Discussion:
Facebook into Heavy Duty Censorship -- Including Conspiracists
Add Reply
John McAdams
2019-05-03 16:13:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Mark
2019-05-04 03:38:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
Instagram at work:

https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-05 01:25:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
John McAdams
2019-05-05 01:26:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Yes, it would be easy to guess:

Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
2019-05-05 21:41:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
What the far left means by "hate speech" is something they don`t want to
hear or something they disagree with.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:26:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
What the far left means by "hate speech" is something they don`t want to
hear or something they disagree with.
Silly. So you are in favor of hate speech, but only if it comes from the
right.
Bud
2019-05-08 00:40:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
What the far left means by "hate speech" is something they don`t want to
hear or something they disagree with.
Silly. So you are in favor of hate speech, but only if it comes from the
right.
What is "hate speech", Tony?
Steve M. Galbraith
2019-05-05 22:16:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
That's because, to a large degree, he doesn't think the banning (and it's
banning people not censoring them, right?) will happen to him or his side.
He can regularly call people Nazis - I once got a charming message from
him on the Mcrae site where he said "I enjoyed the murder of children by
the Nazis" - and other names because he knows he won't be banned.

This is the problem with the liberal/left on this issue: they so dominate
the media that they don't think their rules will be turned against them.
And rightly so.

I also think Facebook is doing this because they've been threatened by
Congress on this issue. They believe that if they don't act that Congress
will; so it's better to get ahead of the issue.

As for me: if you don't like a message or post or video, just use your
mouse and move on. It takes all of two seconds.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:27:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
That's because, to a large degree, he doesn't think the banning (and it's
banning people not censoring them, right?) will happen to him or his side.
Silly. It happens to the left and it happened to me.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He can regularly call people Nazis - I once got a charming message from
I try to do it regularly, but the Nazis are not always regular in the
frequency of their posts.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
him on the Mcrae site where he said "I enjoyed the murder of children by
the Nazis" - and other names because he knows he won't be banned.
Silly. I was banned from the McRae site and slandered.
Did you see the phony photo he posted as my avatar?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
This is the problem with the liberal/left on this issue: they so dominate
the media that they don't think their rules will be turned against them.
And rightly so.
No, never.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
I also think Facebook is doing this because they've been threatened by
Congress on this issue. They believe that if they don't act that Congress
will; so it's better to get ahead of the issue.
As for me: if you don't like a message or post or video, just use your
mouse and move on. It takes all of two seconds.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:28:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
Silly. I am always the VICTIM of censorship.
Why don't you post ALL my messsages which you have censored and try to
explain why you censored them.
Have I ever censored a message?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2019-05-06 13:30:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6 May 2019 09:28:38 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
Silly. I am always the VICTIM of censorship.
Why don't you post ALL my messsages which you have censored and try to
explain why you censored them.
If I kept them (which I don't) no explanation would be necessary.

It would be obvious that you call people "cowards" and "liars" and
"trolls."
Post by Anthony Marsh
Have I ever censored a message?
No, but you would if you could. You have proven that.

.John
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 17:54:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 6 May 2019 09:28:38 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 4 May 2019 21:25:20 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Of all the people on this newsgroup, Tony would be the one to approve
censorship.
Silly. I am always the VICTIM of censorship.
Why don't you post ALL my messsages which you have censored and try to
explain why you censored them.
If I kept them (which I don't) no explanation would be necessary.
I keep them.
Post by John McAdams
It would be obvious that you call people "cowards" and "liars" and
"trolls."
So now you claim that you only censor my messages when I say "cowards" and
"liars" and "trolls"? But other people have used the same words and you
don't censor them. How about Nazis?

You don't censor that word when you complain about my using it. I issued
you a challenge and you ran away like a coward.
Post by John McAdams
Post by Anthony Marsh
Have I ever censored a message?
No, but you would if you could. You have proven that.
No, never. I said I encourage the Nazis here to show that they are Nazis.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
2019-05-05 21:41:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Did you look at the photo they removed?
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:27:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
Did you look at the photo they removed?
No. why don't you repost it here. I am sure McAdams would approve any
hate speech.

He wouldn't post the cartoon I uploaded. Ask him why if he believes in
free speech. He doesn't. He believes in censorship.
Mark
2019-05-07 02:35:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
No, silly, of course not.

My position is that is awfully hard to define hate speech.

If you folks on the left think you can define it right now, will you be
okay when the tables are turned and it's defined as what you think?

To me, that's a very short-sighted position.

Don't censor thought, let everyone be heard, and may the most popular
thought win at the ballot box.

I didn't intend to lean on the cliche Slippery Slope but it's surely
applicable here, and it's a very frozen downhill. Mark
Steve M. Galbraith
2019-05-08 00:43:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
No, silly, of course not.
My position is that is awfully hard to define hate speech.
If you folks on the left think you can define it right now, will you be
okay when the tables are turned and it's defined as what you think?
To me, that's a very short-sighted position.
Don't censor thought, let everyone be heard, and may the most popular
thought win at the ballot box.
I didn't intend to lean on the cliche Slippery Slope but it's surely
applicable here, and it's a very frozen downhill. Mark
Mark: The slippery slope metaphor needs updating but here's a terrific
piece by law professor and first amendment scholar Eugene Volokh on the
concept as it applies to laws:
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/slipperyshorter.pdf

As he points out we can't always rely on the response - after all we
accept some speech restrictions, e.g., libel - because we think allowing
defamation is a greater harm then creating laws to prevent it.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 00:44:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
No, silly, of course not.
My position is that is awfully hard to define hate speech.
That's one way to avoid admitting a problem.

Why don't you say that it is very hard to define genocide or racism?
That way you don't have to admit that they exist.
Post by Mark
If you folks on the left think you can define it right now, will you be
okay when the tables are turned and it's defined as what you think?
To me, that's a very short-sighted position.
If you mean Facebook, sure. And I think it was intended that way.
Post by Mark
Don't censor thought, let everyone be heard, and may the most popular
thought win at the ballot box.
Thought is not speech. Do you understand the difference?
Post by Mark
I didn't intend to lean on the cliche Slippery Slope but it's surely
applicable here, and it's a very frozen downhill. Mark
Then don't go skiing. It's too dangerous.
Mark
2019-05-08 00:24:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
My first answer to you was based on the larger question of what Facebook
is doing, which I believed is what you were referring to.

But now let's focus on the deleted Instagram picture.

Has your hatred for the Trumps crowded out your supposed respect for
fairness?

Do you think Instagram was right in deleting the photo of Trump Jr and the
veteran?

I was hoping you were an "old-fashioned" liberal who believes in free
speech for all.

Instead, this thread has made crystal clear that you don't want free
debate. You so badly want the world to turn out your way that you are
wishing that only your side could be heard. Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-09 01:03:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
So, what is YOUR position? You think they should be allowed to spread
hate speech as long as they are rightwing?
My first answer to you was based on the larger question of what Facebook
is doing, which I believed is what you were referring to.
But now let's focus on the deleted Instagram picture.
Has your hatred for the Trumps crowded out your supposed respect for
fairness?
I don't hate all the Trumps. I feel sorry for Baron.
Post by Mark
Do you think Instagram was right in deleting the photo of Trump Jr and the
veteran?
What photo? Show me. Do you think McAdams was right in banning the cartoon
I uploaded? It was SOOOO cute.

How about the cat playing the theremin?
Post by Mark
I was hoping you were an "old-fashioned" liberal who believes in free
speech for all.
How old? Some very old Liberals were more like fellow travelers.
Post by Mark
Instead, this thread has made crystal clear that you don't want free
I am not allowed to engage in free debate here. I am censored.
Post by Mark
debate. You so badly want the world to turn out your way that you are
wishing that only your side could be heard. Mark
I don't want the whole world to be exactly the same everywhere. But I
would like to see Democracy restored to the United States. I don't think
we have the right to impose our system on everyone else.
Bud
2019-05-05 01:28:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
While it is not on the same level as what Facebook has done, here is
https://nypost.com/2019/05/01/donald-trump-jr-rages-against-instagram-for-deleting-photo/
Mark
Facebook owns Instagram.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-04 14:49:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
Cute. Did they ban any LEFTWING conspiracists?
Shouldn't you file a discrimination lawsuit?
Post by John McAdams
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Which Kennedy? All Kennedys?
alt.assassination.kennedy?
BOZ
2019-05-05 01:24:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
Cute. Did they ban any LEFTWING conspiracists?
Shouldn't you file a discrimination lawsuit?
Post by John McAdams
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Which Kennedy? All Kennedys?
alt.assassination.kennedy?
Did they ban Leftwing conspiracists? You are still around.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:30:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
Cute. Did they ban any LEFTWING conspiracists?
Shouldn't you file a discrimination lawsuit?
Post by John McAdams
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Which Kennedy? All Kennedys?
alt.assassination.kennedy?
Did they ban Leftwing conspiracists? You are still around.
Well, sure, here, but not on Facebook. Never on Facebook.
I once accidentally signed up for Twitter just to get something for free
and I keep getting their junk mail.
Can YOU answer my point which McAdams ignored?
Do we need a separate newsgroup for each assassination or can we just
lump them all together?


Was Obama correct when he suggested to Trump that we need a newsgroup
dedicated to the assassination of Tupac?
BOZ
2019-05-05 17:52:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
Cute. Did they ban any LEFTWING conspiracists?
Shouldn't you file a discrimination lawsuit?
Post by John McAdams
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Which Kennedy? All Kennedys?
alt.assassination.kennedy?
Which Kennedy? John Kennedy Toole.
BOZ
2019-05-05 01:01:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
John McAdams
2019-05-05 01:05:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.

This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.

The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-05 21:36:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Not every conspiracy theorist is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
BOZ
2019-05-05 21:36:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
John McAdams
2019-05-05 21:39:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?

And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-06 13:44:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist. There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
John McAdams
2019-05-06 13:46:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:47:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
My coherent point is that the article has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. I said nothing about censoring. Where the hell did I say
anything about censoring? This article is beside the point, not to the
point, immaterial, not pertinent, not germane, off the subject, neither
here nor there, unconnected, unrelated, peripheral, tangential,
extraneous, inapt, inapplicable. IT HAS NOTHINg TO DO WITH THE JFK
ASSASSINATION.
John McAdams
2019-05-07 19:49:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
My coherent point is that the article has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. I said nothing about censoring. Where the hell did I say
anything about censoring? This article is beside the point, not to the
point, immaterial, not pertinent, not germane, off the subject, neither
here nor there, unconnected, unrelated, peripheral, tangential,
extraneous, inapt, inapplicable. IT HAS NOTHINg TO DO WITH THE JFK
ASSASSINATION.
So Facebook starts censoring people with disapproved views, including
Alex Jones, and that has nothing to do with JFK conspiracy theories.

Really?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-08 19:49:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
My coherent point is that the article has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. I said nothing about censoring. Where the hell did I say
anything about censoring? This article is beside the point, not to the
point, immaterial, not pertinent, not germane, off the subject, neither
here nor there, unconnected, unrelated, peripheral, tangential,
extraneous, inapt, inapplicable. IT HAS NOTHINg TO DO WITH THE JFK
ASSASSINATION.
So Facebook starts censoring people with disapproved views, including
Alex Jones, and that has nothing to do with JFK conspiracy theories.
Really?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Alex Jones' belief that JFK was killed by evil conspirators is outside the
realm of the article. The article does not mention JFK. I do not care.
It's a good discussion, so keep it going and I will stay out of it.
BOZ
2019-05-08 19:49:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
My coherent point is that the article has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. I said nothing about censoring. Where the hell did I say
anything about censoring? This article is beside the point, not to the
point, immaterial, not pertinent, not germane, off the subject, neither
here nor there, unconnected, unrelated, peripheral, tangential,
extraneous, inapt, inapplicable. IT HAS NOTHINg TO DO WITH THE JFK
ASSASSINATION.
So Facebook starts censoring people with disapproved views, including
Alex Jones, and that has nothing to do with JFK conspiracy theories.
Really?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I would say that this article has more in common with white genocide
conspiracy theory than JFK conspiracy theory. I withdraw from this
discussion.
slats
2019-05-08 19:53:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
My coherent point is that the article has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. I said nothing about censoring. Where the hell did I say
anything about censoring? This article is beside the point, not to the
point, immaterial, not pertinent, not germane, off the subject, neither
here nor there, unconnected, unrelated, peripheral, tangential,
extraneous, inapt, inapplicable. IT HAS NOTHINg TO DO WITH THE JFK
ASSASSINATION.
So Facebook starts censoring people with disapproved views, including
Alex Jones, and that has nothing to do with JFK conspiracy theories.
Really?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Allowed:

1) JFK/RFK conspiracists
2) Moon landing conspiracists
3) 9-11 conspiracists
4) GWB National Guard conspiracists
5) Russian Collusion conspiracists
6) CIA "crack cocaine" conspiracists

Not allowed:

Sandy Hook conspiracists
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-09 00:58:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
My coherent point is that the article has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. I said nothing about censoring. Where the hell did I say
I thought the article did. Why else would you cite it?
Post by BOZ
anything about censoring? This article is beside the point, not to the
point, immaterial, not pertinent, not germane, off the subject, neither
here nor there, unconnected, unrelated, peripheral, tangential,
extraneous, inapt, inapplicable. IT HAS NOTHINg TO DO WITH THE JFK
ASSASSINATION.
Ok, so YOU had nothing to do with the JFK assassination. I can accept
that.
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:51:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Your comment about making a coherent point is quite rude. If you said it
to my face I would tell you to go F#ck Yourself.
Mark
2019-05-08 19:48:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Your comment about making a coherent point is quite rude. If you said it
to my face I would tell you to go F#ck Yourself.
What is going on with you?

This subject--Facebook's decision--is not off-line on here.

They are trying to silence a person who among other things is a JFK
assassination conspiracy theorist--Alex Jones.

I don't understand how you cannot see the strong connection between that
and this newsgroup.

The Tony Marshes of the world are oblivious to the fact we are standing up
for them. Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 17:55:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Cute idea, but it might be hard to find anyone who only believes in one
conspiracy theory.

I think your point it that you think rightwingers should be allowed to
spew hate speech, but leftists should be censored. After all, that's what
you do here.
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
That is not a requirement in this newsgroup. You encourage a certain
poster here to post his theory that has no coherent point.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-07 18:05:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I'm not arguing that Alex Jones should be banned. Where the hell did I say
that? I'm arguing that this article is not a JFK assassination article and
therefore should have been rejected by the moderator.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-09 00:58:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
I know that Alex Jones is a JFK conspiracy theorist. He is also a 911
conspiracy theorist.
So it's OK to believe in one conspiracy theory, but if you believe in
two or more you should be censored?
Post by BOZ
There is no point in arguing with the moderator.
There would be if you had a coherent point.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I'm not arguing that Alex Jones should be banned. Where the hell did I say
that? I'm arguing that this article is not a JFK assassination article and
therefore should have been rejected by the moderator.
But then he would have nothing to complain about.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:28:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
So you think that when Hitler opened up the concentration camps he made
them equally available to his own Nazis as well as Jews?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:51:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article does not mention Alex Jones as a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Should you allow an article that discusses Alex Jones, Charlie Sheen and a
group of pornstars? This is a good article, but it belongs in a newsgroup
about freedom of speech. The article doesn't mention Oswald, Tippit, Ruby,
the grassy knoll, the CIA, the Chicago Mafia. The article only made it
through because you are the moderator. Let's be honest.
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:52:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
Did you see the words "Alex Jones." He is a JFK conspiracy theorist.
Did you know that?
And once censorship starts, why do you doubt it will be extended to
all disapproved views?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Where does the article discuss Alex Jones as a JFK conspiracy theorist? I
want you to give me a quote word for word and I want to know the context.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:27:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I read the article again and it has nothing to do with the JFK
assassination. Where are the words "JFK" "Oswald"? i don't see them there.
How dare you challenge your leader?
If he posted it he thinks it is on topic.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:31:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
It ought to be obvious: conspiracy theorists are among the people
they are censoring.
This is also a litmus test: since people on the right are the vast
majority of those censored, this issue separates the genuine liberals
(who claim to believe in free speech) from the authoritarian leftists.
The former are more and more scarce. The latter more and more
dominant.
OK, so agree with my position which is pro free speech. As I have said
thousands of times before, it is important for everyone to see how
dangerous these Nazis are.

It's important to see what leads them to killing people. What is it about
the Nazis from Shelby, Ohio which makes them think that they have the
right to run over people with their cars?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:30:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Interesting article. What does this article have to do with the JFK
assassination?
How dare you question the leader of the cover-up.
Obviously if he approved the post he thinks it's on-topic.
Mark
2019-05-05 01:06:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Another addition to the debate:

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/

Mark
John McAdams
2019-05-05 01:08:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.

I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-05 21:39:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
What does Farrakhan have to do with Lee Harvey Oswald? Malcolm X
assassination?
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:28:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
What does Farrakhan have to do with Lee Harvey Oswald? Malcolm X
assassination?
I think at one time the Black Caucus wanted to include the Malcom X
assasination in the HSCA agenda.
Ramon F Herrera
2019-05-06 02:02:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
My Automated Deplorable Debater, who was put out to pasture says:

"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"

Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.

The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
Congress, trained seals, so-called men on their knees, is one of:

HATRED vs. TOLERANCE

and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?

"The left hates ideas (which is fine!!!)...
.... the Right, people"
-Moi

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
#FreeTheSlavesInThisNG

============================================
Trump voters:

Actually, the hate groups below belong in YOUR SIDE. OWN them.

=========================
The New Black Panthers:

The Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights consider the New Black Panthers to be a
hate group.[5][6][7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party

"The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic
organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews
and law enforcement officers."

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party

=========================
The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Farrakhan as antisemitic and
anti-white

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrakhan

"Louis Farrakhan heads the Nation of Islam, a group he has led since 1977
and that is based on a somewhat bizarre and fundamentally anti-white
theology. Farrakhan is an anti-Semite who routinely accuses Jews of
manipulating the U.S. government and controlling the levers of world
power. Farrakhan blames Jews for the slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim
Crow, sharecropping and general black oppression."

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan

=========================
John McAdams
2019-05-06 02:06:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
"The left hates ideas (which is fine!!!)...
.... the Right, people"
Nonsense. The left hates all kinds of people: "deplorables" (you use
that term, showing your hatred) "bitter clingers," people they call
racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.

The one person on this newsgroup condoning Facebook censorship is the
leftist Tony Marsh.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
-Moi
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
#FreeTheSlavesInThisNG
============================================
Actually, the hate groups below belong in YOUR SIDE. OWN them.
=========================
The Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights consider the New Black Panthers to be a
hate group.[5][6][7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
"The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic
organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews
and law enforcement officers."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party
=========================
The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Farrakhan as antisemitic and
anti-white
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrakhan
"Louis Farrakhan heads the Nation of Islam, a group he has led since 1977
and that is based on a somewhat bizarre and fundamentally anti-white
theology. Farrakhan is an anti-Semite who routinely accuses Jews of
manipulating the U.S. government and controlling the levers of world
power. Farrakhan blames Jews for the slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim
Crow, sharecropping and general black oppression."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan
=========================
What's your point?

The Southern Poverty Law Center is itself a hate group, although they
are right about these two groups.

But both have a right to free speech.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Ramon F Herrera
2019-05-07 02:36:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
On behalf of which of those groups are you speaking?

That is a typical response from Deplorables: "The blacks hate the
Mexicans", "the Jews hate the Blacks", etc. It is a common strategy to
justify hatred.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
John McAdams
2019-05-07 02:38:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
On behalf of which of those groups are you speaking?
That is a typical response from Deplorables: "The blacks hate the
Mexicans", "the Jews hate the Blacks", etc. It is a common strategy to
justify hatred.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
You honestly believe that white separatists and black separatists get
along great?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-08 00:27:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
On behalf of which of those groups are you speaking?
That is a typical response from Deplorables: "The blacks hate the
Mexicans", "the Jews hate the Blacks", etc. It is a common strategy to
justify hatred.
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
Ramon how do you justify your hatred of Trump?
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 00:45:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy!  Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
On behalf of which of those groups are you speaking?
One does not have to be a member of either to have an opinion.
Many white marched with blacks to oppose racism.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
That is a typical response from Deplorables: "The blacks hate the
Mexicans", "the Jews hate the Blacks", etc. It is a common strategy to
justify hatred.
It's also known as divide and conquer.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
Ramon F Herrera
2019-05-07 02:38:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
I will ask again: Nothing is perfectly aligned, but if a neutral
observer saw the 2 parties today, and was asked: "Which of the two you
see on the side of hatred (not toward IDEAS but toward humans)?"

"What leader is dividing this country like no other in memory?"

What would this very smart, outsider (*) say?

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
#StopCensoringRamonsPosts

(*) That Mr. Spock or similar would solve the JFK case, to most people's
satisfaction, after a few days of following this NG. No need for lengthy
investigations or equations. All s/he has to do is realize which side
believes in their cause and themselves and which does not.
John McAdams
2019-05-07 02:42:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
I will ask again: Nothing is perfectly aligned, but if a neutral
observer saw the 2 parties today, and was asked: "Which of the two you
see on the side of hatred (not toward IDEAS but toward humans)?"
The party that rioted outside the opposition candidate's rallies and
beat up his supporters.

The party that refers to those who disagree with them as "bitter
clingers" and "deplorables."

The party of people on college campuses who shout down speakers they
don't like.

The party that wants to censor people they disagree with.

The party who calls those with different opinions "racists" and
"sexists" and "homophobes."

Sound familiar?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 00:47:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
I will ask again: Nothing is perfectly aligned, but if a neutral
observer saw the 2 parties today, and was asked: "Which of the two you
see on the side of hatred (not toward IDEAS but toward humans)?"
The party that rioted outside the opposition candidate's rallies and
beat up his supporters.
Do you mean the Trump supporters who beat up the black guy and Trump
encouraged them? Or you make up some fake story?
Post by John McAdams
The party that refers to those who disagree with them as "bitter
clingers" and "deplorables."
Wow, so you're saying that she should not have the right to say that?
Post by John McAdams
The party of people on college campuses who shout down speakers they
don't like.
So you think they do not have the right to shout?
Post by John McAdams
The party that wants to censor people they disagree with.
YOU are the only one here censoring.
YOU censored my Latin because you didn't understand it.
Post by John McAdams
The party who calls those with different opinions "racists" and
"sexists" and "homophobes."
They are not always all of those things.
So you say that such types do not exist?
You say there is no racism?
Post by John McAdams
Sound familiar?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2019-05-08 00:50:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 7 May 2019 20:47:42 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
I will ask again: Nothing is perfectly aligned, but if a neutral
observer saw the 2 parties today, and was asked: "Which of the two you
see on the side of hatred (not toward IDEAS but toward humans)?"
The party that rioted outside the opposition candidate's rallies and
beat up his supporters.
Do you mean the Trump supporters who beat up the black guy and Trump
encouraged them? Or you make up some fake story?
Post by John McAdams
The party that refers to those who disagree with them as "bitter
clingers" and "deplorables."
Wow, so you're saying that she should not have the right to say that?
Post by John McAdams
The party of people on college campuses who shout down speakers they
don't like.
So you think they do not have the right to shout?
Tony's intolerance keeps coming out.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-09 01:03:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 7 May 2019 20:47:42 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
I will ask again: Nothing is perfectly aligned, but if a neutral
observer saw the 2 parties today, and was asked: "Which of the two you
see on the side of hatred (not toward IDEAS but toward humans)?"
The party that rioted outside the opposition candidate's rallies and
beat up his supporters.
Do you mean the Trump supporters who beat up the black guy and Trump
encouraged them? Or you make up some fake story?
Post by John McAdams
The party that refers to those who disagree with them as "bitter
clingers" and "deplorables."
Wow, so you're saying that she should not have the right to say that?
Post by John McAdams
The party of people on college campuses who shout down speakers they
don't like.
So you think they do not have the right to shout?
Tony's intolerance keeps coming out.
What am I intolerant of? Murder. Mass shootings. Hate Speech. Treason.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2019-05-09 01:05:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 8 May 2019 21:03:58 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 7 May 2019 20:47:42 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
The party that refers to those who disagree with them as "bitter
clingers" and "deplorables."
Wow, so you're saying that she should not have the right to say that?
Post by John McAdams
The party of people on college campuses who shout down speakers they
don't like.
So you think they do not have the right to shout?
Tony's intolerance keeps coming out.
What am I intolerant of? Murder. Mass shootings. Hate Speech. Treason.
You call everything you dislike "hate speech" or "treason."

You have made it clear you think leftists have a right to shout down
conservative speakers.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
1***@mail.com
2019-05-07 02:43:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
"The left hates ideas (which is fine!!!)...
.... the Right, people"
Nonsense. The left hates all kinds of people: "deplorables" (you use
that term, showing your hatred) "bitter clingers," people they call
racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.
The one person on this newsgroup condoning Facebook censorship is the
leftist Tony Marsh.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
-Moi
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
#FreeTheSlavesInThisNG
============================================
Actually, the hate groups below belong in YOUR SIDE. OWN them.
=========================
The Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights consider the New Black Panthers to be a
hate group.[5][6][7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
"The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic
organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews
and law enforcement officers."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party
=========================
The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Farrakhan as antisemitic and
anti-white
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrakhan
"Louis Farrakhan heads the Nation of Islam, a group he has led since 1977
and that is based on a somewhat bizarre and fundamentally anti-white
theology. Farrakhan is an anti-Semite who routinely accuses Jews of
manipulating the U.S. government and controlling the levers of world
power. Farrakhan blames Jews for the slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim
Crow, sharecropping and general black oppression."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan
=========================
What's your point?
The Southern Poverty Law Center is itself a hate group, although they
are right about these two groups.
But both have a right to free speech.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The censorship doesn't come from the "left." This is corporate censorship.
They tend to like the Democratic Party corporatists, but they don't mind
Republican corporatists, if that's all they can get. Trump will do nothing
about it. This is capitalist censorship. The capitalists don't want an
internet which threatens revenue streams. "To hell with free speech when
money is at stake!"
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 00:50:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
"The left hates ideas (which is fine!!!)...
.... the Right, people"
Nonsense. The left hates all kinds of people: "deplorables" (you use
that term, showing your hatred) "bitter clingers," people they call
racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.
The one person on this newsgroup condoning Facebook censorship is the
leftist Tony Marsh.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
-Moi
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
#FreeTheSlavesInThisNG
============================================
Actually, the hate groups below belong in YOUR SIDE. OWN them.
=========================
The Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights consider the New Black Panthers to be a
hate group.[5][6][7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
"The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic
organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews
and law enforcement officers."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party
=========================
The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Farrakhan as antisemitic and
anti-white
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrakhan
"Louis Farrakhan heads the Nation of Islam, a group he has led since 1977
and that is based on a somewhat bizarre and fundamentally anti-white
theology. Farrakhan is an anti-Semite who routinely accuses Jews of
manipulating the U.S. government and controlling the levers of world
power. Farrakhan blames Jews for the slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim
Crow, sharecropping and general black oppression."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan
=========================
What's your point?
The Southern Poverty Law Center is itself a hate group, although they
are right about these two groups.
But both have a right to free speech.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The censorship doesn't come from the "left." This is corporate censorship.
They tend to like the Democratic Party corporatists, but they don't mind
Republican corporatists, if that's all they can get. Trump will do nothing
What Right does Trump have to do anything about it?
You probably aren't old enough to remember the last President who used
Federal troops to protect free speech.
Post by 1***@mail.com
about it. This is capitalist censorship. The capitalists don't want an
internet which threatens revenue streams. "To hell with free speech when
money is at stake!"
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 18:03:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
"Just when I thought I was out, they keep on bringing me back in!"
Professor, any Harvard educated peer will tell you that the issue cannot
possibly be synthesized are "Left-vs-Right". Why? Because the extremes are
vicious, they meet, they touch each other. White Separatists and Black
Separatists get along great.
No, they don't. They hate each other.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
The issue, specially these days when division is fomented from the White
House throwing gasoline to a minor fire and from the obedient laps dogs in
HATRED vs. TOLERANCE
and you all know darn well which party is on which side, doncha?
Yes, I know perfectly well who is censoring speech they don't like.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
"The left hates ideas (which is fine!!!)...
.... the Right, people"
Nonsense. The left hates all kinds of people: "deplorables" (you use
that term, showing your hatred) "bitter clingers," people they call
racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.
I think you need a dictionary. Deplore does not mean hate. Feeling sorry
for or looking down on is not hate. You are infected with Trump's disease
of trying to create a false equivalency when you can't admit a fact.
Post by John McAdams
The one person on this newsgroup condoning Facebook censorship is the
leftist Tony Marsh.
Condoning? I never said anything like that. Stop lying.
If I say I deplore it would you say I hate it?
Post by John McAdams
Post by Ramon F Herrera
-Moi
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
#FreeTheSlavesInThisNG
============================================
Actually, the hate groups below belong in YOUR SIDE. OWN them.
=========================
The Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights consider the New Black Panthers to be a
hate group.[5][6][7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
"The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic
organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews
and law enforcement officers."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party
=========================
The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Farrakhan as antisemitic and
anti-white
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrakhan
"Louis Farrakhan heads the Nation of Islam, a group he has led since 1977
and that is based on a somewhat bizarre and fundamentally anti-white
theology. Farrakhan is an anti-Semite who routinely accuses Jews of
manipulating the U.S. government and controlling the levers of world
power. Farrakhan blames Jews for the slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim
Crow, sharecropping and general black oppression."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan
=========================
What's your point?
The Southern Poverty Law Center is itself a hate group, although they
are right about these two groups.
But both have a right to free speech.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:32:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
So do you. It is important for everyone to see just how far right you are.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2019-05-07 18:05:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
I like that strategy! Swamp the censors.
I obviously don't care for Farrakhan, but I think he has a right to
speak.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Facebook suspended Jones's profile because he violated Facebook's
standards against hate speech. Facebook said nothing about the JFK
assassination.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:31:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
Mark
Yeah, right. Trump is still investigating who killed B.I.G. and Tupac.
He suspects it was The Deep State.
Mark
2019-05-07 02:50:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
Mark
Yeah, right. Trump is still investigating who killed B.I.G. and Tupac.
He suspects it was The Deep State.
Can anyone tell me how this reply to my link to an article about
Facebook's decision and Snoop Dogg's reaction to it has anything to do
with anything?

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 00:51:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/05/03/snoop-dogg-encourages-everyone-to-post-louis-farrakhan-footage-on-facebook-and-instagram/
Mark
Yeah, right. Trump is still investigating who killed B.I.G. and Tupac.
He suspects it was The Deep State.
Can anyone tell me how this reply to my link to an article about
Facebook's decision and Snoop Dogg's reaction to it has anything to do
with anything?
Mark
No, because you are afraid to look at the video of Obama making fun of
Trump's conspiracy theories.


John McAdams
2019-05-08 00:52:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 7 May 2019 20:51:19 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
No, because you are afraid to look at the video of Obama making fun of
Trump's conspiracy theories.
http://youtu.be/zeGpLg0b3DE
Odd statement, coming from somebody who believes Trump conspired with
the Russians.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-09 01:06:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 7 May 2019 20:51:19 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
No, because you are afraid to look at the video of Obama making fun of
Trump's conspiracy theories.
http://youtu.be/zeGpLg0b3DE
Odd statement, coming from somebody who believes Trump conspired with
the Russians.
Why odd? I don't believe that the Russians had anything to do with the
JFK assassination.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
1***@mail.com
2019-05-05 01:13:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:32:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?

I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
1***@mail.com
2019-05-07 02:51:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?
I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
I don't think McAdams would censor it, but I can't post a video here. I
can type words, but it's the kind of evidence which you must see. Of
course, you would miss the point, but maybe somebody would understand.

The girl who was in the Twitter meme photo with the boyfriend in the red
shirt bending over his "dead love," is what I'm talking about. In the
video released at the time of the trial, which was taken from inside the
Marathon Sports Store, you can see this man run from inside the store out
the front door. Then you can see him through the window. This is after the
explosion. This is the "boyfriend" from the Twitter meme photo. Through
the window, you can see him bend down, then he gets up, walks around, and
then he helps the girl get up off the sidewalk. You can see them both walk
over to the spot where the meme photo was taken afterwards. She was
walking around before the meme photo was taken, when she was "dead." Then,
later photos show she is not dead, just supposedly injured. But the
boyfriend took off his shirt and disappeared. Other people tend her after
he left. Clearly, he was not her boyfriend, she was not dead, she was not
injured, and the whole thing was a pre-planned hoax.

Also, in the same video, you can see a man bring in Tamerlan Tsarnaev's
backpack, AFTER the explosion. In other photography, you can see this man
grabbing the backpack from underneath a fallen sign, just after the
explosion. He carries Tsarnaev's backpack into the store after the
explosion, so Tsarnaev's backpack could not have exploded. And showing
this in a video on YouTube makes me a bully.
John McAdams
2019-05-07 02:52:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?
I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
I don't think McAdams would censor it, but I can't post a video here. I
can type words, but it's the kind of evidence which you must see. Of
course, you would miss the point, but maybe somebody would understand.
The girl who was in the Twitter meme photo with the boyfriend in the red
shirt bending over his "dead love," is what I'm talking about. In the
video released at the time of the trial, which was taken from inside the
Marathon Sports Store, you can see this man run from inside the store out
the front door. Then you can see him through the window. This is after the
explosion. This is the "boyfriend" from the Twitter meme photo. Through
the window, you can see him bend down, then he gets up, walks around, and
then he helps the girl get up off the sidewalk. You can see them both walk
over to the spot where the meme photo was taken afterwards. She was
walking around before the meme photo was taken, when she was "dead." Then,
later photos show she is not dead, just supposedly injured. But the
boyfriend took off his shirt and disappeared. Other people tend her after
he left. Clearly, he was not her boyfriend, she was not dead, she was not
injured, and the whole thing was a pre-planned hoax.
Also, in the same video, you can see a man bring in Tamerlan Tsarnaev's
backpack, AFTER the explosion. In other photography, you can see this man
grabbing the backpack from underneath a fallen sign, just after the
explosion. He carries Tsarnaev's backpack into the store after the
explosion, so Tsarnaev's backpack could not have exploded. And showing
this in a video on YouTube makes me a bully.
If you are, in fact, accusing a recognizable living person of being
part of a terrorist conspiracy, I can see why they would take it down.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
1***@mail.com
2019-05-08 00:31:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?
I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
I don't think McAdams would censor it, but I can't post a video here. I
can type words, but it's the kind of evidence which you must see. Of
course, you would miss the point, but maybe somebody would understand.
The girl who was in the Twitter meme photo with the boyfriend in the red
shirt bending over his "dead love," is what I'm talking about. In the
video released at the time of the trial, which was taken from inside the
Marathon Sports Store, you can see this man run from inside the store out
the front door. Then you can see him through the window. This is after the
explosion. This is the "boyfriend" from the Twitter meme photo. Through
the window, you can see him bend down, then he gets up, walks around, and
then he helps the girl get up off the sidewalk. You can see them both walk
over to the spot where the meme photo was taken afterwards. She was
walking around before the meme photo was taken, when she was "dead." Then,
later photos show she is not dead, just supposedly injured. But the
boyfriend took off his shirt and disappeared. Other people tend her after
he left. Clearly, he was not her boyfriend, she was not dead, she was not
injured, and the whole thing was a pre-planned hoax.
Also, in the same video, you can see a man bring in Tamerlan Tsarnaev's
backpack, AFTER the explosion. In other photography, you can see this man
grabbing the backpack from underneath a fallen sign, just after the
explosion. He carries Tsarnaev's backpack into the store after the
explosion, so Tsarnaev's backpack could not have exploded. And showing
this in a video on YouTube makes me a bully.
If you are, in fact, accusing a recognizable living person of being
part of a terrorist conspiracy, I can see why they would take it down.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
But it's true.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 17:11:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?
I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
I don't think McAdams would censor it, but I can't post a video here. I
can type words, but it's the kind of evidence which you must see. Of
course, you would miss the point, but maybe somebody would understand.
The girl who was in the Twitter meme photo with the boyfriend in the red
shirt bending over his "dead love," is what I'm talking about. In the
video released at the time of the trial, which was taken from inside the
Marathon Sports Store, you can see this man run from inside the store out
the front door. Then you can see him through the window. This is after the
explosion. This is the "boyfriend" from the Twitter meme photo. Through
the window, you can see him bend down, then he gets up, walks around, and
then he helps the girl get up off the sidewalk. You can see them both walk
over to the spot where the meme photo was taken afterwards. She was
walking around before the meme photo was taken, when she was "dead." Then,
later photos show she is not dead, just supposedly injured. But the
boyfriend took off his shirt and disappeared. Other people tend her after
he left. Clearly, he was not her boyfriend, she was not dead, she was not
injured, and the whole thing was a pre-planned hoax.
Also, in the same video, you can see a man bring in Tamerlan Tsarnaev's
backpack, AFTER the explosion. In other photography, you can see this man
grabbing the backpack from underneath a fallen sign, just after the
explosion. He carries Tsarnaev's backpack into the store after the
explosion, so Tsarnaev's backpack could not have exploded. And showing
this in a video on YouTube makes me a bully.
If you are, in fact, accusing a recognizable living person of being
part of a terrorist conspiracy, I can see why they would take it down.
Not sure I see your logic there. You seem to be ASSuMING that she is
innocent and being accused of being a terrorist.

I didn't get that feeling from what he said. I don't think he accused her
of being a terrorist. Surely if we have film footage of a terrorist we
should be able to see it. Did you censor it when he uploaded it? Maybe if
enough people saw it, someone might recognize her and clear it up. Please
upload the video so that we can see for ourselves what he is talking
about.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 17:11:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?
I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
I don't think McAdams would censor it, but I can't post a video here. I
can type words, but it's the kind of evidence which you must see. Of
course, you would miss the point, but maybe somebody would understand.
In other words you can't back up what you say. You seem to forget that I
lived through it and I probably saw 20 times the TV coverage that you did.
And you don't even know how to use Google to find the thing you are
blabbing about.
Post by 1***@mail.com
The girl who was in the Twitter meme photo with the boyfriend in the red
shirt bending over his "dead love," is what I'm talking about. In the
Maybe he THOUGHT she was dead.
Post by 1***@mail.com
video released at the time of the trial, which was taken from inside the
Marathon Sports Store, you can see this man run from inside the store out
the front door. Then you can see him through the window. This is after the
explosion. This is the "boyfriend" from the Twitter meme photo. Through
Did he say he was the boyfriend or did a reporter just ASSuME that? Why in
the world would you believe anything you see on Twitter? What are you, a
Trump low information voter? BTW, the cat videos are fake too.
Post by 1***@mail.com
the window, you can see him bend down, then he gets up, walks around, and
then he helps the girl get up off the sidewalk. You can see them both walk
over to the spot where the meme photo was taken afterwards. She was
walking around before the meme photo was taken, when she was "dead." Then,
Who said "dead"?
Post by 1***@mail.com
later photos show she is not dead, just supposedly injured. But the
Supposedly? So now you think she was just an extra acting?
Post by 1***@mail.com
boyfriend took off his shirt and disappeared. Other people tend her after
he left. Clearly, he was not her boyfriend, she was not dead, she was not
injured, and the whole thing was a pre-planned hoax.
No, YOU are a pre-planned hoax.
Post by 1***@mail.com
Also, in the same video, you can see a man bring in Tamerlan Tsarnaev's
backpack, AFTER the explosion. In other photography, you can see this man
grabbing the backpack from underneath a fallen sign, just after the
explosion. He carries Tsarnaev's backpack into the store after the
explosion, so Tsarnaev's backpack could not have exploded. And showing
this in a video on YouTube makes me a bully.
No. There were 2 different bombs. You are confusing them. Do you intend to
be a bully? Exactly whom are you trying to bully? The terrorists? Or
Bostonians? Not everyone at the Marathon was a Bostonian.
1***@mail.com
2019-05-08 00:33:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by 1***@mail.com
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
If you point out the supposedly dead girl walking around in front of the
Boston Marathon Sports store after the explosion, YouTube removes your
video for "bullying." She's there. She's walking around. She's not dead.
She's not injured. So, I'm a bully.
But you are afraid to show us what you mean, because McAdams might
censor you?
I was in that exact spot a few years earlier with my bus dropping off
runners.
OK, Marsh. I love futility, so I will show you here. I did video captures
instead of a video, and I uploaded them to some free site so that I may
continue eating, one of my favorite activities.

http://tinypic.com/r/2lxugkx/9

That first photo is the Twitter meme as reposted by Dzhokhar Tsarneav, the
falsely convicted Marathon Bomber. He says that it is a "fake story." He
is correct.

http://tinypic.com/r/2wlvm39/9

This 2nd photo is a group of screen captures from the Marathon Sports
Store surveillance video as released at the time of the trial. It shows
the same man as in the Twitter meme inside the store, and outside helping
the "dead" girl get up and walk to the location of the Twitter meme photo.


http://tinypic.com/r/2ym6t95/9

This third picture shows the same scene from another angle, as is
explained in the caption.

http://tinypic.com/r/x4kps6/9

And these photos in the 4th demonstrate that it is the same girl taken
from different angles. She got up and walked to the location of the
Twitter meme photo.

http://tinypic.com/r/20ueivt/9

And this last one shows the photographer who took the Twitter meme photo.

I eagerly await your verbal abuse or silence, as I know that you will
never admit that I am right about anything.
Bud
2019-05-05 01:29:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.

Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.

Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...



Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
Steve M. Galbraith
2019-05-05 22:19:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
The problem (or one of them; the other is the concentration of power that
Silicon Valley has) is with the "next" group, the "next" person. It's an
easy call to ban odious people like a Jones or Farrakhan. But that won't
be enough since many on the left (and apparently Twitter and Facebook are
dominated by people with these views) don't distinguish between an overt
racist like David Duke and someone who thinks we need to control our
borders and place limits on who is allowed in. For the left, the two are
the same with the latter just using "dog whistles" or "code" words.

Of course, this has been the same problem - the slippery slope - with
government censorship. How to define it? How to limit it? How to keep the
government from using the laws to ban critical speech?

The main group here that should be worried are the JFK conspiracy people.
I fully support their right to express their goofy views even though it's
clear that some people are misled into believing their nonsense (hell, I
used to). The response is simply to present our side and let others decide
who is correct. The "marketplace of ideas" doesn't always work - most
Americans think there was a conspiracy - but it's the best method we have.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-07 02:29:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
The problem (or one of them; the other is the concentration of power that
Silicon Valley has) is with the "next" group, the "next" person. It's an
easy call to ban odious people like a Jones or Farrakhan. But that won't
be enough since many on the left (and apparently Twitter and Facebook are
dominated by people with these views) don't distinguish between an overt
racist like David Duke and someone who thinks we need to control our
borders and place limits on who is allowed in. For the left, the two are
the same with the latter just using "dog whistles" or "code" words.
Of course, this has been the same problem - the slippery slope - with
government censorship. How to define it? How to limit it? How to keep the
government from using the laws to ban critical speech?
The main group here that should be worried are the JFK conspiracy people.
I fully support their right to express their goofy views even though it's
Not true. You don't complain about McAdams censoring me. You are in
favor of censorship as long as it is not against the right.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
clear that some people are misled into believing their nonsense (hell, I
used to). The response is simply to present our side and let others decide
who is correct. The "marketplace of ideas" doesn't always work - most
Americans think there was a conspiracy - but it's the best method we have.
Bud
2019-05-07 02:31:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
The problem (or one of them; the other is the concentration of power that
Silicon Valley has) is with the "next" group, the "next" person. It's an
easy call to ban odious people like a Jones or Farrakhan.
It shouldn`t be an easy call, neither should be banned.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
But that won't
be enough since many on the left (and apparently Twitter and Facebook are
dominated by people with these views) don't distinguish between an overt
racist like David Duke and someone who thinks we need to control our
borders and place limits on who is allowed in. For the left, the two are
the same with the latter just using "dog whistles" or "code" words.
I don`t even know why we have the discussion. Let David Duke talk. If
someone wants to hear David Duke talk, let them.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Of course, this has been the same problem - the slippery slope - with
government censorship. How to define it? How to limit it? How to keep the
government from using the laws to ban critical speech?
It is simple. If it isn`t a call to violence leave it alone.

The left *has* been getting away with actual incitements to violence
without repercussions, against cops, the Covington kids, even the
President.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
The main group here that should be worried are the JFK conspiracy people.
I don`t think they are going to ban these ideas, they are just going to
bury them, and make sure they don`t come up in searches. I knew about
4chan, but then I heard about a similar site called 8chan. I did a google
search for it and it didn`t come up. Apparently google decided the site
was too offensive, and removed it from the search engine. I found the
website address on wikipedia. I went there right after the New Zealand
mosque shooting and they had the footage of the shooting taken by the
shooter. For some reason the powers that be felt this needed to be
suppressed, and were forcing it`s removal everywhere. It was even removed
from Liveleak. There is a guy in New Zealand looking at twenty years in
jail for posting it. They want to decide what we look at and what we
think. The newest thing is pulling out a soapbox in the middle of all
movies these days to get the SJW message out. I don`t need to be preached
to, where does Hollywood get off trying to change my wrong thinking to
their correct thinking?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
I fully support their right to express their goofy views even though it's
clear that some people are misled into believing their nonsense (hell, I
used to). The response is simply to present our side and let others decide
who is correct. The "marketplace of ideas" doesn't always work - most
Americans think there was a conspiracy - but it's the best method we have.
A lot of this is a backlash against Trump`s victory, the left sees the
internet as helping him to get elected and they are looking to stifle the
power these pundits are getting on their platforms by just speaking common
sense and getting a following.

Paul Joseph Watson is about as benign as it gets. The problem is he is
pro-Trump and he has 1.6 million subscribers on youtube. They *need* to
stop these guys by any means possible. Here is his response videos to the
banning...





This video on modern architecture is typical of the kind of content PJW
usually produces...


Anthony Marsh
2019-05-08 17:13:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
The problem (or one of them; the other is the concentration of power that
Silicon Valley has) is with the "next" group, the "next" person. It's an
easy call to ban odious people like a Jones or Farrakhan.
It shouldn`t be an easy call, neither should be banned.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
But that won't
be enough since many on the left (and apparently Twitter and Facebook are
dominated by people with these views) don't distinguish between an overt
racist like David Duke and someone who thinks we need to control our
borders and place limits on who is allowed in. For the left, the two are
the same with the latter just using "dog whistles" or "code" words.
I don`t even know why we have the discussion. Let David Duke talk. If
someone wants to hear David Duke talk, let them.
How else would we know how racist and dangerous he is?
Post by Bud
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Of course, this has been the same problem - the slippery slope - with
government censorship. How to define it? How to limit it? How to keep the
government from using the laws to ban critical speech?
It is simple. If it isn`t a call to violence leave it alone.
The left *has* been getting away with actual incitements to violence
without repercussions, against cops, the Covington kids, even the
President.
When you phrase things that way you are self-identifying as an extreme
right winger and making it clear that you support hate speech as long as
it comes from the extreme rightwing.
Post by Bud
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
The main group here that should be worried are the JFK conspiracy people.
I don`t think they are going to ban these ideas, they are just going to
What ideas?
How are we going to ban ideas? This is about Hate Speech. You are free
to think the most hateful ideas you want.
Post by Bud
bury them, and make sure they don`t come up in searches. I knew about
What searches? You don't even know about Google works and customizes
searches.


Do you even know that 4Chan is supposed to be a PORN website?
Post by Bud
4chan, but then I heard about a similar site called 8chan. I did a google
Do you even know that 4Chan is supposed to be a PORN website?
CHAN means a porn web site.
Post by Bud
search for it and it didn`t come up. Apparently google decided the site
Maybe, maybe not.
Post by Bud
was too offensive, and removed it from the search engine. I found the
website address on wikipedia. I went there right after the New Zealand
mosque shooting and they had the footage of the shooting taken by the
shooter. For some reason the powers that be felt this needed to be
Yes, and there is a debate about allowing terrorists to advertise online.
Post by Bud
suppressed, and were forcing it`s removal everywhere. It was even removed
from Liveleak. There is a guy in New Zealand looking at twenty years in
jail for posting it. They want to decide what we look at and what we
Remind me again what form of government they have in New Zealand.
Can you post their Bill of Rights for me?
Post by Bud
think. The newest thing is pulling out a soapbox in the middle of all
movies these days to get the SJW message out. I don`t need to be preached
I'm not hip to your lingo. What do you mean?
Post by Bud
to, where does Hollywood get off trying to change my wrong thinking to
their correct thinking?
They do it all the time. Birth of a Nation. The Color Purple.
Post by Bud
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
I fully support their right to express their goofy views even though it's
clear that some people are misled into believing their nonsense (hell, I
Yes, Hollywood is full of goofy ideas. It sells.
Post by Bud
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
used to). The response is simply to present our side and let others decide
What is YOUR side? You make your own movies? What's your budget? Not more
of those damn cats "playing" the piano. I saw a really cute video of a cat
"playing" a Theremin.

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1360&bih=661&ei=CsXRXLfaHqGHgge_54n4Dw&q=cat+playing+a+Theremin&oq=cat+playing+a+Theremin&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0.8405.13907..15594...0.0..1.467.2404.8j2j0j3j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j0i13j0i7i30j0i8i7i30j0i13i30j0i8i13i30j0i30j0i8i30.4BoNq9U1kNU

How on-topic is that!
Post by Bud
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
who is correct. The "marketplace of ideas" doesn't always work - most
Americans think there was a conspiracy - but it's the best method we have.
A lot of this is a backlash against Trump`s victory, the left sees the
internet as helping him to get elected and they are looking to stifle the
power these pundits are getting on their platforms by just speaking common
sense and getting a following.
Paul Joseph Watson is about as benign as it gets. The problem is he is
pro-Trump and he has 1.6 million subscribers on youtube. They *need* to
stop these guys by any means possible. Here is his response videos to the
banning...
http://youtu.be/aMqlfwV4BA8
http://youtu.be/XDxRlsBi4Ac
This video on modern architecture is typical of the kind of content PJW
usually produces...
http://youtu.be/-lB5QbMxvac
Ramon F Herrera
2019-05-06 02:07:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger.
Bud:

Being this a forum dedicated to, I don't know, what was our charter
again? Kennedy? Oh, yes, right. The murdered president.

Care to rewrite your statement, adapting it to the JFK murder case?

Who is silencing dissent here, in this case, in all forums loyal to your
side?

Are you aware that as I type this, I have no idea of whether you will ever
read it? You have a fake address, for starters.

It is hilarious that you mention "arguing with ideas" since you people
hate the maximum exponents and guardians of ideas and ultimately, The
Truth: Our schools and our MSM.

As long as you claim to be a big defender of ideas, and at the risk of
being sanctioned for asking the same question, the one that remains
conspicuously unanswered, I ask you:

Do you, Bud, support any of the JFK Numbers initiatives?

To make it easier for you: Should the doctors from the BU School of
Medicine be invited to our project No. 1, to safeguard the most famous,
controversial, in danger to be lost X-rays in history?

Should this forum stay the way it is, a colossal depository of empty
keystrokes, of Gone With The Wind bullshit, or should we become more
activist? Would you pen a missive to somebody important, actually
influential in real life? You can count with my John Hancock in advance,
but we need a few more. Otherwise Professor McAdams (our duly designated
representative) will not take us seriously.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
Bud
2019-05-07 02:44:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger.
Being this a forum dedicated to, I don't know, what was our charter
again? Kennedy? Oh, yes, right. The murdered president.
Care to rewrite your statement, adapting it to the JFK murder case?
Who is silencing dissent here, in this case, in all forums loyal to your
side?
Are you aware that as I type this, I have no idea of whether you will ever
read it? You have a fake address, for starters.
It is hilarious that you mention "arguing with ideas" since you people
hate the maximum exponents and guardians of ideas and ultimately, The
Truth: Our schools and our MSM.
As long as you claim to be a big defender of ideas, and at the risk of
being sanctioned for asking the same question, the one that remains
Do you, Bud, support any of the JFK Numbers initiatives?
As far as I can tell you say nothing and do nothing.
Post by Ramon F Herrera
To make it easier for you: Should the doctors from the BU School of
Medicine be invited to our project No. 1, to safeguard the most famous,
controversial, in danger to be lost X-rays in history?
Should this forum stay the way it is, a colossal depository of empty
keystrokes, of Gone With The Wind bullshit, or should we become more
activist? Would you pen a missive to somebody important, actually
influential in real life? You can count with my John Hancock in advance,
but we need a few more. Otherwise Professor McAdams (our duly designated
representative) will not take us seriously.
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
Ramon F Herrera
2019-05-08 00:30:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger.
Being this a forum dedicated to, I don't know, what was our charter
again? Kennedy? Oh, yes, right. The murdered president.
Care to rewrite your statement, adapting it to the JFK murder case?
Who is silencing dissent here, in this case, in all forums loyal to your
side?
Are you aware that as I type this, I have no idea of whether you will ever
read it? You have a fake address, for starters.
It is hilarious that you mention "arguing with ideas" since you people
hate the maximum exponents and guardians of ideas and ultimately, The
Truth: Our schools and our MSM.
As long as you claim to be a big defender of ideas, and at the risk of
being sanctioned for asking the same question, the one that remains
Do you, Bud, support any of the JFK Numbers initiatives?
[Showing utter lack of respect to the readers and himself, Bud wrote:]
Post by Bud
As far as I can tell you say nothing and do nothing.
So why is professor McAdams so diligently protecting you from my
say-nothing posts, then? He -and your peers- have grown very uncomfortable
from my say-nothing posts. Such an opinionated crowd you guys used to be.
Who would have predicted that at the end, the Republicans would turn out
to be the cowards?

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints
Ramon F Herrera
2019-05-08 00:31:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by Ramon F Herrera
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger.
Being this a forum dedicated to, I don't know, what was our charter
again? Kennedy? Oh, yes, right. The murdered president.
Care to rewrite your statement, adapting it to the JFK murder case?
Who is silencing dissent here, in this case, in all forums loyal to your
side?
Are you aware that as I type this, I have no idea of whether you will ever
read it? You have a fake address, for starters.
It is hilarious that you mention "arguing with ideas" since you people
hate the maximum exponents and guardians of ideas and ultimately, The
Truth: Our schools and our MSM.
As long as you claim to be a big defender of ideas, and at the risk of
being sanctioned for asking the same question, the one that remains
Do you, Bud, support any of the JFK Numbers initiatives?
As far as I can tell you say nothing and do nothing.
Can your loyal readers have your comments about the facts stated below?

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

=========================================

Summary:
The percentage of studies with preordained results and
confidential/proprietary data (thus, that may be called anything EXCEPT
scientific) whose files and numbers are restricted, out of the reach of
The Public (viewer, taxpayer and therefore OWNER), produced by the LN
side is 100%.

IOW: Every single study since 1964 until today which supports the
official version has this in common: secrecy, locked files.

Having said that, the LN quarters are not alone in that execrable
practice, that slap in the face of Science that deserves a rotund,
unequivocal condemnation by all of us.

Since the days when I posted this:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23022-four-reconstructions-of-the-crime

I have been unearthing a number of additional studies. This being the
21st. century [*], let's cover only those where computers were used:

(1) 1992, Sponsor: American Bar Association, Engineering: Spectus
Technologies and Failure Analysis.



(2) 1993, "Case Closed", Author: Gerald Posner, Sq. Other than the names
"Alvarez" and "ITEK" -both long gone- very little is known about the
scientific base and Mr. Posner's current position, as the author is not
available for questions.

Loading Image...

(3) 2003, "The Kennedy Assassination - Beyond Conspiracy", Sponsor: ABC,
Implementation: Dale Myers, Certifying Company: [**]



(4) 2008, "Inside the Target Car", Sponsor: Gary Mack/The Sixth Floor
Museum, Implementation: Michael Yardley, Adelaide T&E Systems (Military
Contractor). Certified by: None

https://vimeo.com/327417508

(5) 2011, The Lost Bullet, Sponsor: National Geographic, Implementation:
Max Holland, Larry Sturdivan. Certification: Max Holland.

https://vimeo.com/326122488

(6) 2013, "The Smoking Gun", Sponsor: Discovery Channel, Implementation:
Colin McLaren and Bonar Menninger, Certifying Persons: Colin McLaren and
Bonar Menninger.

https://vimeo.com/334167823

(7) 2013, "JFK Assassination: The Definitive Guide". Sponsor: History
Channel, Implementation: Professor Tom Stone, Dallas, Certifying Person:
Tom Stone.

https://vimeo.com/325492772
https://vimeo.com/325640707

(8) 2013, "PBS Nova Cold Case JFK", Sponsor: PBS, Engineering: Leica
Geosystems and Scientific Analysis. Certifying Authorities: Luke and
Mike Haag.



(9) 2018, Orr-Schnapft Model, Sponsor: John Orr, Engineering: Knott Lab,
Certifying Company: Knott Lab.



(10) 2018, Knott Labs Model, Engineering: Angelos Leiloglou, Certifying
Company: Knott Lab.

https://knottlab.com/news/angelos-leiloglou-interviewed-about-jfk-assassination-and-single-bullet-theory
https://knottlab.com/team/angelos-leiloglou

(11) 2018, "Gunshot-Wound Dynamics Model for John F. Kennedy
Assassination", Implementor: Nicholas R. Nalli, Sponsor: I.M. Systems
Group, Reviewing Peers: None

https://www.history.com/news/jfk-assassination-grassy-knoll-theory-debunked
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934694
https://www.imsg.com/about-us/customers

(12) JFK Numbers. In progress. Sponsor: Ramon F Herrera, Engineering,
Ramon F. Herrera. Certification: You.

http://www.dealey-plaza.org/this-government-as-promised

I will provide more details about each. As usual, I ask my forum
companions to contribute any additional information. Let's work TOGETHER.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

#FreeTheCranium
#FreeTheBlueprints

[*] We should organize an Internet wide collection, to buy the "scientific
researchers" on both sides of the aisle a calendar. No need to splurge
with much detail: the century will suffice.

[**] I am sure that our most esteemed David Emerling knows the name of the
private certifying company. He has mentioned it, asking for our respect
and trust, based on Faith. Perhaps you guys will have better luck, since
David -the only known Myers representative, for 11 years- has decided not
to reply to my posts or e-mails.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-06 13:33:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
What dissent? Hate speech is not dissent.

Please dazzle us with all the hate speech you can imagine, but don't try
to defend it as being dissent. Dissent from common decency?
Post by Bud
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
So your criteria is that we have to wait to see the shooting and
bombings and hundreds of victims bbefore taking it seriously?
McVeigh was a hero of yours?
Post by Bud
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
You are entitled to THINK whatever nutty things you want. You are not
reee to kill anyone you want.
Post by Bud
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
ANY? No one said ANY.
Post by Bud
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
So you are a supporter of hate speech as long as it comes from the right?
John McAdams
2019-05-06 13:37:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6 May 2019 09:33:55 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
What dissent? Hate speech is not dissent.
Please dazzle us with all the hate speech you can imagine, but don't try
to defend it as being dissent. Dissent from common decency?
I just posted a message from Tony where he said he believes in "free
speech."

Not he makes it clear that he's censor anything he dislikes, calling
it "hate speech."
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
So your criteria is that we have to wait to see the shooting and
bombings and hundreds of victims bbefore taking it seriously?
McVeigh was a hero of yours?
Another absurd comment from Tony.

Tony makes it clear he believes in censorship. At least so long as
leftists are doing the censoring.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
You are entitled to THINK whatever nutty things you want. You are not
reee to kill anyone you want.
Tony quickly goes from speech to killing. It's the basic
authoritarian impulse.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
ANY? No one said ANY.
Post by Bud
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
So you are a supporter of hate speech as long as it comes from the right?
Tony is projecting.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
2019-05-07 17:56:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
What dissent?
The ideas that conflict with leftist ideology.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Hate speech is not dissent.
And dissent is not hate speech. And the left can`t differentiate between
the two.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Please dazzle us with all the hate speech you can imagine,
It is the left that imagines hate speech and tries to shut it down.
Post by Anthony Marsh
but don't try
to defend it as being dissent. Dissent from common decency?
Certainly the left cannot be trusted to be the arbiter of common decency.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
So your criteria is that we have to wait to see the shooting and
bombings and hundreds of victims bbefore taking it seriously?
You have to wait until a crime is committed before it is criminal
activity.

Maybe you think Black Lives Matter should have been shut down before
they incited people to kill cops.
Post by Anthony Marsh
McVeigh was a hero of yours?
Micah Xavier Johnson a hero of yours?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
You are entitled to THINK whatever nutty things you want. You are not
reee to kill anyone you want.
The left wants to stop people from saying anything they want.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
ANY? No one said ANY.
No one said what speech got those people banned from facebook.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Bud
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
So you are a supporter of hate speech as long as it comes from the right?
I`m for free speech for everyone. The left hates free speech that they
don`t agree with, they want it shut down.
BT George
2019-05-08 19:53:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bud
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. The left can`t
argue ideas so it has to silence dissent. It will label ideas "dangerous"
without showing any danger. There are about a dozen people I watch fairly
regularly on youtube, and Paul Joseph Watson is one of them.
Certain pundits have been growing in popularity, gaining more followers
and influence than the mainstream media. The forces that be want this
stopped. and this is only the beginning. They *can`t* allow free thinking,
they need the sheep to believe what they are told, so they are going to
label any speech they can`t control "hateful" and shut it down.
Check out the Nazi at 3:28 here...
http://youtu.be/m9BiTV9vvZ4
Somebody, somewhere might be saying something she doesn`t agree with,
and she wants it stopped now!
Sickening. And it ought to scare every American who values freedom of
expression and conscience.
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:48:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Professor Mcadams show me the words JFK, Oswald, Ruby, Sheba the dog in
the article. The article made it through the censors because you are the
censor. I repeat "There is no point in arguing with the moderator." You
are in the catbird seat. I corrected you and you can take it.
Anthony Marsh
2019-05-09 00:58:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Professor Mcadams show me the words JFK, Oswald, Ruby, Sheba the dog in
the article. The article made it through the censors because you are the
censor. I repeat "There is no point in arguing with the moderator." You
are in the catbird seat. I corrected you and you can take it.
What's Sheba got to do tith it? She did not kill JFK.I'm going to report
you to PETA.
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:49:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Facebook said nothing about banning people because they believe that the
CIA killed JFK. Here is what Facebook said: "We've always banned
individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate,
regardless of ideology." Nothing about the JFK assassination.
BOZ
2019-05-07 17:50:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
You have dismissed some of my posts because they are irrelevant. I admit
that some of them were irrelevant.This article is as irrelevant as several
of my posts. This article made it through because you are the moderator.
Why don't you just admit it instead of bullshitting?
BOZ
2019-05-08 19:53:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
https://www.chron.com/news/article/Facebook-bans-far-right-leaders-including-13814271.php
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The left wants to get rid of Alex Jones because a large majority of his
listeners voted for Trump. What's happening in the USA right now is right
out of the Gulag Archipelago.
Loading...