|
|
|
France: It is now illegal to visit terrorist Web sites
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 24 March, 2012
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has made it illegal for French citizens to visit Web sites that encourage terrorism or hate crimes.
The move comes after the psychotic al-Qaeda-affiliated Mohamed Merah killed Jewish children and French soldiers before dying in a firefight with police officers.
Says Sarkozy: "From now on, any person who habitually consults Web sites that advocate terrorism ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
nb69
Newbie
|
24. March 2012 @ 13:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
way to go Sarkozy.
If that is what it takes to curb the terrorism, let it be so.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
24. March 2012 @ 15:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
Are you kidding..? Tell me ONE instance where censorship of any form has prevented a terrorist attack. Just one.
Furthermore, how the heck are researchers and journalists going to keep tabs on these sites? Lets keep the terrorists roaches where we can SEE them.
Sticking your head in the sand (by attempting to ignore these sites out of existence) is A-number-one useless, while trampling on the rights of French citizens; did y'all have that bloody revolution for nothing?!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. March 2012 @ 15:33
|
Member
|
24. March 2012 @ 16:07 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
France will not tolerate forced recruitment or ideological indoctrination on its soil."
It's not exactly forced if people are visiting the sites willingly. Furthermore, what about for research and educational purposes? I guess the word habitually is a key qualifier, but my wife, who researches campus sexual assault, reads a source over a hundred times on some occasions.
|
|
Clam_Up
Junior Member
|
25. March 2012 @ 00:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
As easy as it is to redirect a browser anywhere, or just to play a prank on someone and go to one of these sites while they're away for a second, this type of legislation just HAS to be the result of a wild night of inebriation.
Want to frame someone? No need to create a tightly-knit web of intrigue. Just redirect their browser while they're not looking.
And the way things are going, they'll start extraditing ordinary citizens of every country to France for prosecution.
Wow. Just... wow.
|
Senior Member
|
25. March 2012 @ 01:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
people need to be educated and prosecuting people for going to websites is wrong.what do they class as a terrorism website anyway.
i dont fully understand hate crimes.if i was to hit someone for being annoying its an assault chage but if they have a different skin colour,sexuality,religion or any other differences it can be considered a hate crime.
custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.
|
|
vigeuth
Newbie
|
25. March 2012 @ 05:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
This feels too dumb to be some sort of ramping up of invasion of privacy, limitation of freedom, or move toward totalitarianism.
It's a response so simplistic that it's comical. I feel like I need to watch some old black and white movie with old French dudes in a parliamentary building saying French shit back and forth with subtitles and the final subtitle saying "Then we will simply arrest anyone who frequents such websites!" and then the others agree and say "oiu oiu!" and they all shake hands and look like silly Frenchies together.
Maybe that's the new strategy to softball us into government control: appearing simple-minding to a childlike level of incompetence and then WHAM, while you were laughing at the stupidity you looked away all of a sudden it's a Brave New World.... nah, Sarkozy's just a clod (or should I say Claude lolz).
|
|
xtago
Senior Member
|
25. March 2012 @ 07:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Are you kidding..? Tell me ONE instance where censorship of any form has prevented a terrorist attack. Just one.
It's not censorship.
The guy shooting up everyone had gone to terrorist sites and then went to training camps then came back to France and join up to a cell in France.
his brother and some other friends of his have also gone to these sites as well but as far as the news sites go they didn't go out to the countries to learn much more about how to make bombs etc.
The idea is to make it harder for people to easily get info or get in contact with people then get brain washed or start doing stuff like riding bikes to shot at people.
If it's harder then people will get fed up and not bother anymore you'll always get a handful that will push further on regaurdless but if you stop 99 people and only 1 gets through then that's better than having far more people going to these sites.
After all you'll never who goes onto a bus with a bomb in a backpack and lets that bomb off, but hopefully you can put in some effort to stop it from happening.
|
|
xtago
Senior Member
|
25. March 2012 @ 07:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Are you kidding..? Tell me ONE instance where censorship of any form has prevented a terrorist attack. Just one.
It's not censorship.
The guy shooting up everyone had gone to terrorist sites and then went to training camps then came back to France and join up to a cell in France.
his brother and some other friends of his have also gone to these sites as well but as far as the news sites go they didn't go out to the countries to learn much more about how to make bombs etc.
The idea is to make it harder for people to easily get info or get in contact with people then get brain washed or start doing stuff like riding bikes to shot at people.
If it's harder then people will get fed up and not bother anymore you'll always get a handful that will push further on regardless but if you stop 99 people and only 1 gets through then that's better than having far more people going to these sites.
After all you'll never who goes onto a bus with a bomb in a backpack and lets that bomb off, but hopefully you can put in some effort to stop it from happening.
|
|
Red_Forman
Junior Member
|
25. March 2012 @ 17:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xtago:
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Are you kidding..? Tell me ONE instance where censorship of any form has prevented a terrorist attack. Just one.
It's not censorship.
The guy shooting up everyone had gone to terrorist sites and then went to training camps then came back to France and join up to a cell in France.
his brother and some other friends of his have also gone to these sites as well but as far as the news sites go they didn't go out to the countries to learn much more about how to make bombs etc.
The idea is to make it harder for people to easily get info or get in contact with people then get brain washed or start doing stuff like riding bikes to shot at people.
If it's harder then people will get fed up and not bother anymore you'll always get a handful that will push further on regaurdless but if you stop 99 people and only 1 gets through then that's better than having far more people going to these sites.
After all you'll never who goes onto a bus with a bomb in a backpack and lets that bomb off, but hopefully you can put in some effort to stop it from happening.
Jesus, that was stupid. What kind of cartoonist world do you live in? I mean dude, do you honestly believe the kind people that have decided to kill someone is just going to give up because his favorite jihad site is blocked?? That's just going to piss him off more, not less.
Terrorist:*Googles 'How to be a terrorist', clicks first link, page says; blocked by government*
Oh well gee, I guess that is that. I should give up my extremist ways and my intent to kill people and reform to peaceful and kind ways of living"
Government: "YAY, We've won the war on terror!"
I'll stick my foot up your ass.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2012 @ 17:22
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
25. March 2012 @ 22:21 |
Link to this message
|
Yes, it IS censorship; having an arguably positive reason for it does not make it any less so. And it simply won't, and can't, ever be effective. Or do you, perhaps, think the *real* terrorists are too stupid/lazy to use a VPN..?
The only way to truly prevent access to these sites is a completely draconian, fascist, strong-arm approach, and that's simply incompatible with any kind of civil freedoms.
I'm very, very tired of people excusing hamfisted, blundering attempts that only remove basic liberties from citizens, in the name of some ephemeral, never-attained "security". Please stop doing the terrorists' job for them; you're destroying Western society FAR more effectively than any jihadist ever could...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2012 @ 22:22
|
|
Whackattack
Newbie
|
31. March 2012 @ 08:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Yes, it IS censorship; having an arguably positive reason for it does not make it any less so. And it simply won't, and can't, ever be effective. Or do you, perhaps, think the *real* terrorists are too stupid/lazy to use a VPN..?
The only way to truly prevent access to these sites is a completely draconian, fascist, strong-arm approach, and that's simply incompatible with any kind of civil freedoms.
I'm very, very tired of people excusing hamfisted, blundering attempts that only remove basic liberties from citizens, in the name of some ephemeral, never-attained "security". Please stop doing the terrorists' job for them; you're destroying Western society FAR more effectively than any jihadist ever could...
I agree 100%. Very eloquently stated, too.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
12. September 2012 @ 17:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's not the real terrorists this kind of thing helps stop but the moron with a grudge who decides to act out his pathetic fantasies.
Too many weapons and devices are too readily to hand for that sort of selfish cretin.
Nobody likes 'freedom' to be curtailed but this is an instance where my freedom is not bothered one little bit & my - and that of my loved ones' - safety is probably enhanced.
Maybe even by only a little.
But I'll not lose any sleep or worry about them blocking bomb-making info sites.
The trick is to ensure this does not become cart-blanche and that law-abiding political opinion/info sites do not get blocked.
|
|
