College Protesters Do NOT Want the Participation Trophy As They Seek Amnesty From...
'Impeachment Has Come for Less': Biden Admin Won't Name Qatar Terror State; Biden...
Never Forget: Corey DeAngelis Takes Us Down the Memory Lane of COVID School...
CNN's Attempt at Trying to Look Hip, Relatable, and Even FUNNY at WHCD...
James Woods DROPS AOC on Her Air-Filled Head for Claiming THIS is Causing...
GRETCH! LOL! Watch NFL Fans Boo TF Out of Gretchen Whitmer Because Guys,...
George Santos' Thread of the WORST DRESSED at White House Correspondent's Dinner Hilarious...
He WENT There! LOL! @Amuse Play-by-Play Video Thread of White House Correspondent's Dinner...
Bill Maher DROPS Don Lemon for Claiming He 'Lives in Uncomfortable Spaces' as...
MEH: Biden Is Boring and SNL's Colin Jost Wimps Out at the White...
Woke Preacher Explains How Drag is Holy
Biden Simp Victor Shi Meets 'National Treasure' Anthony Fauci
The White House Correspondents' Dinner aka 'Nerd Prom' is as Obnoxious as You...
'We Don't Like White People': Here Are Some Highlights From the Pro-Hamas Protests
Columbia Says It Won't Be Calling the NYPD to Handle Campus Protests Again

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