Amazon Bans Tommy Robinson’s Book, ‘Mohammed’s Koran’

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Allaroundyou

Forgive me, what does it mean to "dox" oneself?

Well based on what it means I would assume that to “dox” oneself would be to expose and make public info about you.
I could be wrong though.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Are you sure you actually "learned" that word today??

They sure have it out for this guy.

What should frighten us is the people defending this action. they’re tying the proverbial noose that will some day appear around their own necks.

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
a reply to: Allaroundyou

Are you sure you actually "learned" that word today??

I was watching a documentary last week that used the term. I believe it was "Alt-right age of rage" on netflix.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Alt Right!

Because when insulting people with Racist,White Supremacist,nazi isn't enough.

Pull another label out of 'thin air'.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Allaroundyou

Alt Right!

Because when insulting people with Racist,White Supremacist,nazi isn't enough.

Pull another label out of 'thin air'.

That is just the name of the documentary film I watched.
You are decent at spreading propaganda. Maybe not try that crap me BRO.

originally posted by: Mach2
While I'm fairly conservative, and believe in free speech, i also believe a private company is free to sell, or not sell something as they see fit.

The privatization of all government functions to privately held monopolies has been extremely profitable. For example, many NSA functions have been outsourced to Booz Allen Hamilton. Do you think an outsourced privately held corporation should be allowed to sell state secrets to foreign governments or the highest bidder? After all, the executives of he company are legally bound to do anything and everything to maximize return to the shareholder.

Ya, sorry, a private retailer can decide whatever the f they want to sell ..or not..ban?..lmfao

a reply to: neo96

If you're fine with the government dictating what certain businesses must sell then are you fine with government dictating who is eligible to purchase firearms? Are you fine with them giving preference to certain people in court?

Hell, you even have a problem with the government telling companies where they can dump their toxic waste.

But the government telling a company they have to sell a book is okay?

Talk about hypocrisy.

a reply to: neo96

It's funny how offended the alt-Right have become at the use of that term when they're the ones that coined it.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Allaroundyou

Alt Right!

Because when insulting people with Racist,White Supremacist,nazi isn't enough.

Pull another label out of 'thin air'.

Can we at least agree having the rule of law takes precedence over hate-speech?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: neo96

It's funny how offended the alt-Right have become at the use of that term when they're the ones that coined it.

Again, amazing, they act like being called alt-right is an insult when really it’s just like calling me a liberal or someone a conservative.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

If you're fine with the government dictating what certain businesses must sell then are you fine with government dictating who is eligible to purchase firearms?

It already does.

What's your point?

Admit it.

You hate Robinson so it's ok for an American company to discriminate against the red headed step child.

a reply to: dfnj2015

ALL speech can be considered hate speech.

Especially when lefists only want to read and hear only what they agree with.

Which makes them no better than NAZIS burning books they don't like.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Allaroundyou

Alt Right!

Because when insulting people with Racist,White Supremacist,nazi isn't enough.

Pull another label out of 'thin air'.

Can we at least agree having the rule of law takes precedence over hate-speech?

No, because "hate speach" is totally subjective. What one person is offended by, another may say meh.

Farracon is a racist, hateful idiot, for example, but i defend his right to say what he thinks.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: JDmOKI

So a site like ATS should be required by law to host any post no matter how repugnant and vile?

A forum like r/The_Donald should not be allowed to delete any post critical of Trump?

What is repugnant and vile about criticising a 'holy' book used to justify atrocity committed across the planet?

I wonder how many people here who seem to really hate Tommy, agree with antifa showing up at his wife and children's house when he was out of the country, and live streaming themselves.. revealing his family address, when they have nothing to do with any of this?

That's right, read coins post again, that's now much they care about reality.

a reply to: neo96

It already does.

And yet you go out of your way to rail against that fact in every thread regardless of if it pertains to gun control or not.

So why are you so vehemently opposed to the government placing restrictions on one amendment but welcome with open arms restrictions on another?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Stop wasting my time with crap.

aclu-co.org...

Private business aren't allowed to DISCRIMINATE against anyone.

a reply to: gallop

So you would be fine if ATS allowed posts espousing the eradication of the Jews, blacks, gays, gypsies, etc?

What about posts discussing how to assassinate the President? Should ATS also be required to allow those?

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Is any part of your reply, meant to mean anything?

And you wish he gets DOXed?

righteo...