Zyrxil

Well then reply to them, not the other person replying to them. You’re causing the confusion here. You don’t always need to reply to the latest post in a thread.

Official gov ID photo.

Got it, giving an opinion that someone should not be invited to speak at a specific location is apparently not an expression of free speech, it’s suppression of free speech. Just like how if someone comes up to you on the street and starts yelling in your face, it’d be suppression of speech for you to ask them to do that somewhere else.

You’re literally claiming things that are not true. Voicing your opinion against a prospective (as in it hasn’t even happened) action by the Speaker of the House is a right afforded to everyone, including representatives. Speaking against something is not perversely somehow suppressing speech. Saying someone is not allowed to speak against something is suppressing of speech.

You have not explained your reasoning at all on how saying they’re against Netanyahu speaking in front of the House is subversion of free speech and not just those representatives exercising their own freedom of speech. That is exactly what freedom of speech is, the right for everyone in the US to voice their opinions.

In contrast, there is no right to speak in front of the House, especially not for a foreign politician. The Speaker can invite someone to speak, and if anyone physically interferes with the invitee’s speaking or shouts over them, that would be a violation of House procedures, not any infringement on their freedom of speech. They would not have been silenced or punished. They would not have been gagged (physically or otherwise). They would still be able voice their opinions.

Actual examples of speech suppression would be searching and questioning pro-Palestinian journalists at the border, and arrests of peaceful non trespassing protestors.

Did you sit down and watch the whole movie and not just the dramatic moments as YouTube clips? Outside of a few good Denzel moments, the movie was just awful in terms of dialogue, pacing, and blunt ‘foreshadowing’

Oh they found him dead, and was there a speedy trial of the entire village in absentia that afternoon? Dark parallels to mass lynching of black people in the Jim Crow south.

These are normal whole melons with normal nutritional value? And I can vomit an infinite number of them? For one watermelons are delicious so I could have one on hand at any time. I’d learn to develop my power over time so every melon I vomit would be the most delicious watermelon anyone’s tasted. I’d fake a hydroponic growing operation and start selling them at $30 a pop. Eventually I’d be so good with my power I could vomit a hundred watermelons a minute and with that kind of throughout I could just start using watermelons frivolously. I’d make them into fertilizer, make a plastic replacement from watermelon, use them as landfill to build artificial land in the sea. Watermelon Man would rule the world.

It’s a bank not a hedge fund. The investors would be the regular people that made deposits- you know, the victims of the fraud. So your knee jerk reaction is “investors bad” without thinking about anything?

That was one scene out of a whole trilogy of Stormtroopers having terrible aim.