PDA

View Full Version : Anti-Trust Law Is...




r3volution 3.0
12-24-2018, 11:32 PM
Vote and comment.

timosman
12-24-2018, 11:35 PM
Are we playing hide and seek, John? :confused:

UWDude
12-24-2018, 11:37 PM
Revolution 3.0's inspiration for this thread and poll came from this video I posted six minutes before he started the poll.

A particular incident that has happened recently does indeed look like anti-trust law has been violated.

You can see the non-partisan, apolitical tech lawyer's analysis here:


https://youtu.be/akJf2oz5JOM

https://youtu.be/akJf2oz5JOM

The thread and synopsis on the removal of SargonOfAkkad from Patreon, and subsequent destruction of a Patreon-like company that he attempted to use as an alternative (named SubscribeStar):
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?529601-Youtuber-Law-there-is-now-a-case-for-anti-trust-violations-against-Patreon-and-Paypal

timosman
12-24-2018, 11:40 PM
He totally just did this because I just posted a story about Youtuber law saying there is an anti-trust case.
He is trying to control the headlines.

He didn't even have time to get the poll up, he was in such a rush.

Asshole.

Dual thread
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?529601-Youtuber-Law-there-is-now-a-case-for-anti-trust-violations-against-Patreon-and-Paypal

You are six minutes late, asshole.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91YS3fNegmE

r3volution 3.0
12-24-2018, 11:41 PM
He totally jsut did this because I just posted a story about Youtuber law saying ther eis an anti-trust case.

Indeed I did.

I saw your thread and thought: huh, I wonder how many people oppose laissez faire?

Thus the poll.

timosman
12-24-2018, 11:47 PM
Indeed I did.

I saw your thread and thought: huh, I wonder how many people oppose laissez faire?

Thus the poll.

Why don't you change your diapers an go to bed, John? :cool:

r3volution 3.0
12-24-2018, 11:52 PM
So that's two opposed to the market economy, though they didn't vote.

AdamL
12-25-2018, 12:05 AM
Time to expose all the fake libertarians on here who think ISPs shouldn't be allowed to deny you service for having the wrong opinions!

Why do you all hate freedom so much? Just go and make your own internet, losers!

timosman
12-25-2018, 12:10 AM
Time to expose all the fake libertarians on here who think ISPs shouldn't be allowed to deny you service for having the wrong opinions!

Why do you all hate freedom so much? Just go and make your own internet, losers!

Just use two coconuts. Aloha (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALOHAnet#ALOHA_protocol).

bv3
12-25-2018, 12:17 AM
Time to expose all the fake libertarians on here who think ISPs shouldn't be allowed to deny you service for having the wrong opinions!

Why do you all hate freedom so much? Just go and make your own internet, losers!

I wouldn't put it on a tee shirt... but yeah. Ill take inconvenience over inconsistency. Heh, then there is that whisper in my year "Let the State own such things, essentials. The roads, the rails, the airways and waves. Only state ownership can guarantee access for all." The voice is strange, its in my head but it isn't mine--I'm not sure quite how it got there.

r3volution 3.0
12-25-2018, 12:21 AM
I wouldn't put it on a tee shirt... but yeah. Ill take inconvenience over inconsistency. Heh, then there is that whisper in my year "Let the State own such things, essentials. The roads, the rails, the airways and waves. Only state ownership can guarantee access for all." The voice is strange, its in my head but it isn't mine--I'm not sure quite how it got there.

There are natural monopolies, but they're rare, internet services aren't among them, and anti-trust law isn't the way to handle them anyway.

In reality, anti-trust law is an anti-competitive device for politically connected enterprises to harass their more efficient rivals.

timosman
12-25-2018, 12:27 AM
#donoevil

Swordsmyth
12-25-2018, 12:53 AM
Anti-trust law is one of the last things we should get rid of after restoring liberty in many other ways.
We do NOT have a free market that is flush with competition and entrepreneurs and if we got rid of anti-trust law before fixing the other problems first we would enable a totalitarian Neo-Feudalism from which we might never recover unless we had a redistributive revolution and that is a precedent that should be avoided unless we end up with no other options.

AdamL
12-25-2018, 12:59 AM
I wouldn't put it on a tee shirt... but yeah. Ill take inconvenience over inconsistency. Heh, then there is that whisper in my year "Let the State own such things, essentials. The roads, the rails, the airways and waves. Only state ownership can guarantee access for all." The voice is strange, its in my head but it isn't mine--I'm not sure quite how it got there.

Ideological purity is a suicidal position in a fight for survival.

I fail to see how giving the banksters and mainstream media even more power is going to advance the cause of freedom. Whose voices do you think are going to be silenced? Good luck having any influence without freedom of the press.

Swordsmyth
12-25-2018, 01:01 AM
Ideological purity is a suicidal position in a fight for survival.

I fail to see how giving the banksters and mainstream media even more power is going to advance the cause of freedom. Whose voices do you think are going to be silenced? Good luck having any influence without freedom of the press.
We can eventually get around to absolute purity IF we do things in the right order and if we are completely successful.

AdamL
12-25-2018, 01:43 AM
Yeah maybe. In the meantime I'm going to choose to deal with reality. I'll likely be dead before that time ever comes.

Swordsmyth
12-25-2018, 01:46 AM
Yeah maybe. In the meantime I'm going to choose to deal with reality. I'll likely be dead before that time ever comes.
That's the way I see it, I don't expect us to get anywhere near perfection in my lifetime.

nikcers
12-25-2018, 01:56 AM
Only state ownership can guarantee access for all.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNEcFMKsi8c

bv3
12-25-2018, 08:51 AM
We can eventually get around to absolute purity IF we do things in the right order and if we are completely successful.
Oh yeah? Well, at least you have a prescription:
"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production." (Communist Manifesto)

acptulsa
12-25-2018, 08:57 AM
Poll doesn't have enough options. Why does the OP get monopoly power to set up the poll selections? That ain't right.

There ought to be a law... :p

Well, as long as we're having one conversation in two threads:


Put a lot of faith in old Teddy, do you [UWDude]?

Ever hear of Edward H. Harriman? Give or take a van Swearingen or two, he was the last great rail baron. He made a mint manipulating the stock market, bought the Union Pacific, and whipped it into shape. Later he merged it with the Southern Pacific in 1903. The combination never had more than the usual local monopoly here and there, by the way. Harriman contributed to Roosevelt's 1904 campaign and never heard a peep from him. He made no contribution to Roosevelt's 1908 campaign and the UP/SP merger was under attack from 1909.

As an aside, they should have been left alone. After they were broken up, the UP swallowed the Western Pacific and the SP was swallowed by the smaller, but much healthier Rio Grande. Because of this, when they later merged again (the two systems were designed and built to work together, especially the SP subsidiary called the Central Pacific) the combination did wind up with a significant monopoly. If the UP/SP had been combined all along, it would never have been allowed to swallow either the WP or the Rio Grande, and the national rail network would be more competitive today.

Meanwhile, AT&T was awarded a major nationwide monopoly about that time. So much for trust busting. That happened because cities and towns were awash in wires. Later improvements in duplex telegraphy eliminated the need for so many wires, as more signals could be carried by fewer wires. But even though the impetus for the monopoly was gone, the monopoly remained for decades. Obviously someone was paying brib--er, I mean campaign contributions.

Without principle, political decisions are made for political reasons.

Does YouTube have a monopoly? No. And yet, in some ways they do. YouTube actively censors libertarians, yet this site allows no videos to be embedded but YouTube videos. Why is that? That site, Facebook and Google all reserve the right to censor political speech, because they're all privately owned. But the CIA and other government agencies were in on their creation. So, are they government or are they not? And if they are, what became of the First Amendment? No one seems to be asking that.

Without principle, political decisions are made for political reasons.

One bad habit you seem to retain from your days as a prog is a belief that government power is good, and when it isn't, the only solution is putting the "right person" in charge. But the real problem is power without principle. So, where is the principle here?

If one is going to invoke the ghost of Teddy Roosevelt, one ought to realize he was just another unprincipled politician. If one is going to look for meaning in the history of the railroads, one should have enough facts to see where these actions of the past left us. And if one calls for government intervention, especially on a libertarian site, one really ought to offer a principle or set of principles which can be used to limit that government power and keep it working honestly for the people.

TheCount
12-25-2018, 08:59 AM
Anti-trust law is one of the last things we should get rid of after restoring liberty in many other ways.
We do NOT have a free market that is flush with competition and entrepreneurs and if we got rid of anti-trust law before fixing the other problems first we would enable a totalitarian Neo-Feudalism from which we might never recover unless we had a redistributive revolution and that is a precedent that should be avoided unless we end up with no other options.
Boromir promises that he'll destroy the ring after he uses it, guys.

acptulsa
12-25-2018, 09:07 AM
Boromir promises that he'll destroy the ring after he uses it, guys.

So did Teddy Roosevelt.

bv3
12-25-2018, 09:16 AM
Boromir promises that he'll destroy the ring after he uses it, guys.

Oh, he promised? Then by all means!

;)

acptulsa
12-25-2018, 09:29 AM
Anti-trust law is one of the last things we should get rid of after restoring liberty in many other ways.
We do NOT have a free market that is flush with competition and entrepreneurs and if we got rid of anti-trust law before fixing the other problems first we would enable a totalitarian Neo-Feudalism from which we might never recover unless we had a redistributive revolution and that is a precedent that should be avoided unless we end up with no other options.

You sound like a Demoncrat (TM). Not because if your sixty-five word run-on stream of consciousness that makes little sense. Rather, it's because trust-busting and wealth redistribution are very DNC, very statist, very progressive "tools".

So, just out of curiosity, why aren't you attacking UWDude as a " Demoncrat or former Demoncrat" the way you do me? After all, unlike me, he actually, demonstrably fits that description.

PAF
12-25-2018, 09:31 AM
Boromir promises that he'll destroy the ring after he uses it, guys.


So did Teddy Roosevelt.

SwordShill reminds me of this self-elected “interim” president:


https://youtu.be/RfdzVyZWMZI

oyarde
12-25-2018, 09:49 AM
I have never read anti trust law . What is it preventing ?

acptulsa
12-25-2018, 10:19 AM
I have never read anti trust law . What is it preventing ?

In theory, after you buy Atlantic and Marvin Gardens, they take Ventnor Avenue away from you and give it to another player.

In practice it goes to the person who has both Park Place and Boardwalk. And who made campaign contributions.

Swordsmyth
12-25-2018, 12:54 PM
You can't have open borders and a welfare state, you must end the welfare state first.
You can't get rid of anti-trust law with crony capitalism, you must get rid of the crony capitalism first.

Krugminator2
12-26-2018, 09:33 PM
Google is a monopoly. I don't think what they do controlling searches and steering people toward liberal clips on Youtube and demonetizing people like Prager U is good. I would rather they shared my values but I can't force other people to agree with me. Yahoo and Bing are awful, so I choose Google as a consumer despite the flaws.

The people who run Twitter, Google, Patreon, etc are all disgusting and immoral people. But they are winning out in the marketplace fairly. What do people want? The Fairness Doctrine? Donald Trump's arbitrary whims to choose? Consumers should choose. Seems clearcut.

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 09:38 PM
Google is a monopoly. I don't think what they do controlling searches and steering people toward liberal clips on Youtube and demonetizing people like Prager U is good. I would rather they shared my values but I can't force other people to agree with me. Yahoo and Bing are awful, so I choose Google as a consumer despite the flaws.

The people who run Twitter, Google, Patreon, etc are all disgusting and immoral people. But they are winning out in the marketplace fairly. What do people want? The Fairness Doctrine? Donald Trump's arbitrary whims to choose? Consumers should choose. Seems clearcut.
They were built by the government and now they are conspiring with the government, we don't have anything close to a free market.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 10:33 PM
They were built by the government and now they are conspiring with the government, we don't have anything close to a free market.

That's totally the left's argument against property rights. The pretense of knowledge is strong with you

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 10:36 PM
That's totally the left's argument against property rights. The pretense of knowledge is strong with you
No, in this case the CIA actually made GOOGLE, that is nothing like the left saying that somehow government is responsible for the success of some random small business that managed to survive being taxed and regulated to death.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 10:38 PM
They were built by the government and now they are conspiring with the government, we don't have anything close to a free market.


No, in this case the CIA actually made GOOGLE, that is nothing like the left saying that somehow government is responsible for the success of some random small business that managed to survive being taxed and regulated to death.
You didn't build that is a slippery slope to zero property rights and you damn well know it.

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 10:42 PM
You didn't build that is a slippery slope to zero property rights and you damn well know it.
"you didn't build that" is completely different from something the government actually built.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 10:44 PM
"you didn't build that" is completely different from something the government actually built.

You don't know what a slippery slope is do you?

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 10:46 PM
You don't know what a slippery slope is do you?
Every concept in the world could be framed as a slippery slope by your standards.
We are dealing with a threshold here.
Very few companies get built with CIA money.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 10:54 PM
Every concept in the world could be framed as a slippery slope by your standards.
We are dealing with a threshold here.
Very few companies get built with CIA money.

NO you know damn well what a slippery slope is that is why you tried to turn my argument upside down. The slippery slope and pretense of knowledge is you redefining property. If you want to create legislation to make it illegal to do business with the CIA than so be it, but do not take away my property rights because you can't comprehend intellectual property.

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 10:56 PM
NO you know damn well what a slippery slope is that is why you tried to turn my argument upside down. The slippery slope and pretense of knowledge is you redefining property. If you want to create legislation to make it illegal to do business with the CIA than so be it, but do not take away my property rights because you can't comprehend intellectual property.
GOOGLE is an arm of the state.

That can't be said of most other businesses.
Don't take away my Bill of Rights by allowing the government to masquerade as a private business.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 11:01 PM
GOOGLE is an arm of the state.

That can't be said of most other businesses.
Don't take away my Bill of Rights by allowing the government to masquerade as a private business.
Where is that in all of the CIA documents and secrets Edward Snowden gave his life away to leak? Are you saying this is so secret that even the CIA doesn't know about it?

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 11:04 PM
Where is that in all of the CIA documents and secrets Edward Snowden gave his life away to leak? Are you saying this is so secret that even the CIA doesn't know about it?
How the CIA made Google (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?469132-How-the-CIA-made-Google)

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 11:04 PM
Where is that in all of the CIA documents and secrets Edward Snowden gave his life away to leak? Are you saying this is so secret that even the CIA doesn't know about it?
Google’s Earth: how the tech giant is helping the state spy on us (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?529500-Google’s-Earth-how-the-tech-giant-is-helping-the-state-spy-on-us)

nikcers
12-26-2018, 11:07 PM
Google’s Earth: how the tech giant is helping the state spy on us (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?529500-Google’s-Earth-how-the-tech-giant-is-helping-the-state-spy-on-us)



That's like saying the soviets helped us build stuff because we bought titanium from them. I seriously don't see how you could invalidate property rights without it getting political or abused by the state. We sort of have a track record of the state abusing every sort of property rights we have.

UWDude
12-26-2018, 11:08 PM
NO you know damn well what a slippery slope is that is why you tried to turn my argument upside down. The slippery slope and pretense of knowledge is you redefining property. If you want to create legislation to make it illegal to do business with the CIA than so be it, but do not take away my property rights because you can't comprehend intellectual property.

CIA isn't doing business with them, CIA is the business. They are the start up investors.
And then they use those companies against us, and claim they are "private companies"

Most CIA money, there is absolutely no oversight, whatsoever. Most of it is black budget.

Weak minded fool.

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 11:11 PM
That's like saying the soviets helped us build stuff because we bought titanium from them. I seriously don't see how you could invalidate property rights without it getting political or abused by the state. We sort of have a track record of the state abusing every sort of property rights we have.

How the CIA made Google (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?469132-How-the-CIA-made-Google)

nikcers
12-26-2018, 11:12 PM
CIA isn't doing business with them, CIA is the business. They are the start up investors.
And then they use those companies against us, and claim they are "private companies"

Most CIA money, there is absolutely no oversight, whatsoever. Most of it is black budget.

Weak minded fool.
What you are saying is google's property is invalid because the CIA took over the country?

UWDude
12-26-2018, 11:37 PM
What you are saying is google's property is invalid because the CIA took over the country?
I'm talking about this list:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?520328-21-Tech-Firms-Unconstitutionally-Funded-By-CIA-Front-Group-In-Q-Tel

and the incestuous relationships they have with Silicon valley.

Lo and behold, Silicon Valley magically has and agenda! It's like all the companies think the same things, and suddenly think it is smart to inject politics into business! Suddenly profit isn't motive #1, silencing nationalist voices is! What a coincidence!

But fear not!


Free Market Austrians tell us that any day now, Some tiny Libertarian upstart from Incirlico Ohio is going to magically create a viable alternative to speech and payment over the internet! Because free market magic! And you are an evil Statist if you think that will never happen!

That will never happen!

Then you say, "oh, it will never happen because this reason, that reason, banksters, fed reserve, welfare, corporate welfare, we just need to get rid of that first."

Oh is that it!? Just those super-powerful megaliths?

Wheew. And I thought I was just going to have to watch free speech and free and fair markets be slowly smothered and raped by a bunch of multi-national faceless corporations and their form-letterese bureaucrats who openly want to quell free speech under the guise of "hate speech" and all that other B.S.

But luckily, it's a big free, truly capitalist market out there, so yeah, free market economics will win, and there will be viable alternatives.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 11:43 PM
Now are you going to tell me the CIA created Ron Paul? I have been following Ron Paul long enough that I remember when the only place that wasn't censoring Ron Paul was google. It even became a meme and bumper sticker. "Google Ron Paul" I watch the Ron Paul liberty report on Google(youtube) every time a new one is posted

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 11:46 PM
I'm talking about this list:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?520328-21-Tech-Firms-Unconstitutionally-Funded-By-CIA-Front-Group-In-Q-Tel

and the incestuous relationships they have with Silicon valley.

Lo and behold, Silicon Valley magically has and agenda! It's like all the companies think the same things, and suddenly think it is smart to inject politics into business! Suddenly profit isn't motive #1, silencing nationalist voices is! What a coincidence!

But fear not!


Free Market Austrians tell us that any day now, Some tiny Libertarian upstart from Incirlico Ohio is going to magically create a viable alternative to speech and payment over the internet! Because free market magic! And you are an evil Statist if you think that will never happen!

That will never happen!

Then you say, "oh, it will never happen because this reason, that reason, banksters, fed reserve, welfare, corporate welfare, we just need to get rid of that first."

Oh is that it!? Just those super-powerful megaliths?

Wheew. And I thought I was just going to have to watch free speech and free and fair markets be slowly smothered and raped by a bunch of multi-national faceless corporations and their form-letterese bureaucrats who openly want to quell free speech under the guise of "hate speech" and all that other B.S.

But luckily, it's a big free, truly capitalist market out there, so yeah, free market economics will win, and there will be viable alternatives.

And we will do that while allowing them to use the rules against us but not against their side.:sarcasm:

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 11:47 PM
Now are you going to tell me the CIA created Ron Paul? I have been following Ron Paul long enough that I remember when the only place that wasn't censoring Ron Paul was google. It even became a meme and bumper sticker. "Google Ron Paul" I watch the Ron Paul liberty report on Google(youtube) every time a new one is posted
They didn't think they needed to censor him and they were right.

nikcers
12-26-2018, 11:48 PM
They didn't think they needed to censor him and they were right.

LOL why were they censoring him on all the other platforms then?

UWDude
12-26-2018, 11:53 PM
Now are you going to tell me the CIA created Ron Paul? I have been following Ron Paul long enough that I remember when the only place that wasn't censoring Ron Paul was google. It even became a meme and bumper sticker. "Google Ron Paul" I watch the Ron Paul liberty report on Google(youtube) every time a new one is posted

CIA tried to censor Ron Paul.

I guess you missed the whole PropOrNot thing:

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/whos-behind-propornots-blacklist-of-news-websites/

http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html

redflagnews.com
bignuggetnews.com regated.com
bioprepper.com rense.com
blackagendareport.com righton.com
blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com
conservativedailypost.com rumormillnews.com
consortiumnews.com ruptly.tv
corbettreport.com russia-insider.com
cosmicscientist.com sana.sy
countercurrents.org sentinelblog.com
counterinformation.wordpress.com sgtreport.com
dailyoccupation.com shiftfrequency.com
dailystormer.com shtfplan.com
darkmoon.me silentmajoritypatriots.com
darkpolitricks.com silverdoctors.com
davidstockmanscontracorner.com sott.net


bioprepper.com rense.com
blackagendareport.com righton.com
blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com
conservativedailypost.com rumormillnews.com
consortiumnews.com ruptly.tv
corbettreport.com russia-insider.com
cosmicscientist.com sana.sy
countercurrents.org sentinelblog.com


blackagendareport.com righton.com
blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com
conservativedailypost.com rumormillnews.com
consortiumnews.com ruptly.tv

blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com

christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org

Swordsmyth
12-26-2018, 11:53 PM
LOL why were they censoring him on all the other platforms then?
It got people like you to go to GOOLAGLE, then they could better surveil the movement.

UWDude
12-26-2018, 11:56 PM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/content.php?10456-Washington-Post-Disgracefully-Promotes-a-McCarthyite-Blacklist-From-a-New-Hidden-and-Very-Shady-Group

Remember this?

Washington Post.. private company, Owned by Jeff Bezos, whose other little company, Amazon.com, got $600,000,000 in contracts in one year from the CIA for cloud computing services.

nikcers
12-27-2018, 12:19 AM
CIA tried to censor Ron Paul.

I guess you missed the whole PropOrNot thing:

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/whos-behind-propornots-blacklist-of-news-websites/

http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html

redflagnews.com
bignuggetnews.com regated.com
bioprepper.com rense.com
blackagendareport.com righton.com
blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com
conservativedailypost.com rumormillnews.com
consortiumnews.com ruptly.tv
corbettreport.com russia-insider.com
cosmicscientist.com sana.sy
countercurrents.org sentinelblog.com
counterinformation.wordpress.com sgtreport.com
dailyoccupation.com shiftfrequency.com
dailystormer.com shtfplan.com
darkmoon.me silentmajoritypatriots.com
darkpolitricks.com silverdoctors.com
davidstockmanscontracorner.com sott.net


bioprepper.com rense.com
blackagendareport.com righton.com
blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com
conservativedailypost.com rumormillnews.com
consortiumnews.com ruptly.tv
corbettreport.com russia-insider.com
cosmicscientist.com sana.sy
countercurrents.org sentinelblog.com


blackagendareport.com righton.com
blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com
conservativedailypost.com rumormillnews.com
consortiumnews.com ruptly.tv

blacklistednews.com rinf.com
christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org
collective-evolution.com rt.com

christianfightback.com ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org


ronpaulinstitute.org

What about his run for President though? That was way after they stopped him from becoming the president.

Swordsmyth
12-27-2018, 12:22 AM
What about his run for President though? That was way after they stopped him from becoming the president.


It got people like you to go to GOOLAGLE, then they could better surveil the movement.

After the campaigns there was less need to entice his followers to use GOOLAGLE.

nikcers
12-27-2018, 12:25 AM
After the campaigns there was less need to entice his followers to use GOOLAGLE.

Do businesses that are hacked by foreign governments have invalid property too?

Swordsmyth
12-27-2018, 12:26 AM
Do businesses that are hacked by foreign governments have invalid property too?
Why would they?

UWDude
12-27-2018, 12:29 AM
Ron Paul was not considered a threat during his runs for president, at all, in any way. At that time, neither was Alex Jones.
That's why they didn't censor anybody back then.

nikcers
12-27-2018, 12:32 AM
Ron Paul was not considered a threat during his runs for president, at all, in any way. At that time, neither was Alex Jones.
That's why they didn't censor anybody back then.

Ron Paul was censored heavily on every form of media. You are living under a rock if you have an account that old and you don't know that.

nikcers
12-27-2018, 12:35 AM
Why would they?

The ones funded by foreign governments or foreign government funneled money because their government is corrupt, you know not by private investments.

UWDude
12-27-2018, 12:35 AM
Ron Paul was censored heavily on every form of media. You are living under a rock if you have an account that old and you don't know that.

The Mainstream media has always silenced dissent. He wasn't silenced because he was a threat, he was silenced because he was dissent.
Also, I gave $400, knowing damn well he didn't stand a chance.
The first money bomb was great, because it got his name in the news, but I knew it in no way meant any chance of victory, whatsoever.

nikcers
12-27-2018, 12:37 AM
The Mainstream media has always silenced dissent. He wasn't silenced because he was a threat, he was silenced because he was dissent.
Also, I gave $400, knowing damn well he didn't stand a chance.
The first money bomb was great, because it got his name in the news, but I knew it in no way meant any chance of victory, whatsoever.

They devoted a lot more resources than you can imagine to censor Ron Paul. Probably with your own tax dollars to boot.

Swordsmyth
12-27-2018, 12:39 AM
The ones funded by foreign governments or foreign government funneled money because their government is corrupt, you know not by private investments.
Foreign governments don't have to abide by our Constitution, if they are attacking or damaging us in some way then they should be opposed with tariffs or bans etc. as part of national defense.

UWDude
12-27-2018, 12:40 AM
They devoted a lot more resources than you can imagine to censor Ron Paul. Probably with your own tax dollars to boot.

I have been around long enough to know the US government, and it's mainstream media propaganda outlets, will kill people to silence them, if it must. I dont need to imagine how much they tried to stifle Ron Paul. I know they did, and they did so because they owned the information battle grounds in 2008 and 2012. google did not mean shit back then. All that mattered back then was mainstream media. Google et al were bought and weaponized when necessary.

Swordsmyth
12-27-2018, 12:43 AM
I have been around long enough to know the US government, and it's mainstream media propaganda outlets, will kill people to silence them, if it must. I dont need to imagine how much they tried to stifle Ron Paul. I know they did, and they did so because they owned the information battle grounds in 2008 and 2012. google did not mean $#@! back then. All that mattered back then was mainstream media. Google et al were bought and weaponized when necessary.
Google was already government back then, they started it, but it was still seducing people to use it and Ron Paul voters were a prime target.

nikcers
12-27-2018, 10:40 AM
https://i.redd.it/cfk4ct51vt621.jpg

TheCount
12-29-2018, 06:23 PM
img

With that headscarf, she's not getting any of Boromir's money.