When you brought this up previously, you linked to a "Conservative Treehouse" article. That article claimed that when Elon Musk purchased Twitter, he was going to reveal that the government was subsidizing it. Is that in the Twitter Files? I have not heard about any government subsidizing of Twitter. Unless you want to spin payment for time gathering data at the government's request as "subsidizing". But I was under the impression that the "subsidizing" was massive. NOT payments for gathering data (as per the law).
Google Search: "jordan peterson RFK Jr interview".
306k results.
1 result from Fox says "YouTube says it removed Jordan Peterson interview of RFK Jr. for violating vaccine policy".
Youtube: "Under our general vaccine misinformation policies, we remove false claims about currently administered vaccines that are approved and confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities and the WHO. This includes content that falsely alleges that approved vaccines are dangerous and cause chronic health effects, claims that vaccines do not reduce transmission or contraction of disease, or contains misinformation on the substances contained in vaccines will be removed. This would include content that falsely says that approved vaccines cause autism, cancer or infertility, or that substances in vaccines can track those who receive them".
Additionally -- As per the Fox article -- RFK JR TELLS JOE ROGAN HE HAS TO "BE CAREFUL" THE CIA DOESN'T ASSASSINATE HIM.
RFK Jr = nutjob.
I am not opposed to YouTube's decision to remove tinfoil hat nutter vaccine misinformation. It can still be posted on Rumble. Twitter and Rumble are private companies and have the right to make their own decisions re what they allow to be posted.
Is the Biden administration threatening Elon Musk? Are they threatening RFK Jr?
[Thom Hartmann, 5:10] ...with a virtual certainty I can say that ... it was the mob who killed Jack Kennedy. ... the mob the FBI was following these people ... Jack Van Laningham ... was the cell mate with Carlos Marcello for a number of years and he was an informant for the FBI. They were audio taping his conversations with Marcello. Marcello basically laid out how they did everything.
You said they were paid to censor. As opposed to paid for their time when the government requested information. As per the law. Law which does not say "we pay you, you censor".
Who in the CIA was convicted of ordering the hit on JFK?
They only provided the government with information? You mean, they only replied to all the government's requests for data to be taken down with "No!"? lol!
Even so, I knew Minus FJ's comment was not serious. The "LOL" gave it away. Also, AS IF he would agree there was no paying for "scrubbing".
If someone in the Biden administration saw something that violated the social media company's OWN policies, contacted the social media company to notify them of the violation, and then the social media company either agreed (and took it down) or disagreed (and left it up)... that is NOT paying for "scrubbing".
btw, as per Qtard's OWN ADMISSION, Qtard does not understand sarcasm. Why it keeps asking for a "banner" (I wrote what I did at the top of this post to mock Qtard). Sarcasm goes completely over Qtard's head. Qtard (due to it's very low intelligence) is unable to understand sarcasm.
Qtard: [Derish Sanders] ...sees nothing wrong with it.
I do see something wrong with it. Big time. "It" being Minus FJ's tinfoil hat "Twitter files" BS accusations. These accusations cost lives (re covid disinformation) or give unfair political advantage (re imaginary "scrubbing" to help Joe Biden).
Like when the Biden campaign complained about Russian disinformation concerning Hunter Biden's imaginary laptop (though I don't know how many, if any, social media posts were actually taken down).
\\I do see something wrong with it. Big time. "It" being Minus FJ's tinfoil hat "Twitter files" BS accusations. These accusations cost lives (re covid disinformation) or give unfair political advantage (re imaginary "scrubbing" to help Joe Biden).
Your lynch-trial attitudes is just your opinions, as you do not influence judges, and do not cost lives...
While Joe is guilty and fully respopnsible for... and it "cost lives"...
Go figure! :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
Clearly, that is TOO MUCH a hard task for such a miserly anonimous forigner to discern.
18 comments:
When you brought this up previously, you linked to a "Conservative Treehouse" article. That article claimed that when Elon Musk purchased Twitter, he was going to reveal that the government was subsidizing it. Is that in the Twitter Files? I have not heard about any government subsidizing of Twitter. Unless you want to spin payment for time gathering data at the government's request as "subsidizing". But I was under the impression that the "subsidizing" was massive. NOT payments for gathering data (as per the law).
Google Search: "jordan peterson RFK Jr interview".
306k results.
1 result from Fox says "YouTube says it removed Jordan Peterson interview of RFK Jr. for violating vaccine policy".
Youtube: "Under our general vaccine misinformation policies, we remove false claims about currently administered vaccines that are approved and confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities and the WHO. This includes content that falsely alleges that approved vaccines are dangerous and cause chronic health effects, claims that vaccines do not reduce transmission or contraction of disease, or contains misinformation on the substances contained in vaccines will be removed. This would include content that falsely says that approved vaccines cause autism, cancer or infertility, or that substances in vaccines can track those who receive them".
Additionally -- As per the Fox article -- RFK JR TELLS JOE ROGAN HE HAS TO "BE CAREFUL" THE CIA DOESN'T ASSASSINATE HIM.
RFK Jr = nutjob.
I am not opposed to YouTube's decision to remove tinfoil hat nutter vaccine misinformation. It can still be posted on Rumble. Twitter and Rumble are private companies and have the right to make their own decisions re what they allow to be posted.
Is the Biden administration threatening Elon Musk? Are they threatening RFK Jr?
"Be careful or we will assassinate you!"
Paying Twitter to censor isn't a subsidy? Who knew?
The CIA didn't assassinate JFK? Who knew? Why'd Ruby kill Oswald then?
...and didn't the mob get paid by CIA to kill Castro?
"Paying Twitter to censor isn't a subsidy? Who knew?"
Nobody but tin foil hatters. Because that never happened.
"The CIA didn't assassinate JFK?"
No.
Youtube transcript:
[Thom Hartmann, 5:10] ...with a virtual certainty I can say that ... it was the mob who killed Jack Kennedy. ... the mob the FBI was following these people ... Jack Van Laningham ... was the cell mate with Carlos Marcello for a number of years and he was an informant for the FBI. They were audio taping his conversations with Marcello. Marcello basically laid out how they did everything.
\\Blogger Dervish Sanders said...
"Paying Twitter to censor isn't a subsidy? Who knew?"
\\Nobody but tin foil hatters. Because that never happened.
And how it would be possible for you to know???
If censure ARE successful. ;-)
Twitter DIDN'T get paid? Who knew?
And the mob didn't get the CIA contract to kill Castro, too? Who knew?
Didn't the mob have the precise expertise that the CIA needed?
:)
:P
Minus: Twitter DIDN'T get paid? Who knew?
You said they were paid to censor. As opposed to paid for their time when the government requested information. As per the law. Law which does not say "we pay you, you censor".
Who in the CIA was convicted of ordering the hit on JFK?
They only provided the government with information? You mean, they only replied to all the government's requests for data to be taken down with "No!"? lol!
Your sarcasm is wasted on him.
That derp sees nothing wrong with it.
Means -- your sarcasm is his reality (small world, miniscule brains)
NO SARCASM BANNER!!
Even so, I knew Minus FJ's comment was not serious. The "LOL" gave it away. Also, AS IF he would agree there was no paying for "scrubbing".
If someone in the Biden administration saw something that violated the social media company's OWN policies, contacted the social media company to notify them of the violation, and then the social media company either agreed (and took it down) or disagreed (and left it up)... that is NOT paying for "scrubbing".
btw, as per Qtard's OWN ADMISSION, Qtard does not understand sarcasm. Why it keeps asking for a "banner" (I wrote what I did at the top of this post to mock Qtard). Sarcasm goes completely over Qtard's head. Qtard (due to it's very low intelligence) is unable to understand sarcasm.
Qtard: [Derish Sanders] ...sees nothing wrong with it.
I do see something wrong with it. Big time. "It" being Minus FJ's tinfoil hat "Twitter files" BS accusations. These accusations cost lives (re covid disinformation) or give unfair political advantage (re imaginary "scrubbing" to help Joe Biden).
Like when the Biden campaign complained about Russian disinformation concerning Hunter Biden's imaginary laptop (though I don't know how many, if any, social media posts were actually taken down).
So desperate...
I even started feeling need to pitty... that poor thing. Almost. :-))))))))))))))))))))
\\I do see something wrong with it. Big time. "It" being Minus FJ's tinfoil hat "Twitter files" BS accusations. These accusations cost lives (re covid disinformation) or give unfair political advantage (re imaginary "scrubbing" to help Joe Biden).
Your lynch-trial attitudes is just your opinions, as you do not influence judges, and do not cost lives...
While Joe is guilty and fully respopnsible for... and it "cost lives"...
Go figure! :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
Clearly, that is TOO MUCH a hard task for such a miserly anonimous forigner to discern.
No Derpy's ravings? ;-P
Post a Comment