The UK State Goes Full On Authoritarian

a reply to: Tartuffe

What harms and dangers have hurt you on the internet?

Well, seeing as I am not a child, your point is?

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Tartuffe

What harms and dangers have hurt you on the internet?

Well, seeing as I am not a child, your point is?

The white paper isn’t for children.

a reply to: Tartuffe

Yes, I know. You asked me an out of context question which I answered. Self regulation has failed.

You did not answer my question - why do you blame Molly Russell's parents for her death?

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Tartuffe

Yes, I know. You asked me an out of context question which I answered. Self regulation has failed.

You did not answer my question - why do you blame Molly Russell's parents for her death?

I blame Molly Russell for her own death. But as to contributing to her suicidal motivations, the parents are more likely to blame than Instagram.

Self regulation has not failed.

a reply to: Tartuffe

That is rather judgemental.

But as to contributing to her suicidal motivations, the parents are more likely to blame than Instagram.

What basis do you have for saying that? Let's wait and see if the Inquest agrees with you. Which will be a public one.

Self regulation has not failed.

All is fine and dandy, then.

a reply to: oldcarpy

I wouldn't bother with him mate, he contradicts himself.
On one hand he insists he is against all censorship but supports censorship of child porn, so by default he accepts the principle of govt censorship in some circumstances.
Then he states that he objects to any attempt by govt denying him the choice to watch torture and genocide.

So, in his warped reality child porn is okay to be censored by govt but they shouldnt censor videos of real torture and genocide.
He's already accepted the principle of govt censorship by agreeing that child porn is censored. This makes his claims of 'I oppose ALL censorship' absolutely ridiculous.

The OP agrees that some govt censorship is appropriate, just so long as it fits with his with his preferences.
I can't imagine what sick #er wants the right to watch torture and genocide though...

a reply to: SerenTheUniverse

Agreed. Also, there can be no valid reason not to regulate sites aimed at vulnerable teens and children aimed solely at encouraging them to self harm (with very graphic pictures by the way) , suicide or promoting anorexia, etc.

we just need to get the tories out , they are the ones harbouring pedophiles , not much use in censorship when the government have been deep into child abuse scandals as well as MI5 !

they will happily lock us up for "harmful" or "hateful" speech
and now they want to ban all "harmful" content as the slippery slope will lead us into a black hole where no moral compass can get a reading

so this could extend to anti government speech , anti government content , anything that can be considered harmful !

So by this logic the government should be banning science sites as potentially the science can teach us how to kill others or blow up government buildings etc !

Oh, they’re in real trouble now.

france 24 is doing a round the clock ‘fake news’

- replete with idiot’s universal pronunciation script-

warning rollout

designed to quash anyone but certified journalists from posting
‘fake stories’, read: ‘political content’.

(smoke billowing, belching, erupting
from every portal and pore
of the ss globaliss)

Yeah. That will make us tune in, listen, and slowly, inexorably... accept the agenda.

They...are so doomed.

# 1032

a reply to: sapien82

we just need to get the tories out , they are the ones harbouring pedophiles ,....

Unlike Labour eh.....Peter Mandelson?
And many current Labour notaries expressed support fpr PIE back in the day.

If you think only The Tories harbour paedophiles I'm sorry mate but you're being remarkably naïve.....they've worked their way in to every one of our leading political parties and senior Civil Service.

Full System Reboot is required.

a reply to: Freeborn

I am not sure they work their way in.... I think they learn this # at school.... it's tradition.... fagging I think they call it..... rich people schools.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: SerenTheUniverse

Agreed. Also, there can be no valid reason not to regulate sites aimed at vulnerable teens and children aimed solely at encouraging them to self harm (with very graphic pictures by the way) , suicide or promoting anorexia, etc.

You might as well get rid of television and video games while you're at it. Think of the children.

The problem is your failure as parents, your inability to regulate what your children access on the internet, has led you to cry for the government's help where your own responsibilities lack.

originally posted by: SerenTheUniverse
a reply to: oldcarpy

I wouldn't bother with him mate, he contradicts himself.
On one hand he insists he is against all censorship but supports censorship of child porn, so by default he accepts the principle of govt censorship in some circumstances.
Then he states that he objects to any attempt by govt denying him the choice to watch torture and genocide.

So, in his warped reality child porn is okay to be censored by govt but they shouldnt censor videos of real torture and genocide.
He's already accepted the principle of govt censorship by agreeing that child porn is censored. This makes his claims of 'I oppose ALL censorship' absolutely ridiculous.

The OP agrees that some govt censorship is appropriate, just so long as it fits with his with his preferences.
I can't imagine what sick #er wants the right to watch torture and genocide though...

You want the government to protect your children where you failed to. Your fear and resultant fear-mongering about an open and free internet, and your demands that the government do something about it, suggests you cannot handle freedom and deserve your chains.

originally posted by: sapien82
we just need to get the tories out , they are the ones harbouring pedophiles

Total broken record, and a mantra that stands no test, not least the thing caller (er) evidence.

Keeping to topic though. There was recent reporting of animal cruelty on Facebook groups by groups in the UK, with large numbers of (sad) followers, which creates a cycle of abuse. Animal cruelty is illegal in the UK and socially unacceptable, so I would be quite happy to see these groups wound up. But no, our Facebook mates don't kill off groups with vile content because (cynical old me) they drive activity. If Facebook won't act responsibly, then quite happy for the blunt hammer of the law to kill them off.

originally posted by: Tartuffe

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Tartuffe

But you contend that it is the corporations who rule us. So which corporation, for example, has anything near that sort of power over you or I?


If, and as, our government has been bought off and taken control of by corporate money,,,,,,,your answer is simply this. Corporate money IS the power that rules us through their governmental leverage.

I will try another approach. If someone hits you over the head with a shovel, is it the shovel that has hit you over the head?

Or better yet, if someone opens fire on a class room of children, is it the guns fault or the one who wields the gun.??

So is it the government that rules us or those who rule the government and are not subject to the whims of voters.

So, in the end, it is the government who rules you.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

So is it the government that rules us or those who rule the government and are not subject to the whims of voters.

Those who "rule the government" are the government. Without them there would be no government.

originally posted by: Tartuffe
a reply to: UpIsNowDown

I mean I get it. But I see it just a little differently.

Yes, we all can agree that live-streaming a murder is wrong, not only because murder is wrong, but because the exhibition of it is also wrong. What I do not agree with is the solution: giving the government power over what we view on the internet.

I've been following the battle against ISIS for years now, and have watched perhaps too many of their warcrimes perpetrated against innocents. Many of these were acts of torture and genocide. They film it all, put it on the internet, and I've seen some of it. It's horrific. The imagery haunts my dreams. I've seen evil. I just as easily could have avoided it. What I do not want is the government taking that choice away.

I to viewed the beheading footage based on the talk on ATS that they were fake, i viewed them via bestgo##.com, but the footage from the moment it is concieved is illegal, it has no place on the internet, it is crime in progress, on a platform farcebook or youtube whose own T+Cs forbid it, so 1 it is illegal and 2 it is against these websites own T+Cs all I asked for is they pour their ever bulging profit into improving there systems.

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown

originally posted by: Tartuffe
a reply to: UpIsNowDown

I mean I get it. But I see it just a little differently.

Yes, we all can agree that live-streaming a murder is wrong, not only because murder is wrong, but because the exhibition of it is also wrong. What I do not agree with is the solution: giving the government power over what we view on the internet.

I've been following the battle against ISIS for years now, and have watched perhaps too many of their warcrimes perpetrated against innocents. Many of these were acts of torture and genocide. They film it all, put it on the internet, and I've seen some of it. It's horrific. The imagery haunts my dreams. I've seen evil. I just as easily could have avoided it. What I do not want is the government taking that choice away.

I to viewed the beheading footage based on the talk on ATS that they were fake, i viewed them via bestgo##.com, but the footage from the moment it is concieved is illegal, it has no place on the internet, it is crime in progress, on a platform farcebook or youtube whose own T+Cs forbid it, so 1 it is illegal and 2 it is against these websites own T+Cs all I asked for is they pour their ever bulging profit into improving there systems.

I saw them on twitter, and they are posted by the families and friends of ISIS's victims. When the victims of these atrocities use these videos to show us evil, to cry for help, they do have a place on the internet.

a reply to: Tartuffe

Lmao, I haven't demanded anything from the government, I just don't care if they ban me from viewing real rapes and murders, same as child porn is banned.
You have already stated you support your government censoring some things, like child porn, so by default you support the principle of govt censorship, but you don't want to be denied the choice to watch torture and genocide. Those were your words, not mine.
I don't care if torture and genocide videos are banned, I dont watch such things, but I see it no less revolting than child porn, which you have already stated you agree as a form of gov't censorship.
By default you must support the principle of some govt censorship or you would not support the censoring of child porn.

Why is child porn okay to be censored in your opinion but you should be free to watch torture and genocide videos?
How about if the people being tortured and murdered were children, would you object to the govt considering denial of your choice?
Ah, but if the children being tortured were naked then you would support the censorship by government...but only then.
You have a very strange outlook, but different cultures is all, perhaps you should spend more time worrying about your own nation than mine.

originally posted by: SerenTheUniverse
a reply to: Tartuffe

Lmao, I haven't demanded anything from the government, I just don't care if they ban me from viewing real rapes and murders, same as child porn is banned.
You have already stated you support your government censoring some things, like child porn, so by default you support the principle of govt censorship, but you don't want to be denied the choice to watch torture and genocide. Those were tour words, not mine.
I don't care if torture and genocide videos are banned, I dont watch such things, but I see it no less revolting than child porn, which you have already stated you agree as a form of gov't censorship.
By default you must support the principle of some govt censorship or you would not support the censoring of child porn.

Why is child porn okay to be censored in your opinion but you should be free to watch torture and genocide videos?
How about if the people being tortured and murdered were children, would you object to the govt considering denial of your choice?
Ah, but if the children being tortured were naked then you would support the censorship by government...but only then.
You have a very strange outlook, but different cultures is all, perhaps you should spend more time worrying about your own nation than mine.

You get in a tizzy and mock me defending the human rights of you and your countrymen, while not giving a hoot what human rights your government encroaches on or what freedoms it takes away. But you don't care because they don't apply to you. You're a statist, pal. You suckle at the government's teet and bow when it removes your rights.