Robert F. Kennedy Jr banned from Instagram

Giraffe

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,730
i think they needed to ban him now cause they're planning on the yearly vaccine soon.

Get the "vaccine", but continue with the distancing and the masks. And wash your hands! We don't know if vaccinated can spread the virus without showing the typical symptoms, but if you're vaccinated, you are not required to quarantine if you don't have symptoms. But only if your last jab was no more than three months ago.

Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Currently Authorized in the United States

At this time, vaccinated persons should continue to follow current guidance to protect themselves and others, including wearing a mask, staying at least 6 feet away from others, avoiding crowds, avoiding poorly ventilated spaces, covering coughs and sneezes, washing hands often, following CDC travel guidance, and following any applicable workplace or school guidance, including guidance related to personal protective equipment use or SARS-CoV-2 testing.

However, vaccinated persons with an exposure to someone with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 are not required to quarantine if they meet all of the following criteria:

  • Are fully vaccinated (i.e., ≥2 weeks following receipt of the second dose in a 2-dose series, or ≥2 weeks following receipt of one dose of a single-dose vaccine)
  • Are within 3 months following receipt of the last dose in the series
  • Have remained asymptomatic since the current COVID-19 exposure
Persons who do not meet all 3 of the above criteria should continue to follow current quarantine guidance after exposure to someone with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.
 
Last edited:

Sam321

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Messages
652
This is very reminiscent of the kind of censorship that swept through Russia during and after the Bolshevik Revolution, time to hit the history books and read up on that and what else happened to see the parallels to today. The acceleration of censorship will not stop.
Check out the book "reinventing collapse". Contrasts fall of Russia to current American collapse.
 

Regina

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
6,511
Location
Chicago
Robert Kennedy Jr. isn't a "conservative."

Also, considering companies like Facebook (who owns Instagram), Twitter and Amazon were founded based off technology from DARPA, they are hardly the product of a "Free Market." All of those companies are basically monopolies at this point, falling more into the category of "utility" than private business.
FB, Google, Twitter, Instagram and youboob are still thoroughly part of the military industrial complex.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
92
It’s a shame, I hate any of these platforms deciding whose opinions on topical issues we are entitled to hear. Surely it’s a basic freedom to listen to all sides and make our own minds up?

As for RFK Jnr, he was a very good friend of a very good friend of mine until my friend died. I have spoken to RFK Jnr. on the telephone a few times and he was always very helpful and polite. Of course charm is a quality that can be learned but the banning is still wrong.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
15
It is already happening indirectly - ISP's throttle your bandwidth depending on which site you go to. So far, they have been doing it for financial reasons to speed up access to their own content and their partners' but there is nothing preventing them from implementing the same procedures if you go to an anti-vaxx website or...even this forum. If somebody complains/sues, the ISP just says "we did not block access, they can still get to it, but we reserve the right to prioritize other websites". Of course, if they throttle your access to the point you are waiting 5min for a page to load, it is as good as a ban. In fact, it is more effective and nefarious than a ban, because it frustrates the user without directly blocking access. So, it will be harder to fight in court (as you'd have to prove malicious intent about specific websites) and the frustration of the user can lead to them simply avoiding certain sites out of fear the throttling will escalate into full-blown deliberate punishment for even legit websites the user depends for their life on. Basically, the ISPs saying "you go to that antivaxx website again, we will not only throttle your connection there but will start throttling your access to your bank, online shopping sites, health/insurance sites, etc. think whether you visit that antivaxx site ever again". That's why they are pushing for creating "risk profiles" on users (I bet they already exist actually) and then using those to decide what quality of service (QoS) you get for ANY online destination/site. The framework for that already exists due to the ISPs using it to fight downloading pirated movies/music, but there is nothing stopping them to expand the risk profile development criteria to any site the govt deems not-Kosher.

But to be fair absolutely none of this happened correct? You are saying right now ISPs give you better bandwidth to go to their own content and partners for financial reasons right now? But then everything you say after is just a hypothetical possibility of what could happen, but has not happened yet, if I'm understanding what you wrote. They are not slowing down your access to any particular websites I believe is what you're saying. And then you say people may become afraid that when they do slow down your access to certain websites, if you even attempt to visit these now slow websites, they will slow down your access to websites you need to live?

I guess I am wondering why you are going this rabbit hole? Anything could happen, but it hasnt, so why think like this? I feel like it could get people riled up in a fight mode when none of it has happened. Unless I am misunderstanding you and this is happening.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom