Only Twitter says it would refuse to help build Muslim registry

[JA]

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/02/of-8-tech-companies-only-twitter-says-it-would-refuse-to-help-build-muslim-registry-for-trump/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[The Other Castro]

Maybe these companies don't want to unnecessarily wade into politics on the basis of a hypothetical question.

[JA]

Maybe these companies don't want to unnecessarily wade into politics on the basis of a hypothetical question.

Why not simply answer with a "no"? They had to know this would ultimately become part of a news piece and that, simply by being asked that question, they were already brought into a heated political issue. By remaining silent they've already raised unnecessary concern, unless they are actually willing to consider participating.

[dead0man]

Do you really think Google and Apple and the others would agree to this, no fight, no complaints, no nothing?  They have Muslims working for them ya know.  They enjoy selling things to Muslims too, and to people that don't think Muslims should be put on a registry (which would be the majority of Americans).  Not answering the hypothetical is the "safe" answer, and the one their lawyers no doubt suggested.  I can't say specifically why they didn't answer, but not answering clearly isn't secret code for an affirmative answer.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Maybe these companies don't want to unnecessarily wade into politics on the basis of a hypothetical question.

this is about human rights, not politics

[The Other Castro]

Maybe these companies don't want to unnecessarily wade into politics on the basis of a hypothetical question.

this is about human rights, not politics

But a company responding to such a request could have political ramifications, and such consequences aren't always in the best interest of the company. Regardless of the issue, there has been no serious proposal of such a registry, and until that time private organisations have every right to act in the best interest of themselves.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

anyways i think the more likely reason most of these companies didn't respond is because nobody takes the intercept seriously

[Enduro]

Good.

[Santander]

Twitter only says no because they're failing and they want attention.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Twitter only says no because they're failing and they want attention.

Do you support a national Muslim registry?

[Alcon]

It's pretty standard practice for companies to not comment on things that could get them dragged into political fights.  When companies do comment on this sort of thing, it's generally a concerted and planned response that multiple people sign off on (as an ongoing policy), not an off-the-cuff response to a random email inquiry.  You could complain that they should respond this time because it's an "easy" response, but consider that this would mean that every time they don't comment, they're saying it's not an easy response.

[Meclazine for Israel]

No comment.

[The_Doctor]

Twitter only says no because they're failing and they want attention.

Do you support a national Muslim registry?

He's a Trump voter.  Of course he does.  “MUSLIMS ARE COMING TO KILL US ALL!!!!! 11111”

[wolfsblood07]

The registry will help us find terrorists.  And it will dissuade terrorists from coming here.  Too bad it wasn't started in the 90s.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The registry will help us find terrorists.  And it will dissuade terrorists from coming here.  Too bad it wasn't started in the 90s.

I doubt it would have helped us with terrorists such Timothy McVeigh, Dylann Roof, Scott Roeder, Theodore Kaczynski, Wade Michael Page, etc. That's the primary problem with indiscriminate profiling. It causes law enforcement to focus time and effort one factor, giving an easier chance for criminals who don't fit the profile of the targeted group to do their worst.