It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Facebook And Twitter Ban Popular Independent Media Sites In Coordinated Purge

page: 10
54
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

Non-persons can be sued since before that stupid ruling corporations and many other entities have been sued




posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oaktree

originally posted by: olaru12
If Fox can broadcast it's rightwing propaganda because it's a privately owned corporation.

Why can't facebook and twitter run their business the way they want. It's not a state owned utility is it?


They can, apparently.
I deleted my account 27 days ago, although it takes 21 days to actually delete, I’m told.


Facebook is like "hotel California" you can check out any time you like but you can never leave. They have your info.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:30 PM
link   
What needs to be done is to get the explanation of why they took the sites off.

They may have legitimately gone against their TOS

Here’s their explanation
venturebeat.com...



Facebook announced on Thursday that it has removed 559 pages and 251 accounts for routinely violating its rules against spam. These pages and accounts used fake accounts to rack up likes and shares, and pushed users towards deceiving website links, most of which pushed political content. Today’s announcement is at least the third high-profile purge of accounts Facebook has announced in recent months. Over the summer, Facebook announced two purges of Pages, accounts, and events participating in “inauthentic coordinated activity.” Some of the Pages and accounts used similar methods as those previously created by the Russian-linked troll farm Internet Research Agency. Others Facebook could say originated in Iran and Russia. At least 700 Pages and accounts in total were shut down over the summer.





Facebook didn’t say in its blog post which Pages and accounts were removed, but the New York Times reported that Right Wing News, which had more than 3.1 million followers, and left-leaning account the Resistance, which had 240,000 followers, were some of the Pages axed. Facebook told the Times that today’s purge “would be the most domestic Pages and accounts it had ever removed related to influence campaigns.”


In a blog post explaining why the Pages and accounts were removed, Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy Nathaniel Gleicher and product manager Oscar Rodriguez emphasized that they weren’t taken down for the type of content they posted or the opinions they expressed, but because they were using deceptive techniques to encourage people to click on their links.

edit on 12-10-2018 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Oaktree

originally posted by: olaru12
If Fox can broadcast it's rightwing propaganda because it's a privately owned corporation.

Why can't facebook and twitter run their business the way they want. It's not a state owned utility is it?


They can, apparently.
I deleted my account 27 days ago, although it takes 21 days to actually delete, I’m told.


Facebook is like "hotel California" you can check out any time you like but you can never leave. They have your info.


I wish I could star your post 100 times. This has me I stitches. So true.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: rollanotherone

originally posted by: olaru12
I own and operate a business and it's nobody's business how I conduct mine. It's called capitalism and free enterprise, you got a problem with that?

Ha! You must be real winner to work for. I feel sorry for your serfs.


You don't have anything to worry about, I don't hire morons!! Or geeks that wear brown shoes!!

No. Your company is just run by a moron. I'll pass.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: rollanotherone

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: rollanotherone

originally posted by: olaru12
I own and operate a business and it's nobody's business how I conduct mine. It's called capitalism and free enterprise, you got a problem with that?

Ha! You must be real winner to work for. I feel sorry for your serfs.


You don't have anything to worry about, I don't hire morons!! Or geeks that wear brown shoes!!

No. Your company is just run by a moron. I'll pass.




You love those brown shoes eh....



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: rollanotherone

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: rollanotherone

originally posted by: olaru12
I own and operate a business and it's nobody's business how I conduct mine. It's called capitalism and free enterprise, you got a problem with that?

Ha! You must be real winner to work for. I feel sorry for your serfs.


You don't have anything to worry about, I don't hire morons!! Or geeks that wear brown shoes!!

No. Your company is just run by a moron. I'll pass.




You love those brown shoes eh....

Truth be told, I am merely offended by the brown shoes hate. Brown shoes are classy outside of the service industry. Why so much hate on us brown people?



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: sine.nomine

originally posted by: muzzleflash

originally posted by: sine.nomine

originally posted by: Willtell
Remember, the right-wing SCOTUS voted corporations are people with rights.
They have the right to reject you

Worst ruling in the history of this nation.


You are incorrect, because if Corporations are not legally considered "Persons" - than they cannot be sued in court. Only persons can be sued.

What your contention really is - is the scope of rights afforded to Corporations. And it is clear that pretty much everyone agrees - Corporations do not have all the rights a "Natural Human" has, such as voting.

You are correct. That's exactly what I mean.


An important right that Corporations do have, as do we real human beings - is Due Process.
And I think any rational person would agree that Corporations should have both Due Process rights and also should be viable targets for lawsuits, therefore the usefulness of the legal fiction personhood.

I ended up having to help several organizations who were trying to get an amendment to the US Constitution by rewriting portions of their proposed resolution - because when they showed it to me I was horrified and felt like they seriously needed my help. I went and dug up some similar resolutions and explained the 'language' to them and why it was necessary to be specific about exactly what rights (campaign finance related) that needed to be explicitly elucidated in the document.

They were just trying to say "Corporations aren't people" and I was like "That's not what you mean though. This is what you mean - ". It took a few days to get it all sorted out. I did not campaign with them or anything though because I don't have time or the interest really to be involved. I was just helping some friends I know to make their document look really professional and legally viable.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash


I have stated that the censorship is being done by proxy.

So it is government doing this.





posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

I guess my biggest problem is with the amount of campaign finances corporations can give to political candidates. I'm admittedly not super informed on the matter, but I think it's a problem. Same with superpacs. I should probably do more research but I don't want to get in a bad mood, lol.

ETA: By the way, I completely agree with corporations having due process and being susceptible to lawsuits. Something just seems unfair with corporate "sponsorship" to candidates.
edit on 12-10-2018 by sine.nomine because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Would it be ok if the electric company cuts off power to people who don't agree with them?
Is that the same?
Sure they can do it, but to do it just to be a dick ....come on already. What are they scared of and why?
Guess we are going to need two internets.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: JHumm
Would it be ok if the electric company cuts off power to people who don't agree with them?
Is that the same?
Sure they can do it, but to do it just to be a dick ....come on already. What are they scared of and why?
Guess we are going to need two internets.

This is my line of thinking too. I believe there needs to be a real discussion about this. When we're at a point where a Facebook, Twitter, or Google plus account is needed to register with so many services, then at what point does it either become a public utility or a regulated service?



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: muzzleflash

Non-persons can be sued since before that stupid ruling corporations and many other entities have been sued


That is incorrect.
In the law only a person can be sued.

I wish you actually read stuff before you ran your mouth spouting falsehoods.

Legal Person

A legal person (in legal contexts often simply person, less ambiguously legal entity)[1][2] is any human or non-human entity, in other words, any human being, firm, or government agency that is recognized as having privileges and obligations, such as having the ability to enter into contracts, to sue, and to be sued.[3][4][5]

So there are of two kinds of legal entities, human and non-human: natural persons (also called physical persons) and juridical persons (also called juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious persons, Latin: persona ficta), which are other entities (such as corporations) that are treated in law as if they were persons.[4][8][9]

While human beings acquire legal personhood when they are born (or even before in some jurisdictions), juridical persons do so when they are incorporated in accordance with law.

Legal personhood is a prerequisite to legal capacity, the ability of any legal person to amend (enter into, transfer, etc.) rights and obligations.

In international law, consequently, legal personality is a prerequisite for an international organization to be able to sign international treaties in its own name.


And please do read this section:

In the common law tradition, only a person could sue or be sued. This was not a problem in the era before the Industrial Revolution, when the typical business venture was either a sole proprietorship or partnership—the owners were simply liable for the debts of the business.

A feature of the corporation, however, is that the owners/shareholders enjoyed limited liability—the owners were not liable for the debts of the company. Thus, when a corporation breached a contract or broke a law, there was no remedy, because limited liability protected the owners and the corporation wasn't a legal person subject to the law. There was no accountability for corporate wrongdoing.

To resolve the issue, the legal personality of a corporation was established to include five legal rights—the right to a common treasury or chest (including the right to own property), the right to a corporate seal (i.e., the right to make and sign contracts), the right to sue and be sued (to enforce contracts), the right to hire agents (employees) and the right to make by-laws (self-governance).[16]

Since the 19th century, legal personhood has been further construed to make it a citizen, resident, or domiciliary of a state (usually for purposes of personal jurisdiction). In Louisville, C. & C.R. Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497, 558, 11 L.Ed. 353 (1844), the U.S. Supreme Court held that for the purposes of the case at hand, a corporation is "capable of being treated as a citizen of [the State which created it], as much as a natural person."


An additional link for further clarity:
Cornell law
22 U.S. Code § 6010 - “United States person” defined

the term “United States person” means any United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States, and any corporation, partnership, or other organization organized under the laws of the United States.


This information shows that since 1844 the Supreme Court ruled that Corporations are considered persons under the law for the purposes of protecting their rights and holding them accountable for wrongdoing.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: JHumm

They'll only cut you off if you don't pay the bill. They could care less about your politics. All they want is pieces of green paper with presidents faces on it



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

You’ve said a lot of things that don’t make sense.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: sine.nomine

Maybe we need to start a facebook page.

#brownshoesmattertoo



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

And you’re wrong as usual and should be sued for practicing law without any sense

It took you that long to come up with all that nonsense no one will bother reading including me



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: sine.nomine

Maybe we need to start a facebook page.

#brownshoesmattertoo


or

#brownshirtsmattertoo

🚿



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: muzzleflash

Non-persons can be sued since before that stupid ruling corporations and many other entities have been sued


I will further add, that Citizens United v FEC was not a case about whether a corporation is a person per se, but instead about what types of rights corporations have in running speech in media in relation to election campaigns.

The popular backlash is often summed up as "Corporations aren't people" which creates a dilemma, because if corporations aren't people than they cannot be held accountable or sued in court and have no rights at all (or alternatively have the right to do virtually anything they want since they cannot be held accountable in court).

What people actually mean is "Corporations aren't human beings with our natural human rights", because no one wants to make corporations invincible with limitless power. So therefore they must be persons under the law in order to govern them effectively.



posted on Oct, 12 2018 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: muzzleflash

And you’re wrong as usual and should be sued for practicing law without any sense

It took you that long to come up with all that nonsense no one will bother reading including me


I'm not in a court practicing law (aka representing someone).

Everyone has the right to look up and actually read the history of law.
We also have the right to post links and quotes to prove you're being extremely ignorant and obnoxious.

What kind of person posts "You're wrong + I won't read what you just said" referring to the same post?
Why do you even post here? To hear yourself while you ignore others you assume you disagree with? How do you even know you disagree if you won't read their post?

I am amazed by your audacity and pretentiousness. It's baffling and inexplicable.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join