Rest in Piss CK.
“freedom” of speech
Charlie Kirk fucked donkeys with his asshole. (Unverified but probably true)
How exactly do they even single these people out and know what’s on their social media?
Because they all live on social media instead of working at their new boring government jobs.
Hope they GTFO ASAP before the gestapo relocation service is assigned to their cases.
Lucky I can say Kirk was a piece of shit in life and his legacy is just shit-tastic in death.
This is why I have long since stopped posting anything online with anything even remotely resembling my real name and identity. I don’t even use my ‘real’ email anymore except for official purposes or shit I pay money for. Even my lemmy accounts are made with temporary emails and no matter how much I use them, they are ultimately disposable. Good luck trying to conclusively prove who I am… yeah I might sometimes reveal a little personal information, but broad enough that I could be anybody.
I pray Charlie Kirk is actually alive and it was a psyop just to piss them all off.
I find it funny how this thread is against the decision while there’s another thread with people supporting Australia for doing the same thing to an american.
I actually support both decisions. Countries should be able to deny/revoke visas without even having to provide a reason.
There is a difference between a political commentator who makes their living spreading rhetoric that is hateful to the countries government and is travelling with the intention of spreading that rhetoric directly and some random travelling for leisure who said some shit on social media that was hateful to the countries government. There is also something to be said for if the rhetoric is actually causing measurable harm to large numbers of people vs if the rhetoric maybe hurt a handful of peoples feelings or seemed embarrassing to the administration.
The difference is that both sides said things, and both sides got denied entry to a country because of it. Here you are trying to justify one side while condemning the other. Either both are wrong or both are right.
I do not believe for a second that the two things are objectively equal, saying they’re the same kind of thing doesn’t make them the same thing. Just because you are claiming to not be able to tell the difference between two kinds of “hateful speech” does not mean there isn’t an objective difference. This is the same kind of nonsense free speech absolutism argument you see ad nauseum online, that you either can’t have consequences for any kind of speech or live with consequences for all kinds of speech. It’s nonsense and usually isn’t even in good faith.
Another paragraph of nonsense where half of it is not even replying to what I said. I never labeled any of their speech as hateful, and I never said that all speech should have consequences.
No matter how you spin it, it boils down to the same scenario: both sides said things that the government didn’t like, both sides got denied entry to the country. Unless that’s a false statement, you are the one typing nonsense and arguing in bad faith.
A government doesn’t need a reason to deny visas, they need a reason to approve them.
Also:
I do not believe for a second that the two things are objectively different, saying they’re not the same kind of thing doesn’t make them different things. Just because you are claiming to see a difference between them does not mean there is an objective difference.
See how we can all play that game? Maybe use a real argument.
Scale is necessary, this isn’t comedy where if everything isn’t fair game then nothing is. Most things boil down the the same scenarios if you cook it long enough.
Theft of a can of beans is not equal to theft of a nuclear sub. Sure, they both “boil down to the same scenario”; theft. But I think we can all agree that the same punishment for both would be imbecilic.
The difference with this thread’s scenario is that yes, they both result in the same thing, but for different reasons. Denial of entry to someone who wasn’t tactful about the boss’ friend who was a hateful bigot is not the same as denial of entry for attempting to weaponise division to destroy a country.
Theft of a can of beans is not equal to theft of a nuclear sub. Sure, they both “boil down to the same scenario”; theft. But I think we can all agree that the same punishment for both would be imbecilic.
Welcome to the real world, where consequences are different depending on where you are. Australia is not the baseline for what should result in denial of entry, and neither is the US. They both have the right to deny entry for just for not liking your name, let alone not liking what you said.
The difference with this thread’s scenario is that yes, they both result in the same thing, but for different reasons. Denial of entry to someone who wasn’t tactful about the boss’ friend who was a hateful bigot is not the same as denial of entry for attempting to weaponise division to destroy a country.
Except that Owens is not trying to destroy Australia, but that’s how you and the Australian government interpret it. Guess what? The US government thinks those people are trying to destroy the US. All that matters is that Australia doesn’t like what Owens said to deny entry, and all that matters is the US didn’t like what was said about Kirk to deny entry.
Ok, let me show you the difference. Making light of a celebrity’s death is not the same thing as spreading propaganda in an effort to destabilize a country.
The US government thinks those people are trying to destroy the US
This is just blatantly false. The US is a fascist state. The govt is deliberately destroying the US and they know full well anyone against fascism is not trying to destroy the US. The US is no longer politically about the nuance of belief between right and left, but about fascism and anti fascism.
Saying Charlie Kirk was a piece of shit who literally got what he asked for is very different from Candace Owens attempting to spread fascism to Australia.
Removed by mod
That’s almost like saying landing on the moon or Mars or the Sun are the same because the craft isn’t landing back on Earth. There is a heck of a lot of difference between a working commentator being held to account (in a country that doesn’t have the same free speech rules anyway for anyone) and holding a vacationer to the same when they are not earning an income from their comments and the country does say that political speech is free speech as a major component of their Constitution. I’m not sure if you are arguing that the US no longer has a Constitution that applies or that you ignorantly thought Australia had the same Constitution as the US.
That’s almost like saying landing on the moon or Mars or the Sun are the same because the craft isn’t landing back on Earth.
Cool example, but that didn’t even make sense.
There is a heck of a lot of difference between a working commentator being held to account (in a country that doesn’t have the same free speech rules anyway for anyone) and holding a vacationer to the same when they are not earning an income from their comments and the country does say that political speech is free speech as a major component of their Constitution.
The US Constitution doesn’t apply to visa holders outside the US.
I’m not sure if you are arguing that the US no longer has a Constitution that applies
If you can quote me saying that, yes. Otherwise I don’t know why you even typed that.
or that you ignorantly thought Australia had the same Constitution as the US.
Never thought or said that. And like I said before, I actually support both decisions so I obviously think it’s legal under Australian law, as well as under US law.
“both sides said things” what a great summary.
that’s like saying it’s hypocritical to protest denying entry to someone who has a satirical blog and one who has a manifesto and detailed plans to bomb the denying country because “both posted stuff online”
Not the same thing. At all.
Comments like this might fly on reddit but people here are generally too sharp for that.
Ah yes, “Charlie Kirk won’t be remembered as a hero” by some random dude with 5 followers - barred from entry to the US, is the same as “When do we deploy troops to Australia? When do we invade Australia and free an oppressed people who are suffering under a totalitarian regime?” along with hundreds of anti-Jewish, holocaust denial comments and whitewashing of (literally) Hitler - barred from entry to Australia.
Yap yap yap Go worm into someone else’s ear with this crap.
“Charlie Kirk won’t be remembered as a hero,” one of the comments posted on X read. “He was used to astroturf a movement of white nationalist trailer trash!”
That’s one of the comments that gets a person deported from the USA? The fascist Republican regime is claiming that such comments celebrate his assassination, which is the same absurd move as calling any sympathy for Palestinians a celebration of Hamas attacks. Charlie Kirk was a far-right white supremacist bigot and provocateur.
Facts get your visa revoked. And this person didn’t even criticize the president, it was some nobody Nazi.
This is what a fascist dictatorship looks like.
Your visa has been revoked for incendiary comment! Twice for being a Hamas sympathizer!!! ;-)
The illusion of the US is over. They aren’t even bothering to pretend anymore
The illusion of the U.S. being a free country will hold for a while, to those who wish it is true. That’s the problem
Fascists are the weakest and most brittle snowflakes.
And they beat their chests and constantly boast about how big and stronk they are, too.
Ape together strong.
Fascists as individuals maybe are weak and brittle. But right now they are united, very strong, and very dangerous and no one can do anything to stop them from just doing what they please.
My work has flirted with the idea of me visiting sites in the US a couple of times over my career. Previously I was a bit nervous about the idea of having to go through the whole security theatre bullshit, and I didn’t actually need to be there, so I put it off. Now it’s an outright no. It seems genuinely like a dangerous place to travel now. Shit’s wild looking in from the outside, and they still insist on touting themselves as the land of the free.
Anything involving the fascist regime is dangerous, but most of the country and cities are safe and most people are nice. There are a groups of magats and Ice agents that are worth worrying about however. And if I had the option, I wouldn’t be here.
I absolutely believe that most people are fine. But those lovely people aren’t running the air ports or immigration control that I would need to pass through to work there.
Yeah exactly. You’re completely right to refuse to travel here.
We used to have free speech in this country. We had more rights in the 1980s
We had more rights in 2024.
At that point, anyone who post on Lemmy is probably considered a terrorist. No way I’m ever stepping foot in the US ever again, and I live an hour from the border.
The Orange Turd declaring anti-fascists as terrorist equates to declaring the majority of the population of the world as terrorists… Imbecile… Fascist imbecile…
Ah, and saying “smart people don’t like me” and the clueless followers clapping… Priceless!
We are all domestic terrorists
Not if we aren’t American.
