Europe’s global censorship threat, spare us the moral posturing, lefties and other commentary

Foreign desk: Europe’s Global Censorship Threat

The European Union’s Digital Services Act is a “censorship law” that “requires ‘very large online platforms’ . . . to remove so-called ‘illegal content,’” warns Adina Portaru at RealClearPolitics. Such content is defined to be “in line with a plethora of anti-free speech legislation across EU countries, such as in Germany, where it is illegal to insult a politician.” But its “vague terms” are “extremely broad,” making them ideal for the commission to “censor disfavored views.” A Finnish parliamentarian “was prosecuted under the ‘War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity’” section of Finnish law for “tweeting a Bible verse.” Because “tech platforms face immense pressure” to set their “global content moderation rules to censorial standards,” laws like these “will become the global baseline.”

Iran: Spare Us the Moral Posturing, Lefties

Events in Iran are forcing the left “to expose to the world the cant and outright inhumanity that too often fuels what passes for ‘anti-imperialism’ these days,” roars spiked’s Brendan O’Neill. “No sooner had the US and Israel launched airstrikes against regime targets inside Iran than the anti-war left was fuming all over the internet,” bashing the strikes as an “illegal war of aggression.” Yet for years, they were silent “as untold numbers of Iranians were massacred by the regime and its religious heavies,” so now they can “spare us” their “moral posturing.” “How do we explain a moral universe where there can be more fury over strikes against a government than there was over that government’s mass murder of its own citizens?”

2028 watch: Attack Boosts Risks for Both Sides

President Trump’s attack on Iran creates “risk” for the 2028 presidential contenders, observes the Washington Examiner’s Byron York. Former Vice President Kamala Harris “declared her outrage” and “unequivocally” opposed it. California Gov. Gavin Newsom called it “reckless.” Pete Buttigieg labeled the action “unnecessary.” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez predicted catastrophe. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was also critical but at least called out the Iranian regime’s ugliness. Trouble is, they can’t “know what is going to happen” in Iran: If a military success leads to a stable, peaceful new government, their foes will “portray them as TDS-afflicted losers.” But if not, Dems “will benefit.” “From the Republican perspective, the gravity and substance of the Democratic criticisms show how politically critical it is that the president’s Iranian mission succeed.”

Space beat: Musk’s AI Moon Dream

Space X CEO Elon Musk “plans to build something called a mass driver on the lunar surface to deploy AI data centers into Earth orbit,” reports Mark Whittington at The Hill. AI facilities would be built on the moon and then “launched into space using the device.” The driver “uses electromagnets to accelerate cargo past escape velocity,” and “the moon, with its one-sixth gravity and almost “no atmosphere,” would be ideal for that. Musk’s plans for a manned colony involves a “swarm of premade space-based AI data centers.” “Mass drivers on the moon and, later, on asteroids, would become a way to move cargo across the inner solar system.” It would show how an idea once considered “impractical” can suddenly enable “a better future.”

Conservative: Dem Pols’ Christian Gaslighting

Prominent politicians who “identify as a Christian” and “moderate” get “priceless media coverage,” fumes The Washington Times’ Robert Knight, — even “while supporting the Democratic Party’s radical social and economic agenda.” Kentucky’s Andy Beshear, who “appears to be readying for a presidential run in 2028,” has “emphasized his Christian faith while boasting that he was a ‘proud, pro-LGBTQ+ governor.’” He “tried to block a state bill protecting minors from ‘gender-affirming care.’” In Texas, James Talarico “touts his Christian faith while cleaving to a radical agenda,” and “much of his rhetoric revolves around Marxist class envy.” His vision of a just economy “is envy disguised as compassion, and it is politicized to enable governments to redistribute income and rewrite society’s moral code.”

— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board