Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Senator Wants 'Terrorist' Label On Blogs

Posted by Soulskill on from the droopy-dog-on-the-hunt dept.

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.'"

21 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Yea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Yea... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      My understanding is that, by simultaneously encouraging potentially dangerous types to brush up on their secrecy skills, and by making a transparent mockery of Enlightenment Humanism's commitment to freedom of speech and expression, a censorship system clearly weakens both those interested in clandestine attacks on us, and those who argue that our civilization is immoral, corrupt, and decadent.

      I'm assuming that it all makes perfect sense, if you squint hard enough...

    2. Re:Yea... by Evil+Shabazz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lieberman has never amounted to anything more than a "flag politician" - one that flaps uselessly in whatever political winds are blowing for the day. The problem is that the unconstitutional committee seniority system in the Senate combined with the bacon he brings back to his campaign financiers (note, I didn't say voting constituents) means he'll never get replaced - you have to wait until he retires. The same is true of Pelosi, Frank, Boehner, and McConnell. They're all useless career politicians who care nothing about you, me, or anything other than their next election campaign. DOWN WITH THE CAREER POLITICIAN. SUPPORT CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS.

      --
      Down with the career politician! SUPPORT TERM LIMITS
  2. Hey, guess what! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Hey, guess what! by IICV · · Score: 5, Informative

      In fact, the official content policy of the United States expressly allows things that could be considered terroristic, or even things that advocate Islamist extremism.

    2. Re:Hey, guess what! by truthsearch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      American revolutionaries are considered heroes today. But they were looked at as terrorists by the British at the time. It's a shame our representatives today have little knowledge or understanding of history.

      --
      Developers: We can use your help.
    3. Re:Hey, guess what! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mel Gibson put the fear in those fuckers. I saw the documentary. They called him The Ghost.

    4. Re:Hey, guess what! by truthsearch · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not true. Subversives did things like blow up shipping docks to intimidate British merchants and military. Bombings and such were relatively rare because they were so hard to successfully carry out at the time, but they certainly did happen. Americans also spread propaganda in London and other cities to try to change public opinion (while I don't consider this terrorism, it falls under what we label as "terrorism" today).

      --
      Developers: We can use your help.
    5. Re:Hey, guess what! by MagikSlinger · · Score: 5, Informative

      They also terrorized Loyalists, which is why most of them fled to Canada.

      --
      The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
    6. Re:Hey, guess what! by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The official content policy of the US of A starts with "Congress shall make no law".

      It doesn't say "Corporations shall may no policy..."

    7. Re:Hey, guess what! by joshuac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      blow up shipping docks to intimidate British merchants and military.

      Sounds more like good guerrilla warfare than terrorism to me. If the supply lines of your much larger enemy have a chokepoint (as it was during the Revolutionary War; the enemy depended on naval transport for everything) that's exactly what you want to target, mainly for the material and personnel effect (the latter assuming most of the people working in the shipyard accepting British transport were on the side of the enemy). Psychological effects at most are a tertiary bonus, if you were lucky...blowing up a dock in the Revolutionary War would be a really inefficient way to instill enough fear in the public of Great Britain to change public support of a war.

      Modern examples of the difference:
      Terrorism: Flying jetliners into buildings in a way sure to get good media coverage and keeping the threat of the possibility of it happening again ambiguous.
      Guerrilla tactics: Attacking supply lines of your enemy in Afghanistan, rather then wasting your personnel in a head-on attacks against a much stronger enemy.

      Guerrilla warfare != Terrorism

  3. Yo Joe by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!
    1. Re:Yo Joe by xs650 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Senator from Israel doesn't recognize the US Constitution.

    2. Re:Yo Joe by truthsearch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He read and understood it. He's not an idiot, he just doesn't give a shit.

      --
      Developers: We can use your help.
    3. Re:Yo Joe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He read and understood it. He's not an idiot, he just doesn't give a shit.

      Well, if that's the case ... then he's clearly a terrorist.

      Upholding and defending the principles of the US constitution is part of the job description, isn't it?

      So, if he's against the Constitution, he's against America, and therefore a terrorist. He should be publicly flogged, and then hanged until dead.

      Of course, I'm not seriously advocating violence towards him ... but I find it appalling that lawmakers have been stomping over enshrined rights to keep up this farce of Homeland Security ... hell, even the term dredges up images of Nazi's and their Fatherland.

  4. This Video Has Been Removed by cosm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    '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
  5. Free speech and all that... by Macgyver7017 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

  6. Who decides who's a terrorist? by mozumder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!"

  7. The US Has Become a Cartoon-Parody of Police-State by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's like watching "Brazil", as reimagined through "The Simpsons".

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  8. Career Politicians = Political Products by denis-The-menace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  9. Re:VOTE! "WHO'S WRECKING AMERIKKKA?" by ideonexus · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's funny is that even people on the Right can't tell you why they hate Soros so much. The man is a self-made billionaire who grew up in Hungary during the time of Nazi Germany, and is one of the most successful capitalists in the world. He is largely credited with being crucial to the collapse of communism in Central and Eastern Europe, where he pumped millions of dollars into supporting pro-democratic programs and independent media. On top of that he is an incredible philanthropist contributing millions of dollars to organizations all over the world in support of spreading democracy, egalitarianism, and toppling oppressive regimes.

    As far as I can tell, the reason they hate him is because he made getting George Bush out of office his top priority in 2003, arguing that America, as leader of the world, was taking the world off course with the War on Terror. He also supports death with dignity through assisted suicide and drug policy reform. The man is obviously a monster.

    Jon Stewart also had a fantastic takedown of right-wing conspiracy theories about Soros.

    --
    i ~ Celebrating Science, Cyberspace, Speculation