LETTER TO TEXAS SENATOR TED CRUZ on HR 7521 'Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act '
Amend the adversarial definition to be decided by the Congress instead of the Intel State Blob or VOTE NO.
Dear Senator Cruz,
I appreciate your service to Texas. You have been a great advocate for the fate of the cancelled online. The objective of this bill is reported to cause divestment from businesses in an adversarial stress position in data trades with the United States.
The problem is TikTok is not the most special of all Chinese-co-owned business even throughout the Great State of Texas!! IF the Senate wants to rule that China is an adversary and make a sanctions bill for global business with BRICS and tertiary parties to divest as policy that would be more of a rules move to protect American data.
TikTok is one platform and they are not 'that special' - even as they conformed to the PRC's national security demands put upon them. EX: Epic Games is 40% owned by the PRC and TikTok is only 20% owned. The bill provided for 50% ownership. However, ANY percentage ownership given proprietary stake gives China national security reach into the transactional intelligence of a US IPO. [So that needs to be cleared up.]
Then there is the longterm matter of handing 'adversary' state definitions to the Intel State Blob. They have been illegally throwing the book at American social media companies through 3rd party NGOs for the last 2 years and couching you, Tucker Carlson, and anyone who objects to their arbitrary med license for speech as 'Russian agents'.
How is that different from the interagency prescriptive allowing the President's men to dictate to American companies who is and is not a 'foreign adversary'? Didn't we just spend hundreds of hours in Weaponization Committees in the House contending that US security agencies have NO legal jurisdiction to distend or dictate to companies User bases what speech is so ‘dangerous' (Objectionable to the State) that they deem it not say-able online? This isn't libel, fraud or slander when the State directs it at its citizens, of course. It's misinformation, disinformation and malinformation classifications for use of functional censorship.
And TikTok censors US citizens online to the whims of the medical security state. So that isn't the issue.
Can someone please tell us why TikTok is the special whipping boy for the National Security State vs. the thousands of unregistered foreign agent allied corporations nested all over say, Washington State, transiting sensitive personal medical data collected under COVID auths from the University of Washington?
Matt Taibbi called this the "Stanford axe" or the FBI/Intel State's arbitrary rules based agenda, driven out of domestic reach & accountability, by foreign policy & UN co-governance. This bill would place the defining party onto CISA, EIP, and the like and beg our permission to do so against the 1st Amendment authority. Let's call for a Supreme Court legal review of the constitutionality of this practice BEFORE it becomes another law to actively repress the public's speech online.
Bottom line call to action: Amend the adversarial definition to be decided by the Congress instead of the Intel State Blob or VOTE NO.
Thank you for your devotion to the Constitution and law for Texas and for the United States of America.
Sincerely,
Sheila Dean