One could suggest this is an attack on free speech.
However, you can’t have rabid morons inciting violence either...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55597840
Earlier on Friday, Twitter permanently banned the account of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh and two Trump loyalists: former national security adviser Michael Flynn and attorney Sidney Powell.
Later in the day, Google suspended Parler - a self-styled "free speech" rival to Twitter that is increasingly popular with Trump supporters - from its online store.
After being allowed back on Twitter, Mr Trump posted two tweets on Friday that the company cited as the finals straws.
In one, he wrote: "The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!"
Twitter said this tweet "is being interpreted as further indication that President Trump does not plan to facilitate an 'orderly transition'".
In the next, the president tweeted: "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th."
Twitter said this was "being received by a number of his supporters as further confirmation that the election was not legitimate".
Twitter said both of these tweets were "in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy".
@shavixmir saidCalling for peace is inciting violence? Explain that to us all.
One could suggest this is an attack on free speech.
However, you can’t have rabid morons inciting violence either...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55597840
Earlier on Friday, Twitter permanently banned the account of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh and two Trump loyalists: former national security adviser Michael Flynn and attorney Sidney Powell.
La ...[text shortened]... te".
Twitter said both of these tweets were "in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy".
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-demonstrators-idUSKBN29B2UT
@metal-brain saidEventually, under pressure, he called for peace.
Calling for peace is inciting violence? Explain that to us all.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-demonstrators-idUSKBN29B2UT
But he stirred that crowd up.
And his initial reaction wasn’t calming either now, was it?
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-55561627
We will never give up. We will never concede.
You are special. We love you.
@shavixmir saidWhat is your source of information?
Eventually, under pressure, he called for peace.
But he stirred that crowd up.
And his initial reaction wasn’t calming either now, was it?
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-55561627
We will never give up. We will never concede.
You are special. We love you.
It isn't the BBC article you posted. It doesn't say what you are claiming.
It is quite obvious why big tech doesn't like Trump.
He demanded the repeal of Section 230 Tech Liability Shield.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/section-230-defense-bill-ndaa-big-tech/2020/12/02/id/999610/
He made powerful enemies. He is right though. They are out of control. They are the real election meddlers. They censored the Hunter Biden story. They censored the Detroit paper's endorsement of John James. They falsely fact check to discredit those telling the truth. They pretty much censor anything big pharma doesn't like.
Freedom of speech is under assault. They found a loophole to kill the first constitutional amendment. Democracy itself is being threatened and it is from the left. Democrats are now the censorship party. They aspire to be Stalin.
@metal-brain saidIt’s been explained that big tech firms are not part of the freedom of speech argument so your lying again. It’s no different to a right wing newspaper not carrying a left wing editorial. Only governments can restrict freedom of speech, everybody else can print, broadcast or platform what they choose to print, broadcast.or platform.
It is quite obvious why big tech doesn't like Trump.
He demanded the repeal of Section 230 Tech Liability Shield.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/section-230-defense-bill-ndaa-big-tech/2020/12/02/id/999610/
He made powerful enemies. He is right though. They are out of control. They are the real election meddlers. They censored the Hunter Biden story. They censored ...[text shortened]... hreatened and it is from the left. Democrats are now the censorship party. They aspire to be Stalin.
Perhaps before he leaves office he’ll insist that Twitter must be sold to a US company, oh no hang on.
@metal-brain saidGoogle it.
What is your source of information?
It isn't the BBC article you posted. It doesn't say what you are claiming.
You know what he said.
@kevcvs57 saidThey found a loophole to kill the first constitutional amendment. Democracy itself is being threatened and it is from the left. Democrats are now the censorship party. They aspire to be Stalin.
It’s been explained that big tech firms are not part of the freedom of speech argument so your lying again. It’s no different to a right wing newspaper not carrying a left wing editorial. Only governments can restrict freedom of speech, everybody else can print, broadcast or platform what they choose to print, broadcast.or platform.
Perhaps before he leaves office he’ll insist that Twitter must be sold to a US company, oh no hang on.
It isn't called small tech for a reason. They control too much information. I did NOT lie. I never claimed what they are doing is illegal. You are lying.
@shavixmir saidAll I know is what you said. You said this:
Google it.
You know what he said.
"Eventually, under pressure, he called for peace."
I heard the same rumor on the corporate news media, but that is just a rumor. How do you know Biden didn't say that after Trump already called for peace?
There is a timeline you have to prove. Nobody else has proven it, but I suppose you could be the first. Can you prove the timeline to confirm that? Yes or no?
The post that was quoted here has been removedYou cannot be that much of a cretin so you must be lying, no other proof required.
You said this concerning trumps Twitter ban
“ Freedom of speech is under assault. They found a loophole to kill the first constitutional amendment. ”
I replied
“ It’s been explained that big tech firms are not part of the freedom of speech argument so your lying again. It’s no different to a right wing newspaper not carrying a left wing editorial. Only governments can restrict freedom of speech, everybody else can print, broadcast or platform what they choose to print, broadcast.or platform. ”
Cretin or Liar make your mind up MB.