Shad
Veteran Member
They could have done that by not making deals with China which mandate censoring of content. Alex Jones is a scapegoat compared to deals with China.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Alex Jones banned from Facebook, Apple, Spotify, and Youtube.
- Thread starter Father Heathen
- Start date
They could have done that by not making deals with China which mandate censoring of content. Alex Jones is a scapegoat compared to deals with China.
Yerda
Veteran Member
Cool story.
Notanumber
A Free Man
Who decides what is or is not Hate Speech?
Notanumber
A Free Man
It is not (yet) illegal in the United States to criticize Islam and to oppose jihad mass murder and the Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. It is, however, illegal to do so under Sharia. Is MasterCard operating according to Sharia blasphemy laws now?
https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2018/08/28/robert-spencer-the-left-moves-fast-to-silence-me/
https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2018/08/28/robert-spencer-the-left-moves-fast-to-silence-me/
Woberts
The Perfumed Seneschal
And here you are, yelling about Islam again.
Notanumber
A Free Man
It is a subject worth yelling about when it affects freedom of speech.
Woberts
The Perfumed Seneschal
It doesn't in relation to Alex Jones being kicked off various platforms.
For violating their terms of service, I might add.
Notanumber
A Free Man
Therefore, you think Robert Spencer will not be silenced then.
It’s very clear what’s going on. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) claims that I am a “hate group leader,” and that’s that: when the SPLC says “jump,” Patreon and MasterCard say “how high?”
Indeed, the SPLC’s infallibility in such matters is taken for granted by all the social media giants as well. This is despite the SPLC’s massive admission of error in the Maajid Nawaz case, in which they paid a $3.3 million settlement to a Muslim reformer they accused of being an “anti-Muslim extremist” (which is what they call me). The SPLC’s far-Left political agenda, in lumping legitimate groups in with the likes of the KKK and neo-Nazis in order to discredit and destroy them, is also obvious.
Where is it going to end?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Have you been on any of those lately? They're overflowing with people expressing their feelings and opinions. Twitter and Facebook are brimming with hateful nonsense, conspiracy theories, bull**** memes and people calling each other every name in the book.
Twitter, Facebook, etc. are not the government. You're not allowed to incite hate and violence on certain social media platforms. They have rules and terms of service for membership. Those social media platforms are within their rights to ban people who violate those rules.
What's stopping them from banning me is that I don't spout off hateful nonsense and incite violence on those social media platforms. If I did, they'd be within their rights to ban me.
This is nothing like 1984. Have you actually read it?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
The problem isn't just Zuckerberg, but IT companies in general that make TOS agreements extremely one-sided, unfairly one sided, and basically require you to sign over your soul to use the software/hardware. Very typically, you own nothing, and they own everything including things transmitted over the platform and physical hardware, and leaving you "paying for the privilege of use" that is based on terms that can change and be terminated at any time without notification.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It's truly shocking how many people aren't reading the rules or TOS before agreeing to them. It's a dead give away they haven't if they think free speech applies to those platforms, because you have to agree to have it limited to use the platform. It's not like the state is involved and saying "no more of this." It's Facebook saying "you broke the rules you agreed to so away with you."
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Right?!
Notanumber
A Free Man
Spencer noted that he could have been shut down due to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) listing him on its “extremist files” for criticizing Islam.
Mastercard Forces Patreon to Blacklist Jihad Watch's Robert Spencer | Breitbart
Mastercard Forces Patreon to Blacklist Jihad Watch's Robert Spencer | Breitbart
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Well, no one is forcing you to use their platforms.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Given his recent banning on Twitter, I recently saw his engagement with Marco Rubio in full. I have to say I understand why Alex was banned.
I'm not a fan of Rubio no more than I'm a fan of Alex Jones but all through the entire thing Alex wouldnt even allow Rubio a word in between. And while Alex wasn't attempting any assault , he did touch Rubio on the shoulder during the intense verbal engagement and was quickly reprimanded for it.
I do compliment Rubio on his candor and calmness as well as maintaining professional demeanor all the while Alex Jones rambled on like a ****.
I'm not a fan of Rubio no more than I'm a fan of Alex Jones but all through the entire thing Alex wouldnt even allow Rubio a word in between. And while Alex wasn't attempting any assault , he did touch Rubio on the shoulder during the intense verbal engagement and was quickly reprimanded for it.
I do compliment Rubio on his candor and calmness as well as maintaining professional demeanor all the while Alex Jones rambled on like a ****.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It goes much deeper and further than that. It's pretty much a guarantee that anything you "purchase" that is digital or an electronic device you don't actually own it. And it's not just a platform here-and-there, but pretty much just about every company. Such terms have been banned in some countries due to them being too long, too complicated, and too one-sided.
Notanumber
A Free Man
Nigel says the Left are losing. Maybe, this is why they are so desperate to shutdown Free Speech.
I think a lot of it might depend on the type of business it is. Since these companies presumably have some measure of competition and there is still consumer choice, then it presents no hardship to bar someone from using the service.
On the other hand, if the local electric company says "we don't like what you write on the internet, so therefore we are cutting you off," I don't think that would fly.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
RF, Facebook, Amazon, Sony, AT&T, they all have similar elements that they own it all, and the service agreement can be changed and/or terminated at any time, for any reason, without notification. Microsoft and Sony, it violates the agreed terms of use to not update them "as soon as reasonably possible," and altering the software/OS in any way, for a number of devices, also violates the TOS. The bigger ones like John Deere (yes, that John Deere) have it worded so they can--and they have--take legal action against you for violating it. And it takes them forever and a day to write it all out to discourage us from reading it because no one would reasonably agree to such terms.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Has it been mentioned that Alex Jones has repeatedly posted videos that incite violence and harassment, in violation of these platforms' policies? That he has been repeatedly warned and suspended?
In one video for example, he threatened a federal official (Mueller) with violence. That's a felony carrying a sentence of 5 to 10 years in prison, as I understand. (Or he came very, very close to doing that - it's always hard to tell with him, because a psycho who is being deadly serious sometimes sounds just like a normal person who is joking or trolling.)
In another video he said Hillary Clinton murdered children, chopped up their bodies ... something about running a child sex slavery ring ... fanning the flames of "Pizzagate" and resulting in an innocent shop owner being bullied and threatened and a crazed gunman storming the shop and firing shots. (Fortunately no one was hurt).
This isn't about political speech it's about a maniac making the gun symbol with his fingers while talking about federal officials, calling on his followers to rise up and get their "battle rifles" ready, etc. etc.
You can even agree or disagree with that speech but, I don't think a private business is obliged to tolerate harassment / bullying / inciting violence.
In one video for example, he threatened a federal official (Mueller) with violence. That's a felony carrying a sentence of 5 to 10 years in prison, as I understand. (Or he came very, very close to doing that - it's always hard to tell with him, because a psycho who is being deadly serious sometimes sounds just like a normal person who is joking or trolling.)
In another video he said Hillary Clinton murdered children, chopped up their bodies ... something about running a child sex slavery ring ... fanning the flames of "Pizzagate" and resulting in an innocent shop owner being bullied and threatened and a crazed gunman storming the shop and firing shots. (Fortunately no one was hurt).
This isn't about political speech it's about a maniac making the gun symbol with his fingers while talking about federal officials, calling on his followers to rise up and get their "battle rifles" ready, etc. etc.
You can even agree or disagree with that speech but, I don't think a private business is obliged to tolerate harassment / bullying / inciting violence.