🔥 Reuters reported on Thursday that TikTok owner ByteDance "would prefer
to shut down its loss-making app rather than sell it if the Chinese company
exhausts all legal options to fight legislation to ban the platform from
app stores in the US."

The Wall Street Journal reported in March that a group of Zionist investors
led by former Activision CEO Bobby Kotick and OpenAI's Sam Altman are
scheming to buy TikTok once the sale is forced. CNBC also reported in March
that former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, another diehard Zionist, is
also organizing a team of investors to buy the site once it's banned.

"TikTok accounts for a small share of ByteDance's total revenues and daily
active users, so the parent would rather have the app shut down in the U.S.
in a worst case scenario than sell it to a potential American buyer, they
said," Reuters reported.

Shutting the site down rather than selling it is a smart move. Force the US
to shut down the most popular app in the country for young people and with
that one single act you'll discredit the entire "liberal" world order and
expose our leaders as complete and total frauds.

<https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=64416>

<https://archive.ph/9lc4y>

followups trimmed to comp.misc

In comp.misc D. Ray <d@ray> wrote:
> Reuters reported on Thursday that TikTok owner ByteDance "would prefer
> company to shut down its loss-making app rather than sell it if the
> Chinese exhausts all legal options to fight legislation to ban the
> platform from app stores in the US."

<snip>

Normally I would be against this forced sale, but since
China severely restricts and even bans many/all? US based
Social Media Sites, I am all for this forced sale. I am
hoping the many law suits are tossed out of the Courts.

--
[t]csh(1) - "An elegant shell, for a more... civilized age."
- Paraphrasing Star Wars

On Sat, 27 Apr 2024 13:28:47 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote:

> Normally I would be against this forced sale, but since China severely
> restricts and even bans many/all? US based Social Media Sites, I am all
> for this forced sale.

You can’t claim to be the “good” guys if you act just like the “bad” guys.

["Followup-To:" header set to talk.politics.misc.]
On 2024-04-27, D Ray <d@ray> wrote:
> 🔥 Reuters reported on Thursday that TikTok owner ByteDance "would prefer
> to shut down its loss-making app rather than sell it if the Chinese company
> exhausts all legal options to fight legislation to ban the platform from
> app stores in the US."
>
> The Wall Street Journal reported in March that a group of Zionist investors
> led by former Activision CEO Bobby Kotick and OpenAI's Sam Altman are
> scheming to buy TikTok once the sale is forced. CNBC also reported in March
> that former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, another diehard Zionist, is
> also organizing a team of investors to buy the site once it's banned.
>
> "TikTok accounts for a small share of ByteDance's total revenues and daily
> active users, so the parent would rather have the app shut down in the U.S.
> in a worst case scenario than sell it to a potential American buyer, they
> said," Reuters reported.
>
> Shutting the site down rather than selling it is a smart move. Force the US
> to shut down the most popular app in the country for young people and with
> that one single act you'll discredit the entire "liberal" world order and
> expose our leaders as complete and total frauds.
>
><https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=64416>
>
><https://archive.ph/9lc4y>
>
>

So now that there is anti-Zionist speech in TikTok, NOW there is an
issue?

It's quite obvious that this is to protect Israel from criticism for
the genocide they are carrying out. It's also quite telling how the
US bends to Israeli interests. Are they trying to prove the
anti-semites are right?

On Sat, 27 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Apr 2024 13:28:47 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote:
>
>> Normally I would be against this forced sale, but since China severely
>> restricts and even bans many/all? US based Social Media Sites, I am all
>> for this forced sale.
>
> You can’t claim to be the “good” guys if you act just like the “bad” guys.
>

I think you are making it too simple. In order to determine good guy vs
bad guy, you need to look at the underlying reasons, as well as the values
that govern the decisions of each country.

Another interesting angle is do the good guys have a right to defend
themselves?

Maybe I could invite you to some politics group to discuss this further or
perhaps alt.philosophy if this takes a turn towards ethics?

On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 11:58:43 +0200, D wrote:

> Another interesting angle is do the good guys have a right to defend
> themselves?

Against what? The USA claims to make such a big chest-thumping deal about
“free-market capitalism”, yet when somebody else does it better than they
do, suddenly they go all protectionist.

On Sun, 28 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 11:58:43 +0200, D wrote:
>
>> Another interesting angle is do the good guys have a right to defend
>> themselves?
>
> Against what? The USA claims to make such a big chest-thumping deal about
> “free-market capitalism”, yet when somebody else does it better than they
> do, suddenly they go all protectionist.
>

Not at all. China is very far from free-market capitalism. The basis of
their current position is IP theft, spies, plagiarism as well as the state
backing their companies.

There was a naive view among the countries of the west that by giving away
technology and doing business with the chinese government, china would
become democratic.

This has been proven wrong. The faulty assumption was that it was "doing
business" when in reality, the government was the counter part, which is
pretty far from doing business along free-market lines.

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:24:42 +0200, D wrote:

> China is very far from free-market capitalism. The basis of
> their current position is IP theft, spies, plagiarism as well as the
> state backing their companies.

The same accusations can be made against the USA.

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:24:42 +0200, D wrote:
>
>> China is very far from free-market capitalism. The basis of
>> their current position is IP theft, spies, plagiarism as well as the
>> state backing their companies.
>
> The same accusations can be made against the USA.
>

Yes, but not as credibly. The weakness is that this is what aboutism and
does not affect what I said about china. If you think that china is the
paragon of human rights, and the US is satan, that is fine. Needless to
say I completely agree and consider US more ethical than china.

I will leave this thread now, and welcome continued discussion in some
kind of political group.

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:18:57 +0200, D wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:24:42 +0200, D wrote:
>>
>>> China is very far from free-market capitalism. The basis of their
>>> current position is IP theft, spies, plagiarism as well as the state
>>> backing their companies.
>>
>> The same accusations can be made against the USA.
>>
> Yes, but not as credibly.

“Credibly” meaning “you are more willing to believe your own country than
another one”?

Consider: the single largest holder of 5G phone patents is Huawei.

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:24:42 +0200, D wrote:
>>
>>> China is very far from free-market capitalism. The basis of
>>> their current position is IP theft, spies, plagiarism as well as the
>>> state backing their companies.
>>
>> The same accusations can be made against the USA.
>>
>
> Yes, but not as credibly.

Sure. US would never bail out failing businesses, no matter how big they
are. That’s communism!

On 2024-05-09, D Ray wrote:
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:24:42 +0200, D wrote:
>>>
>>>> China is very far from free-market capitalism. The basis of
>>>> their current position is IP theft, spies, plagiarism as well as the
>>>> state backing their companies.
>>>
>>> The same accusations can be made against the USA.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but not as credibly.
>
> Sure. US would never bail out failing businesses, no matter how big they
> are. That’s communism!

Here's the "/s" you dropped ;)

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860