Wednesday, September 06, 2023

Musk may Sue ADL for Defamation

The fight between Twitter and ADL continues:
X owner Elon Musk is threatening to sue the Anti-Defamation League for defamation, claiming that the nonprofit organization’s statements about rising hate speech on the social media platform have torpedoed X’s advertising revenue.

In a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, Musk said US advertising revenue is “still down 60%, primarily due to pressure on advertisers by @ADL (that’s what advertisers tell us), so they almost succeeded in killing X/Twitter!”

Musk also claimed that since he took over the platform in October 2022, the ADL “has been trying to kill this platform by falsely accusing it & me of being anti-Semitic.”

For background, see People Should be Talking About the ADL’s Support for Extremist Racialist Policies in Israel. The author of that article has been banned from Twitter/X, just like Nick Fuentes, at the demand of ADL.

Anti-semitism is almost entirely a hoax perpetrated by the ADL, and like-minded Jews. They complain about it all the time, but it is almost impossible to find any example of it.

The Twitter debate has cited an Israeli movie on the subject, which you can watch at this banned site. The documentary details how Jews are taught anti-semitism myths so that they will hate gentiles, and support Jewish ethnic cohesion.

My guess is that most Jews do not agree with this strategy. But it very much is the strategy of the ADL, and of the Jews who are out to destroy free speech in America.

There is no free speech as long as the ADL can extort major platforms into banning people like Anglin and Fuentes. The ADL must be exposed for what it is.

1 comment:

CFT said...

If someone does dislike Jews, and says so, why is it a crime and not just an opinion?
If someone dislikes Europeans or white people, and says so, they are considered 'speaking their truth', 'you tell 'em brother', 'Amen to that!' or is even a former President Obama blathering about 50% of his genetic heritage while conveniently forgetting about the other half unless he wanted to talk trash and cast shade on the majority of people living in America.

If the allegation is that an ACTUAL threat was made, it should be handled like any other threat. Period. Belonging to a religion or skin color is irrelevant. Belonging to a particular political party is irrelevant. The issue is the threat, not what group, religion, or imaginary species, or real/imagined gender, the theoretically 'threatened' belongs to.

Most of the time what the thin skinned call a threat or hate speech is someone else's negative opinion or bigotry, not an actual threat to do violence.