Lol you're  so far right and partisan that you don't see this as an overeach   He can't make them shutdown because they're a private company . He can't hack it for being fact checked. He is a child he has other issues but wastes all his time to appease his target audience which is people like you who are so deluded because you chose to belive everyone is against you. 

That's right you couldn't answer the question which is normally the case when someone is talking bullshit. 

Anyways I'm not saying that it'll go ahead because I do agree with you in regards to them being a private company, and therefore being allowed to censor people that go against their narrative. 

What I am saying is that I hope it goes ahead, and if so it is a great move for everyone on social media. Well except those who don't like to have their views challenged. But I'm not one of those people, I'm open to debate.

"when the looting starts the shooting starts" 

Fuck me swinging, this dude is a national leader ffs.

Be surprised if America hasn't devoured itself by the time the election rolls around.

-PB

What it will lead to is SM platforms just outright deleting shit.

Discourse will be worse off overall, this isn't going to lead to far right loonies having their anti 5G theories posted more often lol.

-PB

It’s not a freedom of speech issue. He can say what he wants but only on his own website.

Twitter is free to allow the publication of what it thinks is reasonable. He is exercising his own freedom of speech by asking Twitter to publish his comments on their platform but Twitter is also within their rights to not publish it.

Imagine someone suing a newspaper for not publishing their op ed or an ad and then claiming censorship. It’s a bit idiotic.

Aww diddums, ol Trump the snowflake can't handle any criticism of his unsubstantiated lies.

They haven't even NOT published his tweets. They put a fact-check on a completely unsubstantiated lie and they put a violence glorification warning on the one where he threatened to kill people.

This as well.

I think you've misunderstood what I said. 

I already agreed with Carlito that Twitter or any other social media company has the right to censor views that go against their narrative. 

I think it is childish and pathetic behavior by social media companies when they do sensor, because in a way they're admitting defeat. Instead of coming out and challenging the claim that goes against their view to prove it wrong, they simply refuse to debate and censor the argument. 

So personally offcourse it would make perfect sense for me, and it should make perfect sense to you and everyone else that you prefer different opinions to be allowed to be expressed, as long as they don't incite violence. And this should be the case regardless of you agreeing or disagreeing with a certain view, unless offcourse you're narrow minded and believe that because your view is right, there should be no opposition to your view. 

As for Trumps tweets I have no idea what that's got to do with what I've said. I'm simply saying I'd love it if it became illegal to censor people. And my reasoning is that I love to view both sides of every story and make you my own mind what's right or wrong and so on. 

First, they aren't censoring. They are putting labels on certain statements (like a fact check, so that isn't admitting defeat).

Second, it's a private platform. So they can delete things as they see fit. By your analogy, a newspaper refusing to run an article is 'admitting defeat'. 

Not at all, you can't compare a newspaper and say YouTube. 

I can't write up an article and expect SMH to run it when I don't even work for them, however with YouTube anything I put on it is accepted, until it starts to get millions of views and then gets deleted. 

There's been a shit load of videos that have been deleted by YouTube. None of which that incite violence which in that case would be fair to remove by YouTube. 

This is retarded logic.  Imagine for a minute Scomo said Port Arthur was a false flag operation on Twitter and Twitter provided a link to fact check that.  Are you saying that isn't a good thing?

I think what's retarded is the fact on many occasions I've been talking about deleted videos. I'm saying I would love it if social media outlets wouldn't be able to delete videos that go against the narrative.  

I have no idea where you get the impression that I'm against fact checking.

 That's a great thing. I've made it very clear that the best way to defeat a theory against your own is to tackle it head on, which is basically fact checking. 

I've also made it clear what I'm totally against is YouTube removing videos off completely instead of fact checking it. 

Don't you prefer it that way yourself Muz? Or do you prefer the video to be wiped off completely?

mate you leapt to the support of Trump shutting down twitter right after they fact checked him. 

You keep saying Twitter, but from my understanding Trump never shut down Twitter.

I support Trump in shutting down any social media company for deleting posts or videos, not fact checking. 

That's two completely different things. Trump shutting down a company that censors people is not the same as Trump shutting down a company that fact checks. 

I know you're not that silly to not know the difference.

I totally understand anyone making an argument in favour of someone like YouTube being allowed to put on only what they want, considering they're a private company. Legally they're in the right, but morally they're not considering their information influences millions of people around the world. 

But on the whole wouldn't you honestly prefer to live in a society where there is open debate instead of censorship?

It would depend. There's no black or white line here and it's subjective depending on who you ask and what you're asking about.

Should prominent anti-vaxxers get equal air time on TV or be refused visas to Australia if they're spruiking dangerous falsehoods where people might actually die if they listen to them?  https://www.solomontimes.com/news/measle-cases-double-in-samoa/9484

Should holocaust deniers be refused a visa?  (As David Irving has in the past.)

Should Pete Evans be allowed to sell a $15000 air ionizer (or whatever it is) to cure covid-19?

etc..

The list is endless.  

A libertarian would say everything goes and let the cards fall where they may.  I wouldn't.  

But it's a private company.  What if Biden was elected and decided to shut down Fox News because they fact checked him?  It's a ludicrous comparison.

Muz, for the 50th time I'm saying censoring is what I'm against, not fact checking. 

I would never support Trump trying to shut down Twitter or anyone for fact checking. 

If Trump said he wants to shut down Twitter because they rocked him on a certain point of his, I'd be against it. However I'm all in favour of him trying to shut down social media removing any videos or posts that are basically of a different opinion to the YouTube owner, or any other social media company. 
 
From your answer about censorship let's just agree to disagree. I'm all for freedom of speech as long as it doesn't incite violence, whereas I gather you're against it even if it doesn't incite violence like the vaccine topic as one of many examples. 

I'm pretty sure when you upload something on YouTube, it is subject to their terms and conditions. So they are within their rights to delete it. What is wrong with them deleting content which might be a breach of copyright, etc?

Trump claims credit for SpaceX launch.
https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1266838346342391808?s=20 

Obama signed the paperwork in 2010 for privately built spacecraft.
https://www.space.com/9305-president-obama-signs-vision-space-exploration-law.html

Under Obama's space plan, NASA will rely on Russian, European and Japanese spacecraft for its space station cargo and crew transportation needs in the near term, and then use American, privately built spacecraft to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station once they become available.

Not only is the bloke a champion in blameshifting he is also a master at claiming credit for other people's work.

We'll just keep going around in circles if you start making things up, or pretend to not know what's going on. 

If something is in breach of copyright it'll get deleted, and rightfully so. At no point have I ever said that's wrong, and Trump being against censorship has zero to do with copyright. 

The censorship I'm against is when a video doesn't breach any terms and conditions, yet gets deleted because the info given doesn't suit the narrative of those running the site.

I'm not sure if you're aware of it happening but just incase you're not there have been shit loads of uploads of clips that have had million views and likes, only to then be pulled down. 

I agree it is the right of the owner to do so, but let's not pretend that it was pulled down because of a breach when we know very well that isn't the case. 

Can you share some more details about all these take downs? Agree that it’s shady and I would like to know if there has been a good compilation of this material.

There have been so many where this has happened, the most recent being an interview with Patrick Bet David and Judy Mikovits.

It was close to two hours of an interview into basically the start of her life till about now, and everything that happened in between. 

Nothing at all to do with copyright. Within dates not weeks, there was over 1 million views and likes. 

It was on the YouTube channel called valuetainment. And this channel is by no means a conspiracy channel as there have been all types of people interviewed on here. Left wing, right wing, you name it, he's had them all on. 

Should Trump somehow shit the bed and managed to lose to Biden of all people come election time, I reckon he will simply try to rule the vote invalid.

-PB

Biden is a lame duck, no matter what happens here Trump isn't losing.  Bernie would have given Trump a run for his money however, he has half a brain.  

I'd be shocked if Biden even makes it to the election at this point rofl.

Never know, he might cash in on the current happenings to increase his African-American vote.

-PB

Quality satire here.  Absolute quality.

https://chaser.com.au/world/mexico-agrees-to-pay-for-wall/

United States President Donald Trump has today convinced Mexico to build a wall on the United States border and to pay for it, after the entire nation devolved into civil unrest egged on by a twitter fight from the President.

“He did it, he really did make America Great again!” cheered Trump’s supporters as the country burned down around them. “Yes, sure there are now murder wasps, and the police are arresting journalists, and racism is worse than ever, and the hospitals are over-run, and 100,000 have died from a plague, and we’re in a cold war with China, and the economy has collapsed, and we’re keeping children in concentration camps, but on the up side nobody’s coming here from Mexico anymore so I think we can chalk that up to a win.”

Though the number of Americans crossing the border into their neighbouring country has been steadily on the rise since 2016, authorities are reporting that the problem has reached epidemic proportions recently, especially after the American President suggested people inject themselves with bleach.

“Really what we are seeing here is that people simply don’t want to live in a country with such visible corruption.” said one Mexican caseworker who has had to deal with the recent influx of refugees. “It also doesn’t help that the controlling regime is threatening military violence against its citizens. If this holds up much longer we might have to invade in order to force democracy on the country. We hear the current President seized power in a clearly rigged election where he won even though he got less votes than his democratic rival. What a sham.”

“There’s police corruption, innocent people are killed in gunfights daily, and a good percentage of the population are hooked on opiates produced by rich oligarchs who don’t face consequences because they donate so much money to the politicians. Hard to believe such a violent and corrupt country can exist right over the border from Mexico, you know?”

Trump today. 

Tear gases peaceful demonstrators so he can get a photo op at a church. 
https://www.9news.com.au/world/donald-trump-criticised-by-bishop-of-washington-church-after-protesters-teargassed/f923de99-b7c9-4e73-95d8-adce3fec8955
https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/nixon-on-steroids-trump-s-military-move-is-a-high-risk-election-bid-20200602-p54ypb.html

It was unclear why the officers took such speedy and confrontational action: the afternoon protests had been peaceful and a curfew ordered by Washington's mayor had not yet come into effect. Then the President strolled out from the White House, crossed the square and stood in front of the church, which had suffered fire damage during the previous night's protests. Posing for cameras, Trump brandished a bible like a victorious sportsman clutching a championship trophy. Then he headed straight back to the White House.

but..
.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10qbt0LHmvE&list=PLOp_wCfbVseEwqs-CRqg5c7MaVLQ2G9BX&index=1

I would bet $1000 to $1 that he's never opened a bible before or since.

Just dog whistlin' to dem televangicals.

-PB