Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Is ows supporting free speech yet?

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 2, 2011, 3:02 p.m. EST by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Comment, if u ever read this.

35 Comments

35 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Once you understand the premise regarding censoring, you should be perfectly considerate of my unwillingness 'to elaborate'. Censorship jaded my view of ows many posts ago. How much elaborating would u do when most of it doesn't get out and never knowing if this one is any exception?

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I have been quite clear. Try topics like anarchy for instance. It was ok weeks ago and it was tabu yesterday. You have lengthy posts rejected as 'too short', etc. A corrupt cronyfunded webforum isn't this repressive. Have u all drank the koolaid? The path to freedom is paved with the trampled advocates of censorship. We lead, you can't even acknowledge ows are just not revolutionary but unremarkable. Why I raise this issue and you use logical fallacies is because you know it's unjustifiable and you cannot reconcile practicing censorship here while being loudly against it publically. Sleep on it. I haven't any further expectations, understandably. Peace.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Yep. Scrolling right out of sight. Ows better practice what it spreeches. Fix it. No censorship, none. There is never justification for it. You behave like u don't need us and what we see is betrayal and hypocrisy.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I'm not vague. Why the sensitivity? Nobody yet has denied it does continue even though censorship is inconsistent with ows' own charter and this global revolution's spirit. Censorship. Get rid of it. Is that less vague to u?

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Why would I gain responding to you in particular? I'm disappointed. Instead of camaderie and community you invariably get condescention, censorship, circular rationale, begging the question, just about everything BUT a policy upholding free speech... Not even assurances. Banning specified terms, etc. I'll say this: not every revolutionary's going to be as disappointed as I am. Where are the 99%rs who value free speech enough to demand it here? I said I was disappointed, believe it.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

So it follows that since you don't see censorship here you disagree with one who's seeing it habitually systematically. How many testimonials does a bright one such as you require before you carefully consider that it is going on and the implications of that predetermination not to provide a revolutinary forum rid of partisan moderation.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Well they've got their 'rules' to begin with. Ever look?

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

I could make a very strong argument that __ ___'s writings, and more importantly, his arrest and deportation by ICE is directly relevant to the goals of OWS. Did you know that the US actively supports the imprisonment of political dissidents, to the extent of arresting and deporting them to serve harsh prison sentences for merely expressing historical views contrary to the governmentally enforced official history?

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I've been checking in for awhile now - better than mainstream content and insights, sense of community, etc., because my own views mirror 99%. Ows continues to flaunt/spam their support of free speech but they've been rabid offenders here since the site launched. Are they planning to observe rights yet or postrevolution. Why the emphasis on 'read the rules' then? You're censoring more than Mubarek did and ows isn't any more transparent or accountable either.

[-] 1 points by screwtheman (122) 2 years ago

No. They will censor it, or attack you for not agreeing with them.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

See what i mean? I've spent hours in the past posting stuff u never saw.

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 2 years ago

I understand the part about comment etc...but please elaborate on your complete premise.

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

Censorship in OWS

To whom are you replying?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26733) 2 years ago

How much were you charged to say that?

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Why do you think that OWS does not support free speech?

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I think ows doesn't support free speech because it doesn't from personal experience. Do you have such experiences here, too?

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I think you would have to relate to me what type of "personal experience" you are speaking of before I would be able to answer that question.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Let's be frank. Ows site isn't any freer than any forum on the web. The moderation isn't either effective or necessary. What this results in is ...? Anyone real out there?

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I'd have to disagree with you... while they do ban or at least delete people that are obviously trying to bring down the movement, I haven't notice any blatant censorship.

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

Because I will be banned and shouted down for speaking the Truth as I know it. Don't ask me. I can't tell you.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Well then why even bother to post a reply at all....

I think you are just trying to stir the pot and have no real "Truth" to tell.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I think you're truly hoping I don't post and why is that? Look at my moniker. Is it too provocative? Reason i'm telling you this ows is this: you're indifferent, rude, and inconsiderate.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Too provocative? What is provocative about your moniker?

Look there is no where in life you can go that there will not be rules...... It's what keeps human beings from complete anarchy.

And why should I care whether you post or not.... Post whatever you like, but my reply wasn't meant for you it was to fjolsvit........ or are you two, one in the same?

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Who tf are you to say? You're the imp defending dishonest censorship not the 99%. Try apologizing and fix it. Oh, u can't. You're just toadying along, incredulous as ever. You must earn credibility/trust and it's already too late for you. Forward some other naif who believes deception, censorship, and browbeating will change the world, and i'll show the 99% yet another faux revolutionary. The threat of ows being overrun by trolls is far more of a stretch than the harm censoring is causing ows due to kids like u trying vainly to justify the indefensible from criticism by your elders who know much more certainly than you. Peace.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Look, I am not saying that all of the actions of the OWS are something I agree with. But Free Speech doesn't mean that you can abuse people, either. In the grand scheme of things this forum is a lot more "free" than others.

As far as your statement: " kids like u trying vainly to justify the indefensible from criticism by your elders who know much more certainly than you. " I am one of those elders. At 60 years old I am watching the OWS movement quite carefully, that doesn't mean I blindly support them, nor does it mean that I will condemn them for mistakes.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

There you go again. Censorship fighters and sincere advocates for universal freedom of speech, must be pariahs on abused people when they are censored here. Barely allowing what I am saying to be plausible. Instead, I'll ignore your ad hominem and keep hammering away at the travesty it truly is in practice for ows to embrace censorship. It's counterintuitive to such an extent that it's alarming to me that virtually all of my ows exchanges are typical as yours. In the end you are going to run out of options before I run out truth. Admit you believe me, admit you agree with me on free speech, and confess you're helpless as all here in ridding ows of censors.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Ad hominem? I never attacked you. Perhaps you should read this: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

Nothing in life is perfect.... neither is OWS or this forum... or for that matter you or I.... Perhaps there is a real reason for their censorship of you.. I don't know since you are reluctant to even give a hint as to why you say the censor....

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I have seen that highest law of the land wantonly violated in both spirit and letter. I have no recourse to the law. The reason I cannot explain myself is because I am confident that I would be immediately banned from this site, and I really don't want that.

When I tried to find a list of banned books in Germany that listed these books, they are not listed. They are, apparently, banned from the banned book lists.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

Well, I could simply post the name of an author and thoughtcriminal and have this thread disappeared. There would be no need to endorse his views. I could even condemn them. The very mention of his name is sufficient. Big hint: he's German.

[-] 0 points by sallyh (10) 2 years ago

ows support's this, which includes free speech.++++++++++ universal declaration of human rights (UN) On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories."


pdf english http://www.wunrn.com/reference/pdf/univ_dec_hum_right.pdf


mp3 english 12 minutes http://www.multiupload.com/M9I27RWFH8


in over 100 launguages http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/SearchByLang.aspx


universal declaration of human rights movie 4 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTlrSYbCbHE-


universal declaration of human rights 20 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epVZrYbDVis


Charter of the United Nations http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/sourcefiles/ispaldoc1945.pdf


PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. training web page http://tinyurl.com/7rvpv43

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I've been checking in for awhile now - better than mainstream content and insights, sense of community, etc., because my own views mirror 99%. Ows continues to flaunt/spam their support of free speech but they've been rabid offenders here since the site launched. Are they planning to observe rights yet or postrevolution. Why the emphasis on 'read the rules' then? You're censoring more than Mubarek did and ows isn't any more transparent or accountable either.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

Just ruddy useless. When the revolution's on ows will be the obedient compliant censorhysterical faction not the champions of the oppressed I expected hosting this. Not the time or place to be callous or hostile to ideas. You're both ows. When coaxing our last vestiges of trust, we are required to make a leap of faith with ows while ows still refuses to be fully transparent, accountable or trustworthy. Not responsive either. How many GAs will it take to be upfront?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26733) 2 years ago

Why are you so vague?

What idea do find they are hostile to?

[-] -1 points by Glaucon (296) 2 years ago

He's vague because he has nothing to say. Read this forum. It is not censored!

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Well they have banned/deleted/scrubbed people that have consistently made unfounded accusations and those that have come out against them. But I think it depends on how the posts are offered....