Privacy

4772 readers

292 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

danielintempesta@programming.dev

510

June was a rough month for privacy! (media.piefed.ca)

submitted 3 days ago by Sunshine@piefed.ca to c/privacy@programming.dev

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

c-22 by Gary Anandasangaree. Will introduce 6 month metadata retention for internet service providers and share canadian data with US authorities.

s-209 by Julie Miville-Dechêne. Will introduce age verification.

c-32 by Marc Miller. Second way to introduce age verification. Yes that guy who called privacy critics of c-22 tinfoil hats.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mal3oon@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your claim of spreading hateful religion is based on prior prejudices and ignorance.

Islam is by definition a supremacist hateful ideology, more so than others. It totally doesn't tolerate criticism and seek to eradicate any challenging opinions. And if you are actually open to be answered you can easily google it or I can guide you through. But let's be honest, you just care about virtue signaling because you know a muslim or two.

Source: I actually studied that shit.

You are just run of the mill right wing racist trying to support your hateful ideologies by a fiscal analysis report (which is a dubious one at best), it is so pathetic.

Again, I don't care about your opinion, or your insult. If you have fact based data, I'm all ears, but let's be honest, you're running on copium.

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Islam is by definition a supremacist hateful ideology, Western supermacist ideology is by definition a supermacist hateful ideology. And what you do right is the number of strategy from the alt-right playbook called "accusation in a mirror", I wasn't born yesterday buddy. You are not completely doing it right though, you missed the deny step and jumped right into accusing immigrants of "spreading hateful ideologies" after calling them parasites/leeches.

Source: I actually studied that shit. You need to study more, starting by actually having a idea about the references you put forward in a discussion.

But let’s be honest, you just care about virtue signaling You are the one who said immigrants have a tendency for "spreading hateful ideologies" and then presented a 300 page fiscal report as proof. You just care about bullshitting your way through your prejudices claiming "they are backed by science". And then someone disproves your claim and you move the goal post to "you are not open to learning". Yea no that won't win you any arguments.

Again, I don’t care about your opinion, or your insult. If you have fact based data, I’m all ears, but let’s be honest, you’re running on copium.

I don't need to insult you, you are doing a good job of insulting yourself and the humanity at large. I have presented more relevant links to why your reference is shit and unrelated to religion or anything about immigrants spreading hateful ideologies than you ever did supporting your views (and on top of references saying why even from a fiscal point of the report is not reliable). Ball is in your court buddy but don't try too hard and hurt yourself. Also don't waste your energy trying to replicate Charlie Kirk's "I am a civilized debater everyone else who criticizes me is a junky trying to insult me because I am right" victim game around here. You can keep repeating that until infinity and it won't gain you any sympathy.