I’ll keep repeating — this is not a private corp issue anymore.
Does United Parcel Service censor; does US Post Office, AT&T and phone services? The private communications carrier (Facebook) can charge a membership fee or not; right now it doesn’t charge a fee to read or write on it. Censorship on public-space communication spaces is by subpoena when there is evidence of transmitting child pornography, criminal activity, etc.
California has the Pruneyard case. That makes a private area that the public can walk into without showing a membership card into a public speech area. The private vendor must allow free speech in at least one designated area.
I find it notable that censorship gravitated to censoring pro-Israel viewpoints — then and now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://www.sjpl.org/blog/free-speech-silicon-valley-pruneyard-shopping-center-v-robbins
It was November 1975; disco was at its height, flared pants abounded, and the United Nations had just adopted General Assembly Resolution 3379, condemning Zionism as a form of racism. High schoolers … set up a table in the courtyard of Campbell’s Pruneyard shopping center (then just five years old) to collect signatures.
—>The U.S. constitution empowers the states to grant citizens whatever rights they see fit, so long as those rights do not run counter to those guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. It was on the basis of the affirmative free speech rights of the California Constitution that Hammer argued to the SCOTUS that the California Court had been within its rights to countermand the precedent established in Lloyd v Tanner. He further argued that since shopping centers often intentionally established themselves as community gathering places, they were obligated to adopt the rules that govern the public square.
As opposed to, say, the Hare Krishnas.
Most Jews protesting today only distinguish their identity when as-a-jew promotes the greater prog narrative.
Pretty pathetic, given recent events. Chuck Schumer KNEELS with a kente cloth tallit while Cuomo and DeBlasio are a disgrace. A few hasidim demonstrate politely, that’s all.
Discover more from Vlad Tepes
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Vlad, you need to run your site on Parler.
Please explain what that means
Desirable theme
A threat.
Cuckitude.
Knee epaulette
Servitude.
https://home.parler.com/how-do-i-connect-my-news-site-blog-or-content-community-with-parler-commenting/
https://bongino.com/dan-bongino-announces-partnership-with-parler
I’ll keep repeating — this is not a private corp issue anymore.
Does United Parcel Service censor; does US Post Office, AT&T and phone services? The private communications carrier (Facebook) can charge a membership fee or not; right now it doesn’t charge a fee to read or write on it. Censorship on public-space communication spaces is by subpoena when there is evidence of transmitting child pornography, criminal activity, etc.
California has the Pruneyard case. That makes a private area that the public can walk into without showing a membership card into a public speech area. The private vendor must allow free speech in at least one designated area.
https://www.google.com/search?q=parler&oq=parler&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l4.4785j0j4&client=ms-android-bell-ca&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
https://parler.com/auth/access
I find it notable that censorship gravitated to censoring pro-Israel viewpoints — then and now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins
https://www.sjpl.org/blog/free-speech-silicon-valley-pruneyard-shopping-center-v-robbins
It was November 1975; disco was at its height, flared pants abounded, and the United Nations had just adopted General Assembly Resolution 3379, condemning Zionism as a form of racism. High schoolers … set up a table in the courtyard of Campbell’s Pruneyard shopping center (then just five years old) to collect signatures.
—>The U.S. constitution empowers the states to grant citizens whatever rights they see fit, so long as those rights do not run counter to those guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. It was on the basis of the affirmative free speech rights of the California Constitution that Hammer argued to the SCOTUS that the California Court had been within its rights to countermand the precedent established in Lloyd v Tanner. He further argued that since shopping centers often intentionally established themselves as community gathering places, they were obligated to adopt the rules that govern the public square.
As opposed to, say, the Hare Krishnas.
Most Jews protesting today only distinguish their identity when as-a-jew promotes the greater prog narrative.
Pretty pathetic, given recent events. Chuck Schumer KNEELS with a kente cloth tallit while Cuomo and DeBlasio are a disgrace. A few hasidim demonstrate politely, that’s all.