Slashdot Mirror
Facebook, Google and Twitter Agree To Delete Hate Speech In Germany (reuters.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Facebook, Google, and Twitter have agreed to remove hateful posts from their platforms within 24 hours in Germany, officials announced yesterday. The web companies committed to the move in a new agreement with German authorities, after coming under increased pressure to help curb racism online in the country. The agreement will require web companies operating in Germany to conform with the law when monitoring hate speech expressed on their platforms, instead of referring to internal policies. The German law stipulates that any comment inciting violence against ethnic or religious groups is punishable by up to three years in prison.
Do the same rules apply?
German Muslim: 'Islam Is Coming And Your Daughters Will Wear The Hijab'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAWNmAdgMHI
All criticism of Islam or resistance of Muslim immigration is hate speech. Modulate yourself, or else.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
There is a big difference between criticism and hatespeech.
There is a big difference between criticism and hatespeech.
...it all depends on who gets to define what "hate speech" is. Therein lies the problem.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
That's why the twitter account of the CSU has been so quiet lately.
(CSU: Conservative party of Bavaria)
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It seems history repeats itself.
this has even more detail, from the Library of Congress (US) no less...
One man's hate speech is another man's opinion. Who are you to judge which is which? That's the entire point of "free speech". It certainly seems like what is being considered "hate speech" in the context of this article has a pretty broad and over-reaching definition.
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Where does it say "but not Muslim"? Anywhere, in any law on what constitutes "hate speech" is "but not Muslim" appearing?
If nowhere, then where did this pansy query come from and why was it so central to your psyche that you HAD TO ask it?
And the same to the other morons making the same whiney-ass pissant little cries about "wadaboudamusim!" like scsirob.
1000 years ago, Christians were roaming the world, killing non-believers. How is this a whole lot different? Christopher Hitchens (may he rest in peace) would go on and on about the evils of religion. But the truth is that religion only dictates the form of the assholery. If people didn’t have the religion, they’d find some other ideoligical reason to go around killing people they disagree with.
I’m not an expert in Islam. People tell me that there are lots of “kill the infidel” parts, and they’re later in the Qur’an, so they supercede peaceful stuff towards the beginning. You can find lots of violence in the Hebrew bible too. In all cases, I think it’s a matter of people cherry-picking the parts of their religious texts that support their idiosyncrasies and using that as justification. So you’re an asshole because God said to be? No. You’re an asshole. And you use your God to justify the shit you want to do.
There aren’t more assholes in the middle east, though. Most people there are relatively poor. However, there are oil barrons who want to control economies, and they find their religion as a convenient vehicle. MAYBE it’s easier to recruit and rile up your troops if you play on their religion, and MAYBE if you didn’t have that religion, it might be harder to do this. But the fact is, millions of people want to leave Syria to get away from ISIS. Those people are primarily Muslim too, but they just want to live in peace.
We taught to think of Hinduism as one of those inherently non-violent religions. But did you know that there are Hindu fundamentalists who feel inclined to resort to voilence over their beliefs? There are. Were some people so inclined, I’m sure they could twist Hinduism around to motivate people into violence.
The main reason that Christians and Jews and many other religious people are no longer violent (en masse anyhow) is because the violence we’re seeing now with Islam already happened with those other religions. The maintream groups have been there and done that and have matured past it. Perhaps in another 500 years, Islam will mature (perhaps through a lot of natural selection) to the point where it becomes an inherently peaceful religion.
We already have Islamic countries that have developed some maturity. Jordan is a great example. Their law is inherently Shari’a, which I wouldn’t want to live under, but it is tempered. For instance, sodomy was made legal in 1951. They don’t embrace it, but it’s not illegal, so you can’t be jailed for it. Basically private consential sex acts are not under the jurisdiction of the government. Moreover, if a family kills one of their kin for “shaming” them in this way or other, that death is considered murder and will be prosecuted like any other. There is maturity in separating the “moral” from the “legal” where they consider something to be immoral but do not take it upon themselves to punish all whom they consider sinners. I’m not saying this is perfect or anything, but Jordan is one of the safest countries to visit in the middle east, yet it is a solidly Islamic country. Why? Because their government is comprised of people who aren’t assholes (irrespective of their religious beliefs).
Your population is old and dying. You don't have enough young people to keep your countries running and the few young people do have are weak cowards who can't take care of themselves. Everything is ripe for the taking, the takeover is happening, and you still won't even acknowledge its happening. You are not allowed to complain about it either and there is nothing you can do about it.
That's NOT hate speech, it is an opinion. Unless it specifically incites someone to violence, like "go out and strangle all muslims at 3pm next Tues"....then it isn't hate speech, or it shouldn't be.
You should be perfectly free, to express that "I can't stand all the fucking 's out there that think wants you to not eat and thinks should blow all and rot in hell. "
That's an opinion, and even if it had all the racial slurs, and all.....it is nothing more than that. That is valid as free speech to anyone that values ALL free speech. The only thing that should be investigated, is if you directly threaten someone or some group with specific violent actions.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........