@kevcvs57 saidDid I contradict that? Nope.
You cannot be that much of a cretin so you must be lying, no other proof required.
You said this concerning trumps Twitter ban
“ Freedom of speech is under assault. They found a loophole to kill the first constitutional amendment. ”
I replied
“ It’s been explained that big tech firms are not part of the freedom of speech argument so your lying again. It’s no different ...[text shortened]... r platform what they choose to print, broadcast.or platform. ”
Cretin or Liar make your mind up MB.
That makes you the liar!
@metal-brain saidSure. Twitter’s banning him because he’s such a nice person.
That is because you cannot prove a lie.
@shavixmir saidWhy didn’t they ban Madonna ‘blow up white house’ or the Maxine Waters person for inciting to attack politicians, or Kamala encouraging a fund to bail out terrorists, etc.? Is Twitter more powerful than all?
Sure. Twitter’s banning him because he’s such a nice person.
There is also, the first thing on lib agenda, ahead of Covid, a move to do away with words like father and cousin and girl. You fellers a part of all this..? I will always call Syzianne a girl, no matter what she is.
@metal-brain saidYes you did though mr liar.
Did I contradict that? Nope.
That makes you the liar!
You claimed that Twitter banning Putins orange bitch was an assault on free speech and I’ve proved you were lying because it clearly is no such thing.
@kevcvs57 saidTwitter is ‘restricting freedom of speech’. Please elaborate, how can you say Only govt can restrict freedom of speech.
It’s been explained that big tech firms are not part of the freedom of speech argument so your lying again. It’s no different to a right wing newspaper not carrying a left wing editorial. Only governments can restrict freedom of speech, everybody else can print, broadcast or platform what they choose to print, broadcast.or platform.
Perhaps before he leaves office he’ll insist that Twitter must be sold to a US company, oh no hang on.
@averagejoe1 saidOh my god, another one.
Twitter is ‘restricting freedom of speech’. Please elaborate, how can you say Only govt can restrict freedom of speech.
You have a right to say what you like but other people have a right to not repeat what you say or facilitate others to hear it.
The only organisation that can be accused of injuring your right to freedom of speech is the government by legally sanctioning you for saying it. Your freedom of speech does not override my right not to listen to you or facilitate the propagation of what you say.
- Joined
- 27 Sep 06
- Moves
- 251103
@metal-brain saidWe all know what you are, METAL BANE,
Did I contradict that? Nope.
That makes you the liar!
A Supreme Court Justice said it best, I will paraphrase;
Your right of free speech does not extend to
shouting FIRE in a crowded theater.
'' ..................Oliver Wendell Holmes
4 edits
@kevcvs57 saidYou are correct, I guess the terrain is overwhelming to us Conservatives,, absolutely overwhelming, a new form of fascism?
Oh my god, another one.
You have a right to say what you like but other people have a right to not repeat what you say or facilitate others to hear it.
The only organisation that can be accused of injuring your right to freedom of speech is the government by legally sanctioning you for saying it. Your freedom of speech does not override my right not to listen to you or facilitate the propagation of what you say.
But I GOTTA ask you this...many threads have railed on about what corps "should do and should not do'. You will agree, I assume? If Twitter and rest of them do their things, why can other corps not do what they want to do??? Why do you and Margaret Warren and the radicals (squad, et al) feel it acceptable to jump into what corporations do in the way of benefits they have for employees, hiring employees, firing employees, paying salaries that they choose to pay, etc etc. What if they do not want t have insurance benefits? Whose business is it?
So, you think corps should be regulated about what they do, but Twitter can do what they do without any interference? Please don't get emotional, and please don't mention Trump. This ENTIRE issue has nothing to do with Trump. It is a much larger issue. Should other folks also fear that Twitter will just willy-nilly turn off their accounts if they don't get in line and do what Twitter wants?
And, If Elon Musk starts talking trench-mouth like Shav, should Twitter kick him off?
1 edit
@kevcvs57 saidKeep your eye on the sparrow, though. One simple reason he was banned.....it was because the Twitter 'staff' (admittedly liberal-minded, be honest) did not like what he said, and yet, you are saying that he should be allowed to say what he wants to say. (that pesky free speech thingy). What a bed-wetting conumdrum for you.
Oh my god, another one.
You have a right to say what you like but other people have a right to not repeat what you say or facilitate others to hear it.
The only organisation that can be accused of injuring your right to freedom of speech is the government by legally sanctioning you for saying it. Your freedom of speech does not override my right not to listen to you or facilitate the propagation of what you say.
@AverageJoe1
No wonder it takes so many thousands of Posts for you libs to say what you want to say. A lot hit and miss, like moving targets at a rifle range.
2 edits
@Metal-Brain
One thing clear now. You are part of the Trump army and would no doubt bring arms to the table if Trump called for it.
You are one anti American and anti democracy son of a bitch.
You and Dood and Joe shmo and Average Joe.
It would not surprise me in the slightest to find any of those faces identified with those rioting.
@metal-brain saidCalling for peace 'after' inciting the violence is a hollow act.
Calling for peace is inciting violence? Explain that to us all.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-demonstrators-idUSKBN29B2UT
@ghost-of-a-duke saidHe did NOT incite violence, he encouraged protests.
Calling for peace 'after' inciting the violence is a hollow act.
Saying it doesn't make it so. You repeating propaganda.
@kevcvs57 saidIt is just that. Does trump have freedom of speech on twitter? NO!
Yes you did though mr liar.
You claimed that Twitter banning Putins orange bitch was an assault on free speech and I’ve proved you were lying because it clearly is no such thing.
It is an assault on free speech that is legal.