Twitter swings the ban hammer at Project Veritas (2 Viewers)

[nolaspe]

Twitter suspends Project Veritas account

The move against the conservative activist organization comes amid a broader crackdown by the social media giant on those promoting misinformation.

www.politico.com

Project Veritas has been known to use deceptive practices and spread misinformation in attempts to expose what it views as “corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct” from liberal organizations or individuals. In September, Stanford University and University of Washington researchers wrote that a Project Veritas video alleging voter fraud with unidentified sources was what a “a domestic, coordinated elite disinformation campaign looks like in the United States.”

 

[Rawlings]

You're ignoring what people are telling you. I see at least 3 posts in this thread giving examples.

And I'm telling you that they're living in the past and ignoring the destructive politics of the Democratic plantation system behind the only real, systemically entrenched vestiges of racism in this country today.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

Saying America is systemically racist is delusional rubbish. Pointing to the institutional and societal racism of the past does not make that case against the America of today, indeed, against the America of the last 40 to 50 years!

FINALLY!
You made a half step towards an actual argument
Ok, where is the pivot point?
Where is the point (or points) where we transitioned from institutionally racist to not?

 

[DaveXA]

FINALLY!
You made a half step towards an actual argument
Ok, where is the pivot point?
Where is the point (or points) where we transitioned from institutionally racist to not?

Exactly. I'm looking for that sea change where we went from much systemic racism to little to no systemic racism. I'm not seeing it.

But, when you have someone who refuses to acknowledge a quacking duck when we see one, there's really no having a sensible discussion.

I mean, start with what does systemic racism mean? I'm pretty sure his definition of systemic racism is far different than that of most rational people.

 

[wardorican]

Saying America is systemically racist is delusional rubbish. Pointing to the institutional and societal racism of the past does not make that case against the America of today, indeed, against the America of the last 40 to 50 years!

I don't think anyone reasonable would say America is 'as racist' as in the past.

Systemic racism is racism on a system level that still exists to some level.

So, knowing that there were a litany of issues 50 some years ago, do you think there are still current effects from some of that today?

 

[Xeno]

Exactly. I'm looking for that sea change where we went from much systemic racism to little to no systemic racism. I'm not seeing it.

But, when you have someone who refuses to acknowledge a quacking duck when we see one, there's really no having a sensible discussion.

I mean, start with what does systemic racism mean? I'm pretty sure his definition of systemic racism is far different than that of most rational people.

 

[Rawlings]

30 years ago, this was accurate. However, as I said, language evolves. Otherwise, we’d still be speaking Old English.

Also, I hate to break it to you, but if you use “they” as the pronoun for “everyone” and “everybody”, you’re already using “they” for a singular antecedent. Both “everyone” and “everybody” are singular nouns.

So you’ve already either shown some willingness to allow language to evolve or some ignorance or inconsistency in your application of your stagnant grammar rules.

Nonsense! You're not breaking anything to me. I broke it to you that using he as the gender-neutral, third-person singular pronoun when the gender of the antecedent is unknown has in fact been the universal standard for centuries. And that remains the case.

One does not write: "The student entered the building and it/they registered for drama." Shut up!

And the reason that the pronoun they is proper for the antecedent everyone/everybody is because the latter is plural in meaning. Each one/every one are singular in meaning. Duh.

Stop talking out your arse.

 

[Xeno]

Nonsense! You're not breaking anything to me. I broke it to you that using he as the gender-neutral, third-person singular pronoun when the gender of the antecedent is unknown has in fact been the universal standard for centuries. And that remains the case.

One does not write: "The student entered the building and it/they registered for drama." Shut up!

And the reason that the pronoun they is proper for the antecedent everyone/everybody is because the latter is plural in meaning. Each one/every one are singular in meaning. Duh.

Stop talking out your arse.

You're right, they'd write, "The student entered the building and registered for drama," because adding a pronoun there makes for a clunky, poorly written sentence.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

Nonsense! You're not breaking anything to me. I broke it to you that using he as the gender-neutral, third-person singular pronoun when the gender of the antecedent is unknown has in fact been the universal standard for centuries. And that remains the case.

One does not write: "The student entered the building and it/they registered for drama." Shut up!

And the reason that the pronoun they is proper for the antecedent everyone/everybody is because the latter is plural in meaning. Each one/every one are singular in meaning. Duh.

Stop talking out your arse.

Do you still refer to friends’/colleagues’ wives as “Mrs. Friend‘s full name?

 

[wardorican]

Nonsense! You're not breaking anything to me. I broke it to you that using he as the gender-neutral, third-person singular pronoun when the gender of the antecedent is unknown has in fact been the universal standard for centuries. And that remains the case.

One does not write: "The student entered the building and it/they registered for drama." Shut up!

And the reason that the pronoun they is proper for the antecedent everyone/everybody is because the latter is plural in meaning. Each one/every one are singular in meaning. Duh.

Stop talking out your arse.

This seems excessively rude and counterproductive to discussion.

 

[zztop]

good news everyone! Parler is back online, now loathsome people everywhere can cheer for their safe bastion of racism, xenophobia and conspiracy theories

 

[brandon]

Nonsense! You're not breaking anything to me. I broke it to you that using he as the gender-neutral, third-person singular pronoun when the gender of the antecedent is unknown has in fact been the universal standard for centuries. And that remains the case.

One does not write: "The student entered the building and it/they registered for drama." Shut up!

And the reason that the pronoun they is proper for the antecedent everyone/everybody is because the latter is plural in meaning. Each one/every one are singular in meaning. Duh.

Stop talking out your arse.

I'll show you my degree if you show me yours.

 

[Rawlings]

FINALLY!
You made a half step towards an actual argument
Ok, where is the pivot point?
Where is the point (or points) where we transitioned from institutionally racist to not?

I've said that all along, as others incessantly and quite unwittingly confound the notion that America, in and of itself, is still systemically racist with instances of societal racism, albeit, inevitably, as is lefty's wont, in terms of entrenched economic inequalities. Oh, lefty just loves pointing the latter out and blaming whitey, the moon, the stars, the tooth fairy . . . as he accuses those who oppose his hackneyed policies of racism.

What does lefty not love to do?

Take responsibility for the 60 years of his policies' failure to fix the generationally entrenched deprivations of our inner-cities especially. Indeed, it's his policies that exacerbate the problems in the first place. Why, one might almost suspect that Democrats want a generationally entrenched underclass of poverty and dependency to use and manipulate and enflame as a means of holding onto power.

 

[Rawlings]

This seems excessively rude and counterproductive to discussion.

Lying is excessively rude.

 

[Rawlings]

good news everyone! Parler is back online, now loathsome people everywhere can cheer for their safe bastion of racism, xenophobia and conspiracy theories

Leftist Hysteria Alert!

 

[wardorican]

Lying is excessively rude.

I agree. Feel free to point out any of my lies.

 

[DaveXA]

Lying is excessively rude.

I'd like for you to point out just one.

 

[Rawlings]

You're right, they'd write, "The student entered the building and registered for drama," because adding a pronoun there makes for a clunky, poorly written sentence.

Oh, for crying out loud! The point was that in those instances when the gender of the antecedent is unknown, he is the historical standard and, in my opinion, the only sensible standard. Period. One does not use it or they in sentences like:

Somebody left his milk on the counter.​

​

Which student crapped his pants?​

​

Lefty is known for his duplicity.​

Better? It wasn't even I who made a big deal out of the matter in the first place. One of you lefties got your feminist panites all in a wade becuse I don't use the feminist she or the awkward he/she. LMAO! I don't go around throwing hissy fits because someone uses she or he/she in the above. Such petty bs wouldn't even occur to me.

 

[Xeno]

Oh, for crying out loud! The point was that in those instances when the gender of the antecedent is unknown, he is the historical standard and, in my opinion, the only sensible standard. Period. One does not use it or they in sentences like:

Somebody left his milk on the counter.​

​

Which student crapped his pants?​

​

Lefty is known for his duplicity.​

Better? It wasn't even I who made a big deal out of the matter in the first place. One of you lefties got your feminist panites all in a wade becuse I don't use the feminist she or the awkward he/she. LMAO!

I'm sorry, you seem to have mistaken me for someone who takes you seriously. That would be incorrect.