Twitter banned the US president and went out of their way to clarify they are not banning the Taliban.

What I especially detest is the implication that if you disagree with Twitter's banning Trump, then you must be a Trump supporter. It's the epitome of the "first they came for X" strategy. I can disagree with Trump, and still also disagree with the precedent of arbitrarily banning a political figure for much less than other figures and groups are allowed to get away with.

And what exactly did he post on Twitter to 'try to overthrow the country'?

I'm not a Trump supporter in the slightest – I think he's a ridiculous buffoon – but I loathe even more the politicisation of truth, and the idea that anything goes, provided it attacks the right people.

What you're saying is not true. That shouldn't be a political statement.

Really. I am not a trump fan but this is completely bolocks. Yeah, good for political discourse, but not something reasonable people really believe. Don’t live in America though, maybe I am wrong.

Likewise, I'm also not a Trump fan and also not American (I'm British), but the American centre-left perspective on the Jan 6 riots is utterly ridiculous. It's yet more predictable histrionics from the bored suburban housewives who - deeply insultingly - arrogate to call themselves the #Resistance, and other such privileged bollocks.

There is no evidence whatever that it was an effort to take over the country - much less that Trump, or anyone beyond possibly a couple of wingnut far-right House reps, conspired to bring it about. It was some angry hicks going on a rumpus.

As a side note, it's disturbing to see that 'the paranoid style in American politics' now extends to the (centre-centre-)Left as well as the Right. First it was the ludicrous fact-free conspiracism about Russia conniving to install Trump as President; now it's the (transitively contradictory) theory that Trump, unable to cheat the election, tried to bring about a coup - not via the enormous tools at his disposal as President, but by supposedly encouraging some morons in fancy dress to storm the Capitol building and then aimlessly wander around stealing petty artefacts.

I suppose the paranoid style is simply a response by the dispossessed - but this is the first time that the rich and comfortable suburban centre has experienced being dispossessed.

Well, its not like the Taliban ever supported an insurrection.

It's ridiculous that this utterly obvious joke is being downvoted. I'm amazed -- and I say this kindly, as someone with Asperger's -- at the aggregate autism level on this site.

Please don't post name-calling putdowns to HN. Adding the word 'kindly' doesn't make something kindly, and it's against several of site guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

That's fair enough - my bad. I wouldn't perceive it as an insult, but I can see that it's widely treated as such.

I call being censored like that "got twittered". It'll be bad for Twitter when that descriptor becomes commonly used.

Just call it being harmonized. That's what the Chinese have been calling it for years. Twitter is part of the same kind of apparatus in the US.

Why would you be surprised that an account that was accused of being part of a content system spreading misinformation would be suspended?

A person can say what they want but no-one is forced to listen to it or help promote it.

As well, if this account was part of a system of bots and fake accounts that were spreading a particular message isn't that something that you want to see removed from a social media platform?

Isn't authentic information and material important?