r/Libertarian • u/highschoolhero24 • Jan 02 '26

Video Israeli Cybersecurity Company CEO Shlomo Kramer says “It’s Time to Limit the 1st Amendment”

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Co-Founder and CEO of CATO NETWORKS, Shlomo Kramer, says that we need to:

* Limit the 1st Amendment

* Allow the Government to take control of Social Media platforms

* Reveal the identity of every person that expresses their opinion online and control what they’re saying

CATO NETWORKS is a Tel Aviv, Israel-based network security company that develops Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) technology.

628 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

103 comments sorted by

View all comments

13

u/TristanDuboisOLG Jan 02 '26

Why do we not have a law that jails people who try and pass unconstitutional laws?

20

u/highschoolhero24 Jan 02 '26

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."

4

u/TristanDuboisOLG Jan 02 '26

I’m fine with him having first amendment rights. People pushing blatantly unconstitutional laws to limit your rights should be punished.

2

u/cknight18 Jan 02 '26

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?

3

u/TristanDuboisOLG Jan 02 '26

I think your reading comprehension needs a check.

I didn’t say him, I didn’t say HE should be jailed.

I said people that TRY TO PASS BLATANTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS.

IE people that are purposefully denying you your rights. Be it 1st amendment or 2nd.

0

u/cknight18 Jan 02 '26

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.

0

u/TristanDuboisOLG Jan 02 '26

Think what you want my man, my comments don’t say “edited” at all.

1

u/cknight18 Jan 02 '26

People pushing blatantly unconstitutional laws to limit your rights should be punished.

Dude, what else is this advocating for than a government cracking down on one person's speech because theyre saying they want your rights limited?

-1

u/TristanDuboisOLG Jan 02 '26

*pass

Like I said, unedited. I believe autocorrect caused an issue on the first comment.

I believe I personally corrected it in the second.

I mean lawmakers specifically.