Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy

In 2012, Milo Yiannopoulos Argued for ‘Bolder’ Censure and the Banning of Trolls From the Internet
“The internet is turning is all into sociopaths“:

So perhaps what’s needed now is a bolder form of censure after all, becausethe internet is not a universal human right. If people cannot be trusted to treat one another with respect, dignity and consideration, perhaps they deserve to have their online freedoms curtailed.For sure, the best we could ever hope for is a smattering of unpopular show trials. But if the internet, ubiquitous as it now is, proves too dangerous in the hands of the psychologically fragile, perhaps access to it ought to be restricted.We ban drunks from driving because they’re a danger to others. Isn’t it time we did the same to trolls?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=nCFonzQbC0E
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

my birthday is "world day against cyber censorship".

Good bait. Lots of retards will probably respond as though this is a serious suggestion.

He actually said this though... How the hell is it bait

trump supports respond to any serious argument with "cuck" or "bait". This is why they support a canidate who things global warming is a chinese hoax. Nothing will sway their deep-seated rust/bible belt stupidity.

Im a conservative atheist actually and a huge trump supporter. Thing is, why cant a man have an opinion? Also to add we trust scientist way to much and usually claim it as fact without question. Maybe we should look at the statistics further and how they do so

This was brought up in an interview with Milo and he said that he stands by it.

Create two or mor versions of inter web.
Me for conservative pussies
One for commerce, legit security and minimal access.
One for psychopaths and free willed, free thinking normal folks
Problem solved

Congratulations, you now realize that Milo is first and foremost an attention-seeker trying to build his brand.

Sauce?

Dude, the data is there. I promise. Anyone from the UN to NASA has released comprehensive data that THIS IS HAPPENING. We are now feeling the effects of the climate change right now. These are the hottest six months on record. Its just not a scientist, its the vast majority (97%). Yet somehow, the leading republican nominee manages to rally a population that thinks its just a big coincidence/hoax. Its fucking sad and pathetic. Why can't a man have an opinion? Because this isn't an opinion. You don't "believe" in global warming like American headlines like to say.

Doesn't matter, Twitter is still biased

Hmmm. I guess he changed his mind.

He changed his mind! Destroy him!
NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO CHANGE HIS MIND

...

conservatives love changing their mind. "gays are good now!! hehe! our years of pretending to hate them worked out eh?"

dumb fucks.

All I am saying is that we trust scientists a bit to much and we need to understand and try to validate their data more. Do I agree with Trump on that one issue? No I do not. But I believe in his politics, not his scientific beliefs

You dishonest piece of shit.

That is the far right religious people. The right has supported gays just as much as democrats.

But if you wanna play that game fine, your leftys want censorship of different harmful opinions

Honestly i think even if researchers gave you more specifix data you still would doubt it. Just give it up

If you lose to something, you usually pick up a strategy that wins, no?

I dont as I believe in global warming etc. Again im scientifically minded, I just want to say that we trust scientists and never really go against them on data. Thats all

How much longer do we have to validate? How many more glaciers melting? How many more coral reefs collapsing?

These scientist don't have an agenda. They are just a bunch of fucking nerds who are pulling their hair as they watch us destroy our selves.

I like some of trump's policies too. I like the thought of high tariffs on goods imported by American companies that take their labor outside the country. I think ISIS is a plague on the middle east and must be dealt with immediately. But on this, on this I cannot budge. This is double jeopardy, by far the most important and challenging issue of the next 2-3 election cycles. I cannot respect anyone who willingly ignores this information.

top kek. Trump supporter? I'm a giant flaming liberal. SJW straw men aside, it's not hard to figure out that trying to regulate Internet speech is pants on head retarded.

And Hillary and Berni supports respond with " are you kidding me" or " Trump is literally hitler"

The issue with your entire statement is that you're comparing drunk drivers who have the ability to kill innocent people to dipshits online who only have the ability to hurt someone's feelings. I do not believe that anyone's rights or privileges ought to be curtailed due to someone elses hurt feelings or ego. That shows weakness on their part and is therefore their own personal problem. It is not societies responsibility to protect these wet vaginas by purging the internet of dicks.

Also fuck Milo and Harambe.

I don't care if some retard actually said this thing. You can find someone to say Elvis is alive. It's still retarded and therefore bait.

Geez, more shit from the lesbian femtwits.

You're an ugly cunt. Nobody loves you. And Ghostbusters is a piece of feminist shit.

Now go kill yourself.

Um i think it was msnbc

As the original poster if that comment I agree, and I am sorry to have made this comment without much validation. Thing is, I support trump on the same things you do, including immigrant issues and obamacare as a failure.

All I am saying is that we not to look at his scientific beliefs as to we need to look at what is going to fix the economy, relations, and the growing divide in America. To me that is the most important, and improtant to my son and daughter growing up on this planet.

He needs to change his view on climate change, I believe you

Op here, that is from milos article not me

You're forgetting to mention the larger hypocrisy of conservative ideology going on with this issue.

>private businesses should be able to discriminate against their customers
>unless they discriminate against conservatives, then it's wrong

But then again, asking a conservative to understand hypocrisy is like asking a fish to climb a tree.

You do know that scientists still operate on a margin of error right? All that bull mess about climate change, is open to alot of interpretation. The doom and gloom is only one outcome out of a ton

>Im a conservative atheist actually and a huge trump supporter
You didn't have to add the second half of that sentence

He was saying that because he is not a religious right wing nut

>The right has supported gays just as much as democrats.
See you have no idea what the fuck you're even saying. The opposite of right isn't dem you tard.

Faggot whats your address ill fuck you up

Hillary is a crook. I hate having to vote for her. Me and millions of other liberals will begrudingly go to the polls and vote for a female nixon. I almost don't want to vote for her because I don't want blood on my hands. I don't want another Iraq, where history blames "misleading intelligence" as the reason for a war. I hate everything about her, but at least she pretends to give a minor shit about the future of our children in regards to climate change. I think trump has a real chance at the white house if he moves closer to the center.

>trust scientists a bit to much
Who? The average Burger is scared of education and intellectualism. You faggots have creationist museums.
>we need to understand and try to validate their data more
That's literally what other scientists do you mongoloid. If you do the same thing, you'd also be a fucking scientists.

He's a retard. Bait isn't determined by whether or not you can find some moron to make ridiculous claims, it's determined by whether an idea is even reasonable enough to be taken seriously.

I have no doubt you could find someone who really thinks Aliens control the Chinese government. It's still bait.

>we trust scientists a bit to much and we need to understand and try to validate their data more.
...so you want, say, a scientific researcher to validate/critique another researcher through, say, a peer reviewed journals? What an insightful and not at all oblivious comment.

Check yer dad's boipussy mate

Scientists go through the harshest evaluation of their data. Reviewed articles actually have to make sense. I mean, it's being done already what you're suggesting.

Who should validate and understand their data? Some of these?
>commoners? politicians? industry?
Or one who has immerse knowledge of the subject, someone like say another scientist?

The whole climate change thing brings to mind the fact that just because they are scientists this means they are infallible. They are not. Plenty of scientific studies have been proven wrong, ones that were applauded in their day.

find me a reputable one in regards to climate change. I beg you.

I thought this was Hypocrisy!

youtube.com/watch?v=nCFonzQbC0E

>faggot
>loves fucking nonwhites
>thinks circumcision is a good thing
>believes in christianity
>jewish heritage

MANY KEKS HERE!!!!! RETARD CURRENTLY GETTING BTFO FOR POSTING ABOUT HIS CRIMES FROM JAIL

>>faggot
>>loves fucking nonwhites
>>thinks circumcision is a good thing
>>believes in christianity
>>jewish heritage

>jewish heritage

so at least there's one good thing about him, right?

No because you can identify anything as being a troll. Online harassment should be treated as now different than blowing up somebody's phone. Anything else is just a difference of opinion and the idea of regulating discourse because of my fee-fees is disgusting.

A reputable what? Be less vague