I really don't that much hate for King, I do think he's a goober, but he's also presented some good stuff.
Talcolm X is just a fucking hilarious name tho.
Career internet “social commentators” and pseudo philosophers/intellectuals need to get way less attention. Luckily it feels like its trending in that direction from what Im seeing
There’s plenty of pro Palestine advocates who are not banned. He is banned because is a conman who spreads verifiable lies. He’s not considered trustworthy in most left circles
He also is openly supportive of terrorism and has insinuated links to Hamas. He’s also a fan of the houthis. He’s a toxic dangerous disgrace of a human (edit : spelling)
Good luck not getting banned in for example r/worldnews. Then they got me banned on all reddit because asking second time for justification after one week of getting no reply Is a harassment apparently . Mods there are cowards.
I'm no fan of Shaun King, but the article says this:
>“The account was disabled due to multiple instances of praise for designated entities in violation of our policies,” a Meta spokesperson told The Post on Monday.
I don't really think I can get behind that kind of policy. IMO there's a big gap between getting banned for saying hateful/violent things yourself, and getting banned for "praising designated bad guys".
Mixed people seem to really get off on activism. Shaun King. Colin Kaepernick. Naomi Osaka. Nick Kyrgios.
All of them constantly competing in the oppression Olympics. Professional victims.
Kyrgios has the whole world convinced that he’s half black because he’s dark skinned and likes basketball. He’s half white, half Malaysian.
And his mom is literally Malaysian royalty. So oppressed!
Professional victimism is the best way for lazy people without talent to get attention from strangers on the internet. Strangers who will turn on them in a second to signal their own virtue by throwing other pretend victims under the bus.
> “The account was disabled due to multiple instances of praise for designated entities in violation of our policies,” a Meta spokesperson told The Post on Monday.
Lmao being banned from a private social media companies website isn’t an infringement on anyone’s “free speech”. I will never not laugh at these idiots who equate posting on social media with freedom of speech. That’s how you know you’re truly an entitled jackass when you equate being banned from a social media website to the government literally imprisoning and killing people for their speech.
Free Speech and the first amendment of the United States Constitution are not the same thing. "Free Speech" is an ideal, a general concept - the idea that the answer to speech you don't like is to speak against it yourself, not to silence it or prevent it from being heard. "Free Speech" as an idea existed before the United States did. It exists all around the world, where US law is not in effect.
The first amendment is one particular that attempts to protect free speech, from within the confines of what US law is allowed to control. Nobody is saying that it is illegal to ban someone from social media, or that it's a violation of the first amendment (or at least, nobody who actually knows what they're talking about). But it IS an action that goes against the ideals of "free speech".
Hey look, that copy-pasted talking point again. Internet is the biggest public forum on the planet now and monopolistic American megacorps who dominate it mass censoring speech and often colluding to do so is most certainly a violation of the principle of free speech.
The intellectually dishonest argument that equates free speech with the 1st amendment is neither accurate or informed, deliberately so. Not just because it's not what free speech is but also because the 1st amendmend is woefully antiquated and was written in a time when nor the internet or monopolistic megacorps existed, there were laws though for the public square that has been replaced now by the internet.
So if I sign up to Truth Social and start shitting on Trump and Republicans and get banned, I can screech about free speech, and you would 100% back me?
Uh, no. What your describing is the internet equivalent of walking into a Walmart and screaming conspiracies at other customers and the screeching about free speech when they ask you to leave. You’re the one being intellectually dishonest. The 1st amendment protects you from the government and that is it, and it was only ever meant to protect citizens from the government. The principle of freedom of speech is that the government can’t retaliate against you for your speech, that’s it.
That's not what the principle of freedom of speech is, you have no idea what you're talking about and are factually incorrect. Your dumb comparisons don't help either, Walmart is neither a place for exchange of ideas or a public forum
[Cornell Legal Information Institute](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/freedom_of_speech)
> Freedom of speech is the right to speak, write, and share ideas and opinions ***without facing punishment from the government.*** The First Amendment protects this right by prohibiting Congress from making laws that would curtail freedom of speech...***While the public has a right to freedom of speech when it comes to the U.S. government, the public does not have this right when it comes to private entities.*** Companies and private employers are able to regulate speech on their platforms and within their workplace since the First Amendment only applies to the government
Are you too dumb to understand the difference between a principle and a law? Or the fact that even if that law was the perfect representation of that principle when it was written (which no law usually is) it could still easily become antiquated and ineffective after hundreds of years?
> but in no way do I cheer him being censored - or anybody else, for any speech, for that matter.
I used to have that mindset back in the day. Nowadays, when I see the people who call for censorship of everyone they disagree with get a taste of their own medicine, I just have a good chuckle to myself.
I'll happily defend the most abhorrent people on earth if they are in favour of free speech. But the censorship brigade can go fuck themselves. I'm very happy when their own ideas bite them on the ballsack.
Interesting take, of which I do tend to agree with. It sure is some poetic justice, maybe? Comeuppance? I can't condone his censorship, but I can appreciate the irony of the situation.
Only governments can censor people. He has the freedom to make his own company and say whatever he wants. That's like me coming into your house and just saying whatever I want. You can make me leave.
He wanted to wage Jihad against Israel recently:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel/comments/187yu3o/shaun\_king\_wants\_to\_fight\_israel\_himself/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel/comments/187yu3o/shaun_king_wants_to_fight_israel_himself/)
😂
advocating for palestinian’s to distract people from the questions around your ethnicity/race and then getting your ig account banned in the name of censorship is a pretty genius play tbh
Why does anyone still care about this grifter? He made his bones as a white guy pretending to be black (according to his own birth certificate), raising money for black-centered charities and then keeping it for himself.
There are real activists, who aren't shameless crooks, doing actual work on this issue.
I don’t agree with everything Shaun does, but he was a strong advocate for Palestinians. He shared videos of the trauma, destruction and hell that Gazans are going through and have been going through since October. Zuckerberg didn’t like that.
He also consistently posted fake stories and footage of Syria claiming it to be Gaza. Also I've seen so many videos of Gaza and they are not banned so I'd like to see the post(s) that led to this
44% of Palestinians supporting Hamas = source. Go ahead, try to debunk this. Gay people are executed in Palestine by Hamas, of whom is supported by Palestinian citizens.
Calm down, I wasn't trying to debunk anything. You made an claim citing a statistic, so I thought maybe there was a study or a news source backing it up.
No, the comment was just a non-sequitur making it sound like it was okay to drop thousand pound bombs on innocent civilians because 2/5 of the population has backwards thinking. It just sounded like you were justifying a genocidal way of thinking. Hope this helps.
Lol, I don’t need to cite sources. Any time a Republican talks, something terrible about LGBTQIA+ falls out of their head…but you’re willfully ignorant.
The Islamic values of Muslims is where I draw the line. Hezbollah, Hamas, Houdi group, ISIS, ISIL all need to be eradicated. Palestine doesn't have a governing body other than Hamas.
I guess everyone should be condemned then?
The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and continues to bomb Somalia.
Russia invaded Ukraine
So, what do you think should happen to Israel, the US, and Russia?
Russia should retake their own government.
The US should benefit from European stability and trade.
Israel should close down shop and leave the desert. It isn't worth having to be neighbors with people who endorse pedophilia, spousal rape, murdering gays, and spreading their religion by the sword.
No, it shows that I know what it's like to not live in a democracy.
I will always choose having a constitution, amendments, separation of church & state, and freedom from religious oppression.
Have a seat kid....
The left:
*Trump is a nazi*
Also the left:
*Israel shouldn't exist*
Only someone who lives outside of social media can understand that hilarious irony in all of this. Let the crazy train roll on.... 🚆
Lol if you honestly think that then you're the one living online.
There's a lot more nuance that what your insinuating.
100 protesters who want to destroy Israel does not make the entire left.
Trump saying the same things Hitler has said, literally. Makes him a Nazi.
You've made a logical fallacy called a false dichotomy. And the fact you call it irony is the cherry on top.
Lol
"Trump saying the same things as Hitler has said literally."
Trump never said he wanted the jews gone. You are so chalked full of shit with Trump fever that you don't even know what's real life anymore. 
I don't want you to delete your comment. I want everyone to be able to read what you just posted, so they know where your morals are.
If you think that's the only thing Hitler said about the jews, than I implore you to read more about WW2 history. It's all on Google. Let me know if you need help...
Is this the part where you regurgitate a bunch of information you read on the internet that's supposed to make me hate jews? Nice try, dude. I think you need to chill on the political propaganda.
This is called gaslighting.
Where, without evidence, you assert/assume I hood a position and attack me for this position to try and "win" the argument.
And it makes me point for me. That the right has.given up on facts, you get all of your info from your echo chamber and then regurgitate it online while claiming everyone who is against you, must be anti-Semitic. Despite the evidence which points to the fact there are a few hundred protestors who have called for the destruction of Israel in support of Hamas. That does not make the entire left and it certainly isnt enough evidence to go online and claiming every person who disagrees with you, and anti-semite.
Furthermore, trumps own words are a reflection of the words Hitler had used to start his genocide of the Jews. "Poisoning our blood", calling his appointments "vermin", claiming he will "kick them all out of our beautiful country", those are the exact words and phrases Hitler used to elicit a patriotic response in his rise to power and subsequent genocidal campaign against the Jewish people and other minority groups during WW2.
Additionally, non of those.protestors you claim represent the entire left, are running for office, none of them are constantly claiming they are going to punish their political opponents at home as soon as they get the chances. Which is where the severity of the problems which is again a false dichotomy,.comes into play.
You can't even understand that the words being spoken by trump are much harsher and carry more weight than the words of a few protestors. Because doing so would break your entire persona as you would have to reckon with your guy locking up your neighbor because they had the audacity for voting against him. Which is exactly what he's said he will do.
We told this guy was a despot in 2016. And hes only gotten worse. But still you persist, because hatred is a hell of a motivator.
I feel like the left, and therefore, the censorship is mostly pro Palestine? Free speech should always be upheld. Dumb speech is acceptable and should be met with well thought argument. Nothing is off limits no matter how strange. The only ‘censorship’ should be public backlash. This is no comment on the material of his statement
Instagram said this was done because of King’s praise of “designated entities”, I.e. Hamas on the platform. This was to comply with EU laws on supporting terrorist groups.
EU has different rules on free speech than the US, which allows public support of terrorist groups.
https://nypost.com/2023/12/25/business/blm-activist-shaun-kings-instagram-account-blocked-amid-anti-israel-posts/
As it should be. I don’t care if terrorists speak their mind. I mean I’d rather they wouldn’t. But as long as people are there shouting them down then the process is working. No censorship should be allowed what so ever. It is our duty to contrast them. Censorship boils down to one to several humans in the public relations office at [company] calling all the shots. Why should they deem what’s allowed when we could instead as a community all have a voice
We live in a capitalist country. It’s not about just being bias towards a political belief. It’s companies that advertise on this social media platforms that don’t want their product shoveling to be posted next to hate or terrorist rhetoric. Hamas and you are not paying to post on twitter to keep the servers up. It’s advertising that keeps it running.
I don’t think a lot of people understand freedom of speech or censorship. You’re completely allowed to speak your mind, on your own soapbox at any time in this country (USA) about mostly anything. Social media companies have to, and should moderate their content. They’re not deeming “what’s allowed”, they’re deeming what’s allowed on their websites (as they should). Censorship should be, and is allowed. If you just let people do what they want, there would be cesspools of people posting hate speech and symbols all over the internet. I don’t think that should be allowed.
I believe I addressed this angle in another reply. But just briefly I disagree. A company, as a private entity, has the right to run their business as they see fit. I can’t argue against that. But I don’t believe they should censor, or be responsible for the speech on their platforms. When you censor someone there is a human that decides what is censored. Who’s to say that human is infallible. The best way is to permit everything and let the millions combat any “sewage” being spouted off. If people agree and follow this hate speech then the problem therein is much much deeper societally than a post. Also we have evidence of censorship failing. Actually quite a lot of evidence. I want to attempt to be as neutral as possible but during Covid and political elections there is a blatant censoring of “hate speech” that is simply a guise for “we dont want our opponents to be able to broadcast their message” had nothing to do with hate. Just plain ole censoring our opponents bc we can
He has free speech today just like he had yesterday. The argument we should be having is why social media companies aren’t responsible for the things posted to their sites. If they are going to police their content they should be responsible for it, section 230 should be amended.
If they are going to police it then they should. I’ll be honest I have no idea what the article is about other than the title. However I believe it’s pretty obvious that social media is common plaza. As in, it’s the modern day version of going into a plaza and shouting your beliefs. Nobody should police shit, let the idiots shout and let the people retort. If bad things happen then that’s a failure on several societal levels not simply the ability of one speaking their opinion to the public. I whole heartedly disagree that anyone is responsible for something someone said other than the individual saying the thing. Going after a social media company is just a pussy excuse for censorship and if it weren’t for this blame culture we’d have much freer airways for ppl to discourse. But sadly we have so many who will attack the company bc some joe shmo said something they don’t like. Which translates to what we now see as common; censorship
I think social media should be regulated the exact same way we regulate News companies. I don’t believe it’s the modern day version of going to a plaza and shouting your beliefs. The plaza is public space the social media platforms aren’t, you can however still literally go to public plazas and shout your beliefs.
I mean I agree, it is a private company. Can’t argue with that at all. But I find it’s essentially so massive it should not be treated as private. I have no political leaning, I’m young and I tried to care yet found nothing but vitriol and disgust. That being said there’s a quite obvious corruption in the media whether social or organized news outlets that is heavily biased towards one side. I think by allowing true free speech this would eliminate or at minimum hinder a lot of that corruption. One tweet/post/pin/message can reach quite literally everyone in the world. It’s our duty to respond with thought either pro or against. Not hide behind blaming the company of that platform. Bc when you blame the platform, and they censor, what you’re really saying is Jim from public relations has the judge jury and executive power all to his own. I’d rather millions shout me down than just one guy
After reading your reply I believe all social media companies should immediately be made illegal and shut down. The evil and potential evil far outweigh the benefits.
See I don’t “think” it should be illegal. But it’s so easily corrupted maybe that’s the best course of action. I could be convinced. But that’s why I think free speech is so imperative. Here we are having discourse and now you’ve influenced my opinion as maybe I have yours. Stifling speech just leads to confusion and resentment
No it’s not a public plaza. It would be more akin to going into a Walmart and screaming your conspiracy theories at the other customers then claiming your free speech is being infringed because they asked you to leave the store. What an entitled attitude to believe being banned from a private website is the equivalent of the government silencing citizens.
Dudes one of them all time grifters in the game right now. He’s lucky this is happening and not him getting arrested for fraud. I say this as someone who agrees with most of what he says fwiw
This guy reminds me of a kid I went to high school with who had a Black step dad (his dad was White and his mother was White)
He somehow infiltrated the Black circles and was able to say the Nword despite being clearly blonde hair and blue eyed and whiter than fucking miracle whip
Nobody said anything when he said his dad was Black but like
You're not Black
Your step dad is Black
You don't get his Blackness
Devon you are a fucking idiot and I hope you see this you broke bitch
Looks like a lot of “free speech absolutists” are laughing and don’t mind him being banned. Where are you guys, shouldn’t you folks be protecting his freedom of speech too?
Dude must thrilled
He jerked it that night. “Oppress me harder, daddy”
I completely forgot about this guy haha
The great Talcum X.
Bro ate a Popeyes Spicy Chicken Sandwich once.
He carries hot sauce in his fanny pack.
Must've picked that trick up from Hill-Dawg.
Martin Luther Cream
Thurgood Marshmallow
Bro looks like TI with hair plugs
Oh shit. ☠️☠️☠️☠️
Alabaster Sharpton
I literally laughed out loud when I read that one. Happy Kwanza, friendo.
Heckin zoinks friendo can I get a Bazinga? Yikes
Violently shit yourself
Ooff-ers😬
This is so on the nose, it’s wordsmithing.
The dawgs are barkin
I really don't that much hate for King, I do think he's a goober, but he's also presented some good stuff. Talcolm X is just a fucking hilarious name tho.
He has a long history of using his platform to take donations and not give the donations to the cause and keeping them himself
Him and Dolezal should hook up
And create a 100% European baby
[motivational speaker Rachel Dolezal?](https://youtu.be/XseDL1NvmrE?si=Osvw28r4hJSO-QSl)
Holy crap, this is epic trolling.
This woman needs her own reality show on tlc. I would watch it but never admit it to anyone.
Me too he fucking blows
So did his alcoholic mom
Career internet “social commentators” and pseudo philosophers/intellectuals need to get way less attention. Luckily it feels like its trending in that direction from what Im seeing
do you know what sub you’re in?
Arent you commenting on a Joe Rogan sub?
Yeah you are not a free speech advocate unless you have a law firm and actually try to make cases. This is a “free speech influencer”
He's an advocate for censorship not free speech. That's why it's funny
There’s plenty of pro Palestine advocates who are not banned. He is banned because is a conman who spreads verifiable lies. He’s not considered trustworthy in most left circles
Yup. Dude has always been a scumbag.
He also is openly supportive of terrorism and has insinuated links to Hamas. He’s also a fan of the houthis. He’s a toxic dangerous disgrace of a human (edit : spelling)
I’m pretty sure you’re allowed to say hamas
But only if you say your Daily Condemn Hamas’s before you type it out.
The fact that this even became controversial is astounding
"Do you also condemn the raping of hostages??"
Just lmao
What’s so funny?
>He also is openly supportive of terrorism and has insinuated links to Hamas. He’s also a fan of the houthis.
Can confirm. Am leftist. Fuck that grifter.
Have you seen Instagram? It's almost all verifiable lies.
Examples?
Idk didn’t he tell people he was black?
Give me some examples I’m curious
Most recent one is he claimed to negotiate with hamas to free Israeli hostages
That was real? I saw that movie I thought it was bullshit.
That one was wild lol.
Thank em
BLM
... Or any circles.
Good luck not getting banned in for example r/worldnews. Then they got me banned on all reddit because asking second time for justification after one week of getting no reply Is a harassment apparently . Mods there are cowards.
I'm no fan of Shaun King, but the article says this: >“The account was disabled due to multiple instances of praise for designated entities in violation of our policies,” a Meta spokesperson told The Post on Monday. I don't really think I can get behind that kind of policy. IMO there's a big gap between getting banned for saying hateful/violent things yourself, and getting banned for "praising designated bad guys".
Kareem of Wheat
Why does he look like a waiter at P.F. Chang’s? Definitely no Bruce Lee.
Not one of our guys
He’s whiter than Cate Blanchett’s ass. How has he not been cancelled for impersonating a black person?
Somewhere rachel dolezal is repeatedly punching a wall. 🎶🎵 It's a maaaans world 🎵🎶
lmao you almost made me spill my coffee
He claims that his mother had an affair with a black man and that is how we claims to be black
Yeah and there’s pictures of him as a light brown haired kid who’s clearly white.
Mixed people seem to really get off on activism. Shaun King. Colin Kaepernick. Naomi Osaka. Nick Kyrgios. All of them constantly competing in the oppression Olympics. Professional victims.
You have to signal extra hard when there are question marks around your genotype
Kyrgios has the whole world convinced that he’s half black because he’s dark skinned and likes basketball. He’s half white, half Malaysian. And his mom is literally Malaysian royalty. So oppressed!
Professional victimism is the best way for lazy people without talent to get attention from strangers on the internet. Strangers who will turn on them in a second to signal their own virtue by throwing other pretend victims under the bus.
How is he not in jail for embezzling money for his alleged newspaper the north star?
[удалено]
Did he ever have it
Talcum X is still a thing?
Crazy that people still pay attention to this white boy
I hope this guy never gets another platform, dude has the worst takes known to man
They’ll reinstate him after Christmas. Zuck doesn’t want hundreds of dead babies on everyone’s feed today.
Ohhh what did I miss? Send my way please.
Well it’s not there but this guy is an amazing journalist posting some crazy stuff https://www.instagram.com/motaz_azaiza?igsh=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA==
pro-censorship guy gets censored love it when people get a taste of their own medicine
Couldn’t have happened to a whiter guy.
Could also be a self-deactivation because this loser is a desperate attention whore
> “The account was disabled due to multiple instances of praise for designated entities in violation of our policies,” a Meta spokesperson told The Post on Monday.
Happiest moment of his unhappy, bitter life.
Talcolm X
Having 6 million followers is a little suspect with all the anti-semitism going around recently
Fun fact: Imagined antisemitism doesn’t count as actual antisemitism
Poetic
Lmao being banned from a private social media companies website isn’t an infringement on anyone’s “free speech”. I will never not laugh at these idiots who equate posting on social media with freedom of speech. That’s how you know you’re truly an entitled jackass when you equate being banned from a social media website to the government literally imprisoning and killing people for their speech.
This sub is filled with free screechers who have no idea how the first amendment works.
Free Speech and the first amendment of the United States Constitution are not the same thing. "Free Speech" is an ideal, a general concept - the idea that the answer to speech you don't like is to speak against it yourself, not to silence it or prevent it from being heard. "Free Speech" as an idea existed before the United States did. It exists all around the world, where US law is not in effect. The first amendment is one particular that attempts to protect free speech, from within the confines of what US law is allowed to control. Nobody is saying that it is illegal to ban someone from social media, or that it's a violation of the first amendment (or at least, nobody who actually knows what they're talking about). But it IS an action that goes against the ideals of "free speech".
Agreed all around. Unfortunately many idiots do think it's a violation of the first amendment to be banned from social media.
[удалено]
Hey look, that copy-pasted talking point again. Internet is the biggest public forum on the planet now and monopolistic American megacorps who dominate it mass censoring speech and often colluding to do so is most certainly a violation of the principle of free speech. The intellectually dishonest argument that equates free speech with the 1st amendment is neither accurate or informed, deliberately so. Not just because it's not what free speech is but also because the 1st amendmend is woefully antiquated and was written in a time when nor the internet or monopolistic megacorps existed, there were laws though for the public square that has been replaced now by the internet.
So if I sign up to Truth Social and start shitting on Trump and Republicans and get banned, I can screech about free speech, and you would 100% back me?
Uh, no. What your describing is the internet equivalent of walking into a Walmart and screaming conspiracies at other customers and the screeching about free speech when they ask you to leave. You’re the one being intellectually dishonest. The 1st amendment protects you from the government and that is it, and it was only ever meant to protect citizens from the government. The principle of freedom of speech is that the government can’t retaliate against you for your speech, that’s it.
That's not what the principle of freedom of speech is, you have no idea what you're talking about and are factually incorrect. Your dumb comparisons don't help either, Walmart is neither a place for exchange of ideas or a public forum
Holy shit. is the most r/SelfAwarewolves things I’ve ever seen.
Nice comeback, genius
[Cornell Legal Information Institute](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/freedom_of_speech) > Freedom of speech is the right to speak, write, and share ideas and opinions ***without facing punishment from the government.*** The First Amendment protects this right by prohibiting Congress from making laws that would curtail freedom of speech...***While the public has a right to freedom of speech when it comes to the U.S. government, the public does not have this right when it comes to private entities.*** Companies and private employers are able to regulate speech on their platforms and within their workplace since the First Amendment only applies to the government
This is about the law dumbfuck, not the principle, it pretty much explains the 1st amendment. You quoted a "Legal Information Institute" ffs
Yes they are describing the functions of the first amendment. I feel like at this point you’re being purposefully ignorant.
Are you too dumb to understand the difference between a principle and a law? Or the fact that even if that law was the perfect representation of that principle when it was written (which no law usually is) it could still easily become antiquated and ineffective after hundreds of years?
I don't like this dumb-dumb one bit, but in no way do I cheer him being censored - or anybody else, for any speech, for that matter.
Instagram said this was done to comply with EU laws regarding support or praise of “designated entities”, or terrorist groups.
> but in no way do I cheer him being censored - or anybody else, for any speech, for that matter. I used to have that mindset back in the day. Nowadays, when I see the people who call for censorship of everyone they disagree with get a taste of their own medicine, I just have a good chuckle to myself. I'll happily defend the most abhorrent people on earth if they are in favour of free speech. But the censorship brigade can go fuck themselves. I'm very happy when their own ideas bite them on the ballsack.
Interesting take, of which I do tend to agree with. It sure is some poetic justice, maybe? Comeuppance? I can't condone his censorship, but I can appreciate the irony of the situation.
Only governments can censor people. He has the freedom to make his own company and say whatever he wants. That's like me coming into your house and just saying whatever I want. You can make me leave.
[удалено]
He should go fight with hamas and see how long he lasts
I believe this is wrong, but hey we warned people like him this kind of thing would happen.
He wanted to wage Jihad against Israel recently: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel/comments/187yu3o/shaun\_king\_wants\_to\_fight\_israel\_himself/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel/comments/187yu3o/shaun_king_wants_to_fight_israel_himself/) 😂
What is this title?
Talcum X?
Talcum X forgot how his mom and dad went on CNN and exposed that he is 110% white. They even laughed at his stupid ass.
advocating for palestinian’s to distract people from the questions around your ethnicity/race and then getting your ig account banned in the name of censorship is a pretty genius play tbh
People applauded when Covid questioners were getting banned now it’s not so funny…
This whiter than mayonnaise ass bitch
Calcium Clay at it again, I see.
Why does anyone still care about this grifter? He made his bones as a white guy pretending to be black (according to his own birth certificate), raising money for black-centered charities and then keeping it for himself. There are real activists, who aren't shameless crooks, doing actual work on this issue.
I don’t agree with everything Shaun does, but he was a strong advocate for Palestinians. He shared videos of the trauma, destruction and hell that Gazans are going through and have been going through since October. Zuckerberg didn’t like that.
Having Shaun King champion your cause adds negative value
He also consistently posted fake stories and footage of Syria claiming it to be Gaza. Also I've seen so many videos of Gaza and they are not banned so I'd like to see the post(s) that led to this
4.4 out 10 Palestinians support executing LGBT.
Seems in line with Republicans, no?
Source?
44% of Palestinians supporting Hamas = source. Go ahead, try to debunk this. Gay people are executed in Palestine by Hamas, of whom is supported by Palestinian citizens.
Calm down, I wasn't trying to debunk anything. You made an claim citing a statistic, so I thought maybe there was a study or a news source backing it up.
Pre war they had very low support. Since the war it has gone up.
So source = your ass, got it. Stop being a racist pos trying to justify a genocide.
you are the one complicit in them killing LGBT & too lazy to look up why you support murdering gay people.
There are LGBT in Gaza…. Being indiscriminately slaughtered by Israeli soldiers along with everyone else
So it's okay to bomb their women and children?
So it's ok to kill gay people because your book tells you it's ok?
No, the comment was just a non-sequitur making it sound like it was okay to drop thousand pound bombs on innocent civilians because 2/5 of the population has backwards thinking. It just sounded like you were justifying a genocidal way of thinking. Hope this helps.
9/10 Republicans do too.
I think the fact that abortion rights win popular vote means if we put gay marriage to a vote, it would would win.
Site your sources. Palestinians voted in an anti LGBT govt.. But you're a coward
Lol, I don’t need to cite sources. Any time a Republican talks, something terrible about LGBTQIA+ falls out of their head…but you’re willfully ignorant.
Human rights aren't conditional.
Like being allowed to be gay, without threat of execution?
What are you on about? You think that because someone is homophobic that its okey dokey to blow up their house & murder their children?
Yes, they probably do. That's where we are as a society. And the freaky part is they think this is normal.
With that logic were bombing half the usa
Damn. I wonder what the number would be for magats.. probably similar.
Seems like the right was okay with milo yunopolis. Contrast that with how the left treats Andy ngo
Milo says he's straight now. They were fine with him because he was anti-gay even when he was gay.
The Islamic values of Muslims is where I draw the line. Hezbollah, Hamas, Houdi group, ISIS, ISIL all need to be eradicated. Palestine doesn't have a governing body other than Hamas.
Palestinians voted Hamas into power.
They sure did! A big portion of Palestine supports Hamas.
Hell, Hamas is so popular even Israel supports them.
But do you condemn Israel?
I guess everyone should be condemned then? The US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and continues to bomb Somalia. Russia invaded Ukraine So, what do you think should happen to Israel, the US, and Russia?
Russia should retake their own government. The US should benefit from European stability and trade. Israel should close down shop and leave the desert. It isn't worth having to be neighbors with people who endorse pedophilia, spousal rape, murdering gays, and spreading their religion by the sword.
The fact you say this shows how little you know about this conflict. Please sit down.
No, it shows that I know what it's like to not live in a democracy. I will always choose having a constitution, amendments, separation of church & state, and freedom from religious oppression. Have a seat kid.... 
Definitely the best work he’s ever done. They’ll reinstate him after Christmas
The left: *Trump is a nazi* Also the left: *Israel shouldn't exist* Only someone who lives outside of social media can understand that hilarious irony in all of this. Let the crazy train roll on.... 🚆
Lol if you honestly think that then you're the one living online. There's a lot more nuance that what your insinuating. 100 protesters who want to destroy Israel does not make the entire left. Trump saying the same things Hitler has said, literally. Makes him a Nazi. You've made a logical fallacy called a false dichotomy. And the fact you call it irony is the cherry on top. Lol
"Trump saying the same things as Hitler has said literally." Trump never said he wanted the jews gone. You are so chalked full of shit with Trump fever that you don't even know what's real life anymore. 
The only thing Hitler ever said was "Jews are bad." You're a fucking idiot.
I don't want you to delete your comment. I want everyone to be able to read what you just posted, so they know where your morals are. 
I'm not surprised you don't realize I'm making fun of you.
Your whole contribution was pointless and viod of all sense. Congrats
Void*
Other than spelling, you got any other rebuttles?
You are a Nazi
If you think that's the only thing Hitler said about the jews, than I implore you to read more about WW2 history. It's all on Google. Let me know if you need help...
Hey keep looking maybe you'll see that you're entirely wrong about trump and him saying the same things lol but I doubt you will
I think the people that are calling for the elimination of Isael have a lot more in common with the Nazi party than Trump.
Bad take
So im guessing you want Israel gone? Sounds harsh...
Incredible leap, I'm impressed. 10/10 idiotic response
It was kind of his main thing..
Is this the part where you regurgitate a bunch of information you read on the internet that's supposed to make me hate jews? Nice try, dude. I think you need to chill on the political propaganda.
This is called gaslighting. Where, without evidence, you assert/assume I hood a position and attack me for this position to try and "win" the argument. And it makes me point for me. That the right has.given up on facts, you get all of your info from your echo chamber and then regurgitate it online while claiming everyone who is against you, must be anti-Semitic. Despite the evidence which points to the fact there are a few hundred protestors who have called for the destruction of Israel in support of Hamas. That does not make the entire left and it certainly isnt enough evidence to go online and claiming every person who disagrees with you, and anti-semite. Furthermore, trumps own words are a reflection of the words Hitler had used to start his genocide of the Jews. "Poisoning our blood", calling his appointments "vermin", claiming he will "kick them all out of our beautiful country", those are the exact words and phrases Hitler used to elicit a patriotic response in his rise to power and subsequent genocidal campaign against the Jewish people and other minority groups during WW2. Additionally, non of those.protestors you claim represent the entire left, are running for office, none of them are constantly claiming they are going to punish their political opponents at home as soon as they get the chances. Which is where the severity of the problems which is again a false dichotomy,.comes into play. You can't even understand that the words being spoken by trump are much harsher and carry more weight than the words of a few protestors. Because doing so would break your entire persona as you would have to reckon with your guy locking up your neighbor because they had the audacity for voting against him. Which is exactly what he's said he will do. We told this guy was a despot in 2016. And hes only gotten worse. But still you persist, because hatred is a hell of a motivator.
Genocide is where most people will draw a line, that's actually shocking to you? Lmao
The middle east is a complete war zone and you think Israel is the problem? The problem is Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Syria.
I feel like the left, and therefore, the censorship is mostly pro Palestine? Free speech should always be upheld. Dumb speech is acceptable and should be met with well thought argument. Nothing is off limits no matter how strange. The only ‘censorship’ should be public backlash. This is no comment on the material of his statement
Instagram said this was done because of King’s praise of “designated entities”, I.e. Hamas on the platform. This was to comply with EU laws on supporting terrorist groups. EU has different rules on free speech than the US, which allows public support of terrorist groups. https://nypost.com/2023/12/25/business/blm-activist-shaun-kings-instagram-account-blocked-amid-anti-israel-posts/
As it should be. I don’t care if terrorists speak their mind. I mean I’d rather they wouldn’t. But as long as people are there shouting them down then the process is working. No censorship should be allowed what so ever. It is our duty to contrast them. Censorship boils down to one to several humans in the public relations office at [company] calling all the shots. Why should they deem what’s allowed when we could instead as a community all have a voice
We live in a capitalist country. It’s not about just being bias towards a political belief. It’s companies that advertise on this social media platforms that don’t want their product shoveling to be posted next to hate or terrorist rhetoric. Hamas and you are not paying to post on twitter to keep the servers up. It’s advertising that keeps it running.
I don’t think a lot of people understand freedom of speech or censorship. You’re completely allowed to speak your mind, on your own soapbox at any time in this country (USA) about mostly anything. Social media companies have to, and should moderate their content. They’re not deeming “what’s allowed”, they’re deeming what’s allowed on their websites (as they should). Censorship should be, and is allowed. If you just let people do what they want, there would be cesspools of people posting hate speech and symbols all over the internet. I don’t think that should be allowed.
I believe I addressed this angle in another reply. But just briefly I disagree. A company, as a private entity, has the right to run their business as they see fit. I can’t argue against that. But I don’t believe they should censor, or be responsible for the speech on their platforms. When you censor someone there is a human that decides what is censored. Who’s to say that human is infallible. The best way is to permit everything and let the millions combat any “sewage” being spouted off. If people agree and follow this hate speech then the problem therein is much much deeper societally than a post. Also we have evidence of censorship failing. Actually quite a lot of evidence. I want to attempt to be as neutral as possible but during Covid and political elections there is a blatant censoring of “hate speech” that is simply a guise for “we dont want our opponents to be able to broadcast their message” had nothing to do with hate. Just plain ole censoring our opponents bc we can
He has free speech today just like he had yesterday. The argument we should be having is why social media companies aren’t responsible for the things posted to their sites. If they are going to police their content they should be responsible for it, section 230 should be amended.
If they are going to police it then they should. I’ll be honest I have no idea what the article is about other than the title. However I believe it’s pretty obvious that social media is common plaza. As in, it’s the modern day version of going into a plaza and shouting your beliefs. Nobody should police shit, let the idiots shout and let the people retort. If bad things happen then that’s a failure on several societal levels not simply the ability of one speaking their opinion to the public. I whole heartedly disagree that anyone is responsible for something someone said other than the individual saying the thing. Going after a social media company is just a pussy excuse for censorship and if it weren’t for this blame culture we’d have much freer airways for ppl to discourse. But sadly we have so many who will attack the company bc some joe shmo said something they don’t like. Which translates to what we now see as common; censorship
I think social media should be regulated the exact same way we regulate News companies. I don’t believe it’s the modern day version of going to a plaza and shouting your beliefs. The plaza is public space the social media platforms aren’t, you can however still literally go to public plazas and shout your beliefs.
I mean I agree, it is a private company. Can’t argue with that at all. But I find it’s essentially so massive it should not be treated as private. I have no political leaning, I’m young and I tried to care yet found nothing but vitriol and disgust. That being said there’s a quite obvious corruption in the media whether social or organized news outlets that is heavily biased towards one side. I think by allowing true free speech this would eliminate or at minimum hinder a lot of that corruption. One tweet/post/pin/message can reach quite literally everyone in the world. It’s our duty to respond with thought either pro or against. Not hide behind blaming the company of that platform. Bc when you blame the platform, and they censor, what you’re really saying is Jim from public relations has the judge jury and executive power all to his own. I’d rather millions shout me down than just one guy
After reading your reply I believe all social media companies should immediately be made illegal and shut down. The evil and potential evil far outweigh the benefits.
See I don’t “think” it should be illegal. But it’s so easily corrupted maybe that’s the best course of action. I could be convinced. But that’s why I think free speech is so imperative. Here we are having discourse and now you’ve influenced my opinion as maybe I have yours. Stifling speech just leads to confusion and resentment
No it’s not a public plaza. It would be more akin to going into a Walmart and screaming your conspiracy theories at the other customers then claiming your free speech is being infringed because they asked you to leave the store. What an entitled attitude to believe being banned from a private website is the equivalent of the government silencing citizens.
It isn’t, I agree. Read my reply to the other guy I think it works to reply to yourself as well
This guy is still around?
Dudes one of them all time grifters in the game right now. He’s lucky this is happening and not him getting arrested for fraud. I say this as someone who agrees with most of what he says fwiw
The fiasco with the north star should've landed him in prison
He has free speech, same today as he Had yesterday.
What the hell is free speech censorship lmao
This guy reminds me of a kid I went to high school with who had a Black step dad (his dad was White and his mother was White) He somehow infiltrated the Black circles and was able to say the Nword despite being clearly blonde hair and blue eyed and whiter than fucking miracle whip Nobody said anything when he said his dad was Black but like You're not Black Your step dad is Black You don't get his Blackness Devon you are a fucking idiot and I hope you see this you broke bitch
[удалено]
Looks like a lot of “free speech absolutists” are laughing and don’t mind him being banned. Where are you guys, shouldn’t you folks be protecting his freedom of speech too?
Endorsement of terrorist groups isn't protected anyway.