It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Democrats Now Claim The Surviving of Our Democracy Relies on Banning More Sites

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 06:14 PM

originally posted by: openminded2011
So the first ammendment is now a threat to democracy. I knew they felt threatened by the second ammendment, but now the first too???

That old "outdated obsolete unworkable document" and amendments always gets in the way of liberal plans and agendas. The constitution.

But hey, if they can censor and control enough of the media and internet, anything might be possible in the future, perhaps including the replacement of the constitution with a new and more "progressive" one.

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 06:28 PM

here is a full video produced by Alex Jones with the late Aaron Russo. I actually shed a tear to this video. Very sincere and I hope it will move you, if you haven't seen it yet. I hope You take a moment out of your busy day to see it!

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 06:38 PM
"Political correctness" was the preferred method of censorship for the left before this: "You can't talk about that. Especially that way".

It's not as effective anymore because everyone had a stomach full, even leftward moderates. So it makes sense that they'd move toward some sort of actual censorship to keep a stranglehold on the narrative.

There is definitely an "information war" taking place. You can tell by the reaction to the election and everything afterward that the left is struggling with the paradigm shift.

I have no use for Jones. My exposure is limited to whatever brief excerpts or quotes I may have seen on this site. But all the "shadow banning" and outright removals of content of conservative content are actually perversely encouraging.

They are finally losing control of the narrative. Intimidation through political correctness isn't working anymore. They are losing the balance of power of all three branches in Washington.

And they have no coherent answer or policy direction to reverse their losses other than to do what they can to silence opposing voices and name calling.
edit on 8-8-2018 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 06:53 PM
a reply to: Bone75

Sites removed from Fckbook, Twatter, Spittify and clicks from Gööble?

For sure, unscribe the crap out of them and move to ATS, bitchute and duckduckgo?

Who cares about the few old farts that rely on a social media site from old for their AJ newsflash (wtf?) if they could just hit up infowars instead? Welcome to hell, you lazy fckbook snowflakes?

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 07:38 PM

originally posted by: anotherside
Its not about left wing agendas. Jones is a psychopath. I used to follow him. Watched his documentaries/expose. He went crazy loon and he foments incorrect thinking..thats right i said he foments bad thinking processes. I think its good he go get some treatment for mania. Hey i have family thats similar i have to deal with on that level. If we get along instead of playing party politics we would get more done. But the children will play.

Democrats Now Claim The Surviving of “Our Democracy” Relies on Banning More Sites

After Alex Jones’ website was banned on Monday via a coordinated action from YouTube, Facebook and other platforms, Democrats are now calling for even more censorship. Shocking, who would’ve thought, right? Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, is looking to impose chicom style internet censorship over websites who incidentally are not agreeing with his party’s political platform. Again, very shocking indeed.

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 09:21 PM

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: xuenchen

Let me correct the title for you:

A member of the Democratic Party Claim The Surviving of Our Democracy Relies on Banning More Sites.

Yeah you just hit the whole nail on the head with most things these days.

One guy or one person does something and we instantly lump his whole demographic with them. Really weird in my opinion.

There are a whole lot of weirdos in the Dem party, that's the problem.

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 10:28 PM

originally posted by: ausername
Translation for the underinformed...

The democratic party can't survive without censoring all major opposition websites and media.

Accurate from my vantage point.

I can read huff post/nyt/etc. and pick it apart easily - no need to censor it.

This censorship is aimed at keeping the narrative intact for the low information voter - which, contrary to what said libs tell you, isn’t the deplorable conservative.

If liberals ever figured out that people don’t want to be talked down to, controlled and really don’t care about things that don’t impact them they’d understand why they lost the election to Trump - but then they wouldn’t be the libs and trying to squash alternative thought.

posted on Aug, 8 2018 @ 10:55 PM

originally posted by: PublicOpinion


posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 12:17 AM
zzZZ... Daily dose of propaganda from Xuenchen as per. Do you not have any hobbies?

You have a president who wants the power to shut down any media that doesn't toe the line with his narrative and agenda.

That's what you should be foaming at the mouth about - your anti-first-amendment president.

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 01:42 AM

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: highvein

What do you expect from the party of "My right to not be offended is greater than your 1'st Amendment right, unless you get offended from being stalked and harassed while eating out, then my 1'st Amendment right is greater than your right to be offended." Or something like that. The Democratic party holds nothing for anyone anymore. The far left have taken it over and that is why a lot of us have left it. The Republican party isn't much better though.

WTF are you even talking about? Try coming out to a union construction site and spew that crap.

In this fictional scenario of yours is a union rep or delegate present? Because people talk differently when those "enforcers" aren't around.

just sayin

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 06:09 AM
Ok So does anyone know how to invent or market quantum radio broadcasting both modalities of computer and internet just like a monitor display with visual server would radio with a shortwave/cb/satellite hopping cell tower jumping algorithm?

edit on 07/01/2017 by LostGods because: too long

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 06:14 AM
a reply to: xuenchen

This sounds a lot like the guy saying, "If you don't join my 'non-violent movement' some friends and I will beat the hell out of you".

I only hope it has the same effect; by waking some people up to their real goals.

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 09:14 AM
a reply to: xuenchen

Isn't democrats a plural? this is laughable.

How do I explain this...'the views expressed by this ONE member does NOT express the viewpoint of the entirety of the Democratic party or it's followers.'

And if I may add some constructive criticism you might want to turn the hyperbole down a notch lest you end up like Alex Jones yourself, this is the view of one person so it's hard to take the fear mongering seriously.
edit on 9-8-2018 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:04 AM
Much like the Nazi's burning books in the 1930s, banning web sites is a bad idea.

If websites are publishing lies, then publish the truth.

If websites are bigoted, then publish the truth.

When you shine a light on lies and half truths, they tend to disappear.

Banning thought, no matter how stupid, is in itself stupid

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:05 AM
The USA is a Republic....Not a Democracy...... learn the Difference and you'll see what the commotion is about
edit on 892018 by MetalThunder because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:22 AM

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: DoubleDNH

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

Easy question.

Are you for or against censorship?

I am against government censorship. I am all for the right of a PRIVATE entity dictating what information is stored on and displayed by their servers. Just like I am all for ATS blocking and banning content they deem inappropriate.


So you're for corporate censorship based on ideology.

I am. It is their infrastructure that they are paying for. It is their servers. It is their storage. Why should we or anyone else force them to host information they deem to be offensive?

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:24 AM
I translate this to in order for their corruption and power to survive they have to use tyranny against opposition

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:26 AM

originally posted by: SoulSurfer
a reply to: xuenchen

Alex Jones was only the start of it. They smell blood like sharks in the water and will try to take down conservatives all in one go like a domino effect.


Are you saying Holocaust Deniers, White Supremacists, hate groups etc plus people that hound and taunt grieving parents of murdered children EQUALS "CONSERVATIVES"???

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:28 AM
a reply to: xuenchenU
Lmao poor Democrats aren't even sure if they're Socialist, Liberal, Progressive, Communist, or Useful anymore. Talk about an identity crisis, they believe they can save the country,you had your chance with 8 years of O'Bummer it failed. Doesn't matter if they shut down every site and or group that doesn't agree with them they will still fall due to their own hubris and sword blade.

posted on Aug, 9 2018 @ 10:29 AM
a reply to: thepixelpusher

But it was just one weirdo in this case..and surely you must know, there are weirdo's in both parties.

Anyway, obviously a very poorly conceived idea.

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in