Plandemic: Censorship, Paranoia or Genuine Threat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter commenter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay, here we disagree. I would personally not use a service that shuts down dissenting opinions. And who says the CDC is perfect and has all the correct information? They clearly don’t. And because someone who dissents with others is not a “crack-pot”. There are more and more studies being led by national and global universities that contradict the CDC. These are not some po-dunk online university that started up yesterday in someone’s living room, these are big universities. Are THEY crackpots?
 
Last edited:
JoeFreedom said:
I would personally not use a service that shuts down dissenting opinions.
Click to expand...
Then don’t, nobody is forcing you (although there is a service we’re pretty close to that likes to shut down differing opinions… 🤔)
JoeFreedom said:
And because someone who dissents with others is not a “crack-pot”. There are more and more studies being led by national and global universities that contradict the CDC. These are not some po-dunk online university that started up yesterday in someone’s living room, these are big universities. Are THEY crackpots?
Click to expand...
I didn’t say they were. Youtube made their rule, anything that disagrees with WHO or CDC is going to get pulled. Otherwise any crack-pot could post a video opposing it. You’re asking youtube to screen all of the videos (which aren’t in line with the WHO or CDC) for reference verification and validation. I don’t blame them for choosing not to do so. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
TC3033 said:
although there is a service we’re pretty close to that likes to shut down differing opinions…
Click to expand...
Huh???
TC3033 said:
I didn’t say they were. Youtube made their rule, anything that disagrees with WHO or CDC is going to get pulled. Otherwise any crack-pot could post a video opposing it.
Click to expand...
First you say “I didn’t say they were [crackpots]”, then you proceed to call them [“crackpots”] and yes indeed, you did call them crackpots in your first post. Call me dense, but you are most certainly calling them crackpots.
 
The thing is if this is to further an agenda of increasing control over they’ve frankly gone a ridiculous route. Every political street activist I know (I move I’m those sorts of circles socially) has an assortment of various types of gloves and face coverings, this has made it socially acceptable to go out wearing them making it harder to identify them. Also there’s so so much sigint because everyone is using digital communications the organisations whose job it is to sort through it can’t because they’re overwhelmed. That side of this strikes me nonsensical paranoia if you give it even a second moderate thought.
 
JoeFreedom said:
Huh???
Click to expand...
😉
JoeFreedom said:
First you say “I didn’t say they were [crackpots]”, then you proceed to call them [“crackpots”] and yes indeed, you did call them crackpots in your first post. Call me dense, but you are most certainly calling them crackpots.
Click to expand...
I’m not calling any specific person, entity, video, dog, cat, hamster a crackpot. The video, for all know could be legit, but they made a rule where if a video advised against CDC/WHO recommendations they were going to pull it.

What I meant was; without that rule, any crack pot could post a video about the conspiracies of COVID-19 and it would be youtube’s job to figure the who/what/why/where/when of the video and the validity of it. That could be tens of thousands of videos or more to weed through. I don’t blame them for saying “pass”.
 
I’m sorry, you are really going to need to tell me what the spoon you are winking about. I’m kind of feeling it’s pointing to me… which I’d like to defend if it is.

And I still think we are going around like a stuck merry-go-round on this crackpot thing. We agree that YT can remove any video it wants, but you keep saying that people who make (even legit) videos that go against the CDC are “crackpots”. You are grouping in millions of people into that group, including thousands of doctors and hundreds of universities worldwide.
 
JoeFreedom said:
I’m sorry, you are really going to need to tell me what the spoon you are winking about. I’m kind of feeling it’s pointing to me… which I’d like to defend if it is.
Click to expand...
It could be the very website we’re using right now.
JoeFreedom said:
you keep saying that people who make (even legit) videos that go against the CDC are “crackpots”.
Click to expand...
No, I’m not. I thought I was pretty clear.

If YT were to start allowing these videos…any crack pot could put a conspiracy video on line “debunking” the CDC and WHO. It would be up to YT to “weed through” possibly 10’s of thousands of videos to figure out which ones are the crackpot ones and which ones aren’t. I don’t blame them for saying we’re going to stick with the CDC and WHO.

And yes, some doctors are indeed crack pots so there’s that whole molehill.
 
Honestly, I think there is a lot of all three.

Yes - it is a genuine threat
Yes - there are some who are overreacting and spreading fear
Yes - there are some (like YouTube) who are censoring positions they don’t agree with and some who are enforcing some strange rules***.

*** For the life of me, I can’t understand how abortion & buying alcohol are essential services, but planting food (or any other plants) in one’s garden needs to be outlawed (here’s looking at you Michigan)

God Bless
 
phil19034 said:
Yes - it is a genuine threat
Click to expand...
Agreed
phil19034 said:
Yes - there are some who are overreacting and spreading fear
Click to expand...
Agreed
phil19034 said:
Yes - there are some (like YouTube) who are censoring positions they don’t agree with and some who are enforcing some strange rules***.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but I wouldn’t look at youtube on this one
phil19034 said:
*** For the life of me, I can’t understand how abortion & buying alcohol are essential services, but planting food (or any other plants) in one’s garden needs to be outlawed (here’s looking at you Michigan)
Click to expand...
To the bolded, do you really not understand?

I’m also surprised how Michigan can outlaw doing anything on your own lawn. I’ll have to review.
 
60 years ago, the government would never have allowed such concentration of power in media, such as Google/YouTube. Back then, there were strict limits on ownership of radio and tv stations.
 
TC3033 said:
40.png
phil19034:
*** For the life of me, I can’t understand how abortion & buying alcohol are essential services , but planting food (or any other plants) in one’s garden needs to be outlawed (here’s looking at you Michigan)
Click to expand...
To the bolded, do you really not understand?
Click to expand...
In my state, all liquor stores are closed. They are only allowed to sell online. 😐

UPDATE: I just learned that 77 liquor stores are permitted to reopen today (May 8th)
 
Last edited:
StudentMI said:
Just as a defense of private property, it’s not censorship when a private site chooses to remove a video. They have the right to.
Click to expand...
Generally, I would agree. The problem though with these large tech companies is that they are almost monopolies.

It is very difficult for a video blogger to use another platform because smaller platforms don’t have the reach nor the advertising revenue to pay the v-blogger.

This is esp true for the ones who are full time.

So independent journalists need YouTube, and unfortunately that provides Google with a lot of power.
 
I don’t know about anyone else and how they view conspiracies/agenda/news in general. I have noticed that such information (right, wrong or obscure) can cause a lot of confusion and worst still an increase of negative emotions such as anger or distrust in people.

I do feel that if this is the case then the conspiracy/agenda and any other information delivered to us that causes the above emotions is diabolical in nature - divide and conquer or increase fear for the recipient etc.

Jesus taught us in Luke 11:17 that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
 
commenter said:
60 years ago, the government would never have allowed such concentration of power in media, such as Google/YouTube. Back then, there were strict limits on ownership of radio and tv stations.
Click to expand...
There is much less concentration of media power now than there was then, so this is an inaccurate comparison.
 
If a foreign power wanted to weaken the United States, they would pretend to be Americans sowing fear, doubt, and confusion on social media and the internet. Have you heard of the Russian troll farms in 2016?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top