Why does Tucows have a problem with registering domains for sites with "hateful opinions" which is legal in the US but does not have a problem registering the domains of sites whose organizations actively promote and advocate for men having sex with young boys aka pedophila and pederasty which is not legal in the US?
Any other examples of tech companies having hypocritical stances as soon as you do any digging into their customer base?
Other urls found in this thread:
Nambla isn't destabilizing your hellhole country at the moment.
It's not hypocrisy if they like pedos and dislike racism. I assume this describes most of the left.
>acting surprised that liberals turn a blind eye to pedos
>pedos
>not ruining a country
yeah ok
Neither is the so calles alt-right.
The Antifa does. The alt-righters would be peaceful if they would be let alone.
Baboons like BLM have raided and looted whole neighbourhoods in the past, Antifa too (see germany, G20 - catastrophic, war-like).
And nambla is pedo-stuff. Should be on the darknet if ever.
>And nambla is pedo-stuff. Should be on the darknet if ever.
Why does the US government allow these sites to remain on the clearnet? NAMBLA members would probably be on an FBI watchlist, so why are they allowed to have a site easily visible to minors?
This. It should be well known by now that if you're a liberal you're a pedophile at a minimum. They've been trying to normalize it for years
They are right though. Racism is about spreading hate, pedophilia is about spreading love.
While hypocritical, it's not so much about the actual ideology of the company, as much as bashing neo-nazis (and alt-right by association) is the current popular thing to do.
Most people can barely articulate an understanding of the situation beyond "muh nazis" and "white supremacy", and eat it up whenever they see something about a company speaking against neo-nazis.
Probably ties to the Clinton Foundation for fresh children supply.
Have to get the child-sacrifices from somewhere.
>Racism is about spreading hate, pedophilia is about spreading love.
lol ok pedo
Children can't fall in love, and have no idea what they are doing with a man. The man is typically using them for sex.
>implying women have never molested or raped children
Feminazi logic
The conversation was about men, but yes, women do it too. They usually insert objects into children since they don't have a penis.
>feminazi
what a strange conclusion to draw from my post
>pedos
>not destabilizing entire generations of children
anyone who agrees with tucows is a soft pedo at the very least
because one opinion has lots of media coverage, while the other does not
>media coverage
who controls the media?
SJWs are against paedophilia and anime (because as they claim anime promotes paedophilia).
They just look at pictures on their PCs, how are they ruining any country?
>The Antifa does
How so? They just have a different political ideology.
>And nambla is pedo-stuff. Should be on the darknet if ever.
I don't really know what they are about but if they did post CP it would not be on clearnet.
Dailystormer is back under Namecheap and some Chicago-based anti-DDOS provider. Namecheap and the DDos provider have both stated they're supporting Dailystormer under the ground of free speech and human rights. Thank the lord some companies still realize Human Rights matter over politics and feelings. I don't want to go down a slippery slope like this...
>Children can't fall in love
I fell in love multiple times when I was a child.
>The alt-righters would be peaceful if they would be let alone.
I am a WWII survivor and I can assure you that people would be peaceful if nazis didn't want to crush their homes, rights, and democracy.
>How so? They just have a different political ideology.
they break other peoples things. "nazis" only shitpost on internet and do no real damage like those antifa people do.
BTFO, Sup Forums tard
>they break other peoples things
Antifascists break other people's things? Most people in the world will identify as anti fascists yet they don't do that.
>"nazis" only shitpost on internet and do no real damage like those antifa people do.
Except beating niggers and Albanians at the streets.
Hopefully pedos, SJWs, and Sup Forumsfaggots die in the upcoming civil war.
Sage for Sup Forums thread.
Did a pedo rape your daughter or something? Most pedos don't even talk to children.
>They just look at pictures on their PCs
Yeah, keep telling yourself that retard
>Antifascists break other people's things?
yes. they do things like break windows and burn cars.
>incitement to violence
>don't post any examples
hmmm really makes you think. and yes the onus is on them to provide evidence because they held an investigation and declared that they were inciting violence. so they should be able to easily copy paste such examples.
>most people break windows and burn cars
???
>How so?
antifa is a terrorist organization and seeks to create a government change, by force if necessary
>Most pedos don't even talk to children.
Cause they're too busy raping them
>Chicago-based
Won't be standing on principle very long then.
>antifa is a terrorist organization
Are you claiming that most people in the world belong in a terrorist organisation?
most people in the world don't want to live in a commie hellhole, so they are on our side.
This is called political repressions, deal with it.
ANTIFA is regarded as a terrorist organization by the NJ department of homeland security. not a strawman.
Most pedos don't rape children.
>most people identify as anti-fascist
Most people don't wear black masks and carry red flags and bats to "peaceful protests". You know damn well who we're talking about.
i didnt know that most people are drug using terrorists.. (those people using the red and black flag logo thing)
>Being intentionally retarded
We're talking about your faggy little Black Bloc.
>You know damn well who we're talking about.
Not really. A poltard earlier today claimed that because in a bug issue a tor maintainer said that she was antifascist means that she is antifa.
>Not distributing neo-nazi content is a violation of human rights
>poltard
Oh look, an outsider.
You would think sometime in the last five years agitpropers would have learned how /board titles/ work.
Is this supposed to be an argument?
You know ANTIFA. The communist group that is old as the Nazis themselves.
No, not allowing the distribution of content because of ANY ideology is a violation of human rights, and taking sides in a political battle and using your narrative as a reason to silence differing opinions is repulsive. Go back to .
>free speech is a human right
QED
>b-b-but muh hate speech
Free speech is a natural right pertaining to expression. It includes political action, discussion, and any other form of expression that does not directly interfere with the natural rights of others. As such, all speech is a subset of free speech.
Hate speech is a subset of speech, which offends some groups. As a subset of speech, it is a subset of free speech.
Hate speech is free speech.
dailystormer.lol looks like they moved to namecheap, they're still on west EU/US providers, just bitching with nothing accomplished
No, it's a simple observation. I'm glad we can agree you're an outside agitpropper.
>lol ok pedo
That was the joke, idiot.
>most terrorists don't kill people
What's an agitpropper?
Also, why are you posting r eddit pictures?
>I'm glad we can agree
It seems that you can't read. I did not agree to anything.
>Cause they're too busy raping them
Only the "Asian" ones in Britain.
Oops meant for
Actually it would be closer to saying that most Mohammedists don't kill people.
>What's agitprop
I'm glad you asked, my closeted leftist friend! Why, such a simple Google search could answer your question, one is almost led to believe you're feigning ignorance!
>why are you posting screencaps of an organized leftist reddit raid on Sup Forums
Oh my, we might need to use a little logicial deduction. I accused you of being an outsider spreading political propaganda and discontent. I posted pictures of an organized campaign of outsiders doing exactly that. Perhaps you could connect the two?
You're cornered, skookums.
>No, not allowing the distribution of content because of ANY ideology is a violation of human rights
So if you ask me to distribute nazi propaganda and I say 'no', then I'm in violation of your human rights?
By the logic of civil rights activists, yes. You have to bake me the cake you Nazi biggot.
>I am a WW2 survivor
Posting on Sup Forums?
SJWs have badly conflated speech with actions such that hate speech is now violence
Action can be free speech. Violence cannot, as it interferes with the natural rights of others. The only case in which a natural right allows you to violate the rights of another is self defense.
If you're a big corporation like Google, or GoDaddy, or some other horrible multi-billion dollar (and/or) government-backed organization, then you are setting a precedence that it's OK to impede on a person's rights if their viewpoints don't match my own. They certainly have the rights as a private company to run their business as they please, but creating a narrative like this will make it possible for governments of the future to impede on ANY speech, including the type you might support.
Isn't being a defender of free speech also a civil rights issue which would arouse civil rights activists to act?
I'm also not in favour of the whole "bake my cake" thing, but that's because I think that it's incongruent with the principles of J.S Mill's liberal theory. But the cake thing, to my knowledge, is based on the idea of protected classes - and Nazis/Communists/etc. are not recgonised as such.
Not really; Marcuse's essay in "A Critique of Pure Tolerance" is worth reading on this point. Speech isn't conflated with action, but rather, the distance between speech and action in some circumstances is vanishingly small which is enough to give it serious consideration as incitement of action.
>natural rights
needed this kek today
>The only case
"It's this way because I say it is!"
>only argument is reddit tier "kek"
sure showed me
Six companies, that almost five are in bed with the DNC.
Those companies would have benefited a lot from the TPP.
>Most people in the world will identify as anti fascists yet they don't do that.
Nobody knows what fascism means in these days.
They only know that "a evil thing" and they should oppose to it.
My god, for some leftist intellectuals, talking to the middle class is fascism. That would be the end of any modern political party if they do that in this era.
>some other ... organisation
Why does who I am matter to what rights I have in the private sphere of action?
>then you are setting a precedence that it's OK to impede on a person's rights if their viewpoints don't match my own
No I'm not. I'm not impeding on your rights by refusing your usage of my private sphere. You don't have any right by default.
>but creating a narrative like this will make it possible for governments of the future
What "narrative"? I am merely exercising my rights, just as you exercise yours. Unless you think that liberal rights are a "narrative". You're using a slippery slope fallacy, too.
My main issue is that when people take the Internet as it is presented to them without looking further, just as Marx says the economy presents itself as a vast array of commodities, the Internet presents itself as various parties that control speech. The only solution to this is decentralisation.
I have commented elsewhere on this:
>it's partly out of the fact that we're using centralised technology to share ideas. It's right to be concerned when the discourse is controlled by a small number of peoeple who act out of the desire for profit, which is what's happening here. The quicker we can dispense of the idea that the "popular" Internet offers a "free market of ideas", the quicker we'll see people losing trust in the controllers of the "popular" Internet, from Youtube to domain registrars.
As such, the main discourse being controlled by few people is well within their rights to do so, but it's the perogative of the people against this commodification of particular viewpoints at the expense of others (if I may borrow from the bourgeois "free market of ideas" idea) to begin to resist this.
Registrar etc. can do as it pleases; the solution isn't to chastise the registrar for its decision to use its rights, rather it is to become disillusioned with centralisation.
It wasn't an argument. I see no evidence that natural rights exist.
>believing in natural rights
Do you also believe in Aquina's labor value theory or in the fifth ways to know God too?
All of this shit is an organized effort on behalf of the US government to control the internet. Trump and the Republicans are inching their way towards deprecating the FCC and the Democrats and Liberal Extremists are actively censoring under the guise of "concerned citizens". Don't be fooled my niggers, this isn't a party thing. This is an all out assault on our access to information, by a government scared shitless of being exposed.
If corporations can legally have some level of first amendment rights how come they have the complete freedom to disregard others that are exercising their freedom of speech on their public facing services? It's funny how it's a one way street just because one side has the money to ensure their rights are enumerated
Really makes me thienk
Because it's not a crime to be a pedophile, only to act on it. "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." is the core tenet behind any advocacy groups, NAMBLA included, being allowed to remain.
Because the first amendment is just a limitation to what the gov can do.
>stormfags cucked from their safe space
Wow I believe in Kek now.
see pic related
What the government is limited to against """""people"""""""
Corporations are people to some extent as well according to the fun rulings in the Supreme Court
They're only people when it's convenient for them
So, an apology is in order, for the whole "gay wedding cake" fiasco? I mean, if Google can pick and choose......
The gov can't go after you if you say "fuck the niggers" but shitty companies can refuse to hire you.
I see no hypocrisy here, stormfags are worse than pedos.
>xD
yes but the hypocrisy is this:
Corporations expect that the gov will not make laws limiting their freedom of speech as corporate entities
Yet they have no respect for freedom of speech for others (sure, they're not legally bound to but it's definitely hypocrisy)
I will agree to that.
isn't this political persecution and much much illegal?
Its like when the US persecuted wikileaks all over the world.
I have no argument against the rights of private corporations, but it does concern me to see them use narratives as a means to gain finances from MSM exposure when the point in question relates to whether it's OK to silence opinions that you don't agree with. Specific political preference has absolutely nothing to do with it.
is this what Sup Forums looks like?
>So, an apology is in order, for the whole
not really because iirc they're trying to pin him on anti-discriminatory business laws for race, gender, sex, ethnicity (even though being a homo doesn't fall into those specifically)
So technically, if Stormwhatever started a religion (which seems to be the latest legal meem) they probably could qualify for those same anti-discrimination laws and have a case against the bandwagon that dropped them
tl;dr alt-right should look into becoming religion or sexual identity
keep Sup Forums in Sup Forums
this is equivelant of youtubers complaining about being taken down. dont like it host it yourself no one is stopping you.
>is
was
>the right rapes kids for centuries
>lol its fine, jesus christ would have wanted it
>the left rapes kids and gets caught
>EVERYONE KNOWS THE LEFT ARE PEDOS FUCK ALL LIBTARDS
how cute
you say this like google isn't a regulated monopoly that has a huge power to censor and is generally regarded as the go to public platform
are we still memeing free market?
if the megacorps are doing what they want that means the majority is affected, whether you're a special snowflake that uses non mainstream services is irrelevant
the internet has existed for a long time before google, and it will outlast it as well. You don't need google to host your own content or for others to find it. It isn't a monopoly when there are other choices and people are free to use those, except they choose not to.
You are not entitled to eyeballs from a platform solely because people choose to be in mass on that platform. No one will stop you from hosting your own content and broadcasting it yourself. This applies to everyone, youtubers, Sup Forumstards, lefty reddit users or sexual predators, idgaf, you're not entitled to anything. Host it yourself.
>stormfags are worse than pedos.
nice bait
>It's not hypocrisy if they like pedos and dislike racism. I assume this describes most of the left.
this guy is telling it how it is
Heck you can sing Hiel hitler in India and no one cares.
leftists also support immigration, so I can see them supporting pedophilia as well.
Neither is the Daily Stormer. To destabilize a country you would need more reach. Like CNN, who promote dangerous conspiracy theories and violent terrorist groups.
Anyway, OP says "Hypocrisy", but since I've never seen people on the left denounce child rape, I'm not sure it's "hypocritical". It seems rather consistent really.
Human Rights are whatever you say they are. Some people believe in Free Speech, some don't.
>host it yourself no one is stopping you
ICANN is.
Good Night Alt Right And Anyone Who Disagrees With Fringe Communist Lunatics
rightists also support religion, so I can see them supporting pedophilia as well.
ICANN isn't stopping you from hosting anything you want.