Diane King Says: “If it’s not free speech FOR ALL,, it’s not FREE SPEECH AT ALL”

Posted on by

 

Diane King Says: “If it’s not free speech FOR ALL,, it’s not FREE SPEECH AT ALL.”

 

GOOGLE’S “HATE SPEECH” DEFINITION & RULESDiane

 

So if it’s NOT free expression – why bother mentioning it AT ALL?

If it’s not free speech FOR ALL, 

it’s not FREE SPEECH AT ALL.  

HATE SPEECH  Our products are platforms for free expression. But we don’t support content that promotes or condones violence against individuals or groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, nationality, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity, or whose primary purpose is inciting hatred on the basis of these core characteristics. This can be a delicate balancing act, but if the primary purpose is to attack a protected group, the content crosses the line.

———

IS IT POSSIBLE TO ADVOCATE HATRED, DISGUST, & CONTEMPT FOR VICIOUS ZIONIST JEWISH ISRAELI LYING & FRAUD? —

Gerald Spezio

__________________
I love the admission of “protected”; that is, privileged groups. Apparently, one could advocate violence against, say capitalists, or Red Necks. Actually, it’s not really so much censorship of calls for violence but the “inciting of hatred” whatever that is, against privileged groups. Really it’s about silencing criticism of protected/privileged groups. – Paul Fromm

 

 

 

6793