Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Poupou Escobar]

Misinformation and disinformation are far more than opinions.

But what makes you qualified to tell the difference? And why should anyone believe your answer?

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Did you miss the bit in the first amendment to the Constitution that shows it's (only) to ensure "Congress shall make no law..."?

It's not a criminal law that can be broken and prosecuted. It's hardly even something that would be open to civil action by anyone, unless Congress had made a law... Feel free to post a link to a case where the US government has been found to breach its own first amendment... and feel free keep getting overexcited by whatever Fox News is telling you to be overexcited about in the meantime.

You might be right that they can't be charged with a crime but it doesn't look like you are right about them needing to pass a law.

The First Amendment applies only to governmental action—not behavior by private employers, private companies, or private, non-government individuals—unless they acted in concert with government actors.

Does the First Amendment apply to private companies or individuals' conduct?

Generally, no. The First Amendment applies only to governmental action. So it’s only governmental action that we can address using the First Amendment, including applying it to the states through the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

People call us all the time complaining about their private employers or private businesses (like Facebook or Twitter) violating their supposed "free-speech" or "First Amendment rights." That's not really a thing and there's nothing we can do about that.

The only exception would be if you can show evidence that private, non-governmental actors are acting in concert or conspiracy with government. (And you can't speculate about that or assume that.)

 

[the phantom menace]

I think you're bolding the wrong bit, in trying to sum up the current Fox News concerns...

"The only exception would be if you can show evidence that private, non-governmental actors are acting in concert or conspiracy with government. (And you can't speculate about that or assume that.)"

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

I think you're bolding the wrong bit, in trying to sum up the current Fox News concerns...

"The only exception would be if you can show evidence that private, non-governmental actors are acting in concert or conspiracy with government. (And you can't speculate about that or assume that.)"

If you've been following the news you'd know it's more than speculation and assumption.

 

[the phantom menace]

If I'd been folowing the *Fox news...

 

[Suitman]

This thread is funny.
It gives be a daily laugh strolling through the latest replies.

 

[Bandwagon]

This thread is funny.
It gives be a daily laugh strolling through the latest replies.

But the gubermint done stole me twitters!!

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

If I'd been folowing the *Fox news...

Well if the mob you're watching aren't telling you what's happening you probably should.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

But the gubermint done stole me twitters!!

It's just a big nothing burger!!

 

[Bandwagon]

You might be right that they can't be charged with a crime but it doesn't look like you are right about them needing to pass a law.



Does the First Amendment apply to private companies or individuals' conduct?

Generally, no. The First Amendment applies only to governmental action. So it’s only governmental action that we can address using the First Amendment, including applying it to the states through the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

People call us all the time complaining about their private employers or private businesses (like Facebook or Twitter) violating their supposed "free-speech" or "First Amendment rights." That's not really a thing and there's nothing we can do about that.

The only exception would be if you can show evidence that private, non-governmental actors are acting in concert or conspiracy with government. (And you can't speculate about that or assume that.)

That's rather interesting......

Whaaaa? I really want to ignore that Trump's side had something removed? Why would I give a f**k? The point is it was heavily weighted to one side, thus the term 'one-sided' is fair. I'm sorry your nitpicking doesn't cut it. It also doesn't matter who was in government.
And who exactly are my red pilled moron mates?

When did I say that the government is seeking to censor views they don't like?

................so you say it doesn't matter who's in government, and you say you never said that the government was trying to censor shit, and now you're saying they were?

Cause elsewise as per your link, there's no 1st amendment violation unless the government is actually behind it.

 

[Bandwagon]

It's just a big nothing burger!!

I agree.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

That's rather interesting......





................so you say it doesn't matter who's in government, and you say you never said that the government was trying to censor shit, and now you're saying they were?

Cause elsewise as per your link, there's no 1st amendment violation unless the government is actually behind it.

The government as in the Republican party. Government departments and individuals within them could have breached the first amendment. And so could the democrats since they came to power.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

I agree.

Yes, you all do.

 

[Bandwagon]

The government as in the Republican party. Government departments and individuals within them could have breached the first amendment. And so could the democrats since they came to power.

So now it does matter who is in government?

And you are saying the government tried to ( or actually did ) censor veiws they don't ( didn't ) like?

Yes, you all do.

Ha ha, that's funny as f**k mate, I mean you're not simply repeating right wing talking points here because why?

Ah, is this like one of them there sheeple things your lot go on about?

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

So now it does matter who is in government?

And you are saying the government tried to ( or actually did ) censor veiws they don't ( didn't ) like?



Ha ha, that's funny as f**k mate, I mean you're not simply repeating right wing talking points here because why?

Ah, is this like one of them there sheeple things your lot go on about?

Huh? No it doesn't matter to me which party is guilty when in government of censoring views. It doesn't appear the Republicans did that but it does look like now the democrats have done so since they got elected.

And yeah it is kinda funny given how your lot tend to parrot the same stuff word for word.

 

[Gary Gutful]

...did somebody say 'KFC'?

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

...did somebody say 'KFC'?

No, their new app is garbage!!

 

[Suitman]

...did somebody say 'KFC'?

I wish!!
I love that shit.
Best tasting chicken ever.

 

[Bandwagon]

Huh? No it doesn't matter to me which party is guilty when in government of censoring views. It doesn't appear the Republicans did that but it does look like now the democrats have done so since they got elected.

Oh dear.

Let's go back.

Not quite. We know that they suppressed the NYP story and had been constantly briefed by the FBI. And although this is not specific does it mean it's irrelevant? No.


And that the censorship was one sided.

The NYP story was suppressed whilst Trump ( the GOP ) were in the Whitehouse, or if you will, were the government.

So either the government requested the suppression, or it did not. If it did, that's the Trump Republican administration, if it did not, and it was the DNC, it's not the government making the request is it, so it aint got shit to do with the 1st amendment. As I said previously.

now, let's look at that tweet again.....it very clearly says, and I quote...............

10.Both parties had access to these tools. For instance, in 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored. However:

............your post, your source, and it out right states the "Trump Whitehouse" - ie the Republican government both requested censorship, and it was actioned.

How the f**k do you reconcile that with.....

No it doesn't matter to me which party is guilty when in government of censoring views. It doesn't appear the Republicans did that

...................?????

Honestly mate, you're all over the shop here, but the doozy is calling me out with...........

And yeah it is kinda funny given how your lot tend to parrot the same stuff word for word.

..................when it's pretty obvious you're just regurgitating random shit you clearly haven't bothered to think through enough to understand how one post contradicts the other.

 

[Bandwagon]

...did somebody say 'KFC'?

Now I'm f**king hungry FFS!

And Lismore KFC is still all f**ked up from the flood.