7 ms·
They were going after political speech while ignoring actual crimes.
by kodyo 4y ago
They were going after political speech while ignoring actual crimes.
- time_to_smile 4y agoI'm seriously out of the loop on this, what were the actual crimes?
- wesleywt 4y agoMore accurately. What was the political speech banned?
- kodyo 4y ago
- simpleblend 4y agoHow about prominent Stanford and Harvard doctors disagreeing with the Covid polices of the CDC?
- jacquesm 4y ago[flagged]
- simpleblend 4y agoHuh? Using the term whataboutism doesn't even make sense here. He asked me to list political speech that was censored, which I did. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford and Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard.
- seadan83 4y agoIf that disagreement were censored, would you know about it? Getting fired is not a 1st amendment violation. The 1st amendment only covers protection from the government (with a lot of gray ground for "disorderly conduct" laws, but I digress)
- simpleblend 4y agoFrancis Collins and Fauci specifically targeted those two doctors.
- tomohawk 4y agoThe NY Post was banned for breaking a story about revelations contained in a laptop computer abandoned by Hunter Biden. This was just prior to a national election. The FBI was involved in pushing this narrative through Twitter. The Babylon Bee is a satire site that was banned for doing satire. There are many many examples.
- g42gregory 4y agoI hope we remember that in the same time period, all mentioning of same story were declared misinformation here, on Hacker News, and posts were flagged, users banned. I wonder if there is any learnings here for the current/future reaction to the ongoing stories?
- favorited 4y agoThe Babylon Bee was not banned, the same way someone who tries to go into a store without shoes on isn't "banned." They just need to put on some shoes, then you're allowed in. The Babylon Bee was told that 1 Tweet violated Twitter's policy, and that they needed to delete it to unlock their account. They chose not to.
- simpleblend 4y ago
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago"All you need to do is renounce your values and violate your principles. What's the big deal?"
- Apocryphon 4y agoWhat values and principles did the Babylon Bee renounce and violate, exactly
- favorited 4y agolmao "Twitter made me delete a Tweet that violated their ToS if I want to keep using their platform" is equivalent to renouncing all of your principles and values??
- kodyo 4y agoThere are lots of crimes that happen in the USA that should probably take priority for the FBI over people posting jokes on Twitter.
- wesleywt 4y agoOh please. Link to where Twitter banned someone for being right wing. Hate speech doesn't count.
- simpleblend 4y agoIt's very convenient that one side of the asile is always in a position to define what hate speech is. Neat trick, but it doesn't work anymore.
- roflyear 4y agoNot a trick, but yeah saying we should harm certain groups of people is hate speech.
- simpleblend 4y agoWho is saying that people should be harmed? Seriously. Whoever you have in mind, if they're actually advocating violence against people then I'm in agreement with you. That's not cool and they shouldn't be doing that. Are you referring to calling a trans person by their biological sex?
- Apocryphon 4y agoWhy does your mind instinctively go to that example?
- simpleblend 4y agoBecause leftists often use that as an example of hate speech.
- jacquesm 4y agoAnd rightly so.
- acdha 4y agoThe thread clearly shows that they were going after misinformation, and trying to make sure they only did so when accurate. At most you could say that the FBI sent some low quality reports, which seems like a better question for your congressional representatives since they have oversight. It does not show or allege a crime was ignored - can you be precise in what you’re insinuating?
- kodyo 4y agoThey didn't have to submit high quality reports because they were working with ideological soulmates.
- mikeyouse 4y agoYou do realize for this to be true - the FBI, one of the most conservative organizations in this history of the country, one that’s never been led by a democrat - would have to be secretly as liberal as Twitter’s trust and safety team? Do you understand why people might not find that plausible?
- kodyo 4y agoThe FBI serves the state, and itself. If they need to make friends with a leftist to get something done, why would that stop them? I personally find it hard to believe that Crossfire Hurricane was run by a conservative cabal in the FBI, but maybe you're right. Whoever were doing it were elitist reprobates.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- djur 4y agoThe FBI investigated both Trump and Clinton in 2016. The difference is that they made a big announcement about Clinton immediately prior to the election.