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.

 

If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

page: 11
20
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


I doubt it. Being that children were murdered & that poster was making celebrity posts about it they banned him all on their own. Make a similar thread about Sandy Hook and see what happens.




posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   


lol

edit on 22-12-2013 by ltinycdancerg because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


Tell that to church that pickets funerals from children, to fallen soldiers, to Mandela.
edit on 22-12-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


The answer to the question is no, that wouldn't be right.
But is it right that a person can be banned and given no reason ?
I been in deep doo doo more than once around here.

My experience everytime compliments ATS amicably..
I remained civil and just explained my side with all respects.
I'm still here. So I have to say any one who gets banned may
deserve it for a reason you don't realise. And you're left
believing you got them banned,when that wasn't the case at all.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   

darkbake
reply to post by winofiend
 


Beezer is a mod, isn't he? Even if he isn't, Wrabbit is


Heya Dark. I need to hop in here for just a moment and address that concern.

First let me say the majority of the topic here is a couple levels above me for response in any form of official basis or policy. Even for the most casual reference. So, don't mistake anything I say for that. It isn't and it's not meant to be.

You raise something I don't want to see get even a kernal of life going where I'm personally concerned though, because it's simply false and, as it happens, painfully so at times.

It's a very big site, with many many people and my Mini- numbers aren't among those that got glitched. I earned every digit.... Which means I know or consider friends, most of the folks here. (It is a BIG site and I'm still amazed how many I never heard of too).

Having said that, it could be assumed but let me remove the assumption. Friendship simply isn't a factor where I put my Mod hat on. It can't be. Ever. If I ever started that path, there is no "end" point and no way to make anything right by reasoning it away for what is and isn't fit to think of in those terms.

I say painful because it's not theory to me and over the months I've been staff, that aspect of my approach has already been tested and ATS came first. It always will, as it must for thinking in this context, IMO.

Thanks for a moment to clarify! I'll hop off now and busy myself with my carrot garden.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   
I'm still waiting for Beez to define what he means by "right"....?



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   

ltinycdancerg
I'm still waiting for Beez to define what he means by "right"....?


Is that like "it depends upon what the definition off 'is' is"? rolleyes



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:12 AM
link   
To be quite honest with you all, I'm a little surprised that ATS hasn't given me the powers yet to be able to ban people I disagree with... ATS, a simple explanation to the delay of this would be nice, unless you're waiting till Christmas to surprise me



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Next important question we have that needs answering is, which bunny is the more badass bunny, Wrabbit2000 or beezzer?



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   

beezzer
reply to post by maus80
 


So do don't believe in free speech. You just believe in speech that coincides with your ideology?


I believe in freedom of speech and that businesses have to be subject to the constitution and may not ever violate human rights. In fact they belong to the customers in spirit.

Many have had violations of speech online, and its not petty when it happens. IT is akin to being raped or murder, you feel like your in danger danger and you also know that those who are doing this will face harming people one day.

I believe in freedom of speech and censorship is evil. As long as your not being abusive. There should be protocol and rules but not censorship.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   

beezzer

Now answer the question that is the title of the thread.

Of course I have no power to control ATS to ban anyone.

But this speaks to the free exchange of ideas. Does that still exist?

I look forward to the answers.

beez




Free speech has never existed on ATS, it's a privately owned and run website who can ban whoever they like and whatever they like, for any reasons they like.

There is no freedom of expression and certain topics and subjects are absolutely off limits, as are some beliefs and opinions.

Pretty pointless thread tbh.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:18 AM
link   

darkbake
reply to post by winofiend
 


Beezer is a mod, isn't he? Even if he isn't, Wrabbit is


I tried to read watership down once but there were just too many funny bunnies for my liking.




posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
I believe one of the simplest examples of "free speech" being taken away on ATS is whenever a thread on Sandy Hook gets removed or 86'd... I honestly wonder why this topic is so touchy to the owners of this site, but 9/11 and a bunch of other conspiracies are fair game....



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Restricted
 


semantics is important and relative in this particular discussion.

However, your condescending Clinton reference IS not.
thanks for contributing that cliche joke though.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

If?

If wishes were horses
Beggars would ride:
If turnips were bayonets
I would wear one by my side.


If I have a long virtual stick, and choose to poke you in the eye after you have me banned - is that right?

:-)
edit on 12/22/2013 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:54 AM
link   
as I, and others have said before, "RIGHTS" are only convenient privileges....there are many examples in America of this, but, probably the most well-known is the internment of American citizens of Japanese decent during world war 2. my father-in-law was one of them, and after he was released, he never again voted or had anything to do with government....he said to me, "when we needed our rights protected the most, those rights failed us".... he lost everything but one suitcase of belongings.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   

buster2010
If a person is against religion it's because of hate? Nothing breeds hate more than religion.


Thanks again for illustrating, displaying a supremely unaware, uninformed, . . . assertion.

1. IF you include the Religion of Scientism, the Religion of Nihlism, the Religion of Atheism, the Religion of satanism . . . and EXTRINSIC pretend "Christianity," you'd be close to making a tolerably accurate point.

1.1 However, you tend to primarily to only mean UNDIFFERENTIATED "Christianity" in your slams. As I've demonstrated with scientific studies on other threads that's so inaccurate as to be ignorant.

1.2 Lumping Extrinsics in with Intrinsics means you are conflating and vainly trying to homogenize two extremes into one brazenly WRONG UNTRUTH.

1.3 Extrinsic "Christians" are the most bigoted, narrow, rigid, harsh, hypocritical etc. on the continuum of Christianity.

1.4 WORSE, when you ignore atheists in such a slam, you are horrifically WRONG AND INACCURATE. The "indiscriminately anti-religious" that make up the bulk of atheists are--of all groups measured to date [in terms of the studies I've read]
by FAR the MOST bigoted, narrow, rigid, harsh, hypocritical, HATE-FILLED of all the interest groups measured.

1.4.1 IIRC, the "indiscriminantly anti-religious" atheists--with their position at the extreme most hate-filled end of the continuum were at least 2.x standard deviations or more from the authentic INTRINSIC CHRISTIANS on such variables.


1.5 The AUTHENTIC INTRINSIC CHRISTIANS are the LEAST bigoted, broadest-with-integrity, most flexible, least harsh, least hypocritical and LEAST HATE FILLED of the groups measured [at least at the time I was doing my dissertation].

2.0 So your relentless, hostile hate-filled rants against religion and Christianity in general are at best horrifically full or scientific errors. Yet you write as though you were the Pope of philosophical accuracy in such hate-filled regions.

3.0 However, your rants are a prime example of the success of the globalist propaganda machine controlling the media, the educational institutions, Hollyweed, etc. for more than 50 years. You have evidently become a very useful and compliant propagandist for the horrifically inaccurate propaganda from the pit of hell and the heart of tyrannical globalism intent on removing EVERY SHRED OF FREE SPEECH AND INDEPENDENCE AND FREEDOM available across the planet.

4.0 The OP question is merely talking about one of the influences of their full court press effort to manipulate the GROUP THINK they have long been installing in the public square and the minds of the sheeple, serfs and slaves.

5.0 This is just a microcosm of what's been liberally and relentlessly spread abroad on every front by their psych ops and propagandists ruthlessly and relentlessly
. Maybe you could volunteer as their poster child success story.

.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by maus80
 


If every forum on every site, every ISP, every provider banned you from sharing your opinion then would your freedom of speech be infringed upon.

Remember free speech zones - speak your mind - in a fenced in area well out of earshot of anyone - but please speak your mind.

It is unlikely that every avenue for free speech would be shut down to an individual - today - but what if it were?

Whats happening more and more today is people are being told they can share their opinions but the establishment is making sure that everytime somebody does it hurts. This has a chilling effect and before you know it no one speaks their minds because its just not worth it. At that moment the public has voluntarily given up their right to free speech.

Nobody said you can't speak you mind - just know that you are going to pay for it.

Like the old saying goes - no one can take away your rights - you voluntarily give them away.
edit on 22-12-2013 by WWJFKD because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 




hey, Wrabbit...I'll give you a thumbs up, we disagree on about everything, but I'm not going to be an ass about it, well, maybe under my breath...I've got enough C&C's (crankies and crabbies) left for real life, I don't want to over-extend myself here on ATS.
edit on 22-12-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


Flowers wilt and paint peels by what I've been known to say under my breath......and which could never reach the screens or ears of who it was so directly meant for. How else do we stay sane when every logical instinct is the opposite?




top topics



 
20
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join