You have no RIGHT to post on JPP, social media, or anywhere else that you did not cre

Perhaps if people displayed more intelligence they could avoid being banned. You don't like the lines that are drawn, but on the other hand we think
you are a reprehensible hate filled disgusting lying slimebag foreign sympathizing dissident paid traitor with no redeeming value and no information of any literary, artistic or scientific value whatsoever.


So...who exactly is being injured here, fuckstick??

Trolling. insult fallacies. No argument presented.
 
It’s not suppressing our speech because we understand how elections work
Apparently you don't. You think election fraud is an election. You think the President is elected by popular vote.
and we don’t follow a fucking baby who believes the only way he can lose is if the election is stolen
You can't steal what never took place. Election fraud is not an election.
.. while at the same time being one of the most hated men on planet earth.
You don't get to speak for everyone on Earth. You are not God.
We believe in facts and science.
Since you believe Biden's ideals are the True Way, you believe in:
The Church of Global Warming.
The Church of Green.
The Church of Covid.
The Church of Karl Marx.

Every single one of these religions deny science. They also deny mathematics.

Science is not facts. Science is not a religion. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Learn what 'fact' means. it does not mean 'proof' or 'Universal Truth'.
Doublespeak.


You believe in trump .. period.

WRONG. I support republics. I support government by constitution (what a republic is). Trump also supports the same thing.

YOU do not recognize the Constitution of the United States nor the constitution of any State. You deny science. You deny mathematics.
 
It is hard for some of you to understand how this should work, but it is simple to grasp if you apply the rules that existed when Alexander Graham Bell started the phone system.

He could have regulated the content and conduct of the discussions but he believed that his invention was simply a device which enabled the 1st Amendment rights to be exercised. He did not have the right to use his machine to abridge the rights of the users to say whatever they wished.

How Bell interpreted how his invention was to be used has little to no bearing on how communication takes place today it’s very simple, adhere to the rules. You don’t get to say any dumb ass thing you want. If you can’t do that, build your own system, but even then, you’ll be restricted by what’s in the best interest of the public and the nation. Only babies can’t grasp that simple concept.
 
Apparently you don't. You think election fraud is an election. You think the President is elected by popular vote.

You can't steal what never took place. Election fraud is not an election.

You don't get to speak for everyone on Earth. You are not God.

Since you believe Biden's ideals are the True Way, you believe in:
The Church of Global Warming.
The Church of Green.
The Church of Covid.
The Church of Karl Marx.

Every single one of these religions deny science. They also deny mathematics.

Science is not facts. Science is not a religion. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Learn what 'fact' means. it does not mean 'proof' or 'Universal Truth'.
Doublespeak.




WRONG. I support republics. I support government by constitution (what a republic is). Trump also supports the same thing.

YOU do not recognize the Constitution of the United States nor the constitution of any State. You deny science. You deny mathematics.

I have neither the time nor interest in reading through your butt-hurt ignorance .. and ignorance is all it is. Do yourself a favor and don’t waste time posting ignorance to me that I have no interest in reading. You are completely incapable of posting serious adult thought. Thanks for playing
 
How Bell interpreted how his invention was to be used has little to no bearing on how communication takes place today it’s very simple, adhere to the rules. You don’t get to say any dumb ass thing you want. If you can’t do that, build your own system, but even then, you’ll be restricted by what’s in the best interest of the public and the nation. Only babies can’t grasp that simple concept.

I respectfully disagree.

The right of free speech is inalienable. Any device or system which conveys communications should be required to operate in the PUBLIC'S best interests, not the device manufacturer's best interests. They provide the ability for us to do what is protected by the 1st Amendment. They have no right, in my book, to infringe my 1st Amendment right simply because they provide the means of my communicating.

Once again, it would have been as if A G Bell had regulated what was permissible to be spoken or conveyed on his telephone, the device he created back then which was THE latest innovation and hi tech gadget there was at the time.

He acted to provide what the hi tech companies should restrict themselves to providing, a conveyance for our expression of our 1st A rights. Not as a regulator or judge or censor.

If they want them revenue that comes from providing a conveyance of our communications, fine. But they should not expect to also be able to control what we say.

That is an outrageous assumption they make and I would hope that premise of theirs is smacked down or reversed if it has been made into law.
 
Last edited:

Into the Night
Verified User

This message is hidden because Into the Night is on your ignore list.


Horz_Cover_Art_small.jpg
 
It's not that this overgrown baby can't grasp the concept. It's that he disagrees with the assumption that we are able to surrender our rights of free speech just because we use their equipment.

That might be like the construction company that built the highway you travel, could assume they have the right to control anything about your travel on that road they built.

Your speed, how many people could be in your vehicle, what music you listen to or if they wanted you to drive in silence, they should have that right, if we applied your argument to highway construction, for example.
 
It's not that this overgrown baby can't grasp the concept. It's that he disagrees with the assumption that we are able to surrender our rights of free speech just because we use their equipment.

That might be like the construction company that built the highway you travel, could assume they have the right to control anything about your travel on that road they built.

Your speed, how many people could be in your vehicle, what music you listen to or if they wanted you to drive in silence, they should have that right, if we applied your argument to highway construction, for example.

I was thinking that hospitals, using their perverse logic, could refuse to treat people because of their political affiliations.
 
The ADL rarely has lawsuits. How would they threaten you if you had a darknet site? It would be impossible to track you down. You story does not make sense. I am calling it a lie.

I said they threatened one, and they do that a lot.

I own a dot onion site and dot onion sites are indexed.
 
Are we allowed to know what type of content is on your website?

There are plenty of any kind of discussion forums on the Darknet. Lots of banned shit on the Darknet. People have been on Darknet (when they're not using VPN) in countries where the contents are banned. Think Wikileaks.
 
There are plenty of any kind of discussion forums on the Darknet. Lots of banned shit on the Darknet. People have been on Darknet (when they're not using VPN) in countries where the contents are banned. Think Wikileaks.

How would you know? If you don't know what dot onion is then you've never been on the darkweb.
 
Back
Top