|
|
Post by bancroft on Aug 26, 2023 18:48:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 26, 2023 20:10:00 GMT
This is dangerous, it's another step towards a Chinese credit system. It's censorship, state state sponsored moderation.
Never forget, Big Brother is watching.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutchyns on Aug 26, 2023 20:14:51 GMT
The Eurocrats might be feeling pretty pleased with themselves, but just wait until we fully unveil our Online Harms Act ..... we can top that I'm sure ..... and additionally if we can get a Labour Government into power, as far as the big government and State inference and control stakes are concerned, we'll choke the internet of its last breaths of freedom quicker that the Eurocrats can say 'Jacques Delors'. And I bet they couldn't have kept Assange locked up in prison as long as we have, just in case Sleepy Joe has plans for him. Anything they can do, we can do better !
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Aug 26, 2023 20:26:29 GMT
This is dangerous, it's another step towards a Chinese credit system. It's censorship, state state sponsored moderation. Never forget, Big Brother is watching. So you just believed everything he posted. Did you not think that as he had to quote from an obscure site called Aletho might be a clue that there might be a fib or a hundred in there? Is the DSA perfect? I very much doubt it but it's far better than what pervades now with all sorts of harmful content freely exchanged on the large web platforms who frankly don't give a shit as long as they make money. And if you read sensible accounts of the DSA it's very much those large platforms that it places burdens on. www.politico.eu/article/dsa-x-twitter-facebook-meta-snapchat-tiktok-google-instagram-content-law/ |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 26, 2023 20:44:24 GMT
This is dangerous, it's another step towards a Chinese credit system. It's censorship, state state sponsored moderation. Never forget, Big Brother is watching. So you just believed everything he posted. Did you not think that as he had to quote from an obscure site called Aletho might be a clue that there might be a fib or a hundred in there? Is the DSA perfect? I very much doubt it but it's far better than what pervades now with all sorts of harmful content freely exchanged on the large web platforms who frankly don't give a shit as long as they make money. And if you read sensible accounts of the DSA it's very much those large platforms that it places burdens on. www.politico.eu/article/dsa-x-twitter-facebook-meta-snapchat-tiktok-google-instagram-content-law/ Who are the arbiters of offence, who decides what harmful content is, the EU? You have to be joking, the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims, and you trust the EU to decide what harmful content is? I am my own moderator, I decide what I want to watch or read. I don't need the nanny state or the EU to vet or censor anything. If I don't like something I wont watch or read it. Christ almighty, what is it with lefties why are they so weak? Why do they need constant guidance. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 26, 2023 20:52:51 GMT
The Eurocrats might be feeling pretty pleased with themselves, but just wait until we fully unveil our Online Harms Act ..... we can top that I'm sure ..... and additionally if we can get a Labour Government into power, as far as the big government and State inference and control stakes are concerned, we'll choke the internet of its last breaths of freedom quicker that the Eurocrats can say 'Jacques Delors'. And I bet they couldn't have kept Assange locked up in prison as long as we have, just in case Sleepy Joe has plans for him. Anything they can do, we can do better ! Sadly I suspect you are right. The government will always claim to protect free speech, but I sense there will soon be a caveat in the small print that says - as long as we agree. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Aug 26, 2023 21:01:26 GMT
So you just believed everything he posted. Did you not think that as he had to quote from an obscure site called Aletho might be a clue that there might be a fib or a hundred in there? Is the DSA perfect? I very much doubt it but it's far better than what pervades now with all sorts of harmful content freely exchanged on the large web platforms who frankly don't give a shit as long as they make money. And if you read sensible accounts of the DSA it's very much those large platforms that it places burdens on. www.politico.eu/article/dsa-x-twitter-facebook-meta-snapchat-tiktok-google-instagram-content-law/ Who are the arbiters of offence, who decides what harmful content is, the EU? You have to be joking, the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims, and you trust the EU to decide what harmful content is? I am my own moderator, I decide what I want to watch or read. I don't need the nanny state or the EU to vet or censor anything. If I don't like something I wont watch or read it. Christ almighty, what is it with lefties why are they so weak? Why do they need constant guidance. The courts are the arbiters. And go on I'll bite: Show me when ' the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims' Sounds very unlikely. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 26, 2023 21:31:43 GMT
Who are the arbiters of offence, who decides what harmful content is, the EU? You have to be joking, the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims, and you trust the EU to decide what harmful content is? I am my own moderator, I decide what I want to watch or read. I don't need the nanny state or the EU to vet or censor anything. If I don't like something I wont watch or read it. Christ almighty, what is it with lefties why are they so weak? Why do they need constant guidance. The courts are the arbiters. And go on I'll bite: Show me when ' the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims' Sounds very unlikely. The courts are not the arbiters of offence. The courts are the arbiters of the law. As appeal court judge The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Sedley said, and I quote... ... "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not a freedom worth having".
Obviously the EU and outraged lefties disagree. Somehow I thought you might ask - link |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 26, 2023 21:35:06 GMT
The Eurocrats might be feeling pretty pleased with themselves, but just wait until we fully unveil our Online Harms Act ..... we can top that I'm sure ..... and additionally if we can get a Labour Government into power, as far as the big government and State inference and control stakes are concerned, we'll choke the internet of its last breaths of freedom quicker that the Eurocrats can say 'Jacques Delors'. And I bet they couldn't have kept Assange locked up in prison as long as we have, just in case Sleepy Joe has plans for him. Anything they can do, we can do better ! This thread is about the EU - the UK is not in the EU.. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Aug 26, 2023 23:50:51 GMT
The courts are the arbiters. And go on I'll bite: Show me when ' the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims' Sounds very unlikely. The courts are not the arbiters of offence. The courts are the arbiters of the law. As appeal court judge The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Sedley said, and I quote... ... "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not a freedom worth having".
Obviously the EU and outraged lefties disagree. Somehow I thought you might ask - linkActually the courts are very much those very arbiters and the issue isn't about offence it's about people abusing children on line, selling fake goods and spreading libel and all the time the Facebooks and Amazons of this world say 'well don't blame us'. And you have completely failed to answer that question. I'll try again: Show me when ' the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims' |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 26, 2023 23:51:12 GMT
The Eurocrats might be feeling pretty pleased with themselves, but just wait until we fully unveil our Online Harms Act ..... we can top that I'm sure ..... and additionally if we can get a Labour Government into power, as far as the big government and State inference and control stakes are concerned, we'll choke the internet of its last breaths of freedom quicker that the Eurocrats can say 'Jacques Delors'. And I bet they couldn't have kept Assange locked up in prison as long as we have, just in case Sleepy Joe has plans for him. Anything they can do, we can do better ! This thread is about the EU - the UK is not in the EU.. Well spotted. I suggest Hutchyns should be charged with bringing the thread and indeed the forum into disrepute. What charge? Ermm... a piffling detail that will be sorted by the time the guilty party is marched in. Since Pacifico highlighted Hutchyns crime, I think it's only fair that he is judge. Of course a suitably qualified lefty should act as council for the defence, may I suggest... Monte, yes Monte. And council for the prosecution, ermmm... since it's an open and shut case, clearly the accused is guilty I think I might have a go meself lol. Remind me again, the black cap thingy... |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 27, 2023 0:05:14 GMT
The courts are not the arbiters of offence. The courts are the arbiters of the law. As appeal court judge The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Sedley said, and I quote... ... "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not a freedom worth having".
Obviously the EU and outraged lefties disagree. Somehow I thought you might ask - linkActually the courts are very much those very arbiters and the issue isn't about offence it's about people abusing children on line, selling fake goods and spreading libel and all the time the Facebooks and Amazons of this world say 'well don't blame us'. And you have completely failed to answer that question. I'll try again: Show me when ' the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims'Oh ffs no, please god no, don't tell me you've put your pedants hat on! OK, I'll play. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) said "it is no coincidence that racist violence is on the rise in the UK at the same time as we see worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in the newspapers", which is why they had the front to issue a recommendation to the British government that Muslim terrorists should not be identified. At the time the UK was a member state which meant 'recommendations' were an instruction. By the way, this is the same European Commission that says housing poor downtrodden refugees in tents and containers is perfectly acceptable. Stephen, it's all in the link I provided, if you have access to google and I suspect you have, you will find plenty more. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Aug 27, 2023 0:57:01 GMT
Actually the courts are very much those very arbiters and the issue isn't about offence it's about people abusing children on line, selling fake goods and spreading libel and all the time the Facebooks and Amazons of this world say 'well don't blame us'. And you have completely failed to answer that question. I'll try again: Show me when ' the EU attempted to ban the British press from mentioning when terrorists were Muslims'Oh ffs no, please god no, don't tell me you've put your pedants hat on! OK, I'll play. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) said "it is no coincidence that racist violence is on the rise in the UK at the same time as we see worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in the newspapers", which is why they had the front to issue a recommendation to the British government that Muslim terrorists should not be identified. At the time the UK was a member state which meant 'recommendations' were an instruction. By the way, this is the same European Commission that says housing poor downtrodden refugees in tents and containers is perfectly acceptable. Stephen, it's all in the link I provided, if you have access to google and I suspect you have, you will find plenty more.  How completely stupid of you Rouge. The ECRI is NOT an EU body. This is basic stuff you've been told about before but it just never gets through that skull of your does it. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 27, 2023 1:25:05 GMT
Oh ffs no, please god no, don't tell me you've put your pedants hat on! OK, I'll play. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) said "it is no coincidence that racist violence is on the rise in the UK at the same time as we see worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in the newspapers", which is why they had the front to issue a recommendation to the British government that Muslim terrorists should not be identified. At the time the UK was a member state which meant 'recommendations' were an instruction. By the way, this is the same European Commission that says housing poor downtrodden refugees in tents and containers is perfectly acceptable. Stephen, it's all in the link I provided, if you have access to google and I suspect you have, you will find plenty more. How completely stupid of you Rouge. The ECRI is NOT an EU body. This is basic stuff you've been told about before but it just never gets through that skull of your does it. LOL, no honestly, I laughed. I wish you wouldn't call me rouge, it's as if you're comming on to me, it sounds kinda gay. Trust me, Mrs R would not appreciate that. As for the rest of your gibberish, read the fekin link. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Aug 27, 2023 6:18:58 GMT
GULP.
No more "nativist narratives" about citizens feeling swamped in their own country by tidal immigration. Bang, we'll stamp this kind of "misinformation" out. Criticism and even dissent of Gender woke, sexual narratives and no doubt minor attraction sexuality will also be censored/cancelled.
The West is sleepwalking into an abyss of regressive-ness and being told how to think and communicate by the Thought Police (EU). It's all a bit dystopian. It's all a bit Orwellian.
|
|
