Facebook bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWars and others from its platforms as 'dangero

Facebook bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWars and others from its platforms as 'dangerous'

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/02/tech...owars-alex-jones-milo-laura-loomer/index.html

___________

About time.

The internet needs to be purged of these CRAZIES.

Do you agree with Facebook?

Thoughts?

It is definitely LONG OVERDUE.

Crazies like Jones, Infowars, Loomer, and Farrakhan (that no one takes seriously) are a Good Start.

 

Click-bait sites should at the very least be identified with disclaimers about their propensity for bull crap headlines.

 

Louis Farrakhan is a racist and an anti-Semite, but he's a 'Black Leader' so the Liberals still have their lips firmly attached to his posterior. He also betrayed the Sudanese people in the 1990s, by
covering for Omar El Bashir when that Muslim fanatic re-instated human chattel slavery in southern Sudan, leading to a civil war as Muslim Arabs attacked and burned villages belonging to Christian,
black, Dinka tribesmen. In ten years over 1,000,000 people were killed and 250,000 sold into slavery.

 

The left seeks to silence opposing viewpoints.

Of course this will backfire spectacularly.

 

Definitely not shedding any more tears for him than I shed for Alex Jones. I support a right to free speech for both of them, but that doesn't mean private tech companies are under any obligation to prop them up and act as their megaphone.

 

Could not agree more!!!!

 

He's a terrible person.

 

Sounds like we need a ministry of truth and truth czars. Is that what you want?

How far would it go?

Would PF be effected?

 

Farrakhan is on the left. And a private company deciding they no longer want to help a person promote their views is not "silencing" their views. I don't understand why lately so many on the right lately treat the promotion of speech as an entitlement.

 

The Democrats in this thread be like... yay! Censorship

 

He didn't say anything about the government. There is nothing wrong about private companies deciding things like this for themselves. Hate to break it to you, but PF has rules of use too. That doesn't make them the "Ministry of Truth."

 

"Conservatives" on this thread be like . . . I forgot that I was supposed to care about property rights, freedom of association, and freedom of speech for publishers and am instead trying to pretend that everyone is entitled to platform regardless of the rights of the provider of that platform.

 

He is a person Democrats respect, hang out with, and embrace. It would be like David Duke going to the White House and hugging Republicans and hanging out with trump.

 

PF already bans people for offensive speech. They have their own "truth czars" because they are a private entity. Just like FB.

 

So if I hang a sign on my public business saying no blacks allowed, that's my right because I'm the owner?

 

Whereas using any kind of government force to prevent either of them from doing so would be the ACTUAL example of authoritarian behavior.

 

In my book, seeing Ted Nuggent with Trump in the White House was far more offensive. As a life-long hunter, seeing a poacher celebrated in the White House is the lowest of the lows. Disgusting.

 

IMO, yes. The market is going to sort that out way faster than the government will.

But there is nothing illegal about a private business having standards of use. Not sure why you would disagree.

No matter what the fringe "right" has told you, no one owes you the use of their soapbox or their bullhorn to spread your message. No one. That entitlement mentality has no basis in reality.

 

You have the right to do really stupid and disgusting things that don't break the law or public ordinances.

 

I didn't know people could openly discriminate like that. If you are open to the public you have to serve all. That's my opinion.

 

Couple of lefty extremists. Apparently.

 

I don't care who they are or what they're saying, they shouldn't be banned unless they're clearly inciting violence, or clearly engaging in prosecutable slander/libel.

 

Welp, private businesses have rights too. They don't owe anyone free marketing of their garbage. You are currently on a platform that has similar rules of conduct.

 

So my local newspaper should be required to publish my work no matter what I say in it? I could write a combination of noise poetry, Marxist ramblings, and Quantum Leap fanfic Breitbart should be forced by the government to publish it for me? Really?

 

"Its not the govt doing it so you should be fine with it"