4 ms·

> "Or because their opinions leads them to construct bombs or shoot people." Who exactly is "they"? Anyone who disagrees with you? Anyone who votes for a Repu

> "Or because their opinions leads them to construct bombs or shoot people." Who exactly is "they"? Anyone who disagrees with you? Anyone who votes for a Republican candidate? Trump supporters? Some subset of Trump supporters who say the election was fraudulent? What about Trump supporters who say the election MAY have been fraudulent -- do they also get silenced? This is a slippery slope. You either have freedom of speech, or you don't. Muzzling people who have ideas you consider dangerous has a way of blowing back in your face; in fact it almost guarantees violence, when people feel they are not allowed to vent.

watwut 6y ago
They are people who put bomb in RNC and brought one to capitol a day before yeasterday. They includes nashville bomber and whoever organized Mitchigan terrorist plot. They are also proud boys starting fights. It is not like US would have shortage of organized political violence lately. It is pretty easy to find "they".
- blisterpeanuts 6y ago
  Your evidence is quite flimsy. The Nashville bomber was one guy committing suicide and he even warned in advance. The Michigan kidnapping plot was about 5-6 idiots who did not represent some kind of farflung organization. The Proud Boys have not started fights, to my knowledge. They have marched peacefully down the street holding U.S. flags and the like, and been violently attacked by antifa elements. They show up at left wing/antifa demonstrations but don't attack; they fight back when provoked. They've been demonized by left wing news as "white supremacists" ironically even though their leader is a black guy. So when you say "it is pretty easy to find 'they'", you need to support that statement. It's pretty easy to make stuff up, too, and I believe a lot of people are being censored on the basis of hearsay and madeup nonsense.
neaden 6y ago
The people who literally stormed the capital earlier this week, some of whom brought equipment like zipties with the intention of kidnapping/hostage taking. Those specific people who we all literally just saw doing the thing on basically every TV Channel while some of them literally livestreamed themselves doing it. This is in no way ambiguous at all.
- blisterpeanuts 6y ago
  There were some extremists and nuts there, agreed. Out of 40K people (some say much higher) there were some 100 or so who actually "stormed" the Capitol building, which is to say they walked past the barricades that the cops helpfully moved out of the way for unexplained reasons, and stood on the steps shouting & taking pictures etc., and a very small subset of these people actually broke a window and entered the building. This is all based on video footage from many witnesses. In the end, some 50-60 people were arrested and one unarmed woman was shot dead by a cop inside the building and there are clear videos of this appalling incident. I don't condone or defend any of these morons for trespassing and my understanding is that 99% of the crowd were yelling at them not to trespass, not to break the window, and there are eyewitnesses now saying a handful, maybe 6-10 of them, were actually antifa agitators trying to stir up violence. Anyway, regardless, yes I agree that some people were violent assholes and they deserve to be prosecuted. However, this still doesn't justify cutting off websites that serve millions of people. Or even websites that serve 1 person. You either have fair and equal treatment for all law abiding people, or you have none at all.
  - neaden 6y ago
    The idea that the violence was from antifa members is a conspiracy theory, that you are mentioning here without any citation or evidence, because there is none. These kind of lies that you are promoting here are a perfect example of how lies spread through the internet.
    - blisterpeanuts 6y ago
      There's a difference between lies and unsubstantiated statements. In this case, I'm quoting eyewitnesses interviewed by vlogger Millie Weaver. Maybe multiple witnesses are lying, but actually they mostly stated that a group looked and acted like antifa. Your statement that I'm promoting lies is itself a lie. Or, to be charitable, a misunderstanding based on insufficient information.
      - neaden 6y ago

watwut 6y ago

They are people who put bomb in RNC and brought one to capitol a day before yeasterday. They includes nashville bomber and whoever organized Mitchigan terrorist plot. They are also proud boys starting fights. It is not like US would have shortage of organized political violence lately. It is pretty easy to find "they".

blisterpeanuts 6y ago
Your evidence is quite flimsy. The Nashville bomber was one guy committing suicide and he even warned in advance. The Michigan kidnapping plot was about 5-6 idiots who did not represent some kind of farflung organization. The Proud Boys have not started fights, to my knowledge. They have marched peacefully down the street holding U.S. flags and the like, and been violently attacked by antifa elements. They show up at left wing/antifa demonstrations but don't attack; they fight back when provoked. They've been demonized by left wing news as "white supremacists" ironically even though their leader is a black guy. So when you say "it is pretty easy to find 'they'", you need to support that statement. It's pretty easy to make stuff up, too, and I believe a lot of people are being censored on the basis of hearsay and madeup nonsense.

neaden 6y ago

The people who literally stormed the capital earlier this week, some of whom brought equipment like zipties with the intention of kidnapping/hostage taking. Those specific people who we all literally just saw doing the thing on basically every TV Channel while some of them literally livestreamed themselves doing it. This is in no way ambiguous at all.

blisterpeanuts 6y ago
There were some extremists and nuts there, agreed. Out of 40K people (some say much higher) there were some 100 or so who actually "stormed" the Capitol building, which is to say they walked past the barricades that the cops helpfully moved out of the way for unexplained reasons, and stood on the steps shouting & taking pictures etc., and a very small subset of these people actually broke a window and entered the building. This is all based on video footage from many witnesses. In the end, some 50-60 people were arrested and one unarmed woman was shot dead by a cop inside the building and there are clear videos of this appalling incident. I don't condone or defend any of these morons for trespassing and my understanding is that 99% of the crowd were yelling at them not to trespass, not to break the window, and there are eyewitnesses now saying a handful, maybe 6-10 of them, were actually antifa agitators trying to stir up violence. Anyway, regardless, yes I agree that some people were violent assholes and they deserve to be prosecuted. However, this still doesn't justify cutting off websites that serve millions of people. Or even websites that serve 1 person. You either have fair and equal treatment for all law abiding people, or you have none at all.
- neaden 6y ago
  The idea that the violence was from antifa members is a conspiracy theory, that you are mentioning here without any citation or evidence, because there is none. These kind of lies that you are promoting here are a perfect example of how lies spread through the internet.
  - blisterpeanuts 6y ago
    There's a difference between lies and unsubstantiated statements. In this case, I'm quoting eyewitnesses interviewed by vlogger Millie Weaver. Maybe multiple witnesses are lying, but actually they mostly stated that a group looked and acted like antifa. Your statement that I'm promoting lies is itself a lie. Or, to be charitable, a misunderstanding based on insufficient information.
    - neaden 6y ago