Tommy Robinson jailed

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Refusing to give bigots a platform isn't bias. It's common sense.

Alright, you don't understand my question or didn't read it.

Let me rephrase:

Why are the accounts of the far left, who promote violence and doxxing, rarely banned?

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Why are the accounts of the far left, who promote violence and doxxing, rarely banned?

Source?

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Source?

How about all the accounts calling for the doxxing or killing of the Covington Catholic High School kids? None of those got banned.

Covington Catholic High School = Conservative MAGA hat wearing kids.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

How about all the accounts calling for the doxxing or killing of the Covington Catholic High School kids? None of those got banned.

I asked for a source because I don't believe your claim. This isn't a source.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Almost as if they don't want to be linked to a racist faudster.

If that was the reason then I'm sure he would have been banned a long time ago.

ohnonotgmail

OMM 0000 wrote: »

That wasn't my point. My point is how the right are overwhelmingly targeted for bans.

There are all sorts of leftist crazies posting crazy stuff, yet they don't get banned.

I look at some antifa accounts and they're constantly talking about hurting people, doxxing people, etc. Yet they almost never get banned.

Surely you can admit there is political bias amongst the media and tech companies?

Perhaps you could link to some examples of these groups breaking site rules?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/12/social-media-facebook-twitter-google-youtube-bias-conservatives-republicans-column/1250893002/

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I asked for a source because I don't believe your claim. This isn't a source.

mcmoustache wrote: »

Really?

You think that Facebook banned him because of something in a TV show? That's actually where your mind went with the information that you have?

You didn't consider that maybe using facebook's platform to spread a lie that had the effect of ddosing the phone lines of a rape crisis centre might have had something to do with it or that maybe he simply failed to heed the warning from facebook?

Yeah, it must be the TV show.

None of that was mentioned as the reasons for the ban. The reasons that were mentioned above in the BBC link, calling for Muslims to be beheaded was one I've never seen him post anything like that although I may have missed it.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/12/social-media-facebook-twitter-google-youtube-bias-conservatives-republicans-column/1250893002/

That's an opinion piece.

mcmoustache

OMM 0000 wrote: »

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/12/social-media-facebook-twitter-google-youtube-bias-conservatives-republicans-column/1250893002/

That's an opinion piece from some anti-abortion guy. When people ask for a source, they aren't looking for any old page that repeats the claims made by the poster.

ohnonotgmail

GinAndBitter wrote: »

None of that was mentioned as the reasons for the ban. The reasons that were mentioned above in the BBC link, calling for Muslims to be beheaded was one I've never seen him post anything like that although I may have missed it.

You think FB just made up something that is as verifiable as that? You also forget that FB can see posts after tommy thinks he has deleted them.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's an opinion piece.

If you google it, there are tons of articles on this topic.

It's constantly discussed by people like Joe Rogan, Tim Pool, etc.

I'm surprised you've never come account this./

I'm not right wing yet I see articles on this all the time.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

If you google it, there are tons of articles on this topic.

It's constantly discussed by people like Joe Rogan, Tim Pool, etc.

I'm not right wing.

You have nothing then. I'm not going to research an argument that you're too lazy to substantiate.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You have nothing then. I'm not going to research an argument that you're too lazy to substantiate.

Obviously do whatever you want, but if you're too lazy to leave your political bubble, I know I would be wasting my time anyway.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Obviously do whatever you want, but if you're too lazy to leave your political bubble, I know I would be wasting my time anyway.

Ah now. You have to actually formulate an argument. It's not lazy of me to do all your work for you.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ah now. You have to actually formulate an argument. It's not lazy of me to do all your work for you.

I already know where this is going. I've been using the internet for too long.

You have your opinion, and you're going to stick to it.

The fact that you're unaware of this topic tells me you restrict yourself to left wing news sources. Right wing news sources CONSTANTLY talk about this issue.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

I already know where this is going. I've been using the internet for too long.

You have your opinion, and you're going to stick to it.

The fact that you're unaware of this topic tells me you restrict yourself to left wing news sources. Right wing news sources CONSTANTLY talk about this issue.

Of course I'm going to stick to it. You've given me no incentive to do otherwise.

You have no idea what media I choose to consume so you just decide for yourself and use that as a cop out.

Telling people to google your argument is just lazy and deserves to be dismissed as such.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

I already know where this is going. I've been using the internet for too long.

You have your opinion, and you're going to stick to it.

The fact that you're unaware of this topic tells me you restrict yourself to left wing news sources. Right wing news sources CONSTANTLY talk about this issue.

As I said yesterday, it's ignorance. A video was posted here yesterday of a BBC employee trying to bribe people for fake stories about TR, but no one wants to watch it because it's Tommy Robinson even though it shows the BBC for what they are, lying scumbags.

Leave the idiots in their little bubble.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Of course I'm going to stick to it. You've given me no incentive to do otherwise.

You have no idea what media I choose to consume so you just decide for yourself and use that as a cop out.

Telling people to google your argument is just lazy and deserves to be dismissed as such.

You cannot be looking at any right leaning news sources if you're unaware of this issue. It's spoken about almost every day. It's actually one of their main topics, along the lines of the usual nonsense like immigration and transgenders.

Snake Plisken

Paul sums it up nicely
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1100396039893323776?s=19

OMM 0000 wrote: »

You cannot be looking at any right leaning news sources if you're unaware of this issue. It's spoken about almost every day. It's actually one of their main topics, along the lines of the usual nonsense like immigration and transgenders.

Reading right wing sources doesn't mean slavishly agreeing with every single word and frankly, the same drivel is just repurposed over and over again though the left wing outlets do that a lot as well.

Mitch Connor

Yeah, sure, Facebook facilitated Brexit and Trump, but will stop good ol' Tommy from defending himself vs the BBC. Cause that makes loads of sense.

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Paul sums it up nicely
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1100396039893323776?s=19

Be more convincing if he presented some evidence.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Yeah, sure, Facebook facilitated Brexit and Trump, but will stop good ol' Tommy from defending himself vs the BBC. Cause that makes loads of sense.

Facebook are not to be trusted.

Mitch Connor

GinAndBitter wrote: »

Facebook are not to be trusted.

Indeed - but why the fook should we think that they removed him due to the BBC. What evidence is there of them working hand in hand with the BBC? Or similar?

GinAndBitter wrote: »

Facebook are not to be trusted.

But a convicted fraudster is?

RWCNT

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Paul sums it up nicely
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1100396039893323776?s=19

What do you think his angle is with that last line? What's his alternative to the free market?

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Reading right wing sources doesn't mean slavishly agreeing with every single word and frankly, the same drivel is just repurposed over and over again though the left wing outlets do that a lot as well.

Obviously you don't need to agree with whatever you read, but I am a centrist, and I make an effort to read the news on both sides of the political spectrum, and it is extremely obvious there is strong left wing bias amongst the tech companies and their employees. Even if you don't believe me, surely it's common sense - San Fransicso is overwhelmingly left wing. This is the location of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram. So the banings generally follow this political bias.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Obviously you don't need to agree with whatever you read, but I am a centrist, and I make an effort to read the news on both sides of the political spectrum, and it is extremely obvious there is strong left wing bias amongst the tech companies and their employees. Even if you don't believe me, surely it's common sense - San Fransicso is overwhelmingly left wing. This is the location of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram. So the banings generally follow this political bias.

Left wing in the US is not remotely the same as being left wing in Europe. Left wing in the US basically means you're not on board the MAGA train.