So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
You invite anyone you want to, controlled or not. If a person is controversial over the long term, you want them. For the simple reason that usually the worst person pushing the shit message that pisses people off aka "bad speech" are the ones who give a warning sign of where censors and authoritarians are moving to censor similar speech.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible? And this have nothing to do with "pisses people off" or " "bad speech" ", and you know that fully well. There are much more controversial non-extreme-controlled opposition people than Richard Spencer that you could invite reg. helping free speech that would have meaningful things to say.
And it doesn't seem to have been in the spirit of free speech that Richard Spencer was invited in any way whatsoever, especially because the MSM very much likes to give speaking time to extremely controlled opposition people like Richard Spencer.
And if they were for free speech, why not host the Muhammed cartoons? Why do they hold their conferences in Turkey, which is not at all known for free speech?..............................
Again: But you don't need to invite extremely controlled opposition people to speak at your organization if you are an "ardent free speech extremist". And since when would Richard Spencer have interesting things to say? He doesn't even believe his own claims at all whatsoever.
Reg. image boards:
Even this forum has much more limited free speech reg. political topics that are very much relevant to Trump supporters than multiple image boards, and you ought to be well aware of that (and you might well be fully aware of that). And describing them as "political soap boxes"..........
Have you ever visited image boards? How much time have you spent there?
So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
That makes no actual sense based on what I said, but as a supposition based on what I said it makes sense, in your framework. Then again, making such a shit supposition based on short statements is more of your problem then mine.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible? ...
You mean, one should help those who have their speech cut off by other actors? Yes. There are other people, though you seem to forget something. Notability helps. I seem to be missing the part where the MSM regularly gives Spenser talking and speech status. If you mean the MSM regularly talks about Spenser then I'd agree.
Have you ever visited image boards? How much time have you spent there?
Apparently more then you have, since I can remember the days when 2ch was geolocked and 4chan didn't exist.
And funnily enough, you completely ignore the part where the people you very much seem to claim are "ardent free speech extremist"(s), choose to hold their conferences in Turkey, who are not at all for genuine free speech, and whom to the best of my knowledge have not hosted the Muhammed cartoons either... and you keep continue to argue for promoting Richard Spencer (not protecting his speech, but instead directly inviting him to conferences and promoting him), whom is controlled opposition to the extreme, instead of caring about promoting other people who are much more controversial and who actually have meaningful things to say that they believe in themselves. And the MSM very much love to cover Richard Spencer.
You mean, one should help those who have their speech cut off by other actors?
And now you are confusing matters on purpose, for that is not at all what they are seeking to do, and you know that well.
So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
You invite anyone you want to, controlled or not. If a person is controversial over the long term, you want them. For the simple reason that usually the worst person pushing the shit message that pisses people off aka "bad speech" are the ones who give a warning sign of where censors and authoritarians are moving to censor similar speech.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible that aren't even meaningfully censored? Instead of inviting much more controversial and much more censored people? And this have nothing to do with "pisses people off" or " "bad speech" ", and you know that fully well. There are much more controversial non-extreme-controlled opposition people than Richard Spencer that you could invite reg. helping free speech that would have meaningful things to say.
And it doesn't seem to have been in the spirit of free speech that Richard Spencer was invited in any way whatsoever, especially because the MSM very much likes to give speaking time to extremely controlled opposition people like Richard Spencer.
And if they were for free speech, why not host the Muhammed cartoons? Why do they hold their conferences in Turkey, which is not at all known for free speech?..............................
And again: But you don't need to invite extremely controlled opposition people to speak at your organization if you are an "ardent free speech extremist". And since when would Richard Spencer have interesting things to say? He doesn't even believe his own claims at all whatsoever.
Reg. image boards:
Even this forum has much more limited free speech reg. political topics that are very much relevant to Trump supporters than multiple image boards, and you ought to be well aware of that (and you might well be fully aware of that). And describing them as "political soap boxes"..........
Funnily enough, I didn't. Rather I considered it not important, since I said I was an ardent supporter. Though I didn't make the claim that they are ardent supporters, only seem like they are. And I haven't made a claim of support of Spencer to invite, I made a claim of support for anyone. You know what's actually funny though? When someone takes clear statements, and injects their own views into them in order to make a point that doesn't exist.
Unfortunately, you didn't get that at the start. Then in your follow-up after the second quote, you somehow manage to get right to the precipice then fail to understand the rest.
And now you are confusing matters on purpose, for that is not at all what they are seeking to do, and you know that well.
Either you don't understand what I'm writing, or you're so enthralled with your pov that you're rearranging what's been said, in order to try and make your view seem realized.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible that aren't even meaningfully censored? ...
They're not meaningfully censored? I didn't realize that being a full on pariah in the media, in the press, and effectively blocked in discussions in all effective public discourse isn't actually being censored. You seem to be working yourself into a logic circuit failure in your reasoning, and you also seem to don't understand that in countries where speech is heavily controlled you use what's available in order to expand speech.
Reg. image boards:
Yes, this forum does limit speech. And yes image boards are much closer to political soap boxes, I'm guessing you're fairly young or don't or haven't ever lived in a country that actually has controlled speech. Otherwise you'd actually understand the importance of speech where you're not pressed by the state or public at large.
You seem to be having some serious logic troubles in your replies.
So you have no sincerity in any way whatsoever, and you lie, deceive, attack strawmen, backpedal, confuse matters on purpose, use a variety of tactics and tricks, etc., and you know that well. And you have succeeded greatly in purposefully distracting and derailing from my first comment in this thread, which you know fully well was meaningful and correct.
Yet again, given that you continue shilling, manipulating and distracting:
And funnily enough, you completely ignore the part where the people you very much seem to claim (and then later back-pedal and pretend not to claim) are "ardent free speech extremist"(s), choose to hold their conferences in Turkey, who are not at all for genuine free speech, and whom to the best of my knowledge have not hosted the Muhammed cartoons either... and you keep continue to argue for promoting Richard Spencer (not protecting his speech, but instead directly inviting him to conferences and promoting him), whom is controlled opposition to the extreme, instead of caring about promoting other people who are much more controversial and who actually have meaningful things to say that they believe in themselves. And the MSM very much love to cover Richard Spencer.
You mean, one should help those who have their speech cut off by other actors?
And now you are confusing matters on purpose, for that is not at all what they are seeking to do, and you know that well.
So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
You invite anyone you want to, controlled or not. If a person is controversial over the long term, you want them. For the simple reason that usually the worst person pushing the shit message that pisses people off aka "bad speech" are the ones who give a warning sign of where censors and authoritarians are moving to censor similar speech.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible that aren't even meaningfully censored? Instead of inviting much more controversial and much more censored people? And this have nothing to do with "pisses people off" or " "bad speech" ", and you know that fully well. There are much more controversial non-extreme-controlled opposition people than Richard Spencer that you could invite reg. helping free speech that would have meaningful things to say.
And it doesn't seem to have been in the spirit of free speech that Richard Spencer was invited in any way whatsoever, especially because the MSM very much likes to give speaking time to extremely controlled opposition people like Richard Spencer.
And if they were for free speech, why not host the Muhammed cartoons? Why do they hold their conferences in Turkey, which is not at all known for free speech?..............................
And again: But you don't need to invite extremely controlled opposition people to speak at your organization if you are an "ardent free speech extremist". And since when would Richard Spencer have interesting things to say? He doesn't even believe his own claims at all whatsoever.
Reg. image boards:
Even this forum has much more limited free speech reg. political topics that are very much relevant to Trump supporters than multiple image boards, and you ought to be well aware of that (and you might well be fully aware of that). And describing them as "political soap boxes"..........
So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible? And this have nothing to do with "pisses people off" or " "bad speech" ", and you know that fully well. There are much more controversial non-extreme-controlled opposition people than Richard Spencer that you could invite reg. helping free speech that would have meaningful things to say.
And it doesn't seem to have been in the spirit of free speech that Richard Spencer was invited in any way whatsoever, especially because the MSM very much likes to give speaking time to extremely controlled opposition people like Richard Spencer.
And if they were for free speech, why not host the Muhammed cartoons? Why do they hold their conferences in Turkey, which is not at all known for free speech?..............................
Again: But you don't need to invite extremely controlled opposition people to speak at your organization if you are an "ardent free speech extremist". And since when would Richard Spencer have interesting things to say? He doesn't even believe his own claims at all whatsoever.
Reg. image boards:
Even this forum has much more limited free speech reg. political topics that are very much relevant to Trump supporters than multiple image boards, and you ought to be well aware of that (and you might well be fully aware of that). And describing them as "political soap boxes"..........
Have you ever visited image boards? How much time have you spent there?
That makes no actual sense based on what I said, but as a supposition based on what I said it makes sense, in your framework. Then again, making such a shit supposition based on short statements is more of your problem then mine.
You mean, one should help those who have their speech cut off by other actors? Yes. There are other people, though you seem to forget something. Notability helps. I seem to be missing the part where the MSM regularly gives Spenser talking and speech status. If you mean the MSM regularly talks about Spenser then I'd agree.
Apparently more then you have, since I can remember the days when 2ch was geolocked and 4chan didn't exist.
And funnily enough, you completely ignore the part where the people you very much seem to claim are "ardent free speech extremist"(s), choose to hold their conferences in Turkey, who are not at all for genuine free speech, and whom to the best of my knowledge have not hosted the Muhammed cartoons either... and you keep continue to argue for promoting Richard Spencer (not protecting his speech, but instead directly inviting him to conferences and promoting him), whom is controlled opposition to the extreme, instead of caring about promoting other people who are much more controversial and who actually have meaningful things to say that they believe in themselves. And the MSM very much love to cover Richard Spencer.
And now you are confusing matters on purpose, for that is not at all what they are seeking to do, and you know that well.
Again, given that it is still fully relevant (from https://patriots.win/p/12hRUzGaFo/x/c/4Dx5HOEkHeL ):
So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible that aren't even meaningfully censored? Instead of inviting much more controversial and much more censored people? And this have nothing to do with "pisses people off" or " "bad speech" ", and you know that fully well. There are much more controversial non-extreme-controlled opposition people than Richard Spencer that you could invite reg. helping free speech that would have meaningful things to say.
And it doesn't seem to have been in the spirit of free speech that Richard Spencer was invited in any way whatsoever, especially because the MSM very much likes to give speaking time to extremely controlled opposition people like Richard Spencer. And if they were for free speech, why not host the Muhammed cartoons? Why do they hold their conferences in Turkey, which is not at all known for free speech?..............................
And again: But you don't need to invite extremely controlled opposition people to speak at your organization if you are an "ardent free speech extremist". And since when would Richard Spencer have interesting things to say? He doesn't even believe his own claims at all whatsoever.
Reg. image boards:
Even this forum has much more limited free speech reg. political topics that are very much relevant to Trump supporters than multiple image boards, and you ought to be well aware of that (and you might well be fully aware of that). And describing them as "political soap boxes"..........
Funnily enough, I didn't. Rather I considered it not important, since I said I was an ardent supporter. Though I didn't make the claim that they are ardent supporters, only seem like they are. And I haven't made a claim of support of Spencer to invite, I made a claim of support for anyone. You know what's actually funny though? When someone takes clear statements, and injects their own views into them in order to make a point that doesn't exist.
Unfortunately, you didn't get that at the start. Then in your follow-up after the second quote, you somehow manage to get right to the precipice then fail to understand the rest.
Either you don't understand what I'm writing, or you're so enthralled with your pov that you're rearranging what's been said, in order to try and make your view seem realized.
They're not meaningfully censored? I didn't realize that being a full on pariah in the media, in the press, and effectively blocked in discussions in all effective public discourse isn't actually being censored. You seem to be working yourself into a logic circuit failure in your reasoning, and you also seem to don't understand that in countries where speech is heavily controlled you use what's available in order to expand speech.
Yes, this forum does limit speech. And yes image boards are much closer to political soap boxes, I'm guessing you're fairly young or don't or haven't ever lived in a country that actually has controlled speech. Otherwise you'd actually understand the importance of speech where you're not pressed by the state or public at large.
You seem to be having some serious logic troubles in your replies.
So you have no sincerity in any way whatsoever, and you lie, deceive, attack strawmen, backpedal, confuse matters on purpose, use a variety of tactics and tricks, etc., and you know that well. And you have succeeded greatly in purposefully distracting and derailing from my first comment in this thread, which you know fully well was meaningful and correct.
Yet again, given that you continue shilling, manipulating and distracting:
And funnily enough, you completely ignore the part where the people you very much seem to claim (and then later back-pedal and pretend not to claim) are "ardent free speech extremist"(s), choose to hold their conferences in Turkey, who are not at all for genuine free speech, and whom to the best of my knowledge have not hosted the Muhammed cartoons either... and you keep continue to argue for promoting Richard Spencer (not protecting his speech, but instead directly inviting him to conferences and promoting him), whom is controlled opposition to the extreme, instead of caring about promoting other people who are much more controversial and who actually have meaningful things to say that they believe in themselves. And the MSM very much love to cover Richard Spencer.
And now you are confusing matters on purpose, for that is not at all what they are seeking to do, and you know that well.
Again, given that it is still fully relevant (from https://patriots.win/p/12hRUzGaFo/x/c/4Dx5HOEkHeL ):
So you don't believe your own words at all whatsoever. You are directly, intentionally against free speech, and you are fully aware of that. You merely pretend to be for free speech.
So one should help extremely controlled opposition people as much as possible that aren't even meaningfully censored? Instead of inviting much more controversial and much more censored people? And this have nothing to do with "pisses people off" or " "bad speech" ", and you know that fully well. There are much more controversial non-extreme-controlled opposition people than Richard Spencer that you could invite reg. helping free speech that would have meaningful things to say.
And it doesn't seem to have been in the spirit of free speech that Richard Spencer was invited in any way whatsoever, especially because the MSM very much likes to give speaking time to extremely controlled opposition people like Richard Spencer.
And if they were for free speech, why not host the Muhammed cartoons? Why do they hold their conferences in Turkey, which is not at all known for free speech?..............................
And again: But you don't need to invite extremely controlled opposition people to speak at your organization if you are an "ardent free speech extremist". And since when would Richard Spencer have interesting things to say? He doesn't even believe his own claims at all whatsoever.
Reg. image boards:
Even this forum has much more limited free speech reg. political topics that are very much relevant to Trump supporters than multiple image boards, and you ought to be well aware of that (and you might well be fully aware of that). And describing them as "political soap boxes"..........