There Is A Lot More to Hostile Takeovers Than Meets the Eye

Editor's note: This is the same Neocon billionaire who was outsourcing jobs to Israel. Has anyone ever thought seriously why this was being done and what Singer's hostile takeover of Twitter was meant to ultimately achieve? Was it meant to takeover Twitter in order to censor all discussion and dialogue concerning Israel and Jewish power? When Singer took over he appointed the Jewish Jesse Cohn to the board of Twitter. How did Singer find Parag Agrawal to replace Dorsey as CEO of Twitter? Agrawal's resume must have met Singer's requirements: Apparently, "Agrawal thinks all whites are racists." Agrawal himself as an immigrant import form India is another servitor of empire. A Jewish Neocon vulture capitalist does a hostile takeover of Twitter then appoints the Jewish Jesse Cohn to the board while the Jewish Yoel Roth was at Twitter (forced to leave because of threats) most likely shutting down any and all criticism of Israel and Jewish power. It is not that complicated to figure out: You do not have free speech when it comes to Jewish run operations and Israel. Since Singer's Elliot Management took over Twitter did Twitter turn to Israel tech firms?

How Neocon Billionaire Paul Singer Is Driving the Outsourcing of US Tech Jobs to Israel

________

Source: InformationLiberation

Jack Dorsey Reveals He Gave Up Fight Against Censorship Due to Paul Singer's Hostile Takeover of Twitter in 2020

By Chris Menahan | December 15, 2022

Twitter founder Jack Dorsey revealed Tuesday that he gave up fighting against censorship in early 2020 after an "activist" investor -- almost certainly billionaire vulture capitalist Paul Singer -- started gobbling up Twitter shares in a bid to oust him as CEO.

Singer, the founder of Elliott Investment Management, is a pro-Israel megadonor to the GOP who funded the Steele dossier and bought off Republican representatives to get them to surrender to the LGBT agenda.

He purchased a massive stake in Twitter in 2020 for at least $387 million, installed Elliott partner Jesse Cohn on Twitter's board and successfully lobbied to have Dorsey booted as the CEO of his own company and replaced with the far worse puppet Parag Agrawal.

Dorsey expressed his regrets in a statement on his blog on Tuesday:

There's a lot of conversation around the #TwitterFiles. Here's my take, and thoughts on how to fix the issues identified.

I'll start with the principles I've come to believe...based on everything I've learned and experienced through my past actions as a Twitter co-founder and lead:

1. Social media must be resilient to corporate and government control.

2. Only the original author may remove content they produce.

3. Moderation is best implemented by algorithmic choice.

The Twitter when I led it and the Twitter of today do not meet any of these principles. This is my fault alone, as I completely gave up pushing for them when an activist entered our stock in 2020. I no longer had hope of achieving any of it as a public company with no defense mechanisms (lack of dual-class shares being a key one). I planned my exit at that moment knowing I was no longer right for the company.

The biggest mistake I made was continuing to invest in building tools for us to manage the public conversation, versus building tools for the people using Twitter to easily manage it for themselves. This burdened the company with too much power, and opened us to significant outside pressure (such as advertising budgets). I generally think companies have become far too powerful, and that became completely clear to me with our suspension of Trump's account. As I've said before, we did the right thing for the public company business at the time, but the wrong thing for the internet and society.

The "Twitter Files" suggest Dorsey resigned himself to his fate and let Vijaya Gadde, Yoel Roth and then-COO Parag Agrawal run the show.

Please go to InformationLiberation to continue reading.

________   


No one should tolerate hatred anywhere including on Twitter. Rigorous and thorough discussion should take precedent but when you attempt to start a discourse you are immediately censored for even broaching the Jewish subject. You can rage against blacks and whites but you are forbidden from critiquing Jewish power. The usual shibboleths are dragged out to pummel to death anyone who challenges the holocaust, Jewish power, Judaism and Israel. Does Twitter use Israeli tech firms to censor Twitter? If anyone figures out how "algorithms promote antisemitism" on social media, by all means blog about it in detail.

Are algorithms fueling antisemitism on social media?

Note: Speech protected under articles 18 & 19 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights