Germany/France/Mexico Denounce Biden Anti-Dissent Crackdown

[saxitoxin]

Even Bernie Bros agree ... America is on the verge of becoming a dystopian nightmare ---

[mookiemcgee]

Number of police officers killed by protesters at CHAZ = 0

Number of police killed by Trump angry murderous mob at the capital = At least 2

[saxitoxin]

Number of

Police officers injured by BLM from Jan 6 2020 to Jan 6 2021: 700+
Police officers injured at Trump rallies from Jan 6 2020 to Jan 6 2021: 7

But actually mookiemcgee doesn't really care. He and Biden would be fine if all police were publicly beheaded. This is just an intellectual cudgel for him.

[saxitoxin]

Wow -- it's sad when France, and ... Germany (!) ... have to lecture the new United Corporations of America and their CEO, Joe Biden, about liberty. Of course the new monster that's just emerged, the Democratic Party combination of state and big business, has no need for either of those countries so will keep on expanding and consuming as it crushes democracy.

Germany and France Oppose Trump’s Twitter Exile

Germany and France attacked Twitter Inc. and Facebook Inc. after U.S. President Donald Trump was shut off from the social media platforms, in an extension of Europe’s battle with big tech.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel objected to the decisions, saying on Monday that lawmakers should set the rules governing free speech and not private technology companies. The German leader’s stance is echoed by the French government. Minister for European Union Affairs Clement Beaune said he was “shocked” to see a private company make such an important decision. “This should be decided by citizens, not by a CEO,” he told Bloomberg TV on Monday. “There needs to be public regulation of big online platforms.” Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire earlier said that the state should be responsible for regulations, rather than “the digital oligarchy,” and called big tech “one of the threats” to democracy.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... roblematic

The new UCA that Biden has founded has just staged a coup against a sitting president but in an Orwellian way has declared that the president is the one who staged a coup against it and used that lie to whip-up with glassy-faced, doe-eyed, banner-bearers like mookiemcgee into a crazed frenzy clawing for revenge and the glorification of the new Corporate State. Up is down, black is white, right is left, war is peace, poverty is plenty, ignorance is strength.

[saxitoxin]

UPDATE: The ACLU and President Obrador of Mexico have joined Germany and France in protesting Biden's attacks on free speech and institutions as he continues - in an increasingly hysterical frenzy - to order his CEOs to suppress and control criticism of him. Joining the growing list of people being deplatformed and silenced, even Ron Paul was banned from Facebook today. This is not normal. This is not a normal presidency.

And now this (STUNNING!) from the Pulitzer-winning gay journalist Glenn Greenwald --->

[jimboston]

Saxi, the sheer volume of your bullshit is evidence that you’re desperate.

It’s obviously over and time for you to go bury your head in the sand and cry.

[saxitoxin]

Saxi, the sheer volume of your bullshit is evidence that you’re desperate.

You can't even respond to facts. When they're presented, you just scream insults and wave the flag, drool dripping off your lips as the intensity of your rage increases in response to the emotive cries of "HATE! HATE! HATE! TREASON! TREASON! TREASON!" your leaders are screaming. What a brainwashed fascist.

[saxitoxin]

First Germany, then France, then Mexico, now Hongkong democracy activists are changing their Twitter avatars to images of Donald Trump, joining the rising global chorus calling for democracy and free speech in America, after Biden's new Corporate State began a mass purge and shutdown of sites critical of America's new ruler.

Comparing Twitter’s decision to ban Trump with the Chinese authorities’ use of censorship to silent opposition voices, Hongkongers switched their profile pictures to portraits of Trump over the weekend, accusing social media platforms of violating rights to free speech. Hongkongers’ divisive views of Trump have driven a wedge through the city’s pro-democracy movement, supporters of which pride themselves on unity against a common enemy—the Chinese Communist Party.



https://coconuts.co/hongkong/news/hong- ... president/

Meanwhile, the suffocation of any content or outlet that has, or potentially could, criticize Biden continues on the basis that "there are two sides to every story" is no longer valid and there are only Facts and False Claims. The popular hunting and target shooting website AR15.com has just been deplatformed after Biden campaign backer Amazon determined some users of it posted content that criticized Joe Biden's gun control proposals, determining that this proposed legislation was "de facto good" and, therefore, not subject to public discussion. The site has managed to move to a server in a free speech country outside the United States.

[saxitoxin]

Shut Down of Criticism, Disagreement Growing

As we surge forward to Biden's inauguration fête - which has the eerily dystopian theme "America United" - the ruling party is calling for the expulsion of more and more opposition parliamentarians so as to increase the size of their congressional majorities, a measure shocking democracy activists around the world.

A SLEW OF rank-and-file Democrats made headlines over the weekend calling for the investigation and possible expulsion of fellow members of Congress who backed President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. But few took note as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi quietly seemed to bless those efforts in a letter to Hill Democrats.

https://theintercept.com/2021/01/11/pel ... s-capitol/

They spent four years warning of fascism but, within 72 hours, they are the ones who have engineered measures unheard of since the Civil War and unknown outside of banana republics. The complete prohibition of dissent or debate and the memory-holing of any critic under the guise of "anti-terrorism measures." Absolutely terrifying.

Meanwhile, the new Corporate State's Twitter arm has announced it has banned 70,000 accounts in 48 hours for making "False Claims" about the incoming government, with its purge just starting to accelerate - Facebook matching step by step in banning users its algorithms determine have committed ThoughtCrime. Some - like the mathematician Dr. James Lindsay - have said they are sourcing parts for paper printing presses so they can continue to participate in public discussion after Biden's proposed new PATRIOT II anti-terrorism legislation comes into force and millions of Americans will be subject to being banned from having internet connections if they make "False Claims" about the government.

[Falkomagno]

this is what you get for electing a delusional asshole with dictator tendencies for four years...the whole system is reacting like the cancer it is.

[HitRed]

this is what you get for electing a delusional asshole with dictator tendencies for four years...the whole system is reacting like the cancer it is.

Some or all of the content shared in this post is disputed and might be misleading.

[2dimes]

this is what you get for electing a delusional asshole with dictator tendencies for four years...the whole system is reacting like the cancer it is.

Some or all of the content shared in this post is disputed and might be misleading.

Yeah, for starters, Joe has been in office for way longer than four years.

[riskllama]

maybe Trump could try tiktok?

[mookiemcgee]

maybe Trump could try tiktok?

(Saxi's jerking to this photo right now)

[riskllama]

yuck.

[mookiemcgee]

yuck.

That's what she (Melania) said

[jimboston]

Saxi, the sheer volume of your bullshit is evidence that you’re desperate.

You can't even respond to facts. When they're presented, you just scream insults and wave the flag, drool dripping off your lips as the intensity of your rage increases in response to the emotive cries of "HATE! HATE! HATE! TREASON! TREASON! TREASON!" your leaders are screaming. What a brainwashed fascist.

THIS is one of the funniest things you have ever said.

You are the Master of this... you ever respond to facts. You generally deflect or respond to a related but different point. When there’s a point you can;t deflect you just ignore it. When you can’t ignore it without looking dumb, you point out the fact that you’re ignoring it.

Meanwhile I’m the most middle-of-the-road poster in this forum... so to claim I drool at the cries of my “leaders” is ridiculous.

I don’t think Trump should be impeached nor do I think we should ask Pence to invoke the 25th. These are bad tactics and only do more harm.

[jimboston]

Interesting fact... the people who are complaining now that Twitter (et al) have shut down Trump are the same people who would argue that a bakery (as a private business) has a Right to choose their customers. Isn’t Twitter aloud to make their own business decisions? Or are businesses only allowed to make business decisions when those decisions suit you?

[2dimes]

*allowed

But more importantly stop responding to Saxi like a rational person.

[jimboston]

*allowed

... um that’s the same spelling.

But more importantly stop responding to Saxi like a rational person.

I believe he is a rational person and this is all a character he’s been playing for 10years.

Either that or he’s an extra-terrestrial alien conducting an experiment.

[DoomYoshi]

Isn’t Twitter aloud to make their own business decisions?

aloud: adverb
1. with the normal tone and volume of the speaking voice, as distinguished from whisperingly: They could not speak aloud in the library.
2. vocally, as distinguished from mentally: He read the book aloud.
3. with a loud voice; loudly: to cry aloud in grief.

[2dimes]

*allowed

... um that’s the same spelling.

Oh, sorry.

But more importantly stop responding to Saxi like a rational person.

I believe he is a rational person and this is all a character he’s been playing for 10years.

That sounds plausible but you are responding to the character.

Basically it looks like you're the straight man in a vaudevillian act and Saxi has a huge spritzer bottle.

Hey!
You're gonna hurt someone with that ol' shotgun.
What's up doc?

Maybe it looks like I'm on your case Jim, that is not my intention.

I'm trying to be supportive. I'm just not very good at that. You definately should continue to post your opinions.

Just try to have a little fun instead of getting riled up.

[jimboston]

Isn’t Twitter aloud to make their own business decisions?

aloud: adverb
1. with the normal tone and volume of the speaking voice, as distinguished from whisperingly: They could not speak aloud in the library.
2. vocally, as distinguished from mentally: He read the book aloud.
3. with a loud voice; loudly: to cry aloud in grief.

LOL

I used allowed and aloud in the same post... LOL...

I blame autocorrect.

[Doc_Brown]

Interesting fact... the people who are complaining now that Twitter (et al) have shut down Trump are the same people who would argue that a bakery (as a private business) has a Right to choose their customers. Isn’t Twitter aloud to make their own business decisions? Or are businesses only allowed to make business decisions when those decisions suit you?

It's an interesting question. The simple answer, from a libertarian perspective, is, sure, private companies in a free marketplace should have a right to refuse service to any customer. In the bakery case, there are many options, and customers refused service can walk across the street to find an alternative. In the present case, not only is Twitter (and other) shutting down access to the service, there is also a coordinated effort* to shut down competitors who serve as alternatives. This would be the equivalent of the baker in question not only refusing service but going around burning down the buildings of any bakers that chose to do business with the particular customers.

* For reference, Google and Apple both shut down access to the Parler app within hours of each other, and Amazon canceled the web hosting contract a few hours later. In addition, Amazon's notice to Parler was posted to Buzzfeed roughly one hour before it was even emailed to Parler! These big tech firms that have been highly defensive of the section 230 immunity against 3rd party content have demanded that Parler relinquish its section 230 immunity.

I also think this de-platforming approach is dangerous in two ways:
1) It exacerbates the political polarization. We already have problems with people at opposite ends of the spectrum relying on different sets of news media and reaching vastly different conclusions about various political situations. Removing a large swath of users based on their political positions will push them to a different platform and further reduce the interactions between the two ends of the political spectrum.
2) Pushing already extreme voices off of a very public platform and onto a much less visible one may somewhat reduce their ability to spread their messages. But it also reduces the opportunities for opposing voices to provide counter points and temper the extremism. As much as I dislike the overwhelming majority of Trump's tweets, I'd much rather he continue posting on Twitter rather than end up hiding somewhere on the darkweb (where his followers are going to find him anyway).

[jimboston]

Interesting fact... the people who are complaining now that Twitter (et al) have shut down Trump are the same people who would argue that a bakery (as a private business) has a Right to choose their customers. Isn’t Twitter aloud to make their own business decisions? Or are businesses only allowed to make business decisions when those decisions suit you?

It's an interesting question. The simple answer, from a libertarian perspective, is, sure, private companies in a free marketplace should have a right to refuse service to any customer. In the bakery case, there are many options, and customers refused service can walk across the street to find an alternative. In the present case, not only is Twitter (and other) shutting down access to the service, there is also a coordinated effort* to shut down competitors who serve as alternatives. This would be the equivalent of the baker in question not only refusing service but going around burning down the buildings of any bakers that chose to do business with the particular customers.

* For reference, Google and Apple both shut down access to the Parler app within hours of each other, and Amazon canceled the web hosting contract a few hours later. In addition, Amazon's notice to Parler was posted to Buzzfeed roughly one hour before it was even emailed to Parler! These big tech firms that have been highly defensive of the section 230 immunity against 3rd party content have demanded that Parler relinquish its section 230 immunity.

I am not 100% convinced there is a “coordinated effort”. It’s also possible that one company is taking action and the others (who were wanting to take action) have been emboldened to do so and a ‘jumping on the bandwagon’. This is certainly the case when it comes to the number of companies that have publicly announced they are stopping political donations either temporarily or to specific politicians who voted to overturn the electors.

The Bakery analogy is not perfect. No analogy is. On the front end it may be that there’s only one Bakery option in the area... not an issue in a city or populous area but maybe a factor in a rural region. The ‘burning down competitor’ analogy is a bit strong. It’s more like the bakery not only refusing service, but then going to other bakeries and demanding they refuse you service too; or else the first bakery (which also supplies everyone with eggs) will stop selling you eggs. Still not cool, but not the same as burning you down either?

I also think this de-platforming approach is dangerous in two ways:

I agree it’s dangerous and not an action to be taken lightly. I don’t agree exactly with your reasons below... but Ido fear the precedent it sets.

That said, although we all believe in the concept of “Free Speech” the fact is that there are limits to this concept. One can’t lie about other people... that’s liable in a civil court. Companies can’t lie about their products. That is also illegal and there are civil and sometimes criminal penalties for these types of ‘speech’. Public debate about ideas from different political positions is great... but why can we not hold politicians to account for lies in the same way we hold companies accountable?

1) It exacerbates the political polarization. We already have problems with people at opposite ends of the spectrum relying on different sets of news media and reaching vastly different conclusions about various political situations. Removing a large swath of users based on their political positions will push them to a different platform and further reduce the interactions between the two ends of the political spectrum.

I agree some of the actions the Democrats are taking increases the tension. I am NOT in support of this second Impeachment. I think it accomplishes NOTHING and only serves to further divide the country.

In terms of the polarization online... just look at this forum. Even though we have people chat with different views and we “talk” to eachother there is very little real conversation and debate. It’s mostly insults and GIFs and flaming.

It’s not technically banning based on political position. It’s banning based on incitement of violence and spreading of lies.
(and please don’t tell me there’s no such thing as real TRUTH... I understand that in some cases there can be debate on facts, but it’s also true that we have gotten to a point where there are demonstrable lies that people are spreading as truth.)

2) Pushing already extreme voices off of a very public platform and onto a much less visible one may somewhat reduce their ability to spread their messages. But it also reduces the opportunities for opposing voices to provide counter points and temper the extremism. As much as I dislike the overwhelming majority of Trump's tweets, I'd much rather he continue posting on Twitter rather than end up hiding somewhere on the darkweb (where his followers are going to find him anyway).

He’ll never go to ‘the dark web’... the only reason he tweets is for fame/ego. I honestly think the best “punishment” one could push on Trump would be taking away his Twitter. Don’t Impeach, don’t try to find some criminal thing you can hang on him. Take away his Tweeting ability and let him fade to obscurity.