...that makes me wonder if that Internet censorship is not just a single narrow aspect of a much larger overall strategy of state censorship in the US, driven presumably by commercial interests rather than by genuine state security interests.
I would say:
Internet censorship is [strike]not[/strike] just a single narrow aspect of a much larger overall strategy of state censorship in the US, driven [strike]presumably[/strike] by commercial interests rather than by genuine state security interests.
Or rather, I'd borrow from you, as the case were.
No comment on the actual article there as I'm sure people can simply imagine me devolving into a frothing at the mouth, excessively loud, profane, obscene, writhing on the floor mess of disturbing rants better left to the most extreme horror films...
Actually, on second thought, I'd like to add to my blatant rip-off from you...
There is another agenda there.
Making nutritious food "illegal"? Claiming that "pizza is a vegetable"? Stealing a decent lunch from a child at school then forcing them to eat "nutritious" chicken nuggets?
No. This is a murderous agenda. It's called forced malnutrition. It doesn't end well...
The same thing goes for Internet censorship -- it's an attempt to starve people's minds. Likewise, it will not end well.