Twitter Files #5 dropping right now.

JGalt

Diamond Member
Mar 9, 2011
70,012
83,643
3,635
Follow it here, if you don't want to read all the comments from other people:


Takeaways:

Twitter violated their own principles by banning Trump. Twitter employees were at odd with each other over the ban, but Twitter staff concluded Trump had not violated any policies and that Trump had not "incited" the Jan. 6 protesters.

In the early afternoon of January 8, The Washington Post published an open letter signed by over 300 Twitter employees to CEO Jack Dorsey demanding Trump’s ban. “We must examine Twitter’s complicity in what President-Elect Biden has rightly termed insurrection.”

In June 2018, Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweeted, “#Israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the West Asian region that has to be removed and eradicated: it is possible and it will happen.” Twitter neither deleted the tweet nor banned the Ayatollah.

. In October 2020, the former Malaysian Prime Minister said it was “a right” for Muslims to “kill millions of French people.”

Twitter deleted his tweet for “glorifying violence,” but he remains on the platform.
The tweet below was taken from the Wayback Machine: Image

22. Muhammadu Buhari, the President of Nigeria, incited violence against pro-Biafra groups.“Those of us in the fields for 30 months, who went through the war,” he wrote, “will treat them in the language they understand.”

Twitter deleted the tweet but didn't ban Buhari.

23. In October 2021, Twitter allowed Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to call on citizens to take up arms against the Tigray region.

Twitter allowed the tweet to remain up, and did not ban the prime minister. Image

24. In early February 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government threatened to arrest Twitter employees in India, and to incarcerate them for up to seven years after they restored hundreds of accounts that had been critical of him.

Twitter did not ban Modi.

25. But Twitter executives did ban Trump, even though key staffers said that Trump had not incited violence—not even in a “coded” way.


26. Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be “coded incitement to further violence.” Image


27. A few minutes later, Twitter employees on the “scaled enforcement team” suggest that Trump’s tweet may have violated Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy—if you interpreted the phrase “American Patriots” to refer to the rioters.

27. A few minutes later, Twitter employees on the “scaled enforcement team” suggest that Trump’s tweet may have violated Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy—if you interpreted the phrase “American Patriots” to refer to the rioters. Image

28. Things escalate from there.

Members of that team came to “view him as the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.” Image

29. Two hours later, Twitter executives host a 30-minute all-staff meeting.

Jack Dorsey and Vijaya Gadde answer staff questions as to why Trump wasn’t banned yet.

But they make some employees angrier.

30. “Multiple tweeps [Twitter employees] have quoted the Banality of Evil suggesting that people implementing our policies are like Nazis following orders,” relays Yoel Roth to a colleague. Image

31. Dorsey requested simpler language to explain Trump’s suspension.

Roth wrote, “god help us [this] makes me think he wants to share it publicly” Image

32. One hour later, Twitter announces Trump’s permanent suspension “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

More here if you hit the refresh button at the bottom of the page:

Thread by @bariweiss on Thread Reader App
 
So you're saying there was conflict over continuing to permit Trump to post on Twitter, that it got heated and then Twitter management decided to go ahead and suspend his account?
 
Twitter violated their own principles by banning Trump. 300 Twitter employees to CEO Jack Dorsey demanding Trump’s ban. In June 2018, Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweeted, “#Israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the West Asian region that has to be removed and eradicated: it is possible and it will happen.” Twitter neither deleted the tweet nor banned the Ayatollah.

Well, JG, after all, the Ayatollah and Israel are just other countries looking to annihilate each other nuking millions; what Trump said and did wanting to make American great again is right here and a DIRECT THREAT to the Left's Marxist-globalist agenda! That and, well, orange blob and all that.

I don't know how you can even compared the two. :smoke:
 
So you're saying there was conflict over continuing to permit Trump to post on Twitter, that it got heated and then Twitter management decided to go ahead and suspend his account?

It shouldn't be up to Twitter to ban anyone short of some incredibly heinous, monstrous act. I bet Twitter never unplugged Jeffrey Dahmer and Charlie Manson! Twitter is just a pipeline for communication, not the endorser of anything anyone says so neither should it be theirs to police, anymore than it is up to the Post Office to stop all your mail service or the phone company to cut off your phone service, or the highway department to remove the road to your home just for something you said or wrote in a phone call or a letter or did while driving that some other group doesn't agree with.
 
Last edited:
Yes. Just released are Hunter's latest nude pictures of himself eating apply pie out of the crack of some french whore's ass while snorting coke off her belly. :smoke:

Another one? He must have really like doing that a lot. :laughing0301:
 
It shouldn't be up to Twitter to ban anyone short of some incredibly heinous, monstrous act. I bet Twitter never unplugged Jeffrey Dahmer and Charlie Manson!
Right, so you're saying there was conflict over continuing to permit Trump to post on Twitter, that it got heated and then Twitter management decided to go ahead and suspend his account?

Twitter is just a pipeline for communication, not the endorser of anything anyone says so neither should it be theirs to police, anymore than it is up to the Post Office to stop all your mail service
Twitter is a private company. The Post Office is an entity owned by the government. And they can stop your mail service. If someone doesn't pay their mail isn't shipped. But even they have limits. I cannot ship firearms through the Post Office.
or the phone company to cut off your phone service,
Phone company can cut off your phone service.
or the highway department to remove the road to your home just for something you said or wrote in a phne call or a letter or did while driving.
"Highway department" is a government entity and it is a government road. if I were in a private complex, the complex could tear up the road.
 
Right, so you're saying there was conflict over continuing to permit Trump to post on Twitter,
I'm not saying anything, how can there be "conflict" over someone posting comments or thoughts to a board DESIGNED for people to share thoughts and ideas on? For Twitter or any electronic messaging service to work, it must by definition include a wide variety of people from all walks of life, experience and location, not to say: "I don't agree with that view, I don't like that comment, or I don't like that person's politics so I want him banned!"

I guess, in order to understand how wrong that is, maybe everyone registered democrat ought to have their Twitter accounts closed for a year.


Twitter is a private company.
Then maybe they ought to be a regulated public utility. Amazon, supermarkets and gas stations are all private companies too. Maybe they should all cut off your service, ban you from buying merchandise, food and fuel just because they don't like you, your politics, your weight or the color of your hair, or maybe just because they spun a bottle and your name came up, then maybe you'd get it.
 
Then maybe they ought to be a regulated public utility. Amazon, supermarkets and gas stations are all private companies too. Maybe they should all cut off your service, ban you from buying merchandise, food and fuel just because they don't like you, your politics, your weight or the color of your hair, or maybe just because they spun a bottle and your name came up, then maybe you'd get it.
They can do that now, unless they are doing it due to a 1964 Civil Rights violation. And?

Again the big reveal is that there was a conflict over whether to ban Trump, yes? That's kind of expected.
 
They can do that now, unless they are doing it due to a 1964 Civil Rights violation. And? Again the big reveal is that there was a conflict over whether to ban Trump, yes? That's kind of expected.

You're still living in denial. Not only shouldn't it even be a question or matter of whether or not to ban someone just because of their harmless views and opinions, much less the president of the United States, but it was being done at the behest of and under the direction of people in the government politically opposed to Trump trying to remove him because they didn't want him in office. Or have you entirely missed what Musk has been releasing in secret emails from Twitter executives?
 
They are private. They could ban him for his bad hair. Is this is Twitter Files #5 its a nonevent.
 

Forum List

Back
Top