FTX Conspiracy Theories

**fried cheese** · 11-18-22, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by jackpot269

The Constitution has no idea what a social media is or did the framers Invision anything like the Internet.
So what ever went for newspapers( because they were the only source information back then )would the same not apply to the Internet now?
I've posted several SCOTUS cases that say only the government can be guilty of taking your 1st amendment rights. That is a paraphrase

yes some of what applied to newspapers now applies to social media. back then the government could not go to a newspaper and tell them they couldnt print a certain story without violating the first amendment. now if the government goes to a social media site and coerces them to not let certain ppl speak or to block ideas that they dont like, then they are violating the first amendment. they are obscuring their crimes by making the social media companies do the dirty work for them so that their actions remain hidden.

the social media sites are effectively working on behalf of the us government.

**milwaukee mike** · 11-18-22, 01:22 PM

i think optional was the one that made a pretty good point about newspapers... that you were PAYING for the news... now that news is essentially "free", someone is paying for it, find out who is paying for it (big pharma/weapons mfg) and that's why the news is pro-jab, pro-war

otherwise how does someone explain that after 9/11 the republicans were all pro-war, while democrats were mostly anti-war... now democrats are in power and it's the democrats that support funding ukraine and other wars, while the republicans are the controlled opposition that search for peace options

whatever party is in power, that's the party of pharma and weapons

**fried cheese** · 11-18-22, 01:23 PM

The First Amendment applies only to governmental action—not behavior by private employers, private companies, or private, non-government individuals—unless they acted in concert with government actors.

**jackpot269** · 11-18-22, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by fried cheese

yes some of what applied to newspapers now applies to social media. back then the government could not go to a newspaper and tell them they couldnt print a certain story without violating the first amendment. now if the government goes to a social media site and coerces them to not let certain ppl speak or to block ideas that they dont like, then they are violating the first amendment. they are obscuring their crimes by making the social media companies do the dirty work for them so that their actions remain hidden.

the social media sites are effectively working on behalf of the us government.

That's been going for years in some form or another!
If I have an App that I own and want it in the Apple and Google store and they find it offensive or for what ever other reason they have they can keep my App of their site, if they could not it would be a free enterprise. Now it's a whole other conversation if they are mandated not to have it!
Be like me having a Christian book store and you wanting to sale anti-christianity books in my store, should I not have the right to refuse it?

**fried cheese** · 11-18-22, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by jackpot269

That's been going for years in some form or another!
If I have an App that I own and want it in the Apple and Google store and they find it offensive or for what ever other reason they have they can keep my App of their site, if they could not it would be a free enterprise. Now it's a whole other conversation if they are mandated not to have it!
Be like me having a Christian book store and you wanting to sale anti-christianity books in my store, should I not have the right to refuse it?

i am only talking about when the social media sites are colluding with the government to censor speech. if they are working with the government then it is a violation of the first amendment. if they decide to censor speech on their own then that is fine as long as they arent violating any federal anti discrimination laws. but the government is obviously influencing the social media sites and zuckerberg has admitted that the fbi advises facebook on what to censor.
The First Amendment applies only to governmental action—not behavior by private employers, private companies, or private, non-government individuals—unless they acted in concert with government actors.

**jackpot269** · 11-18-22, 06:05 PM

Ok...

**hehfest** · 11-18-22, 06:50 PM

....
This is how the jews stay out of the military and sit back and laugh at the dumb goyim fighting for them to STAY SAFE! This is a non-classified document so don't worry about being affiliated with such an extreme person for pointing out the elephant in the room all the time!

[IMG][/IMG]

**19th Hole** · 11-18-22, 07:58 PM

HEILfest...Did you release after posting that garbage?

**Bostongambler** · 11-18-22, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by 19th Hole

HEILfest...Did you release after posting that garbage?

Lol.. 😂

**EddieMusher** · 11-20-22, 12:45 PM

**milwaukee mike** · 11-20-22, 01:11 PM

wow just a short amount of time in the past, someone could actually make a joke about jewish control

norm macdonald would now be fired, cancelled, forced to apologize 8000 times, and probably tarred and feathered

oh wait he was actually cancelled before his death, just for the cardinal sin of defending roseanne's ability to speak her mind and make jokes

**milwaukee mike** · 11-21-22, 09:32 AM

how is this guy STILL not arrested? i would get arrested for stealing a candy bar, this guy is connected so let's leave him alone a little longer, it was only a few billion, much less than we're stealing for "ukraine" overall!

he said the quiet part out loud, that as long as you're connected it's all a game

“Ya, I had to be, it’s what reputations are made of, to some extent,” the disgraced crypto fraudster responded. “I feel bad for those who get f***** by it, by this dumb game we woke Westerners play where we say all the right shibboleths , and so everyone likes us.”

**fried cheese** · 11-21-22, 04:57 PM

Originally posted by milwaukee mike

how is this guy STILL not arrested?

ftx just claimed in a legal filing that bankman-fried was the one who hacked and stole the 100s of millions from ftx on orders from the bahamas government while they were holding him in custody. so thats how hes not in jail in the bahamas.

Court filing says Sam Bankman-Fried 'moved digital assets to Bahamas'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11441311/Bombshell-court-filing-suggests-Sam-Bankman-Fried-transferred-digital-assets-Bahamas-government.html

FTX has claimed that formed CE Sam Bankman-Fried gained 'unauthorized access to FTX systems before moving 'digital assets' to Bahamian regulators.

**milwaukee mike** · 11-21-22, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by fried cheese

ftx just claimed in a legal filing that bankman-fried was the one who hacked and stole the 100s of millions from ftx on orders from the bahamas government while they were holding him in custody. so thats how hes not in jail in the bahamas.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...overnment.html

that is some weird stuff

almost as believable as jeffrey epstein killing himself, and all of his client lists just disappearing at major news outlets

my guess is he was connected to the same type of sicko stuff, like epstein/anthony weiner/etc... pretty much everyone that has ever seen weiner's laptop has ended up dead

**hehfest** · 11-23-22, 04:38 PM

Sam (Uncle Sam)
Bank (Central Banking Cartels) man (tribe ending to last name)
Fried - Uncle Sam Fried your $$$ through the Fraud (Fried) tribe central banking cartels (also tribe last name)

**milwaukee mike** · 11-24-22, 10:16 AM

weird how they just laugh while throwing names in our face

CIAnCIA the lax terrrorist

aldrin's mother maiden name MOON

colorado gay nightclub bartender murdered, name RUMP

**mjsuax13** · 12-03-22, 11:40 PM

Only 1 reason why this guy isn’t in custody yet…

**EddieMusher** · 12-04-22, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by mjsuax13

Only 1 reason why this guy isn’t in custody yet…