That’s always a rational and logical place to take the conversation - viscious McCarthyist paranoia! Who knows, I could even be Xi himself, trying to make you lower your guard so I can feed you an ad for my dastardly electric car companies while you scroll past memes and tits.

That’s fair, I’m also bored with the topic.

1. They were also fined 2,500 USD each.

2. The case against them that most relates to what you’re talking about is in Michigan. They’re charged in accordance to a Michigan statute that bans deterring voters through “corrupt means or device”, referring specifically to disinformation that the two individuals specifically engaged in and their stated goals. That’s a world of difference from having a social media platform whose policies cultivate a userbase that seeks to get out the vote for a candidate and whose owner uses as a platform to advocate for that candidate. The case is actually going to the supreme court because the statute may be overly-broad.

3. You haven’t provided any evidence or compelling argument that what they or Musk do falls outside of 1A protection. It seems to me that you’re implying that media institutions with a slant towards a political actor or party during an election is violating campaign laws? Please clarify.

4. Invoking 20511 implies you believe pro-Trump disinfo on X posted by thousands of users constitutes “intimidation” of prospective voters. 30101 makes the “X support for Trump constitutes campaign finance fraud” argument look ridiculous:

(B) The term “expenditure” does **not include-

(i) any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;

The articles simply describe Chinese media firms buying ads on Tiktok. You can literally search through the ad library and find media firms from basically every country that can afford it.

There is quite literally zero evidence that Tiktok “spreads propaganda” relating to the Russia-Ukraine war of its own volition. There are literally millions of pro-Russia users around the world - i.e India where a huge percent of users come from and where the population is split on which side of the war is to blame - who are responsible.

China doesn’t “write rules” even in its own region. Neither does the US. Newspapers like this one are trapped in a ridiculous false dichotomy. Go look at the regional agreements that govern trade and data which China and the US are both not a part of

Yes, we are all very, very invested in your support and are seeking to trick you into taking sides. You are very intelligent and got one over on us 👌. Please keep contributing inane statements to signal that you’re not being fooled.

I could not think of a way you could have missed the point harder. The point of the article is that firms based in non-belligerent states are offering services to a government that has slaughtered children on an industrial scale for the past year. The article is talking about the legal and moral scrutiny that this monstrous cooperation demands and the ways in which this complicity is buried. You may as well have responddd to an article about 1930s IBM with this tripe.

There are no laws on the books that force social media platforms to tolerate all political expression. While there are laws allowing then to be sued for violating civil rights, that’s not the same thing. Selective bans on people of specific political background are still a common thing across the internet.

So until that’s remedied we’re trapped with billionaire cretins trying to swing politics with their huge platforms.

Wohl and Burkman were fined for sending threatening and intimidating robocalls. Not spreading misinformation.

Fox News is also providing measurable benefit to Trump. They also spread disinformation. If euther of those things were illegal they’d been shut down back when they were calling Obama a Kenyan Muslim.

Please identify exactly which law Musk is breaking and with exactly which action.

How does a US citizen “interfere” in a US election? Nothing described in the article is illegal. “Interfere” is usually used to denote actions by outside powers.

US is not happy about this lol.

I’ll spell this out for you.

The US Israel FTA does not include military sales, which are regulated in separate treaties.

The 10 year memorandum is a memorandum (meaning non-binding) and only deals with financial assitance and missile defense - which I already mentioned. It can be cancelled at literally any time.

Neither agreement affects the other. You should Google a little more thoroughly. Or better yet, stop arguing about topics you don’t understand.

This is the last time I’m responding to you. I get the impression you’re just here to feed your ego.

This is not a constructive way to learn about topics you’re unfamiliar.

You have brought up exactly one concrete claim - that the arms relationship is a “decades-long trade agreement” - and it was embarrassingly wrong. I can see why you find the topic so complicated, you seem to not know the first thing about it.

A Syrian friend in Turkey once explained to me that Turks (who love playing tough but haven’t fought a conventional war since WWI) tell Syrian refugees that they should have stayed and fought… and he’d tell them that no matter how brave you are - and Syrians are in my opinion uniquely brave - “you cannot defeat tanks and aircraft with Kashinkovs. Look at Ukraine, where they have a modern military that is weaker. Look how many left. But Syrians are supposed to fight Russian bombers and Assad’s tanks with their hands?”

It’s not a “decades-long trade agreement” to begin. Do you think it’s NAFTA or something? Maintaining Israel’s QME is written into law but very vaguely define, and the Leahy law can be invoked to stop all offensive weapons while still allowing defensive weapons - such as interceptor missiles - through. You’re a complete midwit grasping at straws. You haven’t outline a single concrete objection, you rely on vagueries to hide your ignorance.

Removed by mod

This is a nice little rant, but there is nothing “complicated” about the Leahy law or the State Department discretion unless you’re literally a child or have some kind of cognition issue. It’s straight forward. If Biden wants to stop sending weapons, all he has to do is tell his Secretary of State “hey, stop sending weapons on account of the law says we can’t” and it’s done.

Your argument is silly. There are laws on the book that empower the State Department to block arms transfers to Israel. The only way this can be undone is if Congress repealed the laws, which is hardly likely.

LOL destruction of the group as a political force is abolutely not in reach or even close to it. This is a deeply entrench sectarian group. It is the political and military expression of Lebanese Shia and the bonds and loyalty run extremely deep. There is no analogue to it among the other two sects, who dominate the official government and will never coordinate together in auch a manner as to defeat it. If it were as simple as assassination leaders, bombing infrastructure and invading the south, it would have been done decades ago.

You’re being sold a delusional bill of goods just as in 2003 and 2006.