We also have the freedom to dispute. I triple dog dear you to try that with Putin.Oh, not the West, you have freedom of the speech where you can take a picture which shows one thing and post it as something opposite to that. That's freedom!
We also have the freedom to dispute. I triple dog dear you to try that with Putin.Oh, not the West, you have freedom of the speech where you can take a picture which shows one thing and post it as something opposite to that. That's freedom!
So why nobody is disputing then?We also have the freedom to dispute.
Because Putin won't let you? Over on this side of the ocean, we're constantly in disagreement on everything. You just refuse to see it and rather focus on what's been polarized & proselytized by Russian media.So why nobody is disputing then?We also have the freedom to dispute.
Plenty of disputing by the minions of the ministries of lies that we had between 2016 and 2020.So why nobody is disputing then?We also have the freedom to dispute.
I see Matt Lee disputing, but zero disputing on MSMPlenty of disputing by the minions of the ministries of lies that we had between 2016 and 2020.So why nobody is disputing then?We also have the freedom to dispute.
Let's go Brandon
Or as thebiden admin calls it, "Disinformation Governance Board".
Headed up by Nina Jankowicz, this board's aim is to suppress "disinformation" and save democracy, from the Russians?
How Orwellian.
Putin lets me dispute US foreign polices just fine, I have been doing it for decades.Because Putin won't let you?
So glad the adults are in charge;
Oh, America's free speech is even "better" than that.Oh, not the West, you have freedom of the speech where you can take a picture which shows one thing and post it as something opposite to that. That's freedom!
Putin lets me dispute US foreign polices just fine, I have been doing it for decades.
Why do you think Russia is entitled to 'free speech' protections in the US?Then why on would you give the government authority to regulate speech? Hello?Because highly effective liars are directly and maliciously harming other people, for the benefit of those liars.And why do we need a law enforcement agency for that??How very Soviet of you.Reality, as revealed by the application of the scientific method.Who gets to define "disinformation"?
No. All speech that is factually incorrect is.Is all speech that questions or criticizes the government "disinformation"?
Because the world is full of cunts who are very effectively spreading lies in order to achieve personal benefit at the expense of wider society.Why the hell would you want to give a law enforcement agency that power?
It's the same fundamental reason as why we give law enforcement agencies the power to stop bank robberies.
There's nothing Soviet about recognising the existence of objective reality. Quite the reverse.
Reality exists. Many questions have a right answer; Many deeply held opinions are simply and factually wrong.
People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
Again, it's the exact same reason why we need a law enforcement agency for bank robberies. The world contains malicious people who seek personal gain at the expense of others, and we should not permit them to thrive.
Do you just trust everything government tells you?
No, of course not. What would make you think that?
I don't trust the police either; I expect them to have checks and balances on their actions. But that doesn't mean I don't think they should arrest bank robbers.
If you bothered to read your own link, there are plenty of categories of speech (political and otherwise) that are not protected. For example advocating the overthrow of the gov't is unprotected speech as is speech that advocates a true physical threat of violence.FFS. Just take the L and cry your authoritarian tears.The First Amendment explicitly mentions religion.Political (and religious) speech gets the highest constitutional protection. Commercial speech, e.g., advertising, gets lower scrutiny, but still protected. You’re not an American so you may not get how the 1st Amendment works. But your authoritarian rantings hint it’ll make you sad.There's no mention in the constitution of protecting "political" anything.It is unconstitutional in the US for the government to regulate political speech. That makes authoritarians like you sad.Law enforcement has always been used to regulate speech. You are not allowed to make false claims to sell a product or service; You are not allowed to yell "fire!" in a crowded theatre.
The US Constitution prohibits Congress from making a law abridging the freedom of speech; And yet this has been ruled not to prohibit speech of certain kinds and in certain contexts. Fraudulent advertising of goods is illegal, and you won't get far trying to defend such fraud in court by claiming the protection of the First Amendment.
Indeed, you would probably find yourself on contempt charges as soon as you responded to "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" with "No, because that would infringe my constitutional rights!"
Your pseudolaw is no more convincing than that of the Sovereign Citzen movement.
It says nothing about politics or political anything. Nor, for that matter, does it mention "commercial speech".
You're American, so your education may well have been poor, but the good news is that anyone (even people outside America) can read the US Constitution online, and let you know whan you are making shit up that simply isn't in there.
The First Amendment: Categories of Speech
But Putin does not permit you to dispute his foreign policies.Putin lets me dispute US foreign polices just fine, I have been doing it for decades.Because Putin won't let you?
The head of President Joe Biden's new Disinformation Governance Board has a history of pushing now-debunked claims that there are ties between Russia and Donald Trump, old and recently resurfaced tweets reveal. Nina Jankowicz promoted several claims from Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign on Twitter, including allegations that are now being looked into by special counsel John Durham. In November 2016, Jankowicz, a Russian misinformation 'expert,' tweeted: 'Husband texted me 'you have news to wake up to.' Never thought it would be this. Confirms our worst fears about Trump. I am horrified.'
He seems to better understand how the First Amendment works than you do, apparently.You’re not an American so you may not get how the 1st Amendment works.
Your post is disinformation.LOL;
The head of President Joe Biden's new Disinformation Governance Board has a history of pushing now-debunked claims that there are ties between Russia and Donald Trump, old and recently resurfaced tweets reveal. Nina Jankowicz promoted several claims from Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign on Twitter, including allegations that are now being looked into by special counsel John Durham. In November 2016, Jankowicz, a Russian misinformation 'expert,' tweeted: 'Husband texted me 'you have news to wake up to.' Never thought it would be this. Confirms our worst fears about Trump. I am horrified.'
Daily Mail
And this bimbo in charge of "disinformation"
No it's not. Apparently, Trump's former security advisor, former campaign manager, former staffer and a bunch of others including Roger Stone didn't go to jail. It was all a hoax. Meanwhile, Hunter Biden's laptop is fucking terrifying, worse than Benjamin Ghazi.Your post is disinformation.LOL;
The head of President Joe Biden's new Disinformation Governance Board has a history of pushing now-debunked claims that there are ties between Russia and Donald Trump, old and recently resurfaced tweets reveal. Nina Jankowicz promoted several claims from Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign on Twitter, including allegations that are now being looked into by special counsel John Durham. In November 2016, Jankowicz, a Russian misinformation 'expert,' tweeted: 'Husband texted me 'you have news to wake up to.' Never thought it would be this. Confirms our worst fears about Trump. I am horrified.'
Daily Mail
And this bimbo in charge of "disinformation"
But his brain doesn't know that. Running on emotion can do that.Your post is disinformation.LOL;
The head of President Joe Biden's new Disinformation Governance Board has a history of pushing now-debunked claims that there are ties between Russia and Donald Trump, old and recently resurfaced tweets reveal. Nina Jankowicz promoted several claims from Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign on Twitter, including allegations that are now being looked into by special counsel John Durham. In November 2016, Jankowicz, a Russian misinformation 'expert,' tweeted: 'Husband texted me 'you have news to wake up to.' Never thought it would be this. Confirms our worst fears about Trump. I am horrified.'
Daily Mail
And this bimbo in charge of "disinformation"
In July 1971, a few months before Australia's leader of the opposition, Gough Whitlam, became our Prime Minister, he visited communist China, where he met the PRC's Premier, Zhou Enlai, who said something similar.Putin lets me dispute US foreign polices just fine, I have been doing it for decades.