Citing Guidelines Against "Abusive" Behavior, Twitter Permanently Suspends Alex Jones and InfoWars After Jones Confronts CNN's Deplatforming Crusader Oliver Darcy

Private businesses can do whatever they want.

Private citizens, not so much.

Oliver Darcy has been a naked activist crusading to get a host of accounts, including Jones' most of all, banned from Twitter, FaceBook, etc.

Oliver Darcy and CNN have abandoned any pretense of objectivity and are simply now activists and lobbyists pressuring other companies to ban their critics and competitors.

Until recently, Twitter had been the lone hold-out, refusing to ban Jones, stating that he had not broken any rules.

Which made Darcy and CNN crusade all the harder to get Jones banned, writing stories frequently demanding that Twitter get with the deplatforming program.

Now Alex Jones has confronted Darcy (I believe in the halls of Congress outside the Twitter/FaceBook hearings) and criticized him to his face. (Video below.)

And I guess this is now the pretext Twitter uses to claim that Jones engaged in "abusive behavior" towards a partisan crusader who's been trying to deplatform Jones for months.

Why is Jones' dogged (and rude) questioning/accusing of Darcy against Twitter's rules whereas Darcy's and CNN's monthslong crusade is not "abusive behavior?"

You know why.

Twitter banned far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and his website InfoWars from its platform Thursday afternoon, a month after several of its Silicon Valley counterparts did so. Jones was suspended from Twitter for one week last month after he posted a video in which he said, "Now is time to act on the enemy before they do a false flag." But Twitter did not ban him from its platform then, even after YouTube, Apple and Facebook each kicked him off.

In a series of tweets from its @TwitterSafety account, Twitter said, "Today, we permanently suspended @realalexjones and @infowars from Twitter and Periscope. We took this action based on new reports of Tweets and videos posted yesterday that violate our abusive behavior policy, in addition to the accounts' previous violations."

Twitter also said that it "will take action" if in the future it discovers other accounts being used to get around the ban of Jones and InfoWars.

The company made its decision a day after Jones accosted a CNN reporter, Oliver Darcy, on Capitol Hill, and livestreamed the encounter through Periscope, which Twitter owns.

So, hostile questioning of someone on camera is now "abusive behavior" -- but not, I imagine, for the main practitioners of abusive, hostile questioning on camera, the leftwing partisan Democrat media.

But Twitter will be okay, as long as it keeps acting as part of the DNC and paying off important ThoughtLeaders of the Corporate Right.

Exit Question: Is it safe to question Darcy, Tapper, Acosta, and Stelter on Twitter, or is it Twitter's unofficial policy that ruffling any of these activists' feathers is a bannable offense?

Does anyone feel safe questioning these people any longer?

If I have The Rules straight, leftist media figures can abuse and interrogate citizens, but citizens have no right to interrogate the media back.

This country is not supposed to have an aristocracy, but the would-be aristocratic class is determined to impose special privileges for the Aristocratic Class on an unwilling populace.

posted by Ace of Spades at 05:51 PM

| Access Comments