Cool I can add "shill" to my cv. But I can help you with the flag, as this is likely an area known by others, but not know to self, blind spot. Selective Free Speech.
You have chose in your statement, by what appears to be a bias to Tommy's belief system that his free speach may not be valuable, and you offered guidance that the alt media should be careful.
This being a typcal trait and tactic commonly used by people who often not capable of offering a competing idea that the market of public oppinion will choose. As such point out character flaws and challance the right of ones opponents rights. In this case, speach.
I had no idea who Tommy was a week ago, and have little energy about his belief system. I do however have a lot of evergy, personal and financial investment in pushing ANY goverment that limits free speech of ANYONE, even those I dont agree with. Living in China for the last few years has likely made me a bit hyper sensitive to the suspression of speech.
I would also offer that I found the same tactic employed by @deliberator in the original post. While I read all of it, watched the ripple effect, as well as the other viedos, and about 4 hours of related viedo, with about 6 total hours of studing the subjects provided by @deliberator.
I will say I learned a lot and am glad @deliberator shared this information. But I have no tolerance for @deliberator tactic to limit anyones free speech, or yours. In 81 words or so, of your colorful reply to @deliberator you included just a few that would lead one to believe, again that Tommy' speach should be censored at some level.
It is often I see the most damage done in limiting the rights of others by the "yes men", as such I have chose to reply to yourself versus @deliberator.
Do you not see the irony in you accusing "us" of limiting free speech, when it is you running around flagging peoples comments, because "you" do not like what they are saying? look in the mirror sunshine, smell the roses, and wise up.
No irony here. You chose to condemn one who has no ability to speak and incited others to do the same. You on the other hand have the ability to speak your views, and I am happy for you. I futher hope you always maintain this freedom. But your chosen target does not.
So yes I do not like what you are saying. For the purpose of clairty, I have little value for a person that targets anyone whos freedoms have been limited by any goverment. Your choice to persecute on a public platform a person who speach was scilenced is your choice. My responce is my choice. We likely both enjoy the freedom of speech, but different value systems.
As documented by your reply, you appear to be free and in control of your facilities in spite of the flag you earned.
If your positions, belief systems or views are so weak that you must resort to attacking those who can not speak, flowers, mirrors and name calling, well you are a sharp lad you will figure it out.... or not.
Bangkok, you were in China before, you need to make your mind up who and where you are.
And as for Tommy boy, I have met Tommy, I know how Tommy works, and who he works for, and it ain"t for you or on behalf of you, before you know it though good ole Tommy might incite some riots, them riots will lose everyone in the UK even more freedoms, will you be happy then? and proud? like I said before, you need to wake up and smell the roses sunshine.
Your loosing focus... I have an apartment near China World in the CBD on the 3rd ring road, and a condo in Bangkok.
It is great you know Tommy, how he works and what he might do. I do not and have no opinions in these regards. But you are welcome to yours.
Disregarding your diflections and inability to debate the point of suppressing the speech of any human by any goverment, I will accept we have different values.
No irony here. You chose to condemn one who has no ability to speak and incited others to do the same. You on the other hand have the ability to speak your views, and I am happy for you. I futher hope you always maintain this freedom. But your chosen target does not.
So yes I do not like what you are saying. For the purpose of clairty, I have little value for a person that targets anyone whos freedoms have been limited by any goverment. Your choice to persecute on a public platform a person who speach was scilenced is your choice. My responce is my choice. We likely both enjoy the freedom of speech, but different value systems.
As documented by your reply, you appear to be free and in control of your facilities in spite of the flag you earned.
If your positions, belief systems or views are so weak that you must resort to attacking those who can not speak, flowers, mirrors and name calling, well you are a sharp lad you will figure it out.... or not.
Cool I can add "shill" to my cv. But I can help you with the flag, as this is likely an area known by others, but not know to self, blind spot. Selective Free Speech.
You have chose in your statement, by what appears to be a bias to Tommy's belief system that his free speach may not be valuable, and you offered guidance that the alt media should be careful.
This being a typcal trait and tactic commonly used by people who often not capable of offering a competing idea that the market of public oppinion will choose. As such point out character flaws and challance the right of ones opponents rights. In this case, speach.
I had no idea who Tommy was a week ago, and have little energy about his belief system. I do however have a lot of evergy, personal and financial investment in pushing ANY goverment that limits free speech of ANYONE, even those I dont agree with. Living in China for the last few years has likely made me a bit hyper sensitive to the suspression of speech.
I would also offer that I found the same tactic employed by @deliberator in the original post. While I read all of it, watched the ripple effect, as well as the other viedos, and about 4 hours of related viedo, with about 6 total hours of studing the subjects provided by @deliberator.
I will say I learned a lot and am glad @deliberator shared this information. But I have no tolerance for @deliberator tactic to limit anyones free speech, or yours. In 81 words or so, of your colorful reply to @deliberator you included just a few that would lead one to believe, again that Tommy' speach should be censored at some level.
It is often I see the most damage done in limiting the rights of others by the "yes men", as such I have chose to reply to yourself versus @deliberator.
Consider rat poison is 99% good food.
Cheers
https://goo.gl/images/JkeMFh
Do you not see the irony in you accusing "us" of limiting free speech, when it is you running around flagging peoples comments, because "you" do not like what they are saying? look in the mirror sunshine, smell the roses, and wise up.
No irony here. You chose to condemn one who has no ability to speak and incited others to do the same. You on the other hand have the ability to speak your views, and I am happy for you. I futher hope you always maintain this freedom. But your chosen target does not.
So yes I do not like what you are saying. For the purpose of clairty, I have little value for a person that targets anyone whos freedoms have been limited by any goverment. Your choice to persecute on a public platform a person who speach was scilenced is your choice. My responce is my choice. We likely both enjoy the freedom of speech, but different value systems.
As documented by your reply, you appear to be free and in control of your facilities in spite of the flag you earned.
If your positions, belief systems or views are so weak that you must resort to attacking those who can not speak, flowers, mirrors and name calling, well you are a sharp lad you will figure it out.... or not.
In Bangkok we prefer jasmine.
Bangkok, you were in China before, you need to make your mind up who and where you are.
And as for Tommy boy, I have met Tommy, I know how Tommy works, and who he works for, and it ain"t for you or on behalf of you, before you know it though good ole Tommy might incite some riots, them riots will lose everyone in the UK even more freedoms, will you be happy then? and proud? like I said before, you need to wake up and smell the roses sunshine.
Your loosing focus... I have an apartment near China World in the CBD on the 3rd ring road, and a condo in Bangkok.
It is great you know Tommy, how he works and what he might do. I do not and have no opinions in these regards. But you are welcome to yours.
Disregarding your diflections and inability to debate the point of suppressing the speech of any human by any goverment, I will accept we have different values.
Cheers
I agree to disagree, have a great day.
No irony here. You chose to condemn one who has no ability to speak and incited others to do the same. You on the other hand have the ability to speak your views, and I am happy for you. I futher hope you always maintain this freedom. But your chosen target does not.
So yes I do not like what you are saying. For the purpose of clairty, I have little value for a person that targets anyone whos freedoms have been limited by any goverment. Your choice to persecute on a public platform a person who speach was scilenced is your choice. My responce is my choice. We likely both enjoy the freedom of speech, but different value systems.
As documented by your reply, you appear to be free and in control of your facilities in spite of the flag you earned.
If your positions, belief systems or views are so weak that you must resort to attacking those who can not speak, flowers, mirrors and name calling, well you are a sharp lad you will figure it out.... or not.
In Bangkok we prefer jasmine.