You are assuming a specific flawed technical fix to the issue, then claiming anyone who doesn't agree with you must be a complete idiot for agreeing to it.
Try thinking. Why not have a facebook.com and a facebook.de, and the de has the censorship applied as per German law, and those accessing it from within Germany are expected (or forced) to access the latter?
You are presuming that I'm supporting a censorship of the entire Internet by a single country because you have a small mind. We aren't all as dumb as you.
Try responding to what was said, rather than jumping ahead steps and guessing wrong, arguing with your own strawmen. It makes you look like an idiot.
Unless FB is serving up content from German soil then, no, they do not have control over them.
Does FB take money from German companies? That alone would be sufficient for Germany to exert some influence. And if Germany doesn't like that, they can go to the EU courts, and try to enforce Germany's laws over any Facebook operations anywhere in the EU. I'm not an EU lawyer, so I have no idea how successful that'd be, but I've heard of similar cases int he EU.
you are less likely to get blown up or murdered by the government while in the US than elsewhere.
FEDERAL government [will be less likely to kill you if you are in the US]. In the US, the municipal governments kill with (relative) impunity. Have you not seen the stories of the unarmed people killed by police?
I think you are the one conflating anti-zionism and anti-semitism.
Nope. Try reading again. I'm pointing out that taking another's definition of anti-antisemitism without having them explicitly state it would result in conflating them. Enough other people confuse them (often deliberately) that it requires explicit definitions to ensure accuracy in language.
Yes, clarity is counterproductive. But you haven't clarified whether a non-jew-hater that's anti-zionist is or isn't antisemitic. Or does that change based on your agenda at the time, so you prefer to not be clear so your hypocrisy is less obvious?
It's traditional to sign your worthless spew at the end, not the beginning. Facebook has customers and suppliers in Germany. That's sufficent Nexus for Germany to force Facebook to comply or "leave".
Regards,
AK Marc
(see, that's a better way of signing a post)
A sensible set of rules governing public speech would gag your stupid ass forever.
Yet we can't get anything sensible in the USA. Innocent until proven guilty, but many people arrested for a felony lose their jobs before trial, and if found not guilty have their arrest records stored for eternity in a public database, and used against them for job and credit for all time.
Yeah, real sensible speech laws you have there. Some places like the UK and OZ have gag rules that protect victims and suspects, until conviction (or before or after, depending on circumstances).
If Germany wants to be a democratic nation, it needs to stop criminalizing speech that the German state doesn't approve of. Is that so hard to grasp?
You mean that the will of the people to criminalize that speech should be discarded because you don't like it. That's not a democracy, that's a dictatorship. Why do you hate democracy?
[breasts} are a problem in the US for no apparent reason
They are not legally a problem. But the corporations are all owned by conservatives who claim it's a legal problem so they can force their morals on everyone else.
Speech shouldn't be protected. Lies should not be protected. Harassment should not be protected. There are various classes of speech that should not have protection.
The reports I've read is that they didn't do that to those slated for immediate execution. Only those kept for work detail, or POWs were identified with serial numbers, and they started out using ink, then sewing them on clothes, then tattoos. So there were plenty who went through without tattoos. But plenty more with. Why would you question whether they did? Many survivors still bear the marks. Denying that would be denying reality. Or is every survivor in on a hoax?
Everything is word games. The questions asked will be "Do you believe the Jews have the sole right to Israel and the surrounding territory?" Any answer other that "Yes, it is their right and destiny" is counted as antisemitic.
Also, anti-zionist will be lumped in with anti-semitic. So to be clear, one must define their words. This is true in all emotionally charged debates, so "wordgames" means "I don't have a fucking clue, but I listen to the side that says what I like to hear".
Businesses Trump has been involved with have filed for corporate bankruptcy 4 times
So he signed the paperwork on 4 bankruptcies, but never went bankrupt. That makes logical sense only to an insane fanboy.
He has been incredibly successful in business by any reasonable metric
And, like most rich people, was born rich and white. Yay white privilege. He worked hard to be born rich and white. Eminem has more "business" experience than Trump. Eminem's net worth is many more times greater than Trumps, comparing today to birth. Yes, trump did well with the millions he was born with, but he was born a multi-millionaire. If you want to talk success, try talking about someone who started with nothing and built on that. Perhaps even had hurdles, other than how best to be a slumlord. His business track record isn't impressive.
Slashdot Mirror
Try thinking. Why not have a facebook.com and a facebook.de, and the de has the censorship applied as per German law, and those accessing it from within Germany are expected (or forced) to access the latter?
You are presuming that I'm supporting a censorship of the entire Internet by a single country because you have a small mind. We aren't all as dumb as you.
Try responding to what was said, rather than jumping ahead steps and guessing wrong, arguing with your own strawmen. It makes you look like an idiot.
Unless FB is serving up content from German soil then, no, they do not have control over them.
Does FB take money from German companies? That alone would be sufficient for Germany to exert some influence. And if Germany doesn't like that, they can go to the EU courts, and try to enforce Germany's laws over any Facebook operations anywhere in the EU. I'm not an EU lawyer, so I have no idea how successful that'd be, but I've heard of similar cases int he EU.
The world is enjoying it's longest most peaceful time period since the fall of Rome and idiots get upset over what it took to achieve it.
Constant wars. That's what it takes to avoid war. War. And lots of it.
you are less likely to get blown up or murdered by the government while in the US than elsewhere.
FEDERAL government [will be less likely to kill you if you are in the US]. In the US, the municipal governments kill with (relative) impunity. Have you not seen the stories of the unarmed people killed by police?
So, anyone you don't like or who says things you don't like is an SJW...
I thought it was blue triangles for immigrants.
I think you are the one conflating anti-zionism and anti-semitism.
Nope. Try reading again. I'm pointing out that taking another's definition of anti-antisemitism without having them explicitly state it would result in conflating them. Enough other people confuse them (often deliberately) that it requires explicit definitions to ensure accuracy in language.
So commercial speech isn't protected. Glad to know you oppose free speech, and we are just discussing where to draw the line.
Yes, clarity is counterproductive. But you haven't clarified whether a non-jew-hater that's anti-zionist is or isn't antisemitic. Or does that change based on your agenda at the time, so you prefer to not be clear so your hypocrisy is less obvious?
Yes, mob rule is the democracy-hater's term for democracy. I'm not confused, I just refuse to play your rhetorical games.
What in my post condemned free speech? I was just pointing out that jcr was anti-democracy.
That's what all the Americans assert. The Europeans attribute more work to CERN and ITU than the Americans do.
Hi Dumb Fuck,
It's traditional to sign your worthless spew at the end, not the beginning. Facebook has customers and suppliers in Germany. That's sufficent Nexus for Germany to force Facebook to comply or "leave".
Regards,
AK Marc
(see, that's a better way of signing a post)
A sensible set of rules governing public speech would gag your stupid ass forever.
Yet we can't get anything sensible in the USA. Innocent until proven guilty, but many people arrested for a felony lose their jobs before trial, and if found not guilty have their arrest records stored for eternity in a public database, and used against them for job and credit for all time.
Yeah, real sensible speech laws you have there. Some places like the UK and OZ have gag rules that protect victims and suspects, until conviction (or before or after, depending on circumstances).
So fraud should be protected speech because you didn't have to listen to the fraud? I still disagree.
If Germany wants to be a democratic nation, it needs to stop criminalizing speech that the German state doesn't approve of. Is that so hard to grasp?
You mean that the will of the people to criminalize that speech should be discarded because you don't like it. That's not a democracy, that's a dictatorship. Why do you hate democracy?
[breasts} are a problem in the US for no apparent reason
They are not legally a problem. But the corporations are all owned by conservatives who claim it's a legal problem so they can force their morals on everyone else.
That's how all democracy works. If decisions were unanimous, there'd be no need for a second party.
One party democracy for less oppression!!
So if it wants to be a democratic nation, it should abolish the democracy that has upheld those laws? Abolish votes for better democracy!!
So fraud should be legally protected. After all, lying speech to harm others should be protected.
So countries should have no sovereignty within their borders if jcr disagrees with it. All hail jcr, Emperor of the World.
Speech shouldn't be protected. Lies should not be protected. Harassment should not be protected. There are various classes of speech that should not have protection.
The reports I've read is that they didn't do that to those slated for immediate execution. Only those kept for work detail, or POWs were identified with serial numbers, and they started out using ink, then sewing them on clothes, then tattoos. So there were plenty who went through without tattoos. But plenty more with. Why would you question whether they did? Many survivors still bear the marks. Denying that would be denying reality. Or is every survivor in on a hoax?
Everything is word games. The questions asked will be "Do you believe the Jews have the sole right to Israel and the surrounding territory?" Any answer other that "Yes, it is their right and destiny" is counted as antisemitic.
Also, anti-zionist will be lumped in with anti-semitic. So to be clear, one must define their words. This is true in all emotionally charged debates, so "wordgames" means "I don't have a fucking clue, but I listen to the side that says what I like to hear".
Businesses Trump has been involved with have filed for corporate bankruptcy 4 times
So he signed the paperwork on 4 bankruptcies, but never went bankrupt. That makes logical sense only to an insane fanboy.
He has been incredibly successful in business by any reasonable metric
And, like most rich people, was born rich and white. Yay white privilege. He worked hard to be born rich and white. Eminem has more "business" experience than Trump. Eminem's net worth is many more times greater than Trumps, comparing today to birth. Yes, trump did well with the millions he was born with, but he was born a multi-millionaire. If you want to talk success, try talking about someone who started with nothing and built on that. Perhaps even had hurdles, other than how best to be a slumlord. His business track record isn't impressive.
Look at and copy are very different things.
Why lie when we can look back one post and see your lies?