Headline: Pavel Durov’s arrest is a defense of the rule of law rather than an attack on freedom of expression
Sub-headline: Elon Musk’s view that the arrest of the Telegram boss is ‘censorship’ is, at best, a mistake and, at worst, a demonstration of bad faith.
The Western National Security States have begun their attacks on Free Speech. In Britain the attack has begun on private citizens, who reposted tweets or comments: three thousand citizens including Richard Midhurst have been arrested/detained under Section 127 of the Communications Act !
The political precursor of this was/is the persecution of Julian Assange!
Editor: Damien Leloup public moralizing/scolding begins in the headline.
Headline: Pavel Durov’s arrest is a defense of the rule of law rather than an attack on freedom of expression
It’s an argument that we heard over and over again on Sunday, August 25, from Moscow to San Francisco: The arrest of the CEO of the Telegram messaging service the previous evening by French police is an attack on freedom of expression. “Pavel Durov sits in a French jail tonight, a living warning to any platform owner who refuses to censor the truth at the behest of governments and intel agencies,” asserted far-right American presenter Tucker Carlson; a “very convincing” advertisement for the US Constitution’s First Amendment (which guarantees a very broad right to free speech), rebuked Elon Musk, owner of X and supporter of Donald Trump.
In response, several Russian officials and politicians described the arrest as “political,” in the words of Vladislav Davankov, vice president of the State Duma. Almost comical accusations. In their statements of support, the Kremlin and Russian politicians seemed to forget that it was Russia that first tried to block Telegram − unsuccessfully − in 2018 and that it was people close to the Kremlin who got their hands on the VKontakte empire, created by the Durov brothers, in 2014. On Sunday, a handful of peaceful demonstrators protesting outside the French embassy in Moscow in support of Durov were arrested for taking part in an illegal demonstration.
Editor: The Reader from America wonders … The American Constitution enshrines the right of Free Speech. In fact Oliver Wendell Holmes opined that the only impermissible speech, was to yell fire in a crowded theater.
Michael A. Carrier, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: Law and the Inner Self, 93 MICH. L. REV. 1894 (1995)
Above all, many of the criticisms leveled at France after Durov’s arrest are, whether in good or bad faith, aimed at the wrong target. Contrary to Tucker Carlson’s claims, the Telegram CEO was not arrested for refusing to “censor” political opinions. The French investigation does not concern “opinion crimes,” but quite standard offenses, including the dissemination of child pornography. As in any democracy, Durov is presumed innocent and will have the opportunity to defend himself in a public trial, should he be indicted.
Editor : it takes time to enumerate the crimes of Durov, although the most toxic, shocking charge of ‘Child Pornography’ , seems to have have disappeared from Damien Leloup’s proposed bill of attainder? Reader, again please note the final paragraph in italics. Leloup seems to be in the thrall Class Bias!
Durov’s arrest comes after years of fruitless exchanges between the application and investigators and governments in dozens of countries, all of whom have leveled the same criticisms at the platform: lack of moderation, failure to cooperate even in serious criminal cases… The company refuses to cooperate in any way with law enforcement agencies and only takes action when the balance of power becomes too unfavorable.
It’s easy to understand why, for Silicon Valley bosses like Elon Musk, who are used to flouting European rules with almost total impunity, this arrest came as a shock. It shows that even a billionaire running a platform with hundreds of millions of users cannot forever ignore the rules of the countries in which he wants not only to operate his service, but also to be able to travel around for pleasure.
Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer.
'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.'
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
StephenKMackSD's Blog 