Slashdot Mirror
Saudi Arabia Calls For Global Internet Censorship Body
Onymous Hero writes "Following the recent YouTube video 'The Innocence of Muslims' and the subsequent Muslim violence, Saudi Arabia has stated that there is a 'crying need for international collaboration to address "freedom of expression" which clearly disregards public order.' The World Telecommunications Policy Forum (a UN body) is the vehicle by which Saudi Arabia (and possibly other states) will try to use to implement a global set of internet content standards."
It's going to happen some day. The world will be dominated by Islamic idiots because the rest of the world will do nothing but appease them.
One little tragic baby step at a time.
NO!
Disconnect yourselves from it. Done and done.
The rotten and corrupt Domain Name System.
The Internet cancer.
I am not one of the "OMG! Look at the religion of peace!" bozos. But this is way over the line. This asks for the ability to apply censorship rules to everyone. They should be bitch slapped and sent out of the room.
In a word, "no". In two words "fuck no".
A governing body such as this would be co-opted in a heart beat.
How about we tell them to stop being so sensitive and they can just ignore it.
-SaNo
Can't keep your citizens in line with fear and religious nonsense anymore?
...wants to send plane loads of Vagisil over to them.
If your feelings get hurt every time someone calls you out on your religious convictions, either you're not confident enough of your religion or you need to stop believing in fantasies.
Either you believe in freedom of speech, and all the nastiness that goes with it, or you want the world to adopt your narrow-minded, pathetic excuses for why women shouldn't drive, be allowed to walk alone or meet with men who aren't their relatives.
When you drag yourselves up to the 20th century, then we can discuss things you have issues with.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
We should be all in favor of this;) Content standard #1 should prohibit anything that doesn't respect equal rights for ALL and due process, since OUR "public order" is fundamental dependent upon those principles. We are offended by civilizations that don't abide by such policies.
For keep funding and supporting this brilliant representative of Islam and the Middle East.
Thank you.
(Note: By "the US" I mean the US governments and authorities, not her citizens, whom I pity much for having to make do with illusionary presidential "choices".)
Freedom of expression is supposed to be uncomfortable and challenge public order. That's the whole idea.
It is part of a 10 year plan of the Muslim Brotherhood to make it a universal crime to speak ill of Islam or Mohammed.
Once this were to be achieved it would be easier for the Caliphate to take over the world since any rejection of Islamic expansion would be viewed as anti-Islam hate speech and thus be illegal.
The Muslim Brotherhood is already entrenched in the US Federal government due to the Obama administration.
The blaming of the killing of the ambassador and 3 others in Libya on some film most have not seen nor care about is meant to advance the agenda so that, in an attempt to placate these people, we will disavow the freedom of speech.
I really don't think that Obama was "shooting first" and thinking later necessarily as he accused Romney of doing.
I think Obama's complicity with the Muslim Brotherhood is telling.
"international collaboration to address "freedom of expression" which clearly disregards public order"
I agree absolutely. Let's set the standard: public disorder - destroying property, killing people - is a crime. Freedom of expression is not. Pretending that freedom of expression forced someone to violence is a transparent and pathetic excuse.
According to TFA, Saudia Arabia is still blaming the video clip for the violence. It is now well-established that the violence was pre-planned; the date of September 11th was picked carefully. The video clip was merely a transparent excuse, and the upload may, in fact, have been coordinated to coincide with the violence. Saudia Arabia is trying to use the situation to impose their fundamentalist values on the rest of the world. No thanks.
So, yes, let's set a standard: Free speech is too important to compromise.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
OK, do as Saudi Arabia calls... but KISS. We only need One Rule to Rule Them All:
RELIGION HAS NO RIGHTS OVER FREEDOM OF ANY KIND BUT ITSELF.
We have freedom of speech, so telling everyone how shitty religion is is my freedom an no religion has the right to shut me down.
We have freedom of sex, so being homosexual is over that shitty religion you keep talking about.
We have freedom of mind, so I don't mind telling how stupid a people is believing in religion but I won't tolerate they attack me (driving people to commit suicide [christians], shouting I must be killed [muslims], etc.) in fact, I will do my whole to erase religion from Earth as it's the worst infection this planet suffers.
And, at last but not at least, please, do not mix "religion" with "ethic". I won't kill anything because I find it unethical not because my *own* religion forbids it. Religion can be sent without any problem to the incinerator and sent to oblivion.
Seriously, what the fuck is its point anymore? Last I check I didn't live in the United Nations. I lived in a country that has it's own sovereign rights and laws.
is like hillbillies giving out cooking tips for haute cuisine.
So I guess they won't like this idea for a new Chicken and Goat restaurant. Ali's Cock Bar and fresh banged Goat! The goat will be severed freshly banged and covered in Mohammad's special sauce, then stuffed with a hot sweaty Lebanese sausage. Mohammad doesn't know what it taste like , but his neighbors love it!
He must have forgotten that the US invented the internet, not Saudi Arabia.
A little here, a little there. Soon enough you have to show you have paid your media and news tax and registered your RealID before being allowed online.
Time to grow up or GTFO, as they would say on the Internet.
Policing public discussion and providing measures to deal with content that crosses the line is a good thing if implemented reasonably. I see no problem with it if the Saudi Wahabist terrorist dictatorship is treated in the same way and held to account for its arrogance, greed, and abuse of human rights. Fair's fair, as they say.
they should do their own censoring and leave the rest of the world's internets alone, china did it, what nations should do is change their system to a nationwide LAN (sortof), and when connecting to websites served from IP address of other nations it should go through a filter if that is what they want to do, if i want to look at naked women eating barbecue pork while holding poker chips with her twat that is my business and should not be of any concern of some religious zealots in some other nation
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Saudi Arabia can go fuck itself.
You have NO RIGHT to NOT be offended.
I call for saudi arabia to eat a bag of dicks and stfu.
bet i get more votes.
Sure, we wouldn't want any "expression" which clearly disregards public order'". That's bad, after all. So let's start with, oh say, censoring out *any* discussion of Islam, Mohammed or the Koran. After all, popular opinion is that they are all terrorists and you can't disregard public order much more than using terrorist tactics, right?
Of course, so much of terrorism is fueled by the oil industry. You know, let's kick anything to do with that off the Internet as well. Not just discussion of oil, but any of their business transactions or automated traffic from their software. If they need to route signals from one refinery to the next, let them build an entirely new infrastructure rather than using the Internet. We need to cut down on influences which disregard the public order.
Say, aren't there links between terrorist groups and the Saudi royalty? Off the Internet for them, then! Might make it a bit hard to get at their bank accounts in Switzerland though. Well, its all for the benefit of public order.
What's that? You don't like those suggestions? Oh, I see, you only want to censor things YOU don't like. That's not really about public order then, is it though? It's about maintaining your control. Well, let us reconsider this in light of this new information. We'll get back to you.
[Sadly, the answer in a few years will be, "Sure, great idea! We can use it in our own countries too!" because the governments of the West who currently control the Internet are becoming as increasingly corrupt and misguided as to their purpose as the tyrannies in the East]
something about history repeating itself probably applies ...
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
It ain't what they call you. It's what you answer to. http://mylyceum.us/
address "freedom of expression" which clearly disregards public order
As a fellow religionist, let me give you my opinion about that: fuck that. Public order means somebody controlling somebody else, and I don't believe in it. Public order can go screw itself.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
neither governments or corporations can be trusted and are the enemies of individual freedom
any organization that is large enough will eventually become corrupt at the top levels
either the individuals who "earned" their positions will commit corrupt actions to retain and profit from their power and influence, or inherently corrupt individuals will seek out the existing positions of power and influence
the technology is there for a decentralized, peer to peer internet
https://github.com/Byzantium/Byzantium/wiki
(and other mesh initiatives)
be part of a solution, find an old laptop, plug it in, run a node, maybe update it every 6 months
when the normals start seeing more and more restrictions on the "public" internet they will start to look for alternatives and by then either we have an infrastructure in place which can easily accept them, or it will be too late
How about international collaboration on having some self restraint and not causing others physical harm to others any time something in the world doesn't go your way?
Welcome to the 21st century. Want to be a part of it? ...then grow the frack up.
I swear they give me mod points to shut me up.
And fuck the Saudis, and anybody else who wants control! And fuckity fuck fuck fuck their goddamn perverted mohamed!
If your deity needs intercession by mortals to prevent others from speaking against him, he is probably not what you are thinking he is. So there's that, but the real thing I want to say, to anyone who would presume to limit my speech on religious grounds is "Piss off!". Seriously. Get a fucking clue and realize that your spiritual path is yours, and yours alone, to walk. The rest of us don't have to join you. Get it?
Censorship isn't about "protecting the people" (who are to be censored). Censorship is about expanding the business of government through both spending and power over the people (which will be leveraged to justify yet even more spending). In other words, censorship is merely one of 1000 gimmicks the ruling class uses to get rich. It's nothing but a cheap smokescreen for the real objective.
- The Constitution of the United States says that any treaty to which the United States shall be beholden must be ratified by two-thirds of the US Senate.
- The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, and prohibits the Congress from passing legislation limiting expression.
- Every single Senator took an oath to uphold the Constitution upon taking office.
Any vote by the US Senate to ratify such UN action would be a direct violation of the Constitution which they swore to uphold. At the very least, I can't imagine that there are 67 senators looking to retire at the end of the term in which this treaty would be voted on for ratification; to say nothing of the Supreme Court throwing it out like a 105mph fast ball...
Hey, if this thing gets passed in other countries, maybe the US will become the best place to host Internet content...
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Judging from the comments and reactions it is clearly obvious that religious nutjobs are pioneers of trolling.
Ah hell go burn some books if it makes you happy
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
The reasons for censorship are irrelevant.
Eventually there will be more and more censorship of the internet, it's already happening and cannot be stopped.
In truth that battle for "internet freedom" is a pointless fight. Like all censorship it will never be absolute, it will always fail.
People will always find ways around censorship. If I cannot speak my mind on your site, I will go elsewhere.
Of course I would argue that if you cannot bear to read thoughts which go completely against your beliefs it should not be me that has to make a change. If we were neighbors, which on the internet we might as well be because distance becomes less relevant for the purposes of communication, would I have to be considerate? of course. Would you have to respect my rights? you bet.
To my Saudi Arabia neighbors I can only say that if you don't like the neighborhood, move away. No one is forcing you to use the internet, facebook etc.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Yeah or create your own separate network for the caliphate. You can call it camelnet.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Isn't disregarding of public order just what we need?
The problem seems to be like they say this "Freedom of Expression".
People or countries should certainly not be allowed to propose such stupid things as Internet Censorship.
How about we not follow the lead of a country that routinely executes people publicly in horrific ways.
I'm no flag waver. I'm still a hippy who is hated at first sight by many of my fellow Americans but I trust this country's respect for freedom of speech more than I trust the UN to gain international consensus to respect freedom of speech.
the Global Internet Censorship Body will ensure equal unrest and humiliation for all.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
Let's start with the freedom to kill and destroy in response to insulting or otherwise uncomfortable information being published. This is a form of expression which seriously needs to be addressed.
Invading Iraq for oil, did not support
Invading Afghanistan to build pipeline, did not support
Nuking Saudi Arabia for stifling freedom of speech, Let me press the button.
They need to turn off the computer if they are offended but growing the fuck up would be even better.
If you don't say anything, you won't be called on to repeat it. -- Calvin Coolidge
Saudi Arabia has stated that there is a 'crying need for international collaboration to address "freedom of expression" which clearly disregards public order.'
There is a "crying need for international collaboration" to address the livid intolerance exhibited by the Monarchists (we've been there before -- self-absorbed, lazy and inbred) pissed that 6 billion people aren't under their thumb.
Yesterday's Weirdness is Tomorrow's Reason Why
Fuck you, and your religion too.
Your pal,
OldSport
To which the United States replied: "But if we don't let them say what they want on the internet, how is the NSA supposed to spy on everything they do?!?"
In response to Saudi Arabia, I would recommended that all religious people and all religion content be removed from the internet. Reactionary, close minded ideology is clearly incompatible with this fast paced open medium. I'll be better for all of us if we take a bold step and separate them.
And now we all can see why "THE VIDEO" was relentlessly trotted out as the cause of the violence. I guarantee you that if you track down who it was in every administration who pushed the idea that "THE VIDEO" was the cause of the violence when they knew better, you'd have yourself a collection of Sharia plants. People whose goal it is for Sharia law to be the law of the world and who have infiltrated all major governments of the world at various levels.
How is this even theoretically possible? Oh you crazy arabs, the RIAA would've done it like a decade ago.
How about not going an burning down houses of innocent people, how about not going and killing and hurting innocent people because somebody made a drawing or a video about some stupid old fairy tale?
If there is something that would be good censoring then it is the utter nonsense the comes from an islamist dictatorship.
I am offended that they are requesting global Internet censorship. I demand that their request for global Internet censorship be censored because it deeply offends me. If we censor everything that anyone is offended by then we might as well not have Internet because somewhere there's someone who is offended by something.
Take your censorship and go f*ck yourself with it.
Sincerely,
The Free World
p.s. we can still buy your oil, right?
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
Linking to DeCSS? Censored.
Internet Gambling? Censored.
Wikileaks? Censored.
Under-18s porn? (Not illegal everywhere) Censored.
under this law such reporting would not exist either http://wownot.com/saudi-arabian-women-win-the-right-to-bear-children/ mohamed hates satire as much as he hates fags, women and infidels .. and he loves child brides
We really should support it. There is nothing at the moment that creates more public disturbance than the Qur'an. We support Saudi Arabia in this and instantly work on banning this book all over the world. Then we can start on the Bible and other religious texts.
The sad thing is that these morons don't understand the words that are coming out of their own mouths.
Right, because every empire from Egypt, to Greece, Rome, Carthage, Persia, China, Japan, the Aztecs and Mayans, Britain, the various Caliphates, the Ottoman Empire and the Soviet Union had no consistent history of aggressive expansion that pushed their ideas, laws and morality on others. Truly, the United States' efforts to remake the world in its image are just unprecedented. Look Solomon, there is something new under the sun after all!...
And your rationale for anything you said is as close to the reality of human history as saying that dinosaurs died out because the Og the Caveman and his Merry Men rode around on their flying unicorns and gunned them down for sport.
Along the tortuous path of life, certain things irreversibly change over time. Accelerating the path to freedom from the mental shackles of organized, dogmatic religion would appear to be one of the direct consequences of inter-networked people freely and finally comparing notes between different brands of those good old 'All-powerful-being / be very scared / you should feel guilty, you unworthy scum' methods of mind control that have been in place for hundreds of years.
This happens to exactly be one of the first telltale signs of their unwilling abdication, as their hateful 'religion of peace' disintegrates in the face of a collective, planet-wide yawn. A day to celebrate!!
Good riddance.
Practical suggestion: close yourself off from the rest of the world instead. Miss you we will not.
Good luck, don't let the door hit you on the way out, and thanks for all the (fossilized) fish oil!
In hindsight, the track record of religious censorship leads me to think that backwards people shouldn't be leading the rest of us.
Gently reply
Then why are Muslims also attacking in so many other countries? There are Muslim terrorist attacks, all over the world, every day, and it's been going on like that for decades. Muslims are actively attacking not only Jews, and Christians, but Hindus, Buddhists, and of course, other Muslims.
How could this all be due to US mid-east policy?
The movie was a red herring. The protests were entirely the result of al qaida operatives fomenting crowds as cover for actual attacks on American embassies.
Many said this from day one, and two weeks after the attacks, it was finally acknowledged by the US.
As for laws prohibiting "offensive speech" - I have some offensive speech for anybody who proposes such nonsense. We live int he 21st century, not the 8th century. Tribal bullshit is tribal bullshit, and was meant to be left in the dark ages, as most of the world has. If your culture is still steeped in such insanity, perhaps it's time to REFORM like the other world religions and grow a thick skin.
Hell No!
The year is 1433 AH so they're currently in the 15th century.
Considering the development of Christianity through the ages, they're about spot on for intolerance and cruelty (no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!). We're just going to have to put up with it/ignore it if possible and resist all attempts to move social development backwards.
And the first thing we do is to censor the Saudi government. Nothing they post online goes anywhere but the bit-bucket...
Their rulers and spiritual leaders think their citizens/followers are mindless automatons that, when confronted with words, have no choice but to riot. Every time, like a well-conditioned dog. Yes, their leaders publicly compare them to dogs. For some people that's supposed to be a serious insult, I've heard...
A Global Violence Censorship Body is needed to keep people from being killed because of a stupid MOVIE!!!
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
is there *any* country out there that doesn't censor the net in one way or the other?
Some for copyright (e.g. Youtube in germany), some for religious reasons (Iran), others call political comments a crime (China), others crush down on gambling sites cause that's a crime there (USA),
And they all have in common that they are "legal" and "fair" and "justified" as the gouvernment responsible for this or that souverign corner of the world declared it illegal. usually with best intents and in complete contradiction with the laws of that other corner of the world.
Deal with it. everyone is already censoring the net. And the differences become rather small if you recognize that the biggest difference is your point of view.
bickerdyke
I would not have put it the way you did. But, other than buying oil, what business does the US have in the mid-east? Why are we putting ourselves in the middle of their ancient, perpetual, and non-sensicle squabbles? Why are giving billions in US aid, every year, to countries like Egypt, and Pakistan?
Please remember: Muslims are not only actively fighting Christians, and Jews. Muslims are also actively fighting: Hindus, Buddhists, and other Muslims, among others.
“Any reasonable person would know that this film would foment violence and, indeed, many innocent persons have died and been injured with this film as a root cause,” the Saudi submission said.
A reasonable person doesn't watch something if he knows it's going to offend him.
No censorship. However I'm fine with truth in advertising. Let's start by jailing people who claim there is a sky daddy who will hurt you unless you obey and give money to His mortal agents on Earth.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
The wahabi sect that runs saudi arabia are the scum of the earth and should have been revolutionised out of power years ago, why hasn't this happened yet?
Thanks to the usa and israel! yes israel cause the house of saud is jewish in origen, and they are extremist scum.
The rotten and corrupt Domain Name System.
The Internet cancer.
Yeah, that doesn't look like propaganda at all ...
...Fuck Islam, and any country that sides with them! Not to mention fuck our "President" because whether he admits it or not he is a Muslim and a Fascist!
Nobody is ever going to trust Muslims because even the moderate ones spawn extremists and then look the other way. That and the whole "lying for Allah" monkey business means that you know they are going to lie to you whenever it suits them. They are ignorant brainwashed extremists each and every one. Until they can show that they can control the extremists and demonstrate that they are trustworthy I think the world should treat Muslims like Pariahs.
Disregard the instructions given to The Jewish People (and only them). Christians actually have been told to CONVERT everybody not Kill the infidels (and actually we have been told to preach and live The Word while we are waiting for folks to choose to convert).
funny how when mocking Christians everybody brings up Old Testament "stuff" and never looks at the teachings of Christ Himself.
and i think if this Global Censor Board happens then Sprint ,Level 3 and friends need to start blackholing any traffic from those nations that run the board.
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
I am not the first one to suggest this. The idea behind these violent tantrums is to send the message: "just give up a tiny amount of freedomof speech, and we will have peace."
Problem is, radical Islam can never be appeased. The more you give them, the more the want.
Pakistan suggested that, in the interest of peace, US freedom of speech should not include speech that is offensive to Muslims.
Then Pakistan offered up $200K to whack the guy who made the video. A "fatwa" I think they call it.
maybe you blokes out there need to be cheered up.
how about buying a new dress? that often works for the women-folk around here.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Can I be a jockey on the camelnet?
That guy's a freedom hater. Fuck him...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09/30/husain-haqqani-muslim-rage-is-about-politics-not-religion.html
Can't be racist since the author is a Muslim.
The basic message is simple: The Islamic powers that be see the decline of the Islamic world and instead of catching up by modernizing their world, they seek to keep what control they can by creating theocracies, where the rule is to not question those in charge. It keeps the population dumb and controllable but also backward and unable to matter in the real world.
A perfect example was shown with Olympics. Saudia Arabia had fielded a female Judoka but insisted she would be allowed to wear a headscarf. Probably the first thing you picture when thinking of Judo is the standard uniform, which has no head covering. It never had, wasn't needed to appease any country ever before. But Saudia Arabia needed to be appeased because else they might withdraw. So the woman was allowed to disregard safety, disregard tradition and wear a piece of kit nobody else was allowed to wear...
AND LOST
Immidiatly, she didn't stand a chance! Not even the slightest. She was the worsed to ever take part in the modern olympics.
She wasn't put into her countries team to win or even to compete, she was put in to be harmless enough to not upset Saudi Arabians while at the same time playing the "the world hates islam" card by hoping she would be barred because of the headscarf. She wasn't and it became clear thar SA biggotted nature simply meant they had no women worthy of competition.
It is easier to shout loudly "rah rah us" and blame everything on them, then to risk modernizing your country and have the people wonder why this old men are in charge. England works that way, "trust us the 1% conservatives, we will fix your country because you are great, trust us". The USA loves its rousing "We are #1" waving made in China banners.
And around the world, were the powers that be have made a mess of things, religion is a good card to rally your troops around the leaders in support rather then looking for a handy rope.
Why do you think backwater North-ireland had religious strife? Because it was managed so well economically? Why do you think the orthodox church is back in power in Russia, because the last time they were in charge, they did so well economically?
No, but in economic hard times when people can't improve themselves or society, they become susceptible to religious control telling them they are right and everyone else is wrong.
Because keeping the people stupid is a good way to control people, but when times are hard, people also prefer to be kept stupid. Easy answers are so much easier.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Well, there is a crying need for international cooperation to address "authority" which clearly disregard public disorder and elemental freedoms. Here's a full, working, ready-to-implement global set of recommendations for the task of setting internet content standards:
Maybe we deserve this world ?
Second, there is only one country in the world that has, throughout its history, used its military power and political influence consistently to try to export its ideas of morality and law to the world, and it ain't no abode of Muslin desperation, it is the U-S-of-A.
You could argue right now that, except for a period of reconstruction following World War II, Germany has done the same regionally since the 1930s. Hitler during WWII, Germany in the EU and ETC. The only reason it didn't happen in WWII was because they were stopped. Same goes for Japan. If they hadn't been stopped by the US, Aussies, New Zealanders, Chinese, British, and even some of the Pacific Islanders, they would have spread throughout the Pacific, and probably pretty deep within Asia.
And, while it hasn't been an historical trend, Saudi Arabia has been trying to use their economic and religious influence to spread their ideas across the world. They have funded Wahhabi mosques and madrassas(not the OMG terrorist! kind, the real meaning of madrassa, ie. religious school) everywhere from the US to the Philippines. They just haven't really had the means to do so until relatively recently. And THAT is the reason why you can only give the US as an example: no one else has had the means and ability to do it until now; not because they lacked the desire to do so. Those that did, were stopped.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
It has been well known that this stuff is dial-a-riot type protests, the numbers are relatively tiny and to many cases of so called "spontanous" protests about stuff that either was released decades earlier or so obscure it could never have been heard of by the protestors unless someone went to the trouble of telling them.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
If Saudi Arabia wants to censor the internet, why can't they just do in their own country?
If everything that offended someone was removed from the internet, there would be nothing on the internet.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Do they not realize the internet and content standards are mutually exclusive?
From my cold dead hands. And I'm as psychotically radically left as they come but I'm not giving the internet to Saudi Arabia. I'll join a dark net first.
The guards at auswitch were just living day by day, so was the baker delivering their bread. So were their families.
All that evil needs to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.
And Muslims do nothing. Many support through donations questionably charities and claim to be innocent because they don't know were the money goes because they don't ask.
Where does innocence end?
I never kept slaves, neither did any of my family, so all blacks in the world should just shut up about slavery because I just want live my live.
In Harlem the guardian angels appeared who said "no, we can't keep blaming others for our troubles, it is black people suffering from black crime, so WE blacks need to do something about it."
I know the popular opinion is to cry over the bomb victims of Dresden en Horishima but I wonder how many of those killed cheered their mass murdering sons and patted them on their backs and told them to kill a few more lesser races. I don't believe in innocence through inaction. When your tribe misbehaves, you leave that tribe or fix that tribe or get treated the same as the rest of your tribe. Three choices. Pick one.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
For all of you in the Middle East, I want to be very clear.
In the United States, the absolute highest law in the land is the US Constitution, and of that Constitution the highest law is the 1st Amendment. That is as important to Americans as the Koran is to muslims.
The 1st Amendment of the US Constitution is what gives American's the freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and several other freedoms. Every single law made, MUST not conflict with the US Constitution, if it does, then only the constitution is valid, and the law passed is invalid, even International law. It would be like a religious ruling that Muhammed was not really a prophet, when the Koran clearly indicates otherwise. Which would you follow that Fatwa or the Koran?
In the US, no politician can make or sign or negotiate any treaty, or any agreement, because they are obligated by oath under the letter and spirit of the law, to support and defend the US constitution. Any such agreements or treaties they enter into is not valid in the United States, and those politicians would be committing an act of insurrection and Treason against the American people; As a result those politicians should, could, and would be removed from their office by military force and thrown in prison for the rest of their lives, if they are lucky.
No treaty will ban any kind of speech in the United States, in any way shape or form.
Saudi Arabia is a lot like the entertainment industry. Neat!
Islam extremists can burn bibles, flags, insult us and do whatever they want and expect no consequences. The leader of one small church here talks about burning a koran, and we are threatened with a holy war. Seems kinda wrong to me.
Its about time we start using neutron bombs on these sand niggers that want to fuck with the U.S.A! After the first few bombings the crap stops, or we just take all of the terrorist bastards out, along with all of their supporters.
Peace through better weapons technology!
Yes, and the common ground here isn't religion. Religion is a symptom of the real problem.
It desn't matter whether you are a Taliban shooting a little girl, or a member of the Red Army killing doctors and teachers--you know, those dangerous edjoomacated people--or a brainwashed 19th-early 20th century expansionist nationalist.
Humans tend to.. not question their beliefs. We become emotionally attached to them. We place way too much value on them. Our beliefs are tribal--We tend to believe what we believe to fit in with our peer groups (when's the last time you were at an outing and someone spewed crap and the rest of the group went along?). We discourage critical thinking, and encourage anti-intellectualism, and encourage far, far too much Authenticity (thinking from the gut) at the expense of reason. It's easy for us to kill. All it takes is a sociopath or narcissist in a position of power to motivate us to do it. Sometimes, not even that much. Our beliefs trump the lives of others. Our beliefs trump the rights of others to live their lives in peace. The problem is humans are arrogant. Religion has nothing to do with it.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
Which part of free speech do the Saudi's not understand? If they want censorship, then they can invent their own Internet.
The more enlightened countries of the world should pool their resources to build a secret satellite that can project huge images on the moon, and will run Muslim-offensive material directed at the more backwards parts of the world until the extremists have all been desensitized to offense towards their religion. We'll start with simple, non-offensive stick-figures labelled "The Prophet Mohammed" just flashed once a week, and move onto stuff like this running all night long until the riots stop:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image,29553/
With no single place to focus their rage, they'll distribute their riots to various western embassies and should be easier to manage.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Are soldiers to blame for acting out the orders of the leaders? The idea in the west with REAL soldiers is that any western soldier has the duty to question his superiors if they order him to do something that is against higher laws. This is at least what I was told when I was drafted, it is in the dutch soldier manual.
So... what about mobs? Is the mob incited by a leader responsible for their actions?
What about a payed mob? Many arab protest are of the dial-a-riot variaty, there is nothing spontaneous about them. They are organized by leaders who decide NOW is the moment to take offense and find something to take offense at. Protests have been held over decades old material OR material so obscure it is unlike to have been found by accident by the protesters.
But lets go further. Where does reponsibility end when it comes time for collective punishment.
It is very PC to cry over the poor victims of Dresden and Hiroschima. Countless innocent children died who weren't even old enough to know the world outside their garden let alone know the politics of the world. But how many of the women who burned and died had cheered their troops? Had hugged their mass murdering sons?
Part of the crew of the Titanic accepted a reward/bribe for rescuing passengers, this was an outrageous thing to do and over of the mothers of the crew slew the door shut in her sons face when he came home and refused to ever speak with him. How many mothers of SS soldiers, Japanse child raping infantry and Islam terrorists have done the same? The father of the muslim who killed 3 French soldiers and 2 jewish kids, didn't even apologize but instead sued the french state for killing his son.
I am not reponsible for the actions of others, in my eyes, goes only so far. If you go to the same church as someone who does something you disagree with, you have to take action, either leave that church or bar that person but you can't just shrug your shoulders and claim the others actions shouldn't reflect on you.
Many talk about the hate of Muslims in the west but so far, Muslims deaths at the hands of white westerners is a fraction of westerners killed by muslims.
Terrorism is not isolated to Muslims but in other parts of the world, what has happened is that the people part of the terrorist group started to protest, held marches to condemn the violence to show they were not supporting it. Often at great danger to themselves.
There have only tiny handful of muslims who publicly showed on their own accord in front of their own people, that the terrorists were not acting in their name.
Plenty hold that every US citizen deserved the 9/11 attack becsuse of US actions. None of these people believe that ALL Muslims deserve the Iraq/Afghan war for Muslims terrorist actions.
Ultimately these people are racists. White people are responsible for the action of their society. Muslims are not responsible for the actions of their society.
I don't think that attitude is right.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I have been to Saudi Arabia. The government does
quite actively block "offensive" websites. I find
government filtering much more offensive than
any dreck that an open internet has shown me.
So all these others wanting no curtailment of freedom of expression are FOR rioting, killing and destruction of property? And the US Constitution PROTECTS this freedom of expression?
Interesting.
This is pretty straightforward.
In the US, free speech means you can say anything you want, except very certain things, under certain situations (like "Fire!" or "There's a bomb in the school," or "Why yes, I am a police officer."). In effect, it's using blacklisting to target specific things. Without explicit ruling to the contrary, you are free to speak what you'd like - thus, "Free Speech".
In the entire rest of the world, speech is rigidly controlled. The default assumption is you are not allowed to say anything at all, unless the government has specifically allowed it. For example, you're not allowed to talk badly about the king, or government, or public workers, or even say some things that might indicate racism or bigotry - this is true even in western governments (check out the laws in England, France, Germany, for example). In some cases, you're not allowed to say something that would have a negative impact on someone's reputation, even if it's provable truth! They don't always prosecute, but they almost always have the option to do so. So, they're denying all by default, and using a white list to allow certain 'free' statements. In these cases, "free speech" refers in part to the few things you're explicitly allowed to discuss, and to the socially protected 'right' to not be offended by random speech. T
The entire rest of the world doesn't get the US's interpretation, and the US, by and large, doesn't get the rest of the world.
So when the rest of the world sees someone producing a muslim hate film, and we say, "well, it's legal," to them, that's the same as saying, "Our government went out of it's way to explicitly, specifically endorse this message." They don't understand the difference, or even the value of the US's version. There's all sorts of funny quotes from world leaders visiting the US and asking the president or other high up why we allow protestors in front of the white house/etc, when we could just have them locked up and/or disappeared.
Hey, Saudi Arabia. Asalaam alaykum.
Don't take it from an agnostic, atheist, Christian, Jew, Hindu, Jain, Bhuddist or any other religion. Give the Aga Khan a call. Take it from a fellow follower of Islam. The Ismaili Muslims have figured out how to drag themselves into the 21st century, you would do well to get some tips from them. It's about time your clerics learned about 2012 rather than clinging desperately to 1012.
In the meantime if you want censorship - UNPLUG THE CABLE. That should give you a satisfactory level of censorship. Run your own, internal 'internet'. If that's too extreme even for you, install and manage your own firewall! Don't expect us to censor things that are perfectly moral, ethical and legal in OUR culture just because they offend YOURS.
The Saudi crown prince "Peace be Upon him" and Can blow me!
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/short.html
Oookay, so you lose all sorts of credibility for linking to the second link, because it is just mindless bashing of 4chan, not linked at all with censorship.
FUCK YOU!
https://freenetproject.org/
They need a reality check. If those Wahhabi bastards think we're going to let them have anything of the kind, they are sadly, sadly mistaken.
This is a symptom of a far bigger problem -- the Saudis, with their oil money have been spreading their evil Wahhabi poison -- and the accompanying ignorance and fanaticism -- around the world for decades.
We need to kneecap them. Find ways to make oil worthless, and it'll crush the Saudi powers-that-be economically. Without money as a crutch to bribe/subjugate their people, they'll be swept away.
"Set America Free", while being a think-tank run by conservatives, have pretty much the right idea. Get off fossil fuel oil for transport, introduce fuel choice, develop alternatives, and then we can crush the Saudi oil despots and set the world free.
http://www.setamericafree.org/
I say to all those who would riot in the streets of their own city over a video that was made half a world away by someone of no consequence, "Grow a pair!"
A religion that requires, for example, human sacrifice would not be permitted in most civilised nations, primarily because a sort of "right to life" would naturally outweigh the appropriate interpretation of "right to religion". If Islam requires censorship then it too will simply not be tolerated by any civilised nation; a watered down form of Islam which doesn't attack the basic rights of non-believers may take its place.
The question is, are there any civilised nations?
Saudi Arabia has stated that there is a 'crying need for international collaboration to address "freedom of expression" which clearly disregards public order.'
I quite agree. So let's address this "crying need" by determining the best way to remove the Saud family from its undeserved nest in Saudi Arabia. So what sort of groups are looking to replace the Saud family with a democracy (which is the sort of government I favor)? Googling around, I see these guys. Anyone have some insight into this issue?
Hitler: “Along with the fight for a purer morality we have taken upon ourselves the struggle against the decomposition of our religion. We have therefore taken up the struggle against the Godless movement, and not just with a few theoretical declarations; we have stamped it out. And above all we have dragged the priests out of the lowlands of the political party struggle and have brought them back into the church.” Documente Zer Kirchenpolitik
Also The Taiping rebellion alone killed as many as World War I, and that was a long time ago. You're not factoring in the countless destruction of cultures around the world deemed Satanic by the puritanical invading Christian armies either. Lastly Hitler was also not a Communist, the communists were his enemies, he attacked the communists, and where do you think the concept of the Third Reich came from? The First Reich was the Holy Roman empire.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
I've searched this /. story over and over and there's still no mention of the greatest Islamic censorship of all. WTF is with you nerds?
If you look up the FBI statistic there was far more christian terrorism attack in the US last year than mulsim. You will hard pressed to find that in the national press, say CNN level. OTOH any muslim terrorist attack is reported with analysis and thickly reported. The reality is that if you look at western country, the local are much more dangerous than external muslim jihadist. 9/11 was a fluke, not a rule.
The violence in Libya was indeed pre-planned, that's not evidence that the violence across the Muslim world was!? You're taking that incident too far.
I fully support the freedom of expression, and I have no interest in Saudi Arabia's suggestion. You however have to give credit where credit is due. That silly movie created a spontaneous reaction across the Muslim world which is far more than simply Libya!
The problem with religion is that it in itself should be treated just the same way an allergy or sickness is being treated. In this case I do believe the best way to treat it would be with small and constant doses of allergen injection. You do the same with an allergy. At first you are at the stage of trying to avoid your allergen, and guess what, your allergy gets worse and worse. Then when you start to treat you problem you are injecting yourself (or be injected) by small measured doses of your allergen and thus teaching your body that the allergen is not something to be afraid of.
The same could be done with each and every religion. Keep a gentle pressure with mocking, once that gentle dose of mocking is accepted increase the mocking. If we are not going to do that we will see the problems with fundamentalist religions getting worse and worse.
As a European I don't exactly trust the US to manage the Internet either. The raids and police actions against "free speech" on .com domains is proof enough. The UN would be a really bad choice, but the US is only slightly better.
I would much prefer an independent, neutral entity without religious or political affiliations. Where is the representative from the Neutral Planet when you need him?!
Sorry, Hitler was socialist, not communist. But despite all of that, anyone who kills in the name of Christ is not a Christian, as Christ, when asked what the greatest commandment was, said "Love the Lord thy God, and love thy neighbor as thyself". Christ also said anyone who hated another person was guilty of murder, and to "bless those that persecute you". Look, I am in no way defending nor denying what people did in the name of Christianity. People have done horrible, terrible things in the name of all sorts of things. However, as I said, Christianity is a "do not murder" religion. (Wrongly) killing in the name of Christianity does not make Christianity a bad thing. It makes the killer a bad person.
I suppose it's too late to say "Screw you guys, I'm taking my internet and going home" now. Oh Well.
1. Take the leash off Israel.
2. Let them and the Arabs sort things out the way nature intended to. I'm sure it'll go nuclear about 20 minutes into it. If not, various nations can Profit by selling arms to both sides . The French and the Germans and the US love such deals. Win for the economy! War is Great! (Don't believe me? War lifted the world out of the 30's depression. Even the losers made off like bandits.)
3. Spend the next 30 years rebuilding the area, ensure good schooling for all, you know, all that jazz that happened after WWII. Maybe then the whole Middle East can make things other than war and hatred and intolerance. Things they can sell and service, and therefore have a somewhat-educated people that's not hell-bent on burning the world.
4. Profit! Buy the stuff they make (if it's worth a damn), and sell them stuff!
And in a perfect world,
5. The world finally wakes the fuck up and loses all its religions, now that the huge religiously-fuelled battle with hundreds of thousands or even millions of lives lost wasn't just filmed and televised, it was tweeted and facebooked realtime. The horror show to end all horror shows.
I'm not trying to be funny or cavalier. I'm sick and tired of all this religion-based bickering. It brings nothing but war and suffering, directly or indirectly.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
On the planet than have them tell me one word what to say or not say.
I've read the Bible so I remember those things, and I agree with the quote "I like your Christ, I don't like your Christians." Problem is, it's hard for others to tell what a Christian is or isn't, when many who've loudly professed Christianity didn't put up again their swords back into their places.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
it's all shit
Just by looking at the responses on this site (where people are supposedly more thoughtful/intellectual and less reactive/emotional, yet have overwhelmingly taken the rant-bait), I have to conclude that they are the new Global Trolling Champs!
Congrats to the Saudi's!
Except there's Israel. We'll never be free of their over-large influence (and I'd say co-opting) of US politics. Sorry about the Holocast, and you're better than your neighbors, but that doesn't justify your willful and active meddling in US policies foreign and domestic.
If there was no religion of any sort, present day would be like living in Star Trek.
Internet censorship isn't about Religion, it's about keeping power by controlling what people can know. Just like China.
No worries, because this will never come to pass. The free thinking world would require that any such law would ban anti-israel hate on the internet, since it clearly fits the definition of "freedom of expression which clearly disregards public order", and muslim hate mongers like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad *who ironically enough was born jewish* would never allow for their preferred form of vile hate to be restricted.
as being ruled by those christian nutjobs that currently stick their noses into everything, but without the hypocrisy.
Most of that "own image" isn't even from the US, most of that has deep British roots.
No, what we need is a international collaboration to address public disorder which clearly disregards "freedom of expression."
or else!
So, the people who are supporting this think it's a good idea to set a precedent that the way to outlaw people offending you is to go on a bloody berserk rampage killing random uninvolved people whenever you are offended?
Even if it were made illegal to offend Wahabiists, and that miraculously caused them to become peaceful, is this really a precedent anyone wants to set? Do we really want the Scientologists to pick up on that lesson?
Saudi Arabia: The issue is the jackass that posted this video and his ability to posts these types of videos
Rationality: Not those who would murder other people over such a video?
Saudi Arabia: Nope. U rly need to get a leash on ur interwebz, yo.
I would vote to nuke them -- I mean quite literally nuke them, with a pound of bacon on board just to make the fallout more interesting -- before agreeing to some censorship policy they endorse.
I would agree that it is completely unacceptable to agree to such censorship but somehow saying "no" seems to be a far better option than killing millions of innocent civilians and releasing large clouds of highly dangerous radioactive material into the environment - not to mention bringing the entire world far closer to the spectre of nuclear armageddon. I know it sounds a bit boring and doesn't have the same Hollywood appeal as a nuclear holocaust would but somehow judging a population based on the actions of its government doesn't seem to be a wise thing for an American - or for that matter anyone - to suggest.
Yeah... there's a touch of sarcasm and stuff like that in there. I was actually being critical of the people who respond to insults with murder. I am also being critical of those who would seek to condone instead of condemn the behavior by seeking to blame freedom of expression... especially religious expression.
"We need plasphemy laws!!" Fuck you Jews/Christians/Muslims and all the rest. We do need blasphemy laws... laws that PROTECT THE RIGHT TO BLASPHEME!!! Your beliefs are yours. Keep them to yourself and your groups. Leave everyone else out of it. You have NO RIGHT to government protect or special government treatment.
How many oil wells does your daddy own?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
As a believer I fully support the parent post.
The all-powerful, all-knowing, eternal, GOD that exists despite and beyond all human puny logic, puerile rationality, or drab stupidity doesn't give a shit about:
- non-belief and proselytizing (you'll know soon enough anyway)
- punishment (that's a human thing unworthy of GOD. GOD is not a sadist)
- sin (the concept of sin is an unneeded over-complication in addition to being mostly about politics. No one needs "sin" to differ right from wrong, those who can't make out the differences won't care either way)
- sexual preferences (all too human)
- muddled abstract concepts like love (marriage) or friendship (again this is just human distractions)
- whatever wrong and insane evil etc. is done to you or me (GOD is not a caricature of your mum)
- being adulated and praised (GOD is not some tacky superhero for us to cheer on)
- theology (making even less sense out of ideas embellished by human fancy beyond recognition)
- politics (again: GOD is not a sadist)
The human condition is likely fluff, with our lives also fluff, and if so then no matter how gruesome or nice your existence is it is only to set default states for what comes after: we do not matter yet. We are being randomized, and it ought to be fucking obvious.
GOD is both the source and more than everything we know of and most religious people don't get it in the slightest and don't grasp any of the consequences.
And fuck islam and all other manipulative non-voluntary political ideologies. Hell fuck most of humanity since we're all assholes anyway but then again a lot of us at least try to be civil or even kind about it (and that's fucking awesome, well done to you).
While those acts themselves weren't appeasing, every other policy adapted in the West - whether it was about profiling Muslims regarding any terror activities, pandering to their wishes which later became demands, and so on, by BOTH the Left and the Right, has been appeasement. Whether it was the issue of the mosque at ground zero, repeated apologies by the US military over the mistreatment of Qurans, allowing Muslim women to get photos taken in their burqhas, having footbasins in MN airports or UMI for Muslims to do their wudu, the Brits making sure that tombstones face Mecca while commodes don't, giving halal meals to everybody regardless of whether or not they are Muslims just to pander to them, providing Muslim criminals choice Islamic gourmets, to name just a few, definitely constitutes appeasement by Western society at large. Something that renders irrelevant all the Jihadi campaigns against America - Osama's dream to see Islam dominate the West is coming true without his minions having to do anything.
And it is in that context that the above story should be taken. Having seen how, despite a string of terror attacks, the West has grown more, not less accommodating of Muslims/Islam, the Muslims are escalating their thuggery and their demands. A Danish and French paper publish cartoons of Mohammed - Muslims react in rage to demonstrate that they are not fanatical (which is what the cartoons were illustrating). An American blogger creates an 'Everybody draw Mohammed Day' on Facebook, and is subjected to death threats, and is finally forced to go into hiding. This is not happening in Riyadh or Teheran or Islamabad - it's happening in the US!!! Somebody makes a movie about Mohammed, and is sent to jail. And while some Mohammedans are only too happy to claim credit for it, others are still livid and want to go out and burn Western embassies, since the entire West must be complicit in all this, right? And then the 50 odd members of the OIC, which is today the largest bloc in the UN, push an agenda of making blasphemy against Islam illegal worldwide (lets face it - Islamic claims about Christianity or Judaism won't fall under that, and nor should that even exist as a law), and not much resistance is shown by non-Muslim members of the UN. So you have Interpol issuing a warrant for a Saudi blogger, while now,the OIC wants to censor the Internet, since that's where the biggest opposition to both Islam and Muslims - individual opposition - is demonstrated.
Therefore, the GP is right - either the world will be dominated by Islam, or we'll be in a world war. Unlike all previous wars, the enemy - Muslims - are well behind our frontlines, so a mere 'nuke Mecca' strategy just wouldn't do. What is needed is a wholesale deportation of all Muslims to the 50 odd countries that constitute dar ul Islam, while all non-Muslims from there should be welcomed out. Once that is done, just quarantine them - make it illegal for Muslims to live outside their empire, which is big enough as it is, stretching from Senegal to Brunei, and then we don't need to bother about Muslims. Let them make their own internet, or marry 6 year olds, or stone rape victims for adultery, or whatever. But at least, we won't need to live with it - and our societies will be a lot better off for it.
Maybe we should reword this and describe this situation in tech terms.
Those wah-wah-bytes are really butthurt because they are very much like the classic monopolist telcos, some patent trolls, the **IAAs or anyone else who wants to continue to operate by steamrolling their competition, buying the laws to do this if necessary.
They have been historically accustomed to doing whatever they wanted, and are ready to go to any length to protect that monopoly. Just like the telco suing a town for giving its residents free wi-fi. Not so, you need to go through us...
And the wah-wah-bytes in question are certainly not ready to share these sophisticated mind control networks that took hundreds of years to build and maintain.
Why should anyone else have the right to be heard?
What's next after that, they're going to have to share the last mile of their brainwashing wires to let competing and unlicensed carriers deliver services over what they've built? Imagine! Suddenly having to allow others to freely voice their opinions, and for those opinions to be broadcast and heard without any control... that's just unheard of!
We should also takes these comments with a grain of salt, it's a show purely being put out for the home crowd to notice. The dudes saying this certainly aren't dumb enough to actually believe that it would work, but since Pakistan's prime minister clamored for the same thing the other day, they don't want to be less devout than the guy down the street and feel obligated to raise the stakes a bit higher on the BUPD scale (blind unconditional prophetic devotion).
But truly, once framed in corporate terms, all of it seems very far from outlandish. Quite the contrary, actually.... very practical and coherent.
It would be nice if you applied this same sort of reasoning to atheism, which you so obviously despise and attribute to evil.
... elimination of stupid people in the Middle East.
If it insults Islam, then don't watch it. Problem solved. The infidels won't care.
As for the First Amendment in the USA, it will stay. The Second Amendment protects it. If you don't like that, then try some economic sanctions.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Don't worry about it. It will happen naturally. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_Land_Model
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Like you hinted on as well: the group mentality.
Back to the 7th century?
Like hell.
Everyone knows by now that the murder of the ambassador was not caused by the video. It was Obama's policy that cause them. It was all planed out in advance, and it was known it was going to happen, the ambassador asked for more help, but was denied it by Obama. Besides, why did this one video make them mad, and not the other 10 million anti-Muslim videos on the net?
I have a better idea. Why don't you eat a big bowl of fucking dicks, Saudi Arabia?
Correct, but overly narrow.
All human social structures and attendant value systems eventually devolve into violence and bigotry. It's part of human evolution, specifically group selection. We intrinsically see people who believe the same things we do as good and decent and people who are different from us as not quite people. Murder is wrong; war is justified. We're hard-working; they're just greedy parasites. Etc. We're tribal creatures. Pack animals.
Religion is just the most historically common system of values shared by large groups of people. In the short time that atheism has had a chance to be a majority value system in parts of the world in the 20th century, it's already given us bad apples like the Soviet Union and the Khmer Rouge. Banishing religion is no cure for violence and bigotry. Just the rhetoric in this thread reveals how much bigotry such a sentiment holds in and of itself.
It's not religion that's the problem. It's humanity. Hell, just look at how much anger and hate erupts over even more frivolous divisions like favorite sports teams or brands of products.
The world is best served by the internet being under US control. The US is the home of the 1st Amendment (to the US Constitution) and the US has a two-century-plus long track record of defending speech of all sorts, even when that speech is very offensive to the most deeply-held religious beliefs of the majority of its citizens.
Until another country can demonstrate the same dedication to the "free speech" and "freedom of religion" (which is essentially a freedom of belief and thought) principles, people of the world should oppose the transfer of the authority away from the US. Other militarily powerful nations like China and Russia have a demonstrated disdain for that freedom. Every Muslim nation has demonstrated its hatred for these basic freedoms... to the degree that any Muslim nation that takes its faith seriously will kill people for simply abandoning the religion (as that one particular religion demands). Most European nations and Canada have already demonstrated a desperate desire to appease Muslims and a willingness to suppress freedoms to do that.
No one sane would ever seriously consider passing any legislation that the Saudi Arabian junta wants. Why can't our governments show some backbone, and publically ridicule these religious fascist regimes. It is the plans for internet censorship and monitoring in the west, that are far more worrying, since they could actually be forced upon us, by the various levels of corporate totalitarian regimes that govern some western countries.
There is no excuse for allowing the mental molestation that is practiced by the organised religion of these regimes. If you don't oppose, your appease.
Remember, sending children to be indoctrinated by a religion, is just another form of child molestation. Sick, and very twisted.
Politics/patriotism/democracy/religion/corporations are Ponzi/Pyramid schemes.
Casteism
If you are afraid that your ideas can't stand on their own without being crushed by different ideas, there is always a "crying need" for censorship.
Those who believe, "The Truth will Out", and are interested in the truth, don't need censorship.
THINK! It's patriotic
Does anyone else see some kind of irony here? W. T. Policy F.???
DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
Arabs need to be taught that they do not have a right to not be offended. Also, when they are offended they do not have a right to go berserk in the streets. We need a Global Body that will kick there asses hard when they do that. Their fucked up religion needs a Global Body to provide some discipline.
To this end, they should be offended as often as possible in the hope that they might learn to understand that most of the world does not want their thought control.
I googled around after that judo player - she was the first woman from SA to ever compete in the Olympics, girls arent even allowed to PE classes in SA. Thats probably why she was crap too, but it looks like her appearance on the mat was political but for the reasons of gender equality.