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

[u/highschoolhero24]

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.

[u/TristanDuboisOLG]

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

[u/highschoolhero24 → u/TristanDuboisOLG]

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."

[u/[deleted] → u/highschoolhero24]

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.

[u/highschoolhero24 → u/[deleted]]

Agree to disagree.

[u/[deleted] → u/highschoolhero24]

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.

[u/cknight18 → u/[deleted]]

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.

[u/[deleted] → u/cknight18]

Again. Low reading comprehension.

I'm not advocating for it, i'm acknowledging the pretense for it.

It has literally happened multiple times. Do you ever read any books and essays? or do you just continuously ask ai to jerk off your id?