I cannot argue about the right of a company to ban someone they don't like, just don't take a moral high ground saying it is "hate speech".
— In the Dankula case, for example, not only did the police arrest him when no complaints were made against the video, the judges of the high court declared that ‘context was irrelevant’ and that his actions were ‘grossly offensive’ despite said context proving that —
-
-
— It was the other way around. As such, hate speech IS subjective. Out of all the social media sites that shut him down, only ONE got rid of him on grounds of hate speech, which means it isn’t a universal reason.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
