BREAKING: Amazon Kicks Parler Off Web Server — Shuts Platform Down Until They Find New Host

[JasperL]

Socialized and regulated are not necessarily connected. But yeah. Only "certain" folks rights are to be protected. If anyone else's are, "we want our country back"-n-shit.

Fair enough. I guess I just don't see a way other than to effectively socialize the platforms and have the government take over the role of moderator that any law can require Twitter et al. to be neutral with respect to political viewpoint. And if the government takes over that role, either directly or through onerous regulations, that would I assume require them to be neutral to neo-Nazis, Klukkers, anti-Semites, white nationalists/supremacists, the most extreme and oppressive versions of Islam, and other political ideologies that are repulsive to the vast majority of all users, including Republicans.

Maybe someone has a workable solution, that just means Twitter is less mean to some 'conservatives', but I haven't seen it or have seen anyone explain how this will work with the 1A, and its guarantee of free association, along with free speech.

 

[roguenuke]

Is it your position that the baker does not have the freedom to refuse his service but companies like google do?

It is my position that the baker and companies like Google have the freedom to refuse service within the confines of the law. Neither can refuse service based on race, religion, sex, or relative race, religion, or sex of a customer or multiple customers together. Either can refuse service for pretty much any reason that is not restricted by law.

 

[JasperL]

I don't want social media to be regulated. I want a place online where I can discuss the ideas I want to discuss without censorship or exploitation.

Yeah, well, private companies are not obligated to provide you with just the perfect platform. They have a constitutionally protected right to kick off essentially anyone that they don't want on the platform, for whatever reason suits them, and overall that's a very good thing. It means DP, where we are posting now, has a right to purge the trolls, racists and other vermin without asking permission from Big Brother, and without fearing lawsuits.

 

[babylonrumble]

Fair enough. I guess I just don't see a way other than to effectively socialize the platforms and have the government take over the role of moderator that any law can require Twitter et al. to be neutral with respect to political viewpoint. And if the government takes over that role, either directly or through onerous regulations, that would I assume require them to be neutral to neo-Nazis, Klukkers, anti-Semites, white nationalists/supremacists, the most extreme and oppressive versions of Islam, and other political ideologies that are repulsive to the vast majority of all users, including Republicans.

Maybe someone has a workable solution, that just means Twitter is less mean to some 'conservatives', but I haven't seen it or have seen anyone explain how this will work with the 1A, and its guarantee of free association, along with free speech.

No, a majority of republicans believe the election was stolen. and are quite comfortable with white nationalism.

 

[phoenix2020]

You realize it would be a trivial matter for the CIA to shut down any social media website by spamming it a large quantity of objectionable content in a short time, claim the company was "ignoring" take-down notices, and blackmailing firms into deplatforming the site on that basis?

The letter in BlueTex's post suggests the deplatforming of Parler by AWS is as a result of 98 unaddressed complaints. This is for a social media service with some 12 million users and millions of daily posts.

if you have issues with the CIA and what they can or cannot do to your Iranian based social media site where you discuss the murder of US officials, you’ll have to take that up with the Iranian government. I suggest you speak with the Ayatolla.

as to complaints, heck I went to Parler and it took me a few minutes to find posts advocating Terrorism and insurrgency. Total cesspool. Widespread advocation for violence across that site that anyone can see. People who want the freedom to plan murder are welcome to leave the country for one more accommodating if their kind of speech.

 

[Tahuyaman]

good point. Why didn’t they?

Maybe the comments in question weren’t as offensive as they are being portrayed? Maybe this is being used as a convenient excuse to silence opposition?

 

[joko104]

Many progressives do not understand that liberalism and collectivism are diametrically opposite adversaries.

Most progressives also do not understand the largest, wealthiest and most powerful monopoly of Google/Facebook/Twitter/Apple are the inherent adversaries of both liberalism and collectivism. Google/Facebook/Twitter/Apple are essentially one company - along with all the other companies including their Chinese partners in the conglomerate - is an international corporate-fascist operation, not American or Western. It is not liberal, progressive or conservative. It is unregulated and unrestrained capitalism increasingly of absolute, totalitarian principles. The conglomerate also is the greater power on earth - not the USA, not China and not Russia.

 

[PirateMk1]

Fair enough. I guess I just don't see a way other than to effectively socialize the platforms and have the government take over the role of moderator that any law can require Twitter et al. to be neutral with respect to political viewpoint. And if the government takes over that role, either directly or through onerous regulations, that would I assume require them to be neutral to neo-Nazis, Klukkers, anti-Semites, white nationalists/supremacists, the most extreme and oppressive versions of Islam, and other political ideologies that are repulsive to the vast majority of all users, including Republicans.

Maybe someone has a workable solution, that just means Twitter is less mean to some 'conservatives', but I haven't seen it or have seen anyone explain how this will work with the 1A, and its guarantee of free association, along with free speech.

There is a proposed modification to 230. That is to change moderation to the legal standard of unlawful speech. Incitement ect. Basically if you can say it legally you can say it online.

 

[trixare4kids]

The Democrats aren't trying to overturn anyone's election. The Democrats did not engage in violent coup attempts. Those were your friends and they deserve to be called authoritarians and fascists and you should have the courage and integrity to call them out.

2016-2020, forget so soon? The Democratic Party and their leftist media most certainly did try to overturn his election.

They tried hard to delegitimize Trump's presidency and prior to that that tried hard to delegitimize his election with their phony made up Putin BS, but failed miserably. Traitors!

The left didn't engage in a violent coup attempt at the Capitol, and I make absolutely no excuses for those who did but if you weren't cherry picking talking points you'd already know that.

Stop lying about "my friends." A very small minority of crazy people who stormed the Capitol are no friends of mine or most of the 74 million law abiding voters who wouldn't think of such a thing. Stop spreading manure.

On another note, the repugnant self-righteous moral indignation and hateful divisive CT crap coming from Trump haters in almost every thread is nauseating. Just thought I'd mention this.

If Trump haters aren't part of the solution, they're a big part of the problem.

 

[CharisRose]

I did read and comprehend, and it seemed to me, you were intimating I was a male white supremist. Then you said you didnt. So you see my confusion.
Perhaps its a mistake on my part in reading your statement. I provide below the context and your statement. Please correct me on how I may be comprehending the statement you made wrongly.

Post 281 My statement to which you responded. I dont know. I am not in the business. I had cloud computing services competing for my business, for my non security sensitive computing and storage needs. I ended up setting up my own as I have full control of it. I am anal retentive that way.

Post 285 Your response. And who is more anal than aggrieved poor downtrodden fragile white male supremacists?

When I read the post to you... I also thought the statement intimated that you were a male white supremist.

imho Roseann

 

[phoenix2020]

2016-2020, forget so soon? The Democratic Party and their leftist media most certainly did try to overturn his election

Tried hard to delegitimize Trump's presidency, his election, but failed miserably. Traitors!

The left didn't engage in a violent coup attempt at the Capitol, and I make absolutely no excuses for those who did.

Stop lying. A small minority of crazy people who stormed the Capitol are no friends of mine or most of the 74 million law abiding voters who wouldn't think of such a thing.

On another note, the repugnant self-righteous moral indignation divisive CT crap coming from Trump haters in almost every thread is nauseating. Just thought I'd mention this.

I agree with you, particularly the last point. It’s absolutely disgusting how they keep pointing to Democrats for commiting election fraud when clearly Ivanka was the one organizing the black van ballot drops, and it was her agents scanning the ballots 3 or more times.

 

[PirateMk1]

When I read the post to you... I also thought the statement intimated that you were a male white supremist.

imho Roseann

LOL . Too funny.

 

[911Sparky]

What Biden has said and what he will do is yet to be seen. And Amazon is a corporation. Its interests are in profit, not "the right thing to do." If it was so interested in "the right thing to do," it would stop selling a vast assortment of products that support heinous regimes, including the very regime that gave the world Covid. Thanks!!

Are you saying that selling Chinese products is equivalent to planning murder and mayhem of those who disagree with trump?

 

[trouble13]

It is my position that the baker and companies like Google have the freedom to refuse service within the confines of the law. Neither can refuse service based on race, religion, sex, or relative race, religion, or sex of a customer or multiple customers together. Either can refuse service for pretty much any reason that is not restricted by law.

We are in agreement on that much. I guess thats a start for us, lol.

 

[trixare4kids]

When I read the post to you... I also thought the statement intimated that you were a male white supremist.

imho Roseann

I fear the authoritarian left has only begun with the incessant demonization of ALL Trump voters. Seperating the wheat from the chaff is not a part of an uber partisan hater's vocabulary.

TBH, I love my political beliefs challenged, but we are on an entirely different level now... . For four years they stomped their feet. Ok, so what? I didn't mind. They wanted Hillary in instead of Trump... I get it, but now it's going on an entirely different level. I am worried for my country.

 

[SMTA]

Boy, this thread is a real fascist magnet. Didn't intend it that way, but here it is. Remember, there's always a backlash.

There is when you posted such stupid shit
Trump is your fascist poster child and Dictator Wannabe.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

2016-2020, forget so soon? The Democratic Party and their leftist media most certainly did try to overturn his election.

Let's revisit that recent history. Trump kept hiring goofy Russian-aligned campaign employees. Manafort was basically a Russian stooge. Everyone knows that now. That was Trump's fault. The FBI didn't hire Manafort. Trump hired Manafort. Trump kept trying to play footsies with the Russians as well. Look at the Mueller report where it shows that Trump ordered Flynn to seek out Russian agents to find Clinton's e-mails. That was Trump's fault. Trump's Republican appointee, Rosenstein, appointed Mueller, a Republican, AFTER Trump tried to persuade Comey, a Republican, to drop the investigation into Flynn and then fired Comey for not dropping the investigation. That's how the Special Counsel's investigation started. Again, that was Trump's fault. TRUMP was the one that fired Comey. The problem was always Trump. And the President -- despite the protestations of Trump supporters over the years -- is not above the law. In the U.S. the President is not immune from investigation. Everything that has transpired has been legitimate and legal.

On Jan 6th a group of pro-Trump thugs -- as Congress was confirming Biden's electoral college votes. tried to overturn Biden's victory using violence and threats of violence. It was a coup attempt.

One thing is legal, and one thing is not. One thing is non-violent and peaceful, and the other is not.

They tried hard to delegitimize Trump's presidency and prior to that that tried hard to delegitimize his election with their phony made up Putin BS, but failed miserably. Traitors!

The problem with your argument is that the media was mostly correct about everything it reported. Why there was so much suggestion, and innuendo, and suspicion was because Trump did suspicious things. Everyone kept wondering what Trump was doing. Why did Trump fire Comey? Why did Trump repeatedly lie and change his story about the Trump Tower meeting? Why did Trump try to shut down the Mueller investigation. Why didn't Trump do a live interview with Mueller. If Trump had been honest and open about what he did instead of trying to cover everything up then things might have gone differently. But was not the media's fault that Trump acted suspiciously. That was Trump's fault. Trump is responsible for Trump's behavior.

Where did you guys get this idea it was the media's job to make Trump look as good as possible? That's not a thing. They are not obligated to make Trump look as good as possible to make Trump supporters happy. That's not their job.

Stop lying about "my friends." A very small minority of crazy people who stormed the Capitol are no friends of mine or most of the 74 million law abiding voters who wouldn't think of such a thing. Stop spreading manure.

Good. You should condemn them, and I'm glad you finally took a break from attacking Democrats and from making excuses for Trump to condemn these rioters and seditionists.

On another note, the repugnant self-righteous moral indignation and hateful divisive CT crap coming from Trump haters in almost every thread is nauseating. Just thought I'd mention this.

If Trump haters aren't part of the solution, they're a big part of the problem.

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about here.

 

[noonereal]

2016-2020, forget so soon? The Democratic Party and their leftist media most certainly did try to overturn his election.

This is complete bullshit. Trumpist lies.

On another note, the repugnant self-righteous moral indignation and hateful divisive CT crap coming from Trump haters in almost every thread is nauseating.

What is CT?

As to your nausea, try Mylanta.

 

[CharisRose]

LOL . Too funny.

I rather doubt you will ever get an apology or even an admission for the mistaken identity leveled at you!

Roseann

 

[babylonrumble]

Yep. At some point that backlash could be a break up of big tech companies similar to what happened with to AT&T decades ago. There are antitrust issues as well as 1st amendment issues.

Anti-trust yeah, but we like monopolies now. 1st Amendment? Nope.

 

[JasperL]

There is a proposed modification to 230. That is to change moderation to the legal standard of unlawful speech. Incitement ect. Basically if you can say it legally you can say it online.

Right, which if course means you can expect to see open racists, porn merchants, scam artists, white supremacists, neo-Nazis, fascists, anti-gay bigots, Muslim extremists and other vermin fouling up every website, including this one. Why should DP or anywhere else have to host speech by people whose opinions it finds repulsive, and that drive off the users it wants to attract? If you a Jewish website, why should government force you to accept neo-Nazis or else you open yourself up to lawsuits? Shouldn't it be that site's choice who to allow on their private property? The 1A in fact guarantees that right - the companion to the right to free speech is the right to free association. That's my point.

White supremacy, racist speech, anti-gay speech, misogyny, etc........... - all that is protected speech in the context of the 1A, and if it's government doing the censoring. I really don't think you want websites in general forced to host that kind of garbage. What you or others want is for Twitter to be nicer to right wingers, but there's a serious problem in getting to that goal without trashing the overall system.

 

[911Sparky]

If all these posts were out there then surely the FBI would have been investigating these hooligans. I mean, it was no secret that Trump was going to have a rally and EVERYBODY knew that Trump is a total psycho so why didn't anyone do anything? Could it be because there is quite an abundance of stupid shit that people put on the internet all the time? I mean, have you ever seen Twitter?

This "cancel" crap is the worst kind of Monday morning quarterbacking and all it does is validate the fears of those that already believe the left is going to throw them in re-education camps while simultaneously validating the exhortations of those that say they really do want to get rid of all the Trump supporters. It doesn't help anything and, in fact, tends to make things worse.

The FBI is probably already investigating many of the posters on parler, and as far as the fears that the left is going to put people into re-education camps, that is just
right wing paranoia. Remember just a few years ago a simple military exercise in Texas was in reality a plan to round up conservatives and hold them in an empty Walmart for re-education or extermination, yeah, that never happened either. Right wing paranoia knows no bounds.

 

[Anthony60]

Anthony60: "Everyone! Three massive, unelected multinational corporations have launched a coordinated attack to destroy their political adversaries."
The Left: "Hurrah! Burn! Burn! Burn!"

So... yeah. I don't get it either.

I never would have believed that even the left would go this far.

 

[MaryP]

If Parlor does do what their host wishes, i see no probem with just banning the user. But you see, Parlor does not want to or will not. They will find out tomorrow when amazon pulls the plug

They say they'll be back up in a week with their own server, and I saw a tweet from ( supposedly) don jr saying a new site will be up in no time-- "freedom" something or other, no doubt run by Dad. So if all these sites are doing it just to cya and protect advertising, they won't care. But will the government? They're serious about not giving space to organizers and rabble rousers right now. So I wonder what the next move will be.

 

[CharisRose]

I fear the authoritarian left has only begun with the incessant demonization of ALL Trump voters. Seperating the wheat from the chaff is not a part of an uber partisan hater's vocabulary.

TBH, I love my political beliefs challenged, but we are on an entirely different level now... . For four years they stomped their feet. Ok, so what? I didn't mind. They wanted Hillary in instead of Trump... I get it, but now it's going on an entirely different level. I am worried for my country.

I also am worried for our Country.

The new political talking point will be no need to worry about the future anymore soon all will be goodness and light!

We will ride on unicorns to travel to the end of rainbows to pick up our pots of gold left by friendly leprechauns!

However, to live in total happiness and harmony... you will need to follow a mandate to surrender all of your freedoms in exchange.

Don’t worry, I just made up that little fairy tale.

Roseann