Elon Musk Blames Twitter Collapse on Jews

[Phil1111 1,149]

Responsibility for mistakes is something republicans and Musk tend to avoid. Elon has laid the blame for the fall of Twitters value on the ADLElon Musk Blames Anti-Defamation League for Destroying Website He Ruined Himself

He placed the blame for "company’s current worth at roughly one-third the $44 billion Mr. Musk paid for it — on the ADL, saying that he was considering legal action against the ADL and signaling that he supported banning the organization from X."

Since Elon too over Twitter and rebranded it as "X" republicans , White Racists have taken over at least Elon gets his $8 a month from real users.

On a positive note at least it wasn't the Jewish space lasers.

[jakee 1,563]

As proved yet again, Elon Musk is a “free speech absolutist” right up until the point where he thinks that speech might have any impact on him. 

[winsor 236]

I briefly had a Twitter account on the advice of a Rabbi.  After rapidly coming to the conclusion that it was a waste of time, I cancelled without a moment's regret.

[ryoder 1,590]

I've heard the ADL forced Musk to buy Twitter for huge multiple of what it was really worth, by threatening to turn the Jewish Space Lasers on the Tesla factories.

[normiss 851]

9 minutes ago, ryoder said:

I've heard the ADL forced Musk to buy Twitter for huge multiple of what it was really worth, by threatening to turn the Jewish Space Lasers on the Tesla factories.

So THAT'S the source of them self igniting!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 hours ago, jakee said:

As proved yet again, Elon Musk is a “free speech absolutist” right up until the point where he thinks that speech might have any impact on him. 

So he is a libertarian. They all want to abolish regulations except for the regulations that are in their favour.

[normiss 851]

7 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

So he is a libertarian. They all want to abolish regulations except for the regulations that are in their favour.

He also appears to want to help Russia with their war efforts.

[billvon 3,070]

1 hour ago, normiss said:

He also appears to want to help Russia with their war efforts.

I'm sure the Jews can be blamed for that as well.  They're sneaky that way.

[billvon 3,070]

3 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Responsibility for mistakes is something republicans and Musk tend to avoid. Elon has laid the blame for the fall of Twitters value on the ADL.

From a Twitter exchange:

 

Other poster - "Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”
Musk - "Great point. A giant data dump would clear the air."

As long as, apparently, the data dump does not contain the position of his private jet.

[jakee 1,563]

On 9/11/2023 at 4:48 PM, normiss said:

He also appears to want to help Russia with their war efforts.

As weird and creepy and megalomaniacal and reactionary and generally unaware of other people’s humanity as he is, he might be getting an unfair rap on this one. Yes, refusing to open Starlink access around Crimea because of ‘escalation’ sucks. But he’s not doing anything different to western governments on that front. Almost all of them, and the US in particular, have slow rolled supply of long range weapons, and placed restrictions on how and where they can be used. The US is still withholding ATACAMS in part (probably) because they don’t to be involved in a bombardment of major Russian bases in Crimea. They absolutely refuse to let Ukraine deploy US supplied weapons against legitimate military targets inside Russia itself. 
 

So Musk is an easy target here because of his total dickishness and previous ‘peace plan’ nonsense, but he shouldn’t be a scapegoat for general NATO over-cautiousness.

[DougH 270]

The discussions that ADL was having with twitter started long before Elon decided to waste part of his fortune on buying it.

The ADL's goals here aren't the opposition of free speech, they are against the amplification of hate speech that calls for violence. 

Sensible people understand that you can't scream fire in crowded movie theater, and that it would be unreasonable for the movie theater management to give a megaphone to the person who was actively doing that.

If Elon doesn't want advertisers to run for their lives he should probably stop making X look like the digital version of a Mad Max dystopian hell scape. 

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by DougH

[JoeWeber 2,823]

55 minutes ago, jakee said:

But he’s not doing anything different to western governments on that front

He's not a government western or not and that is the sole issue. Citizens should not be using incredible wealth to project power into a war without expecting that they themselves become a target.

Edited September 12, 2023 by JoeWeber

[wmw999 2,534]

6 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

He's not a government western or not and that is the sole issue. Citizens should not be using incredible wealth to project power into a war without expecting that they themselves become a target.

Exactly. 

Wendy P.

[jakee 1,563]

15 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

He's not a government western or not and that is the sole issue. Citizens should not be using incredible wealth to project power into a war without expecting that they themselves become a target.

A littl clarity here - do you want Musk to stop helping Ukraine or do you want the DoD to nationalise Starlink?

[jakee 1,563]

10 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Exactly. 

Wendy P.

Same question to you.

[JoeWeber 2,823]

Just now, jakee said:

A littl clarity here - do you want Musk to stop helping Ukraine or do you want the DoD to nationalise Starlink?

Straw man argument. I think people with enormous wealth like Musk, but not limited to Musk, shouldn't be making decisions that might affect the outcome of a battle or conflict in a war zone just because he can afford to. How we get that genie back in the bottle given our current political situation is beyond my ken.

[jakee 1,563]

21 minutes ago, DougH said:

If Elon doesn't want advertisers to run for their lives he should probably stop making X look like the digital version of a Mad Max dystopian hell scape. 

Yep, Musk's claim that the majority of advertisers left because of the ADL's statement really doesn't pass the sniff test. It would be hilarious to seem him try and prove that, and have all those companies say 'no, we left because we saw it was full of Nazis, not because they said it was'.

[jakee 1,563]

Just now, JoeWeber said:

Straw man argument. 

Bullshit. See below.

Quote

I think people with enormous wealth like Musk, but not limited to Musk, shouldn't be making decisions that might affect the outcome of a battle or conflict in a war zone just because he can afford to. 

So to be absolutely clear - you're saying he shouldn't have decided to provide Starlink to Ukraine in the early days of the war and he shouldn't be continuing to help them now?

[JoeWeber 2,823]

33 minutes ago, jakee said:

Bullshit. See below.

So to be absolutely clear - you're saying he shouldn't have decided to provide Starlink to Ukraine in the early days of the war and he shouldn't be continuing to help them now?

No, I’m thinking that weapons of war, which in this case Starlink is, shouldn’t be treated like support by an NGO. Probably we should have told Musk DoD would contract and pay for the service.

[jakee 1,563]

6 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

No, I’m thinking that weapons of war, which in this case Starlink is, shouldn’t be treated like support by an NGO. Probably we should have told Musk DoD would contract and pay for the service.

That has nothing, nothing, to do with what you were just saying. Probably that should have happened - but it didn’t. The government did not step in and make anything happen.

So, in the real world of situations that actually existed should Musk have 1) made a decision to affect the outcome of a conflict and provide Starlink to Ukraine or should he have 2) not helped?

[JoeWeber 2,823]

1 hour ago, jakee said:

That has nothing, nothing, to do with what you were just saying. Probably that should have happened - but it didn’t. The government did not step in and make anything happen.

So, in the real world of situations that actually existed should Musk have 1) made a decision to affect the outcome of a conflict and provide Starlink to Ukraine or should he have 2) not helped?

Goodbye, jakee.

[Phil1111 1,149]

3 hours ago, jakee said:

As weird and creepy and megalomaniacal and reactionary and generally unaware of other people’s humanity as he is, he might be getting an unfair rap on this one. Yes, refusing to open Starlink access around Crimea because of ‘escalation’ sucks. But he’s not doing anything different to western governments on that front. Almost all of them, and the US in particular, have slow rolled supply of long range weapons, and placed restrictions on how and where they can be used. The US is still withholding ATACAMS in part (probably) because they don’t to be involved in a bombardment of major Russian bases in Crimea. They absolutely refuse to let Ukraine deploy US supplied weapons against legitimate military targets inside Russia itself. 
 

So Musk is an easy target here because of his total dickishness and previous ‘peace plan’ nonsense, but he shouldn’t be a scapegoat for general NATO over-cautiousness.

Impulsive and impetuous are common terms used to describe Musk. He previously supplied support for free and is now under contract with the Department of Defense paying the Starlink bills. Evidently the contract was not entirely clear about Musk having any say in limiting service. Thats likely to be further defined in future contracts.

The idea that Musk or anyone else could become a Wagner Lite for profit needs to be clear and defined. But then FOX has been in a propaganda war for decades without arising concerns.

[jakee 1,563]

16 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Goodbye, jakee.

What a surprise, you twist and turn and refuse to actually think about what you're saying. I'd remind you tat on our last Ukraine disagreement you argued for about 6 months before finally coming around and agreeing with what I'd been saying all along. Maybe you'll do better this time.

[jakee 1,563]

14 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Impulsive and impetuous are common terms used to describe Musk. He previously supplied support for free and is now under contract with the Department of Defense paying the Starlink bills. Evidently the contract was not entirely clear about Musk having any say in limiting service. Thats likely to be further defined in future contracts.

Two points - first, by all accounts the US and Europe started paying for Ukraine's Starlink this year. The incident in question was last year. Like most things, contracts generally go forwards in time, not back.

Second, what makes you think the DoD would have done anything different? Ukraine is begging the US for their stockpiles of weapons that could let them bombard Crimea, the DoD continues to refuse. Ukraine asked Musk to enable Starlink for an attack on Sevastopol, Musk refused. What's the difference?

To be clear, I think they're both wrong in refusing more help with offensive operations. But it doesn't make sense to focus all the outrage on the man child, he isn't the one whose decisions are doing the most damage.

[wmw999 2,534]

I think Joe was focusing more on a system that allows individuals to have so much power extra-legally. Not illegally, just extra-legally. I don't have an idea of how to fix it either, especially in the current global climate. But while John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and their likes molded America in the late 19th century and into the 20th, and Henry Ford tried somewhat in the 20th, that era is not seen as a halcyon era of development. Because they drove the country as they saw fit. And populism rose in America in the late 19th century, just as it did in the Depression, and is rising again now.

Maybe that really obvious inequality, which Musk and Bezos particularly just love flaunting, isn't just the reward for hard work.

Wendy P.