Google is officially a threat to democracy. Executives exposed admitting the company is trying to ''prevent another 2016''

[Basil II the B.S]

And just to prove that liberals will call ''Nazis'' anyone they don't like, Google internal documents now show Ben Shapiro and Prager University being labeled as ''Nazis''.
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/...e-dogwhistles/

Shapiro in a sense deserves that. Because he hypocritically defended censorship so long that it applied to right wingers he also doesn't like. However as most predicted, this was never going to stop. Indeed now Shapiro is a target as well. What's really funny is that Liberals are in full force applying their favourite Brecht quote. ''First they came for Alex Jones...''

Next on the line is Bernie supporter Tim Pool, just as evidence that it will be everyone who doesn't completely surrender to this tragedy of an ideology. Time to step up and declare these people enemies of democracy. They are at the level of Salafists.

[Gaidin]

If veritas doesn’t like google that’s a point in google’s favor!

[Muizer]

@ Basil Yeah that's real bad. Would be a justified complaint if it came from someone who does not habitually make posters complicit in the words and actions of left wing radicals. 'Your side this, your side that'. You're in no position to accuse people of such tactics.

[conon394]

And just to prove that liberals will call ''Nazis'' anyone they don't like, Google internal documents now show Ben Shapiro and Prager University being labeled as ''Nazis''.
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/...e-dogwhistles/

Well I agree that was a bit foolish they should have stuck with ignorant stupid and biased and apparently not understanding science for Prager University.

[The spartan]

Looking at your previous posts, all I can say is: Oh the irony.

What? What partisan equivalent of Project Veritas have I ever quoted or used? Do you know anything about the organization?

[Cyclops]

What? What partisan equivalent of Project Veritas have I ever quoted or used? Do you know anything about the organization?

Wait OP is quoting Project Veritas as fact now? What's next, quote WH40K codices as evidence of US military trends?

[Basil II the B.S]

@ Basil Yeah that's real bad. Would be a justified complaint if it came from someone who does not habitually make posters complicit in the words and actions of left wing radicals. 'Your side this, your side that'. You're in no position to accuse people of such tactics.

Main reason I do it is because conservatives are constantly called like this, everywhere. Media, tech, etc. Hell, even guys who aren't really conservative like Jordan Peterson are called ''Alt Right''. It's the most recurrent tactic of the left to justify censorship, deplatforming, harassment and sometimes violence. This forum is filled with examples like that. You see how bad does it feel to be associated with nutjobs you don't agree with?

Now, if you decide to be intellectually honest like in this post, then I have no reason to do it. Topics like this ones are great examples to see where lines are drawn.

Wait OP is quoting Project Veritas as fact now? What's next, quote WH40K codices as evidence of US military trends?

Well, it's them who made the exposé. Next time we'll wait for Godot of the NYT checking Google bias. Oh wait they are busy posting fictional articles of a dystopian future where my side controls social media.

I guess we can't really count on them to report facts.

[Coughdrop addict]

Lmao your post looks like a page from Antifa book:
-first attack the other side, either with outright violence or deplatforming, or censorship or whatever else your side can find;
-other side defends itself;
-antifa cries Nazi;

Except as you admitted in an earlier thread, you have never been attacked, persecuted, or discriminated against beyond having people disagree with you over the internet. You hate liberals because of what you imagine we're like, not from any actual experience with us. So you are calling for people like myself to be stripped of citizenship and civil rights, declared enemies of the state, and put in concentration camps (all things you have at one point proposed in threads on this forum) without us having harmed you in any way or evidence that such drastic actions would be necessary to prevent us from harming you in the future.

You are the aggressor here.

Main reason I do it is because conservatives are constantly called like this, everywhere. Media, tech, etc. Hell, even guys who aren't really conservative like Jordan Peterson are called ''Alt Right''. It's the most recurrent tactic of the left to justify censorship, deplatforming, harassment and sometimes violence. This forum is filled with examples like that. You see how bad does it feel to be associated with nutjobs you don't agree with?

Even assuming any of that were true (it's not), all that proves is that you are just as bad as those you despise. In fact the more you act this way the less moral authority you have when criticizing "attacks" done to yourself. It begins to look like, and is actually the fact, that you're just complaining about things you would be doing yourself the instant the shoe was on the other foot.

[Basil II the B.S]

What a dumb argument. If I see someone unfairly attacked, then I don't need to wait they come for me before doing something. Your side has attacked people because of their gender, race, sexual orientation and/political beliefs. I don't need to wait the Kommissar to knock at my door to put me in the gulags with the other kulaks if I see him down the street doing it to others.

Your side is the aggressor and you agree with them.

[Heathen Hammer]

Except as you admitted in an earlier thread, you have never been attacked, persecuted, or discriminated against beyond having people disagree with you over the internet. You hate liberals because of what you imagine we're like, not from any actual experience with us. So you are calling for people like myself to be stripped of citizenship and civil rights, declared enemies of the state, and put in concentration camps (all things you have at one point proposed in threads on this forum) without us having harmed you in any way or evidence that such drastic actions would be necessary to prevent us from harming you in the future.

We can recall liberals calling for exactly the highlighted part in regards to right-wingers, both in broad media field and even on this forum. And this has been going on for years. Although one doesn't need draconian measures to crush pseudo-liberalism of the elites, just ban companies from arbitrarily denying platform based on political views and update defamation laws, so that groups like SPLC can get sued to living hell.

[irontaino]

We can recall liberals calling for exactly the highlighted part in regards to right-wingers, both in broad media field and even on this forum. And this has been going on for years. Although one doesn't need draconian measures to crush pseudo-liberalism of the elites, just ban companies from arbitrarily denying platform based on political views and update defamation laws, so that groups like SPLC can get sued to living hell.

For example?

[Coughdrop addict]

What a dumb argument. If I see someone unfairly attacked, then I don't need to wait they come for me before doing something. Your side has attacked people because of their gender, race, sexual orientation and/political beliefs. I don't need to wait the Kommissar to knock at my door to put me in the gulags with the other kulaks if I see him down the street doing it to others.

Your side is the aggressor and you agree with them.

And yet you cannot point to any official discrimination against white male conservatives. You aren't stripped of citizenship or civil rights, no politician runs on vowing to wipe you out. The worst you can say is that sometimes laws are passed or companies make decisions that you personally disagree with. Instead of just accepting that sometimes you won't get your way in life, or even campaigning against the laws/decisions, you'd rather engage in ridiculous hyperbole and revenge fantasies.

For example?

Once again, it's a classic frame flip. "I hate these people and want to harm them. But if I say that out loud people will think I'm a dangerous crank... I know! I'll just say they are attacking me and I'm only defending myself!"

[Basil II the B.S]

You just changed argument from discrimination against me to discrimination against white conservatives, which is actually the topic of the thread as Jen Gennai admitted that Google's ''fairness' policies specifically protect only ''historically marginalized groups'' thus not white conservatives, whom, according to her, they don't care about.

Classic.

[irontaino]

Some Olympic level mental gymnastics there, Bazzy.

[Cyclops]

Bizarre to read a rant about intellectual honesty and then the same poster comes up with "Your side is the aggressor and you agree with them".

... dystopian future where my side controls social media. ...

Just to be clear here, your side includes Vladimir Putin, right?

[Infidel144]

No, she will have to testify before congress soon so nobody at Google is allowed to even acknowledge it. YouTube took down the video and is banning anybody putting it up or linking to it.

She went into hiding and the company is suppressing people who dare to mention the sting operation. A good example of behavior from someone that's totally innocent.

Interesting. She does not deny it. Google does not. They just try to hide it.
And even the fellow travellers don't seem to be denying it. All they can do is scream 'Emmanuel Goldstein'... er... I mean 'O'Keefe', 'Project Veritas'... like the good little Party members they are.

[Basil II the B.S]

Just to be clear here, your side includes Vladimir Putin, right?

At this point my side includes anyone who stand up to White Libs. China included. White Libs are at the level of Saudi Arabia and North Korea.

Interesting. She does not deny it. Google does not. They just try to hide it.
And even the fellow travellers don't seem to be denying it. All they can do is scream 'Emmanuel Goldstein'... er... I mean 'O'Keefe', 'Project Veritas'... like the good little Party members they are.

The irony here is indeed this is a good test to see the intellectual integrity among liberals. You don't see the right defending Christchurch or anything like that, ever. Yet when it comes to the far left, what you see are the usual tactics: deny, when that's not possible, defame, when that's not possible either, derail.

[Infidel144]

Shapiro in a sense deserves that. Because he hypocritically defended censorship so long that it applied to right wingers he also doesn't like.

What are you referring to?

[Muizer]

The irony here is indeed this is a good test to see the intellectual integrity among liberals. You don't see the right defending Christchurch or anything like that, ever. Yet when it comes to the far left, what you see are the usual tactics: deny, when that's not possible, defame, when that's not possible either, derail.

It is not possible for anyone to maintain integrity on behalf of some group other people claim they're a part of. So basically, yes, if you ascribe to 'my side' the views of the far left, then that is exactly the same thing as me ascribing to 'your side' the views of neo-nazis. As far as I'm concerned you're entirely free to call out individuals who do commit such fallacies, but to maintain personal integrity you'd have to desist from committing them yourself.

[Basil II the B.S]

What are you referring to?

When Alex Jones was deplatformed, Shapiro defended it with the usual ''private companies have the right to do it''. He insisted it on pretty much every other occasion until they went after Steven Crowder recently, then he flipped.

Part of the reason he was ok with it is that he really doesn't like any right wing commentator who's not in line with Neocon foreign policy, so by deplatforming them, he probably figured he could win a bigger audience. The thing is, and he knew that, Susan Wojcicki had openly stated her desire to get rid of him as well, but he never thought they'd go that far because he thought to be within the ''acceptable opinion''.

It's clearly not the case. The term ''alt right'' or ''Nazi'' is indiscriminately applied to everyone including anti-war leftist like Tim Pool. Indeed the latter saw this coming because he has been harassed by Antifa on regular basis.

It is not possible for anyone to maintain integrity on behalf of some group other people claim they're a part of. So basically, yes, if you ascribe to 'my side' the views of the far left, then that is exactly the same thing as me ascribing to 'your side' the views of neo-nazis. As far as I'm concerned you're entirely free to call out individuals who do commit such fallacies, but to maintain personal integrity you'd have to desist from committing them yourself.

You see how it really sucks when you get conflated with people you don't like nor agree with?