View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
Old October 28th 11, 01:24 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave,rec.sport.golf,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy
John Smith[_7_] John Smith[_7_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Apr 2011
Posts: 987
Default Stunning crime by government authorities, right out in the open,attack on free speech ...

On 10/27/2011 1:57 PM, SaPeIsMa wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 10/27/2011 4:13 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 10/26/2011 11:24 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...


http://www.infowars.com/feds-order-y...ent-criticism/





Misleading title

It appears that a great many requests were for removal of defamatory
material against individuals due to a court order
I don't consider such removal to be interference with free speech.
Do you ?

Google has a transparency report where requests for removal are
explained
http://www.google.com/transparencyre...nmentrequests/



Yes, when they allow others and pick the ones they don't agree with
for banning, I do! MOST CERTAINLY!


Too bad
Google is NOT the government
The Ist Amendment does NOT apply.




No. They are simply breaking the law by saying one thing and doing yet
another ...


Go ahead and cite the law that they are breaking ?


I think..


That's where your problem is
YOu confuse "believing" with "thinking"




You mean like the practice of fraudulent deception in claimed business
practices, mission statements, and implied foundations of the contracts
you are agreeing to, and for the purpose of gaining or increasing
profits? Really? That needs explaining? If so, I don't believe any
possible will be acceptable to you!

Regards,
JS