Facebook puts Seals in timeout!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/30/Facebook-Censors-Navy-SEALS-To-Protect-Obama-on-Benghazi-Gate

Amazing how the fine folks at Facebook use their social networking tool. It's a shame,

and a joke. Did Facebook ever recover from their fall from grace IPO?

They will become irrelevant eventually, except to the illiterate.

[mikegideon]

I passed that one on. Kinda closed the barn door after the horse was gone.

[R_Bert]

FB was down to $19 a few days ago; hovering ~22 right now but was turning down again.. fun to pull up the chart and look at the dismal dive

Still interested in who is next FB replacement..

[greenego]

So much for freedom of speech.

[BryanP]

So much for freedom of speech.

On a privately owned forum? In that sense FB is no different than TGO. You're welcome to use it at the pleasure of the owners. They can censor you or boot you at any time and you really have no recourse, nor should you.

[gjohnsoniv]

Well they are certainly showing which side they favor.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Find that kind of speech in their rules.

I had to go check my remarks about treason to see if they got deleted. Not, yet. If it is such a great place,

you would think they would be a bit less political.

[RobertNashville]

On a privately owned forum? In that sense FB is no different than TGO. You're welcome to use it at the pleasure of the owners. They can censor you or boot you at any time and you really have no recourse, nor should you.

Absolutely correct.

Freedom of speech does not guarantee one a platform from which to speak nor an audience to hear you.

I'll admit, I find Facebook's actions distasteful but they have a right to run their site anyway they wish.

That said, I've posted this link on MY Facebook page along with some appropriate comments and encouraged all my friends to do the same. Maybe by the time all is said and done this will be posted by so many FB members that FB will have no choice but to leave it alone.

Edited October 31, 2012 by RobertNashville

[greenego]

On a privately owned forum? In that sense FB is no different than TGO. You're welcome to use it at the pleasure of the owners. They can censor you or boot you at any time and you really have no recourse, nor should you.

Point well taken. However if they want to limit discussion to just what they want posted, they should inform their subscribers that criticism of Mr Obama is not permitted. maybe like the school teacher in NC. I just posted the link to this story on Facebook. If they take it down, I will post it here.

As a second thought, Facebook is now a publicly traded company. Don't know if that makes any difference to BryanPs' point.

Edited October 31, 2012 by greenego

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I have used the words "treason" and "treasonous" regarding Obama's inaction about Benghazi many times

when commenting on others' walls on FB. THere are many saying that and more need to challenge their

views.

I don't disagree with their site being private, but when they have no rules against such speech and just make

it up as they go, or decide political is all of a sudden offensive on one side, and not the other, I have a problem

with that. I've seen many posts that were offensive directed towards Republicans on FB. The place is obviously

showing their favorite.

[BryanP]

Well they are certainly showing which side they favor.

Except that when I saw that this morning I went to the facebook page for the people making the claim. Oddly enough that image was still in place. I have to wonder if someone is making mountains out of molehills.

[gjohnsoniv]

Except that when I saw that this morning I went to the facebook page for the people making the claim. Oddly enough that image was still in place. I have to wonder if someone is making mountains out of molehills.

Not denying that either, I think both sides could be equally guilty.

[mikegideon]

Point well taken. However if they want to limit discussion to just what they want posted, they should inform their subscribers that criticism of Mr Obama is not permitted. maybe like the school teacher in NC. I just posted the link to this story on Facebook. If they take it down, I will post it here.

As a second thought, Facebook is now a publicly traded company. Don't know if that makes any difference to BryanPs' point.

Not sure why they blocked it. There are similar memes all over Facebook right now. Certainly been TONS of political stuff. It's an Obama bashin' free-for-all.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If you wish to call it making a mountain out of a molehill, which kind of speech do you prefer? Any time

speech is hindered, good or bad, it is a bad thing. It is an infringement of the 1st Amendment if it is not

a protected and private place for discussion.

Maybe FB should just say they are restricting speech because of a certain political party. I would gladly

leave. I am considering that anyway.

[RobertNashville]

Many people, including me have had our speech "limited" here on TGO at one time or another - many have even been permanently banned. Is that "bad" or "good"?

I accepted my punishment and never disagreed with David's right to impose it (I still have two "warning points" although I've never actually investigated what the means precisely ). I realize it's not a perfect comparison but it's not terribly different either I don't think???

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Facebook is worldwide and is specifically targeting one side in this case, not quite the same as here, Robert,

but I understand your statement. If they came out and declared something or wrote their own position on this,

it would be different.

Instead, they are doing what the mainstream media is to Benghazi: ignoring it.

[mcurrier]

[Dolomite_supafly]

As far as private sites making up the rules as they go I think all of them, from their first day to their last, are a work in progess. And every rule out there is the result of someone doing something that the owner never invisioned happening. Just like all the warning labels all over products that are obvious.

I believe if a site wants to limit their speech they are perfectly allowed to providing they give an explanation as to why. That way the person speaking, so to speak, can choose to follow the new rules or leave.

And rules don't need to be specific to be effective. There is plenty of actions that would likely get you in hot water here that are not in the rules. I think when you have too many rules it makes it hard to follow them, like in the real world. We have so many laws that you can be criminalized for doing just about anything anymore.

Because the Constitution protects a person from having the governement infringe on their right to free speech I wonder how that works with government run sites? I mean if someone were to post something on a site owned by the governement and it is removed, could you sue?

I also believe that if no public funds are used to create or maintain a site then they can do with that site what they wish. They can limit whatever speech they want. But if a site used public funds, through grants or other governemnt programs, then the rules of the Consitution should apply.

I have FB account but I am never on it. I mean I check it about once a month or so.

Dolomite

[mikegideon]

Facebook is worldwide and is specifically targeting one side in this case, not quite the same as here, Robert,

but I understand your statement. If they came out and declared something or wrote their own position on this,

it would be different.

Instead, they are doing what the mainstream media is to Benghazi: ignoring it.

I don't know if you see many of my posts because of the way Facebook filters stuff, but I beat the hell out of Obama on a daily basis. Gill is a lot louder than me. I'm just wondering if there's an important detail missing from the story in the OP.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I know, Mike. I see your posts on the wall.

[mikegideon]

I know, Mike. I see your posts on the wall.

I'm not as bad as ChuckieT. I figure he's made a list or two

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think I have as many libtards on my wall as you do. You know? Those union thugs I work with.

[Guest TNBrat]

I think I have as many libtards on my wall as you do. You know? Those union thugs I work with.

I've had to remove 2 of my sisters from my feed so I don't have to see their crap in my news feed. And I'm not one to not listen to your political views just because I don't agree, but they're putting crap on their walls. Like Don't vote for Romney because he believes women get what the deserve if raped…wtf is that all about. And then my cousin who's an American citizen living in Canada proudly displaying her personal letter from Obama. She makes it a point to spew Obama crap daily. And the word here is crap! Say something intelligent if you've got something to say.

TNBrat Hiding in the woods…

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I've had to remove 2 of my sisters from my feed so I don't have to see their crap in my news feed. And I'm not one to not listen to your political views just because I don't agree, but they're putting crap on their walls. Like Don't vote for Romney because he believes women get what the deserve if raped…wtf is that all about. And then my cousin who's an American citizen living in Canada proudly displaying her personal letter from Obama. She makes it a point to spew Obama crap daily. And the word here is crap! Say something intelligent if you've got something to say.

TNBrat Hiding in the woods…

I have a niece who is getting the same treatment.

[jtmaze]

I have a niece who is getting the same treatment.

I have a cousin that got that boot years ago. I haven't spoken to her in years and we were the tightest of 9 cousins growing up and now we don't speak because she can't put her liberal bs aside.

JTM

Sent from my iPhone