While this is a British concern, a reminder of what the United-States rebels enshrined into their new Constitution: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
21–30 of 102 posts
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#22Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#23While this is a British concern, a reminder of what the United-States rebels enshrined into their new Constitution: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Tweeted Oct. 5th 5:59am :
"Why Isn't the Senate Intel Committee looking into the Fake News Networks in OUR country to see why so much of our news is just made up-FAKE!"
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#24This article is pretty click-baity. It claims to be about reading banned literature in the title, then when you navigate to the site it immediately says the announcement/law is actually about watching videos promoting terrorism. The main body of the article is pretty incoherent and rambling; it never really clearly states what the law is actually about. If you actually go read the linked BBC article[0], you'll find t…
> then when you navigate to the site it immediately says the announcement/law is actually about watching videos promoting terrorism. Huh, is that somehow better? Can I not watch promotion videos for whatever reason and not go to jail? Research and journalism are obvious examples, where the politicians will say "of course those people will not get prosecuted" (until there is a journalist publishing negative stuff abou…
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#25While this is a British concern, a reminder of what the United-States rebels enshrined into their new Constitution: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#26Oh...shit. That is both stupefying and petrifying. More and more I feel that there is a new class war coming; and it is not rich vs poor so much as it is governments vs civilians. Really wondering whether this will be shot down or if other governments will follow suit down this road as quickly as possible. Instinct tells me the latter is more likely. I've not been on this Earth long, but where the fuck did all my fre…
Seems like we're returning to feudalism with the little people being serfs, while in the palaces the 1% enjoy their riches. Terror in Europe (and the export of fighters from that continent to the middle east) is borne out of little people not seeing any future and being easily influenced by talk of joining some "great" cause of Jihad...
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#27Reading words? Looking at pictures? Watching a video? Felony jail time? Really?
This is policy that any sane person would resist.
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#28Holy shit. I'd leave the country and renounce citizenship over something like this. Reading words? Looking at pictures? Watching a video? Felony jail time? Really? This is policy that any sane person would resist.
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#29While this is a British concern, a reminder of what the United-States rebels enshrined into their new Constitution: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
For example, "freedom of press" doesn't cover publishing whats defined as "information of non-public interest" (see Gawker). I'm not defending or accusing Gawker, just providing an example that "freedom of press" comes with a lot of exceptions and new ones are continuously added.
Re: Longer jail terms for viewing terror content online
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
All this does is extend the jail terms. Where were you when the law was initially created? It's been on the books for years.
Same place I am now. Clutching my head between my hands and wondering how the world went to hell so quickly.