Lying Blind: Dem Ilhan Omar Says She Didn’t See That a Criminal Illegal...
White Noise: Singing Religious Radicals Target Minneapolis Retail Store Over ICE Arrest
Hold Them Accountable: DOJ Probe Into Walz/Frey for Shielding Illegals and Threatening ICE
Criminal Illegal Alien Walks Free After Ramming ICE Vehicles Head-On: Seattle Jury Says...
Trump and Powell Clash as Federal Reserve Faces Unprecedented Scrutiny
Traitor Alert: Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost Outs ICE Hotel Locations Around Orlando to...
Don't Put Your Parents in a Home—Build One Together ... A Radical (But...
Ignorant or Complicit: TMZ 'Shocked' to Learn About 'Nazi' DHS Stunt
Michael Knowles Makes Kyle Kulinski Look Like a Frothy-Mouthed Moron (Because He IS...
Lee Zeldin Speaks Slowly to Answer 'a Top Contender for Dumbest Reporter Question...
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Tells DHS's Tricia McLaughlin That Renee Good Was Fatally Shot...
Jacob Frey Says Democrat Violence and Chaos Will End in Minnesota if Feds...
Not Laughing Now, Are Ya'? German Chancellor Laments the Nation's Abandonment of Nuclear...
Flashback From Tim Walz on Federal Immigration Enforcement in MN Proves 'TDS Broke...
Daily Beast Uses 'Expert' to Prove Trump Suffered a Stroke Months Ago ......

Twitter Files Extra: The Australian government’s censorship requests

Matt Taibbi introduced this latest turn in the Twitter files:

Advertisement

So… here… we… go!

Social cohesion? The (American) Supreme Court once had something to say about the First Amendment and social cohesion:

Accordingly a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute, … is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest. … There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. For the alternative would lead to standardization of ideas either by legislatures, courts, or dominant political or community groups.

Advertisement

Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) (Citations removed.) Naturally, there is nothing wrong with the government promoting social cohesion by means unrelated to the suppression of speech, but to do it by censorship is wrong.

But of course creating a standardization of ideas is the entire point of these censors down under:

And their censorship was not limited to their borders:

Advertisement

That link in turn links to the article in the Australian mentioned by Mr. Taibbi at the beginning, but its behind a paywall and we are cheap.

Some interesting reactions:

Australia more than most.

Advertisement

That seems like a useful resource.

***

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos