Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

It doesn’t matter if Twitter heard from “legit scientists and experts.” Those people can be and often are wrong, too. That is the whole point of science. It is not about specious appeals to authority, but rather rigorous, empirical testing. Even if the Florida surgeon general is completely wrong, what should happen is that he should be refuted with actual evidence. Not silenced for being incorrect.

THIS

This is why the Democrats terrify me with their blatant censorship. Which was so over the top during Covid.

This is exactly how science works. If you disagree, you provide data to explain why your disagree. You don’t simply ‘cancel’ the other scientist.

Okay. https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/10/09/a-critical-review-of-floridas-new-vaccine-analysis/

Also, Democrats censoring? Are you saying Twitter the company and the Democratic party are one in the same?

DP
Pretty much.

When the WH directs Twitter, or any other social media company, to censor speech, this is a violation of the 1st amendment.
And, evidence shows they did exactly that.

https://www.city-journal.org/did-the-government-pressure-twitter-to-curtail-speech

Last month, Covid vaccine skeptic Alex Berenson was allowed back on Twitter after being “permanently” suspended for allegedly violating the platform’s Covid-19 “misinformation” policy. Remarkably, Twitter acknowledged that his tweets “should have not led” to his suspension.
Now, new internal Twitter documents publicized by Berenson reveal that the Biden administration likely played a pivotal role in his suspension. As a Twitter employee reported on the company’s internal Slack messaging system, the company faced “one really tough question about why Alex Berenson hasn’t been kicked off from the platform” in an April 2021 White House meeting. Another employee reported that Andy Slavitt, senior adviser to President Biden’s Covid response team, claimed that he had seen evidence indicating that Berenson was “the epicenter of disinfo that radiated outwards to the persuadable public.”
In the summer of 2021, the federal government repeatedly pressured social media platforms to ramp up efforts to crack down on Covid “misinformation.” On July 16, 2021, Biden claimed that social-media companies were “killing people” by failing to censor Covid misinformation. A few hours after Biden’s comment, Twitter suspended Berenson’s account for the first time. The next month, Twitter banned him after he tweeted about the vaccine’s inability to stop transmission and infection over the long-term and its side-effect profile.

If a boob flashes on TV and the network blurs it out is it not the government “directing a media company to censor speech”? Has Fox broadcasting been violating the first amendment for their entire existence?

It is not the same. In the first example, the network would be following FCC regulations. The regulation would have gone through public notice and public comment, and approved by a bipartisan commission. The regulation is then a matter of public record and we all can read it and submit comments or petition for rulemaking if we believe the rule is flawed after it passes. So the public can comment and participate, in a democratic fashion.

In the second example, the pubic is unaware. There is nothing for the public to inspect and no forum for democratic participation. It is conducted in secret with no record and no acknowledgement, like a covert operation.

This is an example of what mean when they say D activity is threatening democracy.

Another good example is the vax mandate and the mask mandate. Look at what the process is for those kinds of regulations, and what actually happened (they skipped public comment period and went to direct final rule without all the normal steps that enable citizens to engage).

Anonymous wrote:I see the anti-vaccine idiots have been active this morning. Do some legitimate research. You killed and endangered a lot people with your nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m pro vaccine and am Covid-vaxxed and boosted, but I’m getting tired of the censorship and gaslighting that there are people out there who did get severely injured or died from this vaccine. It happens. Side effects and deaths have occurred in numerous treatments in the past. But the fact that we can’t have an open conversation about THIS vaccine, is incredibly annoying and dishonest.

Why on earth are random tech people on Twitter who have no medical knowledge deciding on health information anyway?

Why would anyone look to Twitter for health information in the first place? Ask your doctor!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

It doesn’t matter if Twitter heard from “legit scientists and experts.” Those people can be and often are wrong, too. That is the whole point of science. It is not about specious appeals to authority, but rather rigorous, empirical testing. Even if the Florida surgeon general is completely wrong, what should happen is that he should be refuted with actual evidence. Not silenced for being incorrect.

THIS

This is why the Democrats terrify me with their blatant censorship. Which was so over the top during Covid.

This is exactly how science works. If you disagree, you provide data to explain why your disagree. You don’t simply ‘cancel’ the other scientist.

Okay. https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/10/09/a-critical-review-of-floridas-new-vaccine-analysis/

Also, Democrats censoring? Are you saying Twitter the company and the Democratic party are one in the same?

DP
Pretty much.

When the WH directs Twitter, or any other social media company, to censor speech, this is a violation of the 1st amendment.
And, evidence shows they did exactly that.

https://www.city-journal.org/did-the-government-pressure-twitter-to-curtail-speech

Last month, Covid vaccine skeptic Alex Berenson was allowed back on Twitter after being “permanently” suspended for allegedly violating the platform’s Covid-19 “misinformation” policy. Remarkably, Twitter acknowledged that his tweets “should have not led” to his suspension.
Now, new internal Twitter documents publicized by Berenson reveal that the Biden administration likely played a pivotal role in his suspension. As a Twitter employee reported on the company’s internal Slack messaging system, the company faced “one really tough question about why Alex Berenson hasn’t been kicked off from the platform” in an April 2021 White House meeting. Another employee reported that Andy Slavitt, senior adviser to President Biden’s Covid response team, claimed that he had seen evidence indicating that Berenson was “the epicenter of disinfo that radiated outwards to the persuadable public.”
In the summer of 2021, the federal government repeatedly pressured social media platforms to ramp up efforts to crack down on Covid “misinformation.” On July 16, 2021, Biden claimed that social-media companies were “killing people” by failing to censor Covid misinformation. A few hours after Biden’s comment, Twitter suspended Berenson’s account for the first time. The next month, Twitter banned him after he tweeted about the vaccine’s inability to stop transmission and infection over the long-term and its side-effect profile.

If a boob flashes on TV and the network blurs it out is it not the government “directing a media company to censor speech”? Has Fox broadcasting been violating the first amendment for their entire existence?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

It doesn’t matter if Twitter heard from “legit scientists and experts.” Those people can be and often are wrong, too. That is the whole point of science. It is not about specious appeals to authority, but rather rigorous, empirical testing. Even if the Florida surgeon general is completely wrong, what should happen is that he should be refuted with actual evidence. Not silenced for being incorrect.

THIS

This is why the Democrats terrify me with their blatant censorship. Which was so over the top during Covid.

This is exactly how science works. If you disagree, you provide data to explain why your disagree. You don’t simply ‘cancel’ the other scientist.

Okay. https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/10/09/a-critical-review-of-floridas-new-vaccine-analysis/

Also, Democrats censoring? Are you saying Twitter the company and the Democratic party are one in the same?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

It doesn’t matter if Twitter heard from “legit scientists and experts.” Those people can be and often are wrong, too. That is the whole point of science. It is not about specious appeals to authority, but rather rigorous, empirical testing. Even if the Florida surgeon general is completely wrong, what should happen is that he should be refuted with actual evidence. Not silenced for being incorrect.

THIS

This is why the Democrats terrify me with their blatant censorship. Which was so over the top during Covid.

This is exactly how science works. If you disagree, you provide data to explain why your disagree. You don’t simply ‘cancel’ the other scientist.

Okay. https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/10/09/a-critical-review-of-floridas-new-vaccine-analysis/

Also, Democrats censoring? Are you saying Twitter the company and the Democratic party are one in the same?

DP
Pretty much.

When the WH directs Twitter, or any other social media company, to censor speech, this is a violation of the 1st amendment.
And, evidence shows they did exactly that.

https://www.city-journal.org/did-the-government-pressure-twitter-to-curtail-speech

Last month, Covid vaccine skeptic Alex Berenson was allowed back on Twitter after being “permanently” suspended for allegedly violating the platform’s Covid-19 “misinformation” policy. Remarkably, Twitter acknowledged that his tweets “should have not led” to his suspension.
Now, new internal Twitter documents publicized by Berenson reveal that the Biden administration likely played a pivotal role in his suspension. As a Twitter employee reported on the company’s internal Slack messaging system, the company faced “one really tough question about why Alex Berenson hasn’t been kicked off from the platform” in an April 2021 White House meeting. Another employee reported that Andy Slavitt, senior adviser to President Biden’s Covid response team, claimed that he had seen evidence indicating that Berenson was “the epicenter of disinfo that radiated outwards to the persuadable public.”
In the summer of 2021, the federal government repeatedly pressured social media platforms to ramp up efforts to crack down on Covid “misinformation.” On July 16, 2021, Biden claimed that social-media companies were “killing people” by failing to censor Covid misinformation. A few hours after Biden’s comment, Twitter suspended Berenson’s account for the first time. The next month, Twitter banned him after he tweeted about the vaccine’s inability to stop transmission and infection over the long-term and its side-effect profile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

It doesn’t matter if Twitter heard from “legit scientists and experts.” Those people can be and often are wrong, too. That is the whole point of science. It is not about specious appeals to authority, but rather rigorous, empirical testing. Even if the Florida surgeon general is completely wrong, what should happen is that he should be refuted with actual evidence. Not silenced for being incorrect.

THIS

This is why the Democrats terrify me with their blatant censorship. Which was so over the top during Covid.

This is exactly how science works. If you disagree, you provide data to explain why your disagree. You don’t simply ‘cancel’ the other scientist.

Okay. https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/10/09/a-critical-review-of-floridas-new-vaccine-analysis/

Also, Democrats censoring? Are you saying Twitter the company and the Democratic party are one in the same?

Last month, Covid vaccine skeptic Alex Berenson was allowed back on Twitter after being “permanently” suspended for allegedly violating the platform’s Covid-19 “misinformation” policy. Remarkably, Twitter acknowledged that his tweets “should have not led” to his suspension.
Now, new internal Twitter documents publicized by Berenson reveal that the Biden administration likely played a pivotal role in his suspension. As a Twitter employee reported on the company’s internal Slack messaging system, the company faced “one really tough question about why Alex Berenson hasn’t been kicked off from the platform” in an April 2021 White House meeting. Another employee reported that Andy Slavitt, senior adviser to President Biden’s Covid response team, claimed that he had seen evidence indicating that Berenson was “the epicenter of disinfo that radiated outwards to the persuadable public.”
In the summer of 2021, the federal government repeatedly pressured social media platforms to ramp up efforts to crack down on Covid “misinformation.” On July 16, 2021, Biden claimed that social-media companies were “killing people” by failing to censor Covid misinformation. A few hours after Biden’s comment, Twitter suspended Berenson’s account for the first time. The next month, Twitter banned him after he tweeted about the vaccine’s inability to stop transmission and infection over the long-term and its side-effect profile.[/quo