Apparently, freedom of speech is acceptable in America if it promotes white supremacy but is unacceptable if it opposes war. Now that’s a very peculiar sense of ethics, if you ask me!
With a President who vociferously defends his use of Twitter to circumvent political norms, evade his ostensible “handlers,” and to stoke racial and xenophobic tensions, Twitter has become an important free-speach frontier. But Twitter is a private company and has chosen to silence accounts it deems abusive or dangerous. Not Donald Trump’s support for armed white supremacists or encouragement of violence against adversaries, not Alex Jones for peddling politically-charged and dangerous conspiracies, but one of our contributors, Peter Van Buren for reasons they obscure. The US Government tried to silence Peter when he worked in the State Department, but he did not expect the same treatment from a social media “free” enterprise. – Ed.
Peter Van Buren
Some of you are aware I have been permanently banned from Twitter as @wemeantwell.
This followed exchanges with several mainstream journalists over their support for America’s wars and unwillingness to challenge the lies…
View original post 196 more words
The Secular Jurist 
Business owners put their bottom line in first place. Van Buren must’ve become a liability. Twitter is probably riding high on the POTUS tweets.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: I Have Been Permanently Banned from Twitter — The Secular Jurist | sdbast
A recent article on Tales from the Conspiratum suggest that net censorship is getting into its stride. What is worrying is the lack of transparency over the specifics of why a particular person/blog has been (seemingly arbitraryily) removed. Though the reason might suggest why.
LikeLike
Yes, I read that article.
LikeLike