Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 994 posts

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#681

Post by spwa4 »

PieTime wrote: post #662
tetromino_ wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have yet to see a free speech absolutist express concern ... Hi there. You are seeing one right now. Well, seeing the words of one. I am a free speech absolutist. What this administration is doing is abominable. I have always seen anti-Israeli campus posters as idiots, but Trump's crackdown on them is, imho, unconstitutional and immoral.

You’re free to support apartheid but I’ve never found slandering your opposition particularly useful. I don’t support any forms of violence, and framing is very important because it leads to peace activists being conflated with war mongering. Israel fascism is at the very heart of why free speech is being banned. https://youtu.be/9Z1NyTdhZ-U?si=9S4rOI-fQY0Yr0XD

I hate the implication you're making, especially since reality is exactly opposite. Israel's system cannot reasonably be classified as apartheid ... and Palestine's system cannot reasonably be classified as anything BUT apartheid. You definitely ARE legally segregated according to religion in Palestine, and you are not in Israel.

Exactly the opposite of your claim.

Yes, the current Israeli government is turning authoritarian (though again: not nearly as authoritarian as Palestine's governments), like so many others. That doesn't change reality though.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#682

Post by dragonwriter »

twright wrote: post #122

This is a really good compilation that should make any "free-speech absolutist" reconsider their support for the current administration. In my understanding, the commonplace interpretation of the first amendment is largely due to a series of landmark cases through the early to mid-20th century. A lot of expansions were provided to the amendment that have been taken for granted since then and we are now going to see c…

> This is a really good compilation that should make any "free-speech absolutist" reconsider their support for the current administration.

The adoption of the "free speech absolutist" brand by certain elements of the Right was never an honest statement of ideology, it was a smokescreen of Orwellian doublespeak for efforts to impose right-wing bias on platforms both by platform owners and by government regulatory efforts.

Those people aren't going to reconsider their support for this administration because it isn't actually committed to free speech, because it is doing what the "free speech absolutist" label they adopted was always cover for.

> In my understanding, the commonplace interpretation of the first amendment is largely due to a series of landmark cases through the early to mid-20th century.

The one thing that the "free speech absolutist" Right-wing crowd was always honest about was that their position had nothing to do with "commonplace interpretation of the first amendment". (

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#683

Post by TOMDM »

aredox wrote: post #566
TOMDM wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone is breaking the law, they should be charged with a crime. How are we at the point where that statement is a partisan issue?

Where are those who attempted a coup on Jan6 now?

Pardoned?

Do you think I support that?

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#684

Post by spiderfarmer »

soraminazuki wrote: post #651
spiderfarmer wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The free speech absolutists were always criticized because of their hypocrisy, not because of their ideology. At least the people saying there should be limits to free speech are clear and impartial as to where those limits should be, supported by laws and regulations.

> clear and impartial as to where those limits should be This is a big claim. The crux of the problem is that it's virtually impossible to set a clear and consistent line. That makes it ripe for abuse by those in power, as we are witnessing right now . I think it's hypocritical to fail to even acknowledge this fact.

Focus your energy on the clear abuses of power by the current regime, instead of hypotheticals and edge cases in the system you once had.

The US had a great (not perfect!) system. Free speech with reasonable limits, set by laws and regulations. And helped by a certain amount trust in the system.

When power hungry people, who started abusing the system with misinformation campaigns, ran into those laws and regulations, they claimed the system was treating them unfairly. Those people are now in power.

And trust is now at a minimum.

You could blame the past system for not being able to prevent this regime, but that wouldn’t fit your beliefs. I for one, am happy that we have more stringent rules in the EU.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#685

Post by amitport »

FilosofumRex wrote: post #665
amitport wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sense a lot Jewsphobia from you. Miriam Adelson is an American who happen to be Jewish, and has many many disagreements with the state of Israel. Are you going to classify everyone who does not seek the destruction of Israel as the pro-Israel Zionist lobby?. A bit Freudian of you to associate some Jewish woman some shadow Kabal. Jewish being targeted is like canary in a mine, never ends well.

There is a whole book written on the corrosive nature of the Israeli lobby on US foreign policy by Stephen Walt and John J. Mearsheimer. A shorter working paper version of it is . "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy." KSG Faculty Research Working Paper Series RWP06-011, March 2006. As for Adelson, just look up her Wikipedia... she owns Israel Hayom, Israel's largest newspaper, and is a major supporter of curren…

Mein camp is a all book also

She is a Jew. There are much more Muslims running around with connections to other Muslims countries and businessness and you don't go around and calling it the Muslims kabal on every move any Muslim does.

As I said, the fact the your post is not yet flagged is the biggest indicator to the coming collapse. You are an antisemite, despite your lack of understanding of it.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#686

Post by kopirgan »

DangitBobby wrote: post #663
kopirgan wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalist has all rights to write about it and perhaps mention enough to prove he's not without proof but not reveal as much as he did. That's reckless. Repeat - revealing sensitive info even if you come across by accident or someone's mistake is a crime. Esp national ones not just corporate secrets.

What information did they reveal that was sensitive? The strikes had already taken place and so nothing they shared had any strategic value after the fact, other than to confirm the validity. To be clear it is utterly fucking insane (borderline "Russian bot" talking point) that you are entertaining this line of reasoning and I feel dirty for even engaging you.

Ha the "Russian talking point" weapon! Never failed. Anyone that doesnt repeat what the ecosystem wants is Russian agent.

Kind of defeats the argument that content of messages will set back relations, affect future intelligence collection etc we kept hearing endlessly?!

Make up your mind. It's either important or not.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#687

Post by harry8 »

TOMDM wrote: post #515
harry8 wrote: post #353

Now might be a good time to revisit the twitter files and really try to understand what was in them and why it was horrifying. Seems many people wanted to pretend they were nothing because it didn't suit their partisan narrative. We're seeing the same kinds of justification now just with different partisans. If we don't call out abuses by our own tribe (whichever that is), maybe we're part of the attack.

The Twitter files that document the FBI requesting takedown of posts and accounts, Twitter internally debating the request, refusing the FBI and then suffering no consequences? Those Twitter files? Meanwhile Trump is suing pollsters for publications he doesn't like; extorting law firms for representation as reparation for them representing clients that sued him, who is deporting lawful permenant residents without due…

> refusing the FBI and then suffering no consequences

The whole thing was clearly just a partisan smear job in your eyes. Precisely the same reaction as the views of current maga types about the current first am disasters.

It's worth revisiting /precisely/ in relation to fighting the current assault. It's worth noting who publicly opposed /both/.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#688

Post by harry8 »

Aurornis wrote: post #375
harry8 wrote: post #353

Now might be a good time to revisit the twitter files and really try to understand what was in them and why it was horrifying. Seems many people wanted to pretend they were nothing because it didn't suit their partisan narrative. We're seeing the same kinds of justification now just with different partisans. If we don't call out abuses by our own tribe (whichever that is), maybe we're part of the attack.

> Now might be a good time to revisit the twitter files Or we could skip the whataboutism that tries to go back to a prior administration, and instead focus on the current administration’s actions which are demonstrably far worse.

What about we stand on _principle_. What about we criticise and oppose /all/ transgressions of that principle. What about we all do it more loudly for whatever tribe we have some loose membership of and don't excuse it because it is politically expedient.

That's whataboutism nowadays.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#689

Post by soraminazuki »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #684
soraminazuki wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clear and impartial as to where those limits should be This is a big claim. The crux of the problem is that it's virtually impossible to set a clear and consistent line. That makes it ripe for abuse by those in power, as we are witnessing right now . I think it's hypocritical to fail to even acknowledge this fact.

Focus your energy on the clear abuses of power by the current regime, instead of hypotheticals and edge cases in the system you once had. The US had a great (not perfect!) system. Free speech with reasonable limits, set by laws and regulations. And helped by a certain amount trust in the system. When power hungry people, who started abusing the system with misinformation campaigns, ran into those laws and regulations…

That current regime is using the exact same machinery that you're advocating for to suppress freedoms, and it seems to me that your solution is to make it more ripe for abuse. This doesn't make any sense. And no, we're not talking about "hypotheticals" here when the abuse is happening right before our eyes.

Laws and regulations aren't a magical solution. You have to think about how they can be abused, or they'll be weaponized to achieve the exact opposite of what you intended. This has been abundantly clear for those who have been paying attention. See for example how lawmakers have been repeatedly pushing laws claiming to "protect children" that does nothing of the sort but does everything to erode civil liberties.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#690

Post by leovingi »

PartiallyTyped wrote: post #673
zmgsabst wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump isn’t the source of that, but a manifestation of it. People are tired of, eg, systemic discrimination being forced on them by elites (euphemized “DIE”) or courts which have outspoken activists refusing to enforce the law against career criminals. They want it to stop — and since elites refused to onboard that correction, they rallied behind a strongman to punish them.

Trump and his ilk are literally “elites”, richest cabinet in history and that’s excluding the unelected SS cutter that meddles into everything. DEI, just so you know, also covers programmes that help poor communities by providing funding for education.

My entire life, professional and otherwise, DEI has ultimately stood for nothing other than "less white people". Of course it's dressed up in definitions that sound beautiful and moral to the supporters of DEI, but at the end of the day whenever someone uses the term "diverse" they are talking about "less white people".

When the company John Lewis was criticized for a lack of diversity [1], it was because they had too many whites.

When the Academy Awards were criticized for a lack of diversity [2], it was because they had too many whites.

When the EU institutions were criticized for a lack of diversity [3], it was because they had too many whites.

When the BAFTAs were criticized for a lack of diversity [4], it was because they had too many whites.

When investigative journalism in the US was criticized for a lack of diversity [5], it was because they had too many whites.

When the show "Friends" was criticized for a lack of diversity [6], it was because they had too many whites.

After decades and decades of this blatant animosity against people like me I can honestly say I do not care at all what Trump does to these programs or how he goes about destroying them, as long as they are destroyed and the people that supported them punished.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jun/16/john-lewis-...

[2] https://www.wishtv.com/news/awards-shows-have-been-criticize...

[3] https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/oped-lack-...

[4] https://www.willistonian.org/baftas-criticized-for-lack-of-d...

[5] https://www.poynter.org/business-work/2020/investigative-jou...

[6] https://metro.co.uk/2023/04/02/lack-of-diversity-on-friends-...

Post reply on HN