9 ms·
I truly hope Musk doesn't cave and the court blocks the site. Maybe this way more people will wake up to all the abuses, violations and honestly, crimes, happe
by hexage1814 2y ago
I truly hope Musk doesn't cave and the court blocks the site.
Maybe this way more people will wake up to all the abuses, violations and honestly, crimes, happening in the country, committed by the Brazilian Supreme Court.
- wewtyflakes 2y agoIf you had ended that with "Twitter" (or "X"), rather than "Brazilian Supreme Court", the comment would have read just as credibly.
- hexage1814 2y ago[flagged]
- decremental 2y ago[flagged]
- wewtyflakes 2y agoI am not equating the power or effects of the two, I am equating the sentence regarding abuse of power (that you said).
- scarab92 2y agoTwitter/X is easily has the lightest touch of the major social media networks. I don’t know why you thought it was sensible to mention two opposite ends of the abuse of power spectrum as comparable.
- wewtyflakes 2y agoA local sharp power versus a global soft power? Seems like an interesting comparison within the context of a reply to: "Maybe this way more people will wake up to all the abuses...". It is interesting because it is a contrast, yet still makes sense.
- gchamonlive 2y agoIf you mean the aftermath of January 8th 2023, that is an absurdly dishonest comment. Nothing in that frustrated coup d'etat attempt can be remotely seen as a protest.
- ekianjo 2y agoyou do a coup d etat by trespassing in a building without weapons? in which dimension does this work?
- gchamonlive 2y agohttps://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/condenado-por-armar-bomba-no-aeroporto-do-df-nega-relacao-do-episodio-com-o-8-de-janeiro/ https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/condenado-por-armar-bo... https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/14/americas/brazil-congress-riots-timeline-intl-latam/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/14/americas/brazil-congress-... Couldn't find a translation for the first one, but in a gist you don't need to when, first the GSI is complacent in the coup and when there would have been a bombing attack.
- matheusmoreira 2y agoBrazilians have occupied Brasília and Palácio do Planato many times before. In 2016, for example, after Dilma was impeached. Now it's a coup d'etat? Come on now.
- surgical_fire 2y agoThose events were very different. In 2016 the protesters were not attempting a coup. They, perhaps, should still be charged with damaging public infrastructure (which has much lighter sentences). Equating those two events mean you are either arguing in bad faith, or you disagree that what happened in Jan 8th was a coup attempt (which is simply denying facts)
- matheusmoreira 2y agoYou bet I disagree. You simply cannot convince me that elderly folks with bibles and flags were attempting a coup d'etat. It's funny. The 2016 people also claimed that Dilma's impeachment was a coup. They still claim that, to this day. Everything in this country is a coup apparently. Everything but the supreme court giving itself limitless powers and becoming a political party made up of unelected officials.
- dyauspitr 2y agoBy protest do you mean a coup d’etat? Treason is still punishable by death even in the United States. Sounds like those “protestors” were given a light sentence.
- anigbrowl 2y ago'a protest' doing a lot of work here. https://apnews.com/article/brazil-bolsonaro-supporter-riot-capital-sentenced-prison-df66a030fd62fe873584a4c582863b48 https://apnews.com/article/brazil-bolsonaro-supporter-riot-c...
- nightvox 2y agoIt's very easy to speak about things you don't know based on a newspaper article, especially when that newspaper is obviously biased. Just look at the site's news about Bolsonaro. All the news that criticizes Bolsonaro has not been proven true or did not reach a conclusion; in other words, they were proven to be purely political narratives. It's hard to argue these points. Everything the Brazilian Supreme Court has done is illegal. A Supreme Court that initiates investigations on its own, is an interested party, and at the same time is the judge. In other words, everything is wrong, everything is illegal. Purely political judgments, typical of dictatorships. Many of the people who were arrested in Brasília were trying to prevent others from committing acts of vandalism or damaging public property. In other words, the trial was done in groups, something the Brazilian Constitution does not allow; it was not individualized in any way to establish individual responsibilities. Not to mention that most of the people there were in favor of the military taking power, contrary to what Bolsonaro advised. Many thought Bolsonaro was too weak, and that’s why they were there protesting, asking the military to take over the government. Saying that Bolsonaro was responsible for those movements is pure lies. It is just an argument that the Supreme Court wants to use against Bolsonaro so that he can somehow be imprisoned, but he is very popular, and not even the Supreme Court can arrest Bolsonaro because there is no real reason. The most ridiculous thing is that well-educated people, because people who read Hacker News are well-educated, let themselves be carried away by these childish narratives.
- surgical_fire 2y ago"a protest". A coup attempt is a lot more than a protest. Honestly, I think the sentences are being too light, especially considering they can leave prison much earlier than that (I am unsure of for this crime it is after a third or a sixth of the sentence).
- chihwei 2y agoSo what crime did X commit to? Or it refused to censor your opponent and made you angry?
- gchamonlive 2y agohttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65246394 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65246394 But I guess the rules play differently when you are a billionaire, so here we are.
- chihwei 2y agoSo you think it's a crime to allow people speak things you don't like?
- Kamq 2y agoIn a lot of places? Yeah. Like super illegal (felony level)
- gchamonlive 2y agohttps://www.un.org/en/hate-speech/united-nations-and-hate-speech/international-human-rights-law https://www.un.org/en/hate-speech/united-nations-and-hate-sp... > While certain restrictions on freedom of expression may be motivated by principles of equality and non-discrimination, “direct and public incitement to genocide” and “advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence” are strictly prohibited under international law, and are considered the “severest forms of hate speech”.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoThere’s no legitimate definition of hate speech. It’s just an ever expansive label used to undermine political speech and justify censorship or criminal charges. Free speech is the most fundamental civil liberty. Also no one cares what the UN’s “international law” is. They just all support it or ignore it as convenient, because it means nothing.
- GolfPopper 2y agoAgreed. If someone wanted to find a bloody shirt to wave to bring attention to real abuses, Elon Musk's failing $44 billion-dollar tantrum is probably among the least sympathetic victims imaginable.
- raxxorraxor 2y agoHaving content on their site that you might not like isn't really comparable. It is sensible to be suspicious of Musk perhaps, but the current hatred of him is as disconcerting as the former glorification. I think one could expect a bit of self-reflection to not have states shut down online spaces. And that is true for those that I do not personally like as well.
- dyauspitr 2y ago[flagged]
- jcranmer 2y agoGiven that, under Musk, Twitter has caved into such governments as Turkey and India when presented with a censor-or-quit ultimatum, one would think the historical precedent of what Twitter will do is clear. Unless Musk's principle is really that one needs to bow down to right-wing attempts to censor speech, and a left-wing attempt to censor speech must be resisted at all costs. (Either way, Musk's adherence to the principle of standing up for free speech universally is very poor, and I truly marvel at anyone who believes him to be a defender of free speech.)
- energy123 2y agoHe caves to requests from autocrats and fights requests from independent judiciaries in liberal democracies. That's the more salient dividing line than right vs left.
- scarab92 2y agoThe Brazilian court’s order isn’t comparable to the court orders from Turkey and India. The Brazilian court ordered global removal, rather than just to have the content hidden within its jurisdiction.
- raxxorraxor 2y agoHaving to cave to countries pushing for more and more content control is what their predecessors made possible. And it isn't just Turkey or India, it is the US and parts of Europe too. For years there were arguments that a private platform could censor what they like. I guess some people are just ignoring the repercussions.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoThis is a false narrative. Twitter has said they’ll abide by local laws. In Turkey and India, they did. In Brazil, they’ve made the claim formally that unilateral secret censorship orders from one justice are not legal per Brazil’s own constitution, and so they cannot comply. You’re using this false equivalence to attack Musk and Twitter as unprincipled when they’re actually being principled.
- 2y ago
- matheusmoreira 2y agoI wish, friend. Even here on HN brazilians will come and gaslight us about the constitutionality of what this judge is doing.
- piva00 2y agoWould be good if you listed all the abuses, violations, crimes happening in Brazil committed by the Supreme Court instead of vaguely referring to something the vast majority of users here will have no idea about, nor any way to research if they don't speak Portuguese.
- diegoholiveira 2y ago- STF started a secret investigation about fake news, which is illegal because it’s not written on our constitution and make it the police and the punisher. - people under investigation or jailed can’t access this secret investigation, even their lawyers can’t, so they don't know why they're being arrested for. - STF is starting other investigations without being provoke, which is illegal under our constitution. - they send one person to prison because he was running from justice on USA, but this person lawyer prove that he never leave the country. Even the USA authorities say he didn’t entered the country. - they censored a magazine that published a report of corruption inside de court. - they censored some journal about people calling to end the secret investigation. - they are trying people who should be tried in the first instance (the US equivalent of local courts), not in the supreme court. - all orders sent to X (twitter) are secret, including the reason why this person or tweet must be down. which is, of course, illegal under our "marco legal da internet", a law approved years ago that was suppose to regulate internet. The list can go on.
- piva00 2y ago> - STF started a secret investigation about fake news, which is illegal because it’s not written on our constitution and make it the police and the punisher. As far as I know this is disputed and not black-and-white, there's been a back and forth between PGR, AGU and the court on the legality of the Supreme Court on investigating activities that directly affect members of the court (including technical employees employed by the court themselves). I'm not so into Brazilian politics since I left more than 10 years ago but got some context from chatting with some law practicing friends. > - STF is starting other investigations without being provoke I don't understand what this means. > - they send one person to prison because he was running from justice on USA, but this person lawyer prove that he never leave the country. Even the USA authorities say he didn’t entered the country. What person? Would like to research more about this case. > - they censored a magazine that published a report of corruption inside de court. Is this about the "O Antagonista" and "Crusoé" debacle from 2019? Edit: just checked about the case in 2019 and if that is what you refer to, the request to take down the article was due to the article lying about Odebrecht mentioning Dias Toffoli and reporting that his deposition was reported to the PGR and Lava Jato task force while both denied receiving any material about it. It sounds like a pretty clear case of defamation/libel. > - they censored some journal about people calling to end the secret investigation. What newspaper was censored in this case? Also keen to check it out if given more information.