DHS Creating "Disinformation Governance Board"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's astounding how the far right has hamstrung and neutered our nation's ability to counter foreign psyops and disinfo just because they are butthurt over being fact checked online.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/gop-muzzled-quiet-coalition-fought-foreign-propaganda-rcna103373

It's a fact that COVID did not leak from a Chinese lab, right?

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

DP.
Please. The government should not be in the business of restricting the speech of others UNLESS it is threatening or dangerous. Expressing ones opinion on vaccines and the efficacy of them is NOT a reason to restrict speech.
BTW - I have believed all along that the virus originated in a lab and I don't buy into the other crap you wrote - except that the vaccine is not necessary for healthy children. RSV is much, much more dangerous to children. Covid - not so much.
I also have believed from the start that masks don't really work at containing the virus - which turns out to be true.
And, then there is that "6 feet" rule which was also a bunch of bunk.
All kinds of information has been censored by the govt which has turned out to be true. They need to stay out of the business of restricting speech since it is - you know - against the law.

Why don’t you ask all the Asian Americans who got physically assaulted if that speech was dangerous or not.

You do understand that Trump was in charge at that time. If the government could censor the media, it would have been official government policy that COVID was of Chinese origin. Any contrary opinion would have been censored as disinformation.

But covid did originate in China.

You had no evidence of a lab leak when you started pushing that conspiracy theory. Refer back to the response above:

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

conspiracy theories are protected by the first amendment, babe.

Not when they harm people.

And why is it SO DAMN IMPORTANT for you people to constantly, willfully spread vicious, harmful and destructive lies? Why do you insist on being so vile and destructive?

The problem is that the government should not be censoring information or opinions.
The other issue is that much of what has been censored has been proven true. And, it was censored at the behest of our government.
And, it wasn't JUST about Covid.

Get off your dishonest high horse. FAR more of the COVID BS was proven FALSE than was proven true. And that continues to be the case with much of what comes from toxic pundits and politicians.

The bigger problem is that we have far too many dishonest and toxic people in our society who have nothing positive to offer, so instead they try to drag everyone else down and destroy them with their lies rather than trying to be more positive, constructive and productive.

I would argue with your first statement.
But, even if it were true...... the government has NO AUTHORITY to censor the speech. NONE.

There is something to your last statement.... I remember what happened to the Covington Catholic kids a few years back when the left tried to smear them with lies. It was horrendous.

Sorry but that is absolutely false. You absolutely WILL be censored and even arrested for many forms of "speech" - in many forms as already described by people upthread. If you sell a product as a remedy you absolutely can be told to remove false or unproven medical claims about it, as an example. Or, Stolen Valor laws regarding wearing a military uniform when you did not serve, or military medals you did not earn. Or impersonating a police officer. You absolutely will be told to stop, and it's entirely likely you may be arrested as well. The government does indeed have such authority.

What do all of your examples have in common? They are regulated by the government. Medications- FDA, Military uniform - government. Police- also government. Saying you are a doctor, or police is still covered (Halloween costume) as long as you do not act on it.

Actions are not speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Covid truths" like microchips and mind control 😆

The PP who thinks she's on the righteous side of truth and justice for continually yammering on about "yabut covid came from China" sounds like a master of the obvious but an absolute idiot.

You know damn well that very few people bought into the microchips or mind control (that is a new one to me).

We do know that, among other things, Covid likely came from a lab; having the vaccine does not prevent one from spreading the virus; masks are not effective in stopping the spread of Covid; Hydroxychloroquine is associated with lower Covid mortality in a recent French study; there are side effects associated with the vaccine - myocarditis and irregular menstrual bleeding being just two; and the laptop does belong to Hunter Biden.

Many of the statements above were censored on social media - and in media in general.

Polling shows 70% of Republicans believe the "election was stolen" LIE.

It's a LIE. And it was directly responsible for the violence of J6. It was a violent, destructive lie that got people killed.

Stop with your LIES that "very few people believe that stuff."

Stop pretending that it's all free fair game to tell whatever lies you like no matter the consequences. You are part of the problem.

So, claiming that the election was stolen or illegitimate is speech that should be censored? Is that what you are saying?

In the case of the Big Steal lie, J6 happened and people died because of it. I think the main figures who promoted the lie should be punished, should be made to publicly retract their lies and apologize to America for them. There absolutely do need to be consequences.

The likelihood of that happening is up there with democrats acknowledging and apologizing for the lies that kept schools closed too long. Or allowing protesters to group together outside, but not kids on playgrounds or basketball courts.
Not happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's astounding how the far right has hamstrung and neutered our nation's ability to counter foreign psyops and disinfo just because they are butthurt over being fact checked online.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/gop-muzzled-quiet-coalition-fought-foreign-propaganda-rcna103373

It's a fact that COVID did not leak from a Chinese lab, right?

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

DP.
Please. The government should not be in the business of restricting the speech of others UNLESS it is threatening or dangerous. Expressing ones opinion on vaccines and the efficacy of them is NOT a reason to restrict speech.
BTW - I have believed all along that the virus originated in a lab and I don't buy into the other crap you wrote - except that the vaccine is not necessary for healthy children. RSV is much, much more dangerous to children. Covid - not so much.
I also have believed from the start that masks don't really work at containing the virus - which turns out to be true.
And, then there is that "6 feet" rule which was also a bunch of bunk.
All kinds of information has been censored by the govt which has turned out to be true. They need to stay out of the business of restricting speech since it is - you know - against the law.

Why don’t you ask all the Asian Americans who got physically assaulted if that speech was dangerous or not.

You do understand that Trump was in charge at that time. If the government could censor the media, it would have been official government policy that COVID was of Chinese origin. Any contrary opinion would have been censored as disinformation.

But covid did originate in China.

You had no evidence of a lab leak when you started pushing that conspiracy theory. Refer back to the response above:

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

conspiracy theories are protected by the first amendment, babe.

Not when they harm people.

And why is it SO DAMN IMPORTANT for you people to constantly, willfully spread vicious, harmful and destructive lies? Why do you insist on being so vile and destructive?

The problem is that the government should not be censoring information or opinions.
The other issue is that much of what has been censored has been proven true. And, it was censored at the behest of our government.
And, it wasn't JUST about Covid.

Get off your dishonest high horse. FAR more of the COVID BS was proven FALSE than was proven true. And that continues to be the case with much of what comes from toxic pundits and politicians.

The bigger problem is that we have far too many dishonest and toxic people in our society who have nothing positive to offer, so instead they try to drag everyone else down and destroy them with their lies rather than trying to be more positive, constructive and productive.

I would argue with your first statement.
But, even if it were true...... the government has NO AUTHORITY to censor the speech. NONE.

There is something to your last statement.... I remember what happened to the Covington Catholic kids a few years back when the left tried to smear them with lies. It was horrendous.

Sorry but that is absolutely false. You absolutely WILL be censored and even arrested for many forms of "speech" - in many forms as already described by people upthread. If you sell a product as a remedy you absolutely can be told to remove false or unproven medical claims about it, as an example. Or, Stolen Valor laws regarding wearing a military uniform when you did not serve, or military medals you did not earn. Or impersonating a police officer. You absolutely will be told to stop, and it's entirely likely you may be arrested as well. The government does indeed have such authority.

the government does not have the authority to censor what it deems “lies” on the internet. period. please cite the case law you believe supports that. ps the stolen valor law was overturned.

The government has the authority to advise a business that there are malign foreign actors flooding their business with lies. And the business has the right to choose to censor those lies.

yes well, this is the factual question in the actual legal case - whether the government was “just” trying to influence the media (legitimate government speech) or acting as a censor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's astounding how the far right has hamstrung and neutered our nation's ability to counter foreign psyops and disinfo just because they are butthurt over being fact checked online.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/gop-muzzled-quiet-coalition-fought-foreign-propaganda-rcna103373

It's a fact that COVID did not leak from a Chinese lab, right?

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

DP.
Please. The government should not be in the business of restricting the speech of others UNLESS it is threatening or dangerous. Expressing ones opinion on vaccines and the efficacy of them is NOT a reason to restrict speech.
BTW - I have believed all along that the virus originated in a lab and I don't buy into the other crap you wrote - except that the vaccine is not necessary for healthy children. RSV is much, much more dangerous to children. Covid - not so much.
I also have believed from the start that masks don't really work at containing the virus - which turns out to be true.
And, then there is that "6 feet" rule which was also a bunch of bunk.
All kinds of information has been censored by the govt which has turned out to be true. They need to stay out of the business of restricting speech since it is - you know - against the law.

Why don’t you ask all the Asian Americans who got physically assaulted if that speech was dangerous or not.

You do understand that Trump was in charge at that time. If the government could censor the media, it would have been official government policy that COVID was of Chinese origin. Any contrary opinion would have been censored as disinformation.

But covid did originate in China.

You had no evidence of a lab leak when you started pushing that conspiracy theory. Refer back to the response above:

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

conspiracy theories are protected by the first amendment, babe.

Not when they harm people.

And why is it SO DAMN IMPORTANT for you people to constantly, willfully spread vicious, harmful and destructive lies? Why do you insist on being so vile and destructive?

The problem is that the government should not be censoring information or opinions.
The other issue is that much of what has been censored has been proven true. And, it was censored at the behest of our government.
And, it wasn't JUST about Covid.

Get off your dishonest high horse. FAR more of the COVID BS was proven FALSE than was proven true. And that continues to be the case with much of what comes from toxic pundits and politicians.

The bigger problem is that we have far too many dishonest and toxic people in our society who have nothing positive to offer, so instead they try to drag everyone else down and destroy them with their lies rather than trying to be more positive, constructive and productive.

I would argue with your first statement.
But, even if it were true...... the government has NO AUTHORITY to censor the speech. NONE.

There is something to your last statement.... I remember what happened to the Covington Catholic kids a few years back when the left tried to smear them with lies. It was horrendous.

Sorry but that is absolutely false. You absolutely WILL be censored and even arrested for many forms of "speech" - in many forms as already described by people upthread. If you sell a product as a remedy you absolutely can be told to remove false or unproven medical claims about it, as an example. Or, Stolen Valor laws regarding wearing a military uniform when you did not serve, or military medals you did not earn. Or impersonating a police officer. You absolutely will be told to stop, and it's entirely likely you may be arrested as well. The government does indeed have such authority.

the government does not have the authority to censor what it deems “lies” on the internet. period. please cite the case law you believe supports that. ps the stolen valor law was overturned.

The government has the authority to advise a business that there are malign foreign actors flooding their business with lies. And the business has the right to choose to censor those lies.

yes well, this is the factual question in the actual legal case - whether the government was “just” trying to influence the media (legitimate government speech) or acting as a censor.

Precisely, so anyone who’s still talking about having a first amendment right to do whatever they want on social media is wrong.

[Anonymous]

Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

Not at all. I have plenty of criticism for the current administration.
But I’m curious, does freedom of speech entitle us to anonymity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Covid truths" like microchips and mind control 😆

The PP who thinks she's on the righteous side of truth and justice for continually yammering on about "yabut covid came from China" sounds like a master of the obvious but an absolute idiot.

You know damn well that very few people bought into the microchips or mind control (that is a new one to me).

We do know that, among other things, Covid likely came from a lab; having the vaccine does not prevent one from spreading the virus; masks are not effective in stopping the spread of Covid; Hydroxychloroquine is associated with lower Covid mortality in a recent French study; there are side effects associated with the vaccine - myocarditis and irregular menstrual bleeding being just two; and the laptop does belong to Hunter Biden.

Many of the statements above were censored on social media - and in media in general.

Start here: https://voterga.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Press-Release-GA-Supreme-Court-Rules-VoterGA-Petitioners-Have-Standing.pdf
Polling shows 70% of Republicans believe the "election was stolen" LIE.

It's a LIE. And it was directly responsible for the violence of J6. It was a violent, destructive lie that got people killed.

Stop with your LIES that "very few people believe that stuff."

Stop pretending that it's all free fair game to tell whatever lies you like no matter the consequences. You are part of the problem.

So, claiming that the election was stolen or illegitimate is speech that should be censored? Is that what you are saying?

There was very little actual censoring even going on. The right wing freaked out over fact checks while leaving the content uncensored. Outraged over the lies being called out.

However when there is damage, destruction, loss of life caused by a lie, those central to the lie should be held accountable. IMHO Trump, Stone and others should be prosecuted as accessory to murder over J6.

Dp- is fraud protected speech?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's astounding how the far right has hamstrung and neutered our nation's ability to counter foreign psyops and disinfo just because they are butthurt over being fact checked online.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/gop-muzzled-quiet-coalition-fought-foreign-propaganda-rcna103373

It's a fact that COVID did not leak from a Chinese lab, right?

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

DP.
Please. The government should not be in the business of restricting the speech of others UNLESS it is threatening or dangerous. Expressing ones opinion on vaccines and the efficacy of them is NOT a reason to restrict speech.
BTW - I have believed all along that the virus originated in a lab and I don't buy into the other crap you wrote - except that the vaccine is not necessary for healthy children. RSV is much, much more dangerous to children. Covid - not so much.
I also have believed from the start that masks don't really work at containing the virus - which turns out to be true.
And, then there is that "6 feet" rule which was also a bunch of bunk.
All kinds of information has been censored by the govt which has turned out to be true. They need to stay out of the business of restricting speech since it is - you know - against the law.

Why don’t you ask all the Asian Americans who got physically assaulted if that speech was dangerous or not.

You do understand that Trump was in charge at that time. If the government could censor the media, it would have been official government policy that COVID was of Chinese origin. Any contrary opinion would have been censored as disinformation.

But covid did originate in China.

You had no evidence of a lab leak when you started pushing that conspiracy theory. Refer back to the response above:

That one falls in the "broken clock is right twice a day" category. Note that the exact same people who ran around saying COVID leaked from a Chinese lab (without evidence) also said:

- COVID is just a hoax engineered by the government to control people: FALSE

- The vaccines contain microchips: FALSE

- The vaccines alter your DNA: FALSE

- The vaccines cause severe side effects and are worse than COVID itself: FALSE, and proven instances of severe side effects were EXTREMELY rare (like one in a million, and you were 32 times more likely to end up with myocarditis if you were unvaccinated and got covid than if you were vaccinated

- The vaccines are not effective: FALSE

- We should not give the vaccines to children: FALSE - turned out that vaccinated kids were 80% less likely to end up in the ER than vaccinated kids

Don't dare get all self rightous over being accidentally right with ONE conspiracy theory out of the DOZENS that you were ABSOLUTELY WRONG ON.

conspiracy theories are protected by the first amendment, babe.

Not when they harm people.

And why is it SO DAMN IMPORTANT for you people to constantly, willfully spread vicious, harmful and destructive lies? Why do you insist on being so vile and destructive?

The problem is that the government should not be censoring information or opinions.
The other issue is that much of what has been censored has been proven true. And, it was censored at the behest of our government.
And, it wasn't JUST about Covid.

Get off your dishonest high horse. FAR more of the COVID BS was proven FALSE than was proven true. And that continues to be the case with much of what comes from toxic pundits and politicians.

The bigger problem is that we have far too many dishonest and toxic people in our society who have nothing positive to offer, so instead they try to drag everyone else down and destroy them with their lies rather than trying to be more positive, constructive and productive.

I would argue with your first statement.
But, even if it were true...... the government has NO AUTHORITY to censor the speech. NONE.

There is something to your last statement.... I remember what happened to the Covington Catholic kids a few years back when the left tried to smear them with lies. It was horrendous.

Sorry but that is absolutely false. You absolutely WILL be censored and even arrested for many forms of "speech" - in many forms as already described by people upthread. If you sell a product as a remedy you absolutely can be told to remove false or unproven medical claims about it, as an example. Or, Stolen Valor laws regarding wearing a military uniform when you did not serve, or military medals you did not earn. Or impersonating a police officer. You absolutely will be told to stop, and it's entirely likely you may be arrested as well. The government does indeed have such authority.

the government does not have the authority to censor what it deems “lies” on the internet. period. please cite the case law you believe supports that. ps the stolen valor law was overturned.

The government has the authority to advise a business that there are malign foreign actors flooding their business with lies. And the business has the right to choose to censor those lies.

yes well, this is the factual question in the actual legal case - whether the government was “just” trying to influence the media (legitimate government speech) or acting as a censor.

Precisely, so anyone who’s still talking about having a first amendment right to do whatever they want on social media is wrong.

No, the people arguing here that political speech and “lies” have no First Amendment protection are wrong. In the pending social media case (Murthy v Missouri) I don’t believe there’s any question whether the speech is protected. It’s whether the government’s actions amounted to supression of the speech or just “government speech.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

Not at all. I have plenty of criticism for the current administration.
But I’m curious, does freedom of speech entitle us to anonymity?

yes it does. for example you can attend a public meeting anonymously. https://epic.org/issues/democracy-free-speech/anonymity/#:~:text=Anonymity%20is%20a%20core%20First,government%20interference%20or%20public%20retaliation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

No, it’s because the guy that ran the last administration is bragging that he will invoke the Insurrection Act to put US military in the streets to quell the inevitable protests if he wins again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Covid truths" like microchips and mind control 😆

The PP who thinks she's on the righteous side of truth and justice for continually yammering on about "yabut covid came from China" sounds like a master of the obvious but an absolute idiot.

You know damn well that very few people bought into the microchips or mind control (that is a new one to me).

We do know that, among other things, Covid likely came from a lab; having the vaccine does not prevent one from spreading the virus; masks are not effective in stopping the spread of Covid; Hydroxychloroquine is associated with lower Covid mortality in a recent French study; there are side effects associated with the vaccine - myocarditis and irregular menstrual bleeding being just two; and the laptop does belong to Hunter Biden.

Many of the statements above were censored on social media - and in media in general.

Start here: https://voterga.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Press-Release-GA-Supreme-Court-Rules-VoterGA-Petitioners-Have-Standing.pdf
Polling shows 70% of Republicans believe the "election was stolen" LIE.

It's a LIE. And it was directly responsible for the violence of J6. It was a violent, destructive lie that got people killed.

Stop with your LIES that "very few people believe that stuff."

Stop pretending that it's all free fair game to tell whatever lies you like no matter the consequences. You are part of the problem.

So, claiming that the election was stolen or illegitimate is speech that should be censored? Is that what you are saying?

There was very little actual censoring even going on. The right wing freaked out over fact checks while leaving the content uncensored. Outraged over the lies being called out.

However when there is damage, destruction, loss of life caused by a lie, those central to the lie should be held accountable. IMHO Trump, Stone and others should be prosecuted as accessory to murder over J6.

Dp- is fraud protected speech?

Fraudulent statements are speech that the government can take narrowly tailored measure to prohibit & prosecute. But an overly broad interpretation of fraud would run into 1A problems. For example a doctor posting online questioning the efficacy of the covid vaccine and paxlovid could not be prosecuted for “fraud” under an attenuated theory like that she would benefit from increased sick patients. But generally the state & federal fraud statutes require a high level of causaility and intention - so it’s going to be rare that there is a 1A issue.

this is a good summary of unprotected speech: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/unprotected-speech-synopsis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

No, it’s because the guy that ran the last administration is bragging that he will invoke the Insurrection Act to put US military in the streets to quell the inevitable protests if he wins again.

right. and hopefully you understand why strong *neutral* 1A protections are so important - because they protect you when it’s your turn to disagree with the administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

No, it’s because the guy that ran the last administration is bragging that he will invoke the Insurrection Act to put US military in the streets to quell the inevitable protests if he wins again.

We have a binary choice ahead of us.
One guy has already retaliated against protesters with the force of the military
And promises to do it again.
The other guys asked Twitter to pretty please not post Russian psyops against our citizens.
Those are the choices

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there been a moment in history where foreign adversaries used our first amendment speech against our democracy so prolifically and aggressively?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
What about opinions propagated with the express purpose of destroying our way of life?
Are they damaging enough?
What about opinions spread for the express purpose of getting millions of Americans killed? Or for causing a catastrophic collapse of our healthcare system?
Is all of that protected speech?
I haven’t noticed this current administration use military force to stop citizens from exercising their first amendment rights…
I did see that with the last administration.
No one is currently stopping anyone from petitioning the government. I have no reason to believe a second Trump administration wouldn’t attack the people, just as he did his first time in office.
My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch.

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration.

No, it’s because the guy that ran the last administration is bragging that he will invoke the Insurrection Act to put US military in the streets to quell the inevitable protests if he wins again.

We have a binary choice ahead of us.
One guy has already retaliated against protesters with the force of the military
And promises to do it again.
The other guys asked Twitter to pretty please not post Russian psyops against our citizens.
Those are the choices

Nice spin. And, when was the force of the military used? Was that during the riots of 2020? IOW - justified use?

Biden admin censored the speech of citizens..... not Russians