The Tolerant Left at it again....again

[*PhilHos*]

(10-20-2020, 01:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Admittedly, I mis-typed when I stated Seattle instead of San Francisco in the OP and if some can make that the subject they will consider it a success.

To them it is more forthright to focus on the typo instead of the absolutely ignorance and intolerance of a group idea that considers them selves to be Anti Fascist, stopping a rally supporting free speech. 

You're wrong, bfine. They're CLEARLY more interested in not labelling the violent people in your OP as 'antifa' or 'the left'. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

So an arrest was made in the unprovoked assault of a black man. The poor guy was punhed in the face twice and botj front teeth were knocked out.

https://www.ourmidland.com/news/article/San-Francisco-police-arrest-man-in-assault-on-15659337.php

Several hundred counter-protesters surged into the area for the 1 p.m. event, overwhelming the handful of conservative activists. Counter-protesters threw glass bottles, filled plastic bottles, metal cans and eggs, said police. The event was quickly canceled as a public safety hazard.

Three San Francisco officers were injured when they were assaulted with pepper spray and caustic chemicals.


The attacker was charged with Mayhem, which is a very serious crime. The sentencing triad is 2,4 and 8. Given the hate crime enhancement don't be shocked if the prosecutor goes for the aggravated sentence of 8. The enhancement would add another two. Hopefully this guy gets at least six.

[GMDino]

(10-20-2020, 01:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Admittedly, I mis-typed when I stated Seattle instead of San Francisco in the OP and if some can make that the subject they will consider it a success.

To them it is more forthright to focus on the typo instead of the absolutely ignorance and intolerance of a group idea that considers them selves to be Anti Fascist, stopping a rally supporting free speech. 

Yeah the new board is weird that way.

Some want complete and total accuracy.

I once shared a FB video that was time stamped for the wrong day.  I admitted my mistake and was not only unable to post a defense of my own mistake but labeled a troll for life.

Stuff happens I guess.

As to the OP as I've said repeatedly, doesn't matter where it happens, violence isn't the answer whether it is the left, right or middle.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-19-2020, 02:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: A group of citizens applied for and was granted a permit by the city of Seattle to hold a rally protesting the censorship of free speech by some platforms. AKA a 1st Amendment rally to support the 1st Amendment.

So a bunch of woke folk show up and violently shut it down because.....wait for it.......this is good........They're against fascism!!

https://news.yahoo.com/free-speech-rally-organizer-attendees-131705837.html

Silly rabbit.  Ideas can't be violent.  

[BigPapaKain]

(10-20-2020, 01:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Admittedly, I mis-typed when I stated Seattle instead of San Francisco in the OP and if some can make that the subject they will consider it a success.

To them it is more forthright to focus on the typo instead of the absolutely ignorance and intolerance of a group idea that considers them selves to be Anti Fascist, stopping a rally supporting free speech. 

Maybe some Adderall would help in preventing future gaffes?

[CJD]

They should arrest those that were violent.

As a side note, why were they protesting private corporations but calling it a free speech rally? They understand that those two things are unrelated, right?

[GMDino]

(10-21-2020, 10:14 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: They should arrest those that were violent.

As a side note, why were they protesting private corporations but calling it a free speech rally? They understand that those two things are unrelated, right?

No.  Unfortunately for too many the Amendments start with number 2.  They know that one inside and out.  "Free speech" is too confusing.

Sometimes people nominated for the SC don't know what the first amendment covers either.  

[*PhilHos*]

(10-21-2020, 10:14 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: They should arrest those that were violent.

As a side note, why were they protesting private corporations but calling it a free speech rally? They understand that those two things are unrelated, right?

(10-21-2020, 10:19 AM)GMDino Wrote: No.  Unfortunately for too many the Amendments start with number 2.  They know that one inside and out.  "Free speech" is too confusing.

Sometimes people nominated for the SC don't know what the first amendment covers either.  

While I fully grant that possibility that they don't understand Amendments apply only to the government (in terms of restrictions or lack thereof), do you guys grant that maybe they DO understand that and want certain businesses to also be held to the same standard as the government?

[CJD]

(10-21-2020, 10:22 AM)PhilHos Wrote: While I fully grant that possibility that they don't understand Amendments apply only to the government (in terms of restrictions or lack thereof), do you guys grant that maybe they DO understand that and want certain businesses to also be held to the same standard as the government?

That may be the case.
That wouldn't be very rightwing of them though. Very rarely do you see the right arguing for more regulations on private corporations.

[GMDino]

(10-21-2020, 10:22 AM)PhilHos Wrote: While I fully grant that possibility that they don't understand Amendments apply only to the government (in terms of restrictions or lack thereof), do you guys grant that maybe they DO understand that and want certain businesses to also be held to the same standard as the government?

(10-21-2020, 10:24 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: That may be the case.
That wouldn't be very rightwing of them though. Very rarely do you see the right arguing for more regulations on private corporations.

This.

Dawg got it.  But within any group of protesters you have people who don't understand what they are protesting OR that what they want may also affect THEM in negative ways.

[Belsnickel]

(10-21-2020, 10:22 AM)PhilHos Wrote: While I fully grant that possibility that they don't understand Amendments apply only to the government (in terms of restrictions or lack thereof), do you guys grant that maybe they DO understand that and want certain businesses to also be held to the same standard as the government?

Here's my problem with the "free speech" rally. Disclaimer before I begin, I don't endorse the violence that occurred.

The whole thing that they were protesting over was not censorship of conservatives. It was an attempt to limit the reach of potential disinformation that could have a major impact. Even the people at the NY Post knew that it wasn't reliable information and the guy who wrote most of it refused to put his name on it for that reason. The NY Post itself is notorious for stories that are less-than-credible to the point where it is almost a tabloid. There is still a ton of misinformation spreading around about the topic as evidenced in other threads on this forum. Facebook had a meeting a few years ago where they discussed they weren't going to censor fake news because an objective application of such a policy would be seen as targeting right-wing users at a higher rate and they didn't want that perception. I'm not joking here, that was the actual reason given.

This is why I can't take those things seriously. Studies show that the right is just more apt to share and spread misinformation and disinformation. It's not that these companies are actively trying to suppress conservative voices, it's just that most of the fake news comes from the right.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-21-2020, 10:24 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: That may be the case.
That wouldn't be very rightwing of them though. Very rarely do you see the right arguing for more regulations on private corporations.

True, but people don't like it when business discriminate against them because they belong to a specific group.

[CJD]

(10-21-2020, 11:07 AM)PhilHos Wrote: True, but people don't like it when business discriminate against them because they belong to a specific group.

I can't speak to what these people experience on social media. Maybe they're being censored right and left, I don't know. But I think corporations' chief concern is liability. Even if the cases don't materialize into anything, if Twitter just hosts whatever people say no matter what, they will face constant lawsuits from people purporting that some tweet or article was left up despite being libelous to them, especially if Section 230 is changed like Trump threatened months ago.

And even if private corporations were changed to be forced to meet the same criteria held under the first amendment, threats of violence would still not be protected (not saying that this particular rally was about threats of violence, but those are definitely on there and Twitter was removing those as well, including people hoping Trump would die of COVID).

At the end of the day, social media is just an expression of our society and I think this rally and the sentiment behind it are just manifested frustration from conservatives whose beliefs are so wildly unpopular that society as a whole does not view them as acceptable beliefs to have. In other words, they reside outside of the Overton window. 

If the social media companies didn't censor them, then the people certainly would. If enough people report a tweet, it's probably taken down, maybe even automatically, I'm not sure. And then those people would just complain about that, labeling it "cancel culture." In a bit of an ironic twist, the majority of "Cancel Culture" is actually just the "free marketplace of ideas" but this is becoming a digression of a digression.

So it's gonna happen regardless of whether Twitter does it proactively or reactively. 

[fredtoast]

(10-21-2020, 10:31 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is why I can't take those things seriously. Studies show that the right is just more apt to share and spread misinformation and disinformation. It's not that these companies are actively trying to suppress conservative voices, it's just that most of the fake news comes from the right.

(10-21-2020, 11:07 AM)PhilHos Wrote: True, but people don't like it when business discriminate against them because they belong to a specific group.

Businesses don't discriminate.  The right gets dealt with differently because they behave differently.

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2020, 10:31 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Here's my problem with the "free speech" rally. Disclaimer before I begin, I don't endorse the violence that occurred.

The whole thing that they were protesting over was not censorship of conservatives. It was an attempt to limit the reach of potential disinformation that could have a major impact. Even the people at the NY Post knew that it wasn't reliable information and the guy who wrote most of it refused to put his name on it for that reason. The NY Post itself is notorious for stories that are less-than-credible to the point where it is almost a tabloid. There is still a ton of misinformation spreading around about the topic as evidenced in other threads on this forum. Facebook had a meeting a few years ago where they discussed they weren't going to censor fake news because an objective application of such a policy would be seen as targeting right-wing users at a higher rate and they didn't want that perception. I'm not joking here, that was the actual reason given.

This is why I can't take those things seriously. Studies show that the right is just more apt to share and spread misinformation and disinformation. It's not that these companies are actively trying to suppress conservative voices, it's just that most of the fake news comes from the right.

Perhaps they were going to protest the hypocrisy over which potential disinformation they choose not to make public. I could easily see why some would consider that censorship. Unless Twitter and Facebook have some prestigious researched facts only journalism award

[hollodero]

(10-21-2020, 10:31 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is why I can't take those things seriously. Studies show that the right is just more apt to share and spread misinformation and disinformation. It's not that these companies are actively trying to suppress conservative voices, it's just that most of the fake news comes from the right.

And that's just the truth of the matter. And this is not just an inherently biased assessment, that can to a certain amount be measured. There are facts, and there are clear falsehoods, and often that can be determined aside from any bias. And while not all, many of the more dire conspiracy stories just come from the right-wing spectrum. As do many of the manufactured fake news stories Russia is producing.

And this whole "censorship of conservatives" talking point seems so overblown. People aren't silenced when they're conservative or support Trump. People are (maybe) silenced when they claim Fauci started Covid or call Democrats a pedophile ring.

[Mickeypoo]

(10-21-2020, 02:49 PM)hollodero Wrote: And that's just the truth of the matter. And this is not just an inherently biased assessment, that can to a certain amount be measured. There are facts, and there are clear falsehoods, and often that can be determined aside from any bias. And while not all, many of the more dire conspiracy stories just come from the right-wing spectrum. As do many of the manufactured fake news stories Russia is producing.

And this whole "censorship of conservatives" talking point seems so overblown. People aren't silenced when they're conservative or support Trump. People are (maybe) silenced when they claim Fauci started Covid or call Democrats a pedophile ring.

Well, Schiff and the entire Left MSM just lied to your face for days saying the Biden laptop was Russian disinformation just to cover for Biden.  Schiff didn't even have any facts to back it up.  Just straight up lied.  I would call that spreading disinformation.  Hell, CNN wouldn't even cover the long and exhaustive 7min FBI news conference yesterday.

[GMDino]

(10-22-2020, 09:36 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Well, Schiff and the entire Left MSM just lied to your face for days saying the Biden laptop was Russian disinformation just to cover for Biden.  Schiff didn't even have any facts to back it up.  Just straight up lied.  I would call that spreading disinformation.  Hell, CNN wouldn't even cover the long and exhaustive 7min FBI news conference yesterday.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/adam-schiff-spokesman-ratcliffe-purposefully-misrepresenting-comments-about-hunter-biden-laptop-story

Quote:A spokesman for Rep. Adam Schiff said the nation's top intelligence official is twisting the California Democrat's words to validate President Trump and his allies' attacks on Joe Biden and his son Hunter.


After Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested the revelations found in emails allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden were a "smear" from the Kremlin, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe accused him of trying to use those in the intelligence community to leverage some kind of political narrative.


"Director Ratcliffe is purposefully misrepresenting Chairman Schiff's words in an effort to mislead the public and validate the latest attacks by President Trump and his allies on Vice President Biden," a statement by Schiff spokesman Patrick Boland read, according to CNN.

Schiff's spox responds w/ a statement that Ratcliffe is " is purposefully misrepresenting Chairman Schiff’s words in an effort to mislead the public." pic.twitter.com/GAeHc6NLsJ

— Jeremy Herb (@jeremyherb) October 19, 2020

 

Boland also cited Ratcliffe's own warnings that disinformation from foreign actors, including Russia, would play a strong role in the 2020 election.

"The new wave of attacks we are seeing on Vice President Biden are consistent with the false and unsubstantiated narratives that the President, his personal lawyer, and a sanctioned Russian agent have been pushing for well over a year," Boland continued. "They appear intended to distract from recent reports that the White House, as early as December 2019, was made aware that Rudy Giuliani was being leveraged by Russian proxies as part of Kremlin efforts to interfere in our election."


Ratcliffe said the intelligence community didn't believe there was any evidence to suggest that the information coming from Hunter Biden's laptop is tied to a Russian disinformation campaign.


"In this case, apparently Chairman Schiff wants anything against his preferred political candidate deemed as not real and is using or attempting to use the intelligence community to say there’s nothing to see here," Ratcliffe said Monday morning on Fox Business. "Don’t drag the intelligence community into this. Hunter Biden’s laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign."

Media reports have focused on revelations that have come from the contents of a laptop and hard drive that purportedly belonged to Hunter Biden. They were left at a repair shop in Delaware last year, but the owner said they were never picked up.
A copy of the hard drive was provided to the FBI and to Giuliani, who later provided a copy to the New York Post.


Among the allegations against Hunter Biden is a meeting that supposedly took place between his father and a senior official at Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy firm where Hunter sat on the board while his father was vice president. The Biden campaign has denied that such a meeting took place based on "Biden’s official schedules from the time" but only as it was described in the New York Post.


Hunter Biden and his father have been the subject of a Republican-led Senate investigation for nearly a year. Schiff pegged claims of possible corruption as politically motivated, a claim that matches the response of the Biden campaign.

"We know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin," Schiff said. "That's been clear for well over a year now, that they've been pushing this false narrative about the vice president and his son."

[*bfine32*]

This is how the Left reacts when one of their own make the slightest gesture to reach across the aisle

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/521814-hug-or-heresy-the-lefts-attack-on-dianne-feinstein-is-a-sad-sign-of-our

Quote:The hysteria over one senator’s act of kindness and mutual respect for another was proof positive of the venomous hyper-partisanship that exists today, mainly from the political left. Just take a look at the headlines that appeared within hours of the now infamous hug:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/senate-dems-agonize-over-embattled-221317323.html

Quote:Chuck Schumer refused to defend Sen. Dianne Feinstein over calls from progressive groups for her removal as top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, with the Senate minority leader divulging he had a “long and serious talk” recently with the California senator.

[*bfine32*]

Looks like Fienstien learned her lesson after her scolding from Daddy Schumer; as no Dem on the Committee was present for the vote this AM. This should be a lesson to any Dem that makes the mistake of trying to find common ground.