« prev   random   next »

4
0

List of people and sites banned or demonetized for political reasons from Wordpress/Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/Google/YouTube/Pinterest etc

By Patrick following x   2019 Jun 8, 9:24pm 2,020 views   96 comments   watch   nsfw   quote     share    


The requirements to be listed are:
1. to have been banned or demonetized from Wordpress/Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/Google or other anti-free-speech sites
2. to have a website which is not on one of the intolerant corporate/liberal sites and has content

Alex Jones https://alexjonespodcast.com/
Anne Marie Waters https://www.forbritain.uk/
Ben Shapiro https://www.dailywire.com/authors/ben-shapiro
Brigitte Gabriel https://www.actforamerica.org/
Candace Owens https://candaceowens.com/
Dylan Louis Monroe https://www.dylanlouismonroe.com/q-web.html
Heartiste, aka Roissy https://gab.com/heartiste and https://archive.is/zvx8C
Jesse Kelly https://thefederalist.com/author/jessekelly/
Laura Loomer https://lauraloomer.us/
Live Action https://www.liveaction.org/
Milo Yiannopolous https://www.dangerous.com/
Natural News https://www.naturalnews.com/
Paul Joseph Watson https://www.bitchute.com/channel/9WF6N0ecQ55u/
PJ Media https://pjmedia.com/
James O'Keefe of Project Veritas https://www.projectveritas.com/ and https://search.bitchute.com/renderer?use=bitchute-json&name=Search&login=bcadmin&key=7ea2d72b62aa4f762cc5a348ef6642b8&query=project+Veritas
Sargon of Akkad (Carl Benjamin) https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hPBWLRZXgklG/
Scott Adams https://blog.dilbert.com/
Soph https://www.bitchute.com/video/68KM8MPvTA75/
Stephen Crowder https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/
Tim Pool https://www.timcast.com/
Zero Hedge https://www.zerohedge.com/

Please add more in the comments. I'm watching this post and will add them up here.

« First    « Previous    Comments 41 - 80 of 96    Next »    Last »

41   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 15, 5:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

I agree that censorship is bad, but where do you draw the line for private companies? Is FOX news censorship? Is Trump blocking people on twitter censorship?
42   CBOEtrader   ignore (5)   2019 Jun 15, 5:26pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

WillPowers says
Then added what was really scary was, not only were right-wing voices being silenced, but left-wing voices were being silenced as well. Now he can add his own name to that list.


Yup. It's anyone who is anti-leftist-establishment, that means many right wing establishment types will be censored , as well as all free thinkers on both sides.

Totalitarianism starts by robbing those that are deplorable to the masses. Once they have their tools in place, anyone who doesn't comply will be oppressed. Eventually they will also be imprisoned and killed.

History is incredibly clear about the trajectory we are currently on. It's a road to hell, paved w the good intentions of the brainwashed. Currently that's anyone who agrees w CNN/MSNBC and the rest of the lying media.

The above mentioned free thinking leftists hate CNN as much as Trump supporters. See Tim Poole as an example
43   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2019 Jun 15, 5:31pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

joeyjojojunior says
I agree that censorship is bad, but where do you draw the line for private companies? Is FOX news censorship? Is Trump blocking people on twitter censorship?


Nope, a TV channel that isn't a user-based social media can't censor users by definition: One-way communication

An individual user CAN block people who are harassing them, necessary for the platform itself.

Since there are already tools (as well as blocklists) for users to block content they don't want to see, there's no reason for Social Media companies to block anybody.

No hard to parse.

In fact, not only does Twitter allow blocking by User, it allows blocking by words. Users can disappear tweets containing terms and never see them.

If Twitter can block users for their perspectives, then bakers can refuse to bake cakes based on perspectives, no?
44   Quigley   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 15, 6:10pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Shared illusions can be a powerful social device to make people feel connected to each other. For example, when Star Wars fans dress up, stand in line for hours, and then watch a new movie, they’re sharing an illusion, a fantasy, an alternative reality whose particulars are agreed upon and known.

I’m starting to understand the mindset of the willingly brainwashed. They want above all, to make sure that people around them understand the world in the same way they do. They want to share the same illusion, delusion, or fantasy as everyone else. And they know that the best way to achieve this is to hold hard to whatever ideology that Authority is preaching, then shame and denigrate anyone with a different viewpoint.
It’s not that they disagree with you, it’s that they really want everyone to think the same way, and find it offensive when other narratives are put forward.

You see, other competing narratives break their shared fantasy about the world into tiny pieces! Rather than relaxing with a comfortable fantasy, they’re suddenly thrust into a world of unknowns, of multiple interpretations, and many possible definitions.

This is why it’s so impossible to convince one of these sheeple that their ideology is wrong, even when it’s ridiculous on its face! To them, it’s not about the truth or reality! They just crave a shared illusion!

I propose that we just “Baaaaaa” at these sad souls and let them stew in their mired thoughts.
45   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 15, 6:16pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Thanks @Quigley I think your interpretation is correct.

It's uncomfortable for people in a shared fantasy to even begin to think about how the fantasy is wrong, because that might lead down the road to even more uncomfortable thoughts, such as:

* men and women inherently think differently
* the different races obviously have different aptitudes and interests
* homosexuality is just a bad choice in life, not innate at all
46   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 15, 6:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

WillPowers says
A story about Pinterest censoring conservatives by James O'Keefe and Project Veritas on Tim Pool's YouTube channel was removed without explaination.


Added links for James O'Keefe and Tim Pool to the original post above.

Thanks again @WillPowers !
47   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2019 Jun 15, 6:26pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Thanks Quigley.

I was eating deli for Father's Day, saw a stereotypical hipster walk by with some Comic Book BS shirt on. Had to have been at least 30 years old.

Grownass men (and women) who never gave up comic books/action figures/anime, not even for a few years as teens/college students/young people, is part of this "Create your own reality" shit we're seeing.

I see grownass men and women with their cubes all decked out in Spider Man and Batman and shit, I'm like WTF.

The Bible talks about "Putting away childish things". I'm not talking about a nostalgia wave parents/grandparents get when kids enter their lives, but mostly childless hipster bastards.

That shit was unacceptable when I was 13, you'd be the laughingstock of the dorm if you decked out your dorm that way. REALLY nerdy guys might get a pass, but it's gone way beyond that contingent now.

There's a permanent adolescence today that is relatively new (seen only among very autistic people in former eras).
49   mell   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 16, 8:47am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

joeyjojojunior says
Quigley says
I’m starting to understand the mindset of the willingly brainwashed. They want above all, to make sure that people around them understand the world in the same way they do. They want to share the same illusion, delusion, or fantasy as everyone else. And they know that the best way to achieve this is to hold hard to whatever ideology that Authority is preaching, then shame and denigrate anyone with a different viewpoint.
It’s not that they disagree with you, it’s that they really want everyone to think the same way, and find it offensive when other narratives are put forward.

You see, other competing narratives break their shared fantasy about the world into tiny pieces! Rather than relaxing with a comfortable fantasy, they’re suddenly thrust into a world of unknowns, of multiple interpretations, and many possible definitions.

This is why it’s so impossible to convince one of t...


Don't be delusional. Nobody got banned ever who didn't break the law. People left on their own volition mostly because Patrick didn't give them global mod rights or because a few of their personal posts were flagged.
50   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 16, 10:28am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

mell says
Don't be delusional. Nobody got banned ever who didn't break the law. People left on their own volition mostly because Patrick didn't give them global mod rights or because a few of their personal posts were flagged.


By law, you mean the made up rules of the website owner? Again, that's exactly what Twitter, Facebook, Pintrest, etc. say.

How is it not 100% hypocritical for Patrick to complain???
51   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 16, 10:36am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HonkpilledMaster says
If Twitter can block users for their perspectives, then bakers can refuse to bake cakes based on perspectives, no?


Yep, the Supreme Court ruled on that one I'm pretty sure.

HonkpilledMaster says
Nope, a TV channel that isn't a user-based social media can't censor users by definition: One-way communication


Yes, an apple isn't an orange. So what? A TV channel can only allow certain viewpoints to make it on their airwaves, thereby censoring content. Same as youtube.
52   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2019 Jun 16, 10:41am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

joeyjojojunior says
Yep, the Supreme Court ruled on that one I'm pretty sure.


It sure did! It ruled that Government Employees working with activists trying to entrap bakers is wrong.

joeyjojojunior says
Yes, an apple isn't an orange. So what? A TV channel can only allow certain viewpoints to make it on their airwaves, thereby censoring content. Same as youtube.


Not at all. The TV produces it's own content, doesn't allow people to start accounts and upload videos about makeup, twerking, old Gary Numan music videos, or SJWs to their 8PM timeslot.
53   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 16, 11:04am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

mell says

Don't be delusional. Nobody got banned ever who didn't break the law. People left on their own volition mostly because Patrick didn't give them global mod rights or because a few of their personal posts were flagged.


@mell is exactly right.

No one got banned for their views, ever.

The only bans have been for deliberately personally insulting other users over and over. And spammers, but they are robots as a rule.
54   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 16, 11:08am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

joeyjojojunior says
How is it not 100% hypocritical for Patrick to complain???


Easy, it's because Twitter and other corporate sites ban people explicitly because of their points of view.

That is absolutely never done on patrick.net.

I welcome all opinions here, unlike Twitter.
55   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 17, 2:20pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Apple Bans Gab from App Development After Company Makes Antitrust Case to DOJ

Tech giant Apple banned the developer account of free speech-focused social media network Gab, preventing the company from creating apps for iPhones and other Apple devices, shortly after the startup submitted a complaint to the Department of Justice about Big Tech’s anti-competitie business practices.

Breitbart News spoke with the CEO of Gab.com, Andrew Torba, about the company’s recent developments. As Torba wrote on Twitter, the free speech social media platform recently submitted a complaint to the DOJ which it hopes will spark an investigation into the business practices of the Masters of the Universe in Silicon Valley. Gab aimed to question if these firms were acting in a deliberately anti-competitive manner against smaller “alt-tech” businesses, and Apple’s recent actions may have proven Gab’s point.

SEE: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/17/apple-bans-gab-from-app-development-after-company-makes-antitrust-case-to-doj/
56   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 17, 3:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HonkpilledMaster says

Not at all. The TV produces it's own content, doesn't allow people to start accounts and upload videos about makeup, twerking, old Gary Numan music videos, or SJWs to their 8PM timeslot.


Don't be silly. TV networks buy content, just like youtube. This should be obvious when shows move from one network to another.

Patrick says
@mell is exactly right.

No one got banned for their views, ever.

The only bans have been for deliberately personally insulting other users over and over. And spammers, but they are robots as a rule.


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Your moderators absolutely banned people by disabling their ability to post because of their political views.

Patrick says
Easy, it's because Twitter and other corporate sites ban people explicitly because of their points of view.


They ban people because they violate their terms of service, just like Pat.net claims to do. Either sites can have their own rules, or they can't. Which is it?
57   mell   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 17, 6:32pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

joeyjojojunior says

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Your moderators absolutely banned people by disabling their ability to post because of their political views.


That's a lie. And you know it. Plenty of left wingers still posting incl. yourself. Why carry on a lie?
58   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 17, 7:02pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bingo.

Please make a point (not about any other user) and see if it gets banned.

It won't.
59   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 17, 8:17pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Scott Adams demonitized on YouTube whenever he mentions the "fine people" hoax, referring to the Charlottesville confrontation where a woman died as a result of a white nationalist running her over with a car. After the attack the quote from Trump everyone refers to is "There were good people on both sides," but if you listen to the whole quote he condemns white supremacists.
60   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 17, 9:30pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

joeyjojojunior says

They ban people because they violate their terms of service


Sometimes no reason is given. Scott Adams recently noticed every time he posted a video that mentions the "fine people" hoax, in reference to Charlottesville demonstrations, his video is demonitized for no given reason. What other reason could it be, besides his conservative views?
61   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2019 Jun 17, 11:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

All of PJMedia (!?!) and ZeroHedge are banned from Pinterest, as well as Live Action, one of the top pro-Life orgs in the nation.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-13/pinterest-is-latest-tech-company-drawn-into-u-s-culture-wars?srnd=markets-vp
62   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 6:53am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Thanks @HonkpilledMaster I added PJMedia, ZeroHedge, and Live Action in the original post above.
63   RafiMaas   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 18, 6:55am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
Thanks @HonkpilledMaster I added PJMedia, ZeroHedge, and Live Action in the original post above.


Problem is your list includes people whom have been demonetized which is not they same as being banned. So it's really just another bullshit list that isn't actually representative of the truth
64   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 6:56am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I think it's valid to include demonetized people.

It's still the same intolerant globalist corporate liberals working to slow or stop the free exchange of ideas.
65   RafiMaas   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 18, 6:59am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
I think it's valid to include demonetized people.


But demonetized does not equal banned.

Is tRump's dishonesty rubbing off on his followers?
66   RafiMaas   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 18, 7:08am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
It's still the same intolerant globalist corporate liberals working to slow or stop the free exchange of ideas.


Why is elgatouno and Mr magic banned from your site?

And by banned I mean has to have their comments checked by a moderator.

Are you an intolerant globalist corporate liberal?
67   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 7:09am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Lol, because they somehow could never just stick to making a point, but deliberately repeatedly insult the other users.

You know it's true.
68   RafiMaas   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 18, 7:21am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says

You know it's true.


Yes I know it's true that banned does not equal demonetized. Anyone trying to say it does is just dishonest.
69   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 7:22am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Demonetized is banned from making money.

But I updated the title to explicitly include demonetized, thanks. I want to be accurate.
70   RafiMaas   ignore (2)   2019 Jun 18, 7:24am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
Demonetized is banned from making money.

But I updated the title to explicitly include demonetized, thanks. I want to be accurate.


Good on you
72   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 18, 5:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

FROM February 2019,

Jesse Kelly, C.J. Pierson & Former Army Ranger, Kris Paronto: These are just a few of the people who were banned on Twitter for little or no reason. The latest victim of the banning craze is Dylan Louis Monroe, creator of the Deep State Mapping Project, to map the posts of Q-Anon, or just Q.

SEE: https://mojomorning.blogspot.com/2019/02/who-is-dylan-louis-monroe.html
73   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 18, 5:50pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HonkpilledMaster says


BRING BACK TEDDY ROSSEVELT, the only President to break up the BIG corporations and he only served one term, a great man, a great President and we need another one just like him to do the same thing. These corporations get too big and they control everything.
74   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 18, 5:53pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

RafiMaas says
by banned I mean has to have their comments checked by a moderator.


One could argue this is not the same as being banned.
75   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 18, 5:58pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

RafiMaas says
demonetized does not equal banned.


True. However, it is like sanctions. Sanctions are not a hot war, but they are a form of warfare and can lead to a hot war, as they did in WWII with Japan. In the same way, demonitization is a form of harssment which like sanctions, hurts both parties involved, YouTube and the user, but play at, 'This is going to hurt you more.'
76   WillPowers   ignore (0)   2019 Jun 18, 6:05pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

And I would like to say something in Patrick's defense. This is the most open forum I have ever had the pleasure to post my acidic rhetoric on this platform and when Patrick made the word "you" red, it helped to raise my consciousness, in that it called my attention to the fact I was making an ad hominen argument, and not addressing the issues. It helped to make my arguments stronger and made me remember I was writing about another living breathing human being who deserves respect just for being alive in this crazy world.
77   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 7:36pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Thank you Will. I really do appreciate your kind words.

I hope other people will post their acidic rhetoric here as well!
78   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 7:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

@WillPowers ^^
79   CBOEtrader   ignore (5)   2019 Jun 18, 7:40pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Quigley says
Shared illusions can be a powerful social device to make people feel connected to each other.


Did you come up w this on your own? Fabulously accurate. I see it more treacherously than you though.

Jonathan Haidt has the same conclusion as you, but he calls it righteousness. He suggests the more irrational the righteous virtue signal, the higher the group loyalty.

Since group cohesion is more important to daily life than rational thought, he suggests the human instinct to be righteous is partially designed to shut down rational thought... and we get an awesome shot of dopemine if our righteous behavior is cheered on by our tribe.

Jung once wrote "people don't have ideas, ideas have people".

Prof Peterson says, "it's past time in humanity's evolution when we can ever again accept violence to support an ideology".

The antifa, extreme leftists, 3rd wave feminist, and I assume the white nationalists as well (though via censorship I have no idea what those guys are staying these days) are all stuck in a virtue signalling righteous group bonding fantasy.

If left to fester, it always leads to mass murder . These people need to be publicly laughed at until they wake up from the fantasy.

Violence would make them more certain of their own delusions. Would never work
80   Patrick   ignore (1)   2019 Jun 18, 7:52pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

CBOEtrader says
Jonathan Haidt has the same conclusion as you, but he calls it righteousness. He suggests the more irrational the righteous virtue signal, the higher the group loyalty.

Since group cohesion is more important to daily life than rational thought, he suggests the human instinct to be righteous is partially designed to shut down rational thought... and we get an awesome shot of dopemine if our righteous behavior is cheered on by our tribe.


Wow, this does a lot to explain pervasive and unremitting Islamic violence as well.

They certainly are doing it for their tribe.

« First    « Previous    Comments 41 - 80 of 96    Next »    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions