US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24 *AND* Beyond

[Chef Boi RD]

“When people thought about ICE, they thought, 'Great, we're going to get rid of the gang members,' they didn't think, 'Great, you're going to get rid of the landscaper.” - Joe Rogan

[Chef Boi RD]

Drain the swamp he said. Bullshit. Scary shit we are seeing unfolding.

https://x.com/jaketapper/status/1969036647355297847

Fucking hypocrite:

Executive Order 14149, titled "Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship", is an executive order signed by Donald Trump, the 47th president of the United States, on January 20, 2025, the day of his second inauguration

[rats19]

Chef when you look up from the rabbit hole can you see daylight?

I’m worried about you man

[5thhorseman]

Everyone should be worried about the direction the US is going.

Are there any checks and balances that have been working of late?

[Per]

There is still free speech in the Netherlands, and the Dutch don’t fuck around:

https://youtu.be/7vRX-BQAjeE?si=p1oC4pTME1a7CMFG

[Per]

So in your world Trump's inappropriateness makes Kimmell's acceptable? 2 wrongs make a right?

What did Jimmy Kimmel say that was inappropriate?

He did not condone the murder or criticize Kirk. He was only criticizing people trying to make politics of the murder.
How is that inappropriate?

And then he showed a clip about Trump being Trump and not giving two fucks about anyone else.
That is sort of the main idea about free press and media, that they criticize those in power and point out their flaws.
That is why a country without a free press can never truly be considered a democracy, and the USA under Trump is now on a very slippery slope toward autocracy. If you dare make fun of the Dear Leader, you’re gone.

[Per]

Freedom of Press is under threat everywhere. According to Reporters Without Borders there are now only seven countries that fully respect it: Norway, Estonia, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Ireland.

The situation in most of Western and Central Europe, as well as the English speaking world, is satisfactory though, with only a few exceptions. In Hungary, Italy, Greece, Croatia and the USA the situation is listed as problematic.

If you look at the rankings, Canada is in 21st place, on par with the UK, but having dropped 7 places since last year.
The USA is now in free fall. It is ranked 57th, sandwiched between Sierra Leone and Gambia.
I guess that is still better than russia in 171st place or China in 178th though.

Israel is a sad story as well. They used to be a bastion of democracy in the Middle East, but they now rank 112th. Their press is more restricted than in countries like Mongolia, South Sudan or Haiti. But I guess that is par for the course for a government involved in genocide. It is so much harder to do that if you allow investigative journalism.
More than 240 journalists have been killed in the current Gaza conflict. That is more than in WW1, WW2, the Vietnam war and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq combined. According to some sources the number may actually exceed 200.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_o ... e_Gaza_war



https://gijn.org/stories/global-press-f ... t-borders/

[Chef Boi RD]

So in your world Trump's inappropriateness makes Kimmell's acceptable? 2 wrongs make a right?

What did Jimmy Kimmel say that was inappropriate?

He did not condone the murder or criticize Kirk. He was only criticizing people trying to make politics of the murder.
How is that inappropriate?

And then he showed a clip about Trump being Trump and not giving two fucks about anyone else.
That is sort of the main idea about free press and media, that they criticize those in power and point out their flaws.
That is why a country without a free press can never truly be considered a democracy, and the USA under Trump is now on a very slippery slope toward autocracy. If you dare make fun of the Dear Leader, you’re gone.

“Free speech is the counterweight - it is the check on government control. That is why censorship is the authoritarian’s dream” - Brendan Carr FCC Chair December 30, 2023.

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. Cherry picker extraordinaries. Carr [mod edit] will go down in political history in shame as the rest of Trumps cronys and sackless coward yes men. Drain the swamp he said.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Hasn't the swedish press been guilty of suppression of information relating to migrant crime? How about your snitch show "Efterlyst" removing race details and calling them all swedes all of a sudden?

Those graphs and charts are pure propaganda. You're being manipulated

Trust nobody

[Tciso]

Canada should probably be ranked lower if transparency of governments was included. The last 10 years of the "most transparent government ever" has just been 10 years of "nothing to see here". And, shut down inquiries. And ignored foi requests. And lost emails and excessive NDAs. And 18 months between budgets.

This government is so transparent, it's a wonder no one has declared that our "emperor" has no cloths.

[Chef Boi RD]

Chef when you look up from the rabbit hole can you see daylight?

I’m worried about you man

The Trump rabbit hole is the abyss, it just keeps on going. The guy is a disaster.

[Per]

Hasn't the swedish press been guilty of suppression of information relating to migrant crime? How about your snitch show "Efterlyst" removing race details and calling them all swedes all of a sudden?

No, that’s a myth. Swedish press operates under a code of conduct though, where they usually refrain from releasing details about suspects that would make them easily identifiable, until they have been convicted. Once they are convicted they will publish all details, but when writing about suspects they will usually only give away the age and gender, ie a 34 year old male. I say usually, because if the police issue a warrant for a suspect, media will typically publish the description in the warrant, which would be much more detailed and could even include a name.

People who are anti-immigrant have argued that media should always reveal the ethnicity of suspects, but typically only far right publications do that. I agree with the current policy though. As soon as there is a conviction the media will tell everything, there is no covering up of who committed a crime. But when people are merely suspects, I agree with the concept of innocence until proven guilty, and find it wise to not reveal who the suspects are, since it could turn out they are innocent. I was shocked when in Iowa and watching the news when there had been a murder and they listed five or six suspects with names, hometowns and photos. This was a crime where most likely just one person was guilty, so why destroy the lives of several innocent people by suggesting they could be the murderer?

Anyway, this is just a code of conduct, not a law. It is only enforced by a jury of fellow journalists issuing a statement on whether the publication of someone’s identity was justified or not. No fine, no prison, no disbarment, just a statement on whether it was the right thing to do. Sometimes when the circumstances make it clear that it was eg a hockey player in a certain city, revealing the identity of the suspect could be beneficial for all other hockey players who are then cleared. So a paper who have published a name can argue that it was the sensible thing to do, given the circumstances.

Also, in the Nordic countries most people still trust the media. Our media is not as politicized as American media. We have left leaning, centrist and right leaning media, but they still pretty much agree on the fundamentals. We all still live in the same reality. They just have different opinions on how we could improve society. They don’t have different opinions on the facts.

As for ”Efterlyst”, I guess what you state could be when they report a Swedish citizen has been arrested in eg Spain or Turkey on suspicion of some crime. The reason it is relevant to even mention this on Swedish TV would be that they are Swedish citizens, but more often then not that will refer to someone of eg Middle East or Latin American background. And once they are convicted we get the full details.

It once again goes back to the principle that you should avoid making suspects identifiable before they have been convicted.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Hasn't the swedish press been guilty of suppression of information relating to migrant crime? How about your snitch show "Efterlyst" removing race details and calling them all swedes all of a sudden?

No, that’s a myth.

Painting anyone who points this stuff out as "far right" is the automatic defacto step one defense of the enabling lefties.

Personally I am quite centrist in my opinions on such matters. I am definitely become more and more aware of these little "agenda's" that are becoming more and more apparent as our western societies degrade into far shittier places to live as we bring in trouble en masse.

This isn't just me pointing this out either... many swedes are not happy with how things have been spiraling downwards for quite a while. You obviously are aware of the temperature in your country but I also get to hear from the rellies I interact with over there. I wouldn't consider any of them what should be painted as far right either. Pretty normal folks

[Per]

Hasn't the swedish press been guilty of suppression of information relating to migrant crime? How about your snitch show "Efterlyst" removing race details and calling them all swedes all of a sudden?

Also, in what way would Swedish press suppressing information be relevant when talking about freedom of press?

Freedom of press means that the government should not tell the media what they can or cannot publish. In a country with freedom of press each newspaper, magazine, TV station, radio station or website decide for themselves what they want to publish and what they don’t want to publish. This is why it is important to have many different media outlets. While it is possible that some media outlets choose to suppress some information, that same information will surely be published by someone else.

Freedom of speech includes the right to stay silent, just as freedom of religion includes the right to not be religious.

The important thing is that the government does not censor the media. What the papers choose to publish is up to them.
No one can tell them what they must write. Well, or actually, if they have been found guilty of libel or spreading disinformation, they can be required by the court to publish a retraction and apology. But other than that.

We also have very strong protection for sources. It is illegal to ask a journalist to reveal an anonymous source.
A policeman or prosecutor who does that can be sentenced to prison. Why?
Because a free press is necessary as a counterweight to government, and therefore it is important that they can find information that the government would like to suppress. Whistleblowers are important in the fight against corruption and government overreach.

In a democracy we have a right to mock and criticize our leaders. Take that away and you kill democracy.

[Per]

Hasn't the swedish press been guilty of suppression of information relating to migrant crime? How about your snitch show "Efterlyst" removing race details and calling them all swedes all of a sudden?

No, that’s a myth.

Painting anyone who points this stuff out as "far right" is the automatic defacto step one defense of the enabling lefties.

I didn’t say that those who point this out are far right, I said that the far right media tend to publish the ethnicity of suspects who are immigrants or belong to a minority group.

Then again, most Swedes trust our media, and the group that has the lowest trust in our media are those who vote for the Sweden Democrats. Now, that’s almost 20% of voters, so it’s a fairly big minority. Many of those would qualify as far right, I mean the party was after all founded by Nazis, but as their voter base has grown they have also attracted a lot of people who are just generally dissatisfied with the status quo. A lot of those actually used to vote for the social democrats before and are definitely not conservatives. But they are now voting for a party that started out as a bunch of neonazis that wanted to purge Sweden from racially inferior individuals.

I actually don’t believe that all of the 33% of Germans who voted for Hitler in 1933 were Nazis. I think a lot of them were just disgruntled voters who wanted change. I think Hitler’s promise to stop paying war damages to France was the kicker that got him elected.