Sucking up will get you no where.I thought you left?

edit: Huh. Apparently posting a photo compilation of some of the nasty things Manveer Heir has said on Twitter is breaking the rules (despite the fact that nobody paid attention to it anyway), so yay, I get to edit this or get banned for 48 hours. :-)

Nothing is funnier then a Trump fanboy screaming about people being intolerant of other people's opinion,given that if you offer any Crittcism of Trump. they go bonkers.
ANyway this thread is evidence of why Game or Movie websites are the worst places on the Internet to have political discussions. It is all about posturing and blindly supporting one side or the other,no discussion of real issues.
Ya know, it iis possiblt to think the Both Trump and a lot of his critics both suck.

Mmmm, the salt...

There's one thing funnier: the thought of you suffering all the way through the next 8 years of Trump's presidency.

b(￣▽￣*)

News just in, Trump's hair DNA tested and revealed to be orangutan pubic fur.

Sheeeeeeit! Imma crawl up in fetal position and cry myself to sleep (after making a long winded post about how I'm never, ever, ever returning to this forum because Kleetus hath insulted the Great American Caesar! The effrontery!

Remember when I told you it was a bad idea to bump this thing?
This is why.

You Chinese sure do speaketh funny.

Reported for racism!

Nah, just kidding. If you get a warning from Fables, though, it wasn't me. Pinky swear!

New York Assemblyman Unveils Bill To Suppress Non-Government-Approved Free Speech

this aims to protect is the power to suppress speech — the power to force people (on pain of financial ruin) to stop talking about other people, when some government body decides that they should stop.

http://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A05323&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y



Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Here with Jones talking about it.

Never tire of your far reaching conspiracy theories, do you? The world is always just about to end.

This is the "right to be forgotten", same as it exists within the European Union if you want an example of what it would be like, you don't have to imagine doomsday scenarios. It doesn't have anything to do with a government censoring your speech, but with giving an individual the right to petition for his own personal information to be removed from websites, or at the very least be unindexed from search engines like Google, instead of having their embarassing teenage photos floating around on the internet forever.

Not that this matters at all, since it's a moot point. Even supporters of the right to be forgotten in the US recognize that this law is superceded by other federal protections, chief among them the First Amendment, and as such even if it was signed it would be struck down the first time someone tried to use it.

Besides, how would a NY law be enforced against a Silicon Valley company?

P.S.: The link you posted ranting about this is a literal copy/paste of the Washington Post opinion piece they linked as a demonstration of support for itself. I've seen plagiarism before, but this is the first time I've seen one cite sources.

In case you haven't noticed, Germany is doing heavy censoring of content. Arresting people and wanting to push 52 Million euro fines for anyone speaking out on what they don't want? It's just another way to legalize censorship and push away free speech, and silence criticism.

http://www.east-west-dichotomy.com/germany-5-to-50-million-euros-penalties-for-hateful-comments/

And it doesn't matter if it happens in NY, it will happen in California soon too, starts in places Democrats control and then rolled out everywhere else.

Besides, aren't most of the data servers in NY and CA? Not to mention Google Facebook and Twitter are rolling out heavier and heavier censorships. This is just the next step.

2 years ago Drudge warned everyone there were the votes required, in order to enforce copyright law. By this he means and he was very specific, that you couldn't even share links to other sites, that they would take those down under violating 'copyright'.

And do you really think the majority of people to use it will be individual citizens?This is a system to be abused by corporations and governments to shut down any and all voices of opposition. Let's take a simple example. The CDC puts out information that says what else is in their vaccines, and some of it includes human embryo lung tissue (from late aborted children?), Guinna pig cell cultures, bovine calf serum... (no seriously it's there!). The CDC puts out this information being required to do so, but bury it and don't make it easy to access. Other people point it out. Instantly they put out a requirement for them to remove it from all searches and to be noticed, and the sites that pointed it out too. Instant censorship! And it will never be found again because the sites that keep it up will be sued out of existence.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf

First of all, this has nothing to do with the "right to be forgotten", and second it's not to silence criticism, it's a fine to enforce previously existing laws against hate speech, in case someone refuses to comply. I know you never leave your bubble, but many, many countries around the world outlawed hate speech decades ago, it's not a brand new thing that came out of the culture wars we have now. In these places things like saying people of a certain race, creed, sexual preference or nationality are sub-humans, that they should be taken out, etc. is against the law, that's what it means.

Now you think that shouldn't be the case and all speech should be protected, even hate speech, then good for you, you live in a country that agrees with you, and any law that proposes otherwise is unconstitutional and will be struck down.

I have no argument against this, it's wild speculation.

For starters, again, this is pure speculation on your part. You're assuming that they want to hide this, and that they will try to sue people to accomplish it, but none of it is based on evidence, only on your belief. Never mind that this, however vague the law you showed may be, and it was, this wouldn't fall under it because the "right to be forgotten" applies to others spreading your personal information, and you can't invoke the right to be forgotten while you yourself continue to put that same information out there. As long as they are required by law to provide that information, they cannot ask anyone else to take it down.

Now, for the ingredients, and I'm probably going to surprise you here, I believe you. And immediately after I'll ask: "so what?"

The red dye used in many cookies and jams and desserts is made from cochineal beetles. That's what "natural ingredients" means, that it's not an artificial chemical created in a lab, and it usually came from some place very weird. Vaccines are no different.

Not to mention all the people who are implanted with pig heart valves every year, we're no strangers to using animals in medical procedures

If you mean the embryo tissue in particular, yeah, they are from aborted fetuses. Either after an induced abortion at a clinic, or after the fetus miscarriages. If the parents, grieving or not, don't wish to keep the remains and leave it in charge of the hospital, the remains will be used in the interest of medical science. Same as it happens with pretty much everyone else whose organs will be used to save people's lives. Considering that they only need a couple of cells in order to produce a culture to house the weakened virus in the vaccine, one sadly deceased fetus would help far more than just one person.

If you find this objectionable, even if the fetus whose cells is used in the vaccine miscarried through completely natural means, that's your moral prerrogative

The problem is that conspiracy theorists read this and instantly assume that there is a vast government conspiracy to kill babies in order to fuel vaccines, which in turn they will use to brainwash people.

Guys at least try to keep to the new rules for a month. I'm referring to personal attacks. Less ''you''s and more ''that''s please.

And rtcvb please just post a link and try to discuss it rather than posting so many and not talking about them at all. Also, what will it take to discredit Alex Jones for you? The guy predicts some sort of apocalypse every 2 weeks and nothing happens. Fool you once, shame on him but not being even slightly doubtful of what he says after all he's said is beyond unreasonable.

That was pretty mild as far as this forum is concerned, but sure, I'll remove any personal attacks.

I admit, no one in this forum has pushed my buttons as much as rtcvb, and I let it get the best of me sometimes.

However, and I'll fully incur any moderation wrath that may come for stating this, I find the behaviour and the type of discourse he has displayed in this thread to be one of the most morally reprehensible things I have ever seen in this forum. It's much easier to tell a lie than to disprove one, and he has taken advantage of that in the past by dodging countering claims and dumping links, and even when he does respond he so often relies on anecdotes and more links that are either false, simple conjecture, or entirely unrelated to the matter at hand, thus stretching the other debater thin by forcing him to debate an ever greater number of claims. A passing reader might read his bold claims and their accompanying source and take them at face value, without ever checking his source, or verifying the sources behind the articles he posts, and come out misinformed. I believe this to be deceitful, insidious, and even dangerous.


What I want more than anything is for it to stop. I don't expect him to change his behaviour, so all I can do is swallow my pride, accept that this will continue, and not bump this again at the risk of allowing something I might know to be wrong to go unchallenged.