“as long as [they] keep engaging in hostile influence campaigns.” - So if it was a pro-US campaign, it’d be fine?
“meddle in our free and open society” - So free and open that they want to shut down any “adversarial” viewpoints. I understand any state has to suppress alternative to a point in order to remain a state, but the fact they try to play both ends and act like it’s super freedom free in spite of the suppression they’re doing.
Of course, there’s also just the fact that this (and worse) is what the US has been doing to everybody else for decades on end, which I assume is meant to be the funny part coming from them.
The language of it is really something.
“as long as [they] keep engaging in hostile influence campaigns.” - So if it was a pro-US campaign, it’d be fine?
“meddle in our free and open society” - So free and open that they want to shut down any “adversarial” viewpoints. I understand any state has to suppress alternative to a point in order to remain a state, but the fact they try to play both ends and act like it’s super freedom free in spite of the suppression they’re doing.
Of course, there’s also just the fact that this (and worse) is what the US has been doing to everybody else for decades on end, which I assume is meant to be the funny part coming from them.