Earlier quoted context omitted.
American citizens that use WeChat have first amendment rights
But they can't exercise the right with this tool.
Sure they can. They communicate using it. They have rights.
Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
371–380 of 401 posts
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#372I think it's easy to say the ban doesn't make sense when it is perhaps a preventative measure. We have seen social networks take over others many times in terms of popularity. If TikTok and WeChat's usage becomes more widespread in the voting population of the US, they would have a lot of influence by controlling what kind of content its users sees; e.g., FB has been criticized many times for this, namely performing…
> The difference between TikTok and WeChat and FB/Google/Twitter is obvious: the former are to some degree controlled by China and the latter are private entities. The irony is that we were just about to witness US govt forcing said "private entities" to ban specific applications.
Thought control is fine, as long as I’m in control.
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's the problem. The CCP has been left to do whatever it wants and it reached a point where it is "too big to fail". Is this the kind of world we want the next generation to live in? The sooner we put a stop to this mess the better.
This is for China's people to decide not you.
Why should it be only for China's people to decide? CCP's actions have global effects, China's people are not the only ones affected.
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#374All sovereign nations reserve the right to regulate foreign goods, vessels, diplomats, currency, and peoples distinctly from their native counterparts. Apps are truly no different.
[deleted]
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#375Why didnt the judges stop WeChat and TikTok entering the US market on free speech concerns in the first place?
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
The danger lies in letting a foreign government controll the communication of americans. But for me as a german, I actually neither want the chinese, nor the US-government (nor the german government) to controll my communication.
I also want neither but if one must, I'd choose the US government to monitor my communication, a thousand-fold over Chinese surveillence :)
The US government has the ability to make my life absolutely miserable. The Chinese government doesn’t without invading the US. So I’d much prefer Chinese surveillance since it’s inconsequential to me.
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#377So let me get this straight.
If an application were, positively and indisputably, spying on the conversations and data which takes place in the households of people with the highest security clearances, again if this were proven to be true, then a judge in San Francisco can stay an emergency (or other) executive order from the POTUS to ban the application because it is a national security threat.
I am just trying to understand exactly what power this judge has. It's really incredible. Is she determining as a matter of fact the application is not as POTUS asserts? Is she claiming that such a spy-ap, if in any way engaging with civilians and their communication, cannot be banned by the US government?
Last I knew, the tech companies are claiming that their conduct is their private conduct and anything they do to their users does not intersect with any 1st Amendment rights of their users.
So this is a private company and POTUS's order is about this company and therefore not infringing on anyone's 1st Amendment rights by banning it.
This positions the maker of any communcation-related app beyond the power of POTUS and his national security team and even Congress itself, unless the Constitution is suspended, as in time of war.
Wow. Just. Wow.
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
While there was always some fear of foreign war, it never rose to the level of century-long occupation or and domination that China experienced. The American colonies were just too unimportant until the French and Indian War compared to the Sugar colonies. Even taking New York was kind of a side effect of New England being nearby and English gradually settling down from Connecticut, rather than part of some grand str…
One of the provisions of the Treaty of Nanking is that the British Empire agreed to not interfere with Chinese trade with other foreign powers. They also withdrew from mainland China in exchange for the island of Hong Kong. Hong Kong was not an economic power at the time and became one as a British colony. [0] By contrast, the British Empire continued to interfere with American trade long after the American Revolutio…
British did burn down the Summer Palace, which action is now considered one of the worst acts of cultural vandalism ever perpetrated.
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly he opposite, Congress is (or should be) the main focus in a democracy because it has elected officials representing the nation. The judiciary should be the last resort in the case of indecision between the other two branches. In the dysfunctional American democracy exactly the opposite happens: people hope that judges will save democracy and the legislative becomes each year more powerless against the executi…
Seeing as Trump can’t do much without congress, I don’t get your point. His executive orders are limited m, and the judiciary is the branch that tells him that, the legislative branch has more power but doesn’t get to tell trump what his executive orders can do like the judicial system.
The point is that Congress should not let in the hands of a person like D.T. the important task of defining which companies should operate in the country. There should be legislation to determine this.
Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's the problem. The CCP has been left to do whatever it wants and it reached a point where it is "too big to fail". Is this the kind of world we want the next generation to live in? The sooner we put a stop to this mess the better.
This is for China's people to decide not you.
The CCP has already decided to be a bully, and it seems its people are supporting them (except the poor ones being murdered like the Uighurs). Let them get a taste of their own medicine.