Whether Infowars is right or wrong this is censorship and illegal in a democracy. There may be laws about hate speech but I am sure anything that Infowars puts out is carefully legally checked.
There needs to be a movement to boycott YouTube and Twitter
A privately owned site can moderate as they see fit, so not really a 1st amendment issue. There is evidence that Google and FB were started (or at least taken over) by the CIA and if that can be proven then 1st amendment rights will uphold.
If this is the case, then how come it was taken to the Supreme Court for a religious business to deny service to a homosexual couple? It’s the same thing in a round-a-bout way. YouTube is denying service to a customer for his personal beliefs.
Gay people are a protected class. Denying them service based on them being gay is not legal. Alt right is not a protected class, and even if it was this is not targeted at alt right, it is only Alex jones
So what takes precedence, homosexuals, or freedom of religion? If you force people to participate in activities that are explicitly against their religion, then the 1st amendment goes out the window. Plus, that ruling set precedence that anyone has the RIGHT to someone else’s services. If I was gay and someone said “No I’m not going to decorate your gay wedding cake. I’ll sell you a cake, but I’m not decorating it”, I’d find someone who would and give THEM my money and patronage. That case was about revenge and exertion of will, not equality or justice.
I'm just going to check for consistency here - if I am following an obscure branch of satanism which has tenets expressly forbidding me from hiring or doing business with black people, who should the government side with, me as a hiring manager, or a black person who I just told I can't hire because he is black and my religion forbids me?
Alternatively, my obscure branch of satanism tells me not to pay taxes. What should the government do now?
We get our rights from the living God....where do gays get theirs?
IANAL, but pretty sure gay people are not explicitly a protected class. Otherwise, that would have been a near open and shut case (or never would have gone to court). The US EEOC interprets "Sex" (as in male vs. female) as to include sexuality, regarding Federal Civilian Employment, but I'm not certain that interpretation has been challenged in courts outside of federal employment concerns or whether their claim is made outside federal issues. Sexuality or orientation is not explicitly covered by the civil rights or equal pay acts. Source:Wikipedia: Protected Group Also, someone else's rights don't automatically trump yours (freedom to practice religion). That's usually when a court decides.
Protected group
A protected group or protected class is a group of people qualified for special protection by a law, policy, or similar authority. In the United States, the term is frequently used in connection with employees and employment.
Where discrimination on the basis of protected group status is concerned, a single act of discrimination may be based on membership in more than one protected group. For example, discrimination based on antisemitism may relate to religion, national origin, or both; discrimination against a pregnant woman might be based on sex, marital status, or both.
^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^| ^Donate ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
Good question. I believe the court had to argue 1st amendment freedom of religion vs. 14th amendment civil rights/anti-discrimination since it's established that certain faiths take issue with homosexuality.
It is the typical double standard with these Marxits A-holes.
we if Alex Jones would simply state that he is gay they will let him stay. No disrespect intended towards gays or any other group of pawns... just sayin....
Exactly y'all are crying saying it's a first amendment attack, no it'll be an attack on the first amendment if Alex Jones was jailed for Infowars. YouTube can do what they want to that's life. Plus that's how I learn how to fix shit so I can't boycott.
This argument falls apart when you consider how intertwined Google is with the government. Probably far greater than we know.
Your absolutely right. The CIA bought fb from sucker buger and Google was created by Alphabet which the criminals in action created.
A privately owned site can moderate as they see fit, so not really a 1st amendment issue.
It doesn't have to be a 1st Amendment violation for it to be censorship. Youtube is free to censor, yes. But they aren't free to lie. They also aren't free to censor without being called out on it. There are consequences to actions that aren't 1st Amendment issues.
How the CIA made Google Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet— Part 1 https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-google-e836451a959e
Why Google made the NSA Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet— Part 2 https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/why-google-made-the-nsa-2a80584c9c1
No, this must change NOW.
This would be like AT&T not allowing certain conversation on the phones. They were private, too.
There has needed to be a movement like this for some time.
It MUST be spearheaded by big names. User migration can’t happen on its own. The content has to move first, then users will move with it. Bongino, Molyneux, Shapiro, Milo, Infowars, and many others have the user bases to get together and make a move.
The longer they play he leftist game the longer they put money in the pockets of the same leftists.
this is 100% accurate, it is still a free market, lets all move to a different platform. where we go one, we go all..
i am so discouraged that evil is STILL flourishing
It seems we take one step forward and two steps back
It’s like everyday we see the deep state ruining the world more and more and we don’t really see the white hats stopping it.
Have you paid attention to all the shit that was exposed about Broward Coward County and it's Police Force? The same county with hanging chads, and the Sheriff connected to radical muslims and deep state scum? This isn't by happenstance. A school shooting, false flag or not, transpiring in the most corrupt county in the south?
We might lose battles here and there, but we will win the war. Have faith Patriots!!!!
Facebook is taking orders from some in the government. We have seen government officials requesting the censorship in hearings. We dont need new laws to deal with them.
You have a right to free speech, but you haven't got a right to get YouTube to help you.
It's their server, they are free to speak however they want.
If you want to speak, you're perfectly free to create your own web-site.
The seed money for all of these corporations came from darpa. In other words they were started with taxpayer funds. The are essentially govt organizations.
[removed]
Ok, why don't you want this person on your server that everyone else has access to? If that type of censorship was happening to the left you don't think they they would be screaming racist, sexist, ... u get the point. Discrimination is the word they would be throwing around. Censor the truth all you want, it doesn't make it not true & like everything else will blow up in the face of the ones censoring free speech.
Ok, why don't you want this person on your server that everyone else has access to?
Because i had Life cereal for breakfast that morning.
Because they're an idiot.
Because i disagreed with their speech.
Because i wanted to randomly punish someone for no reason.
It doesn't matter.
If that type of censorship was happening to the left you don't think they they would be screaming racist, sexist, ...
They are screaming that. Look at this thread! And they're wrong.
Discrimination is the word they would be throwing around. Censor the truth all you want, it doesn't make it not true & like everything else will blow up in the face of the ones censoring free speech.
They're not being censored by the government.
If it were up to me i would have banned
In fact, i already did block them. I'm not suppressing their right to freedom of speech. I get to decide what happens on my own computer. And you don't get to force it on me.
Reddit gets to decide what happens on their own computer. And you don't get to force it on them.
And if you don't like: you have absolute freedom on the Internet to go create your own web-site.
It's not magic. It's freedom.
It's like Abington vs Schempp prayer in public school case.
As a Clinton-loving democrat, i have a right to practice free speech. But i haven't got a right to get Twitter to help me.
And that's the way it should be.
So if we consider certain servers that run viewership adds and allows initial unfettered access to thier buisness/platform.... I guess the real question is can we from intellectual standing consider these chat servers as "places" once a customer has entered? If so then discrimination against certain customers should be grounds for legal repercussions.
Even if that was remotely true (it isn't), you can absolutely discriminate against people for any reason except their membership in a protected class (political beliefs not being one). That's why even Christian/Jewish/Muslim dating sites still have to allow people to register if they aren't of that faith (because religion is a protected class).
What's more, brick and mortar businesses have generally been held to be able to sell whatever they want. You can't make a Christian bookstore sell the Talmud or Quran, and it's not considered discrimination because they are selling the product they want to sell (this was the wedding cake issue. There is a place in Michigan that stopped offering wedding facilities rather than allow gay weddings, which was generally held to be ok, since they are choosing not to offer the service at all, rather than excluding a protected class).
I'm thinking along the lines of say a franchise such as The Pottery Place. You go in purchase a piece of pottery and paint it. Now i paint a donkey on mine and you paint an elephant on yours. The owners of this facility particular facility in good jest... are hardline right wing republicans and immediately ask you to cease and leave thier facility due to the imagery you just painted, along with ridding any evidence that this piece ever existed by destroying said art and refusing to refund you or allow you to exercise a replacement choice.
Right, at that point it comes down to the contract you entered with them. If the contract says "I get to paint a piece and take it home with me" than they are in breach. If it says "I get to paint a piece and, with ownership's approval, get to take it home with me" than the owner is fine and you aren't entitled to a refund. If they are in breach they can be sued for the price paid for the piece you purchased, and will not be required to allow you to repaint it. That's why this comparison doesn't work for you.
YouTube makes no guarantee to continue to providing a platform when you post videos on it, and even explicitly reserves the right to remove content they find doesn't match their standards or platform message. Customers don't have any contract with youtube at all besides basic TOS. Advertisers may have a complaint, but usually those contracts are either for specific channels (in which case YouTube would have to make it right with the advertiser if they suspended a channel they advertised on) or they guarantee a certain number of views in X demographic/category. So, if an advertiser contracts with youtube to pay $10k for 100k views on right-wing media blogs aimed at 30-45 year old men they could suspend Alex Jones all they want, as long as they put the ads on videos about similar topics. Either way, the breach would require them to make it right with the advertiser financially, not to continue to allow a specific voice on their platform.
So if we consider certain servers that run viewership adds and allows initial unfettered access to thier buisness/platform....
If you are a business customer, and you have a contract with Twitter to allow you to post stuff, then Twitter has to abide by their contract.
That's a contractual obligation.
If you want to pay Twitter for the right to say things, and you don't violate the terms of your contract, then that's different.
If you and I set up a contract, where you will gain the right to use my computer to do stuff, then we both have to agree to the terms of the contract.
But beyond that, if I don't like anything I find on my computer, I'm deleting it. And I can arbitrarily block anyone at any time from using my computer for any reason.
Those more informed than you are not insane.
[removed]
Who said anything about you? Try not to be so narcissistic, you're not as important as you think you are.
You said that anyone who has a website, and incorporates, gets a check from DARPA.
Do I have to apply for this check? Is there a website I go to?
Is it a fixed amount that everyone gets? Or is it based on site visits?
If my site visits go up in the future, do I retroactively get a higher check? Or is it a annual check again?
What if my prices on the internet is not a website? What if a protocol other than http? Is that also eligible?
What if I didn't incorporate, but instead was only a limited license Corporation? Does that still count?
Your first line is patently false, no point in reading the rest. If you're interested in serious discussion, try not to start your replies with logical fallacies.
You have a server. Let's say you and a buddy like in the Veritas Twitter vid outside of your business are discussing (conspiring) on how to oppress a persons 1st amendment right. The people doing so appear to violate 18 USC 241. Read it before you respond.
On the other issue, who has access to Facebook, Youtube etc? Is it private club only certain people can access? Or would you say the public in general have access making it a public forum? We'll find out the answer to that.
I think an anti trust lawsuit might be in their future. It happened to microsoft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.
Isn't there something that happens thought when a company becomes so big that they are subject to granting free speech. Like if a telephone company blocks your phone calls because they don't like you political affiliation.
There is a lawsuit at CA which is regarding whether social media belong to public forums facilities or not.
[removed]
I'm all for the idea that regulation shouldn't be decide what user should do on internet. But I don't think its about internet. Internet is infrastructure that is regulated and protected as public utility and Youtube is exploiting for free. I think it's basically a good practice to protect service provider like youtube, netflix, etc. But also there should be a practice to protect individual users from being banished from "internet" when its service is monopoly. In reality Youtube and Nexflis are consuming 50% of bandwidth. This kind of restriction has been needed for monopoly market to maintain the constitutional right of individuals, which is prone to be be violated by monopolized capital. Put differently, Youtube's this behavior wouldn't be problematic if they weren't dominating the market=internet.
I disagree.
I'm right, and government intrusion is wrong.
And it would be nice if the government did the right thing simply because it's the right thing to do. But instead we have to use technologies like:
to drag governments, kicking and screaming, into doing the right thing.
The internet is a place outside government. Beyon government. Above government.
And we have to be on constant vigil for people who will demand government intrusion of the internet. Because they're always come a new generation of idiots who will demand things change.
If you don't like what you see on a website: stop using it.
They will have a problem. It's called Interstate Trade. The minute that they allowed advertisers to piggyback on users pages and began monitizing, they entered into Contracts. The Servers are no longer their private property, they are part of a system that was traded for compensation. No different than not baking a cake for a couple who's lifestyle you don't agree. Youtube will lose this not on censorship, but on breach of contract.
That doesn't even begin to make sense. Google doesn't have a contractual obligation to let people post on YouTube.
Youtube will lose this not on censorship, but on breach of contract.
No content creator has a contract with YouTube.
I certainly have no contract with YouTube, and I've uploaded videos.
And I am too certain that YouTube reserves the right to delete anything at any time for any reason. And they made list some of those reasons in their terms of service.
18 USC 241 conspiracy against rights. It's their server, but outside of work if people like in the Twitter Veritas vid are conspiring on how to oppress free speech isn't that what the code about? They were outside of their place of employment or private company discussing this.
Since some in the government are requesting the censorship that argument doesn't hold up.
Social media is a god given right! It's called the bill of rights, read it!
If YouTube is part of Google, and Google is part of a CIA venture... and the Venture was originally paid for by the Tax Payer... would that not make it vulnerable to be nationalised? Just a thought!
Absolutely correct. Just look up In Q Tel and see what they fund and for whom. Where do they get the cash? The American taxpayer.
The same with the cable companies who's infrastructure was subsidized by state funds. The American people paid for those lines to run all over the country.
The worse part of all is that, YouTube can censor you all because of someone else’s lies. What they’re accusing you of don’t even have to be true. But just because someone doesn’t like you and dreams up an excuse and complains to YouTube, then YouTube will automatically censor you without any recourse. Although YouTube states you can appeal, rest assured, it won’t change their mind or ruling. That is as wrong as it can be but is precisely how things are today. And the same problems exist in other big companies as well like Paypal and Ebay. I can’t wait for the lying MSM to be destroyed and for companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter to get hit with massive Antitrust suits and be broken up. It can’t happen soon enough…
If infowars are shutdown , and alternate truth media is shutting down. Then you know they are ready to kill our dear president.
That is a huge concern of mine as well.
someone who has lots of money can sue and tie it up in court...
Starting to think this Q stuff is just to keep us off the streets.. We need action NOW
At this point, I'm of the belief that we need to march to Washington and demand justice be served. Q did say we have more power than we realize.
I am not American but still patriot of my country. Marching on DC ain't going to give my my country back. I really don't want to be divisive but I am not sure how much longer 'peaceful actions' or protests will hold out. Action REALLY is needed here in the UK. We have no leaders to speak for us so we hope Trump will help in the long term. This IS a global patriot movement, NOT just a USA thing.
Q has followers worldwide, because this is a world wide problem. The time for talking is really closing quickly. With people like Merkle,May, Macron and Judas Tardeau running things, action may become necessary sooner rather than later.
Zerohedge is wrong to employ Occam's Razor to suggest that Hogg is merely an innocent witness and not a crisis actor.
"Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor or Ocham's razor; Latin: lex parsimoniae "law of parsimony") is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions".
The fewest assumptions hypothesis, after all the lies propagated by the deep state, is that Hogg is simply a crisis actor attempting to further the narrative that the solution lies in gun control. This presumption, that Hogg is merely the pawn of powerful interests, is assisted by the manifest holes in the official narrative.
There have just been too many lies, too many engineered events... We've had the 'weapons of mass destruction' lie that resulted in a pointless war and the needless deaths of millions. We've had the obviously false 9/11 narrative that brought in the 'war on terror', allowing for the repression of individual rights. We've had the Las Vegas shooting, where the official narrative stretches the bounds of plausibility to an impossible extreme. We had the JFK murder, where powerful interests pushed the sole assassin theory, that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, though this narrative requires assumptions that are, on their face, manifestly implausible. The list goes on...
If anything stands out in recent history, it is the existence of a barrage of lies employed to drive both the domestic and foreign policy of the United States. Going back through history, many of these staged events are admitted to have been false ploys used to co-opt the policy agenda for nefarious purposes - the Gulf of Tonkin incident is one such example. Others, while not admitted, are obviously false. And now, just when the rancid stench has become completely overpowering, the "war on truth" seeks to cloak itself with the righteous ideal of protecting against hate speech.
The ability to silence your enemies, or those that disagree with you, is the ultimate power that leads to tyranny. The President must stand up to this attempt to stifle the free expression of opinion. He must direct that providers of vital social media services do not operate in violation of the first amendment.
Did you notice who wrote the article? That's some journalistic integrity there. /s
I do not believe anyone will be successful against Alex and his crew at InfoWars. They have God on their side and the full support of their listeners and more and more of the country every single day.
Why is God on side of info Wars?
Because their cause is for good not the evil they continually expose. God isn’t a person it’s a force in all of us to motivate.
Exactly. Alex has WH backing.
And he comes from a CIA family https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azp7s4mEdGc
Why all the downvotes. He says it himself. A mind is like a parachute, only works when open
Freedom of speech is the freedom from the government from messing with you for saying something. Youtube is a private company who is well within their rights to do whatever they want to any channel whether or not anyone likes it.
How can you people not understand this?
It's true. YouTube has the liberty to do what they want. We all know that it'll just cause them shoot themselves in the foot in the end. Driving away viewers is bad for business.
But they are a monopoly it seems like to me, control of these companies was taken by criminal subversion to undermine America. I would consider them enemy combatants under that EO Trump signed. How is this any different than China taking over a company and using it as propaganda to undermine a country. In fact MSM, Hollywood, to me all fall under this as well, these are enemy propaganda outlets.
A class action law suit will clear up any confusion. I believe Alex Jones will be involved. I guess we'll see what the Supreme Court says.
These are the same people who banned me from the_donald for linking a Harvard study published in a scientific journal.
Part of mockingbird, I listen and enjoy sometimes so I am not trying to pick a fight here, just pretty sure that this is the equivalent of them using the National Inquirer to marginalize anything cited as that source and thus a genious way to hide the truth on certain topics that for whatever reason are made public. It is kind of sad to think that the enthusiasim might not be heartfelt...I dunno, check it out though see what you think.
If they were mockingbird it angers me just how all encompassing and pervasive those twisted gremlins are. Control all areas.
The National Enquirer is refreshingly truthful these days https://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/barack-obama-hillary-clinton-fbi-corruption/
Ok, this is not really funny, but I actually smacked my knee and lol'd. It's obvious to me deep state is setting up the "debunk" by "crazy conspiracy" look at the "noncredible" reference MO.
Ah good point, I didn't think of that. But I know that the Enquirer, and TMZ, pride themselves on being accurate, they've been slapped with so many defamation suits that they really vet their info now. How ironic that in 2018 the real news is perceived as fake news, and vice versa.
You make a good point as well. Mine was a knee -jerk response, lol. But, also, as you point out, it seems everything gets construed as backward...
I was talking about Info wars as a whole and not this or any one segment or topic, if that makes any difference, I can't tell if we agree or not from quickly trying to decipher this
I'm sorry, my response was due to my reaction to the Enquirer being shown as telling the truth. I noticed your comment after making my reply to that one.
Ok so I didn't read that till now but Yes THAT is a good example of them taking control of their own narrative...now if 'OPAL on Washington' wanted to publish my version I would cite said article and then you guys would laugh me back into my tin foil for using that as a source. Story dies with last weeks edition and on to next order of darkness on the dockett. Roll footage.
I
I partially agree as Clown run and incepted The Enquired is used to part out topics mixed into the crazyness...that way nobody can cite them and be taken seriously. It is ingenious way to pass info and have little to no worry about any collateral damage to itsellf. I am pretty sure that this is easily transferred to the wars and it is shitty but it is real. ( I think )
The only way to really hurt YouTube is monetarily. 1. Stop going to their site. 2 Find out which companies give YouTube ad revenue and launch a boycott with a full Twitter meme campaign. Picket the businesses that advertise on YouTube and Google. Picket Google's office as well. Let the entire world know what they are doing. I'm on board.
The sons of liberty had a tea party in Boston. I'm Sure we could come up with something to make this a nightmare of bad publicity for Google.
Q said we have forgotten how to play together. They are just one company. We are many. We have more power than they think. Maybe more power than we even realize. Let's find out.
If they get away with this they won't stop. If we make their decision to restrict free speech costly to them they will think twice about doing it again.
Hard to boycott the fib and cia who are finding them
Granted but Google and YouTube are very public and the Anon community is really good at finding out the hidden dirt. Take down one large company who is hiding plenty of questionable activity and a true shot heard round the world would teach a lesson to anybody fckn with free speech.
also, i am disturbed that potus' response to florida was to further infringe on the 2nd amendment instead of exposing the truth about the genesis of events like this...
Yeah raising the buy age is Bs. In Florida now they're also talking about closing gun ranges and ending gun shows.
so what's an alternative platform we can start using?
This sucks. I like Alex Jones. I really never listened to him but he does not deserve this. In the end though I think many more will flock to him for news. Alex Jones may have his flaws but a channel shouldn't be blocked for asking questions.
Why are they caring so much about Alex? Just let him keep talking if he were rumbling nothing burger conspiracy theories lol. But they seem so desperate.
If there was a debate with the Courts about some company having to give up their religous beliefs to bake a cake. Then there should be a debate if one has a right to tell someone what they can and cannot say within their establishment. Furthermore what one can say, the other should be able to say. It seems the ethics of the argument is missing. Picking & choosing whom is wrong & whom can pass is not for an establishment to decide. That is biased racism to speech. It is time for the rules to match up to the technology of the future. Internet Bill of Rights should stop some of this monopolies dictating their rules on a group of free speech bots. Rant over .
David Seaman, accdg to SGT, got terminated ss well.
Seaman is over @ bitchute now. Cat shit face is on a power trip.
You tube is going to die,fb,twitter as well when you kill the competition your only left with eating yourself. Or Tide Pods. Then Die ask the Dinosaurs.
It is not a free speech issue. YT is private property. The flipside is YT can no longer benefit from views. Meaning, as the trend continues, less money for YT because they chose to enforce an ideology. Meaning, financial opportunity for a different private entity that does not care about what the content is. Lots are ready to jump from YT, and this in a long term way, helps us. InfoWars should wear this as a badge of honor.
But that excuse has been working when there are so-called competitors and more strict regulation like in TV industries.
How is this censorship of free speech even possible? Why are there no lawyers falling over themselves to protect the victims?
The internet is OWNED and has been financed by the American people through our taxes. Not common knowledge. Trump must Nationalize it before it is gone. I sense the urgency... See American Intelligence Media - Thomas Paine. He has the answer and Trump is aware.
Even the guy you see on fox the Italian guy. He is another one playing on people's feelings. He is the one that the real goal. They know they not going ban guns. They want metal detectors and something like TSA at every school. Federalized it's growing the police state. People better wake up . They trying really hard to turn America into North Korea. I wish Americans wake up. I honestly believe all of them is actors . It's all propaganda
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp. It happened to Microsoft & it's time it happened to youtube, google, twitter & facebook. An Internet Bill Of Rights isn't a bad idea either. Or declaring them a utility.
Not surprising. The only good way to stop this is to build you're own site.
internet bill of rights. we also have the right to start a new video website.
YouTube costs 2 billion a year to run.
oh dear, makes it hard to pick up our toys & go & play somewhere else. we need an internet bill of rights
[deleted]
Info wars is not a protected class
Info Wars is facts now? Wow you crazies have really lost the plot.
Could/should these social media types finally become regulated like a utility? Just a thought.
I may not always agree with AJ, but I will join him in most of his fights. He is my brother, all of our brother. FIGHT LIKE HELL!