Matt Taibbi

Rank 35 of 47
|
Score -49
5/13/2024, 3:43:39 AM
X
In reply to:
Pops
@BobBail46225980
·
443d
@mtaibbi @Timcast Is there any bright line that separates a person who “supports” a designated terrorist org from one who is a member of? What constitutes “membership?” Surely you support no fly for actual members?
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
443d
You seem to be missing the part where the No Fly List would be compiled and maintained by the FBI. You couldn’t draw up a more perfect example of a 1A violation.
Dale Baker
@dlbkr2
·
443d
@mtaibbi Flying on planes owned by someone else with other people is not a “right” it is a privilege. Same as driving on publicly funded roads. If they are hindering you from owning an airplane, I could see the argument.

The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the implications of existing laws on civil liberties, specifically addressing concerns about the potential overreach of state power in punishing individuals for activities such as protesting, which may not constitute 'material support' to terrorist organizations as defined by law. The statement critiques a proposal that could allow for severe punishments for actions that do not align with the legal definition of material support, raising issues about freedom of expression and the right to protest.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to prevent harm by critiquing a potential misuse of legal power that could unjustly penalize individuals. [+2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects the dignity of others by defending the rights of individuals to protest without facing severe legal consequences. [+2]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by clarifying the distinction between 'material support' and other forms of expression like protesting. [+2]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    It engages in constructive criticism of a proposal that could infringe on civil liberties, fostering dialogue on the balance between security and freedom. [+2]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The statement acknowledges the existing legal framework and uses it to argue against potential overreach, showing a commitment to factual accuracy. [+2]
  6. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    By discussing the implications of legal definitions and potential state actions, the statement uses its influence to advocate for the protection of civil liberties. [+2]
  7. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds principles of free speech by defending the right to protest and expressing concerns about policies that could restrict this freedom. [+2]