Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Tuesday December 19 2017, @10:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the new-rules dept.

As reported by The Huffington Post:

New rules implemented on Twitter Monday have led to the suspensions of accounts belonging to prominent neo-Nazis, white nationalists and other far-right extremists.

[...] "You may not make specific threats of violence or wish for the serious physical harm, death, or disease of an individual or group of people," states Twitter's rule for "violent extremist groups," which went into effect Monday.

"This includes, but is not limited to, threatening or promoting terrorism," the rule continues. "You also may not affiliate with organizations that – whether by their own statements or activity both on and off the platform – use or promote violence against civilians to further their causes."

[...] The "alt-right ― a loose association of neo-Nazis, white nationalists, assorted racists, fascists, and other far-right elements that has used Twitter for years to organize and recruit ― anticipated today's "purge," with many preparing to make the jump to Gab, a largely rules-free micro-blogging platform used primarily by white nationalists.

Related: Twitter: Our Blue Check Marks Aren't Just About "Verification"


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:56AM (10 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:56AM (#612178)

    They held their fire because they understood the danger. The State of Virgina (Democreep gov tied to the Clintons of course) had the National Guard mustered to the North of the park ready to swoop in and massacre the lot of them at the first sound of gunfire.

    Do you understand what you just said? If it wasn't for the threat of massive retaliation you jackbooted thugs would have murdered people. And you wonder why people don't like your chosen group. It's all just a massive conspiracy against you, no waaaay that it's your group who is in the wrong.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Flamebait=1, Troll=1, Insightful=3, Total=5
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @07:52AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @07:52AM (#612201)

    Wait! From this entire post I cannot tell which jackbooted thugs we are talking about, except that it was not the Antifa. Right wing militia, who hold their fire, since fire would be, well, at least assault with a deadly weapon, or attempted thereof, or actual murder in America. And some cretian asshole unreconstructed fucking nazi lover here has the audacity to refer to this as "fire control"? Please, next time, pop off a few rounds, so we can see how the alt-right insurrection is going to play our. Remember, "The South will Lose Again!"

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:14PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:14PM (#612372) Journal

      That is correct, lackwit. It is a great demonstration of fire control. When someone is swinging a club at your head, you are JUSTIFIED if you shoot him down. Life, asshole. Reality, asshole. Gt acquainted with it.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:12PM (7 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:12PM (#612371) Journal

    It is you who does not understand reality. The "jackbooted thugs" as you call them had every right in the world to start gunning down the communis/socialist/leftis/progressive bastards who were attacking them. The "jackbooted thugs" were smarter than your socialists. They understood that they had entered an ambush, and the olny way to survive that ambush, was to deny the socialists the expected reaction.

    So - which side is more like Mahatma Ghandi, here? Not your socialists, that's for damned sure. Most likely, none of them had ever read a word that Ghandi said.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:22PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @05:22PM (#612379)

      The "jackbooted thugs" as you call them had every right in the world to start gunning down the communis/socialist/leftis/progressive alt-right bastards who were attacking them.

      FTFY, you anti-America traitor, Runaway!

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday December 20 2017, @06:01PM (5 children)

      by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday December 20 2017, @06:01PM (#612413)

      > had every right in the world to start gunning down

      No.
      Just no.
      In a civilized world, you're entitled to a proportional response to the threat, if you cannot retreat and let/make the cops do their job.

      Think of it that way: if you could mow down any threat, then the antifa idiots should have been allowed to open fire on the Nazi scumbags, just for being Nazi scumbags.

      > communis[sic]/socialist/leftis[sic]/progressive bastards

      As an old fart, how many people did you personally know who took up arms and risked their life to go kill some Nazis ? Would they slap you in the face for throwing every name you think is an insult to shame people who oppose extreme-right/Nazi-salute parades in your own country (not condoning the violence part of antifa, which is dumb)?

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 20 2017, @06:11PM (4 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 20 2017, @06:11PM (#612425) Journal

        No. Right back at you, no. This "proportional response" is nonsense. In any civilized world, you end a threat if possible. If not possible, then you retreat. Proportional response is nonsense. When a man swings a club at your head, you are not obliged to run from him, look back to see if he is still chasing you, run some more, look back again, and only shoot him if he chases you for a whole mile. The bastard swings a club at your head, you double tap his ass, and end the threat, immediately.

        And, THAT is the situation in which those Nazi marchers found themselves. Except, as I have already noted, they were perfectly aware that they had marched into an ambush.

        How many people I have known pesonally? Many. I even met some Jews who had survived the death camps. (Three who verified the fact, by showing me their tatoos) Slap me in the face? I hardly think so. Some, maybe most of them, would recognize Antifa as modern Brownshirts.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday December 20 2017, @07:38PM

          by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday December 20 2017, @07:38PM (#612475)

          Swinging a club at your head is "assault with a deadly weapon". Feel free to put a bullet in the idiot, but try not to hit bystanders, who could take umbrage if you didn't use an opportunity to retreat and de-escalate instead. (context is everything)
          Threatening you with slogans and fists when you're holding an assault weapon is not a situation where you're likely to get sympathy from many people if you open fire.

          Nazi sympathizers should always have the feeling they are marching into an ambush. They're fucking Nazis. Not oh-my-god-commies-are-a-threat-wait-no-they-collapsed idiots, full-blown racist-warmongering-holocaust-again assholes. I don't agree with the violence of AntiFa, though I agree with the need to confront Nazis anywhere they show up.

          But you more than deserve that slap, for insulting those Holocaust survivors by saying they would equate violent anti-fascists with brownshirts or Holocaust supporters. The Resistance was probably the same as the Gestapo, right? Shame on you.

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @07:53PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 20 2017, @07:53PM (#612488)

          In any civilized world, you end a threat if possible. If not possible, then you retreat. Proportional response is nonsense.

          You are a dangerous imbecile, Runaway. You do not live in Florida. "Stand your ground" is only racist dogwhistle for cowardly ammosexuals like the child-killer Zimmerman. You have a duty to retreat. You are legally obligated to retreat. Frigging Russians pretending to be Arkansawsians!!

          • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday December 20 2017, @10:15PM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday December 20 2017, @10:15PM (#612582) Journal

            Runaway is an old, angry, impotent (in both senses of the word) asshole who peaked somewhere around age 13 in gym class and thinks having (so he tells us...) been in the armed forces for a while makes him every Tom Clancy protagonist ever written rolled into one. Sometimes it really is that simple. He's getting more and more unhinged day by day, and it really would not surprise me if he ended up committing murder-suicide at some point within the next few years.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 20 2017, @11:46PM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 20 2017, @11:46PM (#612614) Journal

            When I feel threatened, I'll shoot. If the DA wants to be an asshole, then I'll stand trial. No plea bargain, mind you, but a real trial. Twelve people will have to decide, unanimously, that I had some "duty to retreat".