overview for FreedomAdvocate

Woman called a child the N word, then she claimed to be the victim. So far she raised over $150,000 in c/politics@lemmy.world

[–] FreedomAdvocate -2 points 10 months ago

Ugh "max comment depth".....response to your NEXT comment is here:

Huh? I literally just responded to your comment:

Gangs are NOT NATIONS OR GOVERNMENTS

to point out that the act is allowed to be invoked when there is an invasion or predatory incursion coming from a foreign nation. I was pointing out where your point is wrong.......and you then start talking about planes full of migrants?

Love the choice of language too - "migrants" rather than what they all are, which is "illegal immigrants". "without due process" has already been explained - the act that we're talking about means that a different "due process" is now in play, one which they did follow.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world

[–] FreedomAdvocate -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

By "everything" you mean "these 2 specific examples", don't you?

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world

[+] FreedomAdvocate -11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Am I missing something?

Yes. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you might have taken the quoted text and the link as being the same thing, when they are 2 separate things.

The X link is a post from X Global Government Affairs regarding this Turkey censorship situation. Some of the text from it:

X received an order to restrict access in Türkiye to the account of the now-detained Mayor of Istanbul. While we have followed Türkiye’s order regarding the account, we strongly disagree with the order and are challenging the order in court. In the spirit of full transparency, we are sharing the court order and our legal filing below.

The order was received from the Turkish Information and Communication Technologies Authority. These orders require X to block content in Türkiye that is available in the rest of the world.

Lack of compliance with these orders can lead to severe sanctions, including throttling of the entire platform in Türkiye. X complied with the court order while we challenge the order in court because we believe keeping the platform accessible in Türkiye is vital to supporting freedom of expression and access to information, particularly following natural disasters and other emergencies.

In the spirit of upholding due process, we carefully review all the requests under the local law. X has been and will continue to object to removal orders including government requests in courts to protect users when those requests do not align with principles of free expression, due process, or other local laws.

Basically the government threatened X to censor that account in Turkey or face severe punishment, like many censorship-happy governments have done lately. X complied but are taking them to court over their order, like they have done with all the other censorship-happy governments who have done the same thing.

BlueSky banned the politicians account there btw. They aren't challenging the order in court.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world

Woman called a child the N word, then she claimed to be the victim. So far she raised over $150,000 in c/politics@lemmy.world

[–] FreedomAdvocate -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

The invasion or predatory incursion is coming from a foreign nation, El Salvador.

I'm sorry but I don't understand how one person can be wrong about basically every single thing they point out.

Coincidentally this happened literally an hour ago:

https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/05/08/long-island-ms-13-sentence-omar-antonio-villalta-central-islip-murder/

Woman called a child the N word, then she claimed to be the victim. So far she raised over $150,000 in c/politics@lemmy.world

[–] FreedomAdvocate -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

apparently we've reached "max comment depth" down below so I'll reply here:

Yes? And did you keep reading? How those words are specifically used during wartime or invasion which this is clearly not?

You mean did I keep reading the very next sentence? I sure did!

The president has inherent authority to repel these kinds of sudden attacks — an authority that necessarily implies the discretion to decide when an invasion or predatory incursion is underway.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world

Woman called a child the N word, then she claimed to be the victim. So far she raised over $150,000 in c/politics@lemmy.world

[–] FreedomAdvocate -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

What exactly do you think in the bit you highlighted proves you right?

Can you read?

I'm asking myself the same thing about you based on this conversation.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world

Woman called a child the N word, then she claimed to be the victim. So far she raised over $150,000 in c/politics@lemmy.world

[–] FreedomAdvocate -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

FROM YOUR OWN LINK:

But the president need not wait for Congress to invoke the law based on a threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world