking gay wedding cakes at Islamic bakeries.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
The denial of free speech is the first act of tyranny. Jewish tyranny...
Since you're continuing to be obtuse about this, let me spell it out for you. Many gay couples want, and can, have children, through a multiplicity of routes, including adoption, surrogacy, complex family arrangements etc. Laws which would forbid this would be a bad thing. The right to have children thus matters, whether an individual has a womb or does not.
Yeah, sure they will. Absolutely, I totally believe fer sure that Twitter will block Trump.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go jump on my unicorn and hunt some snipe and leprechauns.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
It's a nonsense term to satisfy people who embrace identity politics who want to find an end-run around the first amendment.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Yeah, it's terrible being a white man in America these days. You only get 99% of the advantages, instead of the 100% you were used to.
...and define it in objective terms.
And I'm betting you have to accept the definition of the aggrieved party. And they can, surprisingly easily, convince most anyone that most anything can be defined, by them, as offensive, threatening, or insulting.
And that's the end of speech.
No, Twitter, you can do this and become irrelevant, but you cannot do it and retain significant credibility. Which is already at risk.
Reddit is well into this, being capricious in censorship, even editing speech rather than deleting it. And Reddit is reaping the rewards of this, being left either with a user base that is offensive to so many and appealing only to an insular group insufficient to support the service, or driving reasonable users away as they realize nothing on the site can be trusted.
I encourage Twitter, though. Finish the job. Kill your service. Suicide.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
From "The Twitter Rules"
if the reported behavior is one-sided or includes threats
The POTUS can prohibit immigration to the US for almost any reason. If the POTUS decides to post intent to do this via Twitter, it could conceivably violate the above rule.
So yes, Twitter is banning certain types of speech by creating user rules against certain types of speech.
That said, they would be utterly stupid to ban Trump. If he moves to another service, it will be very harmful to Twitter.
SJW? You say it as if it is an insult
You probably don't understand how "snowflake" can be an insult either. SJWs are just bigots of another color, they don't really care about fighting for others, they want to flip everyone over to how they want the world to be run and often it's no better (like the neo-feminists that really want a matriarchy instead of actual equality.)
Actual advocates of civil rights and equality don't wear a label or post to social media every time they are outraged for someone else.
Regarding the cake-baking, I had an answer to that question from a conservative that seemed insightful. The criterion they suggested was creativity. So one might be required to bake some sort of standard cake to order, but not be forced to do any custom decoration. It seems like a workable criterion but I'm a little wary of simple answers to complex questions. How much of a moral stake do you have in speech that someone else pays you to create? Twitter however isn't providing units of anything, they're providing a platform, and have no creative input into any of their content, so the comparison is invalid even though they're both free speech issues.
We all know the real issue with the Internet. It's not just Twitter and Facebook. Many people, when given the opportunity of pseudonymous free speech, will abuse it, often in ways that cause real harm. Twitter is legally required to prevent criminal speech (e.g. child porn), and other criminal acts. They have to moderate, and they can't do community moderation. If they moderate too lightly, they risk becoming 4chan, Whatever they do will draw criticism. And yes, their moderation will be influenced by their politics and morality. What's that saying, "show me a neutral moderator, and I'll show you beryllium"? Eh, close enough. Even if there were such a thing, though, the perception of neutral moderation is always going to be biased towards one's own interests. They're in a no-win situation. The problem is intractable, the means inadequate, and every action is wrong.
Having written all that in response to your comment, and notwithstanding the importance of the issues raised, this story is bunk. The Twitter statement was simply that their terms of service applied to all accounts, whereas Facebook said they'd take into account political considerations. The latter seems a little more weaselly to me; all things considered I'd rather have a company that takes an explicit moral stance on an issue rather than one that bends to political expediencies, but either way, this is rabble-rousing clickbait posing as news. Wake me up when it actually happens.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Gay? I was responding to a post mentioning gender. Did not realise you were talking about gays.
My point was that men and women are biologically different, and no amount of "rights" will change that.
It was a Monty Python reference, in case you missed that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"I think having the courage and decency to stand up for what you know is right"
You mean like the witch hunters did back in Salem? The problem with the SJW is their refusal to allow a trial, to allow evidence to be brought forth and the refusal to hear the other side. If you don't see the problem....well, I just view you as a dangerous vigilante.
"...working towards a fairer and better society, are things to be proud of."
i think that is the disconnect between what they think of SJW's and what you think of them.
If you want a better world, I hope you're donating to charities, money or time, or volunteering with habitat or something. you know actual work that actually helps people. walk for cancer, march of dimes etc. etc.
ranting on twitter doesn't count as "working towards a fairer and better society."
those protests after the election were hilarious. some people treated them as cry-ins... which is, adorbs? and other people chanted "not my president." which... yes he is. and still others walking around trying to flip cars.
meanwhile, I'm just sitting there, wondering what goal they're trying to achieve, how they think they'll achieve it, and why i find it all so hilarious?
Exactly, they hate them so they try to portray them as inferiors... they fear what will happen to them however when their "inferiors" stop fighting amongst themselves and instead go after the real scumbags who are destroying not just this country, but the world with their greed for power and wealth at the cost of everyone else's...
considering that Trump is those things, or at least campaigned that way,
and merely pointing them out is making a factual statement and not harassment....yes.
and if you were at all knowledgeable about the topic, rather than woefully ignorant as you seem to be,
you'd know that alllivesmatter is inherently racist, and meant to be.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Without condoning Trump Twitter is being mighty hypocritical here. Warning the President-Elect about hate crime while allowing "#popacop" There Twitter service has had its time, the less relevant service has been caving to the demands of censors and dictators everywhere.
Because of your electoral system you had the choice between an intellectual dwarf and a moral dwarf. You have chosen: we have had more than our fair share of both. You will survive no problem. I do not understand the doom sayers. America is bigger than that this. It is a great country that has has given more to world culture in 300 years than almost any other nation on Earth.
I am a white male. Based on my color and gender I feel offended by the statements of CNN, MSNBC, The Daily Show, SNL, ABC, NBC, CBS, all SJWs, Black Lives Matters and more.
Twitter should start there.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
http://www.trumpgolfdubai.com/
Who despises Muslims
Or is it only the poor ones ....
Well, somebody gotta report it, not gonna be fixed automagically for ya...
My god, liberals are the fucking whiniest piles of crap on the planet. Hypocrites to the last. The fact that they want to censor EVERYONE they disagree with isn't banning hate speech, it's banning SPEECH altogether.
Could these pathetic children be any less mature?
Pax Vobiscum
Well, if you listen to the SJW types, there can be no racism against "whites" or sexism against "males" or whatever, because those people have "power". Ask them to define what that is, and they will all cry about "privileged". Ask them to define their solution to "Privilege" and it is to enslave everyone at the lowest common denominator of social status, rather than trying to elevate everyone not yet there.
So the whole thing is nothing short of Reverse racism tied with white elitist guilt.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My God! Think of what could have happened if Twitter had let that man abuse their service for an entire presidential election. Why, it might have swayed enough illiterate morons into thinking he was a legitimate candidate with the backing of the people at Twitter.
Good thing Twitter is banning Trump before something really bad happens.
since you obviously think that the constitution only applies to people like yourself and their opinions.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
what makes you so special that you think you can control what they allow on their systems. You can spew your hate filled ignorance and lame attempts at playing the victim all you want. Just don't expect your sense of entitlement to allow you to do it on someone elses dime.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Openly racist? Hardly. The only vaguely racist thing in those links is the "White Tears" cup. He makes good points in most of those posts in fact...ironically, anyone who considers all of those posts to be "openly racist" is providing examples of why he's right.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
... if Twitter shut down it's entire system and all the twits went away. Or are they called tweets??
Twitter .. working to become the home of the endlessly offended.
Anyway, there are plenty of other electronic means for people to offer up their viewpoints. Perhaps Twitter itself could shut down and stop being the source of useless news articles announcing that some celebrity no one cares about had a meltdown that amounted to nothing in the grand scheme of things.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Why do democrats say they are against hate speech but support those that have it as part of their religion? The role model for Muslims (Muhammad) preaches violence and hate toward jews, gays, and non-believers. He also encourages terrorism, child weddings/rape, and wife beatings. Not exactly enlightening ideas. Many people around the world are indoctrinated into these primitive beliefs. Their prophet Muhammad is very consistent so there is no option to "opt out" for followers. To be muslim is to be like Muhammad.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So.... if YOU are offended by something, the response to whatever offends you is "love it or leave it"? But if someone else is offended by something, you think they are being overly sensitive and they should "love it or leave it"? You are aware of what hypocritical means, yes?
There is no law that states that you must stand up for the anthem. Don't like freedom of expression? It's a founding belief of our country, love it or leave it.
That's the thing about that stupid statement, it applies to you too. What is so funny about those people who talk about crybaby, snowflakes who got participation trophies (and other asinine phrases) - they are the people who bitch and moan the most. What do you mean I can't have a fully automatic rifle, that tramples on my 2nd amendment rights!!! Wahhhh Wahhhh. It's illegal. Love it or leave it. The government raised my taxes again!!! Vote next time. Love it or leave it. Marriage is between a man and a woman, the bible says so!!! It's the law.. love it or leave it.
Just say "love it or leave it" to yourself every single time you disagree with anything, and you'll start to realize how stupid it sounds.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
The job is done and all money is taken by rent seekers.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Social fail by Twitter. "Hate speech" means anything they disagree with and they, as well as Facebook, have done this to shut down free speech and oppress anyone who has an opinion differing from theirs. Bigot corporations.
It's so CUTE when you keep trying to pretend that you're still relevant! In fact, The Donald's delusional tweets were a gift to Twitter, they kept people still talking about you when you should already have gone the way of MySpace and AOL.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
You know, where you;re not allowed to criticise NK and their leader, or it's treason. Or those other fundie muslimist extremist countries that still have laws against free speech against either the country, the government, or the ruling class.
Very american of you.
"...speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color..." Then every last person that used the phrase "except white people" should be banned. Otherwise I could potentially sue for discrimination.
He really is an openly racist person.
That list of tweets is dripping with racism. If you don't believe me, try this experiment: Reverse all instances of "white" and "black" in his tweets and repost them. See how fast your account comes down. If someone started tweeting about "black tears" you can bet the shitstorm would be legendary.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
We live in a weird future.
The American Bar Association concluded:
"However, under the First Amendment, individuals do have a right to speech that the listener disagrees with and to speech that is offensive and hateful.
Think about it. It’s always easier to defend someone’s right to say something with which you agree. But in a free society, you also have a duty to defend speech to which you may strongly object."
Assault and battery.
Two charges often mentioned in news and police reports. Assault is making threats of bodily harm against someone. Battery is actually harming someone, whether you threaten them or not. The 1st Amendment does not protect assault or battery, but "offending" someone's feelings is neither.
Making offending words illegal speech puts ammunition into the hands of unstable people, who are often exploited by those with a "politically correct" agenda for the purposes of speech, thought and political control. That's what Facebook, Google and YouTube have and are doing. The owners and managers of all three corporations were "in the tank" for Hillary Clinton, and used several methods to silence opposition against her, calling Conservative view points "hate" speech. Very convenient. YouTube, after years of encouraging people to create and post video content for a share of the ad revenue, turned on those with Conservative content and demonetized them. Those videos didn't just suddenly stop drawing ad money, but Google greedily keeping ALL the revenue for itself, destroying the livelihood of some who depended entirely on ad revenues for income. When deliberate detrending, shadow banning, or even altering the content of posts on Facebook or Twitter didn't stop the opposition to Hillary those corporations deleted the accounts of the "offenders". Very Orwellian of them.
The Public Commons was, in historical times, the place where citizens of a community gathered to discuss and debate issues of the day. Being a public place everyone had free access and freedom to say what they wished, aside from assault or battery. Facebook, Twitter and Google/YouTube all began supporting free speech but ended up turning to evil and placing limits on what people could say that went beyond prohibiting that which is already illegal. Some, especially those who own the corporations, and those on the Left whom the corporations represent more than any other part of the political spectrum claim that being private corporations they do not have to honor the 1st Amendment. I disagree. ALL of the Bill of Rights applies to ALL Americans no matter where they are on every square inch of this country, regardless of who owns the soil. According to current political dogma it is a violation of the 1st Amendment for a Christian baker to NOT bake a cake for a gay couple, but it is NOT a violation of the 1st Amendment for Facebook Twitter or YouTube to censor or ban Conservatives. Both businesses depend on consumers from "off the street". An example of their double standard can be seen in a Twitter experiment testing the fairness of Twitters application of the censorship rules:
http://www.informationliberati...
In previous generations children were taught that "sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me". The lesson was "toughen up, the world is a dangerous place. Words will hurt you emotionally ONLY if you let them." Today, Social Justice "Warriors" rampage across our nation attacking people and destroying property, but if confronted in public places where their identity is not hidden behind bandannas, hoodies or balaclavas masks they retreat to their academic "safe places" to be coddled by their Marxist mentors.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
"The arrogance of white people faced with questions of race is unbelievable."
"White men hate being blocked on Twitter because it's the first time in their sad lives they've encountered someone not forced to listen."
"'Prejudice against white people' can't be a serious thing you are claiming. They don't even approach the same league awfulness."
"Yes, white person, please tell me MORE about how race works. I'll just sit here and listen attentively"
These are some of the examples from that link. You don't find these even "vaguely racist"? Try a search and replace 'white' -> 'black' and see if that clarifies the situation for you. If not, it is clear that the two sides of this debate do not have an agreed understanding of what the term "racist" means. We are all merely talking at each other without really performing any communication.
"what the government prosecutes as hate speech,"
There's no such constitutional authority for such actions.
Saying "I hate and wish all people with a certain skin color would die" may be offensive, but not prosecutable.
I'm sort of curious how these videos do not violate the YouTube TOS. Isn't this hate speech?
First the left said the right would limit your thought. But the only ones being persecuted these days are people who dare to be conservative. Like colleges taking down American flags that veterans died to hoist.
Second the left said the right would limit free speech. But I only see left-leaning tech companies pushing their agenda, like reddit censoring Trump because they dont agree with him politically. Or now Twitter doing the same thing.
The common denominator is most of these companies essentially are worth billions with 0 or negative revenue. They are almost all funded by Andreessen Horowitz and Marc Andreessen is a big HRC supporter. Ben Horowitz I don't know much about, but the TL;DR here is that tech companies are censoring and limiting speech because they dont like it politically. Not that any of the media will actually report that though, because, you know, social media being a big circlejerk where no one wants to be an iconoclast.
bioware? EA subsidiary? Fsck them.
It's ok to kill people - just don't hurt muh fuckin' feelz. Typical liberal garbage...
I don't think you used enough exclamation points. Also, there needs to be at least one, "1" in there or you risk being taken seriously.
how is the view with your head in the sand?
As a fellow anonymous coward, let me be the first to say . . . STFU. He (Ali Artan) obeyed the legal processes to get into the Christian Caliphate (A.K.A., the U.S.A) - or do you think that waterboarding him first would've discouraged him?
Oh, let's not forget - remember the Pilgrims? More than half the adults died within a year of arrival - there were more children than adults left alive before the locals (foolishly) assisted the illegal immigrants, and who were they assisting? A bunch of guys who got expelled from Jolly Old England for not being good Catholics. They chose to be Christian instead. Fancy that!
Anything sound familiar? C'mon, you seem to be a fan of Herr Drumpf.
Sure, stop black people from stepping foot into your home or your store. Refuse to buy or sell with them. It's your right!
If you want the legal protections of a corporation then you have to give up such rights just as you give up legal ownership when you hand the business assets over to the corporation.
Corporations are legal entities defined by government. They exist as part the government system; though they are independently managed.... a few more steps of indirection above an "independent" government dept.
Government too often violates the law by going to 3rd, 4th, or 5th parties... almost always corporations who are improperly allowed private rights. If they were actually private humans without the super powers corporations have thru government there would be fewer people willing to do things they could end up in civil and/or criminal court over (as opposed to their corporation which is abuse to hide corruption.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Hell, he already looks like a mutant, and he makes Archie Bunker look like a tree-hugging hippie by comparison.
Meathead.
Just one example of many: https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55863
User tested the twitter double standard by posting a racist rant against white people voting for trump, and then an identically phrased racist rant against black people voting for clinton. Guess which one got them banned?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Nobody who actually listens to #BlackLivesMatter people will find them saying that black people are the superior race. That's hilariously nutty. Boogoo nutterballs. These videos reflect more on you than they do #BlackLivesMatter.
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
Yeah... poor poor white people like myself. If only we had real political representation, like maybe a super majority in both houses and senate for 200 years running or 97.6% of presidents. I have a dream! If we all dream together maybe we can make it a reality!
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
"SJW's" is a very divisive and ill defined term. But I think most social justice is an attempt at exactly that. It always strikes me as incredible how much some people fear change. They look at it like it's "discrimination" to treat people with basic respect. I'm not sure if that's what you're doing in this comment, I'm not sure exactly who you're talking about. I would be opposed to more discrimination myself.
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
Oooo. Banned by twitter...
I can see how these would appear openly racist under a "colorblind" view of race relations - a view which ignores context and history, and under which the "find and replace" test is seen as an infallible, almost mathematical tool which zeroes out cultural biases to objectively measure the racism of a statement.
But it's not. The problem is that the "cultural biases" it zeroes out ARE the context and history. For example, prejudice against white people is both much more rare and, in almost all societies, vastly less damaging than prejudice against other races because of the position of dominance and privilege whites enjoy in nearly all societies. In some societies the imbalance is so great that to equate prejudice against whites to prejudice against other races is to trivialize most forms of prejudice.
To look at another one of his posts, a "black tears" cup is vastly worse than a "white tears" cup in the US for example, because the former is an insult to injury, celebrating a dominant position. The latter on the other hand, is merely a distasteful joke because of the same dominant position of whites. It's like a poor person owning a "1%er Tears" cup.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I should add that those store owners that did that back then had strong beliefs that they considered just as valid too, and they sometimes even claimed that their bigotry was supported by God.
There's a lot of that shit about, it may be gays this week but remember that the guy running Enron said he was doing God's work by cheating Californians out of their money. Maybe it will be you getting picked on by someone taking God's name in vain next time.
currently living at 1600 Penn.
Obama attacked Trump repeatedly claiming the White House and the Presidency were serious and not for Reality TV people..... while he went on more reality TV shows, and had more reality TV people and other entertainers to the White House, than any president in history.
Obama made a joke of the very concept that the White House was only for serious and qualified people. The man was a completely unqualified self-admitted coke-head and pot puffer who'd never done a damned productive day's work in his life and who spent his entire 8 years in office being snarky, sarcastic, obnoxious, and basically behaving like a teenage punk on a basketball court or a football field. Obama made Trump look over-qualified, and now for the next four or eight years Trump will look more dignified and "presidential" just by not cleverly flipping people off all the time (as Obama has been doing in photo ops through his presidency - you do not have to do a very difficult search of the web to see any of the many photos of him not-so-subtly giving people the finger), not sneering at half the country, and not spending his time consulting with Jay-Z and Beyoncee. Obama the man-child has, by his awful behavior, destroyed the standards. It's very sad, really, there are many black Americans who were far more competent, actually qualified, and far more dignified, who could have gone into the history books forever as the "first black president" and who could have been respected by everybody. That opportunity, like any standards, was demolished by Obama.
There is ZERO evidence that "being gay is a physical condition".
1. That whole "gay gene" argument was a scam cooked-up by gay activists to get sympathy from straight people (mostly sympathetic straight women). There have been an endless number of twin studies that show no correlation between genetics and homosexuality.
2. The argument that it MUST be biological because NOBODY would CHOOSE to engage in a lifestyle that made them part of an oppressed minority is completely bogus. There are many subcultures and activities people CHOOSE to engage in that make them outcasts. People choose to be thieves, rapists, peeping toms, and banjo players, etc.
3. The argument that IF a person is unable to resist a desire, then it's illegitimate to criticize them and that desire is also bogus. Nearly every rapist, serial killer, and child molester claims to have always felt compelled to do what he did and unable to resist the urge; yet no sane person suggests the normalization of child molestation, rape, or serial killings.
"Hate" is an emotion. You cannot make an emotion illegal, nor can you scientifically prove that a particular emotion is responsible for an action. It's fine to punish a person for a crime (like murder) which can be proven, but it's quite warped to punish for the presumed emotion you cannot actually prove. Saying hateful things is indeed a choice, but it's also in the ear of the listener. I, for example, believe it is hateful to oppose anything Mr Trump says, therefore all the people who oppose Mr trump are HATERS and all their speech must be BANNED! - See how easy, and STUPID, this childish bull excrement is? No civilized American wants limits on "hate speech" or laws against "hate crimes"; real crimes, like assault or murder, should be punished the same no matter the emotions of the perpetrators and any bans on speech based on something as subjective as the label "hate" are capricious.
YES THEY DID DUMASS! go to youtube and see a guy being harassed for having an all lives matter sign
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Like telling people to check out Alicia Machado's nonexistent sex tape?
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
If Twitter banning Trump sets him off and he starts attacking the Silicon Valley elite, then perhaps they can annihilate each other in an all-out war and there is hope for us after all.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
.... that a small minority of people actually like him. The rest of us who voted for him had no better alternative.
So I hope Twitter bans him. It would do everyone a favor (protect Trump from Trump, and us from Trump),
Twitter doesn't care about hate speech, it only cares about harassment, incitement and threats. Like the law in the US does.
That's not what the article says.
"Separately, reporting hateful conduct will also help Twitter better process reports from bystanders, alleviating the burden on the person being subjected to the abuse, Harvey said.
Second, Twitter has retrained support teams, offering sessions that teach the cultural and historical context to help moderators recognize hate speech, and has put in place an ongoing program to refresh employees on abuse and update them on new forms of it, Harvey said."
If they didn't care about policing hate speech in the past they sure will now.
The point I was failing to make was that YOU can do whatever but the corporation for which "own" you CAN NOT do everything you want.
People get jailed for STEALING from their own corporation (and other crimes) because their corporation is not them.
I know a man who used to work for a bank and his job was to go to small corporations and take them over for the bank so they wouldn't default on their loans. Sometimes he would fire the founder and "owner" from the corporation and put somebody else in charge. Often he would end up catching a family member employee doing something illegal and it was the corporation that pressed charges, not the relative (or a deal was made... interesting stories.) I did some work for 1 of these places: CEO's wife wasn't even an employee but she used the biz like it was her bank account, so did her son (the IT guy) and both are now in jail.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Was JUST getting ready to ramp up the Blackliesmatter will get protection. This terroristic organization is still violating constitutional rights and even is getting funded by groups like Kellogs (DIRECT QUOTE) and most likely by sorros to help keep people stirred so that we do not look at the bigger picture.
Killing cops - representatives of this country are black, asian, white and every other color out there. Some are even muslim or atheist. The point is that saying "x"lives matter but ignoring how many black people are killer by black people while rioting when a thug is killed by an officer (even if the thug meant to KILL the BLACK officer) seems to indicate that only one segment of that population really matters to them.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
During the Bush era (Bush the 2nd) the lefties made a movie about assassinating him. Can you imagine the fervor if the right had made such a movie about Obama? But since Bushitler was President there were no howling wailing complaints about hate speech, just a torrent of hate coming from the left.
And now we have that same tired old argument that you nailed that the American left uses as often as it can. It's very simple. If I can get your opposing viewpoint declared hate speech I can suppress your opinion and therefore in the name of free speech I take your free speech away.
The only thing you can't do is scream fire in a crowded theater for crissakes.
As the Democrats haven't been this angry since the Republicans force them to free their slaves, or forced them to give the vote to women, this is only the beginning of insanity to come the next four years. Make popcorn...
Let's take the feigned righteous indignation over the flag remark. Justice Anton Scalia said pretty much the same, exact thing two years ago. No outrage then. Didn't even make the news.
Murphy was an optimist
AKA Trumpdot. This site has officially become a platform for dudes who's biggest dream is to lick Trump's balls, that in spite of their anti-feminism thoughts give up their entire lives and freedom to get some vagina, have a bunch of little shits and then pay for it all with their own labor. It's hilarious.
And yet you'll use big dollar signs and figures like you used above and apply them POSITIVELY to trump. I wonder why that is...
"Really I think that the whole not standing for the anthem was because he is a lazy ass fuck and didn't feel like standing"
OH! There it is! The tired "niigers are lazy" trope.
"They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists."
Could you tell us who said this?
I am pretty sure the owners being bigoted assholes are the ones who got their bakery shutdown, but you keep blaming the evil libruls mmkay?
Could you explain to us what your name means? It's odd hearing someone going off about race when they voluntarily use a moniker that specifically separates everything into a race and is concerned with those races intermixing. The next thing you're gonna type is that you actually aren't racist....
Xenographic:
Of or pertaining to xenography (surgical transplantation between species).
The preliminary conclusion was that the SARS virus crossed the xenographic barrier from palm civet to humans.
Of or pertaining to xenography (writing in a language one has not learned).
"So this court decision prioritized civil rights over religious rights clear and simple."
AS IT SHOULD. There is no official religion for the untied states. Specifically a separation of church and state. So you want us to take you seriously that a civil court ruleing on the side of civics is some kind of liberal conspiracy theory?
I knew you'd say that, so tell us, what did he mean by what he did say then, hmmm?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Out of all of the posts, which are over 1000 at this time, you picked this one to get butthurt over and make a snarky response to. So maybe you don't support trump (I think you do) but I know why you picked this one. The hit dog hollered. Either racist, sexist, or bigot hit a little too close to home and you had a guilty dog barking moment. You'll deny it, of course, but people pick the conversations, words, and symbology used for a reason whether conscious or subconscious.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There's no evidence any more that women are getting paid less for the same job.
There is substantial evidence that women get paid less than men for the same jobs. It's not even a debate. Your assertion is plainly contradicted by the evidence. Women get paid less even after controlling for factors like child rearing, working hours, education, etc.
If you have an apple and 50 oranges, does the apple stop being an apple? You're fucking stupid. Racism is racism, it doesn't matter how often one group or the other is the victim. People like you don't seem to understand this, and that's part of the problem. If you want true equality, you can't scream at someone for being racist and then proceed to be racist yourself. Now do us all a favor, sit down and shut up. You're so ignorant and stupid on the subject it's astonishing.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
It's about mutual respect. If you can't have mutual respect you won't have an end to the problem. The "mutual" part is the thing you seem to be having problems with.
How do you think statements like the ones Manveer makes improve the situation for other races? If anything, it gives the truly racist white people more reason to want them gone.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
You're quite confident in your "colorblindness"...just don't fool yourself into thinking it isn't harmful.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Common sense tells us that two wrongs don't make a right no matter how much you'd like them to. If you stopped to think about it, randomly blaming every white person for problems generated by a very small subset is bad enough - you can and will create white on black racism with that. If you continually make someone the bad guy without any reasonable provocation you'll just wind up with a self-fulfilling prophecy.
What's worse is when you think that racism perpetrated by the very few justifies racism as a whole. An attitude that is in and of itself racist. If you really want tolerance and equality (which you don't seem to want at all, what you really want is one group that has more rights than everyone else) then you wouldn't tolerate it in any context at all regardless of who is the instigator and who is the recipient.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
By condoning and defending "hate speech" of their own while defining it as anything that breaks leftist narratives, they're becoming the ones that aren't civil.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
That's complete tosh.
While proof has shown otherwise. Look at those who use favored positions on platforms like Twitter(where a leftist will never be banned or disciplined, but conservatives will) or Reddit (e.g. the edits made from the Fuck Spez incident) to harass others.
Oh, and your sig needs to be revised to say "This is fascism, Clinton fits."
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
problems generated by a very small subset
Ahaha if only that were true! Racism would be as small of a problem as colorblind people believe it is. Klansmen, neo-nazis, and racist old men from the South are actually the smallest part of the problem, the jutting tip of the iceberg. They're easy to defeat because they acknowledge what they're doing and can be easily marginalized. The majority of white people (in the US) are in fact responsible for the majority of racism through unconscious efforts such as the colorblindness you're advocating, and because they don't even know they're doing it and will invariably deny their involvement when confronted with the damage they've been doing, it's an incredibly hard problem to solve.
you can and will create white on black racism with that. If you continually make someone the bad guy without any reasonable provocation you'll just wind up with a self-fulfilling prophecy.
And here we are having a discussion on race centered around the protection of white feelings. A discussion where you categorically absolve virtually all white people of any responsibility by simply not recognizing the reality of their unconscious racism. This is colorblindness in full force, a safe space for white people who want to avoid confronting race issues, composed of an impenetrable turtle-shell of denial with egalitarian posters on the inside for reassurance. It's not "actively racist" and blinds adherents to the very "passive" racism it perpetuates, which is good enough to keep it going forever I guess?
What's worse is when you think that racism perpetrated by the very few justifies racism as a whole. An attitude that is in and of itself racist.
No, I'm saying that it's not racist to point out that in the US, most white people have a racism problem because they in fact do. Just as surely as white South Africans during apartheid did, except that present-day Americans' problem is subtle and mostly unconscious.
Recognition of this fact is colorblindness kryptonite, and most of Manveer's posts which have been called racist are only identified as such for highlighting this fact in some way or mocking its denial (such as making fun of the idea that anti-white racism is just as common and damaging as any other form of racism in the US). He's not helping by being dismissive and mocking instead of trying to have a meaningful and informative debate, but to call it racism only serves to deny the reality of the problem and perpetuate it.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel