bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
58,835
Reputation
8,672
Daps
163,050
I reject the idea that the constitution is a world document.
The founders certainly were not thinking about the rights of foreigners when they framed it. Heck they didn't even care about the rights of black people in the beginning let alone foreigners who live halfway around the world.

asked an AI about the inherent dangers on your view of constitution...

If non-U.S. citizens or foreign-owned entities operating in the United States were not afforded protections under the Constitution, there could be several inherent dangers and negative consequences:

  1. Violation of human rights: The Constitution and its amendments, such as the Bill of Rights, provide fundamental protections for all individuals within U.S. jurisdiction, regardless of citizenship status. Denying these protections to non-citizens could lead to violations of basic human rights, such as due process, freedom of speech, and protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
  2. Discrimination and unequal treatment: Without constitutional protections, non-citizens and foreign entities could face discrimination and unequal treatment under the law. This could create an environment of uncertainty, insecurity, and potential abuse, undermining the principles of fairness and equal protection under the law.
  3. Negative impact on foreign relations and investment: Denying constitutional protections to foreign nationals and entities could strain diplomatic relations with other countries and discourage foreign investment in the United States. This could have adverse economic consequences and damage the country's reputation as a stable and fair place to conduct business.
  4. Erosion of rule of law: The Constitution and its protections are fundamental to the rule of law in the United States. Denying these protections to certain groups or entities could erode the principles of equal justice and undermine the integrity of the legal system.
  5. Potential for abuse of power: Without constitutional checks and balances, there would be a greater risk of government overreach and abuse of power against non-citizens and foreign entities, as they would lack legal recourse or protection against arbitrary actions.
  6. Reciprocal treatment of U.S. citizens abroad: If the United States denies constitutional protections to foreign nationals within its borders, other countries may reciprocate by denying similar protections to U.S. citizens residing or conducting business in their territories.
It is important to note that while the Constitution and its amendments primarily address the rights of U.S. citizens, the Supreme Court has consistently held that certain constitutional protections, such as due process and equal protection under the law, apply to all persons within U.S. jurisdiction, regardless of citizenship status.


Yes, U.S. government officials and personnel are generally bound by the U.S. Constitution when operating in foreign countries while acting on behalf of the U.S. government. This principle is known as the "extraterritorial application" of the Constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution applies to the actions of the U.S. government and its agents, even when they operate outside the territorial boundaries of the United States. This ensures that the fundamental rights and protections guaranteed by the Constitution are not abandoned simply because U.S. officials are operating abroad.

However, the extent to which specific constitutional provisions apply extraterritorially can vary depending on the circumstances and the specific constitutional right or protection in question. The Supreme Court has established a "functional approach" that considers the practical circumstances and the nature of the government's control or authority over the person or territory in question.

In general, the following constitutional protections are understood to apply to U.S. government officials and personnel operating abroad:

  1. Due Process: The Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process applies to U.S. government actions abroad, ensuring that individuals cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
  2. Equal Protection: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to U.S. government actions abroad, prohibiting discrimination based on factors such as race, ethnicity, or national origin.
  3. Unreasonable Searches and Seizures: The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures applies to U.S. government actions abroad, although the specific requirements may vary depending on the circumstances.
  4. Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to U.S. government actions abroad, restricting the use of certain interrogation techniques or punishments.
It's important to note that the extraterritorial application of the Constitution is not absolute and may be subject to limitations or exceptions in certain circumstances, such as during armed conflicts or in areas where the U.S. government lacks effective control or sovereignty.


b2dFyUj.png

 

Hood Critic

The Power Circle
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,200
Reputation
3,772
Daps
110,355
Reppin
דעת
US corporations have actively been working to collapse US society, so what the fukk are you talking about? What the fukk do you think Cambridge Analytica was all about? Do you guys even hear yourselves??

This is one of the dumbest things I've seen on this site.

Cambridge Analytica was an operation ran on British soil at the behest of an idiot and his merry men to capture the presidency. It's result very well shook the foundation of the country but it was not the intent to collapse it. It was made possible by Meta lacking oversight of its 3rd party integrations and data handling. Zuck is an idiot, not an accelerationist.
 

Hood Critic

The Power Circle
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,200
Reputation
3,772
Daps
110,355
Reppin
דעת
asked an AI about the inherent dangers on your view of constitution...







b2dFyUj.png

Tik Tok as a corporation, therefore a "person", does not operate on American soil. It utilizes a US based datacenter in Virginia, others in Malaysia and Singapore to store user data. This and the move to route data through Oracle Cloud are recent as of 18 months ago to address intel community uproar and an attempt to good faith follow some US regulations.

 

Robbie3000

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
29,885
Reputation
5,339
Daps
132,288
Reppin
NULL
Economic collapse obviously, so that it can then ascend to super power status. We may be China's biggest trade partner but we're not the only one.

This isn't an imaginary villain story.


Economic collapse of the U.S would be catastrophic to China. China most certainly doesn’t want the collapse of the U.S.

Unlike the Whites, sorry I mean the West, the Chinese have historically built walls to keep people out not go to far away places and tell people how to conduct their affairs.

Did we not learn anything from the long, costly and destructive Cold War?
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
58,835
Reputation
8,672
Daps
163,050
Tik Tok as a corporation, therefore a "person", does not operate on American soil. It utilizes a US based datacenter in Virginia, others in Malaysia and Singapore to store user data. This and the move to route data through Oracle Cloud are recent as of 18 months ago to address intel community uproar and an attempt to good faith follow some US regulations.



"TikTok’s global headquarters are in Los Angeles and Singapore, and its offices include New York, London, Dublin, Paris, Berlin, Dubai, Jakarta, Seoul, and Tokyo."
 

Ozymandeas

Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
15,422
Reputation
2,420
Daps
72,984
Reppin
NULL
I really don't understand this distinction you guys are making between US companies and foreign companies. The health of the US is the priority of 0 of the active participants, regardless of where they're based. If the power social media platforms have is the issue, then you regulate all the social media platforms. You don't say "this is so dangerous, let's make sure only insane, right wing, terror funding, society destroying, American sociopaths can wield this power and no one else."

US corporations have actively been working to collapse US society, so what the fukk are you talking about? What the fukk do you think Cambridge Analytica was all about? Do you guys even hear yourselves??

Why do you think the largest banks (BOA, Chase, WF) in the US aren’t foreign banks? Or why the largest telecommunications companies like AT&T, Verizon, etc. aren’t foreign companies? Or so on and so forth. If it would be eyebrow raising to have China running AT&T and supplying everyone’s internet and phone services, why do you think it’s fine for them to control the largest social media platform?
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
46,304
Reputation
7,003
Daps
147,268
Reppin
CookoutGang
Why do you think the largest banks (BOA, Chase, WF) in the US aren’t foreign banks? Or why the largest telecommunications companies like AT&T, Verizon, etc. aren’t foreign companies? Or so on and so forth. If it would be eyebrow raising to have China running AT&T and supplying everyone’s internet and phone services, why do you think it’s fine for them to control the largest social media platform?
Folks have just let TikTok convince them this is about Gaza.

None of these guys are free speech abolitionists. Just look at the Twitter thread on this site.
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
58,835
Reputation
8,672
Daps
163,050
Why do you think the largest banks (BOA, Chase, WF) in the US aren’t foreign banks? Or why the largest telecommunications companies like AT&T, Verizon, etc. aren’t foreign companies? Or so on and so forth. If it would be eyebrow raising to have China running AT&T and supplying everyone’s internet and phone services, why do you think it’s fine for them to control the largest social media platform.

oh so foreign companies can be successful only up to a point? :rudy:

ma bell and it's successors predates china or other telecommunication firms, thats why they aren't the largest providers. tiktok is one of the largest, not the largest social media platform. your argument could be applied to american social media companies as well since they operate the largest social media platforms in over a hundred countries. do you think they should be forced to sell their business to native owners in different countries?
 

Hood Critic

The Power Circle
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,200
Reputation
3,772
Daps
110,355
Reppin
דעת

"TikTok’s global headquarters are in Los Angeles and Singapore, and its offices include New York, London, Dublin, Paris, Berlin, Dubai, Jakarta, Seoul, and Tokyo."
They actually have offices in about 7-8 other states as well, which I wasn't aware of.
 

Hood Critic

The Power Circle
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,200
Reputation
3,772
Daps
110,355
Reppin
דעת
Project Texas is TikTok's answer to national security concerns:

 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,333
Reputation
6,237
Daps
168,007
Last edited:

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
88,994
Reputation
3,727
Daps
158,437
Reppin
Brooklyn
love seeing people go to bat for the genocidal Chinese regime just because reasons

:mjlit:
 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,333
Reputation
6,237
Daps
168,007
What is it with Americans and the need to create a villain? If it’s not the Soviets, it’s Islam, if it’s not Islam, it’s China. Japanese companies bought a few buildings in America in the 90s and we freaked out about Japan taking over. The paranoia is crazy.
We destroyed the Japanese economy because of their cars and buying buildings. They haven’t recovered.

We are a young nation who need enemies to justify our military spending and the eroding of the social contract.
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
58,835
Reputation
8,672
Daps
163,050
love seeing people go to bat for the genocidal Chinese regime just because reasons

:mjlit:

you should quote the posts supporting your assertions.


on a supposedly black forum, posters are arguing FOR the consolidation of major social media platforms by white owners. :snoop:
 
Top