Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Censorship's got a foot in the door:
Anti-terror censorship: France blocks 5 sites without court order
Published time: March 17, 2015 04:02 Get short URL
Islamic-news.info visitors are redirected to a warning
France has blocked five websites suspected of condoning terrorism and spreading hate speech, marking the first usage of new anti-terrorism powers approved by parliament last year that allow such bans without court orders.
“I do not want to see sites that could lead people to take up arms on the Internet,” French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said at a public meeting Monday.
“I make a distinction between freedom of expression and the spread of messages that serve to glorify terrorism. These hate messages are a crime,” he added. Internet service providers were given 24 hours to comply.
Among the sites that are being restricted is al-Hayat Media Center, accused of possible links with Islamic State militants, according to Cazeneuve. The ministry also says it plans to target “dozens” of other similar websites.
Internet service providers have been given 24 hours to take “all necessary measures to block the listing of these addresses” under the new rules introduced in November last year.
It is the first time the new powers have been put to use to block websites without going through a court with due diligence. Visitors to the sites are now redirected to a page from the French Interior Ministry, containing a warning graphic of a big red palm, reading “the contents...incites terrorism or justifies terror acts.”
France is still on high alert under Operation Sentinel which mobilized over 10,000 troops on French soil to protect 682 sensitive sites across the country including religious sites, railway stations, airports, and tourist attractions in the wake of a rise in religious tensions following Charlie Hebdo attacks in January.
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
yep, censorship is inevitable, its the biggest threat to the best kept secrets and power. False flase terror attacks, coming somewhere near you soon, will be blamed on social media sites.
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Quote:
“I do not want to see sites that could lead people to take up arms on the Internet,”
... with:
Quote:
These hate messages are a crime,”
My bet: "Quenelles" sites are soon to follow:
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
it's interesting to see how the gov't ignores its own mistakes and missteps and punishes the individual lol :(
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Back in 2000 I was amazed at how the internet was taking off and wondered when THEY would step in and control it. I knew it wouldn't be a free and open place for long. It lasted another 15 years (in the West, China stepped in quicker).
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
This is relevant for Americans.
THE INTERNATIONAL FORECASTER - Net “Neutrality,” or, How To Regulate the Internet to Thunderous Applause
by James Corbett
corbettreport.com
March 14, 2015
Everything is marketing. Observe.
Want to overturn basic protections from unlawful government searches and seizures? Just write some new laws and bundle them up in something called the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.” The media will universally and unquestioningly refer to it as the USA PATRIOT Act and you can paint any would-be detractors as disloyal terrorists. Bingo. Done.
Want to do damage control after the illegal surveillance activities of your National Security Agency have been revealed to the general public? Simple. Get some of the agency’s biggest critics in the House to forward a bill that promises to protect everyone from the illegal surveillance. Call it the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-collection and Online Monitoring Act” so everyone gets the idea that this about protecting USA FREEDOM. Then add a bunch of provisions during the passage of the bill that hardwire in all the worst surveillance abuses and make sure no one will ever be held accountable for them. No sweat. Done.
Want to implement total federal regulatory control over the internet? No problem. Just call it “Net Neutrality” and watch trendy internet activists blindly rally around the idea, even though they can’t read the actual laws underlying it. Piece of cake. Done.
For those who aren’t up on their lingo, “net neutrality” refers to a network (in this case, the internet) in which all data is treated equally. In practical terms, this means that your ISP can’t form a special deal with a big company like Netflix to let their data pass through the network more quickly (prioritizing traffic) or relegate other sites to an internet “slow lane” where data passes to users more slowly (throttling traffic). It also means that ISPs can’t interfere with traffic based on protocol (like when Comcast tried to block peer-to-peer file sharing), perform “deep packet inspection” to censor certain types of data (like that employed in the national censorship schemes in Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia, Iran and elsewhere), or favoring private networks (like Comcast did in a special deal with Microsoft).
Now let’s make one thing clear: net neutrality is a good thing for the average internet user and it’s only the real-life grinches at the cable companies or certain misguided libertarians who think that throttling won’t be used against them who argue otherwise. But it’s easy to get everyone (or basically everyone) to agree on the goal. It ends up being much more important how you get there.
Before we get into the specifics of the FCC regulation that has just radically transformed the ISP industry in the United States, let’s just take a moment to review who it is that is supposedly championing the little guy by implementing it.
wheelerFirstly we have Tom Wheeler, the current FCC Chairman. Even that bastion of truthiness Wikipedia has it right when it describes him as “an American businessman and politician” in that order and in that many words. He is the chairman of the FCC, and, as such, the “defender of the public interest” entrusted with regulating the cable companies and telecoms. So what did he do before becoming FCC Chairman? Oh, that’s right, he’s the former President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association and the former CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association. Yes, the man who has presided over the most significant regulatory framework ever imposed on the internet in the history of the United States is a lifelong lobbyist for the very industry he is supposedly regulating (the only ever double inductee of the Wireless Hall of Fame and the Cable Television Hall of Fame, no less).
But the regulatory plan that the FCC ultimately adopted wasn’t Wheeler’s. In fact, it was proposed by the Liar-in-Chief himself, Obama, last November. That’s right, the same man who was against warrantless wiretapping before he was for it. The same man whose second largest campaign donor was Goldman Sachs and who supported the bank bailouts from the get go. The same man who promised to close Guantanamo and promised not to appoint any lobbyists to his administration. The same man who oversees a secret presidential kill list that allows him to mark anyone on the planet (even American citizens) for death without so much as a court trial. But trust him on this one, guys. He’s got your back.
“But all of this is circumstantial,” the dear trusting internet activists will argue. “Show us the proof that these net neutrality rules aren’t what they say they are!” Would that it could have been refuted before it was voted on. Sadly, in an all-too-familiar repeat of the we-passed-the-PATRIOT-Act-without-reading-it syndrome and the “you’ll have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it” disease, the new FCC regulations, too, were held secret from the public until after the plan was voted on last month. It was finally published (all 400 pages of it) on the FCC’s website earlier this week, but before that all that was available was a five-page press release of fluffy rhetoric about “preserving the internet.” In other words: “Trust us. Have we ever lied to you?”
So what did the FCC actually do? It reclassified internet service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Federal Communications Act of 1934, as well as Title III of the same Act and Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Previously, cable modem service and wireless broadband service had been classified under the far less regulated status of “information services” under Title I of the Communications Act. Now the FCC has the authority (even if it claims it won’t use it at the moment) to regulate the practices and agreements that ISPs engage in and even the rates which they charge their customers.
Or, translating from legalese gobbledygook: the internet is now classified by the U.S. government as a public utility and treated in the same way that the phone system was treated back in the days of Ma Bell. Yes, US ISPs are now subject to the same regulations that created the AT&T monopoly and arguably held back advancements in the telecommunications industry by half a century or more.
What does this mean?
It means that the US ISP industry is now in a “whack-a-mole” environment of uncertain regulations that will be subject to massive litigation for years to come.
It means that local, state and federal fees that apply specifically to Title II services will create billions of dollars in new charges that will be shunted on to American internet users.
It means that ISPs and wireless providers who are already struggling to break into a competition-adverse market will have an even harder time as a host of new legal roadblocks and pitfalls are placed in their way, and lawyers and consultants become necessary to ensure compliance with industry standard practices.
fccinternetBut most chillingly of all it means that any future bunch of FCC commissioners (or even this particular bunch if they so desire) will be able to wield broad powers to enforce vaguely-written rules over any service on the internet in any way they see fit. In effect, the keys to the future of the internet have just been handed over to the FCC, not just today, not just this group, but anyone who ever steps into that position. Ever.
And it’s not just fringe conspiracy theorists like me that think the FCC has just given itself far too much power to regulate the internet as it sees fit. Even the EFF, one of the main (Soros-funded) groups arguing for net neutrality in the first place wrote a letter to the FCC arguing against the vague, ominous “general conduct” provision that allows the FCC to regulate against anything it decides will cause “harm” to consumers or content providers. The clause is so nebulous as to allow any FCC Commission to effectively attempt to regulate against any practice, standard or company it wishes in the future.
Don’t worry, though, the FCC promises it won’t use most of the power its given itself…at this point. Just like Obama promised he wouldn’t use the indefinite detention clause in the 2012 NDAA. Just like Bush promised all that NSA wiretapping business was above board and legal. Go on, trust them. Has a politician ever lied to you?
Oh, and to top it all off the FCC slips this little gem into their new rule package: obligations for ISPs to conform to rules like the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act “could in some circumstances intersect with open Internet protections,” but don’t worry. “Most commenters recognize the benefits of clarifying that these obligations are not inconsistent with open Internet rules,” they insist. That’s probably because most commenters have no idea what CALEA is or how it hard wired backdoor access to the internet and telecom equipment two decades ago.
If the problem is the threat of an overly restricted internet, does anyone really think that the answer is another layer of government bureaucracy operating with a 400-page instruction manual to micromanage the most pervasive and free network ever devised using a carte blanche “general conduct” clause?
And if that isn’t the answer, is there an alternative way of ensuring net neutrality? One that doesn’t require government “regulation” by bought-and-paid for corporate lobbyists?
As a matter of fact, there is. It doesn’t take an economics professor to realize that the best way to ensure the consumer gets what he/she wants is to foster competition for services. In that regard, the average American household is stuck with, at best one or two major broadband providers, and has to take what they’re given…
radio…Unless, that is, they create their own competition. I’ve talked before on The Corbett Report about wireless mesh networking as an alternative to the existing internet backbone. Although this technology truly does offer the promise of an alternate infrastructure that evades the current NSA track-and-control matrix and could be configured to be as neutral (or not-neutral) as its users want, the idea of a wireless mesh network that could truly rival the scope and penetration of the existing internet is not realistic in the short term. In the meantime, though, mesh networking could still be used to harness an already untapped potential of available bandwidth: unlicensed spectrum, i.e. the wi-fi connections that remain locked away behind passwords by their owners. As Peter van Valkenburgh writes in a compelling Wired op-ed, the combination of bitcoin micropayments, traffic encryption, and peer routing could create a mesh network that would in effect be a ready-to-go competition to the broadband monopoly giants. In effect, a community of interest could set up its own broadband network by pooling together the resources of its constituent members. The best part about this plan? It’s the peer-to-peer economy at play in the process of providing peer-to-peer connections through a peer-to-peer network itself. Talk about Inception.
Of course, now that we have Title II regulation of the internet, the FCC could regulate that such community broadband efforts are against the interests of the public and thus impermissible. And so here we find ourselves yet again subject to the whims and fancies of a bunch of bureaucrats and their political puppetmasters.
Whatever else there may be to say about this subject, there’s at least one important lesson to take from this: everything is marketing. Just calling the wholesale regulation of the internet “net neutrality” made it possible in the first place. Perhaps the freedom movement can do some marketing of its own to sell the idea that freedom is the answer to every political question.
Anyone got a catchy slogan?
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Quote:
Posted by
Hervé
[...]
My bet: "Quenelles" sites are soon to follow:
How predictable:
French comedian sentenced for ‘condoning terrorism’ in FB post
Published time: March 19, 2015 00:06
Edited time: March 19, 2015 04:57 Get short URL
Amid a crackdown on hate speech and “condoning terrorism” online, a French court has handed out a two-month suspended prison sentence to prominent comedian and political activist Dieudonne over a Facebook post in the wake of Charle Hebdo attack.
The 49-year-old Dieudonne M’bala M’bala, or simply Dieudonne has been convicted for being “an apologist for terrorism” over a Facebook post he made following attacks in France that killed 17 people.
“I feel like Charlie Coulibaly,” he wrote in a coined phrase on Facebook on January 11, four days after the Charlie Hebdo attack, allegedly making a mockery of the slogan “Je suis Charlie” (I am Charlie) a global rallying cry against extremism. The second part of the phrase mimicked the name of Amedy Coulibaly, the gunman who killed four people at a Paris kosher supermarket.
Prosecutor Annabelle Philippe argued that Dieudonne is guilty of presenting “in a favourable light the acts committed by Amedy Coulibaly.”
“The feeling of hostility towards the Jewish community that Dieudonne kept up in front of a public attracted by his charisma increases his responsibility,” the court argued. The prosecution was seeking a harsher sentence of up to 7 years in prison and a potential 100,000 euro ($106,000) fine.
Dieudonne, who was not present at court during the sentencing on Wednesday, was also fined €30,000 ($35,000), which, if not paid, will result in a prison term.
According to French daily, 20minutes, Dieudonne argued in court on January 28 and February 4 that he has condemned the Charlie Hebdo attacks “without restraint and without any ambiguity.” Dieudonne also claimed at the hearing that he wished to participate in the march in Paris against the extremism, but the Interior Ministry had requested that he be “excluded” and treated as a “terrorist.”
The comic’s case was the most prominent case of several dozen investigated in France in connection to hate speech and allegations of “condoning terrorism.”
The comedian is known for his extreme right views and has been credited with inventing a hand gesture called the “quenelle,” interpreted by many as an inverted Nazi-like salute. He had previously been found guilty seven times for slander or anti-Semitic statements. A Paris court has also recently banned the sale of a DVD featuring Dieudonne on the grounds that it is anti-Semitic, condones the Holocaust and “collaboration with the enemy”.
Amid fierce debates in France over whether the authorities are guilty of double standards on freedom of speech, France blocked five websites suspected of condoning terrorism and spreading hate speech earlier in March. It marked the first usage of new anti-terrorism powers approved by parliament last year that allow such bans without court orders.
France is still on high alert under Operation Sentinel which mobilized over 10,000 troops on French soil to protect 682 sensitive sites across the country including religious sites, railway stations, airports, and tourist attractions in the wake of a rise in religious tensions following the Charlie Hebdo attacks in January.
Read more
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
And here in South Africa, they have an even more novel approach.
Bear in mind that 65% of South African households have NO access to the Internet, and of the 35% that do, only 10% have Internet access from home (Other access points are from work, educational institutions, or Internet cafes)
From Right2Know:
Quote:
The Right2Know Campaign calls on the public to reject the Film and Publications Board’s (FPB) proposals to censor the internet in South Africa. The FPB wants
broadly defined powers to police everything published on the Internet – including blogs, personal websites and Facebook pages.
The Right2Know Campaign demands that the Film and Publications Board to scrap the
Draft Online Regulation Policy document gazetted on Wednesday, 4 March 2015. The FPB must desist from any attempt to exercise pre-publication censorship of Internet content...
According to the document,
anyone wishing to publish or distribute content will have to first apply for a digital publisher’s online distribution agreement with the FPB, which will require a subscription fee. Once paid, the publisher would have to submit the content to the FPB for classification prior to publishing. This effectively is a specific form of pre-publication censorship, which is not acceptable.
Moreover, the
time spent on the pre-classification of content would undermine one of the most valuable traits of the internet – its immediacy. There is also a very real threat that in the future, organisations lacking in resources and unable to afford costly subscription fees, such as community-oriented news outlets and civil society groups, will be severely hampered by the unnecessarily bureaucratic regulations envisioned by the FPB. These online media outlets provide a valuable contribution to the diversity of the South African media landscape. The FPB draft regulations will disenable this diversity.
Worryingly, the regulations would allow the FPB to “
dispatch classifiers to the distributors’ premises for the purposes of classifying digital content.".
Full article: #HandsOffOurInternet!
If this actually goes through, I will not be able to post anything to the Internet anywhere anymore, as I am not prepared to pay an already ragingly corrupt government ONE CENT towards my own censorship.
Only in South Africa, where you pay them to censor you. :tape:
You gotta admit, Avalonians, that's pretty hard to beat! :rolleyes:
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
I am in Canada and I am having a lot of trouble using my more controversial sites and no trouble using the usual sites. I am unable to use my seen.is page at all, the CTM page at seen.is I can not use either, when I log onto Caravan To Midnight all the weird stuff starts there too! Other sites I get the ERROR message, site does not exist etc. even though I know they are still there. Some books I perused and went back to purchase just disappeared altogether like they do not exist. I ordered a perfectly legit item from a U.S. supplier and was put on the DEA suspect list, this came first hand to me via the RCMP who have since dealt with that for me. Apparently freedom is over even in the mundane day to day things I/we do.
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
It continues
I use Google, Bing, whatever, go to the usual news sites, local weather etc, all is well. Then I go to Beforeitsnews, seen.is, CTM, etc, my computer screen cuts in and out, slows down, locks up, becomes totally unusable.
Example:
I tried to open a page on Jade Helm, WAM, everything locks up. I have to not only shut down (if possible) but also unplug the computer from the wall power source. I come to Project Avalon, no problem. :confused:
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Whenever I have tried to log in to PA while using google chrome, unlike Firefox or Internet Explorer, it has not let me in.
GoogleChrome blocks Project Avalon with the caption "unsafe site" and it will simply not navigate to the log in page.
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
I have not the bandwidth to watch this yet (I have to wait for next month for more quota), but this looks like a very relevant and pertinent discussion to this thread, with some impressive participants.
Topic: Big Brother out of control
Sacha Stone and Paul Seils from New Earth Nation spoke with:
Foster Gamble (Creator and producer of the THRIVE movie)
Noam Chomsky (MIT Linguistics professor and political commentator)
Paul Craig Roberts (author, economist and former Assistant Treasury Secretary in the Reagan Administration)
Max Igan (Australian filmmaker and radio host)
Pippa King (advocate for protecting children from in-school bio metric invasion of privacy)
Gerald Celente (founder of the astoundingly accurate Trends Journal)
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Thanks !
Would like to hear peoples opinions on Foster Gamble; I did watch all of THRIVE, but was left with idea that, as a Multi (Billion... ) -Millionaire, he and the Missus, have jumped on a very nice, lucrative bandwagon ?
As Stalin pointed out, best way to Control opposition , is to lead it............ I cannot put my finger on it, it's a little like trusting Mr. Farage, with dismantling government and Banksters....
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
To any and all who follow(ed) this thread, see this other one for the why behind all these connections difficulties:
Is the deprecation of insecure HTTP an attack on alternative media?
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Africa's Worst New Internet Censorship Law Could be Coming to South Africa
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Defending your rights in the digital world
May 21, 2015 | By Jeremy Malcolm
Quote:
Only once in a while does an Internet censorship law or regulation come along that is so audacious in its scope, so misguided in its premises, and so poorly thought out in its execution, that you have to check your calendar to make sure April 1 hasn't come around again. The Draft Online Regulation Policy recently issued by the Film and Publication Board (FPB) of South Africa is such a regulation. It's as if the fabled prude Mrs. Grundy had been brought forward from the 18th century, stumbled across hustler.com on her first excursion online, and promptly cobbled together a law to shut the Internet down. Yes, it's that bad.
But don't just take our word for it—read some of its provisions for yourself. First, the regulation applies, in the first instance, to films and games (regardless of subject matter), as well as to publications containing certain loosely-described forms of sex, violence and hate speech.
Full article can be read here.
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Quote:
Posted by
Ioneo
Want to implement total federal regulatory control over the internet? No problem. Just call it “Net Neutrality” and watch trendy internet activists blindly rally around the idea, even though they can’t read the actual laws underlying it. Piece of cake. Done.
Censorship of the internet has arrived and we have not even witnessed the tip of the iceberg. Over the coming months and years, we will start to feel and see the impact of net neutrality laws in both Europe and the USA.
Regulating the Internet as a public utility is a terrible mistake. The Internet is full of possibilities we haven’t even imagined yet. Leave it to politicians and bureaucrats to believe they are smart enough to control something as dynamic and ever-changing as the Internet. Politicians fear what they can't control, especially the flow of information. Most politicians have learned over years to view catastrophic events as opportunities to pass unpopular legislation. These new laws and regulations (many passed under public duress) ensure that only the big boys with enough money can play in the game, exactly as pubic utilities have been setup. It is much easier to control a handful of big companies with money than thousands of small companies just trying to start up and succeed.
As these internet laws and regulations unfold and morph into what the government wants I am afraid they will become a very popular topic on Avalon..............that is if Avalon is "allowed" to continue.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Microsoft threatens to take down Gab:
Attachment 38705
And so it continues...
MM
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Quote:
Posted by
Hervé
My bet: "Quenelles" sites are soon to follow:
Good old Mr. Shoahnanas. :bigsmile:
I'm not really a fan of EU immigration policies as a whole, inasmuch as they follow the Kalergi Plan, but in this case you guys found a real gem. Congrats. :)
"Tu me prends par la Shoah, je te prends par l'ananas…." I laugh every time.
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
Soros' Role in Social Media Censorship
August 26, 2018
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...eaked-document
Leaked document
http://theduran.com/leaked-49-page-m...ia-censorship/
Media Matters founder, David Brock, working at Soros behest.
MM
Re: Internet Censorship: So it continues...
This is troubling on so many levels.
It is with the tools that we have, and created over time, that we owe our existence here on this planet. Whether it be the tool of communicating to alert others to danger, or the tools to build our homes, or the tools or weapons we create to protect ourselves.
The "Tool" of the day is open communications across boundaries, or the internet... When society gets to the point where they take away ANY of the tools of the day.. That we face a serious issue as a whole...
