Posted on 08/07/2018 12:26:23 AM PDT by grundle
Saying white people are bullt wont get you banned from Twitter but saying Jewish people are will.
Thats what happened to conservative activist Candace Owens, who was suspended from Twitter for mimicking the racist tweets of new New York Times editorial-board member Sarah Jeong.
Ms. Owens, the communications director for Turning Point USA, tweeted Saturday that Jewish people are bullt like dogs pissing on fire hydrants #cancelJewishpeople Are Jewish people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun? The above statements are from @nytimes editor @SarahJeong. I simply swapped out the word white for Jewish.
Despite her tweet explicitly saying it was a parody of someone elses tweets, that got her a note from Twitter saying Your account has been locked for violating the Twitter Rules. Specifically for violating our rules against hateful conduct.
Ms. Jeong did not mention in her scores of tweets about white people that they were parodies. But not only are the tweets still up, her account was not suspended over them.
After an outcry among conservatives for the obvious double standard, Twitter restored Ms. Owens account, saying it was an error, but not until after shed deleted the tweets.
BLOWN AWAY by the amount of patriots that just came to my side to make this happen, Ms. Owens wrote on Twitter after her access was restored.
She also criticized Twitter for going as far as it did.
I actually AGREE with Twitter Ms. Owens told Breitbart News. These tweets are an example of hateful conduct. It begs the question why was it okay when the hate was directed at White people? Why are her tweets still up?
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Great job Candace!
Twitter, Facebook, and Snapchat are poking a tiger.
There are Libertarians on here who say that Facebook and Twitter can do what they wish as private companies. Does that mean the phone and internet providers can get together to ban entire groups of Americans from being able to communicate by phone, email or text, because the corporate leftists dont agree with their political views? Alex Jones is a test case. If they get away with this, next it will be the NRA, pro-life groups, Judicial Watch, and eventually anyone who has ever done a positive retweet of President Trump. The left knows that the MSM is increasingly discredited and ineffective, so they want to ban conservatives from social media and the internet.
Bookmark
“Does that mean the phone and internet providers can get together to ban entire groups of Americans from being able to communicate by phone, email or text...”
Good point.
I’m guessing that public conveyance and public accommodation laws can be used to stop the social media from banning speech.
Can’t someone come up with alternatives to these liberal puppets? I don’t use any of the platforms mentioned but I would consider it if a conservative alternative came out.
I’m less concerned about Youtube and Facebook. There are other ways to post information, and I never used it to access or comment on political issues (good way to alienate family and friends). But Twitter had become the major communication channel for political speech on all sides of the political debate. I don’t see how they can force the President to permit trolls to post malicious crap on his Twitter page, then claim they have the right to ban others who happen to have a different political viewpoint. If they are completely private, then ban the President, but don’t tell him who he has to communicate with.
There of course is another solution to this: the creation of alternate social media platforms for conservatives, and other common sense people who don’t want to be hijacked by leftists.
A problem with simply creating conservative versions of these, is that Leftists will just attack those advertisers and get them shut down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.