Slashdot Mirror
Senator Wants 'Terrorist' Label On Blogs
itwbennett writes "Terrorist suspect Jose Pimentel had a blog on Google-owned Blogger. And so it follows that Senator Joe Lieberman sent a letter to Google CEO Larry Page taking him to task because 'Blogger's Content Policy does not expressly ban terrorist content.' Lieberman also pointed out that YouTube does ban terrorist content and added that 'Google's inconsistent standards are adversely affecting our ability to counter violent Islamist extremism online.'"
So if we ban public content that indicates terrorism and force them to hide it better from the government, how would that be better at countering terrorism? At least if it's public everyone can see it and so can the government, which would enable them to do something about it, rather than being unprepared.
I've heard that the Content Policy of the United States Constitution also fails to expressly ban terrorist content...
Those 'founding fathers' must have been a bunch of rag-heads or something.
Dear Honorable Senator Lieberman:
May I interest you in an important Historical Document that, I might add, you were supposed to have read and understood when you were sworn into the Senate?
Reading comprehension is important for everyone.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Whenever I think they can't get any more stupid, one of them goes and proves me wrong.
Illegal content isn't allowed on Blogger.com at present.
Terrorism is illegal at present.
Therefore nothing new to see here, just move along and stop wasting our time.
Maybe Senators could focus on something important, like the economy and trillions in debt instead.
'Google's inconsistent standards are adversely affecting our ability to counter violent Islamist extremism online.'"
Well Mr. Lieberman, you're quite the one to talk about inconsistent standards. And I'm sure censorship is most definitely the best way to fight terrorism online. It always works, right? Right?
US Government: Fighting the symptoms, and not the causes. To get one vote at a time.
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
Who is trying to terrify us here? Why, Joe Lieberman and his ilk, of course. What is the biggest terrorist organization in the US? The Department of Homeland Security, who wastes no opportunity to further terrify the populace (terror alert! new scanners! we are at risk! etc.)
Suddenly we should ban certain content? How is google supposed to know what is protected speech and what is illegal? Why should they ban anything other than outright illegal content which they don't need policy to remove?
Should google label anything from the US government as terroristic?
These days, no one can really tell who's the good guys, with random bizarre wars and occupations so on.
"These Palestinians looks like they have some pretty good land we Jews can take.. Let's take it with US government funding!"
Or is this yet another case of "one law for us, another for anyone who doesn't agree with us or fit our agenda-du-jour"?
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
... but unfortunately that doesn't stop individual Sith Senators from trying to use their influence to curb free speech.
Ironically, some of his speeches on Iran would probably have to be censored if he had his way. I guess YouTube already won't host his Beach Boys parody, BOMB-BOMB-BOMB BOMB-BOMB-IRAN.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Senator Lieberman's wet dream is to be at the head of a state with the power to edict fatwas in order to protect and push his dogmas, just like those ruling Iran.
Tattoo "TERRORIST" across their foreheads too.
Put neon lights on their homes.
Force them to put "I am a TERRORIST" at the start of every sentence they speak.
US Govamnent's inconsistent standards are adversely affecting our ability to counter violent Islamist extremism in real life.
I smell a messy court battle if this picks up traction.
Just sayin . . .
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
Just shut the fuck up
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
It's guys like Lieberman that drag American into the whole Middle-east religious wars, due to his fundamentalist support for Israel.
I propose that whenever Google reports search results pertaining to Lieberman, they're required to mark-up him as being a root-cause of America's terrorism problem.
"Google's inconsistent standards are adversely affecting our ability to counter violent Islamist extremism online." They're not inconsistent standards. By default, Google just index bloody everything. Mr. Liebermann says he wants to counter terrorism but continues to define that as violent Islamist extremism. Apparently other forms of violent extremism (KKK) are tolerable. Who's being inconsistent here? Also, free speech yada yada yada. Now, I don't have to agree with a viewpoint to defend people's right to express it. I do think that mr. Liebermann got one thing right- Sure, add a label to the search result, but don't block the result itself. As long as there's no tracking going on to see who's visiting labeled results, I'm fine with that. Just because I'm reading a page written by a suspected terrorist, that doesn't make me one too.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
Are you kidding? The right for free speech needs to be absolute and effective for everyone or it will never work. Having to brand a blog from a terrorist violates that right. It's free speech just not free and not read with out prejudgement.
What we need here is a law that politicians can be arrested for egregious stupidity. Oh, it would be a bit chaotic for the first few days, having to replace 99.5% of them, but I'm thinking we could substitute with labrador retrievers without any noticeable drop in efficiency.
You track them.
How do you track them?
You lure them our into the open.
How do you get them in the open?
You lull them into a false sense of complacency.
If you prevent this content, it still it exists, it just moves underground. The serious terrorists are already encrypting and doing steganography, its about catching casual idiots like this guy.
So senator joe is no tactician. Allow this content, and monitor it for the lone yahoos. Basic strategy joe
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'm starting to think that we need to make our elected representatives take the same test we force immigrants to take to become US citizens.
Senator Joe Lieberman is not running for re-election.
Members of Congress usually have absolute immunity from damages for legislative activities (passing laws, resolutions, etc.). But I wonder if they can be held liable if they do something outside their legislative duties, like writing a letter on official letterhead. It would certainly make for an interesting argument: Can a member of Congress be held financially liable for publicly pressuring a private entity, outside of the legislative process, to censor a customer's protected speech? I'd certainly be wiling to try if it was me that they did it to.
BTW, for those who say general advocacy of violent activities, complete with links to bomb-making materials, isn't protected speech:
"[T]he constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. As we said in Noto v. United States, 367 U. S. 290, 297-298 (1961), 'the mere abstract teaching . . . of the moral propriety or even moral necessity for a resort to force and violence, is not the same as preparing a group for violent action and steeling it to such action.' See also Herndon v. Lowry, 301 U. S. 242, 259-261 (1937); Bond v. Floyd, 385 U. S. 116, 134 (1966). A statute which fails to draw this distinction impermissibly intrudes upon the freedoms guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments. It sweeps within its condemnation speech which our Constitution has immunized from governmental control."
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969). Note that this was a unanimous decision.
For some more cases holding that the First Amendment does not permit the government to engage in viewpoint-based regulation of speech absent a compelling governmental interest, such as averting a clear and present danger of immediate (not speculative it-might-happen-soon violence), see R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992); Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of New York State Crime Victims Board, 502 U.S. 105 (1991); Boos v. Barry, 485 U.S. 312 (1988); Police Dept. v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92 (1972); Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969); Kingsley Int'l Pictures Corp. v. Regents, 360 U.S. 684 (1959).
It's like watching "Brazil", as reimagined through "The Simpsons".
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Sounds like someone's trying to backdoor the evil bit into existence!
More like the Three Stooges version of 1984.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
This, of course, means nothing. One cannot counter any sort of extremism on-line, Islamic or otherwise. The whole premise stinks of naivety-sm. Alas, this is really why we wont see a solution to the problem. Those responsible view the world through children's eyes.
So their standards are not affecting your ability to counter violent Jewish, Christian, or other religious extremism online?
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=C6lZPebJiN4
http://www.whoarethe1percent.com/
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
... according to google is
terrorism/terrizm/
Noun:
The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
*The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.*
how many governments does that definition cover?
how many politicians?
as someone who was born, (mostly) grew up in, and currently lives in, a country where the term "terrorism/terrorist" is used in SO many contexts - .lk for those who want to know (not .us like many would think) - the word "terrorism" is more accurately defined as "that guy over there that we don't agree with"..
unfortunately, "terrorist" has become a new witch-hunt word - equal in power (or a VERY close second to "pedo")
i think it is time that we ALL start identifying ourselves as terrorists.. because close to every political statement we make - including "seriously.. can you imagine life with THAT guy in office" while standing at the water cooler - can be construed as terrorism..
this is one of the reasons that the UN has yet to define terrorism.. because if they were to do so, many - in fact, most - governments would fall under the "terrorist" definition.
my advice; call, email, write a letter, send a pigeon to senator leiberman (and any others supporting this bill and tell them "you are not with us. you are not with the terrorists. you ARE a terrorist".. maybe they will get the clue
Suchetha "why yes, i am a terrorist" Wijenayake
learn from yesterday, plan for tomorrow, party tonight
or one out of three ain't bad
In 2007 a medium sized town in Quebec, with a muslim population of 0, explicitly banned stoning people to death.
Because apparently the existing laws against murder and capital punishment didn't send the right message.
It's the same concept here. Of course terrorism is already illegal, but that's not the point. Few politicians can resist any opportunity to publicly hate-monger and generate faux-controversy.
Seriously he is just the dealer at the Three Card Monte game the government(executive+legislative) is playing with the citizen's brain...
On the red card we will fix the economy, but look at this nice "therorist" card...
Not only do we not care, but anything we would do would just be to solve this issue we have:
See people to find things like "bootleg blockbuster video" use various search engines...
Now we would like to know exactly what was searched and found, with google or any other search engine..
So if we can get a nice "tagging" law 'to save the children' there is no reason we can not also have a global "tag the content" law...
do not forget that lieberman is a "Hollywood Democrat"
This is the same fool who thought Julian Assange should be tried for Treason and still claims to have no clue as to what the Occupy Wall Street protest is about. Andf for those who want to play a fool, Its about getting corporate out of government. So say something and expose your ignorance and while you are at it, tell us, did you vote for Joe?
I suspect he was one of the people in congress that participated in insider trading and has himself committed treason against the united states numerous times, as it is an age old trick to claim of another what you yourself are guilty of, in effort to hide your own guilt.
Clearly he persist with proving he is not qualified to be in Government unless that position is as a sanitation worker.
if he was a Republican, all the trolls woulld be out about "OMG Republicans are teh evil."
Your butthurt would be less funny if it wasn't below the posts calling Lieberman a Nazi and a terrorist.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
No, he's not. He jumped ship years ago and has been hanging with the reds while claiming to be "independent" ever since. He's full of shit and so are you.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
No, he's an Independent. And it's not like he's independent in name only. He already screwed over the Dems and the country by joining the Repubs in filibustering a public option health care plan. That's why the trolls aren't out... because even the trolls know that he can't be attached to either party.
Oh, except for you. Congratulations! You are officially the stupidest troll on Slashdot! Quite an honor, I'd say, as the competition is very fierce.
I think he already gets money from big business, so ... mission accomplished.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
... Senator Deputy Dawg, I mean Joe Lieberman, sent a letter to ventriloquist Jeff Dunham about the puppet Achmed the Dead Terrorist who constantly threatens audience members with shouts of "Silence! I kill you!" Lieberman is concerned that comedy may be "adversely affecting our ability to counter violent Islamist extremism online." The senator believes that Achmed's past appearance on Dunham's Very Special Christmas Special, where he sung a song called "Jingle Bombs," was morally unacceptable and contrary to the Christmas spirit.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Actually, the world is waiting for the US to crumble. We don't really want to see any WMDs anymore, nobody gives half a shit about it. We just want to know when the bully gets tossed out of the school so we don't have to act as if we like him anymore to avoid getting beaten up.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
He once was a Democrat but the last time he ran for office he was defeated in his party's primaries by a candidate that Connecticut Democrats apparently felt better reflected the values of their party. Subsequently Lieberman ran, and was re-elected as, an independent.
You're forgetting that a significant number of Americans want to start WWIII in the Middle East so they will be 'Raptured Away'.
Since career politicians are bought and sold should we refer to them for what they truly are: Political Products.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
If Lieberman is so upset about Terrorist Content, has he seen the islamophobic drek that's rapidly growing in the US?
Last year, WordPress.com deleted a blog after CAIR complained that it contained posts that advocated burning mosques, making false bomb threats implicating Muslims, desecrating Muslim graves, and that recommended the “proper way to shoot a muslim [sic].”
Again, they're asking Wordpress to suspend the popular hate site Bare naked Islam. I love free speech, but this is one of those sites that inspires future Anders Breviks. It routinely calls to violence against American Muslims and supports desecrating mosques. “I want [Muslim] blood on my hands as a matter of principle” was one of their tamer comments I can post.
I haven't seen Jose Pimentel's blog, but I'm sure it's tamer than hate sites like these that are flourishing.
Lieberman wasn't a democrat since he lost the party nomination to Ned Lamont in 2006. Since then, he endorsed John McCain and voted against Obama's policies.
...that he is clueless piece of trash. Same shit, different day. The only thing different is that there are, sadly, probably a few more of his peers who will be unable to bring themselves to break ranks and call this what it is, yet another erosion of our civil rights that will not a single fucking thing to keep us "safe from terrorists". Thank for nothing, again, Joe.
BOO!
Were you terrified?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Because all terrorism stems only from Islam...
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
Not that any group hell-bent on world domination through violent means is not dangerous, but the "islamists" are just not the only ones. There is plenty of pan-slavic sentiment that is encouraged in wink-wink-nodge-nodge style by the Russian government. I've seen a few Russian-language videos acting as plain terrorist-instruction manuals on YouTube. I am sorry, if someone thinks that it's "art" or some form of free expression, but when a video describes graphic details of how to create the most casualties in a crowded place and peppers the description with the enough "cool" factor, it makes a promotion of violence rather than just a description of violence. And helping out the people who promote senseless violence is just not the business that Google should be in.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
No, he hasn't. He is fiscally liberal and socially conservative. He wouldn't fit in the modern Republican party by a long shot.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
They would suck the country dry, living lavishly, while people endured famine, legally had the right to rule and it was illegal to do anything to them, or against them.
when the final famine ensued in between 1770-1780, things have changed. people started to insult, harass, and beat up aristocrats here and there. they were still living lavishly with their huge income derived from people, while being exempt from tax. then we know what happened.
Current situation is not too different from how it was back in 1789.
Read radical news here
I suppose the best move by Google is now to remove the terrorist ban on YouTube, to restore consistency on its many platforms.
-- Cheers!
on some of those big-wigs or clowns (however label you may give them), the butt-holes are going OoOoOoO at some level and that's when they dream up that stuff.
Politicians and other string pullers have no defense when a larger section of US population gets really pissed.
I am surprised that nothing more is happening - how many people have lost their homes through foreclosure - Millions!
The American Dream mass-hypnosis seems to be working very well.
When it comes time to stick that label on websites like whitehouse.gov and senate.gov for all the warmongering talk, illegal drone strikes, etc?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Joe is such a ridiculous self-parody. "I am a staunch East Coast Jewish liberal. Period. End of story. Wait... the Neo-Con war machine is taking over the Republican party so they can justify unlimited military spending by killing Arabs? I am a Republican."
This story might as well read, "The Senator from Israel said today that Google is not doing enough to demonize heathen Muslims." The guy is a joke. A bitter, hateful, joke. I look forward to him being relegated to the same shelf of "famous people from our past that we're a little ashamed of" as Andrew Dice Clay.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Until you grow a pair, you're going to have to kiss someone's ass even if the US does crumble.
And spoken like Droopy Dog.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
The only issue I have with this is who decides what constitutes "terrorism" on the Internet?
Frankly, if Google is going to "apply policy" to Youtube they should be consistent on said policy for all their platforms.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Yup. Mr. Senator, if anything, you don't want to ban any terrorist content. Makes 'em easier to track, ya know? And here I thought that our government loved the ability to track the turrists.
Of representatives who've sworn to uphold the Constitution, then promptly try to wipe the grubby asses with it. A new law needs to be passed that if ANY person in a position to make, pass or decide on a laws attempts to remove, diminish or expunge any right guaranteed by the Constitution, will immediately receive a full cavity search by a trained low land gorilla sans lubrication.
I propose this on the obvious presumption that these people are trying to hide something foul by misdirecting the publics attention by making an unholy ruckus elsewhere.
These long term treason-ists who have presided over America's decline should all be facing long Jail time or a firing squad, Lieberman at the head of the list.
These people have had decades in the Congress to protect and defend America but with their Liberal BS they did nothing, and they now want people to self censor.
What about the first amendment do these idiots not understand, with the Internet they are afraid, deathly afraid that dissenters will be heard, and they will. We are in the middle of the Internet Reformation, just as when in 1450 Guttenberg started mass printing the Bible, and the authority of the Catholic heirarchy crumbled.
The problem is that the Progressive Left is Pure of Heart, but as thick as two short planks and as the Tea Party wises up more and more ordinary citizens that they are regularly lied to, and stolen from by their own government terrorism will be the last thing they need to worry about. They just need to be attached to a tree or lamp post, with the hemp rope they despise; but In case of Emergency, steel cable or piano wire works too.
MFG, omb
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens - Friedrich Schiller
And while we're at it we should be able to "Idiot Labels" on Senators.
I want one, too! Can I preorder?
Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
Lifetime NRA rating of "F".
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Blog Commenters Want "Deceased" Label on Senator
to counter violent extremism online.
I don't have any problem with islam, and think all violent extremism is equally bad.
posibly hes just making sure that you can be charged - its why they ask you if your an agent of a foreign power when you enter the country. Or mor likely hes a senator kinsy grandstanding or looking for some pork from google in his state
Dunno, but if it's anything like school, the moment the bully gets tossed, we noticed that we're better off if we don't let some idiot like that emerge again.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Cool. How do I sign up?
The guy is the biggest goniff in DC. The people of Connecticut should be ashamed.
The Three Stooges version of 1984 already exists IIRC.
Use of the words "good", "bad" or "evil" is almost invariably the result of oversimplification.
I'd like to point out that Joe Lieberman is a fucking dipshit.
I believe that the country being referred to has a constitutional principle that amounts to people being presumed innocent until proven guilty. Or has that constitution been superseded? And that would be the same constitution that bans the free expression of political opinion? Sorry, that should have been "permits", not "bans" ; a Freudian slit, if ever there was one.
There is also no indication in TFS (I can't be bothered wasting my time on reading further about foreigner's inability to follow their own laws) that the disputed blog actually contains material that may be considered offensive. The commentary is about the blog being banned because the blogger is (allegedly) a terrorist. But TFS doesn't actually inform us whether the blog is bomb-making instructions, a list of the blogger's stamp collection, or the blogger's (constitutionally protected) free speech making a rational case for the introduction of Sharia law to the country. Or an irrational case for the unanaesthetised clitoridectomy of all bankers and sentators, regardless of their gender (which proposal might gain considerable popular support from the non-terrorist portion of the population).
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Once Lieberman retires next year to be replaced by Linda McMahon, she'll put the smackdown on these terrorist jabronies.
Uh huh. Here's a better story:
CITIZENS WANT TRAITOR LABEL ON GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
"A group of irate citizens sent a letter to Senator Joe Lieberman taking him to task because Congressional policy does not expressly ban treasonous, corrupt or inept behavior. The letter also pointed out that other countries do ban such activities, and that Congress' inconsistent, arrogant and frequently ignorant behavior is adversely affecting our ability to survive and maintain what is left of our standard of living, our freedoms, indeed our very future"
Hypocrites, all of them.
Let Congress clean its own house before it starts pointing any more goddamn fingers. I'm tired of these sanctimonious pricks decrying others for not doing their part, when in fact it is Congress who put is in a situation where terrorism is an issue. Face it, it was Congressional dealmaking and corporate collusion over several decades that made us a target in the first place.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.