Free speech.

[husaberg]

What that is evidence of, is Twitter having a much stricter interpretation of their ToS if you are on the Right Wing vs if you are on the Left. Which has been my sole point. It's not what you are repeatedly trying to twist it into.

Alex Jones happened to be on the Right. And he's been banned.

Antifa (again, a Domestic Terrorist organization) they are on the Left and they are still on Twitter...

All this is your suposition the facts are as given by twitter and the others Jones was banned for breaking TOS
We also have ample evidence that jones broke the TOS of these platforms, this is irrefutable.
You are attempting to turn it into something else , the only way you can do this is by refusing to acknowledge these facts, you do so as they don't suit your own theory what actually happened.

[Drew]

So, I posted the description of "White Male Privilege" from a scholarly source, were it clearly articulated that it was in fact applying the attribute to ALL members of a group (whose membership is a protected characteristic).

You now have a problem: The definition of "White Male Privilege" is clear that is meant in the same way that "Maori are Criminals" - since it states explicitly that all Men have it. You are arguing one is Racist and one is not.

The means by which you argue this is to try and redefine and twist language - because you know you've been hoisted by your own petard.

The privilage of white males is evidence of racist and sexist. I dunno that it's the same as saying Maori are criminals.

[jasonu]

The privilage of white males is evidence of racist and sexist. I dunno that it's the same as saying Maori are criminals.

Yeah it's the same where ever you go. Rag on whitey as much as you want but don't dare say anything negative about colored folk because

[Ocean1]

The privilage of white males is evidence of racist and sexist. I dunno that it's the same as saying Maori are criminals.

The "privilege" of white males is a myth perpetrated by the radical left to justify yet more income redistribution, to make things "equitable".

And yes, saying Maori are criminals is exactly the same as saying white males are privileged. Worse, it's racists AND sexist.

That there's any doubt about that is an indication that the decades long socialist indoctrination via academia and the media has been effective in redefining a watertight, logically pure definition to pure hyperbole, at least for those gender fluid fuckwits a little under the IQ mean who are envious of the rich white prick meme.

All clear?

[husaberg]

What that is evidence of, is Twitter having a much stricter interpretation of their ToS if you are on the Right Wing vs if you are on the Left. Which has been my sole point. It's not what you are repeatedly trying to twist it into.

Alex Jones happened to be on the Right. And he's been banned.

Antifa (again, a Domestic Terrorist organization) they are on the Left and they are still on Twitter...

Here we go again, you are still trying to make jhat happened into something else.
If you are going to attempt to refute what i said start with the beginning
Did twiiter ban Jones Y/N
Did twiiter give a reason for banning jones Y/N
was the reason that jones was banned in the TOS Y/N
did the reason for banning jones match what jones had done Y/N
Did the platform recieve an overwhelming amount of complaints about jones Y/N
Was Jones warned by the platforms that his behavior was in breach of TOS Y/N
if it yes to all of this its no to your conspiracy that he was kicked of for other different reasons, doesn't hold water.

[pritch]

I'm sure some will be delighted, but somebody is bringing a group of "right thinking" speakers down under. Included, among others, are: Ann Coulter, Milo Yiannopolis, and... drum roll... Tommy Robinson.

Enjoy.

[TheDemonLord]

Here we go again, you are still trying to make jhat happened into something else.
If you are going to attempt to refute what i said start with the beginning
Did twiiter ban Jones Y/N
Did twiiter give a reason for banning jones Y/N
was the reason that jones was banned in the TOS Y/N
did the reason for banning jones match what jones had done Y/N
Did the platform recieve an overwhelming amount of complaints about jones Y/N
Was Jones warned by the platforms that his behavior was in breach of TOS Y/N
if it yes to all of this its no to your conspiracy that he was kicked of for other different reasons, doesn't hold water.

An irrelevant chain of logic to the point I am and have been making.

You just keep setting up that strawman though...

[TheDemonLord]

The privilage of white males is evidence of racist and sexist. I dunno that it's the same as saying Maori are criminals.

Okay Drew - Consider the following premises:

We all agree that the statement "All Members of this Group are Negative attribute" is an example of Prejudice.

For example - it's prejudicial to say "All Motorcyclists are bad motorists"

We all also agree that when the group membership is based off of a protected characteristic (which for reference are "age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership and pregnancy and maternity") - that is discrimination - we have placeholder names such as Racism, Sexism, Ableism etc. etc. to describe the discrimination.

For example - it's racist to say "All Maori are Criminals" or it's Sexist to say "All Women can't drive"

Finally - the definition of "White Male Privilege" has made it clear, that it applies to All White Men. And that Privilege in this instance is a negative attribute - namely that they are getting something that they have not earned and that should go to someone else.

If it is Racist to say "All Maori are criminals", why is it not equally Racist to say "All White Men are privileged"? If it is sexist to say that "All Women can't drive", why is not it not equally Sexist to say "All White Men are privileged".

Now, there are people on the radical left that have realised this. Which is why they are trying to redefine Racism as "Power + Privilege" so that they can state "You can't be racist to a White person".

I happen to hold the belief that the way to a Less racist society is to have less Racism...

[husaberg]

An irrelevant chain of logic to the point I am and have been making.

You just keep setting up that strawman though...

Your claim is not logical orr supported by any facts.
You are not making a point either, you are using a series of false equivalents to try make out you can somehow add weight to prove conspiracy theory you have.
you are failing because you can prove something occurred with a series of false equivalents.
Suggesting i are proving a straw-man argument is ridiculous as all the facts i have produced are 100% related to the suggestions you have made.
The fact that you claim they are not relevant points to the total lack of evidence you have top support your claims.

I will give you a hint you cant claim that a murder didn't occur if you have evidence that shows a murder did occur and who done it, by attempting to use the basis that other people had not been charged with other murders.
Nor can you conversly suggest because there is evidence that others are in your eyes murderers, that somehow suggests that there is a conspiracy against a person where there is ample evidence to prove their guilt as a murderer. just becuase the other people are not yet convicted of murder.
Logic dictates you judge individual cases on its merit.
proof is not made on the absence of information its made on the present of information.

[husaberg]

I'm sure some will be delighted, but somebody is bringing a group of "right thinking" speakers down under. Included, among others, are: Ann Coulter, Milo Yiannopolis, and... drum roll... Tommy Robinson.

Enjoy.

I cant see robinson AKA getting in considering he has a conviction for passport fraud and he has been denied entry to other countries.

[TheDemonLord]

Your claim is not logical orr supported by any facts.
You are not making a point either, you are using a series of false equivalents to try make out you can somehow add weight to prove conspiracy theory you have.
you are failing because you can prove something occurred with a series of false equivalents.
Suggesting i are proving a straw-man argument is ridiculous as all the facts i have produced are 100% related to the suggestions you have made.
The fact that you claim they are not relevant points to the total lack of evidence you have top support your claims.

I will give you a hint you cant claim that a murder didn't occur if you have evidence that shows a murder did occur and who done it, by attempting to use the basis that other people had not been charged with other murders.
Nor can you conversly suggest because there is evidence that others are in your eyes murderers, that somehow suggests that there is a conspiracy against a person where there is ample evidence to prove their guilt as a murderer. just becuase the other people are not yet convicted of murder.
Logic dictates you judge individual cases on its merit.
proof is not made on the absence of information its made on the present of information.

That post is just proof of how badly (either deliberately or via Ignorance) you are interpreting the point I'm making.

To use your analogy: I'm not making any claim as to whether a specific Murder was or was not committed. Once you can understand that point (despite it's the umpteenth time I've pointed it out to you) - then we can try and progress. Until then, you can either keep on spouting poorly written twaddle or you can get thee hence.

[pritch]

I cant see robinson AKA getting in considering he has a conviction for passport fraud and he has been denied entry to other countries.

The person who posted what I saw thought it was optimistic too.

[TheDemonLord]

I cant see robinson AKA getting in considering he has a conviction for passport fraud and he has been denied entry to other countries.

Mortgage fraud.

[husaberg]

Mortgage fraud.

he has that as well as passport fraud do keep up

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-20935502

EDL leader Stephen Lennon jailed for false passport offence
The leader of the English Defence League has been jailed for 10 months for using someone else's passport to travel to the USA.
Stephen Lennon, 30, from Luton, admitted possession of a false identity document with improper intention.
Lennon used a passport in the name of Andrew McMaster to board a Virgin Atlantic flight from Heathrow to New York, Southwark Crown Court was told.
He entered the US illegally then used his own passport to return to the UK.
Lennon had previously been refused entry to the US and used a friend's passport to travel to the country in September.
He used a self check-in kiosk to board the flight at Heathrow and was allowed through when the document was checked in the bag-drop area.
But when Lennon arrived at New York's JFK Airport, customs officials took his fingerprints and realised he was not travelling on his own passport.
Lennon was asked to attend a second interview but managed to leave the airport, entering the US illegally.

Previous convictions
He stayed one night and travelled back to the UK the following day using his own legitimate passport, which bears the name of Paul Harris.
Judge Alistair McCreath told him: "I am going to sentence you under the name of Stephen Lennon although I suspect that is not actually your true name, in the sense that it is not the name that appears on your passport.
"What I have to deal with you for is clear enough. You knew perfectly well that you were not welcome in the United States.
"You knew that because you tried before and you had not got in, and you knew the reason for that - because, rightly or wrongly, the US authorities do not welcome people in their country who have convictions of the kind that you have.
"With that full knowledge, you equipped yourself with a passport. I am told that it was given you by way of a loan from your friend Andrew McMaster, to which you bore, I am told, some resemblance."
The judge added: "What you did went absolutely to the heart of the immigration controls that the United States are entitled to have.
"It's not in any sense trivial."
In mitigation, Lennon's barrister Giles Cockings told the court the passport was not stolen and his client had only used it for a day.
Lennon was jailed for assault in 2005 and also has convictions for drugs offences and public order offences, the court heard.

April 2005 conviction for assaulting an off-duty police officer
June 2011 arrest for brawling
July 2011 arrest for brawling
October 2012 arrest for false passport
November 2013 arrest for mortgage fraud. He had conspired with a crooked mortgage broker, Deborah Rothschild, and others, to obtain mortgages under false pretences. Robinson obtained £160,000 over a period of 6 months; Rothschild helped her co-conspirators obtain a total of £640,000 and she was also jailed for 18 months
May 2017 arrest for contempt of court

[husaberg]

That post is just proof of how badly (either deliberately or via Ignorance) you are interpreting the point I'm making.

To use your analogy: I'm not making any claim as to whether a specific Murder was or was not committed. Once you can understand that point (despite it's the umpteenth time I've pointed it out to you) - then we can try and progress. Until then, you can either keep on spouting poorly written twaddle or you can get thee hence.

You have no valid points or any evidence to support the point you claim, Which is why you avoid the fact that he was removed for breach of TOS
on the other hand i have heaps of evidence the is guilty of breach tos and that is why he was removed.
As for claiming i am ignorant i am not the one that is being ignorant, you are ignoring the facts that he was removed for breach of TOS.

You are claiming he was removed because he was right wing yet this is not backed by facts in any way shape or means

Alex Jones happened to be on the Right. And he's been banned..

Your claim is not backed by facts Yet what is backed by facts, is that he was removed for breaching the sites TOS. But you claim this is irrelevant.