Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Facebook Now Suspending Accounts Which Question Mainstream Media Reporting/Account of Events

page: 3
74
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattdel
reply to post by foodstamp
 


#1: Not my picture, not my article.


Ok


#2: Everything in the picture was released by a media outlet at one point or another.


And SELECTIVLY put together to indicate conspiracy and push an agenda of "conspiracy theory". Disinfo in it's truest form. Sure, you or anyone else can spread mindless drivel and have ignorant people take it as fact. I respect that right, but you wouldn't do it on "My" site that "I" pay for and have created, nor should you expect FB to do the same.



#3: Removing everything that everyone finds offensive from the Internet will effectively cut it's size to about 1% of what it is now. Dangerous precedent we set for ourselves.


This point of view I can agree with, however has absolutely no bearing on the subject in question. Which is a FB posting that's been censored.



Please see your way out, you clearly have a vendetta against me, or you're incapable of admitting that you snapped at me out of context and now you won't leave without a fight.


A fight? No, A debate to "Deny Ignorance" indeed! Shall you accept my challenge or walk away?




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by foodstamp
 


List the inaccuracies. To my knowledge, he was autistic, dressed himself like Rambo, and it has been confirmed from several sources including superintendents that she never worked there. Do I need to keep going?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Facebook is for socializing with friends and family, not for making political statements. There are children on it and it's open to the general public. They have a standard to uphold.

If they had a way to set boundaries for pages that were "questionable" then they would do that, but they don't. Everything is open so everyting is held to the same standard.


That's not entirely true. There are plenty of security measures in place, and more it seems every week. Most of them are questionable as far as ethics are concerned, but if I so choose to I can prevent anyone I want from viewing the things I post. I can make it so I have to authorize you to see ANYTHING beyond my chosen profile name. It's not a giant free for all.

The point is, various people use FB for various reasons. It's not up to the "offended" masses to decide what you or I can talk about, ESPECIALLY when you have to come looking for the offensive image.
edit on 17-12-2012 by mattdel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by paradox
 


One of his "friends" likely reported him. I doubt Facebook was actively looking for it.



BINGO.

OP, I would take a close look at your "friends" ... I know some people have hundreds, even over 1000+ "friends" on facebook so it may be difficult for you to determine who ratted you out.. but I can pretty much guarantee that it was someone on your list.

I had an PUBLIC account under a pen name and posted nothing but political rants, etc. But only had 3 "friends" and they all shared my viewpoints. Facebook never once deleted anything or otherwise contacted me for any reason... and I can tell you, that photo you posted is a joke compared to some of the things I have shown and/or the language I'd decided to use for said descriptions. I held nothing back.

You have a mole!
edit on 17-12-2012 by HIWATT because: add



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by foodstamp
 


List the inaccuracies. To my knowledge, he was autistic, dressed himself like Rambo, and it has been confirmed from several sources including superintendents that she never worked there. Do I need to keep going?


Ok, I'l bite.. Let's list inaccuracies and unconfirmed points and how they've been twisted into a "Conspiracy Agenda"

1. "In full body armor who's never shot a gun before" Unverified and unsourced. Nor do I think anyone could verify except him weither he shot a gun. He certainly had access to them.

2 "Drives to another state, gets into a locked school looking like Rambo" *Inaccurate* The school was reported to have locks, but not locked. He just walked right in. (Can you see how they're going to insinuate a conspiracy yet?)

3. "Kills 26 people with Dead on accuracy" This goes against previous statement on the poster, which was "Never shot a gun before" Thus insinuating, dare I say, a conspiracy. However, this is outright false! Most of his victims were point blank and no more than 10-20 feet away. Where's the accuracy? Is there autopsy reports that indicate precise vital organ shots!? No! This is FALSE INFO!

Need I go on?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattdel

Originally posted by L8RT8RZ
Facebook is for socializing with friends and family, not for making political statements. There are children on it and it's open to the general public. They have a standard to uphold.

If they had a way to set boundaries for pages that were "questionable" then they would do that, but they don't. Everything is open so everyting is held to the same standard.


That's not entirely true. There are plenty of security measures in place, and more it seems every week. Most of them are questionable as far as ethics are concerned, but if I so choose to I can prevent anyone I want from viewing the things I post. I can make it so I have to authorize you to see ANYTHING beyond my chosen profile name. It's not a giant free for all.

The point is, various people use FB for various reasons. It's not up to the "offended" masses to decide what you or I can talk about, ESPECIALLY when you have to come looking for the offensive image.
edit on 17-12-2012 by mattdel because: (no reason given)


Well, if you don't like it, cancel your account.
That'll show em



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by foodstamp
 



So what's your point? Are you saying he had his account suspended for posting "false information" on his Facebook?

This thread isn't about whether that info is correct or not... it's about censorship.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Facebook is one of the worst places on the internet to say what you really think. I thought it was well known by now that Facebook and CIA are joined at the hip.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by foodstamp

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by foodstamp
 


List the inaccuracies. To my knowledge, he was autistic, dressed himself like Rambo, and it has been confirmed from several sources including superintendents that she never worked there. Do I need to keep going?


Ok, I'l bite.. Let's list inaccuracies and unconfirmed points and how they've been twisted into a "Conspiracy Agenda"

1. "In full body armor who's never shot a gun before" Unverified and unsourced. Nor do I think anyone could verify except him weither he shot a gun. He certainly had access to them.

2 "Drives to another state, gets into a locked school looking like Rambo" *Inaccurate* The school was reported to have locks, but not locked. He just walked right in. (Can you see how they're going to insinuate a conspiracy yet?)

3. "Kills 26 people with Dead on accuracy" This goes against previous statement on the poster, which was "Never shot a gun before" Thus insinuating, dare I say, a conspiracy. However, this is outright false! Most of his victims were point blank and no more than 10-20 feet away. Where's the accuracy? Is there autopsy reports that indicate precise vital organ shots!? No! This is FALSE INFO!

Need I go on?


Coroner reported exactly 2 shots per body. In the heat of "battle", it takes a well trained, well prepared person to fire exactly 2 rounds into each separate person. That, or someone accustomed to execution-style weapon use.

We'll see sooner or later, I suspect. I have a feeling that the lid on this one is gonna pop off.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by L8RT8RZ
 



A better idea would be to "play nice" on your "real" account, but create a totally new one which focuses on specific issues... and limit it as far as "friends" go.

Don't "friend" anyone that doesn't support the views you're expressing therein.

No complaints = no interference.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT
reply to post by foodstamp
 



So what's your point? Are you saying he had his account suspended for posting "false information" on his Facebook?

This thread isn't about whether that info is correct or not... it's about censorship.





It was probably suspended because somebody complained about it. What you post is seen by people on your list. If they don't like it and they complain about it, facebook does something about it. If nobody complains, they don't do anything. They don't have moderators going around checking stuff out, they just rely on member complaints and respond to them as they happen.
If he wants to prevent it from happening again, he can find out who complained and take them off his list, otherwise, if he does it again and they see it, they're going to complain. End of story. Be more careful of who you friend.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Here is the video with the statement of prosecution for false information on any social media sites.





Much love

RangerClark29



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by foodstamp
 



Ok, I'l bite.. Let's list inaccuracies and unconfirmed points and how they've been twisted into a "Conspiracy Agenda"


Your on a Conspiracy Website, but yet you seem to really have an issue with Conspiracy Theorys??? Not quite understanding that one.......



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by RangerClark29
 


Thank you for bringing that along. Couldn't find it.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by six67seven
I don't see a problem with "permanent facebook account termination", in fact I encourage people to set that as their facebook goal.

Permanent Facebook account termination = progress

What would people do with all their newly discovered spare time???


Ya I guess every ATS member that as a facebook account should re-post it a few time
would be a good reason to leave



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


Well, there unfortunatly is a fine line between actual conspiracy theory backed by evidence and just outright paranoid accusations based on someones belief system. I however, am interested in the first example.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by foodstamp
 



Ok, I'l bite.. Let's list inaccuracies and unconfirmed points and how they've been twisted into a "Conspiracy Agenda"


Your on a Conspiracy Website, but yet you seem to really have an issue with Conspiracy Theorys??? Not quite understanding that one.......


Probably loves conspiracies. Probably can't stand to think that the Government would kill 26 people to further an agenda that we aren't privy to know about. Most people can't handle that train of thought. Part of the reason 9/11 truthers got stifled in their efforts, no one wants to hear earth-shattering, world changing things like that. Gimme my iPhone and my Starbucks and GTFO my way, I got money to make to feed the banks.

The Libor connection alone is HUGE, but unsubstantiated and "taboo" around here, it would seem.
edit on 17-12-2012 by mattdel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by mattdel
 


Yeah, sure it'll pop off. He had some experience with guns and played a WHOLE LOTTA video games. And the news was inacurate in saying he had no experience. End o' story.

And for the record. A double tap into a target at 10ft is no feat at all. You can't make a statement of "dead on accuracy" because the coronor noticed most of the people were shot twice can you? I mean really? Let's keep it real here. This is how BS starts.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT
reply to post by foodstamp
 



So what's your point? Are you saying he had his account suspended for posting "false information" on his Facebook?

This thread isn't about whether that info is correct or not... it's about censorship.




My point?? Bud! really? My point is they have EVERY RIGHT to take off anything they deem inappropriate. And not only that, but the "User" agreed to those terms!

Your right it's about censorship! FB is not America, FB is a privately owned corporation/website.

edit on 12/17/1212 by foodstamp because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by foodstamp
 



Well, there unfortunatly is a fine line between actual conspiracy theory backed by evidence and just outright paranoid accusations based on someones belief system. I however, am interested in the first example.


Fair enough! But what do you consider evidence? Something that we hear the talking heads on TV telling us, whom by the way are all owned by 6 huge corporations?

Are critical thinking skills now officially outlawed and we must believe what the TPTB tell us is truth??

Not meaning to bash you, but truth is becoming an animal listed on the "extinction list" if you get my drift.....

I unlike you appreciate those on ATS that keep my mind working versus believing everything I am told.
edit on 17-12-2012 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join