Twitter bows to threats from Congress and finally bans Hamas and Hezb'allah

Twitter sanctimoniously announced this week that it suspended the accounts of Hamas and Hezb'allah.  "There is no place on Twitter for illegal terrorist organizations and violent extremist groups," said Twitter's spokesperson.

Really?  Then why did it take until November 2019 for Twitter to notice that Hamas and Hezb'allah are illegal and violent?  Why did it take threats from four congressmen to force Twitter to ban two of the most infamous terrorist organizations on the planet? 

Hamas and Hezb'allah are two Iran-proxy terrorist groups that have killed Americans, murdered Jews, bombed Israeli civilians, tyrannized normal Muslim citizens, coerced children to become suicide-bombers,  and worked night and day to destroy Israel.

Twitter never noticed until November 1, 2019?

Twitter has no trouble noticing and banning all sorts of speech its woke employees don't like.  They suspended Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell for posting the vicious attacks of woke activists harassing his family; Trump's favorite meme-maker, Carpe Donktum; a GOP Senate candidate in Missouri; conservative commentators across the web; the producer of the Ben Shapiro Show (his sin was a joke about Brussels sprouts); and even an Ocasio-Cortez parody.

But for years, Hamas and Hezb'allah had a place on Twitter to spread their vile teachings and recruit killers.

This stopped only because four congressmen threatened Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey with being hauled before Congress to explain why Twitter was flouting U.S. law by supporting designated terrorist organizations.

Twitter did not comply without a fight.  The first response was a statement from Twitter's director of public policy and philanthropy that Twitter "draws a distinction between the political and military factions of these organizations" and would not suspend the accounts.  Twitter, the congressmen were told, bases its decisions on its "own violent extremist group criteria."  The Twitter spokesperson boasted that the company's decisions were "additionally informed by national and international terrorism designations," not by United States' designations. 

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.Y.), Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), Max Rose (D-N.Y.), and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) were having none of that nonsense.  They wrote CEO Dorsey:

If you believe that Twitter is better at determining violent extremist content than the United States Government's interagency process, then we urge you to come testify before Congress to explain your own process and how it differs from that of the State and Treasury Departments.

Twitter sanctimoniously announced this week that it suspended the accounts of Hamas and Hezb'allah.  "There is no place on Twitter for illegal terrorist organizations and violent extremist groups," said Twitter's spokesperson.

Really?  Then why did it take until November 2019 for Twitter to notice that Hamas and Hezb'allah are illegal and violent?  Why did it take threats from four congressmen to force Twitter to ban two of the most infamous terrorist organizations on the planet? 

Hamas and Hezb'allah are two Iran-proxy terrorist groups that have killed Americans, murdered Jews, bombed Israeli civilians, tyrannized normal Muslim citizens, coerced children to become suicide-bombers,  and worked night and day to destroy Israel.

Twitter never noticed until November 1, 2019?

Twitter has no trouble noticing and banning all sorts of speech its woke employees don't like.  They suspended Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell for posting the vicious attacks of woke activists harassing his family; Trump's favorite meme-maker, Carpe Donktum; a GOP Senate candidate in Missouri; conservative commentators across the web; the producer of the Ben Shapiro Show (his sin was a joke about Brussels sprouts); and even an Ocasio-Cortez parody.

But for years, Hamas and Hezb'allah had a place on Twitter to spread their vile teachings and recruit killers.

This stopped only because four congressmen threatened Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey with being hauled before Congress to explain why Twitter was flouting U.S. law by supporting designated terrorist organizations.

Twitter did not comply without a fight.  The first response was a statement from Twitter's director of public policy and philanthropy that Twitter "draws a distinction between the political and military factions of these organizations" and would not suspend the accounts.  Twitter, the congressmen were told, bases its decisions on its "own violent extremist group criteria."  The Twitter spokesperson boasted that the company's decisions were "additionally informed by national and international terrorism designations," not by United States' designations. 

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.Y.), Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), Max Rose (D-N.Y.), and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) were having none of that nonsense.  They wrote CEO Dorsey:

If you believe that Twitter is better at determining violent extremist content than the United States Government's interagency process, then we urge you to come testify before Congress to explain your own process and how it differs from that of the State and Treasury Departments.