521–530 of 984 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy.
Do you remember the shooter who shoot congressmen at a congressal ball game? The difference, he had a gun these people didn't
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They smeared feces, stole laptops, broke windows, killed a police officer and got one of their own killed. People with bullhorns directed their fellows to the next target. It was an insurrection attempt by incompetents and LARPers, but absolutely an insurrection attempt.
Like every single riot over the past year? How do you justify the destruction, assaults, murders, deaths, and overall chaos there? Hold these assholes accountable 100%.. but let's also stop pretending people who want to hold the left accountable as well aren't crazy.. and maybe see it as just as damning.
No one is pretending that the crazies on the left don't need to be accountable. There are those, of course, who believe that. But you are arguing against a point that hasn't been made--and most definitely one I did not make.
I'll say it myself, just to be clear: Anyone who riots (or foments an insurrection) needs to be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law after a fair trial.
Host your own hardware, it's not that hard. If you care about free speech so much don't go cheap on infrastructure next time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely ridiculous. Unless you are credibly telling people to actually go and commit violence, it is no such thing.
Trump did not "credibly tell[] people to actually go and commit violence". He "set the stage" as it were, and people did what they did. It's really not that different from what the women did: She got people upset about Islam.
"So we are going to--we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we are going to the Capitol, and we are going to try and give--the Democrats are hopeless, they are never voting for anything, not even one vote but we are going to try--give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help, we're try--going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy.
> Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the la…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, Amazon had given notice to Parler that they want some moderation that is automated... What are the specs for that? What would satisfy Amazon? Can it be delivered within that timeframe setting aside whatever else is going on? What makes you think Parler is interested in complying with the terms of the contract at all? The only benefit of Parler over Twitter or Facebook is the fact that you can say things which…
I am trying to steer our discussion past the politics of this. It is clear that there exists today violent content on both twitter and FB as well, but that is beside the point. > If Parler implements moderation which will comply with Amazon's terms of service Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle…
It's laid out in the court documents.
https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-...
> We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on.
I'm not sure what you are talking about here? We need to agree that Amazon's Terms of Service are subjective? Or are we going to start digging into the rabbit hole of definitions of words like "Harm"?
As with any legal discussion, ultimately the courts decide. But the fact that the court didn't see a need to give Parler the injunctive relief they sought says a bunch.
> I implore you to step out of the political lens for this argument.
I haven't said anything political. I said Parler is in Breech with Amazon. Obviously that's up to a judge to decide, but early signs suggest the judge doesn't favor Parler. If the judge thought Parler was likely to succeed in this case, they'd have given them the injuction they sought.
> You don't have to search too hard to find such content on twitter and FB as well.
You can certainly find threats and hate speech on Twitter and Facebook, but many many people have been banned and many posts have been blocked for such speech.
Parler was created because of the moderating people were facing on Twitter and Facebook. If Twitter and Facebook didn't block this kind of content Parler would not exist.
> Let me ask you for a minute to pretend you are right wing, and you start that recipe making app -- you will not be at peace even though current app is just fine.
Depends. Is it a recipe app that allows users to make death threats to each other? This is literally what we're talking about here, death threats, rape threats, discussing kidnapping people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The scary thing is how large amounts of people are apparently willing to attack democracy You mean, like set up an autonomous zone in a center of the city and kick the police out? Burn down a federal court? Destroy the police station? Take over capitol building and occupy it for several weeks? Attack an elected official's family at their own home because you don't like their policies? Yeah, that happened, but not s…
Grievances about racial inequality are a lot more grounded in reality than QAnon and there was no attempt to disrupt elections, so no, very different situation.
Neither side sees themselves as terrorist, they see themselves as freedom fighters. Both groups are idiots and damaging the country. If you support either, you're adding fuel to the fire. Big Tech stepping in and shutting a group off the internet may see correct today, but all political tides wane and a new wave comes in, how sure are you that it will be the wave you want and not one where you're the dangerous one we have to silence?
I gotta say, recent events have left me shaken to my core. I thought I believed in free speech, to the point where I started a company dedicated to providing privacy and communications products that were not subject to control by any central authority (that turns out to be very hard!) But watching the events of the past few years unfold I am no longer convinced that this would really make the world a better place. I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whoever made decision to move him into the bunker doesn’t change the fact that the protesters did not go past the gates or otherwise do anything which was unusual from decades of protests – which happen all of the time in DC. You are clearly desperate to portray a false equivalence but that simply doesn’t fit the facts.
So what about rioters burning the entrance and exit to Ted Wheelers home in Portland (which he wasn't even present at)? Would you agree the actions there were also attempts at murder and destruction of property of a duly elected official? To act like the past year has had nothing in comparison to insanity .. is well insane. Theses Capital idiots are just that Idiots and they'll see time in court. What's not clear is…
From that you could easily draw the conclusion that I don’t approve of any use of violence or threats of violence against elected officials but I don’t expect you to since you’re pretty obviously more interested in playing whataboutism games.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Successful in what? Stealing Pelosi's podium? Yes, she'd have to order a new one. And a new laptop. And probably fix some windows That's terrible, but what "population of people" do you mean here, beyond folks that need to clean up that shit (and who have my wholehearted compassion, it must have sucked)?
> Successful in what Successful in killing/hold hostage those elected officials they deemed against their cause. This could have ended so much worse than it did. For example, what do you think would've happened if AOC or one of the other congresswomen maligned by Trump ended up in front of these maniacs? Do you think they would have stopped at stealing podiums/laptops?
Why is this not viewed in the same way? It's a complete attack on our country and government, but was somehow sanctioned?