InfoWars Banned from Facebook and iTunes

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point is that you are trying to tell a business how to conduct its business. That is really the story at the end of the day.

I am? That's the biggest lie I've heard so far today.

a reply to: Words
Well you don't appear to come across as properly understanding the 1st Amendment. So I'm just calling it like I see it.

This scumbag said sandy hook was a hoax. He's lucky he's not been lynched.

Good riddance.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Words
Well you don't appear to come across as properly understanding the 1st Amendment. So I'm just calling it like I see it.

I don't think you understand the first amendment one bit, the principles it protects, and what the free market is. All I see is casuistry.

No where did I tell a company how to conduct its business.

a reply to: Words

Ok smart guy. Explain how Apple dropping AJ from its podcast services violates the 1st Amendment.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Words

Ok smart guy. Explain how Apple dropping AJ from its podcast services violates the 1st Amendment.

I never said it did, smart guy. You know full well what my arguments were, genius.

a reply to: fencesitter85

I'm betting you don't know squat about what Alex said or not. Your fake outrage over a non issue is hilarious.

a reply to: Words

Actually, I'm not sure what your argument is. You seem to just be whining for the sake of whining. Especially if you are acknowledging that this move on Apple's part is Constitutional. The way I see things as long as the Constitution hasn't been violated then I have no problem with how Apple conducts its business. I already don't approve of the company so they doing what they do has no baring on me.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Actually, I'm not sure what your argument is. You seem to just be whining for the sake of whining. Especially if you are acknowledging that this move on Apple's part is Constitutional.

I'm not going to decipher it for you because any graduate of elementary school could. But it involved me successfully refuting, even proving to be lies, most of your arguments.

I think this is becoming clear that this is a coordinated effort to censor Jones by someone or some group beyond the platforms themselves. The ban has now extended to 9 platforms including Jones email platform. It's a shut down on sharing and communication. Even internet radio has shut him down.
Whilst individual companies should always be allowed to decide which content they want to publish, when I see such widespread coordination like this, I think it's gone beyond reasonable. I am also suspicious of politicians involvement here... there are a few calling for even further measures and many called for it before the ban.
Legal or not, if you support this then you really haven't thought it through.

a reply to: Words

Except you can't refute the fact that this move was Constitutional and 100% within Apple's rights to do, and at the end of the day that is all that matters here.

If T&C is considered a contract, they have broken it under false pretenses. Let the court decide.
They have demonetized many channels while still making money on them. Let them pay retrospectively.
The next step is to let SCOTUS decide whether any local, state or cyber - rules can defy constitution.
California is clearly undermining peoples' 2nd A. rights by official obstructions.
This is just a start. A seed. You are not ready for it. My mind is couple of years ahead so I can see it comming

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Except you can't refute the fact that this move was Constitutional and 100% within Apple's rights to do, and at the end of the day that is all that matters here.

I'm not sure who is arguing otherwise. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.

What I was arguing against the notion that Jones was a "victim of the free market", and saying such was a gross misunderstanding of the free market.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Words

Except you can't refute the fact that this move was Constitutional and 100% within Apple's rights to do, and at the end of the day that is all that matters here.

It's not really all that matters, though. Put aside the viewpoint on the guys show for a moment. If you have a situation where a coordinated effort by who knows who can effectively remove a person's ability to communicate or share content to 98% of internet traffic, there is more at stake. You might feel Jones deserves it, but the power over an individual's voice should concern you regardless of politics.

a reply to: UKTruth

Boohoo. He has a website of his own. If people don't visit it then that is his own marketing problem.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Words

Actually, I'm not sure what your argument is. You seem to just be whining for the sake of whining. Especially if you are acknowledging that this move on Apple's part is Constitutional. The way I see things as long as the Constitution hasn't been violated then I have no problem with how Apple conducts its business. I already don't approve of the company so they doing what they do has no baring on me.

hey krazy...keep up the good work. I noticed you changed you avatar...after more than 10 years on here, I don't stay long anymore in the political threads. I call it being "exhausted by the stupid". I still like reading your own posts and responses.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What about us banning you from ATS without a reason? You can have a rant on your website

a reply to: PapagiorgioCZ

Well you aren't a mod so I really don't care what you think about banning me, but if SkepticOverlord banned me for no reason then that would be on him. I'm sure I'd appeal the result and be pretty angry about it but its his website at the end of the day. He has the final say in the matter.

a reply to: jimmyx

Yeah I've toned down my responses too recently. Politics gets exhausting these days. Too much hostility just for expressing an opinion. Especially if it is unpopular.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Too much hostility just for expressing an opinion. Especially if it is unpopular.

Then why won't you defend Alex Jones? It's a genuine question.