(844) 627-8267 | Info@NationalCyberSecurity
(844) 627-8267 | Info@NationalCyberSecurity

In Elon’s Twitter Takeover Bid, Neocons Found An Invasion They Oppose | #socialmedia | #hacking | #aihp

Along with the news that mega-billionaire Elon Musk had made an offer to buy Twitter in full came the predictable screams from leftists and others who can’t bear the thought of a free-speech champion owning their No. 1 means of censoring political opponents (even after tut-tutting for years that private companies can do whatever they want).

Included in that group are the warmongers of the word, the chief of them being Washington Post opinion columnist and neocon Max Boot who wants you to please stop using that term. It seems like just yesterday that Boot was fist-pumping forever wars, supporting the deadly war in Libya, pushing for the United States to invade and occupy Iraq, and covering for President Biden calling for regime change in Russia.

Today, the very serious thinker had a public nervous breakdown about how “frightened” he is that Twitter could soon be controlled by Musk (something that’s already been characterized in fighting terms such as “invader.”)

“I am frightened by the impact on society and politics if Elon Musk acquires Twitter,” Boot hyperventilated. “He seems to believe that on social media anything goes. For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less.”

Just to clear things up, by “impact on society and politics,” Boot means “impact on election outcomes for Democrats.” By “if Elon Musk acquired Twitter,” he means “if Parag Agrawal no longer has the power to nuke political opponents.” By “anything goes,” he means “free speech.” And by “content moderation,” he means, “ideological censorship.”

Here’s the full translation: “I am frightened by the impact on election outcomes for Democrats if Parag Agrawal no longer has the power to nuke political opponents. Elon Musk seems to believe that on social media free speech is OK. For democracy to survive, we need more ideological censorship, not less.”

Boy, Boot is really against Musk’s invasion of Twitter. It’s actually the first time the neocon has ever opposed a full-scale takeover, which the Tesla CEO’s $43 billion offer would represent. Though I suppose it makes sense when you consider how peaceful and non-aggressive Musk’s paperwork proposal was and how smooth the deal will continue to be if Twitter actually sells instead of suicide-bombing itself.

Not that anyone has ever needed Boot’s endorsement (it sure didn’t help Hillary Clinton any!), but if Musk had wanted it, all he would have had to do was declare war on Twitter with a Silicon Valley ground invasion, carpet-bomb its headquarters, snipe some civilian families in the vicinity, and behead a few women in the street.

As The Federalist’s CEO Sean Davis said, “Boot only supports hostile takeovers with body counts. Peaceful negotiations with no loss of life bore him.”

No wonder Boot isn’t into the whole Twitter buy-out thing. Not only could it allow his opponents to say what was on their minds without fear of being whisked away to Twitter jail, but it would be just too peaceful of a takeover, what with all its negotiations and whatnot. Looks like the neocon finally found an invasion he can oppose. Historic!

Click Here For The Original Source.


National Cyber Security