Social Media Expert Plays the REPUBLICANS POUNCE Card Over Pro-Hamas Columbia Protesters a...
'F**king CLOWN Show': Julie Kelly Shares DAMNING Unredacted Evidence from Trump's Classifi...
Cori Bush Using Her Cred as a Ferguson Protester to Defend Pro-Hamas College...
Media Stunned by Trump's Soaring Poll Numbers
WTF Is THIS?! Dem Rep Shares Video of Himself Handing List of Reps...
REEE! RNC Hilariously Mocks AOC for Calling Columbia /Yale Protests 'Peaceful' and She...
Yeah... RIGHT! Ilhan Omar Wishes Jewish Communities a Happy Passover and Pisses EVERYONE...
WAT?! Bree Newsome Claims the Middle East Is Better to Women and Gays...
Kamala Harris Community Noted So BRUTALLY Even Elon Musk Can't Help but LAUGH...
Carol Roth Shares TERRIFYING Guess About Who Democrats Might Swap Biden Out for...
The Lost Jedi: People React to Mark Hamill's Claim That Joe Biden Is...
'Biden's Newest Handler': #EarthDay Brought Biden and AOC MUCH Closer Together (Caption Th...
Another Win: Judge Rules That Donald Trump's $175 Million Bond Stands
Leftist Protestor Harasses Alec Baldwin Until He Majorly Loses His Cool
UCLA School of Medicine’s Woke DEI Chief Caught Plagiarizing

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