[macintux]

You can object to the "digital invasion", but using the phrase "freedom of speech" as some sort of magical shield is pointless.

> 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.

The U.S. federal or state governments, courtesy of that amendment, have very limited authority to control your speech. That's where the legal authority ends.

[shkkmo]

> That's where the legal authority ends.

So you see no problem with using jurisdiction washing like Five Eyes to remove our rights?

If we don't tolerate a government we elect abridging our freedom of speech, why would we accept a foreign government doing that?

When foreign governments try to force conpanies to abridge free speech by Americans on American soil, that is an attack on something that we deem important enough to have enshrined in our constitution.