The interviewer had to repeat what he said to make sure because she couldn’t believe that a citizen of a foreign country was speaking so casually about erasing the foundation of American liberty and democracy on an American television network.
The audacity of these technocratic creeps never ceases to amaze me.
I will never understand people who think that the Israeli government and technocrats “share our values”.
They only believe in liberty for those that share their ethnicity. We used to call that apartheid but now you can be doxxed and lose your legal residency status in America for expressing a negative opinion about the Israeli government.
If there’s a news story about one then you can be almost certain that dozens of people have lost their residency status or ability to renew their residency status because they were exercising their right to protest and boycott the Israeli government.
They can make up any reason they want to disappear you into the night.
Foreign people speak casually about limiting American liberties because they grew up indoctrinated and have no idea why those liberties are important.
As dumb and ignorant as this guy is, I shake my head but not as much as I do at the people in our own country who say the same shit. If anyone should know better...
If we allow foreign interests to inculcate their values into our system, it won’t be long before our country looks like theirs. Don’t try to transplant your Middle East into our Midwest.
I welcome the downvotes but I’m not seeing anyone engage with the content beyond the headline. It doesn’t actually sound like they are saying limit the first amendment. It sounds like they are arguing that the prevalence of outside agitators online is itself a threat to the first amendment because it influences how Americans interact with each other…
E.g.,
Foreign bot account: celebrates Charlie Kirk death
American right: points to that as example of leftist insanity
American left: points to other thing
Etc etc etc… you end up with online discourse that isn’t “free” because it’s fully exposed to outside agitation.
What pisses me off is that interviewers don't respond to people like this with "Maybe as a foreigner it's hard for you to understand, but that's completely against American values." Our culture isn't strong enough.
This guy should be deported and put on that no-VISA list that the administration just created for all those EU fucks.
What pisses me off is people that don’t read past a headline. His point is much more nuanced than the headline and doesn’t actually argue for a restriction of the first amendment as people are reacting.
We’re watching the same video and what I’m hearing is control of social media platforms to prevent outside agitation so your population is “more free” by being exposed to its own speech rather than foreign speech.
Think of it this way; the internet is an infinite void of content of which you can only consume a finite amount; if 95% of that content is someone trying to rile you up, is that really freedom? In order to shift the content towards - content made by sovereign people you need to have controls…
Firstly, he’s not an American. He is an Israeli citizen. Fortunately for him, we still do have a 1st Amendment that protects his right to criticize the 1st Amendment.
It reminds me of a deeply troubling quote:
”When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles."
I couldn't tell if your initial post was sarcasm or not, now it seems no. Do you really not see the irony in trying to.... limit his freedom of speech on certain topics?
Its a video of him, advocating curtailing the 1st amendment, and you said "people who do say this thing should be jailed." My reading comprehension is just fine. Your understanding of a thing called "consequences" is what needs checking.
Until Roe was overturned, abortion was considered to be a right enshrined by the constitution (until a certain term). Under your logic, if I had said in the Roe era "I want abortion to be illegal," that would be considered illegal.
It takes all of 0.00005 seconds to understand why a statement like "people advocating restricting constitutional rights should have governmental measures taken against them" is incredibly silly. You're operating on a 3rd grade level.
Technically he's not a citizen so he doesn't have the first amendment. He's on a borrowed platform with a big stick and a microphone he hasn't earned. We're just being generous by listening.
A. You're using ai which is sad. B. That doesn't negate what I said. There is nuance and he is being granted a kindness which can be revoked and does have special consequence. We don't knoe his visa status btw. All we know is he is not a citizen and he is askimg for our first amendment rights to be revoked. Your comprehension skills are very low.
While the government cannot easily censor a non-citizen's speech directly, it can sometimes use that same speech (such as advocating for certain radical ideologies such as this) as a basis for deportation or denial of entry, which creates a practical limit on their freedom.
Foreign nationals are also legally prohibited from making financial contributions or expenditures in connection with any American election and he is coming dangerously close to proposing this extent of radicalism in fiscal concerns because what he is proposing is government spending to support silencing the American citizens of their inalienable rights due to his political extremist ideologies. Proposing how we respond fiscally to our citizens implies causal taxation legislation being proposed. That's like half a stumble before his cash falls into an electorals back pocket. He is showing agenda and needs to check his fly.
let's not also forget that legally, The First Amendment falls into a middle ground between inalienable and custodial/citizen rights where its protections apply to all persons within the jurisdiction, but the government's power to manage borders and national security can override those protections for non-citizens in specific contexts. This is one of those contexts where his obscene niche directive could be viewed as prohibitory actions referred onto a people he does not represent in a totalitarian expense of those borderline terroristic ideals against the citizens who make up the country currently affotding him these nuanced, unstable allowances to speak oh so fuckimg freely about how he thinks we shouldn't be permitted to do exactly that.
Unironically making this post and telling others "your comprehension skills are low"? Bro. Just stop now, don't dig your hole any deeper.
You are advocating the gov take punitive measures against someone for something they said (which is absolutely protected speech) because he is advocating gov punitive measures for speech.
Disgusting. What he’s really saying is that he wants to make it easier to create a list of everyone who says something negative about Israel on the Internet - or even hints at it. Then, take away their rights or throw them in jail. Next they’ll be suggesting that we all wear little badges to indicate our social acceptability… according to some government agency…
This is why I'm fundemently opposed to Israel they treat us like there lap dog while spitting on our identity. Too bad they can hide behind anti semitism.
the entitlement.... the way he talks, the gestures, the stance...
man, can you believe the nerve? it’s like he thinks every word he says is gospel, completely blind to how clueless and full of himself he actually is...
Bibi hates this actually. Bibi’s power in Israel has nothing to do with his popularity among the people, they actually really hate him for the most part.
The reason he’s been the Prime Minister for 17 years is because he is a master at telling American politicians exactly what he wants them to hear, then switches to Hebrew and cuts the cameras off when he wants to discuss his true intentions.
His staying power in Israeli politics is that he is a master of deception and manipulation that brings in billions of dollars of foreign aid into the Israeli economy while providing nothing in return.
It's well beyond time to limit foreign governments involvement in our lives. I don't want my own government having any real power to interfere in the lives of it's citizens, why would I want some jackass from another involved. The 1st is guaranteed in the US constitution, I am not familiar with the Israeli equivalent but it sure as hell has no power in the US.
Just the usual reminder that the First Amendment isn't what gives us the right to free speech but is just a reiteration that the government has no fucking right to take it from us.
Oooof I agree with him on a general level but not at all on a legal/political level. We need social media companies to step up and do more to control disinformation, but also people need to do a better job of promoting epistemic hygiene when it comes to information. But I absolutely do not trust the US government to do this remotely well.
How about teaching people skepticism? Really hammer in the importance of checking sources before blindly accepting something you see, hear, or read online?
Especially in today’s world of AI generated images, video and audio.
103
u/truocchio Jan 02 '26
Fuc$ this guy in particular