Slashdot Mirror
French President Proposes Jail For Terrorist Website Visitors
howardd21 writes "French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is only a month away from an election, argued that it is time to treat those who browse extremist websites the same way as those who consume child pornography. 'Anyone who regularly consults Internet sites which promote terror or hatred or violence will be sentenced to prison,' he told a campaign rally in Strasbourg, in eastern France. 'Don't tell me it's not possible. What is possible for pedophiles should be possible for trainee terrorists and their supporters, too.' Is this a good move for security, or just another step towards a totalitarian society that prohibits free expression?"
So do you jail the intelligence agents who monitor said sites?
The French should remind themselves that their motto is Liberté, égalité, fraternité, and that all three bits are important.
I can't find any details on the specifics of the proposal so I can't help but wonder if this is one of those things where everyone is guilty and now the government can arrest and detain whoever they want? So a scenario is a terrorist uses Yahoo Mail or Twitter to send messages, the French catch it and shut it down. Years later, I'm using twitter or yahoo! Now, if they arrest me or confiscate my laptop, they have the choice to hold me on the grounds that I was visiting terrorist websites. If they are forced to say which websites, they might just cross reference my browsing history base URLs with their database and pick the least well-known site (maybe Reddit or Slashdot even?) that they claim to have detected terrorist activity on? Ideally (for the government), I'm sure they would get away without even ever naming the sites on national security grounds or something.
The politicians justify this by thinking they're good people and these laws where anyone could be arrested will not be abused. The people justify this because it happens infrequently enough that they can dismiss cases as outliers. But once a jerk is elected and these laws still exist, people start to notice because they'll use them against anyone -- even political enemies.
"I don't like this guy. Go arrest him and make sure to get his computer. We don't have anything on him but we will."
My work here is dung.
Thoughtcrime _is_ death.
This is wrong on so many levels, but let me address just one, identifying terrorists. If you don't make it illegal, but rather just identify who the frequent consumers are would this not generate a list of people you may want to have a talk with. You can then rule out the folks who visit for innocuous reasons and focus on those folks who are bent in the direction of terrorism.
Meet my friend, 4chan. 4chan, Sarkozy.
This certainly won't get abused at all.
How long before the entire French government, including Sarkozy, is jailed under their own law for looking at terrorist websites?
Presidential elections are just one month from now. He just wants to glean some votes from the far-right voters
That the one who does not go with the rest. Should be bust all slashdotters too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremist
the world would be a much nicer place without islam. no wonder everyone hates muslims.
They're just a bit nervy because they recently got pwnd by a bunch of moon cultists.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
...the summary said so, he's only about a month away from the elections. That's just an easy way to get people to remember your name.
What he proposed isn't going to happen of course.
what's good for the sheep.....
this is the kind of warped perspective that makes no sense to me
so much venom for the west
what do you think of guys who hold the hair of eight year old girls and execute them?
i'm not supporting this ridiculous visit-a-website,go-to-jail law. it's stupid
i'm taking a stand against the warped perspective that: the west does something you dislike, so you support something far worse
you do realize it's possible to be disgusted by BOTH islamic radicalization and censorial overreach, right?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
First they came for those looking for child pornography... /s/ anonymous documentary writer
Then they came for those looking for bomb recipies...
Then they came for those looking to write a documentary on terrorist/extremist web-sites.
It would also be a much nicer place without sarkozy. No wonder everyone hates france.
And for this, slashdot will be classified as a terrorist website only so that sarkozy can nab me whenever I have the bad misfortune to somehow end up in his nation of wine soaked douchebags.
Such a law would be a joy for military recruiters. Click the links below to be put onto a French terrorist watch list!
Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines!
Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines!
I suppose the French President meant violence he does not agree with should be prosecuted. That makes more sense.
but it is also true that France is currently being colonized by Muslims. Not only Muslims reproduce more but they also demand French people to adapt to Muslim costumes.
I wonder if we should jail those who think about visiting said sites? That would be a crime too, if I'm not mistaken.
Looks like Slashdot will now qualify as a terrorist web site, all French readers had better turn yourselves in now. Give me your mod points, you won't need them where you're going.
It would be even easier to just recognize that importing large numbers of foreigners who don't share your country's values, and who have a history of having a minority who advocate making open war on your society, was a huge mistake for the Western nations. You could correct that by revoking visas in the hundreds of thousands and sending them back home. But no, you cannot do that. That would be "hateful" even though it would be an even greater violation of the human dignity of those people, to say nothing of your citizens, to subject them to a police state because you don't want to accept the fact that there is a constant, indefatigable minority who not only cannot integrate but are violently opposed to Western values. When I say "violently" I mean in the sense of willing to actually use real force, not the sort of pissant, isolated incidents associated with native conservative Christians and Jews once in a blue moon.
But wouldn't far-right voters be affected by this law? Or are non-muslim right-wing extremists excluded?
Permitting terrorism and hatred are awful things. They lead, directly or not, to real dangers to society and to humanity at large.
However, consider the danger posed by a government given the power to say, "There are things you must not know." Not official secrets, which have some justification, but thoughts of people who think our governmental system is unfair - which is what Islamist thought is all about. How about thoughts about which God is the "right" God? Thoughts about what constitutes Evil or Good?
Governments have been in the business of thought control ever since Socrates, and probably a long time before that.
Whatever danger access to terrorist web sites constitutes to society, giving a government the ability to decide which thoughts you should think and which thoughts are criminal acts is a far greater hazard to humanity than any nut case with a bomb can ever be.
Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.
Now all of you who have read this post, give yourselves up at the nearest police, s'il vous plais.
Including Inspire magazine (Al Qaeda's English-language publication), the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups, and sites sympathetic to the Oklahoma city bombing.
I want to understand what motivates these people; I want to think about what sort of public policy creates the most freedom, prosperity, safety; I want to understand the enemy and figure out why they're the enemy in the first place.
So I guess I'd be put in jail for this if I lived in France. Is Sarkozy saying that only politicians are able to reason about such things? Hell of a job they've done so far.
Just because you and a bunch of English/American people hate France doesn't mean everybody hates France. The guy who carried the attacks was pretty much targeting the Western world in any case, and in the case of Sarkozy, he's very afraid of losing the elections since the leftist candidate is going to win so he has started making crazy and racist comments.
Look it's obvious that this is the right strategy against terrorism. When the people who regularly visit extremist websites go to jail for it, they will contemplate about the thought crimes they've committed and get a new life as democratic and well-adapted citizens. What else could happen?
This is a law-project tailored specifically to address the crazy killer that shot 7 people recently in France.
The presidential election is less than 1 month away and no more laws would be discussed or voted in the mean time. So this law would never pass.
The killer was under scrutiny since his return from Afghanistan. Since he hasn't done anything in France, he could be arrested and jailed. They weren't able to detect any suspicious behavior like planning to plant a bomb which is the most common terrorist act in Europe. We have very few gun-related deaths compared to the US, so such a killing spree is very unusual. This is the most obvious reason his planning went undetected.
The point of this stupid law is to give an excuse for the Police to arrest and jail anyone with a slight hint of suspect behavior, before they might be planning to commit actual crime.
As usual, this is stupid and inefficient.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
This is what happens when you live in a reactive society. All it does is give the authorities an excuse expand their power and the illusion that you'll somehow feel safer
Eight year old girl executed? Where?? [citation needed]
you do realize it's possible to be disgusted by BOTH islamic radicalization and censorial overreach, right?
Yeah, and I'm disgusted by those who make up horrible atrocities to further their own political agenda.
I don't even
Sadly, from the point of the totalitarian society, this is not an "either or" question.
Unfortunately, this proposal sounds a little like thought crime to me. You've not done anything illegal, but by looking at it, you're now a criminal.
If I read a copy of the "Anarchists Cookbook", am I now a terrorist? Once you start outlawing certain kinds of thought and expression, you can definitely be on a slippery slope ... what next, books by Che Guevara? He was a revolutionary. What about Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience"? Ghandi maybe?
Not to say that I'm defending the guy whose killing spree triggered this, but at a certain point, you can't criminalize thoughts and ideas unless they're directly inciting harm and violence.
But, how many of us still have that uncle (or father) who still makes really crass jokes we all cringe about? Do we start outlawing that?
This seems like it might cause more alienation between France and its Muslim population than actually helping anything.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Can someone post a comprehensive list of URLs we're not supposed to follow (Anarchist's cookbook, WikiLeaks, and all the rest)? So we can avoid them, of course.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
"Anyone visiting websites for emo teens will be fined for self-inflicted depression that taxes the entire public health care system."
What bullshit thoughts does Sarkozy have in his brain now?
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
I suppose the French President meant violence he does not agree with should be prosecuted
Government is the organization holding the unique "right" to employ violence (meaning coercion or threat thereof) as a business model. That is the ONLY 100% objective definition of government.
Therefore, what you said is more than just true: it's nothing less than the core foundation of all government.
Of course, violence should be punished, because it represents a violation of self-ownership. No rational human being would disagree with that. But some human beings, like myself, take it a step further. I don't differentiate between violence coming from within government and violence coming from outside government. Violence is an attack on human rights, and no amount of voting, "representation", or "executive mandate" can change human nature.
Cutting access to terrorists should certainly reduce their influence and access to new members.
But who decides who is actually a terrorist? In the UK in the 80's our Prime Minister (Margaret Thatcher) used to refer to Nelson Mandela as a terrorist. Th Chinese Communist Party call anyone who stands up to their rule "terrorists", as does Assad in Syria today.
So I understand the reasoning but fear the consequences.
"they also demand French people to adapt to Muslim costumes."
Aha! I think I finally understand why they banned head scarves, then.
... Before peaceful protest websites are declared terrorist websites, and all protest participants jailed as terrorists.
France has repeatedly harbored those who my country considers to be terrorists. Time to imprison Sarkozy in Gitmo!
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2012
In a few weeks the presidential election will start. What do you think Sarkozy is doing ? he is batting for a renewal of his job. He has to show he is doing something and as usual it is individual liberty which take a shot in the knee.
Whereas it is true that there are some legal precedent (downloading child pornography is punished by law, and as far as i can tell, even in the US, and nazi apologist or race hatred incitations is punishable by law), it would be difficult on the technological side (most of those site are on foreign soil).
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Sarkozy is just pandering to the extreme right in an election year.
This law would not be applicable given the French constitution, and in fact would also violate EU law. Any law which limits free expression must have a very specific target, and simply saying "terrorism" or "hate speech" is way too vast.
Child pornography is illegal because it can be easily and precisely defined, but what would define terrorist or hateful speech ? And what is the difference between genuine political speech and hate speech ? It's all very subjective. It would also lead to some interesting consequences, like that Mein Kampf would be legal to sell in print but not viewable on the Internet.
Article (in French)
...to rickrolling - or call it terrortrolling. Just set up a few fake links for your gullible frenemies, and get them the dawn knock on the door.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
It is the french POLITIC which should be reminded. The same way the US guys often sigh at the US political being in the pocket of corporation, we have similar problem here around.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
A general rule of powers given to government is that if they can be abused. See anti-terror laws used to spy on people alleged to be cheating the school placement system, and jaywalkers who happen to do it in a defence establishment. And I can see so many ways this can be abused to persecute the merely curious.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
"...it is time to treat those who browse extremist websites the same way as those who consume child pornography."
Read: It is time to slip a little further down the slope.
This attitude is similar to:
- It's time to attack consumers of alcohol like other drug users.
- It's time to ramp up penalties on copyright infringers.
- It's time to extend public exposure laws to ban shorts, short skirts, and short-sleeved t-shirts.
Can we not just expand law simply because some time has passed! Indeed, can we consider retracting or abolishing some laws.
Setting the mouse trap...
This is the latest of so many instances. Every time there is some news that has a strong echo, he creates some new oppressive law to please the far-rights voters..
This law reminds me of the precrime from Minority Report.. At least in the US FBI entraps the suspect before jailing him.
What's next in "Le pays des Droits de l'Homme" ? Jailing someone because a "Total Information Awareness"-like program consider him a terrorist-wanabee ? (he read the wrong book and regularly shops in ethnic grocery stores)
"Julie Amero"
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
"The fourth victim was Myriam Monsonego, seven, daughter of the head teacher, who was reportedly grabbed by the hair and shot in the head."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17428860
Is that good enough for you? Cunt.
the toulouse gunman did this a few days ago, outside the jewish school
cited in numerous news sites
so this was just made up in order to justify censorship?
are you a paranoid schizophrenic?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Sarkozy's joined the National Front
He always was a little runt
He's got his hand in the air
With the other cunts.
--
BMO
about 26 years... this talk is so 1984
He's exactly right.
Which is why only production of pedophilia should be illegal, and why it should no more be censored than such terroristic revolutionary documents as the Declaration of Independence and the Federalist Papers. Or even Mein Kampf or the Bible.
Government repression of free expression, on the other hand...now that's something that should be considered treasonous.
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
it is time to treat those who browse extremist websites the same way as those who consume child pornography
Don't equate me with a terrorist just because I like to download some child porn, put some lettuce in the printer, and make myself a BL(cp)T.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Voltaire where are you? To witness the raping of your ideas and the decay of your motherland...
First they came for those who were curious to look at child pornography, but I didn't speak up because I am not a pedophile and find child abuse offensive.
Then they came for those sympathized with extremists and considered terrorism as a possible tactic, but I didn't speak up because I do not condone murder.
Then they came for those who spoke of protest and revolution against the upper class, but I didn't speak up because I believe in working within the system.
And so it went on. So that when they finally came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me.
The loss of civil rights and freedom always starts with the offensive and unpopular. But once it starts with them, it never stops with them. Unless someone stops it... unless we stop it before it gets to them.
It's fucking madness! Shit like this makes me want to join the "terrorists"!
They're not terrorists if they vote for us!
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Are you serious? One minute on Google will find multiple cases of children "executed" by organized militant groups. Check out Amnesty International or other human rights sites. Islam Watch, a site run by former Muslims, is another good source. Just because your head is seven miles up your ass doesn't change the reality of it all.
Welcome to the age of Minority Report, France: Now you, too, can be convicted of a crime you haven't yet committed, but that we suspect you'll commit! What's next, France? Jailing someone who researches how a nuclear bomb works? How about jailing someone who watches Breaking Bad because they obviously are planning on becoming a producer and dealer in methamphetamine? Whoops, little 5 year old Johnny at the supermarket with his mother almost walked out the door with a candy bar in his hand, better send him off to Juvenile Hall, he's on his way to becoming a hardened criminal!
Seriously, Sarkosy? Are you seriously going to plunge head-first down this slippery slope? Are you really that stupid?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Nice generalisations. The sign of a great argument, to be sure.
And you should do the same.
Now please go to prison.
So shouldn't we try to fix the system, instead of stopping possibly-useful laws from being put on the books because of a perceived threat of abuse? Just asking.
Everyone hates France?
Maybe in America, but who cares about what America thinks of an EU country?
The problem here is Sarkozy not France in its entirety.
Well, just don't end up in France. More wine for us.
But wouldn't far-right voters be affected by this law? Or are non-muslim right-wing extremists excluded?
I think it's clear by now that far-right voters never contemplate that they might be subject to the laws they advocate. The laws are to stop the "bad" people, after all.
Seriously, how on earth do you define a Terrorist? Isn't that almost as difficult as defining a 'bad person' - let's jail all 'bad people' and all people who frequent 'bad people' sites - sorry, but there is too much subjectivity required to determine who is a 'terrorist' that it can not work effectively for the purpose it purports to be for.
Really? I'm just baffled how anyone of any authority could think this is they way we need to head....
I think the world is pretty fscked up, and the shear size of our societies and apparent incompatibilities between them mean they are dysfunctional by virtue - but this is not the solution. I'm not saying I can devise a good solution, but I can recognise that this is not one.
Never happened. True story.
Jailing someone for familiarising themselves with a subject is wrong...
Guides on how to commit acts of terrorism could be perceived as interesting, and are useful reading for someone working on the other side of the fence looking to prevent, deter or even just detect such acts... In fact this is a common problem, those looking to prevent a given activity simply don't understand how those who want to carry out such activities think... Wether it's hacking, burgling, terrorism, piracy etc, and you end up with wholly ineffective measures that look really fancy but are easily circumvented by those who are serious about doing it, while providing significant disruption for innocent civilians.
There seems to be a generally flawed mindset out there that concentrates on big fancy front gates, while totally forgetting about the rotten wooden door at the back.
Personally i think the more people understand about how terrorists think, the greater the chance of their activities being discovered and stopped. Imagine you live next door to someone who keeps bringing bags of fertiliser into their house, are they a keen gardened or can fertiliser be used to make bombs? Have you seen any evidence of well cultivated plants in their back garden? Can you smell canabis coming from their roof space? Or can you smell other chemicals you've read about in the jolly roger's cookbook?
Child porn is entirely different, most people simply won't want to look at it, even if they should stumble across it accidentally.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
doesn't matter. If elections are in just one month, he doesn't need to get this law passed, he doesn't even need to actually flesh out the details of the law, he's just making noise.
And he (probably rightly) assumes that his target audience assumes that muslim and terrorist are synonyms and their favorite websites would not be counted.
This. Oh, so very much THIS!
liberty...remember??? hard to win...easy to give up
once you lose it... generations of descendants will curse you and die to get it back...
enough said
Just political campaigning. Sarkozy makes a habit of saying big things, and then not delivering on them. Nothing to see here, folks, move on.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
...he'll give up this idea quickly. The French always do.
Will it still be legal to make movies, TV-shows, comics or write books in which crimes are being commited? In Sweden the baseline is that comics are illegal and can only be purchased or read if they contain "approved" stories. Will this be the standard for all media and art in Europe?
Will I have to destroy my Terminator2 and Alien trilogy in the next few years because they depict murder?
Who gets to decide what constitutes terrorism and extremism?
They might be bastards, but at least they're our bastards!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Probably this: Nothing is so common as to imitate one's enemies, and to use their weapons.
And probably not the misattributed quote about defending someone's right to say abhorrent things.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
You assume there is a clear definition for 'worse.' That is not the case. People make up their own standards. Things that one culture holds to be the most noble of values can be considered morally abhorent to another - and yet representatives from either side would insist, with equal sincerity, that their side is in the right.
That puts directly Google, Microsoft (Bing) on the terrorist watch list then.. they're crawling their way to prison!
If you know a way to fix the system, let us know. Basically, it is cause by using those fallible components called "human beings". It happens under all political systems, and probably less under a democracy than any other. But it still happens. It is the same thing as makes politicians two-faces windbags, so once you have worked out how to fix it, politics will be a hell of a lot nicer.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
It's a desperate attempt by someone whose popularity is very close to hitting rock bottom... from below.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Some will just put invisible IFrames on their sites, pointing to a "bad website". Guess what comes next You're in jail.
Not that the Foreign Legion engages in violence. http://www.legion-recrute.com/en/ How do they distinguish between good violence and bad? I guess they mean state-sponsored versus free-market. Oh wait. Isn't "free market" something good?
Good for you! You really think things through and I'm proud to share the planet with ya buddy!
Most people on the fringes of an ideology tend to have a lot of blind hatred towards the opposing fringes of opposing idealogies, that they don't see how their own decisions affect themselves, just how it will affect their "enemies".
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
Not every wine soaked douchebag is French, you insensitive clod!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
May be worth mentioning the guy who killed 70+ people in Sweden was snow white and claimed to be Christian. Look that fact up too.
This is the reason we rallied against censorship and surveillance laws that these fucking liars said would be used only against "child abusers". Today they want to use it on people they call terrorists. Tomorrow they'll use it to fight copyright infringement, and the day after on people making fun of politicians.
A general rule of powers given to government is that if they can be abused.
A general rule of powers given to government is that if they _WILL_ be abused.
Wait a month. The country could still learn from its past mistakes, not everything is completely lost yet.
I think everyone has the right to make a mistake once. It's only shameful if you don't learn from it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If you think nation states cannot trade, communicate freely and all of that without going to war or having ethnically "diverse" societies, you are sadly mistaken. The reason diversity is a problem is that without common, shared values and culture you have a limited shared social fabric for how to form a government, regulate public and private dealings and host of other things which bind society together.
Shared ethnicity is very important and ethnicity transcends race. It's possible for a black and white man to have the same ethnicity; it's possible to have two blacks and two whites each be of different ethnicities. What matters most is having the mostly ethnically homogenous society you can while not tying ethnicity to race. At least in America, we've done a good job of separating race and ethnicity. You frequently now see whites and blacks treat each other as fellow citizens while both being suspicious of illegal immigrants as they're not from the same larger group as we are.
That was in Norway, though your point is still valid.
Do you jail citizens who regularly visit violence promoting sites like this one?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The word "sarkozy" in french literally means "asshole"
In France's estimation, where does Greenpeace fall in the spectrum of terrorist organizations these days? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Warrior_%281955%29
"Anyone who regularly consults Internet sites which promote terror or hatred or violence will be sentenced to prison".
Guess I can't visit the Fox News site when I visit France.
This kind of thing wouldn't work with the "right wing" of the U.S. That's because these types of laws end-up targeting people with pocket Constitutions and Campaign for Liberty bumper stickers. I'm amazed that Sarkozy's proposal would work with France's right wing.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Look, I try really hard to apply this principal and assume that politicians just aren't intelligent or versed enough to be thinking of far-reaching consequences, but can anyone really be that stupid?
Execution is a legal killing carried out by a government as in the case of capital punishment. The victim was brutally murdered, not executed (executions are by the way illegal in the EU).
Sarkozy is an "Operation Gladio"-style fascist mole. A "Manchurian Candidate".
http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16194033
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/243240-Toulouse-Shootings-Gifts-Sarko-the-Avenger-Climb-in-Election-Opinion-Polls
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
I can see his point, but if the content is illegal enough to result in someone being imprisoned for looking at it, surely it's illegal enough to institute a block to prevent people from viewing it in the first place.
Censorship is bad, but arresting people for viewing material you think should be censored is a hell of a lot worse.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
If I did see an actual benefit in it, I could support it. The problem is that the amount of false positives outweighs the perceived gains.
First of all, I'd love to see the definition of "an Internet site that promotes terror or hatred or violence". Depending on how loosely you define that, a wide array of Internet pages can apply. Essentially, news coverage of a terrorist attack could be constructed as being "promotion of terrorism" since it tells you how "successful" that recent attack was. See the slippery slope there?
So how do you want to define "promotion of terrorism/hatred/violence"?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Won't you be shocked when Ron Paul wins the Presidency?
If you know a way to fix the system, let us know. Basically, it is cause by using those fallible components called "human beings"
It is pretty obvious, isn't it? Remove all human beings and the system will be perfect.
It's honestly refreshing to see good ol' fashioned bigoted intolerance somewhere other than America. See, this sort of thing pops up everywhere.
totally irrelevant to this discussion, only muslims commit all crime the world over. period.
It seems like every side wants to make something illegal. I guess then it depends what you want to read about, extremist Islam or Western enlightenment values? It's not like they're banning Stephen King books.
It has been said that GW Bush first presidency was "saved" because of the atrocious 9/11 events. Even though he certainly didn't want/hope such events, that act of terrorism was a way to legitimate more immediate and tough actions, like retaliation / wars, that are certainly easier to handle compared to improving economy and unemployment.
In France, that very tragic event from a week ago may be Sarkozy's lifeline during the coming presidential elections (May). Taking rough and strong measures immediately, and just a few weeks before the elections, may help him to win a second term. Internet freedom in France may not have been endangered if the elections were in two years from now.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
No, just Muslim.
Why doesn't France just change the law so that only born french can vote, then simply indoctrinate the muslim youth with public 'education' and make illegal home schooling. That would pretty much take care of the problems they're having with non-native invasive species. :)
Define 'hate'.
I can understand better a prohibition against creating or frequenting sites that promote say violent revelation, but anyone who says anything is 'wrong' can be said to be promoting 'hatred'.
Occupy Wall street 'promotes hate' of corporations.
The Democrats Promote hate of the republicans.
The republicans promote hate of the democrats.
Pro-abortion advocates promote hate against women and minorities ( according to pro-life advocates).
Anti-abortion advocates promote hate against women and minorities ( according to pro-choice advocates).
Anyone who says they have a religious belief that that anyone is doing anything wrong "promotes hate" against
the person who's action they disparage.
Anit-hate laws are just another way of saying 'the people in power want to shut up anyone who strongly disagrees with them'
I regularly visit the restroom. Does that make me a piece of shit?
Wait. Don't answer that.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
EU should just ban immigrant voting. Let only the second or third gen vote after they've been properly 'educated' (indoctrinated) and ban any and all home schooling. That's a little fascist, but not as bad as starting up a police state. It should be noted that the root cause of mass immigrant migration could have something to do with the US blowing their countries all to hell....also, the hypocrisy of so called Christians, who are all for blowing them all to hell, isn't likely a beacon of shining virtue in the muslim world. They do read newspapers, you realize. Muslims probably associate Western society, Christians... all of it with the death of somebody (friend, immediate family, perhaps gay lover lol) they love. But seriously, try to look at it from their perspective. It's not helpful only looking at all this through Bush Jr's eyes. They don't hate France or America for their freedoms, they probably hate them for damn good reason. We'd hate them if they were here blowing our asses to hell. Sorry, but it's true.
Yes it would, because that the right wing violently hates the Constitution just as much (sometimes more, in fact) as the left does, their professed reverence for it notwithstanding.
I must start frequenting French government sites so that I can be "punished" with a cushy public pension when I retire... certainly, as a visitor to the site I must be treated like a French public employee, non?
Nice once had a very corrupt mayor (Medecin) who had to exit suddenly to South America. He was corrupt but he was quite good at raising money for the city, and he stayed in power for some time. Very Nice...anyway, the week after his exit I was visiting Nice on business and was talking to the taxi driver on the way from the airport. I naturally asked him what he thought of M. Medecine. His reply? "C'est un vieux con, mais c'est notre con a nous." (more or less a literal translation of your post.)
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Well, the French perhaps feel a bit of guilt for invading and colonizing Muslim countries in the first place. As for Norway, what terrorist attacks have been done here have been done by our home-grown right-wing Muslim-hating lunatics (not counting Mossad's assassination of a Maroccan they thought was Palestinian)..
As for you, you have just replaced "Jew" with "Muslim" in an old broken record of hate.
The problem is the people who elected Sarkozy.
ETA is not composed of muslims. Neither were the Brigate Rosse or the Red Army Faction or Action Directe nor IRA.
All of these groups were terrorist groups, ETA is still a terrorist group to this day.
All of these groups were more prominent in Europe than Al Quaeda has ever been.
Being Muslim is not the problem. You can find criminals in every layer of society and of whatever religion.
One man, one man cannot be the "scape goat" for the criminalization of Islam.
Its interesting how many of Europe's terrorists in the last 30 years have been catholics and marxists. Muslims not so much.
This is not even against freedom of speaking anymore, this is against the freedom of having an ear.
How to make a bomb? How to hack websites? How to open your ipad? Or perhaps how to download movies for free?
Why doesn't the nations, police, etc simply do massive denial-of-service attacks at all such web sites? I'm sure the US or French governments could gather a few thousand special computers just for that purpose. Very quickly those who are hosting such sites would remove them.
that's insane
we're not talking about fashion or music choice
if enough pakistanis tell you this is ok, its ok by you?:
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/03/22/202385.html
cannibalism was once ok in certain parts of the world. its about evolving away from bad practices to better ones
you may say i have an absolutist position, but it is you who has the absolutist position: that culture's mores never change, and are unquestionable
i object as a human being to your relativity, an excuse to justify atrocities. nationalism and religion do not excuse gross violations of simple human rights
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Same situation is happening in other European countries. For example, in Sweden, the number of aggrevated rape cases has skyrocketed right after Sweden's Muslim invasion.
i don`t know about that but in france i see muslims treating french girls really bad, they basically have no respect for girls, must be a cultural thing.
However much I don't want terrorism and througherly wish it could be discorraged and prevented, I really don't want to go to jail for reading anything. Perhaps sites with such information should have a poll, just like slashdot. It could ask - "are you going to use this information for good or evil?" All those who click evil go to jail.
Wan't Sarkozy the one that passed a 3 strikes law and then immediatly was found to be downloading torrents?
Youtube has quite a few terrorist videos posted. And pretty much every world news site. Also many social network sites are used by these people. No more twitter either.
You're welcome xx
"First they came for the people viewing child pornography, and I didn't speak up because I don't view child porn. Then they came for the people visiting terrorist web sites, and I didn't speak up..."
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
May be worth mentioning the guy who killed 70+ people in Sweden was snow white and claimed to be Christian. Look that fact up too.
Which means that the common denominator here is "the perpetrator is deeply religious".
Ezekiel 23:20
Remember that the next time you record someone and there is a radio playing in the background.
Great, so he could put "terrorist" and "pedophile" in the same sentence as "Internet". Only missing word is "killer game" in this sentence (for computer games that show violence). And the Americans might want to add "drug dealers" as replacement ... - what a farce!
Go live in a muslim country and be all the muslim you want to be.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
This has to be put into context : not 2 weeks ago Sarkozy was so far behind in the polls people were wondering whether he would be in the second round of the presidential election (which only selects the 2 first candidates)
His babling is just horseshit aimed at winning some of the far right votes from Marine Le Pen.
He's just finished, everything he has tried has failed, his review is terrible, his approval rating is the lowest ever for a president in France. He is going the same way Berlusconi has, and just want to make as much noise as possible doing so because his incredibly large ego (compared to his actual size) can't handle the fact that he is a loser.
That being said I'm deeply ashamed that my fellow citizens and I could ever elect such an asshole...
Actually, the problem with cannibalism isn't moral, it's medical. It's a *bad idea* to eat animals that are genetically closely related to you (pretty much all the primates). Beuacoup bad diseases get spread that way.
Of course, killing people AS food is also bad... but that's certainly not the only way that cannibalism happens. There are cultures that eat their own dead.
The problem isn't migration, plenty of people do that just fine. But the good immigrants are also something else. EMIGRANTS. They leave one country and culture for another. That works... more or less, it doesn't happen often after all but there are plenty of people who left their old land and never returned.
With north african migration, this is no longer the case, they return every summer, bring their own religion, shops and places to hangout and create a little bit of home in the new country.
They weren't accepted in France? Right, the french bent of backward to accomodate, going back on decades of seperation of church and state to accomodate the Muslims. And it is not like polish or irish or any immigrant group in the US was welcomed with open arms.
But how many of those early immigrants to the US ever went back? Wanted to go back? Most had fled and vowed never to return.
In many ways, the suburbs around Paris, filled with the unwanted who do not want to be there is like a holiday resort where people go to a foreign country to shop in the same supermarkets as they do at home, drink the same drinks, eat the same food and are relieved everyone speaks their language.
It is nasty... multi-cultural? By its is own definition, it cannot work, it is a contradiction in terms. Multi-cultural is a SINGULAR culture, for it to work, EVERYONE has to subscribe to it, so how can you say multi-cultural has many cultures when all must believe in the same one? Multiple groups can live together... if they all want to and nothing happens to upset it. India was famous for its religious tolerance, the only place Jews were never prosecuted. Well, until Muslims changed it... gosh, again that same religion.
You can keep trying to come up with excuses, launch another study, talk a bit more but so far it ain't helping. And if you think Sarkosy is right wing, there are far far worse people you never ever heard off.
A lot of bleeding hearts are calling the rethoric of the likes of Wilders (Holland) the signs of the 1930's. No price for quessing the reference. They are of course full of it... IF there is a resemblance witht he past, then it is the 1920's.... what happened then you ask... yes, nobody ever told you that. The story always starts with Hitler in rising to power but never sets the scene by showing how the vacuum was created that allowed this rise. The many failed elections and parties unable to deal with the massive issues of the day that allowed the nazi much later.
Wilders, Le Pen, etc etc are not Adolf Hitler and the likes of Job Cohen are not Chamberlain... this is good because by the time the nazi's marched the battle had been lost.
But we need to act now, make it clear that in a society, there are rules, you can be a bit to the left of that and a bit to the right but NEVER to much. If you really hate a society that much, MOVE. We cannot allow a few nutters to either turn the west Muslim with Sharia law (and there are parties who want this quit openly, google Sharia4Belgium) or to become a nazi party. The real nasty bit for being tolerant and multi-cultural is that you cannot be tolerant of extremists or all cultures.
Let us not forget that the issue here is Muslims. There are a lot of Jews, Hindu's, Catholics, Christians, Boedhists and god knows what else is out there, living peacefully in the western world. ONLY Muslims are causing problems everywhere. PC might make you feel warm and fuzzy inside but at a given point you got to deal with the fact that a specific group is causing endless problems and deal with it. Or someone else will come to power and come up with a solution. And you might not like that one at all, I guarantee it won't be PC.
Hitler and those like him are the enemy, that is obvious. But your enemy should also be the people that created the vacuum of leadership, of taking responsibilty, of sorting out the common man's complaints that allowed Hitlet to convince people that he could solve their problems (which btw, he totally failed to do).
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
GP may be bigoted, but his intolerance is reflecting a real issue: there is a serious problem with integration of Muslim immigrants in Europe, and it is reflected in crime statistics. Societies tend to become intolerant when their lifestyle and culture is threatened by people whom they perceive as an easily identifiable group.
So, how's that jihad going?
Norway.
Those that feel victimized can make it very convincing.
Oooh, I am so badly treated in the west....
That is bad, tell you what, here is a free one way ticket to anywhere in the world where you can be with your own kind... and please tell them to stop coming over here as so many off them drown on the way and they ruin the beaches with the bloated corpses
No, I don't want to go, I have a right to be here! No, you don't have a right to go to my country and do what you want to do, but I got a right! No duties, just rights
It is like reading up on conspiracy theories, it can get very convincing until you realize you are hearing half the story.
For instance Israel attacked and killed a palestinian "terrorists"... of course, the other side of the story, a palestinian that went into an Israeli house and killed everyone inside with knife, even a baby... that doesn't get told.
If you really want to study these stories in details, make sure you read the stories that upset your world view and THEN question them.
You will be amazed by the lying.
See the BBC on this terrorist attack. EVERY single story on the BBC site mentions that he did it to avenge the killing palestinian children. Notice that the swedish killer stories did NOT have a constant mention that he did because he wanted to avenge the muslimfication of sweden.
I wonder why that is? What do you think?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Norway and sweden, check for yourself.
I think that was Norway. Also, some argue that the killer is agnostic - although a "cultural Christian."
I think the killer, in the this case, (Brevivik?) is just insane, like the guy who Giffords.
For sure, the killer was not connected to any terrorist group.
Also, that was all of **one** case. There have been about 7000 terrorist attacks by Muslims over the last 10 years.
Islam is insanely misogynistic. Read the Koran for instructions on how to beat your wife - oops, I mean wives.
Why is it considered "bigotted" to cite facts? Everything I posted is factual, look it up.
You are 100% wrong.
Want to show me where all aggrevated in rape in Sweden - or anywhere - is commited by Jews? Want to show me where Jews flew 747s into the WTC? Want to show me where Jews commited 7000 acts of terrorism in the last ten years.
Face reality. Muslims are problem. None of these problems are happening due to Jews.
Don't understand what 'execution' means, do you dickhead?
Here's a hint: it involves the state. Idiot.
Every damn rick roll would lead to one of those sites.
I will be building and stocking my bunker now.
The list of websites are a mile long, the *chan sites (4chan) , somethingawful , portal of evil, encyclopedia dramatica (or whatever is left of it), fox news, westboro baptist church, just about every news site's comment sections, all news coming from the middle east about Israel... I can go on but won't.
I think that's just too wide of net by simply saying "visitor" because it's entirely possible to place "link bombs" in any forum site on the net that allows you to link images, and thus send all sorts of fake traffic to hide the true visitors.
Even link anonymizers/shorteners cause this.
So relax and take a chill pill, if you're upset by the content of the site, then make your own site to counter-point it, or ignore it.
Execution is a legal killing carried out by a government as in the case of capital punishment. The victim was brutally murdered, not executed (executions are by the way illegal in the EU).
I believe the common term is "execution-style murder".
Execution-style murder, also known as Chicago-style murder, and execution-style killing are news media buzzwords applied to various acts of criminal murder where the perpetrator kills at close range a conscious victim who is under the complete physical control of the assailant and who has been left with no course of resistance or escape.
Are you an idiot? Seriously, are you?
Execution is a carried out by the state in accordance with their laws. The child killings that happen so frequently in the US are not 'executions'.
Idiot.
France is currently being colonized by Muslims.
Colonise
Dude, they're just immigrants.
They aren't melting well, and that's causing problems, which turns you into a bigotted fascist.
Muslims reproduce more
Yeah, they probably do. Holdover habits from the old country. Give em a generation or two and they'll match 1st world standards. (Isn't a slumping birthrate an issue for Europe?)
they also demand French people to adapt to Muslim costumes
Calling it a costume makes you a fascist bigot.
But cite some sources for this. Here in the USA I have zero casual knowledge of this and I don't see it as having a snowballs chance in hell of actually happening. I mean, the immigrants can whine all they want, but that doesn't mean the girls have to cover up.
That's not 'execution', dumbass. An execution is a lawful action carried out by the state.
Apparently there isn't a dictionary stuck up your ass along with your head.
The problem is France ... Remember the french ban on S/MIME in old days of Netscape Communicator?
I can't think of anything that makes this better than the book burning the nazi's did, and when I learned about that in school, it was portrayed as a bad thing. This is also a great example of how you start out abusing people no one likes (pedophiles), then you take on progressively less unpopular groups until you end up abusing everyone. Terrorist website *viewers* are probably pretty low on the list of people whom voters hate, so it seems like France is pretty far along in that process if anything ever comes of this.
I wouldn't want to do it myself, but I don't really know what the big problem with cannibalism is. It could spread disease, but then just check the meat for that first and cook it thoroughly like we do with other meat. Lots of people wouldn't like their corpse to be eaten after they are dead, so require the will to say that it's OK. What it is really about is that eating humans feels yucky, and dangerous if done wrong, so let's ban it. It's a primitive and sad human instinct to ban yucky things for no other reason than that. So it seems like the example you choose of evolving away from a bad practice is pretty much an example against your point, which is sad, since I agree with your point, your example is just terrible. You should have stuck to the honor killings.
I take these comments in a particular way: 1) It's very French to consider such a philosophical response. "Don't tell me it's not possible." Which leads to Point #2... 2) Sarkozy's need to appear "tough on crime" to fend off his ultra-conservative competitor in the upcoming elections, Le Pin.
Anybody who watches islamist snuff videos and regularly consumes islamist propaganda is likely to be a threat, and belongs in jail (or should be deported).
You didn't mention anything about having to do anything, so nice thought crimes, there.
and for that, they get kuru:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease)
aka, prions, like mad cow disease, no cow need apply:
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
that yucky feeling is a valid biological response, not a cultural or moral one: you get diseases this way
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease)
eating the dead of your own species is a last resort biological thing, not a last resort cultural or moral one
i also always assumed it is why some religions ban eating pork. South Pacific Islanders called human flesh "long pig": take a wild guess what we taste like
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Julian Assange's creampie rampage caused 70+ abortions?
Now I know why they were so adamant about getting an extradition order.
An there have been no terrorist attacks by Christian Forces across all the various countries that America and Friends have invaded / bombed across that time ?
ppppfffttt!! HAHAHA OH MAN! I misspell a word WHILE LINKING TO A DICTIONARY! That is probably my classiest moment ever.
But cite some sources for this.
im the source. do you think its funny to see girls all covered up during plain summer, it is not and trust me they dont feel cold cause you can smell them from a distance also when i go out at night is usual to see groups of arabs stalking and harassing girls who dont want anything with them. they are rude and treat girls worse than dogs. also everytime i meet a arab they always try to convince me about their religion and how good its like i cared. maybe you dont feel this cause you dont have to deal with them everyday but i have to.
Your source seems very anecdotal to me.
But actually, I do feel for you. I'm fairly atheistic and essentially had to hide it for 3 years as I worked for a... more traditional employer. Also had to make up a bullshit story about being "apolitical" when the boss's friend asked me to weigh in on a controversial topic. Sucks being the minority. Also sucks when the minority is annoying as hell about their minority status.
But... just an idea. Maybe you could show a spine and stick up for the girls? I mean, the knight in shining armor schtick has some nice benefits. And every time I meet a Jehovah's Witness they try to.. I think the term is actually "witness" me. They're usually pretty nice about it after you simply say you're not interested.
Anyway, you hate muslims. So congrats on being a bigot walterbyrd (182728). We have your type over here in the states too. It's so refreshing to find common ground!
i wouldnt say crime but more like intolerances against existing society costumes. its like they dont want to adapt to french costumes and want to impose their own to french people. what most concerns me is how they treat girls, you have to see it happening in france to believe it
Does it make sense to ask a question the answer to which you won't be able to comprehend?
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
>what do you think of guys who hold the hair of eight year old girls and execute them?
What is the relevance to the subject?
And this is moderated through the roof on slashdot, where making connection with the content and action is ridiculed on the daily basis.
What is the relevance to the subject?
What is the relevance to the subject?
What is the relevance to the subject?
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
1. You are an idiot
2. You are an idiot
3. "the west does something you dislike, so you support something far worse"
You are an idiot: Jihaad goes on no matter what West does. That was the subject.
4. You are an idiot
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Yes. I'm constantly surprised at how so many people underestimate the capability of others to comprehend.
It does look pretty good on paper...
But... just an idea. Maybe you could show a spine and stick up for the girls?
I was one of the girls you jerk!
He strangely but really generates fanacism among his supporters, suppress their brain and have them vote for him. Very strange to witness first handedly. And quite frightening.
The heavy use of so called "sondages qualitatifs" (quality-driven polls ?) has surely something to do with it. Never has a president so much relied on them: he just chooses a somewhat homegeneous audience and delivers a targetted message to them, one that will suit them very well. After that, he can nearly say what he wants on other matters, they will vote for him.
#1 target group: old people, do not really know anything about the Internet, feel frightened, think the young guys of their time were better. They vote for him much more than the average Frenchman. To put it another way: it just work.
I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
Guess why he didn't pass one against corruption.
See? Even he can learn from his mistakes.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Given so many fascist leaning political website exist in the USA....e.g. Fox News, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Rush Limbaugh.com....etc. Could give their visitors all a night or two at Club Gitmo. Rush would just love that.
if it really is those "who regularly consult" then I think it's a good move. You need to slow the growth of anyone who would otherwise join such endeavours, and security at airports and cameras everywhere ain't better. it's not that this is a good thing, it's that it's an excellent replacement for worse things. and because it's earlier in the process, it's way better.
7. What the fuck is wrong with these people?
1. Why? Why do you want to understand these people? I'm serious. Why deliberately fill your head with hatred and evil and seek to know what motivates these people? Can you? Is it possible? To what end?
Because ignorance is dangerous, willful ignorance doubly so. How can you address any problem if you don't understand or even listen to someone you disagree with? The attitude you suggest is completely irrational and frankly disgusting.
Hatred and bigotry are, of course, unproductive and harmful and thus something we should work to eliminate. However, refusing to educate yourself about the issues and demonizing the other side with terms such as "evil" is hypocritical at best. A mature and well-adjusted adult should be able to listen to an argument, regardless of its source or content, and break it down rationally. It's called critical thinking. Bigotry has no justification, so if you are as easily swayed by such weak excuses for hatred as you seem to imply, then the problem is not with us, but with you.
2. No you wouldn't be put in jail. Read it again.
Excuse me, but read what, exactly? There is not yet any legal language on paper to read. None that has been made available, anyway. However, Sarkozy certainly does seem to be supporting the idea that yes, a simple visit to a website could result in prison.
Screw all this pompous "blah blah blah I'll defend to the death your right to say anything, even if I disagree with it, etc.". I understand the good and mighty intentions behind it, but look at what it's done.
Okay, elaborate. Pray tell, what has it done? What conceivable downside to the protection of free speech are you seriously trying to imply, here?
This has been promoted to ridiculous extremes in the past few decades, and the result has been an absolution of personal moral accountability. People no longer feel they have to take responsibility for their actions; instead, they can do and say and be and behave however they want, no matter how offensive or stupid or wrong, and not have to worry about the consequences.
Now I'm really lost. "Extreme" protections of free speech? I can only assume from context that you really mean "speech I don't agree with", which is the point of free speech. I'd love to hear some examples of what "in the past few decades" actually involves, though.
You also seem to be conflating action and thought/speech, which are not the same. One does have consequences, the other should not have any.
Screw it. Time to say there are absolutes, and some things are wrong, and should be censored.
1) No, there really is no such thing as a moral absolute.
2) WHO defines WHAT is morally wrong and censored? Sorry, trick question. Such restrictions only work when they are completely self-imposed.
3) There is no boogeyman great enough to warrant punishing an individual for visiting a website or for the mere possession any sort of information. That includes child pornography and terrorism. If information is made publicly available, then criminalizing its possession is insane, especially in the Internet age.
Maybe this wouldn't be necessary in an ideal world, but society has declined too far.
Oh, please. Really? People have been saying this for thousands of years.
Whose definition of terrorist? Some may consider sites like wikileaks to be a terrorist organisation. We already live a world where you can be considered a terrorist by exposing a country's crimes, I would hate to live in a world where you can go to prison for reading about them.
What is missing in today's 'war on terror' is a clear definition of a terrorist. A problem arises when people only are not only imprisoned for offences related to inciting or aiding in the murder of civilians but also for other actions considered not to be in a governments best interests.
Due to extreme fatigue, Sarkozy no longer could support the weight of his giant head. He lost his balance and crushed the assistant standing next to him.
You mean everyone will be shocked, when he wins. Most people have no clue how the delegate process works, which is why most folks don't understand Ron Paul is actually in 2nd place, if not first. It's been a two man race between Romney and Paul for a long time, even though the other two candidates won't publicly admit it.
When we go to a brokered convention (which is surely coming): Once the convention has gone through its first round of voting without a clear winner being chosen (also likely).....all those bound delegates (bound to Romney, etc) now become unbound, which means they can vote for whoever they want.
Republicans have spoken a lot about wanting to beat Obama. Ron Paul is the one person who can do that. Regardless of the extreme establishment attempts to censor and downplay his importance in this race, he has tons of actual support, which is what actually matters. This is the key reason I'm fairly confident he will walk away from this convention as the nominee, with Mitt Romney as his vice presidential pick.
Sarkozy is just throwing nonsense in order to collect far right votes in the upcoming elections.There is no way he can pass a law now, as the parliament is on vacations until the election.
that much power is risky, goverments are prone to fall in the tentation to abuse power. To their convenience they can call any site to be violent, hatred, terrorist.
you can't compare this with child porn, because those are Facts. A site has a nude child age 16, that is a fact. Little arguement for a Fact. Such person supports underage sexual exploitation, it is a fact.
But with politics, everything is a freaking Gray zone, nothing is a fact. So he is mischeavious when he compares both things as equal, miss leading, manipulating - traitor.
My post could be deemed as Violent, Hatred and if I encourage all to Take Action and Post infinite objections threads against this idea - to the point the goverment is spammed with objections, I could even be deemed a terrorist for encouraging actions that disable goverment in any way or disrupting the "peace".
So this shouldn't be allowed.
for the Presidency, and who NOT to vote for !
...is one month from being thrown and someone else being elected in his place. He is desperate, pandering to the extreme right "let's halve the number of legal imigration", "no gay mariage" AND the extreme left with his idea to tax rich french living abroad to escape French taxes.
He's a clown, as can be clearly seen here with his idea to make reading illegal ; even the extreme right reacted by saying this is stupid.
It would be more accurate to say one religion banned eating pork. Islam inherited it from the Jewish religion it decended from. Some of the Jewish dietary restrictions may have some medical basis in avoiding meat likely to transmit disease, but a lot of it looks to be a cultural identification thing - like the sabbath, and circumcision. It's a way to keep the tribe intact, a visible way for people to proclaim 'This is who we are, and why we are not like the outsiders.'
I'm not saying cultured don't change. I'm saying that they do change, all the time - but there is no real way to say that any given change is for the better, or for the worse. There is no universial standard by which cultural standards may be judged
they also demand French people to adapt to Muslim costumes
Calling it a costume makes you a fashionist bigot.
Refined that for you.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
From all those you cited, how many were involved in corruption affear ? And I can't remember if Jospin was in the contaminated blood affair (*), but I might have been.
(*) rather than pay some money to use a canadian AIDS test, some minister/politics decided to let a test be developped by French scientist, but in the mean time left the blood untested. Hundreds of people got AIDS as a results of an OP and getting contaminated blood. The msot scandalous part of this is at the end, they were not even condamned to real prison, they were just put "en sursis" can't remember the US equivalent, but it means you get in prison only if you get into a second infraction and then go in prison for both in total.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
there is a universal standard: treat others with respect. its not complicated. are you being willfully ignorant here, whats the source of the hesitation here over the obvious here? you have every right to judge what is wrong by your HUMAN conscience. i didnt say american. i didnt say muslim. i said human. cultural and religious differences do not trump your humanity
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I propose that anybody who regularly reads vampire novels should be incarcerated, as well.
Give him the addy obscured by tinyurl.com (or bit.ly) or ip and boom - Sarkozy will eat his heart for being a terrorist...
Braindead... "idea"
Bastards like Harper, Obama, Szarkozy, the British, NZ and Aussie governing pols, etc., have all been emboldened by the excuse of Islamic terrorism to create what they have devoutly wished for at home - totalitarian, fascist-like states under the iron heels of their police, their armies, and the rest of their bureaucrats. There have been so many moves in the direction of totalitarian control and surveillance in the former democracies that the foregoing conclusion is beyond challenge. Don't bother looking to left-wingers for help here. A recently published analysis of the thinking processes of these national socialists describes the 1933 Masters Thesis of the social democrat icon Tommy Douglas wherein he advocated strongly for Eugenics policies, which include forced sterilization of so-called "lesser" humans in order to cleanse the human gene-pool for the future. Eugenics-based policies were implemented in various parts of Canada, and elsewhere in the world, but the most thorough implementation of Eugenics ideas was done by Hitler and the German National Socialists. Both conservatives on the right and social democrats, socialists, communists, on the left and their ilk across the world have shown themselves willing and anxious to destroy democratic institutions and civil liberties in the name of ORDER and CONTROL. Both flavors are contemptuous of personal freedoms and arrogantly believe that they and their bureaucrats are better and more capable than the rest of us, and consequently entitled and duty-bound to govern the "great unwashed" without our sniveling hindrances. The best weapon we have against this onslaught is the Internet, which is precisely why it is constantly under attack everywhere.
Sure you were Walter Byrd. Sure.