DHS vs First Amendment

From the US Constitution [1]:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

From the Pulse [2]: The Facts:

The US Department of Homeland Security has stated that sharing “misinformation” online may be considered domestic terrorism.

They point to COVID-19 as being an instance where misinformation led, or could lead to, violence.

From DHS.gov [3]:

The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information (MDM) introduced and/or amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors. These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence. Mass casualty attacks and other acts of targeted violence conducted by lone offenders and small groups acting in furtherance of ideological beliefs and/or personal grievances pose an ongoing threat to the nation. While the conditions underlying the heightened threat landscape have not significantly changed over the last year, the convergence of the following factors has increased the volatility, unpredictability, and complexity of the threat environment: (1) the proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions; (2) continued calls for violence directed at U.S. critical infrastructure; soft targets and mass gatherings; faith-based institutions, such as churches, synagogues, and mosques; institutions of higher education; racial and religious minorities; government facilities and personnel, including law enforcement and the military; the media; and perceived ideological opponents; and (3) calls by foreign terrorist organizations for attacks on the United States based on recent events.

What DHS says it is doing:

DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis established a new, dedicated domestic terrorism branch to produce the sound, timely intelligence needed to counter related threats. The Department expanded its evaluation of online activity as part of its efforts to assess and prevent acts of violence, while ensuring the protection of privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.

Historically ‘officially sanctioned truth’ is nearly always MDM…

Learn to read and listen with discernment:  “mis- dis- and mal-information (MDM) is all around us.  Do not trust any message that denigrates your fundamental rights, such as the right to free speech and the universal right of informed consent.  Do not assume the ‘good intentions’ of any agency or institution just because it tacks-on “while ensuring the protection…” of your rights to its statements.

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

——

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/

[2] https://thepulse.one/2022/02/13/sharing-misleading-narratives-labeled-as-domestic-terrorism-by-homeland-security/

[3] https://www.dhs.gov/ntas/advisory/national-terrorism-advisory-system-bulletin-february-07-2022

2 thoughts on “DHS vs First Amendment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.