TidaLWaveZ

? On a wired connection!?
 
The only thing I can think of that you haven't listed is updating the router firmware.

Nostalgia

because bookstrap looks much fancier than discount 7-eleven logo

Exactly,the comments section can be fun and some channel owners rely on helpful comments for feedback on their content.

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery.
 
Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. 
 
Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory.
 
Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery.
 
Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. 
 
Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory.
 
Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

I'd personally never take his advice at face value. He definitely has his own motives, I mean infowars sells health supplements for christ sakes. The only thing I support about infowars(and everyone) in this situation is the right to disperse their content without interference by social media.
 
I guess I understand your criticism of viewpoints that he injects but the documentary contains at least an hours worth of raw footage of the events including the full ritual, it's basically indisputable evidence of what happens.
 
Should of guessed the resident armchair extremist would rush in.
 
"FaceBook is a private entity. The can block whatever the f**k they want."
That means they can allow whatever they want as well... 
 
I noticed you targeted all opposition views while failing to criticize the OP, who made this thread criticizing Facebook for allowing infowars material.
 
XDDD
 

maybe it's time to start imposing term limits on company CEOs like they do with presidents/prime ministers

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery.
 
Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. 
 
Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory.
 
Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery.
 
Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. 
 
Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory.
 
Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

many have tried to do so, and most failed its not easy to compete with youtube because costs are large and until you have a big audience ads will not be worth much 
problem is that they are allowing way to many people to be upset, if a site shows up that could compete they would loose views pretty quickly, though its probably very hard to do so right now, 

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery.
 
Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. 
 
Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory.
 
Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery.
 
Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. 
 
Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory.
 
Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

I'll take the potentially unpopular opinion here.  Why should I let Facebook...no anyone for that matter tell me what is fake news?  Are they basically trying to tell the individual that they are incapable of doing that themselves and we need Big Brother Zucc to do it for us?

I know for a fact it's inaccurate because when I took one I got slightly above average. 

I'll just post the same thing again since you seem to ignore it and instead criticize my comprehension of statistics, which was addressed in my first sentence.
 
Nobody is arguing that London is a deadlier place than New York City in general. I'm just providing a real life example of strict gun laws not being the end all answer.

Not in the first three months of 2018.
 
Nobody is arguing that London is a deadlier place than New York City in general. I'm just providing a real life example of strict gun laws not being the end all answer.

No, the original stat is quarter 1 2018
 
London’s Metropolitan Police launched 46 murder inquiries in the first three months of 2018 – including 15 in February and 22 in March.
That is roughly double the number seen in the first quarter of last year and, in the latter two months, more than in New York, a city of comparable size.
It is the first time in modern history that London’s homicide rate, which has grown nearly 40 per cent in three years, has been higher than New York’s.
 
The point of me using this comparison is to point out that stricter gun laws don't unconditionally equate to less murder.

Humanity is the problem.
 
If we want there to be no crime then we have to sacrifice our humanity as a whole and just live completely controlled lives.

Humanity is the problem.
 
If we want there to be no crime then we have to sacrifice our humanity as a whole and just live completely controlled lives.

Yeah. Remember that time when an "assault rifle" went on a rampage and shot up a bunch of people?
 
(For those that can't tell, this is heavy sarcasm. Guns don't kill people. People kill people.)