You're very welcome. Just trying to get you off to a good start here at FR.
Look for threads like this one to participate in:
Posted on 01/16/2009 11:01:45 AM PST by dbz77
Does anyone know why LewRockwell.Com articles can no longer be posted here?
He also is a writer for the Huffington Post.
Alex Jones
At the risk of being banned for not showing sufficient obsequious deference, that looks to the rest of the world like arbitrary censorship and intellectual cowardice. If you can think of a more accurate term, I'd appreciate hearing it.
A forum supposedly representing the pure strength of freedom of thought and the value of exposing falsehood really shouldn't have anything to fear from the occasional screw-ball post. It and its poster will be derided to death anyway. And frankly, it makes a humorous contrasting background to the overwhelmingly excellent quality of the other posts on FR.
Allowing flaky free speech in a forum called "Free Republic" hardly means "we" (in fact, Jim Robinson, because "we" have no say in what is or is not allowed here) endorses it or its source. It just shows certainty in the unalienable value of free speech and confidence in truth being triumphant. Frankly, I think a dismissive response (or flurry of them) is far more damning than a story spike or black out.
After all, a screw-ball conspiracy theory about Clinton having an on-going sexual tryst with an intern turned out to be true. Nobody is sufficiently pre-cognitive to determine beforehand what "crackpot" theories will turn out to be true, and thereby proactively filter so that only valuable content gets through.
I don't expect this to change your mind, but in the interest of intellectual honesty, I feel compelled to supply a counterpoint, because nobody else would dare.
If I disappear, it's because I've been banned for expressing this view.
Welcome to FR
FR is privately owned.
You and I are here as guests.
There is no ‘right’ to be here, hence banning or blocking sites is not censorship.
It would be similar to telling punks to get off your lawn while they blare their crap music.
The punks wouldn’t be getting censored as they have no ‘right’ to be there.
Is Lew still dating Cindy Sheehan?
It is for the exact same reason why we don’t allow anything from racist sites like Stormfront, conspiratorial propaganda like Alex Jones, radical liberal sites like Huffington Post (where Lew Rockwell writes), pornography, violence, etc. This is a private site, by and for Conservatives. This is about a FREE REPUBLIC. In a Free Republic, private property rights are honored, including the desire of this site to remain a Conservative forum versus a soapbox for every crank in the world.
The First Amendment says the government cannot restrict free speech, it does not give anyone the right to come on your or my private property and yell whatever they want to. It is a restriction on government, not a restriction on the standards you set for your property.
If you look at the posts here, it is pretty clear what the community thinks of Lew Rockwell.
By the way, people aren’t banned for just expressing their view, it is how they express that generally gets people banned or if their view is, for example, racist propaganda.
Hi Darksheare,
Thank you very kindly, and I understand that precisely. That is why I chose my words very carefully:
that looks to the rest of the world like arbitrary censorship and intellectual cowardice.
I mentioned nothing about "my rights" or anything remotely related to the concept. I was talking specifically about the perception of FR both internally and externally, and specifically about the value of being less restrictive in content. Or how about this - having a "Moderator Disavows This Article or Author" flag for the tin foil hat or leftie stuff. These are just my thoughts, and Jim Robinson will do whatever he feels like doing, and it won't make any difference to me one way or another. My goal is simply to get important, valuable information to as many people as possible, and I consider FR a fantastic resource as it is, but submitted my opinion to make it even better (admittedly, my subjective opinion).
I'm being quite genuine about this.
Will you get 72 virgins for martyring yourself here?
Boy, I sure hope not. Besides, I think committing suicide online doesn't get you any points unless you take some digital infidels with you. I'd have to get some of you folks banned along with me in order to earn so much as a goldfish in the Islamic Online Afterlife...
Even if I've avoided being banned, I am probably now under a fatwah. Thanks a lot, ZX12R :-)
That is your opinion, we do not exist for appearances, we exist for Conservative values. If you exist for appearances, you are nothing but pop-culture. All forums have topics and themes. We are a Conservative site for Conservatives. Democrat Underground is a liberal site for liberals. Architectural Digest is an Architectual site for architects and designers. EGullet is a food related website for foodies and chefs. We offer a service to a specific clientele- Conservatives. You don't go to The Tavern on the Green and say they are censoring food because they don't serve McDonald's hamburgers.
Damn right I will.
And here's what I feel like doing:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts
Sorry, Lew Rockwell, antiwar.com, Alex Jones, and their allies Code Pink, InternationalANSWER, et al, do not fill the bill (unless your bill includes offering aid and comfort to the enemy that is).
So what?
This is a PRIVATE forum, certainly a libertarian (I assume) like yourself should understand that First Amendment rights have NOTHING to do with private property.
My goal is simply to get important, valuable information to as many people as possible,
There are other places to post.
By the way, people aren’t banned for just expressing their view, it is how they express that generally gets people banned or if their view is, for example, racist propaganda.
OK, well that's good to know. You'll note the details of my previous responses. I have no illusions about FR being some sort of "public property", and I completely endorse the concept of it as digital real estate. I simply disagree with the exclusion of all content from some sites (Lewrockwell and one I encountered personally, newswithviews.com), for the reasons I stated previously. I have to admit, I have only read a few Lew Rockwell articles (same with newswithviews, usually forwarded to me sporadically), and they have been by other authors, and I found them to be excellent. But that is only personal anecdotal evidence. It may be I found the 1% of worthwhile content in a mound of rubbish. As for racist propaganda, I totally agree and understand, as I have seen many, many online online forums invaded and destroyed by the Aryan Whatevers.
So, there, end of advice and observation. Back to mining valuable information and making fun of collectivists...
Damn right I will.
And here's what I feel like doing:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts
Sorry, Lew Rockwell, antiwar.com, Alex Jones, and their allies Code Pink, International ANSWER, et al, do not fill the bill (unless your bill includes offering aid and comfort to the enemy that is).
I don't disagree with a single sentiment defined there.
Nor would I spare so much as a drop of urine to extinguish any member of the groups you list were they to be found in mid-combustion (although I must admit the entire Lew Rockwell revelation today is a shock - I really had no idea).
I respect your reasoning, and I trust my good-will critique, expressed precisely, is taken in the spirit it was intended: An admittedly subjective idea for quality improvement from a guy on your side.
Of course, the best thing about advice, especially unsolicited advice, is that it can be ignored.
Because they have a lot in common. Both are total Moonbats.
Who cares what the rest of the world thinks?
When the rest of the world cares what we think, then I will give that statement consideration.
I mentioned rights because only governments censor, and rights are in place in counter to that.
Again, the perceptions of the rest of the world be damned.
Counter point is that such sites are disallowed due to the perceptions of the world being that if you allow such sites, then you are affiliated and or openly support such nonsense.
Were they allowed to be posted here on 11.05.08 when you signed up?No.
Beautiful :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.