Slashdot Mirror
Web Censorship Proposed For Norway
Aqwis writes "A Norwegian Web filtering system (link in Norwegian), comparable to the Great Firewall of China, has been proposed to the Norwegian legislature. It would, if enacted, block all Web sites and servers that contain hate material (racial hate, pro-Nazi sites, hate towards the government, etc.), most kinds of pornography (not only child pornography), foreign gambling sites, and sites that share copyrighted or other material that it is not legal to share (such as most BitTorrent sites and services such as LimeWire). Reactions have been mixed; however they are mostly negative."
Ah, Norway, that progressive place of freedom. Nope. Don't buy it. Who's in charge there? Liberals? Let's not say anything that would offend anyone. We have to be tolerant of the offended.
Crap, another country I thought was on the right track, until now.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
It's working just fine, thank you. The PATRIOT Act has nothing to do with free speech. Absolutely nothing whatsoever. The objections to certain articles of the PATRIOT Act have to do with invasion of privacy and a perceived lack of judicial oversight for certain provisions.
When you say that Norway is at the top of the list, the United States is not far back. And this is a completely unscientific, opinion-based, qualitative ranking that you are citing. The survey is wildly erratic and, with the US at least, . The US fell over 20 places in Reporters Without Borders for, according to them, the decisions made in the Judith Miller case. That had absolutely nothing to do with her being censored or deprived of the right to speak or publish her opinion in any way, shape, or form. She was arrested for contempt of court. If she has facts that are related to a specific trial, she has a legal obligation to give up those facts. Whether you are a journalist or a private citizen, you simply can't ignore a grand jury summons. By refusing to testify when she had valuable information, she undermined the integrity of the court case. You do not, and should not, have the right to withhold information from a jury.
For an example, El Salvador was ranked ahead of the United States last year. Can you honestly tell me that you would feel safer criticizing the government in El Salvador? That El Salvador has more societal and governmental assurance of a free press?
I know US-bashing is in fashion and the OP was wrong, but please shut the fuck up. We've had asshole presidents, moronic legislatures, and stupid, pointless wars before and we'll have them again. That doesn't change the fact that we have a long and proud history of freedom of the press.