Bridget Johnson, who specializes in covering issues related to terrorism, was reportedly suspended from Twitter not for posting an offensive tweet or for arguing with anyone, but just because – as Twitter has offered Johnson no explanation for this sudden act of censorship. It has been over a week, in fact, since Johnson was last able to access her Twitter account, and many of her followers and supporters are demanding answers.
As explained in Twitter's Help Center, there are only two types of suspension that the social media giant imposes on its users. One is a "temporary timeout" that results in a user's account being reinstated rather quickly, usually within just a few hours. The second type of suspensions is more "permanent," and is considered to be a much more serious mode of action.
By all appearances, Johnson's Twitter account was subjected to the latter form of suspension, which is something of an anomaly as Johnson has always acted professionally and with dignity while using her Twitter account. She has furthermore not been observed engaging in abusive or otherwise unacceptable behavior, which begs the question as to why she was apparently targeted for removal.
"While many Twitter users engage in abusive behavior on the platform, Bridget does no," writes colleague Paula Bolyard for PJMedia.com.
"Nor does she brawl with other users or engage in flame wars. She's a veteran journalist who, prior to joining the PJM team, worked at The Hill, the Rocky Mountain News, and the Los Angeles Daily News. She is an NPR contributor and has also been published at USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, Politico, the New York Daily News, The Jerusalem Post, the New York Observer, The Washington Times, and RealClearWorld. Bridget is a respected terror analyst and is known for her fact-based, impartial reporting."
The technocracy's sinister crusade against free speech strikes again
A quick perusal of Twitter's terms of service regarding all of the potential causes for account suspension reveals that, once again, the social media platform is in violation of its own guidelines. The only reasons given as to why Twitter might suspend an account permanently is if they appear "spammy" or fake, if they pose a security risk, or if they include "abusive tweets or behavior."
An archived view of Johnson's Twitter account activity shows none of the above – unless, of course, Twitter has once again decided to arbitrarily apply its own definitions of "abusive" to condemn content that its employees or shareholders (which include Saudi leaders like Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz Alsaud, who was recently arrested) find objectionable or that go against their personal agendas.
This seems to be the only possibility, in this case, as to why Johnson's account was suspended. Somebody didn't like what she had to say, so they targeted her account for removal with no explanation as to why. And as of this writing, she personally has yet to receive a response from Twitter providing any input on the matter.
As we reported earlier in the year, Twitter, along with other social media giants like Facebook and Google, decided to implement new free speech restrictions to silence users presenting politically "incorrect" views. Following Twitter's implementation of this policy, the company had this to say in apparent contradiction of what it's actually doing in reality:
"We stand for freedom of expression and people being able to see all sides of any topic. That's put in jeopardy when abuse and harassment stifle and silence those voices. We won't tolerate it and we’re launching new efforts to stop it."
Discover more news coverage of the dangerous CULT of the Left at LeftCult.com.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
