Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
pepperonikkid

Left-Wing Scholar Pushes to Censor Social Media Accounts Opposing Child Sex Trafficking by Tying Them to QAnon Movement

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

pepperonikkid

Left-Wing Scholar Pushes to Censor Social Media Accounts Opposing Child Sex Trafficking by Tying Them to QAnon Movement

 

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/

By  Shane Trejo

on  Sep 25, 2020

 

Article:

 

pjimage-17-1200x630.jpg

 

 Academic scholar Marc-André Argentino of the Global Network on Extremism & Technology is attempting to get social media accounts that are raising awareness of child sex trafficking thrown off of social media by tying them to the controversial QAnon movement.

Argentino is demonizing 114 groups that are raising awareness of child sex trafficking that he wants thrown off of social media because he claims they are affiliated with QAnon:

 

 

Full Story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

Child trafficking, and likewise Child pornography is abhorrent of course. But is Q doing more harm than good by trying to make a "political conspiracy " out of the subject? In a sense, I wonder if Q is this generation's "McCarthy"? There are remarkable similarities.

"Tail-gunner Joe" McCarthy was a fraud. Not in the sense of being "wrong" exactly - YES, much of his stuff has been verified, with Venona etc. - but in a much more insidious sense.  What McCarthy brought to the table was the ability the "Grandstand" the issue in such a way as to turn a very very serious issue into a laughingstock. And, in so doing,  the damage that McCarthy did to this nation lasts to this day. But don't take my word for it: Go ahead, call someone a "communist" in public these days and see how many people take you seriously. If someone told me McCarthy was a "plant" for the sole purpose for demolishing the anti-communist movement, I'm more than prepared to believe it.

 

Fast forward to 2020. Substitute "Sex Trafficking" for "Communism" and Q for McCarthy, and "it's Deja Vu all over again" as Yogi Berra once said.  Like, McCarty, Q does tell the occasional "truth". That's the "Hook" in marketing parlance. But it's never been anything "new" that couldn't have been gotten from other sources rather than McCarthy or Q.

 

 

  • Sad 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
1 hour ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

Child trafficking, and likewise Child pornography is abhorrent of course. But is Q doing more harm than good by trying to make a "political conspiracy " out of the subject? In a sense, I wonder if Q is this generation's "McCarthy"? There are remarkable similarities.

"Tail-gunner Joe" McCarthy was a fraud. Not in the sense of being "wrong" exactly - YES, much of his stuff has been verified, with Venona etc. - but in a much more insidious sense.  What McCarthy brought to the table was the ability the "Grandstand" the issue in such a way as to turn a very very serious issue into a laughingstock. And, in so doing,  the damage that McCarthy did to this nation lasts to this day. But don't take my word for it: Go ahead, call someone a "communist" in public these days and see how many people take you seriously. If someone told me McCarthy was a "plant" for the sole purpose for demolishing the anti-communist movement, I'm more than prepared to believe it.

 

Fast forward to 2020. Substitute "Sex Trafficking" for "Communism" and Q for McCarthy, and "it's Deja Vu all over again" as Yogi Berra once said.  Like, McCarty, Q does tell the occasional "truth". That's the "Hook" in marketing parlance. But it's never been anything "new" that couldn't have been gotten from other sources rather than McCarthy or Q.

 

 

First sentence: Nobody else is doing jack about child trafficking so I for one am happy that Qanon is doing so. 

The rest of your post: definitely TL;DR. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
13 minutes ago, zurg said:

First sentence: Nobody else is doing jack about child trafficking so I for one am happy that Qanon is doing so. 

The rest of your post: definitely TL;DR. 

People ARE doing jack about it. At least here in the ATL area, MAJOR busts at least once, twice a year. Heck, just a few weeks ago:

WSB-TV Atlanta (Aug 28, 2020): Nearly 40 missing children rescued during Georgia sex trafficking bust

My concern is that QAnon's interest in the subject is merely moving the whole topic into the realm of "Conspiracy Theory" rather that something to be taken seriously. As explained in the remainder of my post.

 

Edited by Dean Adam Smithee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

Question: What's "TL;DR"?

:scratch: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
14 minutes ago, MontyPython said:

Question: What's "TL;DR"?

:scratch: 

 

Too long; didn’t read. 

I actually learned it right here, possibly even from Adam.... :whistling: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
1 minute ago, zurg said:

Too long; didn’t read. 

I actually learned it right here, possibly even from Adam.... :whistling: 

OK thanks.

I hate unnecessary abbreviations. See how much of your time has now been wasted explaining something that didn't need abbreviation in the first place?

:hairpull: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SARGE
1 hour ago, MontyPython said:

OK thanks.

I hate unnecessary abbreviations. See how much of your time has now been wasted explaining something that didn't need abbreviation in the first place?

:hairpull: 

 

Agreed, and when others are left out of the meaning, it is quite rude.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
1 hour ago, MontyPython said:

OK thanks.

I hate unnecessary abbreviations. See how much of your time has now been wasted explaining something that didn't need abbreviation in the first place?

:hairpull: 

 

Well, it’s not my custom to do so, but in this case Adam’s irritating (to me) post made the karma from giving him back (what I consider) his abbreviation somehow poetically appropriate... apologies for the inconvenience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
14 minutes ago, SARGE said:

Agreed, and when others are left out of the meaning, it is quite rude.

 

Exactly.

 

7 minutes ago, zurg said:

Well, it’s not my custom to do so, but in this case Adam’s irritating (to me) post made the karma from giving him back (what I consider) his abbreviation somehow poetically appropriate... apologies for the inconvenience.

 

I thought Smithee's post, and the point he was making, were both very good.

:shrug: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator T
19 minutes ago, SARGE said:

Agreed, and when others are left out of the meaning, it is quite rude.

Eh, I'll defend Adam on that one.  TL;DR is pretty common internet parlance and has been for a while.  It might not be "LOL" level of common, but its common enough that it isn't just used by the kids, even if it hasn't seen much use around here.

I have a bigger problem that it needs to exist at all.  What's the point of having a conversation if you need a summary because you refuse to read long posts?  I blame Twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
5 minutes ago, Moderator T said:

Eh, I'll defend Adam on that one.  TL;DR is pretty common internet parlance and has been for a while.  It might not be "LOL" level of common, but its common enough that it isn't just used by the kids, even if it hasn't seen much use around here.

I have a bigger problem that it needs to exist at all.  What's the point of having a conversation if you need a summary because you refuse to read long posts?  I blame Twitter.

 

( . . . Um . . . For the record, it was Zurg who used TL;DR, not Adam . . . )

:) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator T
8 minutes ago, MontyPython said:

 

( . . . Um . . . For the record, it was Zurg who used TL;DR, not Adam . . . )

:) 

 

Then I'll defend them both, ride or die!!!!   😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
1 minute ago, Moderator T said:

Then I'll defend them both, ride or die!!!!   😛

:2up:

:usabiker:

 

Edited by MontyPython

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
Just now, MontyPython said:

:2up:

 :USAbiker:

 

R O D!!!!😉

K...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
26 minutes ago, MontyPython said:

 

Exactly.

 

 

I thought Smithee's post, and the point he was making, were both very good.

:shrug: 

 

If you'd care to elaborate I'd like to hear? Up  front I don't read Q (or XYZ for that matter) not because I'm terrified of conspiracy theory's ( I still think there may be something to that whole Humpty Dumpty thing) but how does a site like Q hurt the efforts to stop child porn or trafficking or whatever?

Kestrel... 

 

Edited by kestrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
5 minutes ago, kestrel said:

R O D!!!!😉

K...

:spank: 

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SARGE

FTW!

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
Just now, MontyPython said:

:spank: 

LOL!..(sorry Laughing out loud)

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
2 hours ago, zurg said:

Too long; didn’t read. 

I actually learned it right here, possibly even from Adam.... :whistling: 

I'll cop to that. I KNOW that my fault is being too "didactic". Probably comes from too many times being smacked on my hand with a ruler by "Friend _____". "Show yer work, and how you got there. Y'all who grew up catholic under Sister ______ have NOTHING on Indiana Quakers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
1 minute ago, kestrel said:

If you'd care to elaborate I'd like to hear? Up  front I don't read Q (or XYZ for that matter) not because I'm terrified of conspiracy theory's ( I still think there may be something to that whole Humpty Dumpty thing) but how does a site like Q hurt the efforts to stop child porn or trafficking or whatever?

Kestrel... 

Kestrel...

I don't read "Q" either. I just think Smithee articulated his point very well and very clearly. And frankly I agree with him that when somebody (like "Q") who has a reputation for grandstanding silly nonsense starts grandstanding on an important issue, it only tends to render the issue less important-seeming in the minds of many.

And what the hell, even if you don't agree with that, I don't grasp what's so "irritating" about him expressing his theory.

:shrug: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
10 minutes ago, kestrel said:

If you'd care to elaborate I'd like to hear? Up  front I don't read Q (or XYZ for that matter) not because I'm terrified of conspiracy theory's ( I still think there may be something to that whole Humpty Dumpty thing) but how does a site like Q hurt the efforts to stop child porn or trafficking or whatever?

Kestrel... 

 

Humpty Dumpy was pushed. Go ahead, PROVE that he wasn't.

Child Trafficking/Abuse/etc, YES, it's a "thing". Never "trafficked" myself but otherwise abused.

My younger sister? Runaway at 15 YO on the word of a good-hearted LEO who said, "Your mom's about to get busted (for prostitution). You'd better not be there".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
5 hours ago, MontyPython said:

I don't read "Q" either. I just think Smithee articulated his point very well and very clearly. And frankly I agree with him that when somebody (like "Q") who has a reputation for grandstanding silly nonsense starts grandstanding on an important issue, it only tends to render the issue less important-seeming in the minds of many.

And what the hell, even if you don't agree with that, I don't grasp what's so "irritating" about him expressing his theory.

:shrug: 

 

I wasn't "irritated" by DAS's  thoughts (maybe you have someone else in mind)..just wondered is all..We been on the periphery of the Qanon thing a few times...I tried to read some of it..but its just not for me..all the "coded" phrases...And maybe I'm just not willing to take the time. But I did kind of catch the...contempt that several people have for it combined with a few that really like it and I'm a little curious as to why.  I respect some on both sides and I was just wondering is all.

Kestrel...

Edited by kestrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
5 hours ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

Humpty Dumpy was pushed. Go ahead, PROVE that he wasn't.

Child Trafficking/Abuse/etc, YES, it's a "thing". Never "trafficked" myself but otherwise abused.

My younger sister? Runaway at 15 YO on the word of a good-hearted LEO who said, "Your mom's about to get busted (for prostitution). You'd better not be there".

"Humpty Dumpy was pushed".  I KNEW IT! :sinister:      Did you get sucked in by Qanon and then disappointed by them/him?..

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
21 minutes ago, kestrel said:

I wasn't "irritated" by DAS's  thoughts (maybe you have someone else in mind)..just wondered is all..We been on the periphery of the Qanon thing a few times...I tried to read some of it..but its just not for me..all the "coded" phrases...And maybe I'm just not willing to take the time. But I did kind of catch the...contempt that several people have for it combined with a few that really like it and I'm a little curious as to why.  I respect some on both sides and I was just wondering is all.

Kestrel...

 

It was Zurg who used the word "irritating" to describe Adam Smithee's post.

So I responded to Zurg with "I thought Smithee's post, and the point he was making, were both very good."

Then you responded to my response to Zurg with "If you'd care to elaborate I'd like to hear? Up  front I don't read Q (or XYZ for that matter) not because I'm terrified of conspiracy theory's ( I still think there may be something to that whole Humpty Dumpty thing) but how does a site like Q hurt the efforts to stop child porn or trafficking or whatever?"

So I elaborated as you requested.

And looking back at the exchange I can now see where the confusion comes from. In my response to you, the final sentence includes the phrase "even if you don't agree with that" and the "you" in that phrase was supposed to be the generic "you". In other words, I should have written "even if a person doesn't agree with that"  in order to avoid confusion. Sorry about that. I was referring to Zurg's comment about Smithee's post being "irritating".

B) 

 

Edited by MontyPython

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...