Are you seeing how dictatorships come to power? They use events like the WH riots to take freedoms. - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is a globally leading online debate platform that is transforming the online debating experience. DebateIsland enables anyone to civilly debate online, casually or formally, with five fun debating formats: Casual, "Persuade Me," Formalish, Traditional Formal, and Lincoln-Douglas. With DebateIsland's beautiful, mobile-friendly, and easy-to-use, online debate website, users can debate politics, debate science, debate technology, debate news, and just about anything else in a large community of debaters. Debate online for free while improving your debating skills with the help of Artifical Intelligence on DebateIsland.


Communities

DebateIsland.com is the best online debate website. We're the only online debate website with Casual, "Persuade Me," Formalish, Traditional Formal, and Lincoln-Douglas online debate formats. Using DebateIsland's beautiful, mobile-friendly, and easy-to-use online debate website, you can debate politics, debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything in a large community of debaters. Debate online for free using DebateIsland, a globally leading online debate website that is utilizing Artificial Intelligence to transform online debating.

Are you seeing how dictatorships come to power? They use events like the WH riots to take freedoms.

Debate Information

Do you see the non stop rush to shut down free speech in America? The Left is using the riots at the White House as a means to their power grab on our freedoms! They want to make you believe that there is an insurrection happening in this nation. What's next, Marshall Law! All because of a fringe Right wing group that 70 million Trump voters are against and share no support for? Democrats want you to believe that Trump supporters are deplorable irredeemable White Supremace. They have total disdain for over 70 million Americans who voted for Trump.

They are shutting down any media site, any business, any person, who THE LEFT deems to be a supposed threat to our nation. UNBELIEVABLE! 
This is nothing more than an extreme Left take over by the Democrat Party. These Democrats have taken positions in our Social media corporations, using their power to transform America into the land of the peasants who must bow to almighty political correctness.

We warned you how extreme they have become, and you always repeated the same deception that Democrats were more moderate and not controlled by the Left. Open your eyes to what we have been telling you.

They are using fear tactics to take control of our lives! Forbes is threatening any company who dares to hire people who worked for Trump! This is how far they are going. Do you see how it works? They are not threatening any company who hires one of these rioters. NO! They are using this smoke screen to censor Conservative thought and threaten your very livelihood.

All you hear about is how Trump lies, and how his supporters lie, as if these hypocrtie Democrats have not made lying an artform.
Remember, Joe Biden had no clue what his son Hunters does for a living in other nations while making millions. The Vice President told us he did not know anything about what HIS SON is doing in the very nations where Vice President Joe Biden had dealings! Nah, they don't lie!

Democrats are trying to lump ALL Conservatives with this radical fringe group that mobbed the White House. This is how censorship takes hold in a nation! They always use fear tactics to turn people against their political opponents. IT'S ALL POLITICS and you should be very afraid of Big Brother's take over of your mind. Trump warned everyone of the power of fake news, and we are seeing it play out before our very eyes.

Trump must bear some of the blame for this riot, but he always told the people to peacefully protest. There is absolutely no grounds for impeachment, but what's new? Democrats have been screaming to impeach Trump for four long years, with no grounds to do so!

This is dictatorship 101.
How to take a nation's freedoms.
PlaffelvohfenDebater123smoothieanarchist100DeeCYDdharta
«1



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +



Arguments



Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -   edited January 12
    @We_are_accountable

    This Dictatorship 101, is also carried out with other venues such as "CLIMATE CHANGE"! They must scare people in order to implement their draconian anti fossil fuel laws. They must first scare you into believing we need to pay three times as much for electricity and heating fuel.

    To get you on board, they needed the help of the Weather Channel. These weathermen started giving a name to every snow or rain storm, as they do for hurricanes. They needed to sensationalize every storm as if it is unusual and caused by "CLIMATE CHANGE"... RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

    Environmentalists once tried to scare people with "GLOBAL COOLING"! THE ICE AGE IS COMING! MOVE TO SOUTHERN STATES!
    But this never panned out, so they next called it "GLOBAL WARMING"! RUN FOR THE HILLS! MOVE TO NORTHERN STATES!
    This of course never panned out, so with egg on their face they once and for all labeled it "CLIMATE CHANGE", which can never be refuted since climate has been changing since the beginning of time.

    What was once a storm system moving across America now has a name... "LUCIFER"!. RUN FOR COVER! STAMPEDE THE GROCERY STORE FOR SUPPLIES!

    It is Big Brother scaring the little people to accept their Green New Deal! It's all money and votes from Environmental groups who have always hated fossil fuels, long before any mention of Climate Change.

    No one is disputing the possibility that the accumulation of Green House gasses in our atmosphere could be causing rising temperatures, but we do not believe it is a matter of emergency whereby our entire way of life must be turned upside down while other nations get a free pass. We believe that normal free market changes such as Wind Mills, Solar, etc. will address this issue with Green House Gasses. No need to allow corrupt politicians to raise your utility bills just to garner Environmental funding for elections.

    Scientists still differ on whether these gasses are mostly man made, or naturally caused by animals and Earth.
    But this mindset will not scare people into capitulation, so with every wildfire, that was once normal seasonal occurences? Is now caused by "CLIMATE CHANGE"!
    DIG STORM CELLARS OR YOU WILL NEVER SURVIVE "CLIMATE CHANGE"!

    Scientists say it is too late to change what has already happened in our atmosphere. I believe technology will come up with a way to clean these gasses out of the atmosphere and who knows, maybe use it for a power source. In the mean time Democrats will never miss out on funding from Enviromentalist groups.

    Leftwing Professors will continue indoctrinating our young adults to fear "CLIMATE CHANGE"! Vote for us! We will save you from those evil deniers!

    Dictatorship 101!
    AlofRICYDdhartaPlaffelvohfen
  • mickygmickyg 208 Pts   -  
    YES ....SATAN....YOU ARE AWARE THAT GOD ADMITTED SATAN OUTSMARTED HIM ?@We_are_accountable
  • DeeDee 3309 Pts   -  
    Bye Donald have a nice day .....


    AlofRI
  • @We_are_accountable

    Can anyone that believes Pi is a ratio tell me how a cost is free?


  • The American government is not a dictatorship, they are just liberty challenging sometimes.

    This message has been paid for by the precedent of standards for united state President. Our moto. We believe, every man who can pat their head and rub their tummies, rub their heads and pat their tummies. Can be Democratically be elected to the Oval Office, but until this task can be performed with a rubbing action that takes place both clockwise and counterclockwise we reserve the rights of the Presidency by legal simplicity.


  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -   edited January 15
    @We_are_accountable

    Tl;dr. The first two sentences misrepresent/mislead:

    Do you see the non stop rush to shut down free speech in America? The Left is using the riots at the White House as a means to their power grab on our freedoms!

    Speech which incites illegal activity or imminent threat of violence isn't protected speech. (Ie. You're not free to say whatever you want wherever you want.) Recklessly inciting gullible people (on the basis of lies) to murder and terrorism isn't a right, and preventing it isn't an infringement. You can't take away a right that doesn't exist.

    PlaffelvohfenAlofRICYDdhartaWe_are_accountable
  • AlofRIAlofRI 1219 Pts   -  
    This post starts out with eight paragraphs. There is barely a word of truth from top to bottom ... nothing unusual from whence_it_comes!

    Just one "f'rinstance": "They have total disdain for the 70 million Americans who voted for Trump!" NO. The "70" Million Americans have total disdain for the nearly 8 million MORE who voted against him! Some_people_have forgotten their cipherin'  I guess! Losers_are_losers! Losers should be_held_accountable!
    John_C_87CYDdhartaWe_are_accountable
  • @SkepticalOne

    (Ie. You're not free to say whatever you want wherever you want.) 
    But, we are allowed to say freely whatever we want, when we want. The 1st amendment however dictates we must be able to prove we did speak somewhere without cost.

     Recklessly inciting gullible people (on the basis of lies) to murder and terrorism isn't a right, and preventing it isn't an infringement.
    Yeah, it is a human right to be wrong, it is not a constitutional right to be intentional wrong, self-regulation is made on translation of cost between complete filed grievance. 

    You can't take away a right that doesn't exist.
    Sure we lose our right to liberty in a variety of degrees every day.

    @AlofRI
    Speech which incites illegal activity or imminent threat of violence isn't protected speech.
    Yes, it is the Nancy democracy state of say so law. The word you're looking for, or should be looking for is directing illegal activity and violence, not incite or threat of violence only. My united state constitutional issue with pregnancy abortion is solely based on the directing of crime not violence, as an admission to a murder that is in idea only. It was originally cited by the Supreme court ruling in the United States in 1973 by loss of privacy. My claim is proving limitation constitutionally only to help women by stoping a form of illegal immigration into America. The witness can know no other facts at first.  All men are created equal by a legal relief of command in regard to a President of the united states of America, why? It literally transfers the burden of legal command of the Presidential state to one man at a time, all the time. Two men who are proven by ability as President on separate constitutional issues are@AlofRI

    Speech which incites illegal activity or imminent threat of violence isn't protected speech.
    Yes, it is protected and it is protected by a form of martial law in the regulation of peaceful assembly. What is not protected is a political dependency on waiting for say so law to be written making some crimes immune from being publicly questioned. A different example is the marijuana debate, growing up listening to people say smoking marijuana is illegal was unconstitutional, it is not a crime to resolve the constitutional issue for all people, People are arrested for having marijuana, for smoking marijuana and not smoking marijuana, yet medical marijuana performs the same type of pollution as all other marijuana in a united state. That means world wide. A person does not need to take part in the lie that describes marijuana as a narcotic placing in the same distinction as patterned medication.                                                                
     
    The truth here is a person can do something as trivial as picking the wrong side of the first amendment as self-incriminate themselves.  

    It is the goal of the American Constitution to create a more perfect union, how is the state of my union?
    PlaffelvohfenSkepticalOne
  • AlofRIAlofRI 1219 Pts   -  
    @John_C_87

    Could be .... I guess.  :frowning:
  • It's a special skill to kill a person with a feather, pen mightier than the sword.
    It is a special skill to be unable to build a chair unsuitable for sitting, yet build principles for a place for all people to stand as a united state. Thank you, Thomas Jefferson.

    A dictator comes to power for one reason a true President no longer understands the value of being relieved of command. It is by his own hand he is then no longer created equal to all men.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1374 Pts   -  
    @We_are_accountable

    Tl;dr. The first two sentences misrepresent/mislead:

    Do you see the non stop rush to shut down free speech in America? The Left is using the riots at the White House as a means to their power grab on our freedoms!

    Speech which incites illegal activity or imminent threat of violence isn't protected speech. (Ie. You're not free to say whatever you want wherever you want.) Recklessly inciting gullible people (on the basis of lies) to murder and terrorism isn't a right, and preventing it isn't an infringement. You can't take away a right that doesn't exist.


    I thought the FBI heard chatter about "calls for violence" before the protest took place.  If that's the case and violence was preplanned, then Pres. Trump's speech had nothing to do with the riot.  If the President's speech incited the riots, then obviously the riots must have occurred after the speech.  However, the riots started while Pres. Trump was still talking.  Nothing Pres. Trump said had anything to do with the riots.
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    @We_are_accountable

    Tl;dr. The first two sentences misrepresent/mislead:

    Do you see the non stop rush to shut down free speech in America? The Left is using the riots at the White House as a means to their power grab on our freedoms!

    Speech which incites illegal activity or imminent threat of violence isn't protected speech. (Ie. You're not free to say whatever you want wherever you want.) Recklessly inciting gullible people (on the basis of lies) to murder and terrorism isn't a right, and preventing it isn't an infringement. You can't take away a right that doesn't exist.


    I thought the FBI heard chatter about "calls for violence" before the protest took place.  If that's the case and violence was preplanned, then Pres. Trump's speech had nothing to do with the riot.  If the President's speech incited the riots, then obviously the riots must have occurred after the speech.  However, the riots started while Pres. Trump was still t⁷alking.  Nothing Pres. Trump said had anything to do with the riots.
    ‘I Answered the Call of My President’: Rioters Say Trump Urged Them On https://nyti.ms/3bOkj00
    We_are_accountableCYDdharta
  • @AlofRI

    Yes, losers should be held accountable and the entire obstructionist Democrat Party with their biased media are complete losers!
  • @SkepticalOne


    The Democrat Party has been inciting riots from their African American voting block for DECADES!

    Where is your outrage for that speech that incited all that death and destruction.

    It is truly sickening wasting time with people who ignore their own corruption.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1374 Pts   -   edited January 18
    ‘I Answered the Call of My President’: Rioters Say Trump Urged Them On https://nyti.ms/3bOkj00

    That's demonstrably false, likely disinformation, considering the riot was pre-planned.
    We_are_accountablePlaffelvohfen
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne


    The Democrat Party has been inciting riots from their African American voting block for DECADES!

    Where is your outrage for that speech that incited all that death and destruction.

    It is truly sickening wasting time with people who ignore their own corruption.
    If a social media company wants to prevent anyone from inciting illegal activity or imminent threat of violence on their platform, that violates no rights. As stated previously, you can't take away rights that don't exist.
    PlaffelvohfenpiloteerWe_are_accountable
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    ‘I Answered the Call of My President’: Rioters Say Trump Urged Them On https://nyti.ms/3bOkj00

    That's demonstrably false, likely disinformation, considering the riot was pre-planned.
    Lol, ok - seems like you have your mind made up.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -   edited January 18
    @SkepticalOne

    I realize you could not care less abut the actual truth and facts of what is going on with all this censorship from Twitter and other big tech.

    Here are the FACTS of what we are talking about...

    You keep talking about these sites censoring posts that incite illegal activity or imminent threat of violence on their platform.

    So tell me why Twitter blocked New York Post's account for merely reporting on Hunter Biden's laptop and the Biden's connections to China?
    Twitter spewed their usual fake news and said that the Post's story was Russian disinformation, or having no basis in fact.

    NEWSFLASH... The FBI came out and gave the facts that they had been investigating these Hunter Biden stories, and his laptop for a long time.

    So tell me where the New York Post was creating an imminent threat of violence or illegal activity with their story on Hinter Biden's Laptop? Tell me why every news media outlet refused to cover that story, other than Fox news. This is sickening Leftwing censorship of any news that would have hurt Joe Biden's election chances.

    This drivel whereby they are only censoring supposed incitement of violence is PATHETIC LIES!

    Do you care? Nah, you will now change your story and make up some other fake news why they had a right to censor the Post. You are the low end voters brainwashed by the Left, and lacking in any desire to hold both sides accountable. The Left once claimed to hate censorship, but as always... it is ok to censor Conservatives.
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdharta
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -   edited January 18
    @We_are_accountable

    I'm not familiar with how the New York Post article was written. Perhaps, they intimated an investigation is equivalent to guilt? If so, then, their reporting is not factual and is perpetuating misinformation and conspiracy theories.

    Regardless, if someone is inciting illegal activity or the threat of violence, then their speech is not protected. 

    Besides that - social media companies are not the government...so the first amendment doesn't apply to them. Those being banned might sue for unfair treatment, but I don't see that being successful for the reason above (unprotected speech).

    Basically, those involved in unprotected speech have no leg to stand on, and whining about it and appealing to the Court of public opinion is their only recourse. They've got you fooled! 
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdhartaWe_are_accountable
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 659 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne. Twitter came out and said they were wrong for censoring the new York post article...after the election, how convenient.

    You are right that Twitter and Facebook as private companies are allowed to censor the issue is the amount of people in society (mostly drmocrats) cheering them on.  Claiming to be antifacist, while openly calling for people's voice to be taken away. All censoring does is keep people ignorant and keep us from making informed decisions.  It's similar to forming a scientific theory while willfully leaving out data.  Not to mention the bias, figures on the left have said and done things very similar to trump.



    A good way to convince people that they are right is to censoring their opinions, otherwise discussion would be allowed.  If we really want to unite people we need to realize that discussion and disagreement is OK. Censorship is just going to tear sides further away and bring us closer to civil war.




    PlaffelvohfenWe_are_accountable
  • mickygmickyg 208 Pts   -  
    freedom of speech does not mean freedom to lie.....
    i doubt you have read the constitution   @We_are_accountable
    PlaffelvohfenWe_are_accountable
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -   edited January 18
    @MichaelElpers

    It seems you're defending speech which isn't protected by any right.

    Speech isn't unlimited ...nor should it be. 

    As I said previously, I'm not familiar with the New York Post article/ban - I can't speak to that.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1374 Pts   -  
    Lol, ok - seems like you have your mind made up.

    LOL, OK, likewise.
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    Lol, ok - seems like you have your mind made up.

    LOL, OK, likewise.
    If evidence (rioters stating they were doing what Trump wanted) isn't sufficient to convince you Trump incited sedition..then there is nothing I can say that would. 

    On the other hand, I accept the evidence.


    We are not the same. 
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdhartaWe_are_accountable
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 659 Pts   -   edited January 18
    @SkepticalOne. What speech am I defending that isn't protected? Specifics please.

    I'm not suprised you didn't hear about the article, that's why they suppressed it. A poll found they 4% of people would have changed their vote if they had heard about it. Media suppresses a lot of stories that don't fit the narrative they want to spread.

    People say if you don't like facebook/Twitter ect. Start your own platform.  When we do that they fo all they can to shut those down too.
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdhartaWe_are_accountable
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne. What speech am I defending that isn't protected? Specifics please.

    I'm not suprised you didn't hear about the article, that's why they suppressed it. A poll found they 4% of people would have changed their vote if they had heard about it. Media suppresses a lot of stories that don't fit the narrative they want to spread.

    People say if you don't like facebook/Twitter ect. Start your own platform.  When we do that they fo all they can to shut those down too.
    If you're defending speech which encourages violence/illegal activity then you would be defending unprotected speech. Maybe you don't defend this (that is why my statement was qualified), but given the context of this thread, it seems that way. Feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood you. 

    As for the rest, companies have the right to do business according to their own principles (provided they are not discriminating against a protected class). You've agreed to as much.
    CYDdhartaWe_are_accountable
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 659 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne. What I want you to do is quote the speech you think didn't fall under free speech, and then tell Me how the speech in the video is any different.

    I've agreed they can do that, my issue is that half of society is cheering them on.  This doesn't bode well for America's future.  I want people to join in and call these companies out for silencing speech. If it is unpopular they won't do it, the fact that is seen as a popular idea is very worrisome.

    We_are_accountable
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -   edited January 18
    @MichaelElpers

    What comes to mind is Trump's speech (and rally) encouraging supporters to March on the Capitol. Rioters have said they were "answering the President's call". Clearly, people on the Right and Left understood it to be an incitement. You can see the link I provided above to another poster.

    I'm in support of businesses realizing their role and removing the platform they've provided to misinformation, propaganda, sedition, murder and insurrection.
    CYDdhartaWe_are_accountablePlaffelvohfen
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1374 Pts   -   edited January 18
    CYDdharta said:
    Lol, ok - seems like you have your mind made up.

    LOL, OK, likewise.
    If evidence (rioters stating they were doing what Trump wanted) isn't sufficient to convince you Trump incited sedition..then there is nothing I can say that would. 

    On the other hand, I accept the evidence.


    We are not the same. 

    Evidence?!?  You call the word of a few criminals evidence?!?  Nah, you just hear what you want to hear, and ignore the evidence.  The evidence is clear that Pres. Trump had nothing whatsoever to do with the riots.

    On the other hand, I accept the evidence.


    We are not the same.

    Plaffelvohfen
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 659 Pts   -   edited January 18
    @SkepticalOne
    I am unable to read that article, but I'd like to point out that just because someone believes they're answering anothers call to violence, doesn't mean that the person actually advocated for violence.
    I'd like to see the quote of Trump's that you believe falls outside freedom of speech.  

    If you watched my video I think many of the democrats comments are comparable, but no one is calling for them to be banned.

    Parler has nothing to do with any of that.  They don't censor anyone, conservatives have flocked there because they can't speak freely on mainstream platforms. 
    We_are_accountablePlaffelvohfen
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1374 Pts   -  
    @MichaelElpers

    What comes to mind is Trump's speech (and rally) encouraging supporters to March on the Capitol. Rioters have said they were "answering the President's call". Clearly, people on the Right and Left understood it to be an incitement. You can see the link I provided above to another poster.

    I'm in support of businesses realizing their role and removing the platform they've provided to misinformation, propaganda, sedition, murder and insurrection.

    "Trump's speech (and rally) encouraging supporters to March on the Capitol"

    Really?!?  Which words encouraged anyone to start a riot?  How could any of the President's words have incited such action when the riots started 20 MINUTES BEFORE the President was finished speaking?
    Plaffelvohfen
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    CYDdharta said:
    Lol, ok - seems like you have your mind made up.

    LOL, OK, likewise.
    If evidence (rioters stating they were doing what Trump wanted) isn't sufficient to convince you Trump incited sedition..then there is nothing I can say that would. 

    On the other hand, I accept the evidence.


    We are not the same. 

    Evidence?!?  You call the word of a few criminals evidence?!?  Nah, you just hear what you want to hear, and ignore the evidence.  The evidence is clear that Pres. Trump had nothing whatsoever to do with the riots.

    On the other hand, I accept the evidence.


    We are not the same.

    Imitation: the sincerest form of flattery. Thank you!

    These 'criminals', right up until they were charged, would most likely be considered respectable and upstanding citizens - many might still view them this way. Plus, it doesn't benefit them to say "they were answering the President's call" or not....so yes, I believe they felt inspired by Trump.

    As for 'chatter of a pre-planned attack' and, most especially, 'sedition was happening *during* the rally - I've not seen any evidence to that. If the former is true, well, Trump was calling for "digital soldiers' to come to Washington on Jan 6th, so the timing would be important.

    Show me the evidence.
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    @MichaelElpers

    I'd like to see the quote of Trump's that you believe falls outside freedom of speech.  

    You seem to be under the impression that an explicit call for violence is required before an incitement has occurred. That's not the case. Also, I don't think you're going to find something comparable from Democrats in your video (I haven't had time to watch), and if you do, that doesn't excuse anyone of accountability.

    Parler was/is apparently a conservative echo chamber with much of the same disinformed rhetoric and polarizing views. The companies who were providing them servers chose not to be a part of it - as is their right.


    Plaffelvohfen
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 659 Pts   -   edited 4:04AM
    @SkepticalOne For it to be criminal and fall outside of freedom of speech it has to be a call for violence. How many times are you going to avoid giving me a quote? 

    Parler doesn't post anything, it censors no one.. What are conservatives supposed to do?  They're censored on mainstream stream sites and you tell them to create an alternative. When they create a alternative, that doesn't even censor the opposing side you call them an echo chamber.  Leftists are creating echo chambers by censoring conservatives.  Theres now going to be one for conservatives because they can't exist on leftist platforms, and leftists who want censoring won't explore outside their platform. 
    We_are_accountable
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1374 Pts   -  
    Imitation: the sincerest form of flattery. Thank you!

    These 'criminals', right up until they were charged, would most likely be considered respectable and upstanding citizens - many might still view them this way. Plus, it doesn't benefit them to say "they were answering the President's call" or not....so yes, I believe they felt inspired by Trump.

    As for 'chatter of a pre-planned attack' and, most especially, 'sedition was happening *during* the rally - I've not seen any evidence to that. If the former is true, well, Trump was calling for "digital soldiers' to come to Washington on Jan 6th, so the timing would be important.

    Show me the evidence.

    Considering the ranks of the rioters were infiltrated by AntiFA and BLM, Inc. agitators, there is indeed a benefit for them to try to falsely blame the President.

    You obviously aren't interested in the reality of what happened, otherwise you would have looked into it on your own.  Your mind is already made up.



    Pres. Trump called for his supporters to "PEACEFULLY and patriotically make your voices heard."

  • piloteerpiloteer 1111 Pts   -   edited 3:38AM
    @We_are_accountable

    If the freedom that you are suggesting is being taken away is your freedom to be a nazi on Facebook without being censored, you never had that freedom to begin with. So don't worry about it being taken away. Problem solved. You're welcome.  
    SkepticalOnePlaffelvohfen
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta

    Considering the ranks of the rioters were infiltrated by AntiFA and BLM, Inc. agitators, there is indeed a benefit for them to try to falsely blame the President.
    Right...all those folks arrested so far have been AntiFa and BLM except for ...ALL of them. Gtfo with that nonsense!



    Also, your link is broken.
    piloteerPlaffelvohfen
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    For it to be criminal and fall outside of freedom of speech it has to be a call for violence. How many times are you going to avoid giving me a quote?
    This has been answered. I'll direct you to my previous reply as to why your request for an explicit call to violence misses the mark.

    Parler doesn't post anything, it censors no one.. What are conservatives supposed to do?  [...] Leftists are creating echo chambers by censoring conservatives. 

    The Parler question has been answered too. Some people don't like being held to standards which disallow hateful rhetoric, blatant lies, and/or misinformation. Apparently, the problem is the standard.



    Plaffelvohfen
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @MichaelElpers

    I had seen some of those clips on Fox news. No other media will show the truth of the anarchist authoritarian Left.

    Thank you for posting that video. Those on the Left, on this site who watch it, will simply ignore the truth of what we say and continue voting for these authoritarian Big Brother elites. The low end voters, wo just watched it with their own eyes,  will call that video misinformation. These are the hypocrites who pretend to be outraged by the riot at the White House, blaming Trump for inciting violence, while they watch the true inciters of violence. The sick part is that they do not care.

    They hate America, they hate God, they spend their lives playing the victim, and angry over their self created hard lives. They are the able bodied people who want to live irresponsibly, take no accountability for their choices, and force tax payers to support them.

    These selfish people do not care how authoritarin Democrats have become. They vote for that Government handout. This has been the goal of the Democrat Party my entire life. Creating a Government dependent voting block that can not be defeated. Joe Biden, the man who most people said they did not even like, supposedly got an all time record number of votes!!!!!!! This says it all!
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    Do you know why you are not familiar with how the New York Post's article was written? IT WAS CENSORED FROM THE PUBLIC'S EYES!

    This is what corrupt Leftwing media outlets do. They hide the truth from the people! They shape the hate Trump narrative and censor any reporting that is at odds with their distortions of the truth.

    If the media had not censored those reports on the Bidens, you would have read word for word the Post's article. You would have been able to verify if what Twitter said was the truth. You would have been a well informed citizen who could make a rational decision on election day.

    You can not be so blind to the corruption on the Left, CAN YOU? These private companies you speak to have a monopoly on our media and will take down any voice that disagrees with their narrrative. They claim to be non biased and therefore deserving of protection by the Government from lawsuits. They are completely biased and are totally deceiving the people.

    Google, Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, Apple are purposely shutting down Concervative voices and media sites, and have the power and monopoly to do so. How on earth can any rational person think this is ok?

    If it were an even playing field where both sides were allowed to compete in the marketplace, and who admitted their biased to those who would become members, then I would agree with to your private business arguments.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    Do you know why you are not familiar with how the New York Post's article was written? IT WAS CENSORED FROM THE PUBLIC'S EYES!

    https://nypost.com/

    Hmmm, looks like their site is up...but somehow those evil social media sites (a.k.a. "Leftists") banned their article from the public and swayed the election?

    You are deep into conspiracy land. Come back to reality, bud. 
    PlaffelvohfenWe_are_accountable
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, so now it is no longer censorship of speech that supposedly incites illegal activity, or threats of violence, but also censoring articles that might not be factual?

    So these monopolies are now the fact checking police? They will decide for themselves, with their paid biased fact checkers, whose story is truthful and whose is not. Are you truly that gullible? Is this how easy a nation can be taken over from within? I'm embarrassed to be wasting my time with this lunacy.

    Like I said, there is nothing we could ever say to low end Leftwing voters who openly support censorhip of diverse opinons. We are actually living out the movie "1984", and are actually debating sheep who allowed it to happen.

    Newsflash, that New York Post's article on Hunter Biden's laptop WAS FACTUAL! The FBI confirmed it!
    It was censored by your fact checkers who pretend to be non baised! Do you see how it works?
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @mickyg

    LOL, coming from Democrats who have lied since the beginning  of time!
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    You said... "As I said previously, I'm not familiar with the New York Post article/ban - I can't speak to that."

    Yes, you can't speak to it because the New York Post was censored and their account blocked!

    You can't speak to the entire point of what this debate is about? You simply ignore the censorship by Twitter, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they were being honest and non biased when claiming the Post's reporting was misinformation and not factual?

    Is this the world you want to live in, whereby Leftwing monopolies tell you what to believe, and you like a good little peasant accept it since the facts were censored from your eyes?

    WAKE UP!
    Plaffelvohfen
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -   edited 3:01PM
    @We_are_accountable

    You said... "As I said previously, I'm not familiar with the New York Post article/ban - I can't speak to that."

    Yes, you can't speak to it because the New York Post was censored and their account blocked!

    ...or because you've been very vague about what article youre referencing or because I don't follow the NYP, or etc. etc.

    They say nuance goes to the internet to die - I think they are right.


    PlaffelvohfenWe_are_accountable
  • mickygmickyg 208 Pts   -  
    the NEW YORK POST HAS HOME DELIVERY
    HOW WAS IT BLOCKED?
    DID SOMEONE TAPE YOUR MAILBOX SHUT?
    HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW....@We_are_accountable
    We_are_accountableSkepticalOne
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 659 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne. You still won't quote him what you think is worthy of "incitement of violence."  

    You accused conservatives of going to an echo chamber when liberals are the ones that created them.  Liberals support banning conservative opinions and you won't venture to sites that allow them because they are "echo chambers".  Chambers you created because they're not allowed to speak on sites liberals frequent. 

    The people who want less government are the ones exhibiting victim culture...lol.  I never claimed I was a victim, I just claiming leftists are supporting facist idealogy by supporting silencing of beliefs they disagree with.
    PlaffelvohfenWe_are_accountable
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @mickyg

    You are a child....IGNORE
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 827 Pts   -  
    @MichaelElpers

    I never claimed I was a victim, I just claiming leftists are supporting facist idealogy by supporting silencing of beliefs they disagree with.

    Right, you're not a victim, but when problematic speech (which happens to be conservative) is disallowed, its 'silencing beliefs' - as though the label "belief" will make everything kosher.

    I'll tell you a little secret- all beliefs are not worthy of respect - especially if they are built on demonstrable lies for the purpose of stoking the fears of a gullible audience in hopes of maintaining political power.

    We_are_accountable
  • We_are_accountableWe_are_accountable 890 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    WOW, I think it's time to ignore a total joke who refuses to admit he loves censorship as long as it is his side doing it.

    The only reason they put their account back up is because of the outcry from Conservatives and Republicans as they were once again caught censoring Conservative opinons and stories that might hurt Democrat elections. They were afraid of what Congress will do to them in regards to future rules protecting them from lawsuits.

    It was not only Twitter, but Facebook and every other major TV news outlet! Only Fox would report on the huge scandal. Joe Biden refused to answer any questions from Fox reporters! What was he afraid of if he did nothing wrong?

    It is insane for you not to admit the bias, and I have better things to do.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2020 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
Terms of Service

Get In Touch