Reply to DHS Creating "Disinformation Governance Board"

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "DHS Creating "Disinformation Governance Board""

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=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. 
[b]My first amendment right seem far safer with our current executive branch[/b]. [/quote]

Perhaps that is because your opinion and views are in line with this administration. [/quote]
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.[/quote]

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 [/quote]

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 [/quote]
Spin? I’m embarrassed you are so uninformed.
Trump used force to clear peaceful protesters. He used the military to do it. You should be outraged. 
The Rosenbergs were citizens too. Hansen was a citizen. [/quote]

yes and Trump’s actions are exactly why we need strong 1A protections. still stumped as to why you don’t get this. is your view that 1A jurisprudence should expressly favor Democrat’s political speech? Because legally, there is not all that much difference between Stacy Abrams claiming her election was stolen and the “big lie” claims, at least as far as speech alone goes. [/quote]

How am I arguing against 1A? I’m not.
But foreign agents have never had 1A protections.  Why do you want them protected now? Is it because you find it politically advantageous? 
Did Stacy Abram’s foment violence and attempt to subvert democracy? She did not. She sought redress in the courts, and was publicly critical. That’s how it works. That’s ok.
Coercing state officials to throw out votes is not free speech. Inciting a riot is never free speech.  Inciting a riot with the express purpose of subverting a legal and fair election? Not protected speech. 
I’m not ok with our government allowing foreign adversaries to harm us. They are supposed to provide for the national defense. A catastrophic collapse of our heath care system is a legitimate threat to our national security. Americans can be unknowing patsies, but they are still hurting our national security, and it’s the job of our government to protect us from that. 
Freedom of speech is the bedrock of our democracy.
Allowing foreign enemies to pervert that right and use it as a tool to destroy the very fabric of our existence can’t be acceptable. 
[/quote]

you’re assuming a whole lot here. nobody is arguing that you can’t prosecute spies. the kinds of statements that were arguably censored were not from “foreign adversaries.” questioning the covid vaccine does not make you a “foreign adversary.” [/quote]

If you are sharing and amplifying Kremlin talking points, you are aiding a foreign adversary. You may not realize you are doing it, but the result and damage is the same. [/quote]

Since the Kremlin doesn't publish all their talking points, anything you label a Kremlin talking point should be censored?[/quote]

Are you aware we have an intelligence service? We have a national security apparatus. We have career professionals who doggedly remain apolitical doing tireless work on our behalf. 
Anything I label? No. I’m just an internet rando. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics