Plastic_Ramses

I can only imagine mr burns looking at this comic and saying:

excellent

A government employee will be censored for the speech that that employee puts out, full stop.

Same way as if that employee put out a hate filled speech about gay people.

The US government can not censor speech for private citizens except in extremely limited terms.

This is a government employee communicating on behalf of the government. The government has every right to censor the speech that it puts out.

Also, for what it's worth, the US has much stronger free speech protections than the EU. Whether or not that's a good thing is up for debate.

“The Affordable Connectivity Program filled an important gap that provider low-income programs, state and local affordability programs, and the Lifeline program cannot fully address,” said FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel in a statement, referring to the name of another, similar FCC program that subsidizes wireless and home internet service. “The Commission is available to provide any assistance Congress may need to support funding the ACP in the future and stands ready to resume the program if additional funding is provided.”

Some US lawmakers proposed bipartisan legislation to extend the ACP in the months leading up to the deadline. But the bills languished in the face of inaction by Republican leaders who showed little interest in engaging with the issue. President Joe Biden and Democratic lawmakers have publicly blamed GOP leadership for allowing the ACP to end.

While your version jives with lemmy's "both sides" reactionary bullshit, reality is quite a bit different.

No, it's not, the governemnt can censor its own workers or speech that its workers make. The government can censor itself.

It was number 2. Number 2 killed my brother.

And the EU is living in an unprecedented era because of it.

The first amendment doesnt apply to governmental communications.

Its the reason that things are able to be censored in public schools.

Thats a very interesting article, thank you!

Jihad is defined as "a struggle or fight against the enemies of islam."

A jihadist is defined as "a person who advocates or takes part in a jihad."

Im not sure why you're trying to muddy the waters here.

Unless youre trying insinuate that every muslim living by their books creed is meant to engage the enemies of islam, which is another problematic stance.

Yeah, so were cameras.

Adapt or die. Welcome to the human condition.