[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Asked About “Freedom of Speech,” Taliban Spokesperson Tells Journalist to Ask Facebook About That Apparently, the Taliban post thanking /pol/ for identifying a thot in need of patrolling was not a one-off, and they are indeed long-time lurkers. They are tapped in on all of the issues. During a press conference on Tuesday, a Taliban spokesman was asked if their new government would honor “free speech.” He replied: “This question should be asked of those people who are claiming to be promoters of free speech, who do not allow publication of all information. Indeed, I can ask that Facebook company. This question should be asked to them.” How utterly ruthless of this man. People have noted that this time around, the Taliban was not dragging mangled corpses from the back of their Toyotas. However, watching this reply was much more brutal than watching a mangled corpse flop around at the end of a rope dragged by a Toyota. The Taliban has never claimed to promote free speech. They’ve claimed to promote Sharia Law, which is what they do promote. The West, on the other hand, goes around talking about how they promote free speech, while literally everything they disagree with is censored. Leftists make bizarre Libertarian arguments in support of censorship, claiming that “private companies” (they’re not private companies) are allowed to do anything to anyone – including organize together to strip people of their guaranteed rights. Now, the White House is admitting to actively being involved in directing the censorship. The First Amendment of the US Constitution is very straightforward. There is nothing there that says “but a coalition of private companies can organize together to target individuals for silencing, at the behest of the White House.” The contracts, tax incentives and infrastructure plans that the US Government signs with Facebook, Google, etc. amount to “laws abridging freedom of speech.” But you shouldn’t need that level of detail to understand that regardless of the mechanism, the effect is the same: huge swaths of the population is banned from expressing their opinion freely. From the position of a person who is blocked from freely speaking, it doesn’t matter if there is some load of mangled libertarian gibberish justifying his being silenced. In terms of practical reality, a person can either speak freely or he cannot, and in Western countries, a person cannot speak freely. The same promise in the US Constitution is in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the basis of the globalist democracy order. And yet in Europe, there are laws against various forms of speech (now including informational speech with regards the alleged virus and the vaxx). These are the stated values of the Western order, which they do not even pretend to uphold. The Taliban is very straightforward: their system is Sharia Law. That is the promise they are making to the population – that they will uphold the traditional Sunni doctrine of Sharia. Therefore, they are not obligated to uphold freedom of speech. They have a completely different social contract. So then the West comes in and says “will you agree to uphold a part of our social contract that we ourselves refuse to uphold?” This is far beyond “ridiculous.” This is a farce. The Taliban are serious people. The people who run our countries are not even remotely serious. They barely even pretend to be serious. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: Ada (#0)
The Iranians are Shiites, who have a running serious feud with Sunnis. If the US wasn't so mad at Iran, they could have helped. Iran must not be pleased to see the Taliban retake Afghanistan, though maybe they better understood it was destined to happen sooner or later.
#2. To: Pinguinite (#1)
Despite the sectarian divide, the Iranians are pretty chummy with the Sunni Taliban, offering them cross border services, refuge, and even arms. And refugees, fleeing the new regime, are not being afforded entry to Iran, which they might more easily gain in places like Tajikistan.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||