Facebook bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWars and others from its platforms as 'dangero

Not everyone -- that is exclusive of tyrants and despots from Ancient Times to Modern Left.

 

Same tyranny, different decade.

 

Exactly.

I can't believe that certain RW BS Sites (that nobody takes seriously), like the site that was the "source" of the Mayor Pete Hoax are even allowed to be used as "sources" in Current Events.

Hoaxes from RW BS Sites like that should be posted in either the Conspiracy Section or the Satire Section.

The Current Events Section of PF shouldn't be used as a dumping ground for clickbait stories "sourced" from RW BS Hoax Sites.

I fully support Facebook's decision.

It's a good start.

Still a lot of work to do to purge even more of these RW BS Sites.

 

I agree with Communists on many economic issues. But their censorship in 1930s was as bad as Liberal censorship now.

My great-grandparents (at least three) fought for the Revolution of 1917, but they became disillusioned when Communism turned Totalitarian in 1930s.

 

It's not all of the sudden, they're not simply banning anti semites and supremacists, and this particular platform isn't doing what FB, twitter, and youtube is doing... unless you have evidence of it.

Give these a watch if you can find the time.

 

And are you now a US citizen?

Sounds like you have some insights into what is going on.

 

You didn't answer in regard to Fox News banning the anti-Nazi ad.

How come?

 

Profanity filters should be completely abolished as far as I'm concerned.

Now this is just complete nonsense. "they're the same because they both have rules" is a complete non-point if the rules are completely different!

This forum only forbids personal attacks, calls to violence and the like.

Facebook engages in active political censorship, and permanently ban people for their political views.

Alex Jones, Milo or Farrakhan would be perfectly free to say whatever they want on this forum and wouldn't get banned. So it's VERY different.

You mean white supremacist antisemites like Alex Jones and Milo? LOL.

The only Nazi on the list is Farrakhan and he's on your side. "Hitler was a very great man", remember?

And even Farrakhan deserves his free speech like anyone else. There's only one side that supports censoring the opposition here and it's not mine.

Nonsense. Nobody wants to censor the NFL players. Free speech is not the right to actively ruin football with politics while being paid to play football.

If you botch what you're paid for, you should be fired. Not a free speech issue.

 

I think if more leftists viewed those clips, they would have a better idea of the actual issues here.

 

Mark Zuckerburg is 1000X more dangerous than the people he banned. How ironic. People need to dump his stolen yap board and get a life.

 

Bottom line:

Facebook can do whatever they want.

If you don't like it, you are always free to start your own social media platform.

Start your own platform and you won't have to worry about FB's policies.

Your "complaints" are falling on deaf ears. Nobody cares.

 

Hillary in a landslide.

 

Oh they can legally do whatever they want. Just like NAMBLA can legally advocate for pedophilia. And I can legally call them scum.

The purpose of this is not to force them to act differently.

The purpose of this is to have over 50% of the population boycott their ass worldwide.

And I guarantee you, they *will* care at that point.

 

Then you should be able to point out why some private property is sacred by others should be forced to publish views that they don't want to. Just let me know when you figure that out.

 

Yet when Facebook participates in that boycotting you cry foul.

 

I am a US citizen since 1990.

 

Boycotting to oppose censorship is right, boycotting to support censorship is wrong. It's about the end not the means.

There's no contradiction in what I said whatsoever, you're just creating confusion by moving the goalposts.

 

Have read the terms here?

7. RACIAL, ETHNIC, HOMOPHOBIC, GENDER, OR RELIGIOUS SLURS

Any post or image that is - in the judgment of a moderator or administrator - a slur against any such group will be subject to infraction.

Farrakhan isn't on my side.

He is free to speak, but not on Facebook.

You can invite that nut into your house or business to speak if you want. No one is stopping you.

Read the article I posted?

Why can't Facebook censor in the same way the NFL has?

 

If you really believed that a private platform having terms of use was the same thing as Nazi book burnings, you wouldn't be on a forum that has terms of use and bans certain content. Also, please have enough integrity to show respect for history. Trivializing actual horrors of history to play make-believe and take cheap, intellectually dishonest potshots at people for exercising their private property rights is, let's just say, a bad look. If you think the two situations are in any way comparable, you don't know a thing about either situation.

 

Its just the one side doing the whole censor thing.

The left.

 

Except you are the one moving goalposts now. Here's what you ACTUALLY said, since you've apparently forgotten:

"Oh they can legally do whatever they want. Just like NAMBLA can legally advocate for pedophilia. And I can legally call them scum.

The purpose of this is not to force them to act differently.

The purpose of this is to have over 50% of the population boycott their ass worldwide.

And I guarantee you, they *will* care at that point."

That's right, you weren't talking about boycotting to oppose censorship. You were talking about boycotting to oppose NAMBLA content. Which is fine in my book so I don't understand why you are pretending otherwise now. Be honest: are you really now changing your mind and claiming that it is wrong to boycott to support "censorship" against NAMBLA? Weird. I'm not sure which AltLightPride I'm talking to now, the one who claims that all "censorship" is wrong or the one who claims that some of it is justified.

 

Both sides will refuse to publish content at times, what you overdramatically call "censorship" and hilariously compare to Nazi book burning. But congrats on dodging everything in the post you just quoted. Care to try again?

 

Here's more:

 

Who gave you the right to publish whatever you want in a local newspaper? Do you own it? Why did you make such fallacious statement?