It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rumble could be banned in the UK under new online safety laws

page: 20
13
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Muldar




Still not a single piece of evidence OFCOM is independent.


We have evidence that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.


You're parroting official lines and linking OFCOM's website. That's not evidence of anything.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:53 PM
link   
20 pages and still those who claim OFCOM is independent are unable to support their assertions.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Muldar

Apart from the evidence I have given you?

No one is apologising. Stop lying.

I notice that you have gone a bit quiet about the IPCC since I gave you my direct evidence of their independence?

Seems you are incapable of accepting stuff you don't like.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Muldar

Jeezus?

I did, already?



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Muldar




You should understand where the burden of proof is when OFCOM or some members claim the organisation is independent.


You have that the wrong way around. The burden of proof that they are not independent lies with you, as you are doubting the official website. You prove that it is not correct. If you can.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

Apart from the evidence I have given you?

No one is apologising. Stop lying.

I notice that you have gone a bit quiet about the IPCC since I gave you my direct evidence of their independence?

Seems you are incapable of accepting stuff you don't like.


I didn't see the IPCC comment. Where?

But do you really think the IPCC I'd independent because they say they are??

It's like complaining to the police about the police. That would be hilarious.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Muldar




You should understand where the burden of proof is when OFCOM or some members claim the organisation is independent.


You have that the wrong way around. The burden of proof that they are not independent lies with you, as you are doubting the official website. You prove that it is not correct. If you can.


Yes I need evidence regardless of whether we have an 'official' site. So what??

And according to this logic the Roman Catholic Church states there is only one God the God of Christianity that the Roman Catholics believe. Does it make the belief true??



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Muldar




Still not a single piece of evidence OFCOM is independent.


We have evidence that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.


You're parroting official lines and linking OFCOM's website. That's not evidence of anything.


The only evidence you are supplying that they are not independent is because you are saying so.

That is not eveidence it's just your way of thinking.

Complete waste of mine and others time.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

Jeezus?

I did, already?


Not really.



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Muldar




Still not a single piece of evidence OFCOM is independent.


We have evidence that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.


You're parroting official lines and linking OFCOM's website. That's not evidence of anything.


The only evidence you are supplying that they are not independent is because you are saying so.

That is not eveidence it's just your way of thinking.

Complete waste of mine and others time.


No it doesn't go this way I am afraid. When people make a claim the burden of proof is on them.

Someone made a claim earlier OFCOM is independent. Burden of proof on them.

Then they linked the official website of OFCOM. But that's not proof of anything.

Neither the official lines are evidence of anything.

I don't need to supply any evidence as I didn't make any claim



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Muldar

Really.

If they were not independent they would not have ruled against the BBC..

"didn't see the IPCC comment. Where?"

What?



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

Really.

If they were not independent they would not have ruled against the BBC..

"didn't see the IPCC comment. Where?"

What?


I am afraid you haven't done well in your maths at school.

If A implies B then B doesn't necessarily imply A

(That goes for the argument you made above)
edit on 29-9-2023 by Muldar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2023 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
POST REMOVED BY STAFF


No.

There is no claim someone has been taken for a fool.

There is no claim that I made involving OFCOM lying or saying the truth.

Someone else made a claim they're independent to which I replied that do you really want us to believe they're independent because you're parroting the official assertions by them.

Burden of proof is on them (OFCOM) and those who are parroting official lines.

Because it's clear what you're trying to do. Justify the coming censorship of Rumble based on the assertion OFCOM is independent.

I don't think you understand what is going on here.
edit on Fri Sep 29 2023 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2023 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: WorldxGonexMad

Contrary to what is commonly thought, no.

Same thing happened with torrent websites in the UK a few years ago. VPNs don't help.



posted on Oct, 2 2023 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Slightly off topic but Panorama currently broadcasting a documentary to expose abuse in top fashion brands in the US after a three year secret investigative journalism. The abuse involves mainy men.

Link: BBC Panorama

Warning it's a very dark documentary with accusers claiming they were forced to be gimps/sex slaves and forced prostitution it's a very stomach churning subject.

EDIT: This is a major scandal -Brad Edwards the lawyer for Jeffery Epstein was involved in the cover up - the documentary features him from the 24 minutes mark.

There had been speculation the documentary would be about Brans but this is an even bigger cover up and expose with forced NDAs befre victims went to parties that turned out to be rapeand forcecd use of poppers,
edit on 2-10-2023 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2023 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: ziplock9000
a reply to: WorldxGonexMad

Contrary to what is commonly thought, no.

Same thing happened with torrent websites in the UK a few years ago. VPNs don't help.


I don't know whether you can go around this if let's say Rumble is banned in the UK. You need to find a way to make it seem as if you are trying to access the internet from another country.



posted on Oct, 6 2023 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Muldar




You need to find a way to make it seem as if you are trying to access the internet from another country.


And do you know much about making it look like your signing in from somewhere else? All I know about is a VPN...



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join