They can both go away.
Musk and the ADL should take a love retreat to Gilligan's. I don't need musk telling me how he's an angle to everyone and I don't need the ADL telling me how everyone but them is evil.
Déjà vu time: Elon Musk is threatening to sue another civil rights group for losing him money. This time, the world's sometimes-richest man claimed on Twitter that its US advertising revenue is "down 60 percent" primarily due to the efforts of a single group: the antisemitism-combating Anti Defamation League. At least, "that' …
Proof of Godwin's law
Godwin's law, short for Godwin's law (or rule) of Nazi analogies, is an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of a comparison to Nazis or Adolf Hitler approaches 1.
Thanks for "mansplaining" Godwin's Law to a group of people who already know very well what it refers to, and why genuine comparisons to fascism are a fair exception, according to Godwin himself.
But hey, you do you, don't let us stop you making a tit of yourself in public.
You people are making shit up about me
making a tit of yourself in public
My friend, you are doing it to yourself.
I'm sure we've all managed to post things and then think, "maybe I should have thought about it a bit more first, before jumping in with both feet." However, it takes a special kind of talent to then go and find extra feet to jump in with, rather than then pausing for thought.
Independent of the rest of this discussion, I'd like to argue against a misuse of that law that seems incredibly common. Read that statement again. It says that it gets more likely for Nazism to be mentioned during a discussion. Nowhere in the text does it say that, when it is mentioned, it should not have been or the person who mentioned it is wrong. You could make the point about almost anything else that becomes more likely to be mentioned if we keep talking about some topic, because people will make connections to stuff they're familiar with. The person who first mentions Nazis may be wrong, but that is by no means guaranteed and wasn't even suggested by the original creator of the principle. I find it a bit weird when people start quoting the law as if it argues for the correctness of their point, as it does not in general or for you specifically.
This post has been deleted by its author
Yes. Dodgy bunch of people - they aren't against true antisemitism, they are against anyone critical of Israels right wing government, and use antiSemitism as their cover - the Rachel Riley school of thinking. (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/rachel-riley-jeremy-corbyn-photoshop-tshirt-antisemitism-racism-labour-apartheid-a9212761.html)
For those that don't know, they are powerful lobbyists, and have even strong-armed many US states into making laws to ban their departments from dealing with any company that supports BDS (a group calling for the boycott of companies in Israeli settlements in Palestine.)
Imagine if the UK government at the time banned any government departments from dealing with companies vocal against South African apartheid? So much for free speech and "land of the free".
THE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE made waves last May when, in a major speech at the organization’s national leadership summit, CEO Jonathan Greenblatt announced that the ADL would devote more energy to combating anti-Zionism. “Anti-Zionism is antisemitism,” he said, promising that the ADL would apply “more concentrated energy toward the threat of radical anti-Zionism” through lawsuits, research, and lobbying. He described Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)—all of which advocate for Palestinian rights—as “extremist” and the “photo inverse of the extreme right,” and implicated them in a rise in antisemitic hate crimes.
By the way, I once had a small smear campaign ran against me (only lasted a week, as I'm a nobody) where a bunch of their members piled on me posting all sorts of antisemitic accusations just because I made some comment about the Israeli government in relation to Palestine.
That reminded me of the time hard-right Israelies attacked the car of my at the time Israeli-Jewish girlfriend, when we were living together near Tel Aviv because of a Palestine sticker on her car... Apparently, she is an antisemite too :rolleyes:
Early this year it became obvious that Musk had been taking actions that were very damaging to Twitter for months. Musk fans were saying that as that was what Musk was doing it must be because that is what he wanted to achieve. Everyone else assumed it was just monumental incompetence. It is now very clear the Musk wants a re-run at x.com (Attempt one merged with confinity and the name was changed to PayPal after Musk was kicked out for impressive levels of failure). Now that Musk fans cannot say he is deliberately destroying x.com (again) some other scapegoat must be found. The obvious choice is Jewish space lasers because the only people daft enough to invest their life savings in x.com are raving loony conspiracy theorists who lap up that cool aid.
Musk had Twitter borrow more than enough money to buy Twitter. So far he has used the excess to pay the interest on that loan. It is about time courts started forcing Twitter to pay its bills and that will empty the pot fast. It should get interesting when Musk has to find new money for Twitter's interest payments.
>Musk had Twitter borrow more than enough money to buy Twitter. So far he has used the excess to pay the interest on that loan. It is about time courts started forcing Twitter to pay its bills and that will empty the pot fast. It should get interesting when Musk has to find new money for Twitter's interest payments.
IIRC He did persuade the Saudis to back him - which has led to at least one citizen of that country facing the death penalty for liking a tweet that was critical of the regime.
I mean, it's not like one of the worlds most public and well known antisemites was banned, then let back on and warmly welcomed back by Musk with open arms - before being banned again for more antisemitism.....and then let back on again. I mean, that would be absurd, and suggest that actually, Musk and Twitter are, broadly, fine with a bit of extremely public jewbashing from a multiple offender on the subject.
Entirely unrelated link
Truly, I cannot imagine why anyone would come to this conclusion.
It was already a deliberate and telling move to spell the word as 'anti-Semitism'. This is to pretend that antisemitism was directed against all Semites, which would include, among others, Palestinians, whereas the word never meant anything but anti-Jewish, having been coined by a German Jew-hating journalist in an equally pathetic and outrageous attempt to create a kind of science under the name.
Antisemitism is not just any racism. Jews are not hated because of their skin tone. Antisemites hate them because they're Jews.
Typical neo-nazi antisemites are also general racists who hate non-white ethnic groups because of their looks, but antisemitism is still a different thing.
MMP finally revealed!
He only paid that much for Twitter so that he could sue every anti-hate-speech group for an insane amount of that "value" in order to drive them all into bankruptcy.
He can then prove that he has enabled free speech for all and it is safe and lovely for everyone, because, look, do you see anyone complaining?
It's well known that they are bankrolled by the J.E.F. who own all the banks. (I'm pretty sure they are also sitting on a huge, huge pile of vaccine cash, and if that fails he will just use the blackmail info his PI dug up about their pedo hobbies to make them send out a 5G mind control command so everyone sends Elon $1000 dollars)
You really think that there aren't any people who do actually believe that sort of twaddle? If so, one envies your sheltered life.
Perhaps you think nobody who could post on The Register could be that way inclined? Hate to break it to you, but - maybe not all of that, all in one go, but the sad truth is we are not as elite a group of commentards as we'd like to imagine. Have you seen the even split in votes?
I assumed the even split to be half assuming sarcasm, half assuming it was real, and not really anyone wanting to upvote that sentiment if it was real. Things are not that dire here. Unfortunately, there are other places that would function that way. Still, I think the votes indicate that the sarcasm was not clear enough, not that we have people who believe all that crap together (I don't want to speculate or think too much about how many people believe some component of it).
"It's well known that they are bankrolled by the J.E.F. who own all the banks. (I'm pretty sure they are also sitting on a huge, huge pile of vaccine cash, and if that fails he will just use the blackmail info his PI dug up about their pedo hobbies to make them send out a 5G mind control command so everyone sends Elon $1000 dollars)"
The Internet is in a sorry state when I can't decide if the AC above is a massive troll, or actually believe what they are saying!!
Anti-SLAPP laws are state level. He may have a hard time in California but not Texas. On the other hand, the ADL could counter-sue and force Musk into discovery where they could demand material on X's moderation policies (or lack thereof), decision making process (or lack thereof) and since Musk is blaming them for economic damage, they could require X to turn over substantial business records showing their value, revenue, and expenditures as well as how Musk's actions have impacted the company's value.
Yeah there's no way a lawsuit like that wouldn't result in ADL's ability to force discovery on Xitter for exactly what changed in their moderation policies, any internal metrics they had before/after about extremist content, communications with advertisers - i.e. did they say "we are doing this because of what ADL said" or is that only in Musk's fevered dreams?
I can't see Musk wanting that to happen, even if the discovery is provided under seal it will become public if the case goes to trial since ADL would be able to use that information as part of their defense. If there's one thing Musk doesn't like, it is his dirty laundry being aired in public.
Since Twitter's still in California and the ADL is in New York, both of which have legislation for that purpose, I don't see why that would pose a problem. Technically, X Corp is a Nevada corporation, but Nevada has anti-SLAPP legislation as well. I don't see why Texas would come into it at all, although they too have some provision for countering such suits if it did. Still, there appears to be no reason why Texas would have any power over a suit between a California-based corporation suing a New York-based organization.
Well, I'm pretty sure that in the US, a public organization like Xitter can't really sue anyone for making true statements about it.
But if Lonnie really wants to give it a go, I'm sure the optics of suing the ADL will *really* help improve ad revenue from already skittish advertisers. I'd guess that already just his *blaming* the ADL for his moronic operating of Xitter is already going to scare more advertisers away.
Well you can attempt to sue someone for anything you like. How successful that is, and whether you get away without sanction, is another question...
People like Musk throw around legal threats as an intimidation tactic. Back off or we're going to waste your money, essentially. I wouldn't be surprised if he never consulted his legal team about most of them.
AFAIK, one can be sued only when there is a suspicion of illegal action?
Other countries may have different laws but in the US you can sue anyone. It is possible it will be summarily dismissed by a judge as being without merit, but the hope for a lawsuit like this is they'd get past that hurdle and force ADL to spend a bunch of money on lawyers.
Though you have to wonder who Musk could get as an attorney to represent Xitter in this case, given that they aren't paying rent or a lot of other bills. They should treat him like Trump, and require payment up front.
> There's something very familiar about all this
Yea, xTwitter under Musk is not under control of the state security apparatus. That and his propensity to speak his mind is the reason for the relentless criticism in the media and the numerous litigations he's at the end of. So, get with the program Elon!
I think it's more because in public he's a moronic twat whose parents should have taught him the merit of keeping his trap shut when someone deems him a moron, as by opening it he tends to confirm it.
Money doesn't change people. It merely amplifies the aberrations, and it appears Musk if full of them - and it.
It's true : it's all the fault of the group of evil little pixies that live in Musk's brain.They can be got rid of pouring half a pint of pickled egg juice in each ear before going to bed, every night for about 2 months.
I am pretty sure that shedding most of the workforce, not paying bills, Musk smack talking in public and being a 24 crt knob-end had more effect on the Ad revenue tanking. Instead of owning that Musk has decided to deflect and blame the ADL and by implication some kind of Jewish conspiracy. Put the crack pipe down Elon and eff off while you're doing it.
Well, let's face it, if you're going to go full-on conspiracy theorist, then sooner or later you're sharing a platform with antisemitism. It's not like all those absolutely batshit crazy theories don't boil down to shibboleths like "the New World Order" (Jews), "the Rothschilds" (Jews), "The World Bank" (Jews), or just plain old straight-up bullshit like "the Protocols of the Elders of Zion" (you know that came from a novel published some decades before it was conjured up as a reason to hate Jews, right).
I'm not sure why Jewish people seem to bear the brunt of all the hate, and have done so over a good deal of European history, but there's a strong suggestion that organised Christianity, and the Catholic Church has something to do with it...
Personally, I think people should calm down a little bit, and live by the adage of "don't be a dick", especially when it comes to being a dick to already marginalised or victimised groups...
That goes double for Elon: Don't be a dick, Elon, don't be a dick...
You are the one linking the NWO and global banks to that conspiracy theory. And the Rothschild's ARE Jewish. That is fact.
So in the now deleted part of this thread we had someone arguing that anti-zionism ISN'T anti-semitism (ADL say otherwise) but now are we saying that being critical of global banks, the Rothschilds etc. IS anti-semitic?
Isn't it usually the political left who are constantly raging against the millionaire and billionaire class?
Talk about double standards... but then you'd have none otherwise ;)
> You are the one linking the NWO ... to that conspiracy theory
You mean the NWO should be linked to a different conspiracy theory? Anything specific, or just one that isn't referring to Jews?
Or should the NWO simply not be linked to any conspiracy theory at all?
Enquiring minds wish to know your truth.
Well done, you're catching on - when you (and I'm pretty sure, from your comment, that you do) blame "the Rothschilds" for something bad that you don't like in one of your little "theories"*, you are just being plain-old antisemitic, because all of these conspiracy theories* are based on a core of interlinked bullshit, almost always having some form of antisemitism at their core. It's a well knwon phenomenon, and widely documented and discussed.
The actuall issue here, is the fact that you pick out "the Rothschilds" as the actual problem; a specific example of (Jewish) rich people; conspiracy theorists never seem to pick on ultra-rich people who happen not to be Jewish, do they? And here's the thing; the ultra-rich DO actually run things - that's called capitalism. If there's a problem with plutocracy (and many woudl argue that there is), the root of that problem is free-market capitalism, not Jews.
Here is a list of the ten richest people in the world, as an aside. As a quick exercise for the reader, how many are Rothschilds, how many are Jewish, how many are white men?
*Not actually theories at all; a theory is formed from a series of testable hypotheses, not a load of old horseshit that someone saw in a youtube video once, or read in a magazine. Those hypotheses must rely on reproducible and testable experimental results. A theory, in its true sense, is actually about as close as science can get to a proven fact.
Um, YOU specifically mentioned the Rothschilds, not me. You are aware that they helped fund Cecil Rhodes (the left hate his legacy) and DeBeers?
I'm still not sure what point you are trying to make here other than proving your original post wrong. Bill Gates runs the NWO and he's on your list so it must be fine to criticise him and the NWO?
Yes, I mentioned the Rothschilds, as an example of the sort of conspiracy nonsense antisemitic nutters harp on about. You picked it up and ran with it, thus proving that you are part of that crowd, or too ignorant to not associate yourself with them. Not that you're actually associating yourself with anything, posting anonymously, but we can all tell it's the same AC.
My point, once again, is this: Pretty much all conspiracy theories, once examined and questioned, boil down to "the Jews did it". Yes, the Rothschilds are Jewish, yes they are rich, and yes, they have done some nasty things, but the point is that there are plenty of other rich people who have done nasty things, but somehow they don't get picked as the "example" of how the "NWO" is run by Jews, and other bullshit antisemitic tropes. The Rothschilds supporting Rhodes has nothing to do with a Jewish conspiracy, but you'd be forgiven for thinking that it did, if you follow all that conspiracy nonsense. If "thinking" is the right word.
You might want to adjust the dose on your meds. 'The Jews did it' is very much concocted by the political left. It is one of the stock NPC responses to try and shut down any type of dialogue. I say Bill Gates is the figurehead of the NWO and you are the one that makes the mental jujitsu move to anti-semitism because you have no actual response to a true statement.
Is the Palestinian president far right? Is he also being racist?
'The Jews did it' is very much concocted by the political left.
It might interest you to hear that (gasps of shock / horror / awe) many political parties on the left actually have Jews as members.
Of course, the conspiracy-minded amongst us might then claim this is so that the lizards can more easily keep an eye on them, or it's Stockholm Syndrome, or something.
People with brains might instead conclude that antisemitism operates regardless of where you fall on the (simplistic) left/right political spectrum, or are you one of "those" who is about to claim that a well known German politician in the early to mid 20th century was a member of a political party that was left-leaning because it had "socialist" in its name. If this is the case, I'll have to (again) point out that the official name of North Korea has "democratic" in it, and that names are not a reliable indicator of, well anything really.
It's almost as if a person's stance on whether rich people should control everything, or whether we should let everyone have a go (a very simplistic reduction of what left/right means in a political sense) has no bearing whatsoever on whether they are a racist.
As for my meds; the packet says I should only take one antihistamine a day. The pollen is quite bad this year, so I shan't be taking fewer than that, and I certainly won't be exceeding the stated dose. Maybe it's yourself that is assuming that everyone is prescribed antipsychotics?
You do know there are Jewish people on the political right? Certainly in the UK they have very much been alienated by the political left in recent years.
Wasn't he Austrian?
If you look at your original list how many of those people would be classed as even vaguely right wing? Maybe Elon, but the rest are very much aligned to the US political left (ignoring the French guy). Your claim that only right wingers want the ultra-rich in power simply does not hold up in reality. The US political left is just as dominated, if not more so, by the ultra-rich and it was really rather funny when Bernie stopped mentioning 'the millionaires' after he became one :) The reality is that a lot of GOP voters in the US and leave voters in the UK are sick to death of the political elite and ultra-rich running the show.
Spiro can. He can repeat: Twitter is a home to invective and hyperbole. No reasonable person would consider it a source of factual information.
That way the Xcretion can apply to ADL litigation but be ignored for CCDH. What is the point of being a two faced blame shifter if you cannot tell contradictory lies for different purposes?
ADL and other anti hate group(s) claim Xitter is getting worse since his muskiness took over, and because of that the Adwertwisers have run away in droves.
So, his muskiness decides to sue the anti hate groups to recoup funds that have vanished since he took over.
If, in fact, the claims by the anti hate groups are correct and substantiated in court, his muskiness looses. If it's shown that the Adwertwisers ran away for some other reason(s), his muskiness looses.
If by some bizarre twist of reality (fate) his muskiness *wins* any of the relevant court cases, would he be inclined to hire Marjorie Taylor Greene as his advertising executive?
Advertisers running away is also a speech expression. Advertisers don't have to bow to pressure groups. They may not even give the real reasons for their departure when asked. Free speech means you try to convince the advertisers that the other side is wrong. Statements of opinion are not statements of fact, so they don't even come under defamation law. Elon Musk is the world's richest idiot.
Advertisers are in a sorta virtue signal arms race. Oddly the people they are trying oh so hard to virtue signal to are likely not major spenders. It is all a perception thing. Not helped by all the ESG stuff, although that seems to be dying off.
20 years ago you'd not expect to see a pride float sponsored by Lockheed Martin. We are living in backwards world where now being a classical liberal (personal freedom, private property rights etc) and anti-war is seen as 'far right'. The very companies that are actually causing a lot of the world's problems are slapping rainbows on everything and being accepted by those who historically have hated them.
> The very companies that are actually causing a lot of the world's problems are slapping rainbows on everything and being accepted by those who historically have hated them
They are trying hard to accepted (duh) and they say they being accepted, but that doesn't mean they actually are accepted.
This is called "advertising".
We are living in backwards world where now being a classical liberal (personal freedom, private property rights etc) and anti-war is seen as 'far right'
This is largely down to how the US has mangled the meaning of the word "liberal" to refer to liberal economics, rather than liberal social attitudes.
Liberal (or, since its decline, neo-liberal) economics is concerned with essentially having an unregulated market where those with the most capital stand to gain the most, at the expense of those with least capital. This is pretty much spot-on the definition of what right-wing means (the original meanings of the terms left and right, as I have pointed out in a post above), refer to whether those in power should represent the rich, or everyone.
"Personal freedom" is also a pretty nebulous term. Are you referring to freedoms such as freedom of movement, the freedom to graze animals on common land, freedom from oppression, that sort of thing, which are all pretty left-wing ideas, or to freedom from regulation, freedom to oppress, freedom to enclose land, freedom to use capital to gain more at the expense of others without regulation, and so on, which are right-wing concepts? As for private property rights, again, are you talking about rights to one's own home, or rights to buy up other people's homes, own multiple properties, rent them out, thus amplifying capital, and "intellectual property" rights where ideas are bought and sold by the rich, in order to make money, and extract "licensing" fees from the poor? Again, if you are arguing against regulation of this sort of "property", then this is right-wing.
As for being "anti-war"; again, define what you mean by this? Are you referring to an ideology where conflict should be avoided (arguably left-of-centre, although it's not really a left/right thing), or are you talking about allowing other nations to invade their neighbours and saying "I'm not getting involved?" Because appeasement didn't work very well in the 1930s, and that really did help the far right.
Anti-war and appeasement are NOT the same thing.
You REALLY need to reconsider your left/right ideas.
"freedom to enclose land"
"freedom to use capital to gain more at the expense of others without regulation"
Is Bill Gates left or right?
"freedom from regulation"
"freedom to oppress"
How about Amazon and its anti-union stance or the way they treat workers?
"own multiple properties"
How many homes does Bernie Sanders own? How many properties are owned by Blackrock? Blackrock being the largest proponent of ESG, very much liked by the political left.
From what I understand of the ADL, Xitter's action against the ADL is like a PT boat attacking a Dreadnought or the Bismark but without the possibility of getting lucky.
Forget Gilligan's Island more like McHale's Navy.
I am surprised that Xittler hasn't yet managed to grievousy offend the Islamic world - a man most deserving his own personal fatwah.
Probably has something to do with the minor detail that Saudi Arabia's Kingdom Holding Company and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal own 4% of Xitter.
They also "facilitated" a lot of the financing of His Muskness purchase.
I'm rather wondering how much of this was simply a way to extract a large amount of liquid cash from Twitter while getting someone else to entirely destroy it.
"the minor detail that Saudi Arabia's Kingdom Holding Company and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal own 4% of Xitter."
This is rapidly becoming a catch-all conspiracy theory. The Saudi wealth fund owns about 4% of pretty much everything, by now. It's usually just the result of diversified investment of a lot of money - though Twitterx might be an exception, where there is a desire for influence involved, that does rather assume that what Twitterx users think about the importance of Twitterx is mirrored by what everyone else thinks, rather than being the exact opposite.
"[The ADL] would potentially be on the hook for destroying half the value of the company, so roughly $22 billion, ..."
"I don't see any scenario where they're responsible for less than 10 percent of the value destruction, so ~$4 billion,"
Ridiculous. You destroyed any and all value. Even the brand. What did you think you were buying? Are you a moron? Am I allowed to say that?
I thought Elon 'Pedo Guy' Musk was supposed to be handing the reigns over the a new CEO so they can attempt to put out the dumpster fire that Elon causes every time he dicks about with TWXT for his own person ego boosting. Is that not happening now?
Hes such a narcissist that if people aren't talking about him he needs to start threating to sue none profits for damaging TwxT revenue just to get himself back on the headlines of the mainstream press. What a bell end