Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

U.S. Lists Web Sites as Terrorist Organizations

Posted by timothy on from the and-declan's-an-isp dept.

mgcsinc writes "The United States for the first time has placed a web site on the list where it normally places terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, placing several conditions on Americans' interactions with the website. Certainly, few could challenge the latest addition, but how could this ability to effectively squelch internet speech be used by the government with less valid rationale in the future?"

38 of 507 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah by Sir+Haxalot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when a website ever directly killed anyone?

    --
    I have over 70 freaks, do you?
  2. What's Interesting About This Is. by 1stflight · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With the current administration so adamant about not criticizing israeli actions...

    Jewish group Kahane Chai or Kach, which is suspected of organizing attacks on Palestinians.

    This is a first!!!!

    --
    3000 dead over past 2 years, still no free Palestinians, still
    1. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is a first!!!!

      Wrong. It's not a first, nor a last. The Kahane Chai group and its predecessor have LONG been labeled by the State Department as a terror group. In January 2001 (this was months before 9/11), the FBI raided the headquarters of a Brooklyn group that maintains the Kahanist Web site, and tried to locate documents linking them with Kach or Kahane Chai. That's worth repeating: They raided a terror group's web host service just to hunt these guys down. The US and Israeli intellgence services have also coordinated searches, and helped dry up funding for this group of thugs. (Again, this was before the hard-line attitude the US has taken towards terrorists since 9/11.)

      America gets lots of bad press in the world because of its support of Israel. Perhaps the US could do more to help promote peace. Perhaps the Palestinians could do more to stop killing children and civilians in restaurants and buses. There's lots of blame to go around. But now we've found a new person to blame: YOU, for not getting your fucking facts straight before you mouth of.

      Perhaps it's only a first for you, since you're finally starting to learn a little about something you obviously know nothing about.

    2. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by dougmc · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Yeah, but when you actually read the website you can kind of see why...
      Not from that page I can't. I see a bunch of inflamatory, racist drivel -- but last I checked, even racist speech was protected by the First Amendment here in the US. At least in name, anyways.
    3. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by silas_moeckel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah but you miss the duplicity of it all. States get to do whatever they want in the name of fighting terrisim, rebels and sepratists including using there tactics. One persons rebel or terrorist is anothers freedom fighter. The problem with these sorts of orginizations is they have become a method to wage war without going to war as fas as there host states are concerned, welcome to the post UN world where you cant go to war unless your on the security council and can veto any reprisals.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    4. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by drooling-dog · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So attacking terrorists is terrorism?

      No, attacking innocent people is terrorism, regardless of their ethnicity or faith, and regardless of whether the attacker operates in opposition to or on behalf of an established government.

      But this word has been such a propaganda vehicle for so long that it no longer has any useful meaning.

    5. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Rabin was murdered, in 1995, by Yigal Amir, who was a member of Eyal. Some have speculated that Eyal is loosely affiliated with Kahane Chai and Kach, based on shared memberships. Speculative, at best, although others may have evidence of stronger links.

      Kahane Chai has publicly assumed responsibility for a number of terrorist attacks of Palestinians, including Baruch Goldstein's slaughter of 29 people in the Ibrahim Mosque in 1994. Since March 1994, both Kahane and Kach have been outlawed by the Israeli government.

    6. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 2, Informative
      Not from that page I can't. I see a bunch of inflamatory, racist drivel -- but last I checked, even racist speech was protected by the First Amendment here in the US. At least in name, anyways.

      Of course. Kahane Chai and Kach did not get on the State Departments limited and arbitrary list of terrorist organizations by publishing. They got there by murdering people and committing other acts of terror in Israel, Palestine and the United States. Baruch Goldstein, who killed 29 worshippers at a Hebron Mosque was a Kach member acting on behalf of her sister organization, the Jewish Defense League (JDL). Officially Kach is a political party and the JDL a militia. Meir Kahane founded both of them. Another Kach affiliated militia, Eyal, assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

      Until 2001 the State Department listed Kahane Chai and Kach seperately. For some reason they merged them that year. The two organizations do have extensive cross membership. IIRC, 2001 was also the year the State department added Hizbollah to the list.

      According to the article, the list includes "newkach.org, kahane.org, kahane.net, kahanetzadak.com as aliases for the Jewish group Kahane Chai or Kach." This is quite different than listing the sites themselves based on their content. I wonder if the names in question are legal business entities.
      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    7. Re:What's Interesting About This Is. by mr100percent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "3.) Many more 9/11 scenerios because it would create more terrorists than it would kill."

      Oh, so since you haven't seen any in only 6 months, then you think its over? The US's worldwide approval ratings have hit solid bottom. Legitimate scholars are NOW saying its ok to hit the US because they are the invaders.

      Things WILL get worse, believe me.

  3. They, of course, neglected... by cliffy2000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    goatse.cx. Now, if that's not a TERROR-ist site, what on earth is?

  4. 1984, right prediction, wrong year. by perlchild · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apparently now emitting an idea, is a crime. There goes protected speech, and thoughtcrime is a reality. George Orwell was just 20 years too early.
    From there there is not that far to outlawing voting for the opposition. USA citizens should have brought their government to heel when they had the chance(the constitution gave them that power) but now they would have to collectively each commit a crime(a terrorist crime no less) to exert their own constitutional rights... From there, how far to outlawing a repeal of a politician? I guess Arnold's election scared all the politicians with thoughts of "he ain't one of us"...

    1. Re:1984, right prediction, wrong year. by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tool.

      Not everything you disagree with is 1984. Fuck. Bush is temporal. E.g. he prolly won't be voted back in...

      Or how about instead of pinning all your problems on one fucking guy you guys take responsibility for your own actions. Stop acting so paranoid and just relax!

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  5. Re:America died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Three good quotes, one by a patriot, two by a fascist

    "The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theatre."
    ~ Frank Zappa, 1977

    ''If this were a dictatorship, it would be a
    heck of a lot easier -- so long as I'm the dictator.'' --George W. Bush

    "I'm the commander -- see, I don't need to explain -- I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." George W Bush

  6. paranoia strikes again by proj_2501 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    effectively squelching internet speech? there is no restriction on accessing the website.

  7. There is nothing wrong with Kahane.org! by sageres · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I see nothing wrong with Kahane websites, or Kahane organization in general. Kahane.org is critisizing Israeli government from the right, thus going against official US position in regards to Israeli government. Irregardless of the believes that Kahane offshot organizations hold, I do not recall a single attack purpotrated against Palestinians by Kahane.org or any affiliated websites, or any affiliated organizations. Is it possible that the US government is trying to influence the policies of Israeli government by banning some of their critics from the right? Does it seem as an attempt of "evenhandidness" towards the Palestinian terrorist groups? Just a note: the founder of Kahane movement was killed by the same person who purpotrated the World Trade Center attack in 1993.

  8. Can anybody figure out what this means? by mabu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems to me the ability to designate any web site as a terrorist organization, would potentially give the Feds the authority to tap the entire Internet. That's the gist i get from the Patriot Act, not that you can easily figure out what this law actually does...

    For example...

    I'd love to get my hands on whatever obfusicator our politicans ran on the USA Patriot Act. What a mess:

    SEC. 201. AUTHORITY TO INTERCEPT WIRE, ORAL, AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS RELATING TO TERRORISM.
    Section 2516(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
    (1) by redesignating paragraph (p), as so redesignated by section 434(2) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-132; 110 Stat. 1274), as paragraph (r); and
    (2) by inserting after paragraph (p), as so redesignated by section 201(3) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (division C of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 3009-565), the following new paragraph:
    `(q) any criminal violation of section 229 (relating to chemical weapons); or sections 2332, 2332a, 2332b, 2332d, 2339A, or 2339B of this title (relating to terrorism); or'.

    Trying to figure out the new powers granted the government in the USA Patriot Act involves a ridiculous array of search-and-replace scavenger hunting.

  9. Re:America died by AVGVSTVS · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As an American, while I do not disagree with your assertion that what America used to be (land of the free, liberty, limited government) is no more, I would like to know which countries DO respect the rights Americans used to enjoy? Europe is hardly a libertarian dream-world, the mid east certainly is not, nor Asia, Africa, Latin America, pretty much all out. This is a global trend, its simply more noticable in the US because we've fallen so far. So to you I would say, yes, we need to wake up, and so does 94% of the world that hates us, maybe if they focused that energy on hating thier own oppressive puppet governments that hold hands with the "US Fascist Regieme" the world might be a better place to live.

  10. Let's see... by errxn · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...for a website to be a terrorist organization, it would have to destroy random targets, and instill fear in the masses. So, umm, don't they mean a site like this?

    --
    In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
  11. 2600?? by dciman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just wait....
    How long do you think it will be until the MPAA, RIAA, or some other "Big Business" (friend of the Bush family) convinces the honorable John Asscroft that 2600 is a terrorist organization. After all, they talk about security exploits, fun with the phone systems, etc.

    If this goes unchallenged, the possibility of abuse against people "not with the team" is almost a definite.

  12. If you read the article.... by ebyrob · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You'd see that donating money to the website is now illegal, and banks are supposed to "freeze funds" of those operating the website... Though, they weren't sure how this would work in practice.

    Even all out blocking was mentioned thusly:
    But the law may not enable the United States to block access to the Web sites, if only for technical reasons.

    That's funny, I don't recall the bill of rights and free speech being called "technical reasons" when I studied US history in high-school and college.

    At the very least, any good slashdotter over 18 should go read every site on that list and make a determination for themself. To even consider that the US needs to "wholly block" sites from another country, seems... unfree. (Note: I'll be doing my reading from an internet cafe and I'll be paying in cash)

    Call it a "war on terror" if you like, I'll continue to consider it a "war on freedom".

    1. Re:If you read the article.... by practicalista · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Call it a "war on terror" if you like, I'll continue to consider it a "war on freedom".

      Which is correct. One thing we have to understand is that with freedom of speech there comes a price.

      In order to allow all points of view to be heard we have to accept that terrorists, peodophiles, facists and all the things we despise in society will also use these rights to further their own ends.

      In the end if we try to limit the free speech of the most despicable people in society, we actually give government a method to limit everybody's free speech.

      It is sad but true. To have our rights we have to accept the downside ...

  13. How Long... by jeffkjo1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    How long before this is a classification that geeks strive for?

    "Getting the google counter and endless slashdot mod points is not enough... I want to be an internet terrorist!!!!"

  14. Confused by astro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So, in my never ending quest to get added to the FBI/NSA/etc watch list, I visited each of the sites referenced in the main post.

    I will admit to feeling naive about it, but the site kahanetzadak.com REALLY freaks me out. This is the worst kind of racism - it's as bad as American Aryan sites. Total hate. From my point of view, it's as bad an advertisement for modern Judaism as I have ever seen.

    The reason I state my response title as "Confused" is that I really wonder if this isn't some reverse-propaganda put up by (equally racist) arabs / palestinians to make the Jews look bad (awful).

    For the record: as a whitebread motherf'ing American cracker, I have no business even having an opinion, but I have long thought that our (our country's) support of what I understand to be a Jewish occupation of Arab lands to be absurd.

    Again, I was just shocked at the uncloaked hate and racisim that flows from that site. Quote from the front page (capslock is theirs): "DO YOU WANT YOUR CHILDREN TO PLAY WITH THEIRS?".

    Gah, we live in a fucked up reality.

    -astro

  15. If you RTFA.... by shirameroix · · Score: 2, Funny

    Apparently Jewish dating services are a major source of terrorism funding in the region.

  16. WOW ... rite on the money! by Tensor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That is in fact, EXCATLY what happened to me. I was about to paste the address when i thouhgt, well what if they are monitoring the logs as we speak.

    Since i am not an American BUT i travel a lot to the us for business the possibility of entry denial by immigrations was too expensive for me to risk it.

    i could use a string of proxies, but it was too much trouble for sightseeing.

    The land of the free indeed.

  17. Article Summary is Misleading by solman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The US has not listed a website as a terrorist organization. It simply listed it as an alias for a known terrorist organization.

    Kahane.com is not being banned for saying bad things. It is being banned FOR CARRYING OUT TERRORIST ATTACKS IN WHICH CIVILIANS HAVE BEEN KILLED IN AN ATTEMPT TO ACCOMPLISH POLITICAL GOALS.

    Listing kahane.com as an alias for Kahane Kach just makes it clearer to US citizens that aiding any group claiming that name is a felony.

    It makes as much sense to claim that kahane.com is a non-terrorist political offshoot of a terrorist group as it does to claim (as the Europeans did until recently) that Hamas is a non-terroist organization.

    This notion that groups which support the killing of civilians can be split into terrorist and non-terrorist components simply does not pass the smell test.

    I'm glad to see the Bush administration applying this principle uniformly.

  18. And now they'll all get slashdotted by Animats · · Score: 2, Insightful
    These are sites run by militant Jewish organizations. Kahane is the descendant of the old Jewish Defense League started by Meyer Kahane, which did some minor terrorist-type stuff in the US in the 1970 and 1980s. Their slogan was "Every Jew a .22". (Today, that sounds like wimpy firepower. The US was less heavily armed back then.)

    Kahane sounds a lot like most extreme right-wing religious groups. The extremists of the Christian right, the Jewish right, and the Islamic right have far more in common with each other than they like to admit.

    I'm surprised that the Bush Administration is acting in this area. Bush Jr. (unlike Bush Senior) gets considerable support from the American Jewish community in exchange for his support of Israel. There's got to be more political story behind this.

  19. The list still isn't complete by davmoo · · Score: 3

    The number one terrorist that needs to be on that list is Attorney General John Ashcroft. He's done more to undermine the Constitution than any foreign organization has ever dreamed of.

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
  20. Websites don't directly kill, Guns and People do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > When has an individual ever directly killed
    > anyone? It is the bullet that's fired by the gun
    > actuated by the finger connected to the hand
    > dangling from the arm that carries out the action
    >, fuckwad.

    There is a key difference. When you pull the trigger, you set in place a series of events that are irreversible. If it hits it's target in a place that will kill someone, you are the direct cause.

    When you post something on a website, people (may or may not) read it. They may or may not be inspired or agitated to do something. If they decide to do something about it they can either *CHOOSE* to do something constructive or destructive. If they choose to do something destructive, they may choose to destroy property or harm people. If they choose to harm people they may choose to do something mild (e.g. drop itching powder on their "enemies") or do something more serious.

    There's a lot of choice with websites. Websites are like books. They provide information. What you do with that information is completely up to you.
    Just because you read a banned book like "Fahrenheit 451" doesn't mean that you are automatically and inevitably a criminal.

  21. pissing in the wind by geoff+lane · · Score: 2, Insightful

    wouldn't it be a better idea to actually go out and _catch_ some terrorists instead of pissing away time and money chasing easy and irrelevant targets?

  22. Re:America died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Maybe we'll just add a little context left out by our friend.

    ...anyone surprised by the speech must not have read Bob Woodward's Bush at War , in which he quoted Bush as saying (OK, in context of Cabinet meetings, but still): "I'm the commander. See, I don't have to explain why I say things . . . Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation.

    source


    So, the President's cabinet is responsible to the President, not the other way around. This is apparently either a revelation or signs of a conspiracy?

    What about the next quote, from December 2000, just after the end of the bitterly contested 2000 election which ended with 7 of 9 Supreme Court Justices finding that the procedures in Florida were unconstitutional and 5 of 9 finding that the procedures couldn't be remedied in the time legally allotted?

    ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: President-elect Bush and the four congressional leaders met for two hours.

    PRESIDENT-ELECT GEORGE W. BUSH: I told all four that I felt like this election happened for a reason; that it pointed out-- the Delay in the outcome should make it clear to all of us-- that we can come together to heal whatever wounds may exist, whatever residuals there may be. And I really look forward to the opportunity. I hope they've got my sense of optimism about the possible, and enthusiasm about the job. I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's okay. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier... ( Chuckles ) ( laughter ) ...just so long as I'm the dictator. ( Laughter )

    ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Afterwards, all four congressional leaders said they believed that today's meeting was a good start.

    source


    So, joking comments about the sometimes difficult process of democracy are signs of a conspiracy?

    And, lets add a few more quotes from Frank:

    Politics is a bunch of show and blow for people who don't understand.

    The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theatre.

    [We] like to talk about (or be told about) democracy but, when put to the test, usually find it to be an inconvenience. We have opted instead for an authoritarian system disguised as a democracy. We pay through the nose for an enormous joke-of-a-government, let it push us around, and then wonder how all those assholes got in there.

    Politics is the entertainment branch of industry.

    source



    Apparently Frank said these things during Jimmy Carter's Presidency. I wonder if he really believed that there was no difference between Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Regan? I wonder if he would assert that a Dean administration would be no different from the Bush administration? Maybe Frank is just a nut. A talented musician, but still a nut.

    I wonder, what is the mental state of the poster of the parent post? Bush hater? Nut? Conspiracy buff? Or just a member of the "looney left?" Bush may not be be everybody's cup of tea, but he is far from being a real, honest to badness fascist.

  23. How to stop publicity to net-based terrorists. by Parallex · · Score: 2, Funny

    Step 1 : Write an article for CNN, providing URL details then /. it...
    Step 2 : Hang your head in shame!

  24. Names Are Not Websites by radtea · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As near as I can figure, this has nothing to do with websites and everything to do with website names. Websites are collections of information, much like books.

    The articles says that the U.S. government has put website names on the list of aliases for terrorist organizations, but this does not mean the websites are in any sense terrorist organizations, any more than a book can be a terrorist organization.

    For example, it would make no sense at all for the government to say: "We have placed the following books on our list of terrorist organizations: MEIN KAMPF, THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO, THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION, THE OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY and THE FARMER's ALMANAC."

    I use the OED and THE FARMER'S ALMANAC as examples because they are books that are also ongoing projects by identifiable organizations. But the books are not the organizations--they are merely a name under which the organization may be identified.

    This is an important distinction because of course only someone inexcusably ignorant of history would want the goverment censoring websites. Noting that website (or book) names may be used as aliases for terrorist organizations, however, is quite a different kettle of herring.

    --Tom

    --
    Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  25. The List by stry_cat · · Score: 2, Informative
    I actually found the list from the Federal Register. He link I used as at http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate. cgi?WAISdocID=91005011465+2+0+0&WAISaction=retriev e Here is the releveant text.

    DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    [Public Notice 4511]

    Amendment of Certain Designations Pursuant to Section 1(a)(ii)(A) of Executive Order 12947

    Acting under the authority of section 1(a)(ii)(A) of Executive Order 12947 of January 23, 1995, as amended by Executive Order 13099 of August 20, 1998, and in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General, I hereby determine that the organizations listed below use or have used as aliases the additional names indicated below. I hereby amend the designations of these organizations to add the following names as aliases:

    Kahane Chai (designated on January 23, 1995)
    Also known as Kach
    Also known as Kahane Lives

    [[Page 58739]]
    Also known as the Kfar Tapuah Fund
    Also known as The Judean Voice
    Also known as The Judean Legion
    Also known as The Way of the Torah
    Also known as The Yeshiva of the Jewish Idea
    Also known as the Repression of Traitors
    Also known as Dikuy Bogdim
    Also known as DOV
    Also known as the State of Judea
    Also known as the Committee for the Safety of the Roads
    Also known as the Sword of David
    Also known as Judea Police
    Also known as Forefront of the Idea
    Also known as The Qomemiyut Movement
    Also known as KOACH
    Also known as New Kach Movement
    Also known as newkach.org
    Also known as Kahane
    Also known as Yeshivat HaRav Meir
    Also known as the International Kahane Movement
    Also known as Kahane.org
    Also known as Kahane.net
    Also known as Kahanetzadak.com
    Also known as Kahane Tzadak
    Also known as the Hatikva Jewish Identity Center
    Also known as the Rabbi Meir David Kahane Memorial Fund
    Also known as Friends of the Jewish Idea Yeshiva
    Also known as Judean Congress
    Also known as Jewish Legion
    Also known as The Voice of Judea
    Also known as No'ar Meir
    Also known as Meir's Youth
    Also known as American Friends of Yeshivat Rav Meir
    Also known as American Friends of the United Yeshiva Movement
    Also known as The Committee Against Racism and Discrimination (CARD)
    Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (designated on January 23, 1995)
    Also known as the Red Eagles
    Also known as the Red Eagle Group
    Also known as the Red Eagle Gang
    Also known as the Halhul Gang
    Also known as the Halhul Squad
    Also known as Palestinian Popular Resistance Forces
    Also known as PPRF
    Also known as Martyr Abu-Ali Mustafa Battalion Islamic Army (designated on August 20, 1998)
    Also known as al Qaeda
    Also known as ``the Base''
    Also known as the Usama Bin Laden Network
    Also known as the Usama Bin Laden Organization
    Also known as Egyptian Islamic Jihad
    Also known as al-Jihad
    Also known as the Jihad Group
    Also known as Egyptian al-Jihad
    Also known as New Jihad

    I determine that no prior notice need be provided to any person subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the measures authorized in the Order.

    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: October 7, 2003.
    Colin L. Powell,
    Secretary of State, Department of State.
    [FR Doc. 03-25888 Filed 10-9-03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P The really scary part is that next to last paragraph saying it doesn't matter if you have a constutional right or not, they are still going to detain you.

  26. My terrorist act of the day: by X86Daddy · · Score: 3, Informative
    And the four sites are:

    Frankly, I think this is perfectly acceptible action at this time, and I hope that the US does not try to go further and block the sites. When you can read vile words from the mouths of fools, you're often alienated from them easier than if they were underground, secretive, suppressed, and romanticized .
  27. Re:America died by RobinH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... I would like to know which countries DO respect the rights Americans used to enjoy?

    The first country that springs to mind is Canada.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  28. keeping freedom of the press by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    and so we see the key to freedom of the press: But the law may not enable the United States to block access to the Web sites, if only for technical reasons. not that i'm advocating these web sites, because i'm not, but the only way we can be sure that freedom of the press won't be taken away is to make it technically or practically difficult or impossible for it to be taken away.

  29. Advocating violence is not protected speech. by ZWithaPGGB · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just because it's on the web, doesn't make it any more protected than a pamphlet. If you advocate violence, you're not engaging in protected speech, you're committing a crime. End of story. Get a clue. Al Qaeda sites were already covered by this. We just finally got some partial balance in it. If someone called this group a source of "Hate Speech" I'm sure the average /.er, who is usually from the lunatic left, would be all for banning it. Zionists are at least as bad as Islamists.