Slippery Slopes-- Freedom Of Speech And Facebook And Trumpanzee

No jail for the incendiary crap Alex Jones puts on social media. In fact, free speech purists are freaking out that his garbage has been banned by Facebook, YouTube, Apple, Spotify, etc. Friday, Roy Gutterman, a professor and free speech advocate wrote that kicking Alex Jones off Facebook "may have opened a new, potentially dangerous door in the digital world where free speech conflicts with good taste, legitimate information and even downright human decency. Jones shot to notoriety through his far-right wing website, InfoWars, which touted outrageous conspiracy theories, misinformation and vitriolic material that many have interpreted as hateful. Though hate speech is neither illegal nor well-defined in the United States, Jones' outrageous and offensive postings have found him removed from Facebook's community of 2.2 billion users."

It is not easy to defend Jones' brand of vitriol and conspiracy theories. In the ever-evolving debate over "fake news," misinformation and hate speech, Jones contributes to all three. Some argue that this sort of content adds nothing to the discussion of important public issues and should not have a place in the marketplace of ideas. Elements of that argument may be valid, but it also diminishes the role of such material in the marketplace. It fuels debate, forces us to confront varying and sometimes ugly viewpoints and counter them with more speech.

...Even with the Facebook ban, Jones will not be without an audience or devoted followers. He still has his website, app and radio platforms and a legion of fans. But Facebook's ban raises concerns, regardless of how civil society may view Jones. By trying to make Facebook a safe space, devoid of offensive or hateful speech, founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg is almost single-handedly deciding to silence unpopular speech.

In another era, it might not have been so unusual to freeze out a host of speakers and ignore some hot-button, controversial or political issues by not covering them in the newspaper or on television, or closing down editorial pages sympathetic to their causes. This was a dominant tactic in the South during the fight for civil rights, where speakers were both censored and punished for their political views.

The internet, however, has equalized the media landscape, providing speakers, writers and consumers with innumerable platforms for expression and communication. Social media is an integral part of the equation.

But when a social media behemoth like Facebook decides to ban certain players, no matter how offensive, we are treading precariously close to the slippery slope. Once these platforms start excluding some speakers today, the question is, who will be excluded tomorrow?

He concludes that "If we truly believe in free speech, the marketplace of ideas must be open to even the most offensive speakers." I was awarded a defender of free speech award by the ACLU once. And this week I was happy when I saw that the moron fake president declassified self-serving Nunes memos on the Steele dossier that now make it incumbent on the FBI to declassify to declassify the reality-based memos. Josh Gerstein wrote that "the FBI has lost its authority to rebuff Freedom of Information Act requests about the bureau’s efforts to verify the report’s intelligence linking Trump to Russia during the 2016 campaign, a federal judge ruled on Thursday."

U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta previously blessed the FBI’s decision to refuse such FOIA requests by declining to confirm whether any records exist about aspects of its handling of the hotly contested dossier, prepared by the former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. The judge ruled in January that Trump’s tweets about the dossier did not require the FBI and other intelligence agencies to be more responsive to public records requests on the issue.

However, Mehta said Trump’s actions in February to greenlight the release of one memo from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) and a separate memo from the panel’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, left untenable the FBI’s position of resisting disclosure.

“It remains no longer logical nor plausible for the FBI to maintain that it cannot confirm nor deny the existence of documents” related to attempts to verify information in the dossier, Mehta wrote in a 13-page opinion.

This is the kind of free speech the Founding fathers were talking about when they drafted the constitution's first amendment (which guarantees freedom of expression by prohibiting Congress from restricting the press or the rights of individuals to speak freely.) I have to admit I don't grok Facebook. I get annoyed when people try to contact me on it and ask them to e-mail me, text me or call me on the phone. I just find Facebook annoying, random and filled with unreliable information-- largely by fools for fools. That said, I was shocked to learn that people go the jail-- real jail, not virtual jail-- for things they write on Facebook.

Business Insider gave 7 examples of young Facebook users who went to prison for stuff they wrote on Facebook. I can even understand a couple of them-- one guy who claimed-- albeit sarcastically-- that he was going to shoot up a kindergarten. Two other guys were sentenced to 4 years each for trying to encourage a riot. "Many people exercise poor judgement on Facebook," wrote Alyson Shontell, "a site where Freedom of Speech may no longer apply. Recently, young Facebook users who have posted controversial status messages have ended up in jail. Sometimes the messages they typed were actually offensive. Other times they were jokes gone terribly wrong. One teen was even arrested for posting violent rap lyrics. Most of the time, the Facebook offenders are impulsive. They type before they think, and lately they've had to pay serious consequences."

This one seems really silly though:

Cameron D'Ambrosio, 18, is a high school student who is also an aspiring rapper. The Massachusettes native posted some of his lyrics on Facebook and was initially arrested without bail. He was told what he posted was a "terroristic threat." The lyrics read: "F--- a boston bombinb [sic] wait til u see the sh-- I do, I'ma be famous for rapping, and beat every murder charge that comes across me."

When the prosector took him before a grand jury for an indictment, they refused and threw out the "case." That really is government trying to interfere with free speech and expression.

Things Politicians Want To Achieve-- Trump's Real Spy-Gate

It was easy to back candidates Ted Lieu, Pramila Jayapal, Mark Pocan, Keith Ellison, Judy Chu, Jamie Raskin, Karen Bass... They had all been in state legislatures where they had created records that showed how awesome they would be in Congress. None of them have disappointed. This cycle, candidates like Jared Golden (ME-02), Lisa Brown (WA-05), Ellen Lipton (MI-09) and Kaniela Ing have built tremendous records of accomplishment in their state legislatures, each one demonstrating an ability to put forth successful cutting edge efforts on progressive policy initiatives. And each one a leader beyond just voting well, of course.

What do I mean? Let me give you a simple example. Earlier this year, the Honolulu Star Advertiser gave a perfect and very typical instance in a report by Kevin Dayton-- State official wants study of government 'jobs for all'. If you guessed that state official is Kaniela, pat yourself on the back. He's proposing (House Bill 1992) a state task force to study whether Hawaii's state government can provide a job for everyone who needs one. That's a good way to signal constituents and to move worthwhile and cutting edge proposals forward.

The Trumpanzee Regime has a very different perspective on what to move forward. How about the Trump Regime moving ahead with its Orwellian-- i.e., fascist-- plans? The Department of Homeland Security has just announced that it intends to compile a comprehensive list of hundreds of thousands of "journalists, editors, correspondents, social media influencers, bloggers etc.," and collect any "information that could be relevant" about them.  Something tells me that conservatives are going to be as unenthusiastic about this as progressives. This is something that will separate the fascists from the conservatives. Neo-Nazis like Devin Nunes R-CA), Diane Black (R-TN), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Brian Babin (R-TX) might get excited about this kind of thing but mainstream conservatives will be pulling out their hair by the roots.

So if you have a website, an important blog or you are just very active on social media, the Department of Homeland Security is going to put you on a list and will start collecting information about you.  The DHS has already announced that it will hire a contractor to aid in monitoring media coverage, and they will definitely need plenty of help because it is going to be a very big job…

As part of its “media monitoring,” the DHS seeks to track more than 290,000 global news sources as well as social media in over 100 languages, including Arabic, Chinese and Russian, for instant translation into English. The successful contracting company will have “24/7 access to a password protected, media influencer database, including journalists, editors, correspondents, social media influencers, bloggers etc.” in order to “identify any and all media coverage related to the Department of Homeland Security or a particular event.”

“Any and all media coverage,” as you might imagine, is quite broad and includes “online, print, broadcast, cable, radio, trade and industry publications, local sources, national/international outlets, traditional news sources, and social media.”

If this sounds extremely creepy to you, that is because it is extremely creepy.

...Freedom of speech is one of our most foundational rights, and many are concerned that “monitoring and tracking” are initial steps that could lead to a significant crackdown on Internet activity. Just check out what is about to happen over in Europe.  The Internet has made it possible for ordinary people to communicate with one another on a massive scale, and any efforts by national governments to interfere with that must be greatly resisted.

Unfortunately, it appears that this new Department of Homeland Security program is moving ahead rapidly.  In fact, it is being reported that seven different companies have “already expressed interest” in participating…

Seven companies, mainly minority- or women-owned small businesses, have already expressed interest in becoming a vendor for the contract, according to the FedBizOpps web site.

All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to be nothing. Please spread word about this creepy new surveillance program to everyone that you know, because what they are doing is not right.

If you've spent any time reading DWT, you'd know I ran right to Alan Grayson with this. And he was ready. "There is a phrase," he told me, "that is already widespread in Europe, and codified in European law: the 'right to be left alone.' We’ll see how long it takes before we here wake up and realize that that’s our right, too."