Censorship? CPAC axes Milo from speaking

[Deleted]

Can anyone point out exactly where the full video with this "Milo defending pedophilia" is? I can find this edited 6:00 minute one, but I want to know where the original, unedited version of it is.

---Edited 6:00 Video---


It's Milo & Joe Rogan. But their is no information or sources anywhere that I can find pointing to the full video so I can listen to the full context of the interview. Trying to figure out which of the dozens of interviews these two have had doesn't help, I know this video is old. At least 1 if not 2+ years old based on Milo's hair and physical body.

So why everyone has decided to use this extremely old "evidence" as a Hit piece on Milo until now, instead of when it mattered such as before Trump became president such as on his College Tour, is beyond me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGL5eRw7rXU

[Underverse]

You're right, I need to make more pseudo-philosophical bullshit posts. Here I go:

*Ahems*

"You know, I don't know the lifestories of those people at that alleged party. I should really stop with my preconceived negative feelings about adults feeding drugs to children and fucking them. I mean this is just a societal norm causing me to think this way. I should challenge my preconceived notions about such things."

No no, you're doing it all wrong. It's "Norms man, are they even real? What if everyone's opinions are just made up and stuff? Like, why shouldn't I be able to just walk outside and dance around naked? What if I wanted to shoot someone for not bagging my groceries fast enough? Like, why is that not acceptable? Challenge the status quo, man. Challenge the status quo."

[kail]

Wow that video is so old... Why are they just giving a shit about it now?

- - - Updated - - -

Also lol @ "condoning pedophilia" finally being the thing that takes him down XD

"Think of the children!" strikes again.

One of the few things both sides can get behind.

[rogueMatthias]

Wait, people have got this all wrong.

Milo just hooks up with black guys, so he was just using +controlling them because of his white privilege. They're the victims in this! #blackpeadosmatter


Jokes aside, this is blown up massively out of all proportion. He's just an idiot trying to sound a stud by showing off how young he was when he was hooking up with older guys. It's literally no different at all to someone like Depp bragging about losing his virginity at 13 to an older woman. If you're happy about banning his book+cancelling his appearances because of this, there's a MASSIVE list of other celebrities you can boycott too for "defending peadophilia" for telling stories of their young conquests over women lol

I do find it interesting from a society point of view that a gay teen is portrayed as the victim in this in the way a straight teen wouldn't be.

[Torto]

So another conservative defending pedophilia. Can't say I'm surprised.

LOL wtf is that supposed to mean? All conservatives are paedophiles now? Along with being sexist misogynists and racists?

You lefties so desperately love your labels.

[kail]

Did you watch the video? The crux of it all comes at 4:32, when he mentions that in HIS mind it wasn't an abusive relationship he had with the priest because he, personally, was into sex with older men. Right or wrong, that was his experience. And as for not naming the priest, maybe do some research on sex abuse victims.

Hmmm? His experience is his experience (he seemed rather sketchy when describing his sexual experiences with the priest). Him being OK with the prospect of older men having sex with adolescents (i.e. 14 years old), that's what explains so much to me. Tried to get the host to admit he was into 14 year olds as well and the host was naturally flabbergasted.

[Sky High]

LOL wtf is that supposed to mean? All conservatives are paedophiles now? Along with being sexist misogynists and racists?

You lefties so desperately love your labels.

and man do you love getting triggered over things people haven't said.

[paralleluniverse]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Look at these right-wing snowflakes, who have railed so hard against censorship, now censoring Milo Yiannopoulos. They got triggered so hard.

FUCKING POLITICALLY CORRECT HYPOCRITES.

[Deleted]

Care to share it with us?

That you say "it" as if the difference is singular is remarkably - shockingly - asinine.

How about you begin with considering the basic biology and then continue from there. Look into some past cases, victim statements, the direction and provision of victim support, the psychological impact, the impetus of the perpetrator and the likelihood of escalation, re-offending or rehabilitation. Then look at how the police and other relevant bodies profile paedophiles - they have many systems in place that categorise the type of person the offender is and even could be. Be warned that you might be shocked by the findings and will probably look at everyone in a much more guarded and reserved way.

The problem is that society is governed by laws which, while making no distinction, considers them behind closed doors in the court room.

Society looks at law and then jumps upon a media circulated medical term incorrectly. Paedophilia is a mental illness that some say, society's stigmatising of, worsens - as in, makes the mentally ill more likely to offend. Can't even begin to imagine how they came to that conclusion, but I digress, the point is that while the stipulated law may not spell it out for you - the handling of that law by the justice system does pay heed to them and you should too.

- - - Updated - - -

What an odd defense of the entire situation. You guys really are funny, you don't think somebody could excuse themselves to the rest room and call the police? Or do you think I meant show up, wave my hands around in the air, going "FUCK ALL OF YOU IMA CALL THE COPS!"

lol.

Defence of what situation? I was commenting on the hypothetical you presented.

What I "don't think" lol, is why are you at this party in the first place. You're either meant to be there (invited) or you're not. How do you stumble upon one of these parties?

- - - Updated - - -

Hmmm? His experience is his experience (he seemed rather sketchy when describing his sexual experiences with the priest). Him being OK with the prospect of older men having sex with adolescents (i.e. 14 years old), that's what explains so much to me. Tried to get the host to admit he was into 14 year olds as well and the host was naturally flabbergasted.

Do a survey on how many paedophiles were abused while growing up.

[Techno-Druid]

As I said earlier if you are ok with 13-15 year olds fucking adults, whatever floats your boat man. But in oir culture that still is informally considered as pedophilia and deemed "wrong".

13 is a little young, but I don't have an issue with, say a 15 year old girl being in a relationship with an older teenager or young adult. As long as both sides consent and their rights are mutually assured.

In many parts of the Western and developed world, the age of consent stands around 13-15.

[Fencers]

Pretty sure this is not censorship. I am not sure why in recent months there is a notion that people are entitled or have the right to either express or represent views contra to the owners of a particular platform.

This is a non-issue at best and not anything close to actual censorship.

[analmoose]

He legit is justifying pedophilia

He's not at all, and he explained so right in the second video. Pedophilia is an attraction to kids. Hebephilia is teens, which he was, and said himself he was not a victim, nor defending anyone.

Do you really think it would end well for him if he just gave up peoples names and outed them on a forum like that? It would destroy his social circles and any relationships he has with people that live a high profile lifestyle. They wouldn't let him anywhere near.

Do you have any understanding how devastating that can be if you are trying to be successful as far as famous lifestyles go? Get a grip.

[araine]

Nobody has a right to any platform, because nobody has a right to force other people to listen. This isn't censorship.

was a different tune at UC Berkley earlier this month from the conservative movement.

[Escepticus]

The age of consent varies by state the lowest is 16. Federal Law says the lowest age of consent the states can have is 12 but no state has one that low.

In Mexico its 12.

Wrong. So wrong. In Mexico is 16-18, depending the state.

[alexw]

LOL wtf is that supposed to mean? All conservatives are paedophiles now? Along with being sexist misogynists and racists?

You lefties so desperately love your labels.

Meaning that if a significant person in the right wing says or does x,y,z, then they all (or a heck of a lot of them at least) normalize it and jump to defend x,y,z. Thus sexual assault is bad until Trump says I grab them by the pussy and they let me do it, then all the right wingers go "don't we all say things like that at some point? There's nothing wrong with his statement". (see also statements by right-wingers defending contacts by Trump's inner circle with Russian spies as "normal").

This is just another example of that. Flip through this thread and you'll find lots of right-wingers in one way or another defending Milo's statements about how sex between 13 year olds and grown men is a good, positive, and wholesome thing.

That they would defend this in any way shape or form is abhorrent.

[Wells]

God this topic is just a delicious smorgasbord. We've got self righteous assholes who have to kick someone out they invited specifically because someone else kicked them out, people who were totally fine with his rampant bigotry expressing disgust over this, its got it all.

My dish though are the conservatives so bent on disagreeing with anything perceived as liberal that they're arguing that statutory rape is actually a Good Thing.

[Torto]

Meaning that if a significant person in the right wing says or does x,y,z, then they all (or a heck of a lot of them at least) normalize it and jump to defend x,y,z. Thus sexual assault is bad until Trump says I grab them by the pussy and they let me do it, then all the right wingers go "don't we all say things like that at some point? There's nothing wrong with his statement". (see also statements by right-wingers defending contacts by Trump's inner circle with Russian spies as "normal").

This is just another example of that. Flip through this thread and you'll find lots of right-wingers in one way or another defending Milo's statements about how sex between 13 year olds and grown men is a good, positive, and wholesome thing.

That they would defend this in any way shape or form is abhorrent.

Yes I accept that point, both the left and right are guilty of cheering their side even if it means ignoring their principles. In your example, the left demonise Trump for his pussy grabbing antics yet cheer Bill Clinton whenever he walks on stage.

However your comment was clumsy and implied all conservatives tacitly approve of paedophilia.

[Wells]

Hahahaha Simon and Schuster is canceling his book deal.

[Skroe]

I said this a few days ago.

By the way, can someone go fucking Predator on Milo already? When I hear kids like this talk about that foreign troll like he's a serious person, I want to throw up.



Everybody should know by now _exactly_ what Milo is. Why do people need to be informed that they're throwing in with a con-artist who will do anything, say anything, to be an agitator?

I just never expected that someone to be Milo him-fucking-self.

I hope this prick enjoys the smoking crater that was his career.

3....2....1.... Breibart fire him!

[Sky High]

However your comment was clumsy and implied all conservatives tacitly approve of paedophilia.

no it didn't, you just have a hankering to be triggered mate.