The French are now arresting people for "pro ISIS" browsing habits

[greenclaydog 6]

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/french-man-sent-prison-visiting-202857691.html

 

 

No one should be condoning or supporting the actions of ISIS or related terror groups; however arresting someone for their browsing habits is unacceptable. 

 

The world is beginning to accept thought crime as a valid criminal offense. 

 

 

First they come for the terrorists

 

then they come for the people who make and watch child porn

 

then they come for normal porn

 

then they come for torrents/piracy

 

Eventually this chain of arrests and crackdowns will come for the political posts on facebook, which news sites you visit, the public figures you support, who you vote for. and the list goes on and on and on.

 

The world can find better solutions to fighting global terrorisim than by tapping the entire internet and arresting people who seek information they disagree with. 

 

Some actual terrorists have been found and investigated by the FBI beforehand and they did nothing stop them, even with all the tools and assets of mass surveillance at their backs. 

[Kepler_452b 77]

@VPNuser172, totally agree with you. I believe once the Trumpublicans take office we are going to see a dramatic lurch to the right including abrogating the personal freedoms and civil rights we are used to.

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

then they come for normal porn

 

Which "modern" countries disallow this?

[serenacat 83]

People who are Bob Dylan fans need to be wary of what they google or access. And scholars of ancient Egyptian mythology are being renditioned somewhere.

 

The masters are not very good at their jobs:

"Authorities in Ghana have busted a fake U.S. embassy in the capital Accra run by a criminal network that for a decade issued illegally obtained authentic visas, the U.S. State Department said."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/ake-us-embassy-in-ghana-shut-down-after-ten-years-issuing-visas-a7455006.html

 

[LZ1 672]

Hello!

 

That's scary. I'm sure the British are taking notes furiously - little addition to the snoopers charter perhaps? Like a little treat for Christmas. Politicians exempt, of course! Haha.

[greenclaydog 6]

 

then they come for normal porn

 

Which "modern" countries disallow this?

 

 

Ironically enough, politicians seem to get off on making other people getting off illegal. I do not have the links on hand at the moment, but the US and UK have repeatedly attempted to restrict or ban porn. The UK recently proposed a total ban on "non standard pornography". It's quite disturbing that we live in an era when it's acceptable for a government to dictate what it's people can and cannot masturbate to or decide whether they can do it at all. 

[Guest]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/a-long-list-of-sex-acts-just-got-banned-in-uk-porn-9897174.html

 

Seemingly arbitrarily deciding what is nice sex and what is not nice sex, the board's ruling on 'content that is not acceptable' (p.24) effectively bans the following acts from being depicted by British pornography producers:

Spanking

Caning

Aggressive whipping

Penetration by any object "associated with violence"

Physical or verbal abuse (regardless of  if consensual)

Urolagnia (known as "water sports")

Role-playing as non-adults

Physical restraint

Humiliation

Female ejaculation

Strangulation

Facesitting

Fisting

The final three listed fall under acts the BBFC views as potentially "life-endangering".

 

 

bold/underlined by me

 

lols

[Kepler_452b 77]

 

 

then they come for normal porn

 

Which "modern" countries disallow this?

 

 

Ironically enough, politicians seem to get off on making other people getting off illegal. I do not have the links on hand at the moment, but the US and UK have repeatedly attempted to restrict or ban porn. The UK recently proposed a total ban on "non standard pornography". It's quite disturbing that we live in an era when it's acceptable for a government to dictate what it's people can and cannot masturbate to or decide whether they can do it at all. 

 

Hilariously straightforward, OP  ROFL

[greenclaydog 6]

The comments on the article are just as bad.

 

"In a ruling that has human rights groups upset..."

Funny how ISIS committing mass killings of children and enslaving women isn't objectionable but a conviction over visiting a website is."

 

Just because people want to protect their right to browse the internet freely does not mean that privacy groups support harboring terrorists and child molesters. 

 

We do not believe the crimes are justified in any sense of the word 

 

We just believe that the methods and legislation's they use to uncover these individuals can, will be and have been used to steal, harm and defame innocent citizens and restrict the ability to attain knowledge on controversial topics and political ideologies all over the world.

 

Simply put, you have to violate the privacy and fundamental rights of lots of Bobs, Alice's, Johns, and Janes before you can end up on a Muhammad or an Osama or a Herbert The Pervert. 

 

And when you ask someone, anyone if they think this is acceptable they respond with...

 

 

(Obligatory Professor Umbridge reference)

[Ricnvolved1956 51]

@VPNuser172, totally agree with you. I believe once the Trumpublicans take office we are going to see a dramatic lurch to the right including abrogating the personal freedoms and civil rights we are used to.

It remains to be seen if Trumpublicans make your prediction a reality. But do you think it would've been any different under Clinton?

 

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151220/08101633141/hillary-clinton-wants-manhattan-project-encryption-not-back-door-that-makes-no-sense.shtml

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/14/hillary-clintons-encryption-proposal-was-impossible-said-top-adviser/

During Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, the State Department aggressively funded the development of encryption and anonymous web browsing tools.

[greenclaydog 6]

 

@VPNuser172, totally agree with you. I believe once the Trumpublicans take office we are going to see a dramatic lurch to the right including abrogating the personal freedoms and civil rights we are used to.

It remains to be seen if Trumpublicans make your prediction a reality. But do you think it would've been any different under Clinton?

 

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151220/08101633141/hillary-clinton-wants-manhattan-project-encryption-not-back-door-that-makes-no-sense.shtml

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/14/hillary-clintons-encryption-proposal-was-impossible-said-top-adviser/

During Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, the State Department aggressively funded the development of encryption and anonymous web browsing tools.

 

Your privacy is not safe under any presidential candidate

 

whether its Donald "Pussy Grabber" Trump or Hillary " What does it matter now" Clinton, neither of them could give less of a shit about your privacy.

 

For all we know the US funded encryption and web browsing tools as a means of purchasing themselves a back door, or maybe they developed these technologies with the intention of specifically protecting their data.

 

I simply find it too hard to believe that the same country running the worlds largest digital mass surveillance operation funding globally used encryption and obfuscation technologies is merely an innocent coincidence that we should just overlook. 

[Staff 9972]

 

then they come for normal porn

 

Which "modern" countries disallow this?

 

Australia, China, Kuwait, Singapore, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Burma, Indonesia, South Korea, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey.

 

A special "mention" (not strictly related to your question) to Russia and Lithuania, in which any positive "mention" of homosexuality is a criminal infringement.

 

North Korea is an outsider, useless to cite it, since no Internet connectivity is available to the citizens (they have an internal intranet with 30 approved web sites, according to an old ONI report in 2007).

 

Kind regards

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

Australia, China, Kuwait, Singapore, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Burma, Indonesia, South Korea, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey.

 

I should've said western. :/ I knew that almost all mideastern countries strictly disallow this.

 

 

Spanking

Caning

Aggressive whipping

Penetration by any object "associated with violence"

Physical or verbal abuse (regardless of  if consensual)

Urolagnia (known as "water sports")

Role-playing as non-adults

Physical restraint

Humiliation

Female ejaculation

Strangulation

Facesitting

Fisting

 

Aren't these making the sexual act a more creative thing to do? Isn't this art in some way?

Could you please tell the officials to also ban art?

[greenclaydog 6]

 

Australia, China, Kuwait, Singapore, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Burma, Indonesia, South Korea, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey.

 

I should've said western. :/ I knew that almost all mideastern countries strictly disallow this.

 

> 

Spanking

Caning

Aggressive whipping

Penetration by any object "associated with violence"

Physical or verbal abuse (regardless of  if consensual)

Urolagnia (known as "water sports")

Role-playing as non-adults

Physical restraint

Humiliation

Female ejaculation

Strangulation

Facesitting

Fisting

 

Aren't these making the sexual act a more creative thing to do? Isn't this art in some way?

Could you please tell the officials to also ban art?

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure the British politicians have that somewhere on their To-Do list somewhere above "Reinstate book burning"

[Staff 9972]

I should've said western. :/ I knew that almost all mideastern countries strictly disallow this.

 

 

 

Australia, Turkey, United Kingdom, Singapore are not mid-eastern countries and could be considered "western" countries for their alleged lifestyle and purposes (Turkey has been negotiating entering the EU since years and years ago, and they should know that a basic founding principles of the EU is the protection of human rights) or for their actual or theoretical legal framework based on protection of human rights (Singapore, Australia, United Kingdom) that have historically been promoted for the first time by western countries (and by United Kingdom itself in times that many forget too soon and too easily).

 

Kind regards

[serenacat 83]

From my experience with the English, this sort of blacklist ban reflects their strong class ideologies. Behind the gates of country estates, and in the "swinging London set" all sorts of experience/art is pursued and practiced, and depravities may just cost some money. But the lower order peons only deserve base Friday night drunken swill crowds, and some magazine titillation. They cannot afford the price of admission, but some can aspire to the "high life".

<p>

In Australia, various efforts at banning porn have come partly from an undemocratic bias to conservative rural voters over urban cosmopolitans, similar to the "bible belt" in the USA. Some have been ridiculous, like a large blacklist compiled by a government agency which was to be downloadable by parents into "parental controls" software on the family computers. This was supposed to stop adolescents, not just 6 year olds, and it needed to be pointed out it would soon be widely circulated as a master guide to "educational" sites for susceptible teenagers. At present the government is a sort of deadlocked "empty center" with various right wing lobbyists try to do a Trump, so although there is no business case for porn hosting in Australia (expensive), access to say the "Collected Works of Sarah Shevon" is not difficult with some searching and torrenting.

<p>

There is more concern presently about the metadata logging which was promoted for fighting al Qaeda etc terrorists becoming widely available across government departments and onward to personnel agencies, credit providers, private investigators etc, and leaked from offshore call centers or government employees and contractors to all sorts of identity theft, blackmail, etc activities. Many tips to "get a VPN".

[mmmxx 12]

Dude, you dial the wrong phone number in Somalia, you are a drone target, i.e. dead.

 

Websurfing to the wrong address is a Thought Crime, the book "1984" told us so.