Facebook and Instagram Ban Proud Boys, Founder

[SBJJ]

Their founder promotes violence calling on people to be punched in the face. From an image stand point it would be wise to promote self defense rather than appear to be looking for a fight. You might be able to keep your social media platform that way. If not, those who run the site may ban you from using it. I don't see the issue. Even sherdog has regulations, do Twitter, FB, and IG not have their own?

Do you think armed people attacking innocent protesters should be punched in the face. I do

Fuck, I just got booted off FB for saying that

 

[SBJJ]

I haven't spoken to any of their members. I haven't taken a stance one way or the other. I'm pointing to the fact that they've ruffled some feathers. So when you're the common variable, maybe it's not everybody else to point the finger at.

Common variable? Have they fought with anyone not Antifa

 

[FightGuyOpenMind]

Do you think armed people attacking innocent protesters should be punched in the face. I do

Fuck, I just got booted off FB for saying that

You are not in agreement with them being removed from the sites I presume? I personally don't know them, nor have I seen their work in person but it looks as if they may have had a hand in digging their own graves as far as their reputation goes. I'm sure they haven't been labeled a "violent extremist group" for helping to walk old ladies across the street.

If FB sites them, and removes them for "hate speech", Twitter or otherwise is that not their right to do so?

I mean you can drive however you want, but don't expect me to give you the keys to my car.

 

[FightGuyOpenMind]

Common variable? Have they fought with anyone not Antifa

They have raised some eyebrows. I'm not against anyone delivering a message, or exercising expression. However, you tread a line when you allow violence to be displayed around you, and you don't denounce it.

I'm all for peaceful protest. If you're defending yourself that is one thing, however, if you're seemingly inviting conflict then you start to lose ground.

I read something about "Fourth Degree" members have to get into a fight with a political opponent from the left wing protestors? Is this true?

If it is then they are operating in a criminal manner. They have to get tattoos and are initiated with a beating (regardless of how corny it is)? Is this true?

It sounds to me like they are operating somewhat akin to a street gang. Law enforcement might have to take notice, and social media may not want them on their channels. They do have a website of their own, so I still don't see the issue.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

We are so fuct as a nation and a western society. I should think the guy that shot up the synagogue would prove this: prevent civil discourse from happening and violent discourse is what you get. You need to let these conversations play out and be moderated organically, you just do not shut people up and force them to echo chambers where their hate will go unchecked. Gavin is far from a racist, just does not think Antifa has the right to assault people with out consequence, and also believes in conservative value......grouping him in with actual racists and nuts like the dude that shot up the temple will just push more moderates in to extreme positions. I think many guys will agree with about 90% of what he says if they bothered to listen to him, especially with his sentiments on equality of outcome vs opportunity. Just like Saudi Arabia attacked us and we went after Iraq, this tragedy is being used as a political scapegoat to further come after free speech.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

Only in 2018 America can you start a fight, get your ass kicked and become the victim. Only one side is wearing masks, and I think that should tell you who the good guys and bad guys were. Just imagine the KKK attacked some black guys and got their ass kicked: that would be an automatic Best Picture for Tarantino.

 

[all caps]

We are so fuct as a nation and a western society. I should think the guy that shot up the synagogue would prove this: prevent civil discourse from happening and violent discourse is what you get. You need to let these conversations play out and be moderated organically, you just do not shut people up and force them to echo chambers where their hate will go unchecked. Gavin is far from a racist, just does not think Antifa has the right to assault people with out consequence, and also believes in conservative value......grouping him in with actual racists and nuts like the dude that shot up the temple will just push more moderates in to extreme positions. I think many guys will agree with about 90% of what he says if they bothered to listen to him, especially with his sentiments on equality of outcome vs opportunity. Just like Saudi Arabia attacked us and we went after Iraq, this tragedy is being used as a political scapegoat to further come after free speech.

I think you and I see things the same way.

Personally i think they (the media) are trying to create extremists. This shit is not happening on accident. They want us to be at war with each other.

 

[FightGuyOpenMind]

We are so fuct as a nation and a western society. I should think the guy that shot up the synagogue would prove this: prevent civil discourse from happening and violent discourse is what you get. You need to let these conversations play out and be moderated organically, you just do not shut people up and force them to echo chambers where their hate will go unchecked. Gavin is far from a racist, just does not think Antifa has the right to assault people with out consequence, and also believes in conservative value......grouping him in with actual racists and nuts like the dude that shot up the temple will just push more moderates in to extreme positions. I think many guys will agree with about 90% of what he says if they bothered to listen to him, especially with his sentiments on equality of outcome vs opportunity. Just like Saudi Arabia attacked us and we went after Iraq, this tragedy is being used as a political scapegoat to further come after free speech.

I like a lot of what Gavin talks about. He has even distanced himself from the race debate. Where he falls short I believe is allowing violence to surround his campaign. It's not always what you say as it is how you're perceived. He is selling an ideal, however, when the ideal is matched with fists being thrown people will pay less attention to it.

I think he is allowing violence to overshadow his movement by not necessarily denouncing it. Instead of saying "throw punches" he could have said his group advocates self defense, and then I don't think it would be seen so harshly. I think bravado is drowning the intended message. I'm all about diplomacy first, whatever else happens after I am accepting of but I won't boast about it.

 

[FightGuyOpenMind]

I think you and I see things the same way.

Personally i think they (the media) are trying to create extremists. This shit is not happening on accident. They want us to be at war with each other.

I think the media is puppeteering the hell out of this country. For what reasons, only time will tell. People need to stop relying on others to determine their view points. Most people seem to want the same thing, but are convinced the other side is trying to deny them that.

There are those extremists as you mentioned who are just against any type of cohesion, however, I think the masses are being duped into believing that the other side is out to get them. It can lead to extreme paranoia, and perhaps even preemptive attacks. People are triggered and on edge. We need to stop and be sensible. Both sides.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

I think you and I see things the same way.

Personally i think they (the media) are trying to create extremists. This shit is not happening on accident. They want us to be at war with each other.

Exactly. Look at really any war in recent history: always over money but framed as being fort human rights. We knew about the Holocaust and did shit, just like we knew about slavery and gave 0 f's.....only started caring when money and or power was on the line. After the blood was spilled tho, it is framed as being for "freeing the slaves.....liberating the holocaust victims.............human rights''. It is just crazy that we get duped again and again and we fall for the same bait.

Now, MSM and big corps are bleeding money in this alternative media, alternative currency society, so there is going to be a calm down put on it under the false cloak of 'hate speech....human rights'.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

I like a lot of what Gavin talks about. He has even distanced himself from the race debate. Where he falls short I believe is allowing violence to surround his campaign. It's not always what you say as it is how you're perceived. He is selling an ideal, however, when the ideal is matched with fists being thrown people will pay less attention to it.

I think he is allowing violence to overshadow his movement by not necessarily denouncing it. Instead of saying "throw punches" he could have said his group advocates self defense, and then I don't think it would be seen so harshly. I think bravado is drowning the intended message. I'm all about diplomacy first, whatever else happens after I am accepting of but I won't boast about it.

How does he allow violence to his campaign tho? He does not go to the violence, the violence comes to him. I still have yet to see Proud Boys needlessly attack Antifa. Every time it is Antifa starts a fight and Proudboys finish it. Should they just let themselves get assaulted - beat up? When did it become such a bad thing to stand up for yourself when someone assaults you? Antifa is the definition of a terrorist group, attacking people for their political beliefs, but Proud Boys do not attack anyone.

The reality is Gavin is funny, effective and he is an influencer. The people that run the show are engaged in an information war and want to silence all the effective people, like Jones and Gavin, and they will use any confabulation or straw man to do so. Worse yet, when these silenced people are told to 'find another Twitter', they do in gab, and then that is shut down. At what point do we admit big tech has colluded and there is a monopoly going on - when your website is being shut down, we are now in monopoly territory, just like with phone companies.

 

[Ruprecht]

How does he allow violence to his campaign tho? He does not go to the violence, the violence comes to him. I still have yet to see Proud Boys needlessly attack Antifa. Every time it is Antifa starts a fight and Proudboys finish it. Should they just let themselves get assaulted - beat up? When did it become such a bad thing to stand up for yourself when someone assaults you? Antifa is the definition of a terrorist group, attacking people for their political beliefs, but Proud Boys do not attack anyone.

The reality is Gavin is funny, effective and he is an influencer. The people that run the show are engaged in an information war and want to silence all the effective people, like Jones and Gavin, and they will use any confabulation or straw man to do so. Worse yet, when these silenced people are told to 'find another Twitter', they do in gab, and then that is shut down. At what point do we admit big tech has colluded and there is a monopoly going on - when your website is being shut down, we are now in monopoly territory, just like with phone companies.

That's not what the criminal charges which lead to them being banned say.

There is a variation in the charges depending on what’s on the video.”Hare charged members of the left-wing group before an Antifa member threw a bottle at the Proud Boys, Assistant District Attorney Jamie Kleidman said Monday night.
“He was the first individual to charge Antifa. Then he threw the first punch,” she said. “He was one of the mob who violently climbed on top of (an Antifa member), pulled him to the ground, repeatedly striking him four times in the head.”
Hare continued to elbow, punch and stomp the Antifa member, even after someone in his own group tried to restrain him, Kleidman said.
Lennan dragged the Antifa member across the pavement while Hare was on top of him, Kleidman said. “He then kicked a second man and bragged about it afterward,” she said.

 

[FightGuyOpenMind]

How does he allow violence to his campaign tho? He does not go to the violence, the violence comes to him. I still have yet to see Proud Boys needlessly attack Antifa. Every time it is Antifa starts a fight and Proudboys finish it. Should they just let themselves get assaulted - beat up? When did it become such a bad thing to stand up for yourself when someone assaults you? Antifa is the definition of a terrorist group, attacking people for their political beliefs, but Proud Boys do not attack anyone.

The reality is Gavin is funny, effective and he is an influencer. The people that run the show are engaged in an information war and want to silence all the effective people, like Jones and Gavin, and they will use any confabulation or straw man to do so. Worse yet, when these silenced people are told to 'find another Twitter', they do in gab, and then that is shut down. At what point do we admit big tech has colluded and there is a monopoly going on - when your website is being shut down, we are now in monopoly territory, just like with phone companies.

You have to be situationally aware. What would you rather give up, your bravado or your message?

If one of your members is caught fighting a counter protestor and calling him a homosexual slur you've given the news a headline and those who don't know you from a can of paint, a bad first impression. People don't typically look deeper than the headline of a story. You become those guys hitting people calling them homosexual slurs.

If you know they are trying to silence you, don't play into their game. Know your enemies' tactics as well as your own.

The monopoly of the internet thing is not isolated to them, I know groups from the left who are worried about censorship. The reason for the censorship is because free speech is free until people get hurt, die, property damage, etc. We have the right to peaceful protest correct?

The govt is not going to care who is the cause of the fight. They'll just see combatants, shut it down, and let us argue over who is right and who is wrong. Then the conversations never get had.

I agree with them having a platform, I agree with some of their views, I do not agree with their bravado. I agree with self defense but I do not agree with "rallying the troops" style comments. "I want violence...." ?? This is not a good way to win people over to your cause in my view.

 

[all caps]

People don't typically look deeper than the headline of a story. You become those guys hitting people calling them homosexual slurs

You are 100% right.

And the forces and resources against you are.... impossible to conquer. I honestly have no idea how you are ever supposed to win. You cant make 1 mistake or 1 bad decisions because you are instantly done (if you even managed to gain any traction)

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

I think the media is puppeteering the hell out of this country. For what reasons, only time will tell. People need to stop relying on others to determine their view points. Most people seem to want the same thing, but are convinced the other side is trying to deny them that.

There are those extremists as you mentioned who are just against any type of cohesion, however, I think the masses are being duped into believing that the other side is out to get them. It can lead to extreme paranoia, and perhaps even preemptive attacks. People are triggered and on edge. We need to stop and be sensible. Both sides.

I think the reasons for the puppetering were told to us long ago by guys like Orwell, who was privy to an inner circle of people that had the gameplan and even wrote of it. They want a controllable, unaware and compliant citizenry; they want people reliant on the state and mentally manipulatable; they want the strong family to be destroyed so that no one from 'the tribe' will be there to stand up for you when the state comes; and they want a consolidation of resources, money and power. If the people realized their true power, they could rise up at any second and take the power back, and this is the tricky situation all leaders find themselves in and why consent manufacturing is such a difficult business (ask the French about that).

When Communism takes over, the first class to always go are the artists, creative people, free thinkers, intelligencia and upper class (high IQ people). When the person is reliant on the state, low IQ, you can control every facet of their life. The CIA invested heavily and tech start ups and silicone valley thru angel investors, and they weren't doing this to help people have better social media. The selective banning of certain political beliefs on all social media tells you what is happening: Antifa and Communists can stay but the guy that says "don't let people punch you....be proud to be a man........equality of opportunity over equality of outcome.....pro family values" is banned, and those saying "men can pee in the women's room....white people are evil groveling goblins....white genocide can not come fast enough.........communism is the best" can stay and are given raises and illustrious jobs. And just like mass shootings are good for gun grabs, being attacked is good for war, the holocaust was good for the zionists, the best thing for a free speech grab is when these disenfranchised nuts that is put in an internet ghetto goes off the hinges and shoots a bunch of people.

Silicone Valley knew what it was doing when it started silencing people, just like MSM knew what it was doing when it was non stop coverage over 'white cops shooting innocent black men': they are creating problems, starting fires and then throwing gas on the fire with a long goal in mind: Divide And Conquer 101. This is the information war and the obvious end result of and reason the CIA was so heavily invested in all these social media companies: who needs to research your enemies when they will tell you all you need to know and make your job easier (right out of the Nazi playbook).

I always thought it was hilarious that people that thought Obama or Trump winning meant good change was coming - instead, it is just an illusion, with presidents being selected to just give people the illusion they have a choice and consent manufacture, to keep them totally distracted from what is going on and then use that President to help further the end goal: i.e. the worst thing for race relations is a black president and the worst thing for free speech is a free speech president (give the people the noose and let them hang theirselves). We constantly make the mistake of thinking these pathological liars drawn to greed, money and power will eventually have our interests in mind, care about right>wrong and surrender their power and resources to us, because it is the right thing to do, but they never will.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

You have to be situationally aware. What would you rather give up, your bravado or your message?

If one of your members is caught fighting a counter protestor and calling him a homosexual slur you've given the news a headline and those who don't know you from a can of paint, a bad first impression. People don't typically look deeper than the headline of a story. You become those guys hitting people calling them homosexual slurs.

If you know they are trying to silence you, don't play into their game. Know your enemies' tactics as well as your own.

The monopoly of the internet thing is not isolated to them, I know groups from the left who are worried about censorship. The reason for the censorship is because free speech is free until people get hurt, die, property damage, etc. We have the right to peaceful protest correct?

The govt is not going to care who is the cause of the fight. They'll just see combatants, shut it down, and let us argue over who is right and who is wrong. Then the conversations never get had.

I agree with them having a platform, I agree with some of their views, I do not agree with their bravado. I agree with self defense but I do not agree with "rallying the troops" style comments. "I want violence...." ?? This is not a good way to win people over to your cause in my view.

I think what guys like Gavin would say is "don't let them control the narrative. Do what you feel is right", as the moment you give these people an inch, they take a mile. If you let them control the narrative, grovel to their level, that will be your undoing. It has been interesting to watch the Me Too movement, and I've seen that the people that apologize are instantaneously destroyed. The only way to deal with these people is swing back, don't apologize and stick to your guns.

I will agree that the reason Gavin gained so much notoriety is because I feel with his rhetoric made him useful to the end goal, and with his humor and wording, it was imminent that he would say something that would make him easy to ban. The way he talks is how regular guys talk, but you can't talk that way in an office.

Gavin was doomed from the gitgo tho: nothing he has ever said has been 1/100th as bad as Sarah Jeung, but she is allowed to stay, given a promotion and he is banned. It's all political and these people will search for any reason to ban someone if it suits their agenda and allow them to stay if they actually engage in hate speech but it helps their agenda. The people at Gab didn't shoot up a Synagogue but now they are be blamed, while twitter still stands and deals with similar stuff all the time (i.e. cop shootings and other crimes being announced on their platforms prior to happening); hypocrisy and double standards galore.

You're right, the free speech is not really a left or right issue, tho it is kind of becoming one, and one for mainstream media watching crowds. A lot of the Bernie crowd, like Jimmy Dore, guys outside the mainstream are pro free speech, while it seems to be the more MSM Hillary types that are all against it. And when push comes to shove, even a lot of Trump supporters would be happy if certain democrats were censored, as the thrill of winning a battle can blind you from winning the war. It's interesting to note that the super left leaning ACLU defended the Klu Klux Klan's free speech, but now a day, we call anyone that we don't agree with a KKK member and advocate to take their free speech without giving a solid reason, other than "He's a Nazi!".

I just see both sides falling for the bait and being played like a fiddle. Alan Watt is a great guy to decipher the end game and explain what is going on. Im relatively new to all of this, did nothing t really sort paying attention to what is really going on until a few years ago, so figuring stuff out as I go.

 

[Fawlty]

Nutter manifestos are always such uninteresting dreck.

 

[FightGuyOpenMind]

I think the reasons for the puppetering were told to us long ago by guys like Orwell, who was privy to an inner circle of people that had the gameplan and even wrote of it. They want a controllable, unaware and compliant citizenry; they want people reliant on the state and mentally manipulatable; they want the strong family to be destroyed so that no one from 'the tribe' will be there to stand up for you when the state comes; and they want a consolidation of resources, money and power. If the people realized their true power, they could rise up at any second and take the power back, and this is the tricky situation all leaders find themselves in and why consent manufacturing is such a difficult business (ask the French about that).

When Communism takes over, the first class to always go are the artists, creative people, free thinkers, intelligencia and upper class (high IQ people). When the person is reliant on the state, low IQ, you can control every facet of their life. The CIA invested heavily and tech start ups and silicone valley thru angel investors, and they weren't doing this to help people have better social media. The selective banning of certain political beliefs on all social media tells you what is happening: Antifa and Communists can stay but the guy that says "don't let people punch you....be proud to be a man........equality of opportunity over equality of outcome.....pro family values" is banned, and those saying "men can pee in the women's room....white people are evil groveling goblins....white genocide can not come fast enough.........communism is the best" can stay and are given raises and illustrious jobs. And just like mass shootings are good for gun grabs, being attacked is good for war, the holocaust was good for the zionists, the best thing for a free speech grab is when these disenfranchised nuts that is put in an internet ghetto goes off the hinges and shoots a bunch of people.

Silicone Valley knew what it was doing when it started silencing people, just like MSM knew what it was doing when it was non stop coverage over 'white cops shooting innocent black men': they are creating problems, starting fires and then throwing gas on the fire with a long goal in mind: Divide And Conquer 101. This is the information war and the obvious end result of and reason the CIA was so heavily invested in all these social media companies: who needs to research your enemies when they will tell you all you need to know and make your job easier (right out of the Nazi playbook).

I always thought it was hilarious that people that thought Obama or Trump winning meant good change was coming - instead, it is just an illusion, with presidents being selected to just give people the illusion they have a choice and consent manufacture, to keep them totally distracted from what is going on and then use that President to help further the end goal: i.e. the worst thing for race relations is a black president and the worst thing for free speech is a free speech president (give the people the noose and let them hang theirselves). We constantly make the mistake of thinking these pathological liars drawn to greed, money and power will eventually have our interests in mind, care about right>wrong and surrender their power and resources to us, because it is the right thing to do, but they never will.

Very well said.