|
|
Post by elnoodle the reasonable on Jan 9, 2021 22:14:12 GMT
And here's the cunt getting huckled. Turns out he's a QAnon arsehole. Doesn't this just throw up all sorts of questions about who was really behind the violence at the BLM protests in the summer? These cunts were organised on Wednesday. It's likely they were organised 6 months ago. America has a Nazi problem. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55606044 |
|
|
|
Post by mekon on Jan 9, 2021 22:38:23 GMT
 Nothing to see...move along. |
|
|
|
Post by mekon on Jan 9, 2021 22:39:44 GMT
Now worse out there but I'd say it's a huge risk to post it. Dude is sick fuck and his father is now the president.
|
|
|
|
Post by mekon on Jan 9, 2021 22:41:15 GMT
President of the United State's son is Saville Row customer.
|
|
|
|
Post by mekon on Jan 9, 2021 22:45:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by elnoodle the reasonable on Jan 10, 2021 0:03:54 GMT
Nothing to see...move along. Yeah, call me stupid but you're going to have to explain what you think this photo shows and what the fuck it's got to do with Donald Trump's attempted coup which resulted in 5 deaths, dozens of injuries and the further threat of violence prior to Joe Biden's inauguration. Don't forget to comment on the growing evidence that much of the rioting during the BLM protests was caused by right wing agitators and agent provocateurs. Here's the bottom line. Cunts that support the far right (and I include you) would have been wearing a swastika 100 years ago. Wednesday showed what the right is all about. Violence and denial of democracy in favour of armed fascist insurrection. Because that's what it was. Be careful what you wish for. Be careful what you support. Just because you're cheerleading for them doesn't mean they give a fuck about you. |
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Jan 10, 2021 10:38:35 GMT
I've got a feeling this thread will continue with Joe Biden as the new El Presidente.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eddie The Bastard on Jan 10, 2021 18:03:47 GMT
I've got a feeling this thread will continue with Joe Biden as the new El Presidente. I don't think so. If I know elnoodle the reasonable, this thread title was a nod to the Young Ones episode. Post 20 January, we might have new thread like geriatric president or something. |
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Jan 13, 2021 11:56:03 GMT
Seems Trump is being kicked off a lot of social media companies and 1 which hasn't is being dropped by the platform it runs on. A recent HIGNFY post on FB says he is posting on Tripadvisor and Mumsnet  Maybe after the opportunity to scupper Biden's inauguration with unhelpful posts has past they will let him back in. I dont think the day will pass without more violence. |
|
|
|
Post by Diego the toe clipper on Jan 13, 2021 12:33:47 GMT
As much as I think that Trump is an undesirable character in politics at a global level, I don't think that trying to silence him and his followers and effectively forcing them undergound is a particularly wise choice. Any idea that they will disappear is pure fantasy.
In Spain the extreme right was always hidden away, partly underground (in the case of the extremists) and partly integrated into the more socially acceptable rightwing parties (in the case of the "moderate extreme"), but with the creation of Vox (a formally setup party, despite some very dodgy funding chanels) some of these previously "invisible" characters have shown themselves to the public.
I know that the counter argument is that by being out in the public they might attract more support, but I like to think that the hardcore support which they will always have are the dangerous ones, not the waiverers who only flutter close to the bulb when the light is turned on, theses are non-commital sheep who just need a flock to join, and it is better to have the hardcore (or at least a representation of them) visible and controlled than underground and clandestine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Diego the toe clipper on Jan 13, 2021 12:35:31 GMT
Did anyone see Arnie's speech about the Capitol insurrection? I nearly choked on my paella and sangria....
|
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Jan 13, 2021 13:50:30 GMT
As much as I think that Trump is an undesirable character in politics at a global level, I don't think that trying to silence him and his followers and effectively forcing them undergound is a particularly wise choice. Any idea that they will disappear is pure fantasy. In Spain the extreme right was always hidden away, partly underground (in the case of the extremists) and partly integrated into the more socially acceptable rightwing parties (in the case of the "moderate extreme"), but with the creation of Vox (a formally setup party, despite some very dodgy funding chanels) some of these previously "invisible" characters have shown themselves to the public. I know that the counter argument is that by being out in the public they might attract more support, but I like to think that the hardcore support which they will always have are the dangerous ones, not the waiverers who only flutter close to the bulb when the light is turned on, theses are non-commital sheep who just need a flock to join, and it is better to have the hardcore (or at least a representation of them) visible and controlled than underground and clandestine. I agree, but think for a week it might be best to shut him up when hopefully tensions will be a bit lower. Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer is the cliché. If he is spouting off in public then everyone can see it. |
|
|
|
Post by spuu on Jan 13, 2021 23:51:53 GMT
As much as I think that Trump is an undesirable character in politics at a global level, I don't think that trying to silence him and his followers and effectively forcing them undergound is a particularly wise choice. Any idea that they will disappear is pure fantasy. In Spain the extreme right was always hidden away, partly underground (in the case of the extremists) and partly integrated into the more socially acceptable rightwing parties (in the case of the "moderate extreme"), but with the creation of Vox (a formally setup party, despite some very dodgy funding chanels) some of these previously "invisible" characters have shown themselves to the public. I know that the counter argument is that by being out in the public they might attract more support, but I like to think that the hardcore support which they will always have are the dangerous ones, not the waiverers who only flutter close to the bulb when the light is turned on, theses are non-commital sheep who just need a flock to join, and it is better to have the hardcore (or at least a representation of them) visible and controlled than underground and clandestine. Trump has been silenced as he is violating the terms and conditions of these platforms. Anyone that violates these should have their access removed. I cant think of anyone to which the t&c's are more applicable to than the President of the USA. It's not like he was banned overnight with no warning. His posts were being flagged for weeks. If he wants to speak and reach the country/world he has the correct channels to do so at his fingertips at any time. Well he does until Jan 20th. |
|
|
|
Post by beefus on Jan 14, 2021 6:45:06 GMT
I think big tech companies have far too much influence overall, with regard to free speech they are making judgements on what is acceptable and what isn't with complete unaccountability, and they themselves are protected by law. It's a fine line between censorship of what they consider to be a breach of their "rules" and authoritarianism. Ban Trump but be consistent and do the same for all of the other unsavoury World Leaders who regularly incite on social media..
|
|
|
|
Post by Diego the toe clipper on Jan 14, 2021 8:15:04 GMT
Totally agree with both posts. We would be free to say that anyone who uses the phrase "orange tan" is violating the rules of the forum and expel them, but what criteria do we have to do that? Would it be "fair" or a grounded cesnsorship? (Not that anyone would care...)
I totally agree with the need to remove and ban posts / posters who break laws like those who post racist, sexist, antisemitic content for example because these are restrictions and laws that apply to everyone in all parts of life, but when the rules of the social sites seem to be directed at censorship via unilaterally established crteria it's a dangerous path to go down.
We are already seeing "fully free" social media sites spring up and this is clearly the way this is going. In the same way people pidgeon-hole other people by the newspaper they read, we will soon be categorised by the social media site we belong to...
Parler will be the Daily Mail of social media of course, Facebook will be Guardian? TikTok the Daily Star?
|
|
