"Terrorist" Now Defined As Anyone Disagreeing with Establishment Dogma

B

Braveheart

Guest
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” ― George Washington

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Trev

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
5
Speech is the human alternative to violence.

By denying Free speech they are all but ensuring violence.
 

stackz07

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
122
noun: terrorist; plural noun: terrorists
  1. a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.



    If you storm the capitol in a mob, trying to interfere with an government process, that is by definition, terrorism.


    EDIT: Also, no one is taking away anyones free speech. These people are free to go yell on a street corner or any public place they want to. But because republicans wanted cake makers the ability to deny wedding cakes to gay people if they so choose, facebook can also kick off anyone they want to.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
They have been using it for years, domestic terror is the new jihadi narrative, underlying it all is profit seeking, oil being the main profit in the Middle East and maintaining the dollar reserve currency status.
Controlling public meanings via information is the new gold, you have the capacity to create new markets, lead the peasants to the new "popular" watering hole etc, with tech you can reach the world, taking down middle eastern countries for oil is one profit, controlling their government and allowing propaganda to spread opens up the countries to western information flows, meanings are created and new markets accordingly, this can be achieved in a mid sized office in NYC.

Censorship in the name of "hate speech" is multifaceted, the main one it stifles criticism of the ruling class, they use the minority argument as shield to cover for their own interests.
It also protects big techs monopoly interests, Parler and other social apps could take millions of users from big tech so they are labeled "hate platforms" and destroyed. The mainstream establishment shills(journalists) start the narrative by claiming said alternative platforms are full of hate, said platform is canceled and then the second wave of shill journos claim said platform never had the capacity to be a viable alternative to Twitter, they create the impression it just wouldn’t generate profit, the counters the monopoly competition argument. If it’s not an American or israeli owned tech company they will be even more aggressive toward it.

57 million voted for trump, they didn’t want them on Parler, this could have started huge growth.
 

stackz07

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
122
They have been using it for years, domestic terror is the new jihadi narrative, underlying it all is profit seeking, oil being the main profit in the Middle East and maintaining the dollar reserve currency status.
Controlling public meanings via information is the new gold, you have the capacity to create new markets, lead the peasants to the new "popular" watering hole etc, with tech you can reach the world, taking down middle eastern countries for oil is one profit, controlling their government and allowing propaganda to spread opens up the countries to western information flows, meanings are created and new markets accordingly, this can be achieved in a mid sized office in NYC.

Censorship in the name of "hate speech" is multifaceted, the main one it stifles criticism of the ruling class, they use the minority argument as shield to cover for their own interests.
It also protects big techs monopoly interests, Parler and other social apps could take millions of users from big tech so they are labeled "hate platforms" and destroyed. The mainstream establishment shills(journalists) start the narrative by claiming said alternative platforms are full of hate, said platform is canceled and then the second wave of shill journos claim said platform never had the capacity to be a viable alternative to Twitter, they create the impression it just wouldn’t generate profit, the counters the monopoly competition argument. If it’s not an American or israeli owned tech company they will be even more aggressive toward it.

57 million voted for trump, they didn’t want them on Parler, this could have started huge growth.

They were talking about executing Pence on parlor. Sooo yeah, they took that ***t down. You're ******* crazy.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
They were talking about executing Pence on parlor. Sooo yeah, they took that ***t down. You're ******* crazy.

The woke brigade on twitter talk about executing people on twitter on an hourly basis, Twitter is also full of religious extremist and general hate, it’s also full of paedophiles, you name the degeneracy and twitter has users promoting it, the attack on alternative tech is to crush any potential competition, it’s financial and power based motives.
 

stackz07

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
122
The woke brigade on twitter talk about executing people on twitter on an hourly basis, Twitter is also full of religious extremist and general hate, it’s also full of paedophiles, you name the degeneracy and twitter has users promoting it, the attack on alternative tech is to crush any potential competition, it’s financial and power based motives.
Show me these posts you speak of and not just your hyperbole. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.
 

triple

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
61
Show me these posts you speak of and not just your hyperbole. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.
1610310221633.png
 

triple

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
61
Show me these posts you speak of and not just your hyperbole. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.
Your corporate overlords thank you for repeating their programming.

Can you figure out what is happening yet?

1610310335737.png
1610310370051.png
 

LucyL

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
1,244
noun: terrorist; plural noun: terrorists
  1. a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.



    If you storm the capitol in a mob, trying to interfere with an government process, that is by definition, terrorism.


    EDIT: Also, no one is taking away anyones free speech. These people are free to go yell on a street corner or any public place they want to. But because republicans wanted cake makers the ability to deny wedding cakes to gay people if they so choose, facebook can also kick off anyone they want to.
Did you not read your own definition? Terrorism is to intimidate the people. "Storming" a government building is not the definition of terrorism. Let me help - OKC bombing was NOT an act of terrorism. Back then some experts attempted to set the record straight for the media, but that was so ignored that now we have people like you saying one thing and then saying it means something else entirely.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Show me these posts you speak of and not just your hyperbole. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.

Are you serious?
A quick search and you will find it, it’s plagued with the issues I mention. The denial of reality and contradictory selective amplification of issues is wokism’s problem.

With regard the argument that twitter,Facebook etc are private platforms/companies and ban who they want is also wrong, it’s now a publicly traded company and has a responsibility to shareholders, jack "woke" Dorsey can have decisions that effect shareholders interests overturned, he is no longer the sole owner.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Your corporate overlords thank you for repeating their programming.

Can you figure out what is happening yet?

View attachment 21137View attachment 21138

A lot of folks believe advertisers are increasing the use of diverse actors for the greater public good, the reason they do it is psychological, the more emotional the advert negative or positive the more likely folks will remember it, they know after the BLM saga that everyone was more race conscious, they didn’t care if it triggered people or not, either way it was a win win for them.
 

Fred

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Messages
487
There are now video compilations of top Democrats repeatedly calling for violence over the last few years. HOW HOW HOW are people still believing the MSM's take on all this?
 

LuMonty

Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
426
noun: terrorist; plural noun: terrorists
  1. a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.



    If you storm the capitol in a mob, trying to interfere with an government process, that is by definition, terrorism.


    EDIT: Also, no one is taking away anyones free speech. These people are free to go yell on a street corner or any public place they want to. But because republicans wanted cake makers the ability to deny wedding cakes to gay people if they so choose, facebook can also kick off anyone they want to.
A single cakemaker doesn't have the monopolistic/oligarchistic power of Twitter, FB, Amazon. You've made a false equivalence.

Nearly every month I was still on Twitter there would be a call to execute Trump for treason, for completely asinine reasons no less. One of the only functions I find applicable to federal gov't is to break up monopolies and other strangleholds on markets, but the Uniparty and their lobbyists enjoy the circus and allows it to continue. Examples include grants to Google to extend their fiber network, which remains unfinished for several years.

P.S. All I had to do was type "violent leftist tweets" to find several examples; the first website had some from May 2020. Many of those I had seen myself there or elsewhere. Or perhaps any site posting those examples is "****ing crazy" and is just fabricating tweets. On r/Aww, a subreddit, there was, for some days or weeks, a blurb about George Floyd, injustice, links to follow for action, and plenty of comments under posts that had nothing to do with the adorable subject matter. Some were violent, though the mods cleaned that up, while simply directing it off-site.
 

Fred

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Messages
487
Parler has now been shut down by NWO ... I mean Amazon and Apple and Google.
But I thought we were supposed to "build our own platform" when we criticized their monopolies.
Prediction: ALL non-NWO-owned servers will be shut down in the near future, probably after a staged terror attack.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Check out the Parler Wikipedia page-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parler
It basically has the antisemitism sign on the page, it’s part of a series on antisemitism on Wikipedia, we know wikipedia is a ruling class propaganda outlet, the same user names edit thousands of pages, it’s only a handful of people, in Germany a court case had to be taken to find the identity of one such editor, he turned out to be an israeli editing any criticism of israel or anybody linked to Israel in general.

The big tech monopoly is clear as day at this point, competition will be destroyed under the guise of hate speech, it’s not like it’s hard for nato or intelligence agency trolls to sign up and pump out crazy narratives on any platform.
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
893
Location
The Netherlands
Check out the Parler Wikipedia page-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parler
It basically has the antisemitism sign on the page, it’s part of a series on antisemitism on Wikipedia, we know wikipedia is a ruling class propaganda outlet, the same user names edit thousands of pages, it’s only a handful of people, in Germany a court case had to be taken to find the identity of one such editor, he turned out to be an israeli editing any criticism of israel or anybody linked to Israel in general.

Ah yes, the classic Scooby Doo villain reveal scene.

 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom