Freedom of speech vs Technology

RyszardKuklinski said:
Fck the nations West of Poland.

You West Euros are insane.

What could possess a people to go berserk looting & shooting the World in racist genocide
Do a 180
Then allow in minorities looting & shooting their own countries in anti racist suicide!?
Click to expand...

that is not going on, except in your stupid fuck polack mind. fuck poland.
 
RyszardKuklinski said:
The Black book on Communism puts a figure of close to 60 million.

But, that's not exclusively Stalin.

Stalin killed likely 30 to 45 million.

Still awful, but.
Click to expand...


60 million was close to the figure that Solzhenitsyn gave. But who knows. Different people have different things to say. But the point is that you wrongly denigrate Hitler. Sure, the Nazis invaded Poland. But after WW I, Germany lost some of its territory to Poland. The main point is that at least Germany was a more Western and civilized country. To a large degree, the Russians weren't. History's greatest mass murder was a Russian named general Vasily Bolkhin. He was almost certainly a jew. He is said to have personally executed around 50,000 people. In the Katyn massacre he is said to have personally executed 7000 of the 22,000 Polish POW's. I will show you a picture that is said to have been him at work. Those two people kneeling could have very well been a couple of your fellow Poles. How does that make you feel.

vasily bolkhin executions.jpg
 
antiall said:
60 million was close to the figure that Solzhenitsyn gave. But who knows. Different people have different things to say. But the point is that you wrongly denigrate Hitler. Sure, the Nazis invaded Poland. But after WW I, Germany lost some of its territory to Poland. The main point is that at least Germany was a more Western and civilized country. To a large degree, the Russians weren't. History's greatest mass murder was a Russian named general Vasily Bolkhin. He was almost certainly a jew. He is said to have personally executed around 50,000 people. In the Katyn massacre he is said to have personally executed 7000 of the 22,000 Polish POW's. I will show you a picture that is said to have been him at work. Those two people kneeling could have very well been a couple of your fellow Poles. How does that make you feel.

View attachment 21392
Click to expand...

you are such a stone cold piece of shit bigot you actually think being jewish has something to do with being a mass murderer? what the fuck is wrong with you, bitch?
 
Hoosier Daddy said:
that is not going on, except in your stupid fuck polack mind. fuck poland.
Click to expand...

Yes,it has been with BLM riots, the Tottenham riots, the Muslim riots in France etc.


Yes, West Euros are being replaced in their own nations.

You are one of the most illogical of Human peoples.

Even South Africa is more resilient to secure their existence.
 
RyszardKuklinski said:
The 2nd plaque says Auschwitz & the first one doesn't say Auschwitz.

What historian believes that 4 million died in Auschwitz alone!?

Even the Wikipedia article says 1.3 million which is close to 1.5 million.

What are you going to show me next the Wiesenthal center adding smoke to the Chimneys in the historic photos of Auschwitz during WW2?

PS.
Jews, Germans, & British are among my least favorite peoples.

Do you honestly think modern Germany is logical in any sense!?

Even the AfD is rabidly pro Zionist.

It's honestly Poland doing the best job out of Europe in modern terms.
Click to expand...


I have better things to do than tell people lies. If you don't believe anything I said, look it up for yourself. Next, from what I hear, Poland doesn't allow muslim invaders into their country. I don't know how the EU lets them get away with that. But if it's true, the Poles aren't stupid in that regard.
 
RyszardKuklinski said:
Yes,it has been with BLM riots, the Tottenham riots, the Muslim riots in France etc.


Yes, West Euros are being replaced in their own nations.

You are one of the most illogical of Human peoples.

Even South Africa is more resilient to secure their existence.
Click to expand...

i can see where an inferior polack is scared of competition and being replaced in his own country by immigrants who cannot even speak the language. you sure are a chickenshit polack!!
 
antiall said:
I have better things to do than tell people lies. If you don't believe anything I said, look it up for yourself. Next, from what I hear, Poland doesn't allow muslim invaders into their country. I don't know how the EU lets them get away with that. But if it's true, the Poles aren't stupid in that regard.
Click to expand...

yes, they are. all racists and bigots are stupid. and chickenshit. and need their ass kicked. punk.
 
Hoosier Daddy said:
i can see where an inferior polack is scared of competition and being replaced in his own country by immigrants who cannot even speak the language. you sure are a chickenshit polack!!
Click to expand...

I didn't mention economic reasons, but cultural ones.

You are one of those retarded Sociopathic Nihilist aren't you!?

Do you believe culture & heritage has no value!?

As for economic reasons.

Millennial incomes had tanked 20% in real wages because of issues like immigration & outsourcing & Feminist workers.

That 20% drop was before Covid hit.

It's probably over a 30% loss in income by now.
 
RyszardKuklinski said:
Fck the nations West of Poland.

You West Euros are insane.

What could possess a people to go berserk looting & shooting the World in racist genocide
Do a 180
Then allow in minorities looting & shooting their own countries in anti racist suicide!?
Click to expand...

And I say fuck the nations east of Germany. But when it comes to blame, there is plenty of it to go around. One of the biggest problems is people thinking that racism is the problem. When in fact it is the solution. How many White Americans are trying to sneak into mexico or points farther south. Or how many White Europeans are trying to sneak into Africa or the Middle East. That should tell anybody where the real problem lies. But most people think that the solution is to destroy White people. They all have shit for brains.
 
RyszardKuklinski said:
I didn't mention economic reasons, but cultural ones.

You are one of those retarded Sociopathic Nihilist aren't you!?

Do you believe culture & heritage has no value!?

As for economic reasons.

Millennial incomes had tanked 20% in real wages because of issues like immigration & outsourcing & Feminist workers.

That 20% drop was before Covid hit.

It's probably over a 30% loss in income by now.
Click to expand...


You should just do what i did an d put hooser on ignore. it's not like it has anything sensible to say.
 
antiall said:
And I say fuck the nations east of Germany. But when it comes to blame, there is plenty of it to go around. One of the biggest problems is people thinking that racism is the problem. When in fact it is the solution. How many White Americans are trying to sneak into mexico or points farther south. Or how many White Europeans are trying to sneak into Africa or the Middle East. That should tell anybody where the real problem lies. But most people think that the solution is to destroy White people. They all have shit for brains.
Click to expand...

Germany helped create Soviets.

Conceptualized by Kosher Israel Gelphand.

Germany in WW1 sent the train of Bolsheviks to Russia in 1917..

Half of them were Jews on that train.
 
antiall said:
And I say fuck the nations east of Germany. But when it comes to blame, there is plenty of it to go around. One of the biggest problems is people thinking that racism is the problem. When in fact it is the solution. How many White Americans are trying to sneak into mexico or points farther south. Or how many White Europeans are trying to sneak into Africa or the Middle East. That should tell anybody where the real problem lies. But most people think that the solution is to destroy White people. They all have shit for brains.
Click to expand...

It's ONLY commonplace in Western European societies to cry about racism by their own so much.

It only gets worse by the year.

My opinion of Western Europeans is poor.

They seem to be very ambitious but a little on the slow side.
 
antiall said:
60 million was close to the figure that Solzhenitsyn gave. But who knows. Different people have different things to say. But the point is that you wrongly denigrate Hitler. Sure, the Nazis invaded Poland. But after WW I, Germany lost some of its territory to Poland. The main point is that at least Germany was a more Western and civilized country. To a large degree, the Russians weren't. History's greatest mass murder was a Russian named general Vasily Bolkhin. He was almost certainly a jew. He is said to have personally executed around 50,000 people. In the Katyn massacre he is said to have personally executed 7000 of the 22,000 Polish POW's. I will show you a picture that is said to have been him at work. Those two people kneeling could have very well been a couple of your fellow Poles. How does that make you feel.

View attachment 21392
Click to expand...

You don't have to convince me on Jews.

I've already made a thread pointing out who the Globalist are.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?180294-Who-are-the-Globalists-!
 
antiall said:
There was a time in the U.S. where the concept of freedom of speech meant something. At one time we had something called the freedom of the press. It was considered to be the Fourth Estate. Which went along with the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches of government. And generally considered to be the equal of the other three in importance. But it would seem that our new technology has put a stake through the heart of that idea. Because of technology we now have places for people to communicate electronically. For instance, in forums like this. But because they label themselves as "private entities," freedom of speech has no place. There is one forum out there where I can see why. Because the truth to some extent is allowed to be spoken there, the place is practically a ghost town. Maybe if all the forums were the same, instead of a place for the self deluded to hide in and speak to each other, that would be different.

Another blow against freedom of speech happen during the Reagan administration. There used to be a thing in the media called the fairness doctrine. Where two sides to any issue were given equal time. But Reagan killed that. I wonder how the incidents with george floyd or ahmaud arbery (for instance) would have been handled if the fairness doctrine was still in place. Is it time we were honest and took the image of George Washington off the dollar bill?

View attachment 21373
Click to expand...

The Fairness Doctrine did not increase freedom of speech, it restricted it, severely restricted it. Why you ask?

The Fairness Doctrine, in short, said that any media outlet--television, radio, whatever--the FCC had regulatory control over had to, by force of law, provide equal time for each side of an issue. This meant that if a radio station put a Republican on for 15 minutes, a Democrat had to be given the opportunity to have 15 minutes as well. Left, Right, Up, Down, whatever your political position was, the opposite one had to have equal time.

Now, that sounds all fair and wonderful doesn't it? Well, in reality it didn't work. Finding two opposing positions wasn't always possible. But it was possible that if a station put on some particular view then out of the woodwork would come someone claiming they needed equal time to present the opposite view--at the station's expense of course, or else (eg., a lawsuit). All of this resulted in stations simply refusing to put anyone on that was foisting an opinion as that was the only way to avoid being sued for not giving equal time.

Thus, speech was severely restricted. The reason the Fairness Doctrine was established to begin with was back in the day there were only three TV networks (well, there was PBS too, but nobody watched it). The same went for radio. In most locales there were a limited number of mostly AM stations to choose from.

By Reagan's time in office this had changed. Cable TV was widespread with now dozens, and moving towards hundreds, of channels. Radio had expanded to FM and there were often twice as many, or more choices to be had. The internet was on the horizon, and this would expand choice of venue to literally hundreds of thousands. There was now a panoply of outlets everyone could choose from. The Fairness Doctrine was obsolete. Everybody's opinion could find an outlet and those most wanted would get more exposure.

Then along came talk radio. This was a lifesaver for AM radio. Most talk radio ended up being Conservative. A few Liberal / Leftist stations tried to compete but found little audience. The Left went elsewhere for their news and information.

But the Left couldn't stand that AM talk radio for the Right existed at all. Thus, the Left and Progressives demanded a return to the Fairness Doctrine to shut Right wing talk radio down. So far, that hasn't worked. If the Fairness Doctrine were in place, and the FCC could regulate the Internet, this very board wouldn't exist simply because somebody could complain that by word count, post count, whatever measure you want to use, some side of an argument wasn't getting equal time on the board.

The Fairness Doctrine in our current world is a pile of bullshit meant to restrict speech.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The Fairness Doctrine did not increase freedom of speech, it restricted it, severely restricted it. Why you ask?

The Fairness Doctrine, in short, said that any media outlet--television, radio, whatever--the FCC had regulatory control over had to, by force of law, provide equal time for each side of an issue. This meant that if a radio station put a Republican on for 15 minutes, a Democrat had to be given the opportunity to have 15 minutes as well. Left, Right, Up, Down, whatever your political position was, the opposite one had to have equal time.

Now, that sounds all fair and wonderful doesn't it? Well, in reality it didn't work. Finding two opposing positions wasn't always possible. But it was possible that if a station put on some particular view then out of the woodwork would come someone claiming they needed equal time to present the opposite view--at the station's expense of course, or else (eg., a lawsuit). All of this resulted in stations simply refusing to put anyone on that was foisting an opinion as that was the only way to avoid being sued for not giving equal time.

Thus, speech was severely restricted. The reason the Fairness Doctrine was established to begin with was back in the day there were only three TV networks (well, there was PBS too, but nobody watched it). The same went for radio. In most locales there were a limited number of mostly AM stations to choose from.

By Reagan's time in office this had changed. Cable TV was widespread with now dozens, and moving towards hundreds, of channels. Radio had expanded to FM and there were often twice as many, or more choices to be had. The internet was on the horizon, and this would expand choice of venue to literally hundreds of thousands. There was now a panoply of outlets everyone could choose from. The Fairness Doctrine was obsolete. Everybody's opinion could find an outlet and those most wanted would get more exposure.

Then along came talk radio. This was a lifesaver for AM radio. Most talk radio ended up being Conservative. A few Liberal / Leftist stations tried to compete but found little audience. The Left went elsewhere for their news and information.

But the Left couldn't stand that AM talk radio for the Right existed at all. Thus, the Left and Progressives demanded a return to the Fairness Doctrine to shut Right wing talk radio down. So far, that hasn't worked. If the Fairness Doctrine were in place, and the FCC could regulate the Internet, this very board wouldn't exist simply because somebody could complain that by word count, post count, whatever measure you want to use, some side of an argument wasn't getting equal time on the board.

The Fairness Doctrine in our current world is a pile of bullshit meant to restrict speech.
Click to expand...

Without the fairness doctrine most of the media went further Left & some went more Republican.

A true disaster for the USA.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The Fairness Doctrine did not increase freedom of speech, it restricted it, severely restricted it. Why you ask?

The Fairness Doctrine, in short, said that any media outlet--television, radio, whatever--the FCC had regulatory control over had to, by force of law, provide equal time for each side of an issue. This meant that if a radio station put a Republican on for 15 minutes, a Democrat had to be given the opportunity to have 15 minutes as well. Left, Right, Up, Down, whatever your political position was, the opposite one had to have equal time.

Now, that sounds all fair and wonderful doesn't it? Well, in reality it didn't work. Finding two opposing positions wasn't always possible. But it was possible that if a station put on some particular view then out of the woodwork would come someone claiming they needed equal time to present the opposite view--at the station's expense of course, or else (eg., a lawsuit). All of this resulted in stations simply refusing to put anyone on that was foisting an opinion as that was the only way to avoid being sued for not giving equal time.

Thus, speech was severely restricted. The reason the Fairness Doctrine was established to begin with was back in the day there were only three TV networks (well, there was PBS too, but nobody watched it). The same went for radio. In most locales there were a limited number of mostly AM stations to choose from.

By Reagan's time in office this had changed. Cable TV was widespread with now dozens, and moving towards hundreds, of channels. Radio had expanded to FM and there were often twice as many, or more choices to be had. The internet was on the horizon, and this would expand choice of venue to literally hundreds of thousands. There was now a panoply of outlets everyone could choose from. The Fairness Doctrine was obsolete. Everybody's opinion could find an outlet and those most wanted would get more exposure.

Then along came talk radio. This was a lifesaver for AM radio. Most talk radio ended up being Conservative. A few Liberal / Leftist stations tried to compete but found little audience. The Left went elsewhere for their news and information.

But the Left couldn't stand that AM talk radio for the Right existed at all. Thus, the Left and Progressives demanded a return to the Fairness Doctrine to shut Right wing talk radio down. So far, that hasn't worked. If the Fairness Doctrine were in place, and the FCC could regulate the Internet, this very board wouldn't exist simply because somebody could complain that by word count, post count, whatever measure you want to use, some side of an argument wasn't getting equal time on the board.

The Fairness Doctrine in our current world is a pile of bullshit meant to restrict speech.
Click to expand...




A pile of right wing crap


Lies are not news


Lies destroy a democracy


Your side lies and cheats non stop



You deny COURT FINDINGS

you deny SCIENCE


you deny KNOWN HISTORY



You deny MATH


you lie


And yes real Americans will always fight lies


No matter how much that ruins your evil plans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top