Slashdot Mirror


France Will Block Web Sites That Promote Terrorism

An anonymous reader writes In the first use of government powers enacted after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, the French Interior Ministry on Monday ordered five websites blocked on the grounds that they promote or advocate terrorism. The action raises questions about how governments might counter groups such as the self-declared Islamic State on digital platforms.

12 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. Recruiting tools by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why not block portions of Facebook and Twitter, which are used as recruiting tools and communications channels? (Though a block of ALL of Facebook and Twitter would be popular with everyone tired of the "chatter")?

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  2. People by scsirob · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Blocking websites is useless if they are unwilling to block the people coming to Europe to spread the poison of islam. With EU having a very weak outer border, nothing stops extremists from coming in to spread hate and indoctrination under young kids. We are now seeing kids as young as 12 years old heading for Syria. Where did they pick up the desire to do that? Who is poisoning their young minds? Blocking a website will have zero effect if the mosque or islam school next door aides extremists.

    --
    To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
    1. Re:People by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where did they pick up the desire to do that? Who is poisoning their young minds?

      Maybe they feel alienated because their websites are censored, they are told how to dress, and so many Europeans think they should "go home". In America, Muslims are as free to speak as anyone else, they are welcome to wear their head scarfs to school, and they are well integrated into society. They are also a tenth as likely to join ISIS.

    2. Re:People by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ^^^^^^^^ This ^^^^^^^^

      People who think the United States is hostile towards immigrants should spend some time in Europe as one, particularly one of color.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  3. How do they define "Terrorism"? by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    THAT'S the relevant question here.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  4. Free speach == dead by rbgnr111 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    so... to protect the free speach of Charlie Hebdo, they ban or block speech that fall under the loose term of "terrorism"

    1. Re:Free speach == dead by itzly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      free speech doesn't mean you're allowed to insult and provoke at your leisure

      That's exactly what free speech means. If you could only practice free speech that wasn't controversial, it would be meaningless.

  5. It's dumb. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you allow the site to remain accessible, monitoring the traffic to/from will give you a clear bead on terrorist sympathizers in your midst. It will also give you a reading on how effective the terrorist's campaign is, and among what demographics. All of this is very useful intel for defeating them.

    Also, being in the spotlight makes them more susceptible to public mockery.

    Blocking it just legitimizes their position (in the minds of some), and people who are interested will just work around your blocks (most likely in ways that makes them harder to trace).

    Whoever came up with this policy is either completely empty-headed, or isn't trying to harm terrorism at all (but is instead trying to endear him/her self to a group of empty-headed people who think this is a good idea).

  6. Re:Necesary Censorship by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Except that basically all extant religions feed on ANYTHING that can be construed as persecution. By trying to censor, you only strengthen their resolve. Same shit with Neo-nazis and Mein Kampf. Nothing could do more damage to that movement than exposing that Das Fuhrer had the language skills of a middle school American sleeping through their first semester German class.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  7. Re:Necesary Censorship by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh, glad that those misguided idiots now can't have access to content promoting hatred in the name of religion.

    Unless of course he goes to his local mosque. So let's shut down the mosques. Then they'll get together somewhere else.

    Face it. There's no way you can keep idiots from being caught by sects. What you can do, and best would be such a way as this, is to make this harder to observe by your security forces.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. Gotta love the irony... by bwcbwc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    of a bunch of politicians who were soap-boxing about freedom of the press and "je suis Charlie" engaging in this kind of censorship. All speech is free, but some speech is more free than others. I don't think there's anyone alive who is in a position to form an unbiased judgment of whether a terrorist site, a porn site or Charlie Hebdo is more offensive. Offense, like beauty, is in the mind of the beholder.

    --
    We are the 198 proof..
  9. Re:Censorship doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nothing has changed. Hitler advocated hatred of a group (jews at the time) as a method of establishing national unity. Today the same thing is going on. 40 years ago everyone hated commies. 20 years ago everyone hated faggots. Today everyone hates pedophiles, terrorists, and anyone with backwards thinking (meaning anyone over the age of 40). Of coarse our present hatreds are perfectly justified, unlike those racists bastards who hated the wrong sorts of people back in the olden days.