Slashdot Mirror
B'nai Brith Pushes for Web Regulation
Baldrson writes: "Wired magazine reports that in late August, B'nai Brith Canada tried to get the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) to pay attention to posts on the Islam Way weblog that solicited for volunteers to join Ossama bin Laden. According to the story: "...after media reports have suggested that Montreal and Halifax may have been meeting points for a number of the terrorists involved in the attack, B'nai Brith Canada is stepping up its efforts to get legislation passed to ban such Web activity.""
As somebody wisely said on this list at KeepersOfLists.org, 'Bad People Use the Internet for Stuff'. Bad People are always going to use the internet, the same as Bad People use cars, the telephone, postal service and even airplanes - but whatever regulations you introduce, it's always going to mean extra hassle for the honest people, while the Bad People just find some way round it.
insignificant sig
Don't ban such activity! Encourage it, and then let the Feds also participate and infiltrate the groups, as they currently do with pedophile rings. A free and open society does not always have to hamper the abilities of the police. Sometimes it fosters an environment where it's easier for the authorities to check things out.
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
.. that there are still people around these days who are stupid enough to believe that this kind of regulation can do any good at all. How many times do they need to be proven wrong, and how often do we need our rights reducing before these stupid (but well intending although angry) people realise they are WRONG?
I fear they will not stop until we reach orwellian levels of monitoring, banning and regulation.
I find it ironic that the US are moving more towards stopping technologies that are evil, (which incidentally is a complete nonsense in itself,) yet none of us would like to live under (for example) the rule of the Taleban. Look again at the Tabeban - all they do is ban, monitor and control things they think are "evil" - just the knod of action we are talking about here.
The world needs to learn that people are good and bad. "Things" are indifferent. Banning or restricting "things" simply hides bad people from view. An interesting side effect that governments find useful from that is that it increases temporarily the perception of safety.
4
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
Posts recruiting for bin Laden are, of course, not helpful. It would be better for everyone if they were taken down. But I think everyone here agrees that censorship powers should NOT be given to the government. So how can we (legally) get rid of such?
(1) E-mail the ISP and ask for the message to be taken down. Self-policing of the Net!
(2) Have the government request (without threatening anything) that the messages be taken down.
(3) *ONLY IF SUCH ACTIVITY CONTINUES AND FORMS A PATTERN* _Gently_ suggest that if many messages of this type appear, the ISP could be under suspicion of *aiding the terrorists*. Do *not* even *think* about using any laws as curbs on freedom of speech or privacy. The government *will* be using every possible resource to track these sons of you-know-what down. But we should be sure that such powers do *not* spill over into other areas.
Your friendly neighborhood nitpicker
Sorry, but I find your opinion disturbing. The fact that some people can actually entertain the notion that human sentiment can be changed by "rules" makes me feel less safe in this world. Please take care - such negative beliefs about humanity have a tendency to become self-fulfilling prophecies
The Web is only a means of expression of the feelings and opinions of people, yes, real live human beings - yes, organic biochemical aggregations exhibiting emotion.
Personally, I'd rather see the diversity of opinions and mind-sets being expressed out in the open, rather than being suppressed by paranoid authorities. In my profession as an alternative health therapist, I deal daily with the devastation caused by people who continually suppress their feelings until they break out in destructive ways.
As I've said in other posts, the real answer to overcoming evil in this world is to probe to its underlying causes - political, social, economic, psychological etc, and educate and empower people to heal and overcome the underlying pain which causes destructive manifestations.
Nothing but a process of education, instilling in people from an early age a sense of local and global accountability for their actions, desires and choices will make any real progress in preventing any future tragedies.
Lastly, in answer to your 'IP theft' point, let me say that IP laws add to the global scarcity consciousness, which is a major cause of crime and war. Isn't it time we recognised the immense human benefits that can come from the freeing up of information?
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
You're right. Last week's tragic events couldn't have taken place without Osama Bin Laden cowardly stealing Dylan Klebold's intellectual property!
I don't get this. I just don't see how the two are inter-connected. Someone help me out, because I must be an idiot. How does this:
The Jewish group B'nai Brith Canada is calling for stricter regulation of hate-related material on the Internet following Tuesday's terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.
fit with this:
However, last year the CSIS issued a report in which it warned that "computers, modems and the Internet are enhancing the operational capabilities of terrorist organizations." The report cautioned, "Terrorists have improved their use of advanced technologies to protect and expedite lines of communication and funding, both nationally and internationally; this has increased the chances that planning for the next terrorist attack may not be detected."
Here's my question: How do these connect? My understanding is this: Hate groups want their filth seen by as many people as possible, so they put it up in the open. Terrorist groups, execpt possibly in the area of recruiting, would want to stay as secretive as possible. You don't post your plans to a message board where it can be plainly seen by anyone . Even in the recruiting aspect, wouldn't publicly posting recruitments be counter-productive? "To join (Known Terrorist Group), meet at the corner of The Feds are Waiting For You Avenue and You Idiot Street in Montreal." Wouldn't this just make certain movents of the groups more traceable, even under current law? (There would certainly be probable cause).
As far as terrorist communication via the internet goes, wouldn't most communications be done via direct e-mail? And tracking these communications would require serious privacy violations. (On a lighter note, it would be strange if a terrorist group was brought down because it got caught spamming)
So, in summary, here's my point. I don't see how restricting speech (as despicable as most agree that it is) has any effect on a terrorist organization. This may be just because I am an idiot, so feel free to explain it to me.
Confused and waiting for someone smart to explain it all to me,
-- If any of the above made sense, I assure it was purely by accident.
However Section 33 allows both federal and provincial governments to pass legislation that ignores Section 2 and Section 7-15 of the Charter
The government uses this provision only in extreme cases (such as banning hate literature). It is not used lightly and it most certainly wouldn't be used in this case.
It's good to see terrorist use opensource software too. Imagine the MS FUD now.....
I have no comment either way about most of what you say, but I'll point out that you're right in one respect. During World War 2, the Japanese killed far more Chinese than the Nazis ever did Jews. Yet nobody ever seems to mention that.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.