The internet is not a lawless space

It's weird how all these accounts calling for Trump to be killed, raped in prison, the same for his family, Trump supporters to be hung and killed in the streets... they are all A-OK with Twitter. But Trump, why he's so dangerous we have to cancel his entire account.

a reply to: oloufo
It's not two sides, not one side. But be honest.

Let's look at the titles of the videos you presented.

Not a good look if you want honest discussions.

I agree with you in summary, but when it comes to evidence, you fell back into the peghole.

Looks like the current American (D)emocrat efforts to reverse all expose(D) (D)emocrat lies and crimes is influencing worl(D)wi(D)e entities and soothsayers.

This will continue for at least 2 years as the coming (D)emocrat failures start piling up high 😃

a reply to: oloufo

Any genuine proof these cited individuals are actually who you claim they are ? 😃

the fairy tale of the stolen election has led to violence, no one can argue that away.

I find it interesting that for about the past 6 years we've had quick a bit of violence / riots over fairy tales that are demonstrably false. Yet, the left continued to support and encourage those riots. Twitter certainly didn't require any astericks or fact checks under tweets, nor did Youtube.

Hands Up Don't Shoot - Michael Brown. FALSE.

Trayvon Martin - FALSE

Freddie Gray - FALSE

Breona Taylor - FALSE

George Floyd - FALSE

originally posted by: jjkenobi
It's weird how all these accounts calling for Trump to be killed, raped in prison, the same for his family, Trump supporters to be hung and killed in the streets... they are all A-OK with Twitter. But Trump, why he's so dangerous we have to cancel his entire account.

Apparently it is illegal to speak unless nobody listens to you.

originally posted by: oloufo

in the end, it is also about the protection of children or people who are possibly not intellectually able to distinguish between lies and truth or who are not familiar with the mechanisms of the internet and are therefore easy to manipulate, which at some point can also have an influence on the lives of these people.

In America, I think we decided a long time ago that it is those peoples' duty to protect their own self.

We owe them no such protection.

it's not about free speech. it's only about protecting the opinions that fit into my world view, right? if facebook had started deleting the profiles of democrats, activists, etc., the outrage here on the forum wouldn‘t be great, am i correct?

The outrage would be great indeed, if such deletions had not already occurred against conservatives.

But since one side has already been the victim of it, having the other side be similarly victimized would make the world appear more fair (at least temporarily.)

This is far from perfect. Of course all censorship is bad, even if both sides suffer it.

hate is not an opinion. and it's no coincidence that in every civilized country there is a legal limit to when an expression of opinion becomes a crime. in germany, for example, you can pay up to 1,000 euros for an asshole. no one gets upset about that.

the internet is not a lawless space.

what if someone attack your wife, your partner, your children on the internet, insult them, threaten them? do you then say: that's his opinion and it has to be protected?

Hate is an opinion.

A threat is not. If someone threatens to harm you they are "confessing" to their intent to do material harm.

I could walk into a bank with a gun on my belt, and tell the cashier I intend to draw the fire arm and kill them if they don't give me the money in the till..... and technically I would only be talking.

But there is line being crossed, because I openly admitted I intended to do more than talk.


But if all they were doing is making fun of my wife, or saying she's a bad person, they have the ABSOLUTE right. (And I could only respond by making fun of them back, or saying they are bad people.)

a reply to: oloufo
You’re right it’s not... so they should hold everyone accountable for their rhetoric that has led to violence.