It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Worse Than China? U.S. Government Wants To Censor Search Engines And Browsers

page: 2
33
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
The German people did not 'let' the nazi's take over, the nazies locked the door to the voting chamber, making sure their own men and fellow travellers were inside first, keeping out all the other parties, then voted yes to the enabling act, which gave Hitler full power to do just as he pleased, first job was to arrest all those locked out!




posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Decade after decade I've watched the "land of the free" become the countries it has pointed fingers at.

In the fifties, Russia was dissed because of the KGB and overt monitoring of her citizens...now we have an alphabet soup of agencies who covertly monitor everything we do and/or say. From satellites in outer space to so-called traffic cameras, our every move is watched and logged.

Our Berlin wall is made up of politics and idiologies instead of brick and mortar but it divides us just the same.

Make no mistake, we in the US will be subject to the same censorship as other countries before too long.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I had heard of the bill last year, but I didn't know they were going for round two. I dunno though... you know how it works. If it doesn't make it through this time they'll send it back, revise it some more, and send it through again. S and F for the hard work. It's people like you who'll help us bring back the freedoms that are systematically being stolen from us.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
I heard about Mozilla Firefox getting around this. Is there any other browsers that can do this as well? Is there any search engines that can do the same? What if I stop upgrading my browsers and windows, will that help at all?



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vrill
act.demandprogress.org...

They rewrote the bill to "give it teeth" and added to the blacklist. It would cause isp's and search engines to censor any website the doj decides should be unavailable in the us, in addition to letting the doj add websites any copyright holder could make an infringement claim to get a website added to the list. Currently there are 325,000 websites on the list and the number would no doubt go up. If you are curious, that is 2.8% of english websites to start with and 11x the number of websites blocked in china.


While I hate censorship, there is a difference between US and China.

Your headline is completely misleading and sensationalizing the actual topic.

The things they want removed from search engines are illegal. Such as a pirated software torrent or a place to illegally DL music. for example.

Not that I agree with the laws, etc, but seriously there is a reason behind it all.

If it is supposed to be illegal to share movies etc then why is it so easy to find on a search engine?

I see both sides of the argument.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vrill
Would be nice if George Washington could rise from the grave, observe what a mess his (and obviously others) nation has become, and lay a beatdown on the idiots driving it into the ground.


If George Washington rose from the grave, he would be pissed he didn't have slaves to do his work and when we told them we have magic screens that can magically transport information over long distances he wouldn't understand anyways.

He is from a different age.

I am sure the right to bear arms (for example) was in reference to a front loaded muzzle gun. It took you more time to load your gun than it did to stab someone back then.

There are reasons why we change things with the times.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Last year I followed closely the COICA bill because it was a really really really really bad bill... and I was glad it died...

But now, according to this, it seems they are back with an even worse bill...

THIS MUST NOT PASS, AT ANY COST.



I am sure the right to bear arms (for example) was in reference to a front loaded muzzle gun. It took you more time to load your gun than it did to stab someone back then.

No. Just no.
edit on 13-5-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo


I am sure the right to bear arms (for example) was in reference to a front loaded muzzle gun. It took you more time to load your gun than it did to stab someone back then.

No. Just no.
edit on 13-5-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)


What do you mean no?

There was no such thing as bullet casings, automatic weapons, or even semi automatic weapons in his day.

Or do I know history different?

You think they existed in their time?

You think that he envisioned gangsters walking the streets shooting 6 year old girls?

You need to realize they came from a different era.
edit on 13-5-2011 by mudbeed because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by mudbeed

Originally posted by Vitchilo


I am sure the right to bear arms (for example) was in reference to a front loaded muzzle gun. It took you more time to load your gun than it did to stab someone back then.

No. Just no.
edit on 13-5-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)


What do you mean no?

There was no such thing as bullet casings, automatic weapons, or even semi automatic weapons in his day.

Or do I know history different?

You think they existed in their time?

You think that he envisioned gangsters walking the streets shooting 6 year old girls?

You need to realize they came from a different era.
edit on 13-5-2011 by mudbeed because: (no reason given)


I think he doesn't want to give up his right to have guns



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Every few months a law like this is proposed but ultimately will always die a horrid death as it won't go to Committee and will be tabled indefinately so expect at least 4 more before the year is out.

THE INTERNET OF TODAY WILL BE THE SAME INTERNET OF TOMORROW SO DO NOT EXPECT THAT TO CHANGE!
edit on 13-5-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Vrill
 


Ready the Bat signal. It's almost time



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish614
Firefox created an extension to get around this, the Dept of Homeland Security told them to disable the feature and Firefox told them to shove it.
www.techdirt.com...


Mozilla has just been added my list of "Good Guys"! Thanks for that.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by mudbeed
What do you mean no?

There was no such thing as bullet casings, automatic weapons, or even semi automatic weapons in his day.

Or do I know history different?

You think they existed in their time?

You think that he envisioned gangsters walking the streets shooting 6 year old girls?

You need to realize they came from a different era.
edit on 13-5-2011 by mudbeed because: (no reason given)


Do you think those gangsters couldn't get guns if they were outlawed?

The only people that wouldn't have guns, that wanted them, would be law biding citizens. Law biding citizens would be at the mercy of every home invader, gangster & rapist. The black market is everywhere, whether you like it or not.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jessejamesxx
 


Yeah but i still think an IQ test should be required to own one. Oh and atheist and Muslims should not be allowed to have them either. Atheist think theirs no consequence when going out in a blaze of glory. And Muslims think they get rewarded for going out in a blaze of glory. Other than that don't touch my guns!!



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Yet another perfect example of the government using fear tactics in order to take away our rights. They make
al-queda out to be the boogey man when in fact there are much bigger threats to our country.

They say they're protecting us.
They say it's for our own good.

The real threat to this country is our own government.

They are slowly taking total control of the flow of information. An uninformed population is a subservient population.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
I stumbled upon your thread.

I would like to add that I believe that I am on some list.There are certain things you can Google to get the attention of "them". I had a personal expierience after trying to find some information on the Google machine.

Everything you type on your computer goes through something somewhere.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jessejamesxx
The only people that wouldn't have guns, that wanted them, would be law biding citizens. Law biding citizens would be at the mercy of every home invader, gangster & rapist. The black market is everywhere, whether you like it or not.


No I completely agree. I have no problems with guns. Since I have one I probably shouldn't have an issue, right?

I was giving perspective of the whole "The George Washington saw us now blah blah" argument.

It was a different world then.

The truth is if you want to know who runs the largest black market (other than the US Gov) would be the way that NRA lobbies for the sales of handguns in inner cities...but that is a another story.

Maybe I wouldn't have to own a gun if they took care of the issue years ago.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Vrill
 


NO stars. NO flags for NOT READING the article.

It's related to copyright infringement!

DENY IGNORANCE.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
THANK GOD
PRAISE JESUS

if it weren't for stuff like this i might have to stand up
speak
and think for myself.

i am just happy that there is a system to do all that for me and my friends.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   
And so here we are. My reading of this is sites that infringe on copyright material which would include what they consider infringement. Take for example something that is considered fair use quoting of an article. We could throw that blanket over ATS, GLP, probably Rush Limbaugh since he quotes articles, Glenn Beck since he's just basically a thorn, Halfpasthuman because well, we can't have that. Lots of sites will be on the list. And the best part is apparently it will only take a complaint to get on the list.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join