ant wrote: As it translates to cyberspace, no content existing within cyberspace need be "in your face" including comments from extremists who are often doing little more than offending certain people's political values. But, what offends you might not offend me.

Selectively banning content that clearly violates free speech protection should always be the exception. A complete ban of the source seems extreme in this case. I suspect Infowars was doing more offending than inciting all these years.

Freedom of speech includes the right:

To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).


I want the government to protect and enforce my free speech rights.
I DON'T want privately owned mega corporate behemoths like Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook deciding what speech is acceptable and what speech is not.
Cyberspace will continue to introduce issues that have never been addressed by case law.

Aren't you and Kinda making this more complicated than it is? No one, that is no government body, has hinted that Alex Jones' website can't remain up for anyone to visit or that his show will be shut down. The constitutional right to free speech applies to government suppression, doesn't it, as in the case you cited? Can facebook really be an infringer in the constitutional sense? Fine, I get it that you think facebook is craven and biased, so I would suggest boycotting it if you have been using it. I've never seen fb, but I see no reason to deny it the right to do what it does. I've seen a little of MSNBC but have no interest in more of it. I wish people would curate their news sources, but that's not the world we live in.

I don't make it a practice to exploit people's grief as a means to make a political point, or convince anyone my political worldview is the best. My work has focused on grief itself, its impact on the bereaved, and integrating it into their lives. Much of these cause célèbre tragedies and the people who have suffered loss are used as props to advance a political party's agenda. The Left does this shamelessly each and every the news sensationalizes a tragedy.
So spare me your finger-wagging moral bullshit lecture. You don't have a clue about my personal life and are no one to cast judgement on me.

Sorry, I was not passing judgement. I summarized the treatment grieving Sandy Hook parents have received (thinking you might not be aware of that) and asked if you thought media corporations had to support that behavior. I take your response as yes.

ant wrote: As it translates to cyberspace, no content existing within cyberspace need be "in your face" including comments from extremists who are often doing little more than offending certain people's political values. But, what offends you might not offend me.

(( Modified only slightly))Imagine your 5 year old child is shot up by a lunatic, then other lunatics call your phones and flood your social media accounts demanding to know where they have hidden their children, how much were they paid for their fake story, etc. On and on relentlessly for years.

The idea that what is said in cyberspace stays in cyberspace is a convenient fiction. Alex Jones makes a career of inciting this kind of thing. The rest of us are supposed to nod politely and say, "Well, good thing you only express yourself in cyberspace,"? This is not credible.

ant wrote: I suspect Infowars was doing more offending than inciting all these years.

No, wait. You don't get to claim cover for incitement by saying "people just don't like my opinions." I understand we don't lock up Alex Jones without a more definite link to the behavior of the people who should be locked up, for harassing other people. But that not-completely-direct incitement is definitely in the faces of the parents.

No 'brick and mortar' company that uses internet infrastructure should have to worry about the Alex Jones case. It is a clear matter of freedom from compelled speech. Just as a baker should not be compelled to issue homosexual propaganda, Facebook should not be compelled to propagate opinions that conflict with its terms of use. Government should have power to regulate and enforce compliance with legal standards on the terms of use of internet carriers.

I'd be interested in hearing Chris' take on this topic. He's in more or less the same position as Zuckerberg, though he may see his circumstances as different. And of course, booktalk is not much like facebook (thank god, right?)

I might put the question a little more pointedly. If Chris knew that as a result of someone's (innacurate) accusations and insinuations, a little tribe of harassers was bothering, say, a fan club of Joel Osteen, would he (a) ask the insinuator to quit; and (b) kick them off if they didn't?

And if not, would he be concerned about a libel suit?

KindaSkolarly wrote:"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

It seems like that statement is from some alien culture now, but it used to be one of the guiding principles in American society.

The neocon Bush/Cheney cabal got hold of the government and we had 9/11. That led to the establishment of the Orwellian "Department of Homeland Security." DHS hired the former head of the East German Secret Police, Markus Wolfe, and the former head of the KGB, Yevgeni Primakov, to work as "consultants" in setting up security for America. The Clintons worked to bring the Communist Chinese into America, and Obama spent eight years race-baiting and dividing.

So it's no wonder that you guys defend the indefensible.

gcnlive.com/JW1D/index.php/onair?type=o ... amp;show=1

That's a link to Alex Jones' radio show re-broadcasts. GCN is the network, and they have some other interesting shows. The Darren Streblow comedy show is amusing. "I told my teacher we was forty-ninth in education and she said, 'Who's forty-tenth'?" Webster Tarpley is informative but wrongheaded now, since he caught Hillary mania. GCN is a good example of the free exchange of ideas, come to think of it...what you guys are arguing against. Shame on you for saying somebody should be shut up...for any reason short of endangering. Freedom of speech baby. If you don't like it, move to China. Oh, yeah, Apple already did. And Google's building the ChiComs a censoring search engine that will I.D. those pesky dissenters. China deals with Falun Gong members by killing them and harvesting their organs to sell internationally. Since you guys are all on the boat to China now, should the US do something along those lines? Harvest the organs of conservatives? And maybe the Leftists that don't agree with Bernie, or Hillary? That's what you're voting for with your support of censorship.

There is a difference in free speech and spewing hate...Is all this speculation on your part or do you have evidence to back up these claims?

I'm having fun watching Alex Jones lately. He's like Rush Limbaugh on cocaine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch9gQ9JOe3Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWd6XgBVIcg

Holy mackerel. But I guess I have to say that if people are gonna believe stuff like this, it doesn't matter whether facebook lets it on or not. The internet is open and Jones will get his message to a receptive audience. It looks as though we're a far cry from the literate, educated populace the founders of the U. S. thought a democracy depended upon.

MasterCard has now jumped on the anti free speech bandwagon. This is corporate fascism--if you don’t support the establishment position, then you’re silenced:

Mastercard Forces Patreon to Remove ‘Jihad Watch’ Founder Robert Spencer From Platform
“Robert Spencer, founder of ‘Jihad Watch,’ a blog that exposes creeping Sharia law around the world and the ongoing Islamic terrorist threat facing the West was axed from Patreon without warning.”
thegatewaypundit.com/2018/08/mastercard ... -platform/

Here’s a video about it.:
Holy s*** Mastercard Has FORCED Patreon to BAN People
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtAMTeo ... e=youtu.be
This guy explains how banning dissenters will work in the future. A website requires the services of several companies, like links in a chain. If any one of those links is broken, then you’re in trouble. Jihad Watch was funded by donations and payments through Patreon. Patreon was fine with the arrangement, but Patreon depends on Mastercard for significant income. Mastercard told Patreon to drop Jihad Watch, or else.

There are good articles about censorship coming out every day now. An example:
How the Left Is Outsourcing Censorship of the Internet
powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/08/how- ... ternet.php
The Silicon Valley censorship is an end-run around our Bill of Right’s First Amendment. The US Bill of Rights is THE major impediment to world government.

Here’s an article that starts with Alex Jones and moves on to larger issues:
Alex Jones is right: China is the threat, and it may be too late
“Where Alex Jones has been very spot on is the threat that communist China poses to our future and our way of life, and how this threat has corrupted our government, our education system and much of our hi-tech industry.”
washingtontimes.com/news/2018/aug/13/al ... be-too-la/
Possibly the best article I’ve ever read about the Chinese threat to America and the world. And it’s current, up to date.

Here’s a link to an audio-only version of the Alex Jones program from a couple of days ago:
http://rss.infowars.com/20180816_Thu_Alex.mp3
I listened to most of it, skipping around, and he and his guests touch on various topics (you can right-click on the slider bar and save the show to your hard drive, to skip past the commercials). The most important topic addressed on this broadcast is the impending false flag operation. The establishment has given every indication that it’s going to blow something up soon. The intent will be to discredit Donald Trump and wrest control of congress away from the Republicans. AND clamp down on Trump supporters, clamp down on the internet and so on. The usual totalitarian stuff.

If you don’t know what a False Flag event is, you should familiarize yourself:
A Brief History of False Flag Terror
http://mikesheedy.com/wp-content/upload ... Terror.mp4 (Video)
http://mikesheedy.com/wp-content/upload ... Terror.pdf (Transcript)

Boston could be the site of the next false flag. The Boston Globe led a nationwide newspaper assault on Trump last Thursday. 350 papers trashed Trump and then said that he would have “blood on his hands” if anybody in the press is injured in response. So maybe a “Trump supporter” will blow up the Globe or one of the other failing old newspapers. My money would be on the Globe, since Boston was trained to accept martial law during the marathon bombing, which itself is a good example of a false flag.

What else? This website produces excellent videos. BlackPilled.com
Are You Ready for the Purge?
“In the last few weeks we have seen the left for who they really are, who they always have been. Anglophopic pedophile degenerates that have been hiding behind this mask of diversity. A word they cleverly employed to hide their true natures. The satanic practice of inversion that has served them so well. And now that the mask is off, it’s only natural that the gloves would follow.... We have exposed the left for who they are and now they are lashing out not only because we see who they are and are disgusted but because we act as a mirror that reveals their true form to themselves. And like the feral dopamine addicted animals that they are they only see one choice and that is to break the mirror....”
blackpilled.com/2018/08/are-you-ready-f ... the-purge/

Pedophile, you say? Pedophilia is the glue that holds the global establishment crowd together. A story from a week ago:
Investigative Journalist Found Dead in D.C. Hotel Room Weeks After Reporting Bill Clinton to FBI & DHS for Allegedly Raping Boy
truepundit.com/investigative-journalist ... aping-boy/
Mark another one gone from the Clintons’ enemies list. I expect the children who witnessed slick Willie with the boy are dead by now as well.

What else? Pictures. The Boston Marathon bombing was done by a company called Craft International. They used to be known as Blackwater, a mercenary company with an ugly history: