James Woods Was Censored On Twitter For Being Conservative – Now He’s Making Them REGRET It!

29 Dec, 2016 by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Print this article Font size -16+

James Woods is one of the very few vocal conservative celebrities out there. He’s witty and articulate and he can slice you to ribbons in one tweet. I enjoy his blunt opinions immensely. Not long ago, Twitter decided in their biased wisdom to start purging accounts that they considered ‘Alt-Right’. They labeled a bunch of conservative pundits as such and banned them… simply because they did not like their political opinion. Ten days after Donald Trump won the presidency, James Woods left Twitter because of this witch hunt. Now, he’s back and they ain’t seen nothing yet.

Woods is about as far as you can possibly get from being a wallflower. It’s simply not in his nature to not speak out. Where some cower in fear because of what others think or because they don’t want to be blacklisted, Woods treads fearlessly, calling it like he sees it. And it is glorious. In the end, censorship never works. It merely empowers those with a louder voice and Woods is definitely one of those individuals.

From BizPac Review:

Conservative actor James Woods has returned to Twitter with a scathing blog post that detailed the reason he originally left the platform.

“Twitter is a dangerous place for the faint of heart,” he admitted. “Gang thuggery can devastate a delicate sensibility and even damage professional reputations beyond repair.”

..

… Twitter and other huge corporate social media “portals” basically enjoy immunity from litigation for republishing defamatory comments made by their users. The argument is quite simple. In order to preserve the hallowed American right of free speech, having to “vet” every sentiment expressed by every user, from the POTUS down to the “pajama boy” hurling grenades from his mommy’s rumpus room, would place an undue burden on these “outlets of free expression.” Twitter, FaceBook, etc. in turn are then obligated by law to remain objective providers of free speech and not purveyors of news. News providers are explicitly NOT protected in this way. News organizations are expected to be objective and apolitical in their news reportage, yet ironically granted the luxury of editorial opinion, where expressly identified as such (editorial pages, commentary pieces). Now the Rachel Maddows of this arena, for example, while good for a chuckle, clearly disappoint by these standards to an alarming degree. They are actually bitter entertainers masquerading as journalists, and are recognized as such by all but their most ardent and slavish acolytes. Germane to this discussion are actual purveyors of journalistic “fact,” as responsible as they can reasonably be. If they mess up or fail in their due diligence, they often end their careers in disgrace (Dan Rather comes to mind as a biased embarrassment even Hollywood couldn’t resuscitate).

I’ve always loved the guy as an actor, but he has a real talent for slicing through all the bull crap and telling it like it is. His scathing blog post concerning Twitter is a must read. Twitter and Facebook both seem to be continually confused over what free speech is and what they should police and what they shouldn’t. They are morally conflicted with fascist overtones.

“I now find Twitter’s latest jihad against those who don’t tow the political line more dangerous by far,” he said, noting that he took a case to court and won after a Twitter user called him a “cocaine addict.” And I would agree. I certainly don’t agree with many in the Alt-Right movement. But I do believe in free speech. Twitter and Facebook are incapable of being unbiased and deeming what is and what isn’t acceptable. They also are easily manipulated by whoever is in power at the time and by liberal power mongers who wish to silence others.

“Deciding that thousands of their clients’ opinions are not to Twitter’s political taste, they banged their corporate noggins together and virtually silenced those voices by terminating the “offending” accounts permanently,” he wrote. If Twitter keeps it up, they will eventually find themselves replaced as a social media outlet by another that is freer and less oppressive. James Woods is one of the guardians of free speech out there… and I am glad to see him back.