Harmeet Dhillon Has a Question for Kimmel and 'No One Is Above the...
Abigail Spanberger Shows Virginia Who She REALLY Is When Journo Asks Her About...
Our Friend, Charlie Kirk
American Heroes of 9/11: Chief Peter Ganci, Jr.
MS NOW Finds All SORTS of Republicans Suddenly Voting for James Talarico, There's...
HOOOBOY: John Thune Receives BRUTAL Wake-Up Call from His Own Party at RNC...
YIKES: What the Lone Holdout Juror Had to Endure During Clancy Deliberations Keeps...
Jim Acosta Asks Why It's OK for Ted Cruz to Go on The...
Obama Attempts Rewriting History Where He's the GOOD GUY and Conservative X Ain't...
Ted Lieu Thought It Was Smart to Play DUMB About Jimmy Kimmel's Talarico...
Genius Troll? Trump Promises Americans $5,000 If Republicans Win House and Senate
Lefties Are Gonna BLOOOW! Brandon Gill’s RNC ‘Land Acknowledgment’ Was an EPIC, Patriot...
James Talarico Busted Big Time for Lying About Opposing Biological Males Playing in...
Bernie Sanders Has a Billion Reasons Why He’s Sparing Gov. JB Pritzker From...
Dem Mark Kelly Says ‘Everyday American’ Left Handwritten Note on Plane Seat While...

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement