000-tobecategorised

Five reasons why Modi-Shah allowed Rahul Gandhi to become a 'martyr'  https://youtu.be/8AiZDoqYyFE?t=288 ThePrint
Mar 29, 2023 Rahul Gandhi's 'victimisation' has fired up the opposition but here are five reasons why Modi-Shah must be happy about it, ThePrint Political Editor DK Singh explains in this episode of #PoliticallyCorrect

Karnataka elections - Caste arithmetic in Karnataka, shifting focus to central issues

Trying to victim RG vs Autocratic centre. belief in Modi centric campaign

Modi v/s Rahul  to relegate main issues

purported insult of OBC

Congress seems emboldened by support of opposition. BJp believes that this is misplaced..

A disturbing example of the normalisation of lawfare https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-disturbing-example-of-the-normalisation-of-lawfare/article66672779.ece March 29, 2023

The case of the former Wayanad MP also spotlights the danger courts could face to their legitimacy — namely, losing their reputation for impartiality between contending political forces.... the conviction and disqualification of Mr. Gandhi represents another signpost in a concerning drift towards the normalisation of lawfare as a political tactic. It is concerning because one crucial component of the legitimacy of courts is their reputation for impartiality between contending political forces. Recent examples from Poland and Hungary have shown how quickly that reputation can be lost. It is for the judiciary to ensure that what could also happen here, does not happen here.

Victory at the Ninth Circuit: Twitter’s Content Moderation is Not “State Action”https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/03/victory-ninth-circuit-twitters-content-moderation-not-state-action BY MUKUND RATHIMARCH 24, 2023

the Ninth Circuit held that Twitter did not act as the government by banning a user months after a government agency flagged for Twitter one of his tweets on alleged election fraud. O’Handley v. Weber is the latest decision rejecting social media users’ attempts to hold platforms liable for deleting, demonetizing, and otherwise moderating their content.

Twitter is a private entity, so the government and the courts cannot tell it what speech it must remove or what speech it must carry. The First Amendment restricts censorship only by the government, not private entities, unless those entities are using government power or otherwise effectively acting as the government.