As I said - you don't understand Russian culture completely to think that this suggests something. Corrupt? Maybe. But only if stupid. They have made their money, why would he risk anything for a little bit more? The point being (except for the usual "you are stupid")? Have I ever claimed race or gender is not fundamental in the US? No. So, please explain to me what is wrong with my assumption that such a claim, clearly based on classical patriarchal culture, made by a politician in the US would result in a shitstorm of him being sexist or so. A shitstorm which could be deadly for any public figure (with the exception of Trump, who openly provokes such shitstorms)? Thanks. A classical false friend (the German word is "Hackordnung"). You think Deripaska has to care about this? Or Putin? For you, it matters. You are US citizens, you have to care about US laws and US indictments. Those 13 Russians don't have to care - at least not about what they have done on Russian territory. And Putin does not have to care too. He tried to explain this many times to that poor NBC journalist, who has the same difficulty to understand that elementary point that only US citizens, or visitors of the US as long as they are on US territory, have to care about US law (emphasis mine): Quite interesting is the clearly visible scheme - Kelly suggests that Putin would have to do what an authoritarian leader is supposed to do - if somebody does something which violates the interests of the empire, he should initiate an investigation. Instead, Putin insists on the rule of law - the Russian constitution, which forbids extraditing Russian citizens, that if they have not violated Russian law, there is nothing that can be done, and that even to start an investigation one would have to follow the official channels: Nice to see how this copies part of our discussion #19 #33, #37, #38, #50, #55, #58 "As I have said, those things which are normally illegal everywhere (like using false names to open bank accounts) can be persecuted in Russia, in a Russian court, because they are illegal according to Russian law too. But "corrupting American elections" by expressing one's opinion about Clinton, sorry, this will be legal in any country with some freedom of expression. " or #92 "With money laundering, there is no problem at all. As I have said, the US can go to Russia and ask the Russians to persecute these 13 guys for this, following Russian laws against money laundering. But Russia will not persecute people, American or other, simply for expressing their opinions, naming this "conspiracy against RF". "
You missed the implication of the video for Mueller's investigation - you even missed it when you emphasized the key fact. More jokes. Living and learning about fascists. You never see them coming. Yep. When claiming Trump's appeal was that he was not "politically correct", for example. In addition, you have made many clueless and silly claims about racism and sexism in the US. You don't know anything about it, is your basic problem. Nope. Mueller is not investigating either of those gentlemen, afaik. Why do you keep bringing up that irrelevancy? That's not among the crimes specified in the indictment. Read the indictment. So is Trump, and everyone in his administration. Mueller is not investigating Russians.
In fact, I don't care and don't have to care about how Mueller may use some irrelevant indirect connections with some Russian citizens to fake a connection with the Russian government. That's your problem if talking with a Russian becomes dangerous for you. Really? Quote with a link, please. Of course, I often make claims you don't like. And your invectives for such claims does not mean more than your disagreement. And for other people, what they have done there beyond having fun with some girls is quite irrelevant. Why should Trump care? (Ok, rhetorical question. He lives in a "three felonies a day" land where it is dangerous to have a business connection with somebody who has a business connection with somebody who works in the Russian government. This can end in a "conspiracy against the US" indictment.)
They're relevant and direct. I'm not going to do any work to prove to you that you claimed much of Trump's appeal was in his challenge to "political correctness". If you attempt to deny that, you make a fool of yourself. Mueller is investigating violation of US law by US citizens. He's a US citizen, subject to US law, and quite plausibly and thoroughly implicated in serious criminal activity - your criterion, remember.
Maybe when you waste that many posts and words in a thread, you should just admit at the outset you're talking about something else. I do admit, though, it's a fine exhibition of what it takes to defend someone like Vladimir Putin.
This is something I have written, several times, and I do not plan to deny this. And you know very well that what you have to support with quote and link is something different. Answer the following question: "Have I ever claimed race or gender is not fundamental in the US?" with a quote with a link. I don't understand your point. I will try to clarify why I have to bother: If the US would be a civilized country of law, which would accept the sovereignty of other states, there would be no reason for me to care about whatever laws you have, as long as I don't plan to visit the US. Unfortunately, the US is not. It behaves as US law is relevant for everybody, even for non-US citizens doing something outside the US. Moreover, despite repeated attempts to get information here about what would constitute a crime, the US participants have avoided giving that information. Only Quantum Quack has proposed some ideas, but I doubt they are correct. I can interpret that refusal only in the straightforward way, namely, that there is nothing which could prevent Mueller to indict me too if he would like to do this. This is typical for totalitarian states and corresponds to what other people think about actual US law (see "three felonies a day"). To remember my question: ------------------------ Of course, I see that there are also other things these guys have done, things which are quite irrelevant for me, given that I do not plan to use names of real peoples as pseudonyms and to open bank accounts with these pseudonyms. (But I also use sometimes pseudonyms, and I would never give any information about these pseudonyms to anybody because I think this is part of my privacy. Given that similar things also appear in the indictment, it would be interesting to learn if simply visiting the US in such circumstances would constitute a crime too.) All I want to know is if I have, without knowing this, already violated the same US law or not. If what I would like to do is legal, I would like to know what I have to do to prevent such indictments against me, or what I should not do, but what these guys have, according to the indictment, done. If what I would like to do is, in fact, illegal, I would like to know about this. The question if I would care about this is a different one, but I would like to know if I risk imprisonment if I simply visit the US. So, my question is: If I regularly (that means, also in times of election campaigns) post information about politicians, inclusive American ones, and this information is sometimes not in favor of them, thus, could be easily described as derogatory, if want to reach with this as much as possible people, would be happy if this influences their decisions, which includes their decisions of how to vote in elections, have some friends who share my political views, and cooperate with them doing this, does this possibly constitute a felony in the US or not? If I use for this purpose pseudonyms and consider information about my internet pseudonyms private information so that I don't give it to anybody, would I become a felony simply by visiting the US? ---------------------------
Of course you don't. The thing is, you don't understand how Americans go about their lives and institutions; the spectacle and market effects are what they are, but there actually is a reason certain institutions go about things certain ways. There is a point, for instance, at which Putin's isolation is irrelevant to American institutions; setting aside that there are some countries who would, if these indicted Russians show up, help the U.S. acquire them for trial, it is also important, for the sake of process, to create a record. If you found Americans less boring↑—you know, if you actually paid enough attention to have a clue—you might be capable of recognizing the significance of the implications; Mueller is either bluffing cosmically, or this clumsy clown car, this Trump cavalcade, really has gone about their (ahem!) "business" in such a manner that it really does look like the Special Counsel's Office has the luxury of cornering the president. That is, the vectors run all around Donald Trump; he's pretty much trapped. The question is whether this stops at the valence of children and children's spouses, which in the American context is is going to be virtually impossible to separate from President Trump. There is, in that, some irony, but you need to be able to at least respect the underlying American narrative enough to understand what it tells you regardless of what you might otherwise think of it: Consider the alleged dissatisfaction Americans are purported to have expressed in electing Donald Trump, and the significance that they have elected the embodiment of what they complain about, because if we can establish that separation for Donald Trump, the people who complain that government doesn't work will have basically achieved their thesis. And if Iceaura understates the point— —it is because the story emerging is supposed to be unbelievable. Then again, the Trump sphere really does seem breathtakingly oblivious. No, really. There is the President who boasts on television; the son who hands over the emails; the son-in-law who ... I mean, what the hell is wrong with these people? Imagine for a moment they are so immersed in either Trump family delusions of grandeur or Republican fantasies of government incompetence, that they aren't covering their tracks, and actually giving it all away as they go, because it didn't occur to them they could be caught. And I say it is supposed to be unbelivable because there is an unwritten sentence that starts with, "The mercenary, who is the brother of the current Education Secretary ...", includes notorious Russians in a secret meeting overseas already presenting questions of perjury, Donald Trump's apparent revenge against a small allied nation for failing to properly assuage the Kushner family, and at some point observes that the United Arab Emirates actually hired the mercenary's army with an eye toward invading Qatar, and things have only gone downhill from there. Meanwhile, Putin arguing that Russian nationals cannot be trusted doesn't really equal rule of law↑, but he does make a certain important point about himself along the way.
I do not think that the USA would be that upset if this were the case ( Russians declared as Russian nationals and not pretending to be USA citizens). Simply expressing an opinion in good faith is not the issue. However when there is a foreign conspiracy to corrupt an electoral process by deliberately spreading disinformation, by using identity deception, defamation and so on with the goal of discrediting and destabilizing USA democratic institutions, there is a case to be answered. Even in Russia any one found to be attempting the same would also be held up for accountability as it would be seen as a direct attack on the sovereign state. Can you not see the distinction between simply expressing a free opinion and a conspiracy to harm the democratic process? Certainly Mueller can I believe. The USA could achieve more damage to the Russian democratic electoral process by supporting Putin using the same methods than by fighting against him. Can you see why this may be so? Imagine thousands of fake Russians spreading disinformation and slander on Russian social media, and media in general all in support of Putin. Then telling the Russian electorate afterwards that they have been duped and played for fools...and Putin's success was a fraud. As part of the modern era (globalization/Internet) all democracies that have freedom of the press (one can not have one with out the other IMO btw) are facing the same issues and the Mueller case is a "test" case for the rest of the world. Democracy has a weakness and it is how to prevent that weakness from being exploited by nefarious actors is the issue globally. Australia currently is having huge issues with the abundant supply of Chinese money being used to influence our political systems and decisions. This influence even if benign and friendly has to be managed to maintain integrity of the Australian democratic institutions. ( Chinese nationals do not vote in our elections this is reserved for Australian citizens) Can you see the scale and gamut of the problem facing the world or not?
Yes... this Qatar thingo has yet to see light 'o day fully and also this Embassy shift to Jerusalem like wise. Also Trumps inaction in Syria, Ukraine and so on.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! but wait there is so much more that doesn't wash too well...
and something that has been repeatedly overlooked, namely the mysterious problems experienced by the staff at the Cuban embassy. Possibly a new type of weapon and if so a weapon that can be used against any one including Trumps family (extortion?)
This makes this, of course, a morally questionable and illegal practice. But, of course, their money-making scheme would not work if there would not be an American banking account to pay money for the advertising, and people would hardly pay for openly Russians even if they would have a lot of American followers. From the point of view of the followers, sorry, nobody cares about twitter names being real names or not, so this is hardly a serious deceit. If American media are upset or not depends on their own political interest. No. If a diplomat would do it, this would be used as a pretense to throw him out of the country. In Russia, there have been cases of videos showing US diplomats meeting with politicians from the opposition. They were heavily used in the propaganda, to discredit the politicians they have caught as paid foreign agents. But there were, at least as far as I know, no other legal consequences, neither for the diplomats nor the politicians. I can see differences. Unfortunately, what I cannot see is a way to distinguish them in a law code so that, on the one hand, it is safe enough that it cannot be misused to sue people for expressing a politically unwanted opinion, and, on the other hand, so soft that one cannot easily circumvent it. And in this particular case, I see not a case of some conspiracy to harm the democratic process, but a dubious money-making scheme. The legally problematic part of it - the faked personalities - had the clear and obvious aim to allow to make money. They needed an American bank account so that their American customers could pay them. So, the dubious part of this was a dubious commercial practice, one which was technically illegal, but essentially nobody was really harmed here - the customers who made the payments received what they wanted, namely an advertising in the group they wanted to reach. The part which is what is classified as "a conspiracy to harm the democratic process" was nothing but the preparation process for this - to create twitter bots with a lot of followers, enough that customers would be ready to pay them for advertising. The way to do this was simply to post things popular in that particular group. Nothing but free speech. I can easily see why you think so, but I doubt you are right. It is not that easy to play Russians. First, Russians did not trust the media already in Soviet time. And those few who started to trust media in post-Soviet time have been played often enough to learn the lesson. Then, the Runet is full of dubious sources and full of sources ready to distribute any pro-American trolling, even for free. Some thousand more or less would be nothing to care about. And to distribute fakes about what Putin thinks is one of the most common exercises of those pro-American trolls. As well as of various other trolls (patriotic and so on). So, nobody would care much about some more trolls hiding as stupid pro-Putin trolls. Last but not least, would it be easy to fake Putin's position? Not at all. Say, this discussion - I explained here some points to iceaura and you about how these 13 guys could be persecuted. And my answer was almost exactly the same as the one repeatedly given by Putin to Kelly. You think this was based on some special knowledge? Certainly not, Russians know the legal situation in Russia much better, and this is all what I have had to use. That Kelly argued somewhere that Putin is a clever guy, not easy to trick or cheat him or so (my back-translation from some Russian source). An average Russian commenter there remarked that in this particular case it was quite easy. I found this remark correct. Putin's answers in this interview were, at least for those who know the Runet, quite predictable. Interesting about details, but predictable. To fake something which is basically predictable is not that easy at all. And, don't forget, Putin himself appears in the media sufficiently often that you can rely on the original. The internet does not forget Putin's speeches. First of all, freedom of press no longer matters today, given that we have internet. Then, no, you can have no real freedom of the press and but a "democracy". The fake "freedom of the press", where a few media magnates control all mass media and decide between themselves what they allow and what they censor, is completely sufficient for Western-style democracy. The only problem is that this no longer allows controlling the information accessible to the people. So, the West starts now to openly censor the internet. Free speech as a weakness of democracy? Fine. But I recommend you to read the classics, Mill, On liberty. Mill seriously recommends "advocates of the devil". Their job - to defend positions which are so evil that no human being is ready to openly defend them. The aim is that this would force us to find the best counterarguments and to identify the weak points in our arguments. So, all those "nefarious actors" can do is to do what would be useful, if not necessary, in a free society anyway. I can see your problems with freedom of speech, but I do not see it as a problem facing the world, I see this only as a problem with lying elites, given that their old methods to lie to the sheeple are no longer sufficient. No, simply some strange local insect which makes sounds uncomfortable for humans. Cubans are used to it, so they did not even understand what the Americans were talking about, the guys in the embassy did not know it and it made them feel uncomfortable. Snowflakes in Cuba, what do you expect?
Repeated: Yes. Repeated: I just did. Right here. As many times in the past. Your consistent claim that Trump's rhetorical appeals to the Republican core voting base of racially bigoted and gender biased white people was instead Trump being "politically incorrect" is exactly that. Quoted and linked on this thread, right here. And like the several other examples of your well-documented cluelessness in the matter of US racism (and sexism, although that's more universal), it's nothing that needs even more repetition for which other people have to do the work. Your unfamiliarity and cluelessness concerning US racism is the default, assumed position when dealing with your posts. You now need to provide the evidence, do the work. - - - - And the thing is, nobody can tell if you're joking or not. You've reached Poe's Law status. I believe you have topped yourself. btw: The pattern of your especially ridiculous postings, the genuinely clownbox slapstick stuff, usually involving biology and weather and the like, continues. (This general phenomenon - the technically adept screwing up biological and sociological reality, blundering around in biological ignorance and confidence as if not knowing what one is talking about were no handicap for those capable of sophisticated argument, is getting to be a cliché of the public discussion. We need a name: STEMflaw? Mathblinded? )
They were indicted for breaking several laws. The conspiracy law was one of them. Mueller would have to prove, in court, with good lawyers making counterarguments, that there was such a conspiracy - not only that your impression of "dubious moneymaking" did not account for the facts, but more than that: only a genuine conspiracy did. According to the grand jury, which has seen his evidence, he has a good case - worth taking to court.
Dissociated. As in, dissociated from purpose. But, yeah, we probably need one that is a bit more catchy and won't confuse those among them already accustomed to the word "dissociative".
It looks easy, when even the crude stuff goes over on them. What makes you think it's difficult? For example, you get played all the time, by even the crudest and least sophisticated of US marketing pros. Look at your Hillaryhate gullibility, or the climate change bs you swallowed whole.
A simple deceit? When a Russian made software program is designed to create false "apparent"American identities online and then pretend to be American and poison gullible and trusting Americans towards their democratic institutions and governance or when a team of professional trolls assume American identities and do the same, you consider this to be a simple deceit? Perhaps for those in Russia where there is little to no trust in governance and democratic processes to begin with the term simple deceit may be useful. Of course but they are bound by free market demands to offer what their readers are willing to pay for. The free market forces and laws associated with media content are seriously a challenge for any free market democracy but one that comes automatically with any vibrant and dynamic political system. Publishing the Truth accurately always makes more money in the long run. Most media elite know this. you have missed my point.( not referring to politicians or diplomats.) try again perhaps...with out the diversion? If it were merely about commercial practice this conversation would not be happening. However the money trail is very useful in determining other more serious outcomes. The recent advent of rampant social media and the gullibility of people generally, world wide has led to many extreme instances of fraud, inappropriate behavior etc. Sexting, bullying, scamming, extortion etc. It is an incredibly difficult area for law makers to deal with at the moment but they are attempting to work through the issues. If some freedom has to be removed in an over reaction then so be it. The Internet if not a God given right! It is something we could all take a step back from, especially now as most forms of hard cash (individual power & freedom) is now transforming into digital form. The inevitable death of cash or hard currency is the greater threat to freedom - individual empowerment and a threat you would be advise to focus on a little. If the twitter accounts were transparently Russian then there would not have been a problem and nor would the bots even be considered by their creators. They were used to defraud Twitter/Facebook users of any sense of systemic integrity or trust in the internet as a medium for serious discourse. What is wrong with being a proud Russian and prepared to disclose your true nationality? Is there something wrong with being Russian? Is the only way for a Russian to succeed a way of cheating and deception? Fake twitter bots Troll factories Cyber extortion. Sports doping.. Do Russians know how to tell the truth? Or are they just lost in Putin's web(s) of deception? Given the intense suffering of the Russian people ( WW2 and post WW2) due to repeated abuse by their own governments, is it little wonder that they would find it difficult to trust any one? Putin is a master at playing peoples fear and thus makes his call to be trusted extremely dubious at best. I think you would be surprised at the truth about Russian support for Putin. Putin himself appears to be worried about it. His recent pre-election actions indicate it. Putin is living in his own echo chamber and when the guillotine (Made in France from cheap Chinese steel) finally falls as it always does on oppressive regimes he may if he is fortunate escape that bubble as his head falls into the basket. Ridiculous statement! The press are probably the most prolific and patronized publisher on the net. I didn't write that. I wrote a general statement: It is the deception, fraud and associated scamming that is . The use of false identity, exploiting anonymity, to harmful advantage etc that is. All of which Russians in particular have a significant reputation for. You know, doping, cheating, deception...etc all sanctioned by a government that is likewise inclined insects.... hee hee... are you sure you are not Russian?
The weird thing is that we're, like, one piece of yarn away from a conspiracy wall connecting a really weird Saudi-Malaysian scandal to the freaking Qatar blockade as revenge on behalf of Jared's daddy. Well, wait, let me reconsider the paint on that potsherd: The Qatar blockade has the appearance of being some scheme for leverage. But that's the thing; the Qatar blockade also touches China, at least until it doesn't, and I remember dissemination of the reporting by which the Chinese had been caught discussing Jared Kushner, except the thing about the intercepts is that the Chinese foreign service knows damn well when we can hear them, which means they weren't caught out but, rather, made certain we heard. And at some point, I keep thinking this can only be a joke. When I first picked up↱ George Nader's name in January, it just seems impossible that anyone not involved in the scandal or investigation could possibly have guessed this joker, who was apparently unknown to veteran Beltway hands working Middle East affairs, would be near, or possibly the linchpin for ... well ... wait, what? Because the thing with China still doesn't make sense, but in the context of rattling the United States out of its international prestige and influence, yes, making certain our intelligence services know the president's son-in-law is corrupt and manipulable just seems one of those things. At this point, tinfoil sparkles enough that I'm willing to say that I will not be surprised if last month's government seizure of Anbang Group really does somehow end up being tied into whatever the hell was going on with Kushner Companies and Qatar, except for the part where at some point I get to be surprised at not being surprised. More seriously, when I first encountered Nader's name, all I could manage was to wonder, "Will that be nuts, or a cherry on top?" He turns out to be a freaking gem. And just for irony, that other piece of yarn? Yeah, Elliott Broidy is hosting Donald Trump's fundraiser in California. And every time I convince myself this isn't happening, it turns out some part of it is. Like the Malaysia scandal; sure, that runs through Broidy at some point but ... it isn't the same scandal as the #TrumpRussia affair, right? And the Anbang Group seizure is about businessmen getting too big for the Chinese government's comfort. Sure, it's the investor that said no, resulting in the Qatari rejection of a Kushner loan, but not everything in the Universe orbits Donald fucking Trump. But it's true that the Nader-Broidy overlap is UAE, and China's overlap is Qatar. These coincidences are merely that until they aren't. The cast of nations is mystifying; the cast of characters is a story unto itself.
it is also to restrict and justify the monitoring of the transfer of money into and out of the nation. Possibly under the pretext of blockading ISIL money supply. Yes ... never underestimate the Chinese... something I have come to appreciate. The magic word for me is "Malaysia" When you consider the intense global events that have transpired since the disappearance of MH370, 8th of March 2014 immediately after a major Malaysian politician and apparently a close friend of the pilot gets convicted and jailed for trumped up charges of sodomy. ( the plane was en route to ... you guessed it....Beijing ) ISIL, Crimea, Ebola, SARS Virus, and so on... Then 2 months later the shooting down of Malaysian flight MH17 over Ukraine 17th July 2014 Initial Mobile phone intercepts suggesting the Russians were expecting to find "a weapon" on board MH17 (and perhaps they did) note: an Al Qaeda biological/chemical weapons lab was/is based in Malaysia. you couldn't ask for anything better if one likes to dabble in conspiracy theories. ...and in among all this mess walks Trump.... with make America great again, a serious candidate for Manchurian blackmail....like a major release of a blockbuster apocalyptic Hollywood movie. breathing... breathing... but wait ... there is more....
uhmm.. eh.. sorry about that.... that tin foil certainly gets hot sometimes... The point I wanted to make was that it was only with and after the mysterious disappearance of MH370 en route from Malaysia to China that the world seemed to go crazy with extraordinary events. ( and it still is apparently) and now we have an apparent nerve agent attack in the UK with a Made in Russia label attached as some sort of message... the next 20 hours will prove interesting I am sure... The UK has been attacked using a Russian only made nerve agent and Trump has done and said nothing...the ramifications are staggering... The USA can not be trusted to keep it's word on global security. ( which is probably the message intended) Co-incidence: Noting also that the recent search for MH370 is about to be aborted as a complete failure. ( possibly due to Malaysian gov. interference) So the óle MH370 is still haunting the block....
Why do you use and even emphasize such a clearly negative-laden word? It clearly distorts the discussion here. What these guys have done was simply to repeat what is already popular among certain groups to gain followers. If what is already popular among the target audience is quite poisoned (and there is a lot of poison almost everywhere), then what they will post will (have to) be poisoned too, else they will not gain a lot of followers. This is, so far, simply amoral money making, the deceit - all that is connected with using names of real persons as pseudonyms and creating bank accounts - is minor here, the laws which forbid such things have not been invented to prevent this sort of deceit, neither the followers nor the sellers of advertising are seriously harmed by the deceit. That what would be worth to be named "poisoning" is something completely different. To "poison" that group you have to distribute there some new, different, and evil ideas. Which is obviously something they could have done simply using a pseudonym, or even openly as a Russian. Once the ideas are attractive enough to change the minds of the poor victims, their origin does not matter. The content matters. The accusation of the distribution of ideas which poison something is, so clearly a free speech issue. If there is free speech, there is free speech also for ideas poisoning whatever. I doubt. Have you asked yourself why the concentration in the media market is that high? Simply writing what is interesting for certain groups of people would not lead to such a concentration. The problem is, that is not profitable at all. If all the gains you have are what you sell in paper and gain via advertising, you will not make money with this. But there are guys ready to buy your paper. And these guys are, for some reason, really big media conglomerates. And they make money. Why? What is the advantage of size? It is political power. A media conglomerate can create a lot of problems for particular politicians. How to transform such political power into real income I leave to your fantasy. But what the sheeple think is not really interesting if this is what transforms an unprofitable business into a profitable one. Your point was The answer, in this case, would be simply no. Nobody in Russia would care about a few American trolls. Except some bloggers spammed by them would block them in their comments section. I agree that this purely commercial part is completely off. Mueller has used it, because it is formally illegal, thus, useful to present these trolls as evil. Here it is only iceaura's excuse, see, they have done much much more than you in your question. But the part which interests me is completely unrelated to this dubious slightly illegal advertising scheme so that it does not appear in my question at all. So, instead of using fake names and opening illegal faked bank accounts, I use simply a pseudonym, and instead of a money-making company, I have simply a few friends with similar political views. But everything else is the same. And in the "everything else" I see nothing but what should be accepted as part of free speech in any country where we have something worth to be named free speech. And democratic lawmakers will do what they do best, namely create chaos, legal uncertainty, three felonies a day. In a place where no state would be necessary at all. The time when there was no state control of the internet at all was the best time of the internet. If there is no God, there can be no God-given rights too. But free speech is a basic human right. Even in the most oppressive societies there have always been ways to express the opinion. Yes, the fight of the governments against cash is clearly one of the most dangerous attacks on freedom.
