User Controls

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7

Posts by Mike David from Redbar Radio

  1. Originally posted by vindicktive vinny but utilities arent the same thing as properties.

    Of course. And here in the free West, a privately owned website is exactly that, private property. That's just true by definition.
  2. Originally posted by BummyMofo You can't. Fuck off, commie traitor bitch. Move to China you piece of shit chinklover.

  3. Two

  4. Originally posted by BummyMofo Well then fuck off. The CCP is a big steaming pile of fuckshit boytwiddling child porn pushing rapists.

    No, I'm here to inform you.
  5. He's talking about jackrabbitpsych
  6. Originally posted by Kev you have no proof it is secure without the pedophiles you stupid idiot

    I don't need it to be secure, only the pedophiles do. They attract attention, they aren't a safeguard unless they are arrested first.
  7. Originally posted by BummyMofo What's going on here? Are we mad at CCP or no?

    Only uninformed people.
  8. Efagger
  9. Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ So you admit it would at least bother you to get banned for no reason.

    Not particularly. Does everything you disagree with "bother" you? Are you too emotional as a person to just disagree with something?
  10. Originally posted by WellHung But why are u promoting that faggot in ur avatar? Does he pay u to advertise for him?

    You sound pretty upset. What that about?
  11. Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Sooo.. if you were banned right now, you'd be fine with it.

    I might not agree with it but what I agree with wouldn't matter: their property, their rules. It wouldn't be a violation of my constitutional rights, that's for sure.
  12. Alv aeoli
  13. Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson True freedom is anarchy…and not having to stick to 20mph in a school zone.

    That's not true at all. All freedoms can't be expressed mutually and simultaneously.

    In a state of anarchy, your freedom to live might overlap with my freedom to shoot whoever I deem necessary. But the same goes for me, and I don't want to live in a world where everybody thinks it's ok to kill me.

    Even if you could kill any one person who tried to kill you, maybe two people mutually don't want to kill each other very much so they decide to put agree not to kill each other and hunt down the murderer shooting people on a whim.

    Maybe a whole bunch of them do that, because they find it more convenient to live in a lawful society where they decide between themselves how not to infringe on each other's basic freedoms and then exercise all the rest of their freedoms as freely as they want.

    Such as banning people from their privately owned platforms.

    I'll do what I want, when I want and for as long as I want…as the lovely DTE likes to whisper in my ear at bedtime.

    No you won't. You're just another member of the state of society.
  14. Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ You should get banned for nothing, so you can see how it feels to be "treated fairly".

    If someone doesn't want you on their property then I say "fair enough".

    You shouldn't feel so entitled to other people's things: it's their right, as their property, to deny you access to it if you cannot play by their rules.

    Just the same way as you can deny a rude or rowdy person entry to your home or your workplace, or ask them to leave it.

    And guess what? In none of those cases are you violating their constitutional right to their freedom of speech.
  15. Who cares
  16. No more hints.
  17. Originally posted by Kev so if a private corporation monopolized the grocery business

    Antitrust laws are an entirely different subject. Are you alleging those companies have done something illegal?

    then they have a right to refuse to sell you food based whether they like your political beliefs?

    It's certainly not an issue of your constitutional rights being violated.

    its very relevant, its balls-deep up your relevant faggot ass

    No it's totally irrelevant because freedom of speech is a protection from prosecution by the government, not freedom from consequences for your actions.

    if you dont like certain websites DONT FUCKING VISIT THEM, dumbshit

    If you don't like a website's rules, don't use it. Same way Lanny can ban you for being gay if he wanted.

    who the fuck are you to deny millions access to websites they love?

    The service provider, a private party engaging in private commercial activity.

    who the fuck is google?

    The privately owned commercial service provider who is allowed to tell you to fuck off.

    Go file a civil rights lawsuit if you think your constitutional brights have been violated.
  18. Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood Yeah I am

    Then why are you hung up on the FDA fully approving something? Either you're for it or you aren't.

    but thats not the world I live in.

    1. It's also not the country you live in. You are Canadian and the FDA has literally nothing to do with your life.

    2. That is literally the world we live in with regards to these vaccines. Either you're for full FDA approval or you aren't, pick a side.

    I live in a world where drugs need to be tested for 5-10 years to be approved.

    Which you are against. So what's the problem?

    They skipped the testing because they are pretty sure it wont kill us all and even if it does it will be less deaths than covid. I get it

    Nobody skipped anything, they are still undergoing FDA approval and well on their way to smoothly gaining it. They were just approved for emergency use because as well.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/11/fauci-vaccines-covid-approval-fda-499158

    But if it takes 5 years of spinning to be a spinner and the president of spinning comes along and makes his son a spinner even though he didn't spin for 5 years. You can't just change the terms and call things safe because "uhh… well.. we approved it so it must be safe right?"

    Using an existing emergency provision as intended is no way changing terms.

    It's just typical and the response is always the same WELLL WELLL IF YOU IF YOU PUT A DIRTY HEROIN IN YOUR ARM JUT TAKE THE VACCINE BRO IF YOU HAVE NO PROVLEM WITH OINE THAN TAKE BOTH

    Yeah you shouldn't

    So you are comparing a life saving vaccine to a street drug cooked in a lab

    No I'm comparing your attitude to either.

    and honestly it's a good comparison.

    Yeah because it demonstrates your behaviour is hypocritical.

    Most modern "street drugs" have much more medical literature associated with them than the vaccine so of course I Am willing to take a drug that has existed for hundreds of years

    1. The literature says they are far more dangerous than anyone has any reason to believe vaccines to be.

    2. Medical literature about substances in lab conditions don't apply to your shake and bake meth addiction.

    If you can't see how people find issue with any of this you should try taking the boot out of your mouth and consider others for once. NOPE THEY ARE ALL RIGHT WING VICTIMS

    You've only succeeded in demonstrating you have no point and your opinion makes no sense.
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
Jump to Top