HateAid CEO says free speech is dangerous

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,855]

Just now, Frozenbeernuts said:

I don't know what his full motives are for sure. He was getting a little fed up with the censorship and figured he would be deplatformed soon. He also saw the data available an amazing source for his AI.

One thing that is a fact is that you can say covid isn't dangerous, it came from a wuhan lab, and the experimental gene therapy is causing more harm than good without being deplatformed. Remember when platforms like Twitter hid the truth about covid by banning people who spoke it? Get out of here with any concern over speech. You lost that right

Remember how they also hid and deplatformed anyone talking about the Hunter Biden laptop?

But, yeah, we're the dumb ones.   

[Frozenbeernuts 2,118]

Just now, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Remember how they also hid and deplatformed anyone talking about the Hunter Biden laptop?

But, yeah, we're the dumb ones.   

Lol it's unreal. They like torturing themselves. It's amazing to see.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,855]

BTW, "HateAid" seems about right for authoritarian leftists and their war against free-speech.

They're dispensing hate as much as they can.

[blick 33]

1 hour ago, jonmx said:

Exactly.   Useless POS. 

Ignore IT, and IT will go away.

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

There can reasonably be limits to free speech. 

For example, the swastika is banned in Germany. Given their history, I don’t think this is unreasonable. Incidentally it was the United States, during our occupation of western Germany in 1945, that first banned the swastika, and ever since then the German governments have wisely followed our example. Does someone here want to make an argument why it should not be banned? I’ll listen. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

There can reasonably be limits to free speech. 

For example, the swastika is banned in Germany. Given their history, I don’t think this is unreasonable. Incidentally it was the United States, during our occupation of western Germany in 1945, that first banned the swastika, and ever since then the German governments have wisely followed our example. Does someone here want to make an argument why it should not be banned? I’ll listen. 

It shouldn’t be banned because it easily identifies scumbags. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,855]

9 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

There can reasonably be limits to free speech. 

For example, the swastika is banned in Germany. Given their history, I don’t think this is unreasonable. Incidentally it was the United States, during our occupation of western Germany in 1945, that first banned the swastika, and ever since then the German governments have wisely followed our example. Does someone here want to make an argument why it should not be banned? I’ll listen. 

Fine.  Let's start by limiting yours.  No posts by you, at all.  Ever.  Anywhere.  Seems reasonable to me and everyone else, no?

Oh, you don't like that?  That's what happens when you let me decide what is "reasonable".  You also seem to think Democrats are always going to be in power.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,118]

17 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

There can reasonably be limits to free speech. 

For example, the swastika is banned in Germany. Given their history, I don’t think this is unreasonable. Incidentally it was the United States, during our occupation of western Germany in 1945, that first banned the swastika, and ever since then the German governments have wisely followed our example. Does someone here want to make an argument why it should not be banned? I’ll listen. 

Yes because the swatiska was a very powerful ancient symbol used by many cultures. No it should not be banned. I would never fly the one used by the Nazi's, but I would fly a different version.

[squistion 1,960]

5 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

Yes because the swatiska was a very powerful ancient symbol used by many cultures. No it should not be banned. I would never fly the one used by the Nazi's, but I would fly a different version.

[TrailGuy 552]

32 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

I don't know what his full motives are for sure. He was getting a little fed up with the censorship and figured he would be deplatformed soon. He also saw the data available an amazing source for his AI.

One thing that is a fact is that you can say covid isn't dangerous, it came from a wuhan lab, and the experimental gene therapy is causing more harm than good without being deplatformed. Remember when platforms like Twitter hid the truth about covid by banning people who spoke it? Get out of here with any concern over speech. You lost that right

Bullshite on Covid isnt dangerous. 7M people died from Covid so shut up about your lies.  This is the kind of "free speech" that is dangerous.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,118]

14 minutes ago, TrailGuy said:

Bullshite on Covid isnt dangerous. 7M people died from Covid so shut up about your lies.  This is the kind of "free speech" that is dangerous.

See. There's no point arguing with these people. They would crap all over the first amendment if it means protecting their beliefs, regardless of the the accuracy of those beliefs.

[TrailGuy 552]

4 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

See. There's no point arguing with these people. They would crap all over the first amendment if it means protecting their beliefs, regardless of the the accuracy of those beliefs.

The 7M people that died, you don't believe that?

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

38 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

It shouldn’t be banned because it easily identifies scumbags. 

But it also can create fear and violence, particularly in Germany. 

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

38 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Fine.  Let's start by limiting yours.  No posts by you, at all.  Ever.  Anywhere.  Seems reasonable to me and everyone else, no?

Oh, you don't like that?  That's what happens when you let me decide what is "reasonable".  You also seem to think Democrats are always going to be in power.

Your argument could be used against all forms of human judgment. Obviously power can always be abused. But at some point someone has to decide something. Oliver Wendell Holmes correctly pointed out that we can’t allow someone to yell “fire” in a crowded theater; therefore there has to be SOME limits on free speech. Who decides those? 

[Fnord 2,055]

Free speech is not absolute. I am not sure why MAGA has such a hard time comprehending that, while also cheering on clear violations of First Amendment rights such as:

Blocking AP reporters from the WH and AF1 because they refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America

Removing references to transgender and queer from the Stonewall National Monument in NYC. Literally a monument celebrating the push for equality by members of the LGBTQ community.

Deleting of websites and internal network content at NSA. The following terms have been banned: privilege, bias, inclusion, racism, anti-racism, DEI, diversity, diverse, confirmation bias, equity, feminism, gender, gender identity, injustice, prejudice, sexuality, stereotypes, pronouns, transgender, and equality. There are more. This despite there being plenty of legitimate, non-"woke" reasons for using many of the terms. Unfortunately, they do not have enough staff to ensure that mission-related websites will not be affected, potentially leaving assets in harm's way.

They removed the word diverse from the Dept of Interior's website discussing museums from the term "diverse collections." Meaning art, exhibits, etc.

They're such children they want the term confirmation bias banned. LOL. Because now the thought police are taking charge!

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

31 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

Yes because the swatiska was a very powerful ancient symbol used by many cultures. No it should not be banned. I would never fly the one used by the Nazi's, but I would fly a different version.

You are correct and the swastika is not illegal here, and it is used for Indian jewelry and in other ways. It IS however illegal in Germany because of its association to the Nazis. I think that’s reasonable, do you? 

[CaptainObvious1 327]

2 hours ago, squistion said:

Sorry, I'm not viewing a nearly 9 minute YouTube video to find out what you said about Hillary is incorrect. 

Then STFU

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Free speech is not absolute. I am not sure why MAGA has such a hard time comprehending that, while also cheering on clear violations of First Amendment rights such as:

Blocking AP reporters from the WH and AF1 because they refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America

Removing references to transgender and queer from the Stonewall National Monument in NYC. Literally a monument celebrating the push for equality by members of the LGBTQ community.

Deleting of websites and internal network content at NSA. The following terms have been banned: privilege, bias, inclusion, racism, anti-racism, DEI, diversity, diverse, confirmation bias, equity, feminism, gender, gender identity, injustice, prejudice, sexuality, stereotypes, pronouns, transgender, and equality. There are more. This despite there being plenty of legitimate, non-"woke" reasons for using many of the terms. Unfortunately, they do not have enough staff to ensure that mission-related websites will not be affected, potentially leaving assets in harm's way.

They removed the word diverse from the Dept of Interior's website discussing museums from the term "diverse collections." Meaning art, exhibits, etc.

They're such children they want the term confirmation bias banned. LOL. Because now the thought police are taking charge!

Excellent points. They also want critical race theory banned from schools, along with books about gender dysphoria, and of course there is the Florida law banning any discussion of homosexuality. But JD Vance is fine with lecturing other countries about free speech because Germany dares to limit what neo-Nazis might say. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Excellent points. They also want critical race theory banned from schools, along with books about gender dysphoria, and of course there is the Florida law banning any discussion of homosexuality. But JD Vance is fine with lecturing other countries about free speech because Germany dares to limit what neo-Nazis might say. 

Florida wants to ban talking about homosexual? I doubt it. 

[TrailGuy 552]

6 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Free speech is not absolute. I am not sure why MAGA has such a hard time comprehending that, while also cheering on clear violations of First Amendment rights such as:

 

Don't forget about banning books at dod schools.

Freedom of speech  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

Just now, TrailGuy said:

Don't forget about banning books at dod schools.

Freedom of speech  

No books should be banned at schools? 

[TrailGuy 552]

National archives about to be purged.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/national-archives-head-resigns-as-trump-takes-control-of-records/

Free speech  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

Just now, TrailGuy said:

National archives about to be purged.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/national-archives-head-resigns-as-trump-takes-control-of-records/

Free speech  

About time. 

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Florida wants to ban talking about homosexual? I doubt it. 

Wants to? They already did: 

https://www.nea.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/30424-know-your-rights_web_v4.pdf

[TrailGuy 552]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No books should be banned at schools? 

Age inappropriate books sure.  Books about slavery or civil rights? No.  That's blatant censorship.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

Wants to? They already did: 

https://www.nea.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/30424-know-your-rights_web_v4.pdf

That has been debunked Tim. You can still say gay. 

[The Real timschochet 6,454]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

That has been debunked Tim. You can still say gay. 

What specific points in the article have been debunked? 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

Just now, TrailGuy said:

Age inappropriate books sure.  Books about slavery or civil rights? No.  That's blatant censorship.

Didn’t happen. All books were reviewed. Fake news got you again. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,963]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

What specific points in the article have been debunked? 

The title? 

[Fnord 2,055]

3 minutes ago, Horseman said:

卐

Gentlemen, I present to you your "LIFE WINNER."

Ignore list long overdue for Horsemanure. Fuking pathetic.

[TrailGuy 552]

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

Gentlemen, I present to you your "LIFE WINNER."

Ignore list long overdue for Horsemanure. Fuking pathetic.

Already had him on ignore.

That's vile.  He's disgusting.

[Fnord 2,055]

Just now, TrailGuy said:

Already had him on ignore.

That's vile.  He's disgusting.

Post is already gone. Hopefully, along with @Horsemanure. 

[Horseman 2,374]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Gentlemen, I present to you your "LIFE WINNER."

Ignore list long overdue for Horsemanure. Fuking pathetic.

 

1 minute ago, TrailGuy said:

Already had him on ignore.

That's vile.  He's disgusting.

Run away weaklings.  

W

[Frozenbeernuts 2,118]

22 minutes ago, TrailGuy said:

The 7M people that died, you don't believe that?

People died from it yes. How many were preventable because treatments that worked were suppressed and called disinformation?

Plus it was made more communicable by man through a bio weapon program. People like you crapping all over the first amendment cost us more lives.

[Horseman 2,374]

@Fnord is a confirmed RAT now. 

You're welcome.  

[Fnord 2,055]

2 minutes ago, Horseman said:

@Fnord is a confirmed RAT now. 

You're welcome.  

GFY. It was damned hard NOT to report you, but I didn't. I'm not even sure why at this point. You are pretty much subhuman and contribute nothing but vile nonsense. 

[Fnord 2,055]

4 minutes ago, Horseman said:

 

Run away weaklings.  

W

Why'd you delete your post, ya fuking coward? Own your pathetic posts and opinions, LIFE WINNER.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,118]

25 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Free speech is not absolute. I am not sure why MAGA has such a hard time comprehending that, while also cheering on clear violations of First Amendment rights such as:

Blocking AP reporters from the WH and AF1 because they refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America

Removing references to transgender and queer from the Stonewall National Monument in NYC. Literally a monument celebrating the push for equality by members of the LGBTQ community.

Deleting of websites and internal network content at NSA. The following terms have been banned: privilege, bias, inclusion, racism, anti-racism, DEI, diversity, diverse, confirmation bias, equity, feminism, gender, gender identity, injustice, prejudice, sexuality, stereotypes, pronouns, transgender, and equality. There are more. This despite there being plenty of legitimate, non-"woke" reasons for using many of the terms. Unfortunately, they do not have enough staff to ensure that mission-related websites will not be affected, potentially leaving assets in harm's way.

They removed the word diverse from the Dept of Interior's website discussing museums from the term "diverse collections." Meaning art, exhibits, etc.

They're such children they want the term confirmation bias banned. LOL. Because now the thought police are taking charge!

See this is where the conversation always leads to. Arguing over small instances of what's allowed and what's not, when the real argument is that the government, aka the liberals, wanted to ban disinformation. When they are the ones in charge, they get to choose whatever they want to be disinformation, and it can change daily if need be. We already saw what they considered disinformation with the Hunter Biden laptop.

Quit circling around this very important topic and talk about what is being specifically brought up. Do you agree with disinformation being banned?

[Horseman 2,374]

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

GFY. It was damned hard NOT to report you, but I didn't. I'm not even sure why at this point. You are pretty much subhuman and contribute nothing but vile nonsense. 

Liar. 

I was on ignore too.  But you can't help yourself.  Pathetic.   

[CaptainObvious1 327]

10 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Gentlemen, I present to you your "LIFE WINNER."

Ignore list long overdue for Horsemanure. Fuking pathetic.

 

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

GFY. It was damned hard NOT to report you, but I didn't. I'm not even sure why at this point. You are pretty much subhuman and contribute nothing but vile nonsense. 

 

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

Why'd you delete your post, ya fuking coward? Own your pathetic posts and opinions, LIFE WINNER.

You seem stable.  Go take a walk.