Visiting hate and terror sites will be punished (21)
olaix: In a attempt to deal with extremism, the French President has proposed new measures, which will allow prosecution of people visiting internet sites of hate and terror.
This has come in the aftermath of a ugly incidence in France, where the police ended up besieging a gunman belonging to a radical idea, who'd been killing several people before he got taken out by commandos.
Although everyone is frustrated about these terror events, and a natural psychological response is the desire to take out the root problem to prevent it from happening again, is punishment for visiting a site even close to a solution, and not even further away from our western traditional values (which was based on reason, not happy naive people)?
Sarkozy means well no doubt, but isn't it a little bit too "George Orwell" with a huge Orwell potential to punish people for looking at the "wrong" information?
Similar suggestions have drawn comparison to people visiting ch*ld pron, but I think its flawed, because for such thing to exist, there must already have happened a crime, and therefor punishment is valid.
The problem decoded - humans have a intention. I have mine, you have yours, but who else can really tell? for all you know, I may be thinking about putting a house on fire (lol) and you would never know before it was to late. And how could it be prevented as I never had problems with the law, or been under any similar form of attention?
I don't really think its that much harder to get a gun than a can of gasoline, if you know where to look. The Norwegian gunman who killed all the youths at Utøya, first blew up a building in Oslo, using fertilizer as component, so bombs are easily made too.
So, I find this approach to dealing with terrorism utter useless, peoples intention is created by what is happening around them, which means every birth is a potential terrorist.
Your opinion?
This has come in the aftermath of a ugly incidence in France, where the police ended up besieging a gunman belonging to a radical idea, who'd been killing several people before he got taken out by commandos.
Although everyone is frustrated about these terror events, and a natural psychological response is the desire to take out the root problem to prevent it from happening again, is punishment for visiting a site even close to a solution, and not even further away from our western traditional values (which was based on reason, not happy naive people)?
Sarkozy means well no doubt, but isn't it a little bit too "George Orwell" with a huge Orwell potential to punish people for looking at the "wrong" information?
Similar suggestions have drawn comparison to people visiting ch*ld pron, but I think its flawed, because for such thing to exist, there must already have happened a crime, and therefor punishment is valid.
The problem decoded - humans have a intention. I have mine, you have yours, but who else can really tell? for all you know, I may be thinking about putting a house on fire (lol) and you would never know before it was to late. And how could it be prevented as I never had problems with the law, or been under any similar form of attention?
I don't really think its that much harder to get a gun than a can of gasoline, if you know where to look. The Norwegian gunman who killed all the youths at Utøya, first blew up a building in Oslo, using fertilizer as component, so bombs are easily made too.
So, I find this approach to dealing with terrorism utter useless, peoples intention is created by what is happening around them, which means every birth is a potential terrorist.
Your opinion?
All I can say is it's a pity it didn't apply on here .
Save a lot of fights,arguments and back biting.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Yeah the French President suffers from the mental disorder of like and dislike.
In 1991 Islam was attacked, and the warfare that came out of that is still been played out around the glob, including the stupid act played out in your country by that right wing clown.
Violence leads to violence until that type of thought sinks in be more the same from both sides
In 1991 Islam was attacked, and the warfare that came out of that is still been played out around the glob, including the stupid act played out in your country by that right wing clown.
Violence leads to violence until that type of thought sinks in be more the same from both sides
------ This thread is Archived ------
olaix: In a attempt to deal with extremism, the French President has proposed new measures, which will allow prosecution of people visiting internet sites of hate and terror.
This has come in the aftermath of a ugly incidence in France, where the police ended up besieging a gunman belonging to a radical idea, who'd been killing several people before he got taken out by commandos.
Although everyone is frustrated about these terror events, and a natural psychological response is the desire to take out the root problem to prevent it from happening again, is punishment for visiting a site even close to a solution, and not even further away from our western traditional values (which was based on reason, not happy naive people)?
Sarkozy means well no doubt, but isn't it a little bit too "George Orwell" with a huge Orwell potential to punish people for looking at the "wrong" information?
Similar suggestions have drawn comparison to people visiting ch*ld pron, but I think its flawed, because for such thing to exist, there must already have happened a crime, and therefor punishment is valid.
The problem decoded - humans have a intention. I have mine, you have yours, but who else can really tell? for all you know, I may be thinking about putting a house on fire (lol) and you would never know before it was to late. And how could it be prevented as I never had problems with the law, or been under any similar form of attention?
I don't really think its that much harder to get a gun than a can of gasoline, if you know where to look. The Norwegian gunman who killed all the youths at Utøya, first blew up a building in Oslo, using fertilizer as component, so bombs are easily made too.
So, I find this approach to dealing with terrorism utter useless, peoples intention is created by what is happening around them, which means every birth is a potential terrorist.
Your opinion?
This has come in the aftermath of a ugly incidence in France, where the police ended up besieging a gunman belonging to a radical idea, who'd been killing several people before he got taken out by commandos.
Although everyone is frustrated about these terror events, and a natural psychological response is the desire to take out the root problem to prevent it from happening again, is punishment for visiting a site even close to a solution, and not even further away from our western traditional values (which was based on reason, not happy naive people)?
Sarkozy means well no doubt, but isn't it a little bit too "George Orwell" with a huge Orwell potential to punish people for looking at the "wrong" information?
Similar suggestions have drawn comparison to people visiting ch*ld pron, but I think its flawed, because for such thing to exist, there must already have happened a crime, and therefor punishment is valid.
The problem decoded - humans have a intention. I have mine, you have yours, but who else can really tell? for all you know, I may be thinking about putting a house on fire (lol) and you would never know before it was to late. And how could it be prevented as I never had problems with the law, or been under any similar form of attention?
I don't really think its that much harder to get a gun than a can of gasoline, if you know where to look. The Norwegian gunman who killed all the youths at Utøya, first blew up a building in Oslo, using fertilizer as component, so bombs are easily made too.
So, I find this approach to dealing with terrorism utter useless, peoples intention is created by what is happening around them, which means every birth is a potential terrorist.
Your opinion?
Not a good idea IMO for a lot of reasons you have mentioned.
I wish Governments would concentrate far more on education than control
------ This thread is Archived ------
robplum: Yeah the French President suffers from the mental disorder of like and dislike.
In 1991 Islam was attacked, and the warfare that came out of that is still been played out around the glob, including the stupid act played out in your country by that right wing clown.
Violence leads to violence until that type of thought sinks in be more the same from both sides
I'd say the confrontation between the west and Islam goes back a wee bit further than 1991.In 1991 Islam was attacked, and the warfare that came out of that is still been played out around the glob, including the stupid act played out in your country by that right wing clown.
Violence leads to violence until that type of thought sinks in be more the same from both sides
------ This thread is Archived ------
yeah it does but the current conflict appears more directly motivated form fairly recent events arising even if ongoing from Israel,Iraq and Afghanistan, But yes your right hard to find a recent beginning
------ This thread is Archived ------
it sounds extreme. part of what moderates extremists is the watchful eye of of the public when we speak up against extremists. so we need to be able to view these sites in order to monitor them. and that should not be left only to the government. plus I think when we are exposed to the thinking of extremists that is the best way to avoid or deter others and ourselves from becoming part of an extremist ideology (because most extremist ideologies are so ridiculous)
here in the US it would be a freedom of expression issue
here in the US it would be a freedom of expression issue
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conrad73: I'd say the confrontation between the west and Islam goes back a wee bit further than 1991.
yes, indeed, it would be difficult for Islamic extremists to find many sympathetic in the US....------ This thread is Archived ------
vinny1967: Not a good idea IMO for a lot of reasons you have mentioned.
I wish Governments would concentrate far more on education than control
I wish Governments would concentrate far more on education than control
agreed - depending on the agenda of the government in question...an UNeducated population is easier to control using fer based tactics
------ This thread is Archived ------
that is supposed to say using FEAR based tactics
------ This thread is Archived ------
olaix: ... incidence in France, where the police ended up besieging a gunman belonging to a radical idea, who'd been killing several people before he got taken out by commandos.
That's the official version of events anyway.
Another possibility is that the guy was a patsy.
It's an election year and the ruling president is very unpopular.
In his last election, 7 years ago, he won only because he ran on a platform of "law and order" and just by chance there was a sudden spate of "riots" in various housing projects around France.
I happened to be passing by one of these supposed riots as it was being filmed for the TV news.
There were only about 20 "rioters", they were all young teenage arabs with scarves over their faces and they were clearly being directed by the televisions crews. They stood around most of the time and only threw rocks when told to do so by media people with bullhorns. There were a few police nearby standing and watching the whole thing without any sort of response. There was no real riot at all.
When I saw the news report that evening it gave the impression that the whole neighborhood had been engulfed in serious rioting and that hundreds of people were involved.
In other words. The riots were totally staged for political reasons.
Now that the same politician has lost all of his popularity, (like Obama has as well) his only hope to stay in office is a crisis so big that people will gravitate to his law & order rhetoric out of fear.
Knowing this, I don't think it is beyond comprehension that puppet politicians (or rather the forces who own them) would be willing to sacrifice a few peasants through fake terrorist attacks in order to keep their regime in power.
Of course they will always have a patsy to take the blame. Preferably somebody they can kill (trials can be so messy).
------ This thread is Archived ------
olaix: In a attempt to deal with extremism, the French President has proposed new measures, which will allow prosecution of people visiting internet sites of hate and terror.
So ...
CS's days are numbered then ....------ This thread is Archived ------
Just read it,-and what can I say?
Sounds like everyday Sweden really,I´m no stranger to this.....
On a serious note however,-where is line drawn what is "hate" and not?
What´s controversial to someone,isn´t to somebody else...
Hey,we don´t have to look further than to this very Forum,to see how sensitive some people are,-handling out the "hate card",as soon as they find a reason.....
Sounds like everyday Sweden really,I´m no stranger to this.....
On a serious note however,-where is line drawn what is "hate" and not?
What´s controversial to someone,isn´t to somebody else...
Hey,we don´t have to look further than to this very Forum,to see how sensitive some people are,-handling out the "hate card",as soon as they find a reason.....
------ This thread is Archived ------
BB_snickers: So ... CS's days are numbered then ....
My sentiments exactly.
------ This thread is Archived ------
BB_snickers: So ... CS's days are numbered then ....
Only if you're French. I'm thinking about launching a terror attack on FB or POF though.....and E harmony....watch your back!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Godsgift: Only if you're French. I'm thinking about launching a terror attack on FB or POF though.....and E harmony....watch your back!
You little monkey you
------ This thread is Archived ------
RayfromUSA: That's the official version of events anyway.
Another possibility is that the guy was a patsy.
It's an election year and the ruling president is very unpopular.
In his last election, 7 years ago, he won only because he ran on a platform of "law and order" and just by chance there was a sudden spate of "riots" in various housing projects around France.
I happened to be passing by one of these supposed riots as it was being filmed for the TV news.
There were only about 20 "rioters", they were all young teenage arabs with scarves over their faces and they were clearly being directed by the televisions crews. They stood around most of the time and only threw rocks when told to do so by media people with bullhorns. There were a few police nearby standing and watching the whole thing without any sort of response. There was no real riot at all.
When I saw the news report that evening it gave the impression that the whole neighborhood had been engulfed in serious rioting and that hundreds of people were involved.
In other words. The riots were totally staged for political reasons.
Now that the same politician has lost all of his popularity, (like Obama has as well) his only hope to stay in office is a crisis so big that people will gravitate to his law & order rhetoric out of fear.
Knowing this, I don't think it is beyond comprehension that puppet politicians (or rather the forces who own them) would be willing to sacrifice a few peasants through fake terrorist attacks in order to keep their regime in power.
Of course they will always have a patsy to take the blame. Preferably somebody they can kill (trials can be so messy).
Another possibility is that the guy was a patsy.
It's an election year and the ruling president is very unpopular.
In his last election, 7 years ago, he won only because he ran on a platform of "law and order" and just by chance there was a sudden spate of "riots" in various housing projects around France.
I happened to be passing by one of these supposed riots as it was being filmed for the TV news.
There were only about 20 "rioters", they were all young teenage arabs with scarves over their faces and they were clearly being directed by the televisions crews. They stood around most of the time and only threw rocks when told to do so by media people with bullhorns. There were a few police nearby standing and watching the whole thing without any sort of response. There was no real riot at all.
When I saw the news report that evening it gave the impression that the whole neighborhood had been engulfed in serious rioting and that hundreds of people were involved.
In other words. The riots were totally staged for political reasons.
Now that the same politician has lost all of his popularity, (like Obama has as well) his only hope to stay in office is a crisis so big that people will gravitate to his law & order rhetoric out of fear.
Knowing this, I don't think it is beyond comprehension that puppet politicians (or rather the forces who own them) would be willing to sacrifice a few peasants through fake terrorist attacks in order to keep their regime in power.
Of course they will always have a patsy to take the blame. Preferably somebody they can kill (trials can be so messy).
A patsy? well maybe, but his brother says he is proud of what Mohammed Merah has done.
------ This thread is Archived ------
felixis99: An UNeducated population is easier to control using fear-based tactics
Yes indeed.
Here's a how-to manual.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Reveur: A patsy? well maybe, but his brother says he is proud of what Mohammed Merah has done.
At least that's what we're told.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Trump on Trial
beauty of the heart
who shaped your life?
biggest lie
Why is this shameful?
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
One week of the most outrageous GOP leadership!
Kultur-multur
Gal / sdarlagg passed away on April 10, 2024
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
1,509 Views
20 Comments
Created: Mar 2012
Last Viewed: 8 hrs ago
Last Commented: Mar 2012
0 Likes
Related Forums
- Trump on Trial
- beauty of the heart
- who shaped your life?
- biggest lie
- Why is this shameful?
- Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
- I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
- One week of the most outrageous GOP leadership!
- Kultur-multur
- Gal / sdarlagg passed away on April 10, 2024
This has come in the aftermath of a ugly incidence in France, where the police ended up besieging a gunman belonging to a radical idea, who'd been killing several people before he got taken out by commandos.
Although everyone is frustrated about these terror events, and a natural psychological response is the desire to take out the root problem to prevent it from happening again, is punishment for visiting a site even close to a solution, and not even further away from our western traditional values (which was based on reason, not happy naive people)?
Sarkozy means well no doubt, but isn't it a little bit too "George Orwell" with a huge Orwell potential to punish people for looking at the "wrong" information?
Similar suggestions have drawn comparison to people visiting ch*ld pron, but I think its flawed, because for such thing to exist, there must already have happened a crime, and therefor punishment is valid.
The problem decoded - humans have a intention. I have mine, you have yours, but who else can really tell? for all you know, I may be thinking about putting a house on fire (lol) and you would never know before it was to late. And how could it be prevented as I never had problems with the law, or been under any similar form of attention?
I don't really think its that much harder to get a gun than a can of gasoline, if you know where to look. The Norwegian gunman who killed all the youths at Utøya, first blew up a building in Oslo, using fertilizer as component, so bombs are easily made too.
So, I find this approach to dealing with terrorism utter useless, peoples intention is created by what is happening around them, which means every birth is a potential terrorist.
Your opinion?