Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


ACLU Says Marco Rubio Is Pushing a Free-Speech Crackdown by Betsy Billingwater - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 13:32:06 EST ID:MN/X2Rk9 No.173509 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1547145126055.jpg -(131037B / 127.97KB, 975x638) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 131037
ACLU Says Marco Rubio Is Pushing a Free-Speech Crackdown

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/rubio-pushes-free-speech-crackdown-on-anti-israel-bds-boycotts-10974008
>>
Alice Ballychot - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 14:53:37 EST ID:Czx10VUL No.173510 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173509
Shouldn't this have gone in the BDS general thread?
>>
William Ginderket - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 15:40:32 EST ID:5sDWO9hA No.173512 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173509
ACLU literally is a verified deplatform on YouTube. Pot meet kettle.
>>
Matilda Goodgold - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 18:35:46 EST ID:8pt/AtPX No.173514 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173512
Is a what?
>>
James Werrywell - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 18:55:49 EST ID:wf9PdUsk No.173515 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173514
He probably meant deplatformer. Which is more the issue of the SPLC. The ACLU actually bothers fighting for things like freedom of speech, usually. This guy is probably just butthurt his millionth useless Nazi alt tard spam account got shitcanned.
>>
William Ginderket - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 18:55:49 EST ID:5sDWO9hA No.173516 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173514
They flag videos they don't like and google/YouTube auto-complies Ministry of Truth style, straight out of Alinksy, accuse foes of your acts, basic manuever.
>>
Emma Backlecheck - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 19:09:56 EST ID:8pt/AtPX No.173520 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173516
And you have proof of this? Also, private company. Don't you alt-right assholes love putting the rights of companies above people, or is that just when they side with you?
>>
Cyril Monnershaw - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 19:24:39 EST ID:5sDWO9hA No.173523 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1547166279182.jpg -(12029B / 11.75KB, 276x182) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>173520
They are publicly traded and received federal subsidisies. They are common carriers like the trashman. This is the turkey of net neutrality, silicon valley is deserving more so than ISPs. Moreover, when did you become ancaps? I'm not an autistic libertarian.
>>
Frederick Dombledack - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 21:11:13 EST ID:KMrlwqCD No.173531 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173515
Southern Poverty Law Center is bordering on a defacto hate group, don't conflate the ACLU with them; there is a huge difference. The ACLU isn't super effective but they fight for legitimate reasons. SPLC just vows censorship on anything they don't like.


>>173523
Yep, it needs to be addressed when you are a private company but hold a monopoly on something nearly everyone in the nation uses nearly everyday for hours a day. It wouldn't take much for Alphabet or Facebook holdings to dramatically shift public values and interests by simply deleting content they don't agree with or like. With basic algorithms, it is just too easy for a handful of people to co-opt a nationwide psychological warfare campaign in their interests. We've already seen it with Russia influencing our election and general public opinion. Cyber warfare is becoming a major threat. I don't like the idea of the government getting a say in what companies can and can't censor because I don't trust them to be competent and unbiased or keep up with changes as already shown. But clearly, the current system has problems when youtube bots remove millions of videos en masse.
>>
Frederick Dombledack - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 21:15:21 EST ID:KMrlwqCD No.173532 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173531
I should also add that this is referring to modern SPLC since I'm sure people here will take that literally and not topically.
>>
Lydia Drorringkure - Thu, 10 Jan 2019 23:37:08 EST ID:i87OFMAA No.173535 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173532
"They're a hate group, but not literally"
>>
Edward Sondlefield - Sat, 12 Jan 2019 23:50:53 EST ID:KMrlwqCD No.173563 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173535
There is a line between, "Kill everything we don't like" and "Browbeat companies into censoring things we don't like."

Kind of like the differences between Antifa and the Alt-Right types. Both are coward punks but one of them is wanting to instate the 3rd reich and the other is just college kids wrapped up in political shit beating people they don't like.
>>
Betsy Condlefag - Sun, 13 Jan 2019 00:44:12 EST ID:4vCtRS3c No.173564 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173531
I really don't know why anybody acts like it's fine as long as corporations do it, like censorship. Corps are even worse than letting the fucking government do it at least government is sometimes capable of being transparent.
>>
Edwin Hullyspear - Sun, 13 Jan 2019 00:54:26 EST ID:M/Ws53KS No.173567 Report Quick Reply
>>173564

From the first amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

It explicitly says congress shall not.... It says nothing about private individuals, or entities, though the law has been expanded upon through various court cases to include various government and government-funded establishments. There has not once been a case about a private website, newspaper, or magazine in regards to this. So essentially, if a company, website, or other business doesn't want to support a certain group's ideas, speech or actions it is not obligated to under the constitution unless it is a government entity, or is doing so explicitly against a certain ethnicity, gender, religion or sexual orientation as outlined in the various laws against hate speech and hate crimes, which are described as actions or speech made for the explicit purpose of harming a certain ethnicity, gender, religion or sexual orientation.

This is simple enough for someone with at LEAST a high school education.
>>
Betsy Condlefag - Sun, 13 Jan 2019 02:37:16 EST ID:4vCtRS3c No.173569 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173567
Yeah except when you are rapidly approaching cyber punk levels and where a few select companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, and Verizon own literally fucking everything as your outlet for freedom of speech. It works as a de facto government censorship too when both entities basically become the same thing, like how our FDA and now EPA are completely gutted and filled with corporate executives. Quite frankly the internet, natural resources, transportation, education, and medicine should all be nationalized. You know why our military is nationalized? Because something as important as defense isn't given completely over to such an idiotic fucking idea as privatization of things that are actually important.
>>
Nell Claystone - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 12:30:23 EST ID:g+vb2gyp No.173584 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1547487023471.jpg -(398756B / 389.41KB, 2048x1152) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>173573
>antifa as described don't even into speech unless it is to arrange violence
Does it count if that violence is exclusively for the purpose of preventing fascists from arranging far greater violence?
>>
Nicholas Nemmermatch - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:55:02 EST ID:M/Ws53KS No.173596 Report Quick Reply
>>173573

The alt right is responsible for shootings, stabbings, bombings, gang violence, domestic abuse, supporting genocide and religious persecution. Antifa is not. It is clear who the enemy is.
>>
Martha Nimmlestock - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 17:05:09 EST ID:k6rJOuXZ No.173598 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173596
You're not replying to someone looking to argue in good faith.
Don't waste your breath on idiots
>>
Martha Nimmlestock - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 17:18:02 EST ID:k6rJOuXZ No.173600 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173599
Seek help, m8
Or go back to the future, whichever suits you
>>
Emma Snodfuck - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 17:46:54 EST ID:8pt/AtPX No.173601 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173596
Don't bother. No amount of evidence provided will ever satisfy, and they'll use that to claim that in fact everyone else does that, but them.
>>
Hedda Gunningford - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:02:45 EST ID:KfGgJBHJ No.173603 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173601
Is must to prove and demostrate their case via censor?
>>
Emma Snodfuck - Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:16:26 EST ID:8pt/AtPX No.173606 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>173603
You ain't Galileo bub.


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.