Earlier quoted context omitted.
The more cynical view is that the government perpetrates the attack to provide the opportunity, ala 9/11 conspiracy theories.
No, that's the insane view.
As is a lot of the proven things involving the FBI and CIA.
France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
121–130 of 273 posts
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#122We see the same impulse in the U.S. and across the world: whenever something bad happens, people call out for something to be done, regardless of whether that something would have helped, or if its negative effects outweigh its positive effects.
We see it with encryption. Yes, encryption can be and is used by bad people for evil ends, but it is also used by good people for good ends; encryption is simply the means. It's a human right to speak privately. Law enforcement can still investigate, can still use different powers to eavesdrop and compel parties to speech to reveal that speech; but it has no right to be party to private speech. Yes, bad things will not be detected as a result, but it's worth it.
We see it with arms control. Yes, weapons can be and are used by bad people to kill innocents; but they are also used by good people to defend themselves, whether from crime or tyranny. It is a human right to be armed. Law enforcement and the military can still use their superior numbers and training to overwhelm a foe, but they have no right to claim a monopoly on arms. Yes, innocents will die, but innocents will also live.
We see it with the war on some drugs. Yes, some people will take certain drugs and commit crimes; but other people will take those same drugs and enjoy a pleasant mental state. Law enforcement can still arrest criminals, but it has no right to arrest folks who haven't harmed anyone. It's a human right to alter one's mental state. The tradeoff is worth it.
The thing is, you have to take this attitude toward all things: religion; drugs; weapons; encryption; speech in general. Once you start to carve out exceptions and exclusions to liberty, you'll end up losing ever-more liberty. It happens faster than one might imagine.
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to offer a summary for those of us that aren't fluent? :)
Created by the DLPAJ on December 1st, the report contains all the police measures that the police (and maybe French military, "gendarme"?) wish to see included in two bills currently being debated: one on the state of emergency and the other on anti-terrorism.
The "Gendarmerie" is a part of the military that operates police duties. Although the concept was originally French, you can find a similar thing in a a lot of continental european countries (the Carabinieri in Italy, the Guarda Nacional Republicana in Portugal, the Guardia Civil in Spain, Internal Troops/National Guard in Ukraine, ...).
In France, generally speaking, the Police National is in charges of cities and large metropolitan areas, and the Gendarmerie is seen in rural areas. They live in barracks, and are weird in that they answer both to the ministry of interior and to the ministry of defense.
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#124Socialist regimes have been te most suppressive in peoples history. Think about Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, etc…
Socialism kills [0]. Or a more eloquent and less extreme read would be "The Road to Serfdom" by F. A. Hayek
---
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
> terrorist organizations Like those pesky ecologists that endanger the state by stopping economic growth and slowing down job creation at the cost of increased pollution, right?
They're not ecologists, they're anti-globalization anarchists that protested against a new airport by destroying shops in downtown Nantes. They recently threw at the police candles that people left at the memorial for the Paris attacks. I consider myself an ecologist but I have no sympathy for these people.
Can you read French? https://wiki.laquadrature.net/%C3%89tat_urgence/Recensement#...
People who commit crimes should be fined or arrested. These are preventive house arrests for crimes that they might commit in the future. You really don't see the problem with this?
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#126Socialist regimes have been te most suppressive in peoples history. Think about Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, etc… Socialism kills [0]. Or a more eloquent and less extreme read would be "The Road to Serfdom" by F. A. Hayek --- [0]: http://jim.com/killingfields.html
This is not extreme left, it's center-left. The distinction is important, otherwise we'd reduce everything to communism and fascism.
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> terrorist organizations Like those pesky ecologists that endanger the state by stopping economic growth and slowing down job creation at the cost of increased pollution, right?
They're not ecologists, they're anti-globalization anarchists that protested against a new airport by destroying shops in downtown Nantes. They recently threw at the police candles that people left at the memorial for the Paris attacks. I consider myself an ecologist but I have no sympathy for these people.
And yet, they're still not ISIS terrorists. The state of emergency was used to stop public discourse and dissent - both anarchists and non-anarchists were banned from attending marches during the Paris climate summit.
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#128It is not the first time France has done things like this. In the 90s, France outlawed encryption completely, with prison sentence for breaking the ban. As tools like ssh became common, this became less and less practical. For example the supercomputer center at my university had to develop a one time password scheme for the French users (printed out and sent to them by mail), since ssh was strictly forbidden there.
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#129All this because 130 people were killed. What would they do to prevent the 4600 people killed in road accidents in France last year? Or the 49000 people killed by alcohol [in 2009]?
People have a tendency to brush those deaths off as "your own fault", or one off accidents. The media hyperinflation of events doesn't help either. It's actually really interesting to look at studies measuring people's relative evaluations of risk. One tidbit is that back around 9/11 and for a long while thereafter people believed that flying was more dangerous than driving, despite that being very untrue.
Is it still untrue if you do not drive drunk?
Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
no book of religion pushes people to grab a knife or a gun to harm others; crazy leaders do and unstable and uneducated people follow. yet, even if we discard that previous point : forbidding religions would be exactly the same as creating one and pointing "believers" as enemies of "non believers" ... triggering more of what you try to stop general education and broad tolerance between cultures (either religious or n…
> no book of religion pushes people to grab a knife or a gun to harm others Yes they do. From the old testament (Deuteronomy 13, 6-13) http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/13.htm --- If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known…
> Granted, I have taken the quote out of context. But so do religious fanatics.
You can't hand-wave this sort of thing away, since anyone can make the Bible say anything they want by selectively quoting it. You are doing more harm than good here.
The Old Testament law was set up to create a theocracy. Many infractions of the law were punishable by death. Contrast that to Jesus' teaching:
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." (Matthew 5:43-8)
But of course, you'll need to understand the context in which Jesus is teaching to understand all of what he's saying in Matthew 5 and during his whole ministry.
In the very same chapter he addresses the law and says that he did not come to abolish it but to fulfill it. That statement has been a great point of contention through the ages as well.
Did I just make things worse by pulling a couple verses out of context? At least the ones I quoted don't advocate homicide.
As far as radical clerics/rabbis/priests/etc, religious leaders worth anything should encourage the congregation to look to the original texts rather than relying only on their words as final truth.