₦airaland Forum

CoolUsername:
So you new that social media companies were conspiring to influence the elections, huh?

Now the conspiracy theories have turned out to be true, the new response is to say that all of it was already known.

prove the conspiracy please, and no conjectures if you may! Prove that the goal was to influence the elections, the breakdown from the tweets by my own understanding showed that the goal was to not influence the elections

Obrigardo:
You are twisting yourself in circles and you think you are smart. What an idiot you are. Who was President when the FBI, as you concocted, told twitter to knock off a story (as you alledge). Isn't the government (at the time) you should be holding accountable?

You are so dumb sha..

Trump told the FBI to tell Twitter top knock off a story that hurts Joe Biden and helps Trump during an election?

Is that seriously what you're going with?

saxywale2:
What I am saying is that the report was not from some goofy looking laptop repair shop owner.

US Intel vs laptop repair man, and given when the news broke. Around 3 weeks to election.

Why should the time of election bother a fxcking social media company?

CoolUsername:
Trump told the FBI to tell Twitter top knock off a story that hurts Joe Biden and helps Trump during an election?

Is that seriously what you're going with?

I'm losing brain cells exchanging texts with you. Just listen to yourself.

Your brain is rotten with conspiracy theories. So Biden as a private citizen, directed Republican FBI Director Wray to strongarm Twitter.

You are not smart. I'm ashamed.

CoolUsername:
Trump told the FBI to tell Twitter top knock off a story that hurts Joe Biden and helps Trump during an election?

Is that seriously what you're going with?

Guy, listen to yourself again. You sound ridiculous.

BraniacX:
prove the conspiracy please, and no conjectures if you may! Prove that the goal was to influence the elections, the breakdown from the tweets by my own understanding showed that the goal was to not influence the elections

FBI told Facebook to delete the posts of the Hunter Biden story that was reported by the New York Post. A government agency colluded with a private company to censor the press.

Let's start with that.

Obrigardo:
Guy, listen to yourself again. You sound ridiculous.

That was your assertion

Obrigardo:
I'm losing brain cells exchanging texts with you. Just listen to yourself.

Your brain is rotten with conspiracy theories. So Biden as a private citizen, directed Republican FBI Director Wray to strongarm Twitter.

You are not smart. I'm ashamed.

FBI colluded with Facebook not Twitter, genius.

CoolUsername:
That was your assertion

Naaa, i didn't assert anything you are dreaming about. Fail.

CoolUsername:
FBI colluded with Facebook not Twitter, genius.

From the bottomest part of my honest mind, You are a dumb stock.

CoolUsername:
At about the 49th minute someone mentions what he thinks led to election results and how he thinks that means Google needs to change its tactics. Why does Google need to change its tactics because of an election? At about the 56th minute mark they refer to Trump's victory as a hiccup in the path of progress but one of the execs basically says they can't just see it that way but have to continue fighting.
Coming from the company that controls information, this is very concerning.

You damn well know what I mean, Google controls over 90% of search engine traffic.

https://www.similarweb.com/engines/

But again, you are inferring words that noone in that video said. Read how you initially characterized the video to now what you are saying about it.

Google's Mission - "Our mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." If a candidate who relied on misinformation esp. emanating from Google' site wins. Yeah, they need to be reevaluating how they are organizing that information. And "its tactics", I assume were referring to how search results came up. It's been a big bone of contention since the 2000 election that some companies purposefully drive misinformation because it gets clicks.

Obrigardo:
From the bottomest part of my honest mind, You are a dumb stock.

I see you're finally running low on brain cells. Sad!

IjeBos:
But again, you are inferring words that noone in that video said. Read how you initially characterized the video to now what you are saying about it.

Google's Mission - "Our mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." If a candidate who relied on misinformation esp. emanating from Google' site wins. Yeah, they need to be reevaluating how they are organizing that information. And "its tactics", I assume were referring to how search results came up. It's been a big bone of contention since the 2000 election that some companies purposefully drive misinformation because it gets clicks.

The company that controls 90% of our search information calls a political party winning, a hiccup to progress and vows to never stop fighting for said progress. Also says they would restrategize to address what led people to make this decision.

Nothing to see here, perfectly fine.

Obrigardo:
Naaa, i didn't assert anything you are dreaming about. Fail.

So what did you mean when you said Trump was President during that time?

CoolUsername:
The PRIVATE company that controls 90% of our search information calls a political party winning, a hiccup to progress and vows to never stop fighting for said progress. Also says they would restrategize to address what led people to make this decision.

Nothing to see here, perfectly fine.

Fixed it for you. Ask yourself why all these top media/information companies are run by "Democrats". It might have something to do with Dems not wanting to control or limit information.

IjeBos:
You don't think there is a through line from his "very fine people" comment and his meeting with Kanye and Nick Fuentes. I'm nor sure what[b] lie you are referring[/b] to. Trump after a rally where KKK members marched and a woman died, said "there were very fine people on both sides". That was not a moment for any US president to try to rationalize anything. He should have just[b] called out White Supremacy[/b] and said there is no place in the US for that. That is the reason people were up in arms about that comment. Any other US President would have had a moral clarity about that moment.

And who do you think he was referring to when he said "there were many fine people on both sides"?

is this dude serious?

you claim to live in the US and because of that you are all-knowing concerning US matters yet you don't know how the media lied about the Very fine people.

He should have called out the White supremacist which he specifically did. the media lied to you and you are not interested in the truth else you would have known this.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00RAteYexNA

Trump specifically condemned the KKK and every neo nazy groups.

benalvino3:
is this dude serious?

you claim to live in the US and because of that you are all-knowing concerning US matters yet you don't know how the media lied about the Very fine people.

He should have called out the White supremacist which he specifically did. the media lied to you and you are not interested in the truth else you would have known this.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00RAteYexNA

Trump specifically condemned the KKK and every neo nazy groups.

These were his comments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

The question was simple. Who did he mean by "Very Fine People on both sides?".

IjeBos:
The question was simple. Who did he mean by "Very Fine People on both sides?".

the Peaceful people who went to protest for and against the statues. watch the Damn video and see that he was clear about who he was talking about. he Explained who the fine people are and said he was not talking about the Neo nazis and that the Nazis should be condemned because they are against what the country is about.

the Video is in your front yet you are clinging to a lie.

even in the video, you provided, trump answered your question. do you have any ability to comprehend anything? the answer to the question you ask me is in the Video you provided.

IjeBos:
The [b]PRIVATE [/b]company that controls 90% of our search information calls a political party winning, a hiccup to progress and vows to never stop fighting for said progress. Also says they would restrategize to address what led people to make this decision.

Nothing to see here, perfectly fine.


Fixed it for you. Ask yourself why all these top media/information companies are run by "Democrats". It might have something to do with Dems not wanting to control or limit information.

You don't think the people that own the companies that control or limit information want to control or limit information?

CoolUsername:
Why should the time of election bother a fxcking social media company?

Direct your question to the FBI.

benalvino3:
the Peaceful people who went to protest for and against the statues. watch the Damn video and see that he was clear about who he was talking about. he Explained who the fine people are and said he was not talking about the Neo nazis and that the Nazis should be condemned because they are against what the country is about.

the Video is in your front yet you are clinging to a lie.

even in the video, you provided, trump answered your question. do you have any ability to comprehend anything? the answer to the question you ask me is in the Video you provided.

There were two sides.
On one side were people who were protesting the removal of a stature dedicated to a Confederate General; Gen. Robert E. Lee.
Background: In the US, we had a civil war where southern states decided to fight because they did not want to abolish slavery. They called themselves the Confederacy. The Confederacy eventually lost the civil war. For whatever reason (the US still being a much more racist country at the time) the statues of these people who were not only traitors to our country buy wanted to own SLAVES were allowed to be put up. Virginia decided to remove them.

On the other side were people who were counter protesting those people who gathered to fight that removal.

So, no, I do not consider that there were good people on both sides. And no, there was no moral equivalency between both sides. If you have decided to take up violence or even march to protect a statue of a man who not only committed treason, but did so in order to continue the enslavement of black people, you are not a good person. Full stop, end of discussion.

And it offends me how you sit comfortably in Nigeria and defend this.

CoolUsername:
You don't think the people that own the companies that control or limit information want to control or limit information?

No, they don't. They take pains when they decide to limit information. It goes back to people actually believing what they say they BELIEVE IN Like the Dems who fought the Arizona county to certify a Republican counties votes because they believe in everyone's vote counting. When in fact by counting those votes cost the Dems a House seat.

IjeBos:
There were two sides.
On one side were people who were protesting the removal of a stature dedicated to a Confederate General; Gen. Robert E. Lee.
Background: In the US, we had a civil war where southern states decided to fight because they did not want to abolish slavery. They called themselves the Confederacy. The Confederacy eventually lost the civil war. For whatever reason (the US still being a much more racist country at the time) the statues of these people who were not only traitors to our country buy wanted to own SLAVES were allowed to be put up. Virginia decided to remove them.

On the other side were people who were counter protesting those people who gathered to fight that removal.

So, no, I do not consider that there were good people on both sides. And no, there was no moral equivalency between both sides. If you have decided to take up violence or even march to protect a statue of a man who not only committed treason, but did so in order to continue the enslavement of black people, you are not a good person. Full stop, end of discussion.

And it offends me how you sit comfortably in Nigeria and defend this.

you are embarrassing yourself.

Trump does not care what you think.

The media lied. the people he called fine people are not the people causing violence.

THE GIRL THAT DIED WAS PART OF THE PEOPLE CAUSING TROUBLE AND VIOLENCE. she was around a group or part of a group that attacked the nazi idiot's car that ran them over.

all these are facts.

So yes, there were good people on both sides who wanted to protest for and against the statues peacefully. and there were idiots who fought for and against the statues. Antifa and white nationalist groups.

The media lie just like they lied against Nick Sandmann

Jimetagambo donkey ye. Kikikiki

uglymods:
Jimetagambo donkey ye. Kikikiki

Kikikikikikiki

benalvino3:
you are embarrassing yourself.

Trump does not care what you think.

The media lied. the people he called fine people are not the people causing violence.

THE GIRL THAT DIED WAS PART OF THE PEOPLE CAUSING TROUBLE AND VIOLENCE. she was around a group or part of a group that attacked the nazi idiot's car that ran them over.

all these are facts.

So yes, there were good people on both sides who wanted to protest for and against the statues peacefully. and there were idiots who fought for and against the statues. Antifa and white nationalist groups.

The media lie just like they lied against Nick Sandmann

Good Response. You told the world who you are. Keep defending racists. Ask yourself what good person marches along White Supremacists shouting "Jews will not replace us" or the KKK? I'd guess you'd be there if you lived in the US.. Honestly, you should be ashamed of yourself as a Black person or even just a human.

Here are some clips of that "rally" and the period after since you are trying to rewrite history.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPLvWO_SOgM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F2kPRW6ZuA

saxywale2:
Direct your question to the FBI.

I thought you said the FBI didn't instruct them.

benalvino3:
The press said a lot of things for the president. The very fine people lie and many more.

So if you are talking to a person who is not understanding a topic and you say. If only I can open your head and put this inside

Next the person goes home sees his son who doesn't understand Mathematics takes an ax to split his head to put Math text because Ben suggested it

CoolUsername:
I thought you said the FBI didn't instruct them.

The only time I have mentioned FBI on this topic below:

IjeBos:
I think you're missing the point of the Presidential Bully Pulpit. Whatever the President says has incredible power. That's why most US President's stick to a written script or are very careful with there chosen words. He should not have been on a podium jawboning about something he knew nothing about. A lot of people took his words as a SUGGETION of something they should try. And some people did try it.

You give MAGAts too much credit. The same people INGESTING poison were the same people swallowing horse dewormers. They are the same people that keep sending their widow's mite to the "dear leader" to stop the steal. The same ones that want Affordable Care Act but don't want Obama care. We can go on and on. A lot of them are uneducated and simple minded.

CoolUsername:
I thought you said the FBI didn't instruct them.

Provide evidence that the FBI instructed Facebook not to publish the hunter Biden laptop story.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."

He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532.amp