Twitter Suspends Dozens of Accounts of Venezuelan Officials(telesurenglish.net)
telesurenglish.net
Twitter Suspends Dozens of Accounts of Venezuelan Officials
https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/twitter-suspends-dozens-of-accounts-of-venezuelan-officials-20200107-0021.html
6 comments
That is a very biased article. All the individuals mentioned are already under sanctions by most of the world, and anyone outside of Venezuela would say the Maduro government is criminal.
Foreign policy guys calling the shots now? Would be hilarious if they jumped to the fediverse.
Twitter's executive for the Middle East is a British psyop officer, so it's hard to view Twitter as anything but a state-owned tool of control: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/twitter-executive-also-pa...
lol. he's a reservist. so are a lot of other people. they are allowed to have a private life.
if every reservist is part of your conspiracy theory of "state-owned" then i guess most corporations are "state-owned". which would be a surprise to the tens of millions of shareholders, the SEC, the FCC and many others.
if every reservist is part of your conspiracy theory of "state-owned" then i guess most corporations are "state-owned". which would be a surprise to the tens of millions of shareholders, the SEC, the FCC and many others.
There is a difference between a reservist and a psy-ops reservists. But yes, in general, you'd think and hope that reservists of a nation are biased towards their nation at the very least. I'm sure this guy is heavily biased towards britain and against venezuela, etc.
Would you respond the same way if a chinese or a russian reservist was a senior member of twitter's team? I highly doubt you be defending him so vigorously.
> then i guess most corporations are "state-owned"
Not necessarily "state-owned" but without a doubt the important companies are at the very least "state-influenced".
Would you respond the same way if a chinese or a russian reservist was a senior member of twitter's team? I highly doubt you be defending him so vigorously.
> then i guess most corporations are "state-owned"
Not necessarily "state-owned" but without a doubt the important companies are at the very least "state-influenced".
No more free speech? or just hypocrisy?