Free speech.

[TheDemonLord]

Or one that covers both, like interpretation...

Or not. Since you know - they are different words and all...

How about we stick to Application, as it's the only thing that has any semblance of relevance.

Of course there is no need for the CEO to sign off, he only did so due to the profile of the case.

So, you are agreeing that he could have declined to sign off on the banning, due to the profile of the case? That is the implication of that statement, that only the CEO can make those kind of Executive decisions.

Which means your comment "There is no need for the CEO to Sign off" is actually BS.

The contradiction was not present in the quote you made which I pulled you up on for taking it completely out of context. So there is nothing to dismiss since you didn't even post it

Except we all know the quote, none of us are disputing the content of the quote, only the interpretation - I'll ask again - how can you profile behavior on a platform like Twitter without monitoring Content?

By that logic, you are trying to claim "White male privilege" means the same as "White males are privileged", and that "Maori crime" means the same as "maori are criminals", right?

So close, You've got the first part right, however - the second part is a red herring, to draw attention away from the fact that you can't dispute that "All Males" means "All Males". Namely because "Maori Crime" doesn't have an academic definition.

We both know you refuse to post this citation, just as you refuse to post the myriad of others, because in the correct context, it does not show what you would like to portray it does.

Again, it's a Direct quote, you've got the name of the resource. You could try a little honest here, but you aren't. And we both know it's because you've no-doubt read the resource, if it had a context that you thought was favorable, you'd post it up, with much fanfare and aplomb. Yet you are curiously silent...

Here's another Direct Quote (said in reference to Peggy McIntosh's 'work')

...Describes it as an "Invisible backpack" of rights and privileges that ALL MEN carry

(there's those 2 pesky words again)

A 'helpful metaphor' as you quoted is not the sort of thing used in a definition.

And yet, it was explicitly clear that it applies to "All Males" - Metaphor or not. See Above.

You've gone and cherry picked some bullshit form some obscure source (wtf is a scholarly source anyway? is it a journal article? or just some bullshit with a name that appear scholarly to the scientifically illiterate?), just like you always do. Get an education and stop making a fool of yourself.

Well let's start with definitions (seeing as you are having great trouble with them)

Scholarly: involving or relating to serious academic study.

So since I've provided the name of the resource, lets see if it is considered any good and whats this?

2009 RUSA Outstanding Reference
CHOICE Outstanding Academic Title for 2009

That would tend to indicate that it's not an "Obscure" definition, but something that has rather a lot of Academic merit.

However, I'm loving how much you are painting yourself into a corner.

[TheDemonLord]

So as well as you claiming to know more than a US federal court judge about the law you now know more than three dictionaries about what words mean
You also attempt to claim that separate parts that get thrown into the alt right, somehow must share the same attributes.
But in reality being alternative right wing and a kook is all it needs to meet the common definition of alt right.
Cognitive Dissonance well, its even more funny when you use it than when Yokel used to

Right - so basically we have some Ad Hominems, I notice you've declined to provide anything to backup your statements about Tommy (I'll help you out here, you haven't, cause they don't exist), you are trying to bait-and-switch the actual definition in with "The common definition" - which as I've pointed out, is everyone to the right of Marx. Jordan Peterson is supposedly Alt-right (classical Liberal, speaks out against any form of Identity Politics), Sam Harris is supposedly Alt-right (despite being a self-declared lefty), Ben Shapiro is Alt-right (he's a Jew and has been the biggest recipient of abuse from the actual alt-right).

But do keep on trying.

You've basically resorted to shitting on the chessboard and strutting around like you've won...

[husaberg]

Right - so basically we have some Ad Hominems, I notice you've declined to provide anything to backup your statements about Tommy (I'll help you out here, you haven't, cause they don't exist), you are trying to bait-and-switch the actual definition in with "The common definition" - which as I've pointed out, is everyone to the right of Marx. Jordan Peterson is supposedly Alt-right (classical Liberal, speaks out against any form of Identity Politics), Sam Harris is supposedly Alt-right (despite being a self-declared lefty), Ben Shapiro is Alt-right (he's a Jew and has been the biggest recipient of abuse from the actual alt-right).

But do keep on trying.

You've basically resorted to shitting on the chessboard and strutting around like you've won...

AKA fits the bill to a tee that why the Alt right has championed his cause.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politic...obal-alt-right
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/...-freed-on-bail
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-donald-trump
https://www.bigissue.com/latest/a-gu...ht-to-britain/
As i said you dont have to share all the same views to be deemed alt right or you need to be is a kook and right wing.

The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loosely-connected and somewhat ill-defined grouping of white supremacists/white nationalists, neo-Nazis, neo-fascists, neo-Confederates, Holocaust deniers, and other far-right fringe hate groups

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fe...084455057.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/o...lly-means.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/u...-glossary.html
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-h...logy/alt-right

The Alternative Right is a term coined in 2008 by Richard Bertrand Spencer, who heads the white nationalist think tank known as the National Policy Institute, to describe a loose set of far-right ideals centered on “white identity” and the preservation of “Western civilization.”

Gish gallop away horsey

[TheDemonLord]

AKA fits the bill to a tee that why the Alt right has championed his cause.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politic...obal-alt-right
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/...-freed-on-bail
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-donald-trump
https://www.bigissue.com/latest/a-gu...ht-to-britain/
As i said you dont have to share all the same views to be deemed alt right or you need to be is a kook and right wing.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fe...084455057.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/o...lly-means.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/u...-glossary.html
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-h...logy/alt-right

Gish gallop away horsey

I'll give you a hint - all of your sources, they all have a bit of a left-wing bias.... They have a vested interested in labelling anyone who isn't them "Alt-right"...

It's even funnier cause you've actually included the real definition of the Alt-right (namely White nationalism and an Ethno-state - as defined by Richard Spencer) the rest is waffle, conjured up by a Media that has consistently mislabeled people they disagree with as "alt right"


Edit: And bonus points - linking to multiple articles in an attempt to avoid actual debate - there's only one person attempting a Gish Gallop here Sonny, and I'm quoting them.

[avgas]

I love how this whole thing is now about what is alt-right and why not to let them speak...... rather than who would hear and why its bad.

Freedom of speech is dead but more importantly - we are scared for stupid people and their numbers are increasing apparently.

We should be educating people to be smart enough so that their brains can interpret what their ears hear. Not try to silence the noise of the world.

Don't do an America, you can do better New Zealand.

[husaberg]

I'll give you a hint - all of your sources, they all have a bit of a left-wing bias.... They have a vested interested in labelling anyone who isn't them "Alt-right"...

It's even funnier cause you've actually included the real definition of the Alt-right (namely White nationalism and an Ethno-state - as defined by Richard Spencer) the rest is waffle, conjured up by a Media that has consistently mislabeled people they disagree with as "alt right"


Edit: And bonus points - linking to multiple articles in an attempt to avoid actual debate - there's only one person attempting a Gish Gallop here Sonny, and I'm quoting them.

So anyone including dixtionaries and wikipedia and the whole of the media doesn't agree with you but you are right.
Really...................................Must be fake news.
so its all the lefts medias fault.
That must be because they are the enemy of the state,
So the media make up stuff just to make the alt right look bad. sure that must be that fake news.
I will give you a hint the alt right is not a huge part of the population
it doesn't receive popular support.
it gets unsophisticated people tp follow it by using racial and radical propaganda to divide people by playing on their fears and insecurities.
Most of this stuff is made up which is why people such as you are all of a sudden getting wound up over "free speech"
the media cover and represent a diverse range of people and political affiliations, if the media was not saying what the people were they would simply swap channels.

[TheDemonLord]

So anyone including dixtionaries and wikipedia and the whole of the media doesn't agree with you but you are right.
Really...................................Must be fake news.
so its all the lefts medias fault.
That must be because they are the enemy of the state,
So the media make up stuff just to make the alt right look bad. sure that must be that fake news.
I will give you a hint the alt right is not a huge part of the population
it doesn't receive popular support.
it gets unsophisticated people tp follow it by using racial and radical propaganda to divide people by playing on their fears and insecurities.
Most of this stuff is made up which is why people such as you are all of a sudden getting wound up over "free speech"
the media cover and represent a diverse range of people and political affiliations, if the media was not saying what the people were they would simply swap channels.

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=sa...hrome&ie=UTF-8

There is the usual culprits: the Guardian, Vice, Vox, The Atlantic etc. all claiming Sam Harris is Alt-right or somehow a gateway to the Alt-right.

It's really simple - you need to believe in several things to be Alt-right: One is White Nationalism and the other is the Ethno-State - That's from Richard Spencer (you know, the guy that created the Alt-right). Yet the Media routinely label anyone who is either critical of the Left or simply on the Right Wing as "Alt-right" despite them never espousing the above views.

I want, however to draw your attention to this quote - because it's ever so slightly off:

So the media make up stuff just to make the alt right look bad

People know the Alt-right is bad. The correct quote is:

So the media make up stuff just to make those it doesn't like look like Alt-right

You've got Peterson, Rogan, Harris, Shapiro, Crowder, DaMore, Molyneux, Murray, Sargon, Yiannopoulos etc. etc. and the list goes on and on as to who is "Alt-right" - and yet, you correctly pointed out, it's a small (actually tiny) part of the population.

JBP has made an excellent observation on this - which is that it is in their best interest to cast their detractors as Alt-right. It's like a modern twist on Godwins Law but more importantly, it's an attempt to poison the well so that they never have to try and rebut anything that they say, they can just dismiss it as by being cast as alt-right, they are pretty much Nazis and the Nazis were bad therefore anything they say is bad.

[Katman]

JBP has made an excellent observation on this - which is that it is in their best interest to cast their detractors as Alt-right. It's like a modern twist on Godwins Law but more importantly, it's an attempt to poison the well so that they never have to try and rebut anything that they say, they can just dismiss it as by being cast as alt-right, they are pretty much Nazis and the Nazis were bad therefore anything they say is bad.

It's really no different to the use of the word anti-semitism.

It's a word used in the hope that it will somehow shame people into silence.

[oldrider]

Warnings to the Jews! Premonitions of the Holocaust https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo1seqLiA5Q for those that may be interested in the subject matter.

[husaberg]

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=sa...hrome&ie=UTF-8

There is the usual culprits: the Guardian, Vice, Vox, The Atlantic etc. all claiming Sam Harris is Alt-right or somehow a gateway to the Alt-right.

It's really simple - you need to believe in several things to be Alt-right: One is White Nationalism and the other is the Ethno-State - That's from Richard Spencer (you know, the guy that created the Alt-right). Yet the Media routinely label anyone who is either critical of the Left or simply on the Right Wing as "Alt-right" despite them never espousing the above views.

I want, however to draw your attention to this quote - because it's ever so slightly off:



People know the Alt-right is bad. The correct quote is:



You've got Peterson, Rogan, Harris, Shapiro, Crowder, DaMore, Molyneux, Murray, Sargon, Yiannopoulos etc. etc. and the list goes on and on as to who is "Alt-right" - and yet, you correctly pointed out, it's a small (actually tiny) part of the population.

JBP has made an excellent observation on this - which is that it is in their best interest to cast their detractors as Alt-right. It's like a modern twist on Godwins Law but more importantly, it's an attempt to poison the well so that they never have to try and rebut anything that they say, they can just dismiss it as by being cast as alt-right, they are pretty much Nazis and the Nazis were bad therefore anything they say is bad.

There you go again trying to sell off another conspiracy without evidence.
The media bunch them all together for a reason It just so happens by pure co-incidence that practically all people that identify With the art right are kooks, conspiracy theorists, racists antisemites and right wing nutters.
the term alt right was only coined to try and avoid the negative connotations its sub-members attract.
all it is is spin a rebranding
All you are trying to do now is distance the group from the ideals that most of the members hold, that society as deemed to be stupid, racist and abhorrent.
Its is the alt right that attempts to distort the media not the other way around.
As for never having to answer what the alt right says it doesn't say anything coherent, it simply makes out they are being conspired against by some malevolent left wing force.
If you sincerely wanted it to be taken seriously it would have to distance itself from the kooks, conspiracy theorists, racists, antisemites and far right wing nutters. but that will never happen as that is what its primary support base consists of.
As evidenced by the posts above.

It's really no different to the use of the word anti-semitism.

It's a word used in the hope that it will somehow shame people into silence.

Feel free to have what ever thoughts you wish, but go deluding yourself for a minute that they wont be challenged and that you are in a majority believing such rubbish or that you wont be held accountable for attempting to sell of your crap as being factual rather than the rehashed neo nazi bullshit and stupid conspiracy theories that it is.

Also dont be surprised when a sites remove it as its their right to do so, if your opinions are deemed not to be within their site rules.

[Katman]

Feel free to have what ever thoughts you wish, but go deluding yourself for a minute that they wont be challenged and that you are in a majority believing such rubbish or that you wont be held accountable for attempting to sell of your crap as being factual rather than the rehashed neo nazi bullshit and stupid conspiracy theories that it is.

The only thing challenged here is your intellect.

Severely challenged.

[TheDemonLord]

There you go again trying to sell off another conspiracy without evidence.

What conspiracy? Is Sam Harris a Member of the Alt-right? (he's left wing...)

The media bunch them all together for a reason It just so happens by pure co-incidence that piratically all people that identify With the art right are kooks, conspiracy theorists, racists antisemites and right wing nutters.

Is Sam Harris a Kook, Conspiracy theorist, Racist, Anti-Semite or a Right Wing Nutter? If so, where is your proof of this (and no, simply pointing to a media article that dishonestly labels him as such isn't proof - I'll accept actual statements from the man himself)

At some point, you'll eventually get to the 2 possibilities:

Option 1: He's alt-right - in which case you can provide me the proof.
Option 2: The Media that portray him (and others) as such are lieing.

the term alt right was only coined to try and avoid the negative connotations its sub-mmbers attract.
all it is is spin a rebranding

Correct, initially.

All you are trying to do now is distance the group from the ideals that most of the members hold, that society as deemed to be stupid, racist and abhorrent.

Not at all, I've stated what the actual ideals of the Alt-right are. Problem is that many people called alt-right do not hold those ideals.

Its is the alt right that attempts to distort the media not the other way around.

Wrong - the Alt-Right love the media attention they get and the Media love the Alt-right as a Boogeyman.

As for never having to answer what the alt right says it doesn't say anything coherent, it simply makes out they are being conspired against by some malevolent left wing force.

Not at all, that's where you are absolutely wrong. Alt Right is all about White Nationalism and an Ethno-State. End of.

As for your last line - do you think there is not some Malevolent Left Wing Force? Was it 100 Million or 200 Million Dead Communists?

If you sincerely wanted it to be taken seriously it would have to distance itself from the kooks, conspiracy theorists, racists, antisemites and far right wing nutters. but that will never happen as that is what its primary support base consists of.

I've got no support or love for the Alt-right.

Can you point to where I've advocated for White Nationalism or an Ethno-State?

[husaberg]

What conspiracy? Is Sam Harris a Member of the Alt-right? (he's left wing...)



Is Sam Harris a Kook, Conspiracy theorist, Racist, Anti-Semite or a Right Wing Nutter? If so, where is your proof of this (and no, simply pointing to a media article that dishonestly labels him as such isn't proof - I'll accept actual statements from the man himself)

At some point, you'll eventually get to the 2 possibilities:

Option 1: He's alt-right - in which case you can provide me the proof.
Option 2: The Media that portray him (and others) as such are lieing.



Correct, initially.



Not at all, I've stated what the actual ideals of the Alt-right are. Problem is that many people called alt-right do not hold those ideals.



Wrong - the Alt-Right love the media attention they get and the Media love the Alt-right as a Boogeyman.



Not at all, that's where you are absolutely wrong. Alt Right is all about White Nationalism and an Ethno-State. End of.

As for your last line - do you think there is not some Malevolent Left Wing Force? Was it 100 Million or 200 Million Dead Communists?



I've got no support or love for the Alt-right.

Can you point to where I've advocated for White Nationalism or an Ethno-State?

you may wish to go back and actually respond to what is written.

[TheDemonLord]

you may wish to go back and actually respond to what is written.

And there you have it - when challenged to prove your case, you shy away.

[husaberg]

And there you have it - when challenged to prove your case, you shy away.

No you are suggesting i said stuff or make suggestions i never have
I never said all alt rights are conspiracy theorist etc i said practically all are. (Although auto correct f-ed it up)
I never suggested the alt right doesn't want media attention i said they attempt to manipulate media use the term alt right in an attempt to hide from what the predominate support base consists of.
I never suggested all alt right were all of one trait i didn't make generalizations like that. I said predominately those that identify with it were a loose collection of nut-jobs that practically all consisted of of those things, not that each and all all had those single attributes
I never suggested you were alt right either. that siad you have showed considerable support for Akas brand of white nationalism, you continually seek to minimalise his actions and agenda even to the point that you attempt to post crap that he cant be racist as he shock hands with someone of a race he attempts to radicalise people against or he claims to have freinds of that race.
etc etc etc
that's without your rant about communists that was out of left field and nothing to do with what i posted.
I noter you removed one part about the suppport base as evidenced by the posts above rather telling you wish to avoid that.
But case in point who wants to admit they have oldjewspam and shatman support.