َQatar adopts a new instrument of repression

Prolificsolns has revealed new details regarding the Twitter deal for American businessman Elon Musk, part of which is being funded by Qatar. The details centered on Doha’s goal of co-financing the global tweets site.

The article’s author, Donald Brammer, says that the answer may be simple and can be summarized in the fact that it is another huge deal, and that it has become a very important debate and topic because Musk’s purchase of the giant social networking platform Twitter can negatively affect freedom.

Fears are growing that Musk will stifle freedom of expression, yet everyone hopes that Elon Musk will deal with it impartially and fulfil his promise to respect freedom of expression.

On the other hand, Qatar is at the heart of Musk’s deal to buy Twitter with investments worth $375 million paid by Qatar Holding Company. Qatar is a well-known state for suppressing freedom of expression, and its presence in this transaction has only one logical explanation, which is the suppression of freedoms.

Qatar had suppressed the freedom of its people from Al-Murrah, who had taken part in demonstrations last summer to demand only the right to vote and stand for election and then face life sentences, only because they had expressed their opinion and demanded their rights.

Doha is also very interested in the global tweet site, even before it finances its purchase deal, employing an enormous number of electronic flies, strictly censoring anyone who tweets from within the Qatari territory, and anyone who tries to express his opinion if it is not in line with the Qatari regime’s policy.

The author of the article says that at some point, Qatar may try to put restrictions on Twitter, especially in their own country. This will reinforce restrictions already imposed on Twitter around the world, as Qatar can further censor the site, and therefore we will see further restrictions and stifling of freedoms.

On the other hand, Donald Brammer does not exclude Qatari willingness to invest and increase revenues by financing the Twitter purchase deal, but has focused on the point of suppressing freedoms as Qatar’s main target.

The author also predicts another possible scenario for Twitter’s future: that Iran, which gains influence through Qatar and its mediation in various international forums, may have control over this large platform, but what kind of investment will they make?

At least, they could be part of it, which is normal. While Twitter banned former U.S. President Donald Trump, prominent media personality Sean Hannity, critic Tucker Carlson and others, it allowed the Taliban to access it. 

Twitter allowed those we consider terrorists to continue to own a platform, and Twitter owners even allowed the ISIS leadership to have a platform on their site.

In fact, having banned a president and television producer because their opinions don’t like them and allowed terrorism to own platforms and tweet, there will be nothing to stop Iran from investing in Twitter with its ally Qatar as an important investor on the global site.

It is also expected that the Qatari and Iranian point of view will dominate the site’s publications and appear in a promoted way to the followers, but observers say that what Qatar and Iran want to show before the eyes of social media followers is not just a point of view, but a dedication to the terrorist agenda of both countries and an attempt to wage psychological war on Arab peoples even from inside their mobiles and devices that they use constantly.

Others say that Qatar, which assists Iran with its expansionist projects, will provide it with a great service in occupying even the virtual spaces of the Arab street.