Care to elaborate? No one's right to speech has been affected here; not pg's nor the IDF's. Free speech has never been the right to not be trolled.
EDIT: Which is to say, it's not illegal or anything, but I'm sending a frowning emoji.
I don't know. I assume any organisation interested in directing online discourse about subjects it is vested in does something like this. Especially political organisations.
This is politics. Kinda dirty, but that's what it is, I guess. It's probably only noteworthy because the context and persons/groups involved are noteworthy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_speech
> In the United States, commercial speech is "entitled to substantial First Amendment protection, albeit less than political, ideological, or artistic speech".
Now, the IDF isn't under US jurisdiction, but the idea that only individual humans have rights is... not supported by the facts.
(It's not like pg doesn't have his own resources and connections, anyways.)
A "the IDF cannot troll people on Twitter" law would seem to limit free speech, not enhance it.
We don't have to go as far as JK Rowling or Bill Gates. There's a billionaire Harvard alumni on Twitter using his "free speech" to harass and doxx Harvard grad students right now.
PG cannot detain people or bomb settlements. IDF can and does. They are not merely trolling here.