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.
Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by vcwxvwligen
What benefit would that have, besides rousing the anger of ignorant sheeple who do not understand what the word "censorship" even means ?
I didn't come in here with this point in mind.
I just made an observation, and suddenly I was mobbed by mods saying it wasn't censorship.
And then all of this happened.
It's their own fault.
That's what you get if you treat people like children, and refuse to admit to obvious situations.
I also will mind my one line responses and big qoutes, since my points are dropping harder than the DOW index after an Obama speech.
[edit on 1/3/09 by enigmania]
Originally posted by mister.old.school
Originally posted by DangerDeath
It is exactly in history, where the authority comes to play, when freedom of speech becomes "abstract".
Please elucidate on your intentions in that statement of yours. I'm not clear as to the intent of your meaning.
If that's what he/she is suggesting, my reading comprehension skills are shot all to hell. Maybe that was the implication of his/her first post. But pages of demands of an "official" ATS admission of censorship buried any such subtlety.
Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by neformore
All threads on all forums in the whole world are affected by all of these approaches.
There is no way anyone in this world can prevent it.
The theme of this topic is totally empty...
and the intent of the OP was to announce who is the boss and that rules don't apply to the boss.
I am very sorry, but my experience in discussions with members of ATS were much more enlightening that this one.
I'm sure you wanted to bring this issue to such an end, you must have a good reason for that.
Debunked.
The boss is naked.
ATS censors some discussion insofar as it does not allow the discussion of every possible topic to continue on its website.
Originally posted by enigmania
The mods were just lying.
I'm sorry, but to me your post seems like debate moulding. You're taking a few choice examples and framing them as a conspiracy against ATS, when in reality it is ATS, scared of the atention those subjects would cause, that is trying to hide them away.
You say the above, and then you say The theme of this topic is totally empty... But if the first is true, then the latter makes no sense. If the approaches are happening everywhere, then the topic theme is not empty whatsoever.
Originally posted by neformore
Simply put - did you use the alert button on the posts you found to be particularly offensive? No.
Originally posted by neformore
Yes, sometimes we see things ourselves, but if we don't get told we don't always know.
Originally posted by neformore
So please, raise an alert on the particular aspect and we'll look at it, but be aware of the difference between discussion and discrimination.
Originally posted by neformore
conversely it its perfectly possible to discuss radical islam without resorting to it.
If you think that by using broken record technique to try and push a single agenda debunks a conspiracy that potentially covers a whole site, then you aren't much of a conspiracy theorist, researcher and debater, are you? I gave you direct evidence from the server logs about the increase in visits from political parties during the election period. You completely ignored that. Sorry, but its not me who's got no clothes on their argument here. You are sitting completely naked right now.
Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by americandingbat
Nice to hear C word, finally
Originally posted by enigmania
reply to post by americandingbat
You don't get it.
It's not about agreeing with me.
The mods were just lying.
The mods were just expressing their opinions as members, and their opinion of the situation. I don't think any of them was lying: I think they really believe that they are using the more appropriate definition of censorship to apply to this case.