BREAKING: New York Post locked out of Twitter after publishing Biden bombshell

[Master Debator]

You're employing a very narrow definition of the term, and you're referring specifically to 1984, a novel with which I am intimately familiar and which is not the only writing of Eric Blair. Try Wiki: " "Orwellian" is an adjective describing a situation, idea, or societal condition that George Orwell identified as being destructive to the welfare of a free and open society." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian

The white wings definition of Orwellian are private entities refusing to do the Presidents propaganda.

 

[Moot]

democrats hate liberty.

The Bill of Rights is the biggest target for democrats to end. The hatred of free speech is well known and documented. democrats nationwide have utterly destroyed freedom of speech, not just through "hate speech" abridgement of free speech, but more insidiously through the Cancel Culture Nazis. We have seen the democrat Nazis destroy people for online words posted decades ago that the party has since outlawed. But beyond the attacks on speech, we clearly see here that freedom of the press is under attack by the Stalinist party. Potentate Obamugabe stated his desire to outlaw Fox News for reporting negative stories about him.

I am a Libertarian, I support individual liberty - which makes me the mortal enemy of democrats who are dedicated to eradicating individual liberty once and for all. democrats are the greatest threat to individualism and basic liberty this nation has ever faced.

democrats are collectivists who promote group privilege and abhor individual liberty. What a person may or may not do is determined by what group they are associated with, white devils for instance are prohibited from speech that is common for black people. The dreaded "N" word that will get a white executed for uttering is an example. Due to group identity, whites are afforded less privilege's. Ditto LgbTQRSTUVWXYZ, Muslim, etc. Under the Marxist rule of democrats rights vanish and group privilege becomes the rule.

Like I said...there is no liberty without personal responsibility.

Democrats are the ones protecting individual/civil liberties....not republicans.

BTW....a real libertarian would never vote for Trump who has all but destroyed the libertarian platform in the GOP.

 

[Uncensored2008]

lol... okay then



Oh, you mean, like this?

NYT: Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

Surprise! That was verified by the Mueller investigations.

Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians (Published 2019)

Donald J. Trump and 18 of his associates had at least 140 contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries, during the 2016 campaign and presidential transition.

www.nytimes.com

Wow, you repeated an insult! It must be true then.



lol... therefore what they write must be true!

The NY Post is a worthless tabloid, which has been in the tank for Republicans for a long time, and doesn't investigate anything. They didn't even investigate this -- Giuliani just dropped the latest manufactured disinformation in their laps.

One thing about the little Goebbels, being exposed as hacks and liars does nothing to slow their demagoguery.

{

Here’s Baquet admitting that for two whole years — two years, y’all — his lousy newspaper was “built” around the Russia Collusion Hoax:

It got trickier after [inaudible] … went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character. We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well.

“Did it truly well”???

For two years he misled his readers into believing Trump colluded with Russia, even though there was not a shred of evidence proving Trump colluded with Russia.

For two years, the Times published a load of lies — lie after lie after lie after lie — rumors, innuendo, Maggie Haberman’s neurotic paranoia, and unsourced nonsense to build a collusion unicorn out of fairy dust.

Yeah, great job.

Here’s Baquet admitting the Times will now focus on another hoax, the hoax that Trump is racist:

Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. I’d love your help with that. As Audra Burch said when I talked to her this weekend, this one is a story about what it means to be an American in 2019. It is a story that requires deep investigation into people who peddle hatred[.]

If Trump was truly a racist, the media would not have to lie to prove he’s a racist, would not have to invent the Very Fine People Hoax.

Here’s Baquet admitting Dirty Cop Bob Mueller disappointed his left-wing readers by not taking Trump out:

The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened. Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, “Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.” And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we’re talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We’re a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that’s what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?

}

New York Times Admits 'We Built Our Newsroom' Around Russia Hoax

New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet admitted to the that for two years his newspaper was "built" around spreading a hoax.

www.breitbart.com

The NY Times are demagogue clowns. Fact.

 

[Visbek]

democrats hate liberty.

The Bill of Rights is the biggest target for democrats to end. The hatred of free speech is well known and documented....

lol, what complete and total nonsense.

Twitter is not a government agency. It can censor whomever it wants, whenever it wants, because it is a privately owned platform. The right to free speech does not mean that Twitter has no choice but to turn into 8kun.

I might add, some of us have seen plenty of examples of conservatives trying to shut down speech -- most obviously with repeated attacks on the mainstream media. They also routinely attack depictions of things they dislike, including but not limited to LGBT individuals, culture and acceptance; depictions of drug use; promotion of equality for women, especially in the workplace; any sort of civil rights for non-Christian religions; any focus on racism -- did you really miss Trump ranting about the 1619 Project?

I am a Libertarian, I support individual liberty....

...except when someone uses that liberty in a way you dislike, I see. That includes your own repeated attacks on media outlets like the New York Times. HMMMMM.

Also, how can you be a "defender of liberty," and fail to recognize that Twitter is exercising its own liberty here? Twitter is a private entity which is fully entitled to editorial control of anything on its platform. This has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment, with government control, with freedom of the press.

By the way, "freedom of speech" does not mean "freedom from all consequences of your speech." It sure sounds like you're all mad that you can't use racial slurs in public without getting called on it, and that's not how freedom works.

Thanks, but no thanks, for the completely inaccurate understanding of the situation, and the political concepts involved. It's almost impressive how much you've gotten wrong in your "argument" here.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Free speech is only protected from government censorship....not from private entities.

You recite the talking points well.

Do commies get a treat when they bleat the response from the hate sites correctly?

But the point is your agreement that Twitter is a publisher who controls the editorial content of their publication.

Twitter has more in common with Newsweek than with Debate Politics.com. They are not a free speech forum, they are a publisher with a particular editorial bent.

 

[Robertinfremont]

IF the Communist party is not panicking over this, why would Twitter and Fascistbook censor the free press ? Can you imagine what the outcry would be if a public library in Texas prohibited the NY Times because they printed a NEW STORY critical of President Trump? We would be regaled with CNN and NBC telling us that humanity would fall because of the "attack on the free press."

But this attack on the free press instead is greeted with unabashed praise by the DNCCP propaganda corpse of MSNBCCN and the trash leftist print media.

The post reported the news. When other publications reported fake news about Trump, they published and allowed the twitter and facebook accounts to remain valid and used.

We know by their acts who the enemy of this country actually is. As Trump says, the fake news is at it again when they defend Biden.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Like I said...there is no liberty without personal responsibility.

Democrats are the ones protecting individual/civil liberties....not republicans.

BTW....a real libertarian would never vote for Trump who has all but destroyed the libertarian platform in the GOP.

Like I said, there is no liberty with democrats - who are totalitarian thugs.

 

[Robertinfremont]

lol, what complete and total nonsense.

Twitter is not a government agency. It can censor whomever it wants, whenever it wants, because it is a privately owned platform. The right to free speech does not mean that Twitter has no choice but to turn into 8kun.

I might add, some of us have seen plenty of examples of conservatives trying to shut down speech -- most obviously with repeated attacks on the mainstream media. They also routinely attack depictions of things they dislike, including but not limited to LGBT individuals, culture and acceptance; depictions of drug use; promotion of equality for women, especially in the workplace; any sort of civil rights for non-Christian religions; any focus on racism -- did you really miss Trump ranting about the 1619 Project?



...except when someone uses that liberty in a way you dislike, I see. That includes your own repeated attacks on media outlets like the New York Times. HMMMMM.

Also, how can you be a "defender of liberty," and fail to recognize that Twitter is exercising its own liberty here? Twitter is a private entity which is fully entitled to editorial control of anything on its platform. This has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment, with government control, with freedom of the press.

By the way, "freedom of speech" does not mean "freedom from all consequences of your speech." It sure sounds like you're all mad that you can't use racial slurs in public without getting called on it, and that's not how freedom works.

Thanks, but no thanks, for the completely inaccurate understanding of the situation, and the political concepts involved. It's almost impressive how much you've gotten wrong in your "argument" here.

When Twitter censors Democrats, when Facebook censors Democrats, but with new leadership at both, suddenly Democrats will tell us, now we get it.

 

[CaughtInThe]

The senate is demanding twitter.explain themselves

oh, please can i be there when Twitter explains their TOS to the older men?

then again it's probably just a rouge Twitter boss or orders straight from the top and Twitter (seeing that it's Trump and he sues everybody and their grandmother) hasn't planned their policies and systems to withstand Senators wanting to know what happened.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The post reported the news. When other publications reported fake news about Trump, they published and allowed the twitter and facebook accounts to remain valid and used.

We know by their acts who the enemy of this country actually is. As Trump says, the fake news is at it again when they defend Biden.

The real enemy of the democrats is liberty.

Trump is just in their way.

 

[Moot]

You recite the talking points well.

Do commies get a treat when they bleat the response from the hate sites correctly?

But the point is your agreement that Twitter is a publisher who controls the editorial content of their publication.

Twitter has more in common with Newsweek than with Debate Politics.com. They are not a free speech forum, they are a publisher with a particular editorial bent.

It's not a talking point...it's the first amendment.

You're just butthurt because the truth won out over fascist's lies.

 

[Uncensored2008]

oh, please can i be there when Twitter explains their TOS to the older men?

then again it's probably just a rouge Twitter boss or orders straight from the top and Twitter (seeing that it's Trump and and sues everybody and their grandmother) hasn't planned their policies and systems to withstand Senators wanting to know what happened.

TOS?

Twitter?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Twitter has one rule - promote the party.

Note how Dorsey had no problem with the NY Times and the supposed "tax returns?" Where was this "hacked document rule?"

Dorsey has a private company, he can lie and demagogue all he likes.

BUT he and Twitter are liable for content, he is a publisher - NOT a platform.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Like I said...there is no liberty without personal responsibility.

Democrats are the ones protecting individual/civil liberties....not republicans.

BTW....a real libertarian would never vote for Trump who has all but destroyed the libertarian platform in the GOP.

No, actually you repeat the myths so often told by Democrats.

We fought hard with Democrats to get civil rights laws passed. They held forth Jim Crow, school segregation, fountains for the races, etc. Now like Charles Manson pleading he just had people who liked him, we find Democrats trying to claim they liked blacks. But the facts show otherwise.

 

[Moot]

The real enemy of the democrats is liberty.

Trump is just in their way.

Democrats are the ones exercising their first amendment rights....and republicans are trying to stop them. I hear that Trump might even call out the military.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Twitter has one rule - promote the party.

☝ That is a lie. I hope everyone reads it so they can judge integrity.

 

[Moot]

No, actually you repeat the myths so often told by Democrats.

We fought hard with Democrats to get civil rights laws passed. They held forth Jim Crow, school segregation, fountains for the races, etc. Now like Charles Manson pleading he just had people who liked him, we find Democrats trying to claim they liked blacks. But the facts show otherwise.

I distinctly recall you claiming that you were a Democrat when the civil rights laws were passed. But now you're a republican....the party of racists, liars and thieves. Birds of a feather flock together.

 

[nota bene]

View attachment 67299683



lol... You can't even read more than one sentence of your own source?

It denotes an attitude and a brutal policy of draconian control by propaganda, surveillance, disinformation, denial of truth (doublethink), and manipulation of the past, including the "unperson"—a person whose past existence is expunged from the public record and memory, practiced by modern repressive governments. Often, this includes the circumstances depicted in his novels, particularly Nineteen Eighty-Four[2] but political doublespeak is criticized throughout his work, such as in Politics and the English Language.[3]

How does Twitter trying to stop election misinformation qualify as a "brutal policy of draconian control" or "manipulation of the past?"

Sorry but no, "Orwellian" doesn't mean "boo scary, mean libruls!" It refers to, among other things, total control of the flow of information by a totalitarian state.

Definitions change over time. Yours is very narrow. "Orwellian" can simply refer, for example, to the omnipresence of CCTV.

And consider Jonathan Turley's use of "Orwellian": https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...-to-censor-ny-post-on-biden-email/vi-BB1a3JFI

Please read: https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/nov/11/reading-group-orwellian-1984

 

[Uncensored2008]

Democrats are the ones exercising their first amendment rights....and republicans are trying to stop them. I hear that Trump might even call out the military.

Oh?

{

Incredibly, the Democrats' disdain for the Bill of Rights includes even the 1st Amendment's protection of free speech. Party leaders are openly pushing to limit free speech rights when it conflicts with their own viewpoints.

In a speech at an Iowa community college, for example, Hillary Clinton said: "We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment."

Left unsaid is that the only way to do what she suggests would be to put restrictions on the 1st Amendment. A couple years ago, 54 Senate Democrats voted for a new constitutional amendment that would do just that.

Meanwhile, a YouGov poll taken last May found that a majority of Democrats said they support government limits on what they consider to be "hate speech." Only 26% of Democrats said they opposed such limits.

In California, Democrats pushed a state bill that would have criminalized speech that questions the "consensus" on climate change.

And Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the Senate Judiciary Committee in March that she has discussed with her colleagues the possibility of pursuing civil actions against "climate change deniers."

}

Democrats Attack 3 Of The 10 Amendments In The Bill Of Rights

Democrats are increasingly agitating to restrict or outright repeal to existing rights enshrined in the Constitution's Bill of Rights.

www.investors.com

democrats are the greatest danger to individual liberty this nation has ever faced.

The hostility of the party to civil rights is overwhelming.

 

[Uncensored2008]

☝ That is a lie. I hope everyone reads it so they can judge integrity.

That is a fact.

They may have other words written, but that is the one and only rule.

 

[trixare4kids]

The senate is demanding twitter.explain themselves

What's to explain?

 

[Quag]

He's just treating others as they treat him.

So all those people he insulted before they ever mentioned him he was just doing that to be proacvtive?

 

[Robertinfremont]

I distinctly recall you claiming that you were a Democrat when the civil rights laws were passed. But now you're a republican....the party of racists, liars and thieves. Birds of a feather flock together.

Good recall on your part. Yes I was then a good, loyal and now I see it, corrupt to vote for Democrats. And I advise all Democrats to quit the party of corruption.
We are not the racists.

Proof is all over the place.

Factually a great place to read Democrats lying is on this very forum. Democrats are the authoritarians who want to rule over us all. Can't let them do that.

 

[apdst]

YEAH!

HOW DARE TWITTER ENFORCE ITS RULES AGAINST A CONSERVATIVE!




The New York Post has been locked out of Twitter over a story that they published on Joe Biden's alleged corruption. This according to business reporter Noah Manskar, who claimed that it was because the story violated the policy against the "distribution of hacked material."

They didn't enforce their rules against the Russia Hoax.

 

[Visbek]

Definitions change over time. Yours is very narrow.

Sure, definitions change over time. However, the definition of "Orwellian" does not, and should not, apply to privately owned social media companies that are trying to avoid spreading misinformation in the closing days of a national election.

And consider Jonathan Turley's use of "Orwellian":

Let me get this straight. Fox News, a Murdoch-owned company, is misusing the term "Orwellian" to attack two private and independently owned media companies for... blocking misinformation spread by the NY Post, a formerly Murdoch-owned newspaper and as someone here helpfully pointed out the 4th largest newspaper in the US, owned by the same company that owns the Wall Street Journal? That is supposed to convince me to expand the definition?

Seriously?

Please read: https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/nov/11/reading-group-orwellian-1984

Please read your own sources next time. Jordinson is pointing out the constant misuse and overuse of the term.

I see no reason why I'm obligated to treat "Orwellian" as a near-meaningless snarl word. At a bare minimum, it should refer to actions by a totalitarian state striving for total information control.

 

[BlueTex]

You recite the talking points well.

Do commies get a treat when they bleat the response from the hate sites correctly?

But the point is your agreement that Twitter is a publisher who controls the editorial content of their publication.

Twitter has more in common with Newsweek than with Debate Politics.com. They are not a free speech forum, they are a publisher with a particular editorial bent.

Until you get a court to agree, you are just whining.... Twitter has been sued many, many times... Guess how courts have always ruled?