Eircom_Sucks wrote: » people are too afraid to speak their minds incase people get upset , id love to hear of any irish person who has never had a bad word to say about foreigners , we all have Look whats happening with a certain ethnic group in balbriggan , people are affraid to say anything incase labeled racist Did we have this problem 20 years ago with ethnic groups ? Did england ? NO They don’t integrate that’s what he is against , he has alot of muslim friends , had meetings with loads of muslims , he’s against the ideology of islam and lack of integration , and when you question their religon you get attacked , he can’t set foot in his own town in his own country by these goat ****ers
lbc2019 wrote: » Why are there so many Tommy fanboys in Ireland?
OMM 0000 wrote: » Why would there be a mistrial if someone reported on it?
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.
sirmanga wrote: » It's quite clear there is a coordinated plan to shut down Robinson, and as far as I'm concerned that's outrageous. People should be allowed to say what they want as long as it doesn't incite violence. Saying Islam is an evil religion should not warrant a ban from any platform. Unless of course Facebook are enforcing blasphemy laws? Saying that Muslims should be killed, on the other hand, should obviously warrant a ban (I'm not saying Robinson ever said this, by the way.) Having said all of this, it's quite clear that Robinson is a thuggish lager lout who now has deluded himself into thinking he's some kind of freedom fighter. Also, if anyone has ever seen videos of him getting into fights, he punches like a 12 year old girl.
According to Facebook, a written warning had been sent to Mr Robinson last month about a number of posts on his page that had violated its community standards, including: a post calling Muslims "filthy scum bags" a post urging people to terrorise and behead those who follow the Koran a post urging people to "make war" on Muslims multiple videos depicting individuals being bullied
OMM 0000 wrote: » https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/12/social-media-facebook-twitter-google-youtube-bias-conservatives-republicans-column/1250893002/
sirmanga wrote: » It's quite clear there is a coordinated plan to shut down Robinson, and as far as I'm concerned that's outrageous. People should be allowed to say what they want as long as it doesn't incite violence. Saying Islam is an evil religion should not warrant a ban from any platform. Unless of course Facebook are enforcing blasphemy laws? Saying that Muslims should be killed, on the other hand, should obviously warrant a ban (I'm not saying Robinson ever said this, by the way.)
ohnonotgmail wrote: » would you consider any of this inciting violence?
malinheader wrote: » Because we have seen what has happened in the UK and also alot of other European countries. And I for one don't want Ireland following suit.
sirmanga wrote: » All of those examples are an incitement to violence, apart from the calling Muslim filthy scumbags.
Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: » Facebook is an independent, private company. They have no duty to provide anyone with free speech - you are bound by the terms and conditions you agree to when you create the account. Same with twitter. Same with boards.ie. Same with indymedia and stormfront for that matter. Also, they could be held liable for anything libelous written on their platforms. There was aver serious case involving this very platform and a major events management company not so long ago.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » so you dont have an issue with FB banning him then?
sirmanga wrote: » Indeed. But the problem is they don't enforce their rules properly. Many people will bebanned for saying something about e.g. black people and they will be rightly banned. A black person will say something derogatory about whites and they won't be banned. The point is that Facebook, if they keep up this selective banning, will one day be forced to admit that they are an editorial website rather than a social media platform.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » there was nothing selective about their banning of tommy
sirmanga wrote: » Indeed. But the problem is they don't enforce their rules fairly. Many people will be banned for saying something about e.g. black people and they will be rightly banned. A black person will say something derogatory about whites and they won't be banned. Just a general example, but I've seen things like this. Also, if they start banning people for saying nasty things about Muslim they'll have to ban people for making fun of Christians. Or at least they should, to be fair. The point is that Facebook, if they keep up this selective banning, will one day be forced to admit that they are an editorial website rather than a social media platform.
sirmanga wrote: » Ok, well I mean in general it tends to be right leaning people who get de-platformed. Alex Jones got banned from Twitter and the Twitter CEO admits he doesn't really know why. (By the way, I think Alex Jones is crazy.) Yet Peter Fonda tweeted out that he thinks Trump's 12 year old son should be locked in a cage a raped and he didn't even get a suspension.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » maybe because they are the ones spreading the hate
sirmanga wrote: » Advocating a child be raped because you don't like his father's policy is not spreading the hate? Okay
Eircom_Sucks wrote: » You mean same edl hes no longer part of ? That one ? Have you even looked into the good he has done ?Raised thousands for kids and people in need
sirmanga wrote: » Also, it's not about spreading the hate. Right wingers are just as entitled to have an opinion on something as left wingers. It just so happens that all of the social media platforms are based in the ultra liberal California. So to think their is no bias is just silly.
Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: » I'd need to see specific examples of selective racism bans, to be honest. Also, saying "nasty things" about one religion and then "making fun" of another; - interesting change of phrase there.
lbc2019 wrote: » What happened? Ugly white men blamed their problems on someone else and voted to leave the EU?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » can you point me to somebody who was banned because they happened to have a different opinion?
sirmanga wrote: » Alex Jones, like I said. They initially said he was banned for spreading conspiracy theories. Then they said they didn't know why he was banned. But Minister Farrakhan, a black man in the Nation of Islam, is a horrific anti-Semite and said Jews were termites but he has not been banned or suspended. Which is worse, spreading nutty fake stories or being a disgusting anti-Semite? Anyway, back to Tommy Robinson. (Who I think is a clown, incidentally. )
sirmanga wrote: » Ok then, if you get banned for bashing Islam then you should get banned for bashing Christianity. Happy?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » sure
sirmanga wrote: » However, he is only being banned because he is gaining a bit too much influence for the left leaning Facebook's liking.
sirmanga wrote: » Whatever "sure" means. I just said a few posts back that I think he's a thug who has this notion that he's a freedom fighter, a kind of free speech activist. But underneath it all he's a hooligan. However, he is only being banned because he is gaining a bit too much influence for the left leaning Facebook's liking.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/fd886e8068d0cf75a5ff800614b8489e.svg)
