We have been discussing the expanding censorship on Twitter and social media. The latest example involves the story of Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors, 37, and her purchase of a $1.4 million home in a secluded area of Los Angeles whose population is reputedly less than 2% black. The professed Marxist received considerable criticism for the purchase, including from Jason Whitlock, an African-America sports critic who has also been a critic of BLM. When Whitlock called out Khan-Cullors, Twitter promptly censored the tweet — leaving a notice that it was “no longer available.”
Last week, various cites like dirt.com reported, “A secluded mini-compound tucked into L.A.’s rustic and semi-remote Topanga Canyon was recently sold for a tad more than $1.4 million to a corporate entity that public records show is controlled by Patrisse Khan-Cullors, 37-year-old social justice visionary and co-founder of the galvanizing and, for some, controversial Black Lives Matter movement.”
It produced a firestorm of critics who noted that Cullors has long insisted that she and her BLM co-founder “are trained Marxists. We are super versed on, sort of, ideological theories.” Critics like Nick Arama of RedState pointed out: “[I]t’s interesting to note that the demographics of the area are only about 1.4% black people there. So not exactly living up to her creed there.”
Jason Whitlock posted a link to a story but was promptly censored by Twitter.
Twitter screengrab
The controversy is illustrative of the age of Internet censors. Tweets, and in some cases Twitter accounts, vanish without explanation. Twitter is notorious for not responding to media inquiries over such censorship and even less forthcoming on the decisionmaking process behind such decisions.
If Whitlock was expressing his contempt for the purchase, it is core political speech.
Even the head of New York City’s Black Lives Matter chapter is calling for an independent investigation into the organization’s finances in the wake of the controversy. This controversy follows an Atlanta-based figure being criminally charged with fraud. According to the Justice Department, Sir Maejor Page, or Tyree Conyers-Page is accused of using a Facebook page called “Black Lives Matter of Greater Atlanta.”
The New York Post and other publications have reported that Cullors is eyeing expensive properties in other locations, including the Bahamas. However, it is not clear if this money came from BLM which has reportedly raised almost $100 million in donations from corporations and other sources. Indeed, Cullors seems to have ample sources of funds. She is married to Janaya Khan, a leader of BLM in Toronto, and published a best selling memoir of her life and then a follow up book. She also signed a lucrative deal with Warner Bros to develop and produce original programming across all platforms, including broadcast, cable and streaming. She has also been featured in various magazines like her recent collaboration with Jane Fonda.
The issue for me is not the house or claimed hypocrisy. It is the censorship of Twitter of such criticism. Cullors is a public figure who is subject to public scrutiny and commentary. Twitter is rife with a such criticism over the lifestyle choices of figures on the right ranging from Donald Trump Jr. to Rand Paul. That is an unfortunate aspect of being in a high visibility position. I would be equally concerned if criticism of Trump Jr.’s big game hunting exploits or Giuliani’s lavish tastes were censored.
Whitlock apparently is a vocal critic of BLM which he has denounced as a scam and even compared to the KKK. One does not have to agree with such statements to support his right to speak freely without corporate censorship.
Indeed, the greatest irony may not be the home purchase but the corporate support. A professed Marxist, Cullors has not only been paid handsomely by corporations like Warner but is being actively protected by corporations like Twitter. When it comes to free speech, I support them Cullors and Whitlock. The question is whether both have an equal opportunity to speak on platforms like Twitter.
Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube pretended they were going to operate like the phone company, simply providing the public a venue to communicate. However, the telephone company does not monitor or censor your conversation. The operator does not cut in, and object to what you tell your friends over the phone, ending the call or cutting service if they don’t like your politics or opinions.
They were granted immunity from lawsuits on the grounds that they would not content discriminate, or operate as a publisher. Then they proceeded to content discriminate, and act as a publisher.
So take those protections away.
We need a digital public square. If it’s legal to say in public, it should be allowed to be said on this public square.
Twitter is well within its rights to remove or moderate (censor criticism): ‘as long as it is done in good faith’.
“The statute in Section 230(c)(2) further provides “Good Samaritan” protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the removal or moderation of third-party material they deem obscene or offensive, even of constitutionally protected speech, as long as it is done in good faith. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
Clarence Thomas has a plan. That section will be scrutinized and revised. He has already made public statements declaring that people can sue these public platforms for such censorship. Be ready for the judgement. Also, I don’t see how simply removing criticism of someone being a hypocrite and buying homes in an all white neighborhood when they claim they believe in Black Lives can be done in good faith from any argument. I think you’re just trying to make people mad by citing the section without the authority. You are not a supreme court judge, so you can’t say anything about how good faith applies to the censorship. Furthermore no suits have been brought to the supreme court but they inevitably will, in addition to the proof of the frivolousness of your reference. Good day.
Your issue may not be the purchase of the multiple homes but it’s definitely my issue. I am the mother of one of those murdered sons and this heffer is living better than any of the families. I nor any other family members that I am in contact with have ever heard from her nor received anything from BLM National so he’ll yes I’m mad!! My house needs repair work and she has multiple homes. What loss has she taken, not one child of hers is a victim.
Condolences to you, Michelle Kenney. People are beginning to see what a scam BLM is. The angels are lining up for you. Keep going and keep speaking out, people are listening. Blessings to you.
Nothing new here, Typical race-hustling. Promoting the false narrative of continuing oppression by an unrepentant, racist white America in order to enrich themselves. Al ‘drug dealer, anti-Semitic, mob rat’ Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and others have been making millions of race-hustling for decades. They are all swamp rats.
So very true if they is a real America left will you please wake up, the predominant racism is that of those using there race issues to raise money to squander.
If Patrisse Khan-Cullors really believed her own racist drivel that whites are evil oppressors out to murder black people, then she wouldn’t buy an expensive home in a majority white enclave.
If Patrisse Khan-Cullors really believed her own Marxist drivel, then she wouldn’t have become wealthy, nor would she have bought any home. She would have donated all income in excess of the national average to humanitarian causes, or the Democrat Socialist Party, and rented an apartment in a black majority city. Earning money through her movie deal with Warner Bros is capitalist, and by her own professed standards, wrong. Capitalism = fascism, right? So her gains are ill gotten and should be turned over to her community. In fact, it is against Marxist ideals for her to own that house at all. Think about how many poor black people she could have, and should have, housed for $1.4 million. Profit is illegal under Marxism.
If she believed that police were unfairly targeting black people, then she would have rented an apartment in a high crime area. After all, incarcerated black people must be the victims of systemic racism, right? Therefore a high crime neighborhood is just unfairly labeled so. Since looting is just reparations, then she should have felt at ease in any number of looted cities in CA.
Ignore what people say and focus on what they do.
And what does the Left ALWAYS do? Censor and crush dissent. Twitter, a Leftist venue, routinely censors conservatives and protects prominent Democrats or their movements from criticism. The Left has to censor or interfere with free speech, because they can’t win an argument based on facts. That’s why they resort to ad hominem, why they threaten to impoverish or ruin anyone who opposes them, going after little old bakers, businesses, or your job. Agree with the Left or you might get hurt or silenced.
https://dennisprager.com/column/why-the-left-has-to-suppress-free-speech/
Hey, you moderate Democrats out there, are you tired yet of making excuses or ignoring totalitarian behavior? Democrats have accused conservatives of being dictators or fascists for decades. But conservatives believe in limited government and robust individual rights. It’s impossible to have Fascism with limited government. The Left, on the other hand, opposes free speech, crushes dissent, punishes you if you disagree, and wants a strong, intrusive government for “your own good”. And it’s the Left that defines what’s “good.”
OT:
When Trump was President the vaccine left government control as soon as possible so people could be vaccinated for Covid-19 as soon as possible.
Biden changed the rules. Now around 50 million shots of vaccine remain under government control while people die of Covid. This is how the Biden administration handles things, Poorly. Go back to Trump’s method and the vaccine will be given to people instead of being warehoused.
Next run for congress and change name to Watters” Sounds like race traitors to me.
It is interesting that a lover of Fidel Castro acts just like him. Million for me and none for thee. When people say that our education system has failed us, they really have no idea how much.
This is not “corporate” censorship per say, this is censorship directed by the intel state. All of these social media entities are tied to the intel state. Per blm, its a racket$$$$ designed to line the pockets of its founders and an organization that obviously has links to the intel state, from its genesis to its members being protected from prosecution for a multitude of crimes.
OT: Zuckerberg group gave Detroit $7.4 million to ‘dramatically’ expand vote in city key to Biden win
The Center for Tech and Civic Life’s donations to blue strongholds are attracting increased attention, controversy.
…”The records obtained in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan show the Zuckerberg monies were used to buy off government officials dictating the manner in which the election was conducted and using government to target Democrat strongholds to turn out the vote for Mr. Biden,” Kline said. “Such action is wrong, unlawful and dramatically undermined the integrity of the 2020 election. We must not let a shadow government run our elections to the benefit of favored candidates and political parties.”
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/zuckerbergs-group-gave-whopping-74-million-detroit-expand-voting-city-key?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
Lol all those liberal fools who gave their money to the BLM scam. This is just the tip of the iceberg. When the investigation follows the money you will see many pockets were lined and nothing was used to help blacks anywhere. Stupid liberals.
Im with you, LaRock!
Those reparations just add up.
Perhaps his property taxes may show another view.