3 ms·
And that is flat ignorance of all the other context of destruction of data going on right now. Ignoring that research data is being maintained by private citize
by jaybrendansmith 1mo ago
And that is flat ignorance of all the other context of destruction of data going on right now. Ignoring that research data is being maintained by private citizens to protect it doesn't support your point. Censorship of government websites is just a small piece of this, ignoring it doesn't help anyone but a rank partisan, which you clearly are.
- torstenvl 1mo ago[flagged]
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo agoYour refusal to look up "censor" in a dictionary doesn't make you right. Some people are actually trying to have a reasoned discussion about the downsides of what the administration is doing, in particular the censorship, which is the problem with articles like this being flagged, especially when it's justified with partisan hyperbole such as what can be found in your comments here.
- torstenvl 1mo agoThe government choosing not to engage in or endorse certain speech does not suppress others engaging in that speech. What is your argument here?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago> "Censorship of government websites" is an oxymoron. > The government choosing not to engage in or endorse certain speech does not suppress others engaging in that speech. The second sentence is not related to what I'm saying. I'm responding to the notion that government resources can't be censored. > What is your argument here? There is no argument, but an observation: government resources can be censored. I'm not going to insult you by copying a definition of "censor" and explaining how it is possible to apply that action to government documents. You're smart enough to figure that out on your own.
- torstenvl 1mo agoYou are quite simply wrong. It would appear willfully so.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo agoThis is a perfect example of a psychological projection. Your comment describes itself.