New government censorship threat

As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now we possibly have
foreign governments censoring western media within our own borders!

http://www.nist.org/news.php?extend.86

Hopefully we'll have the backbone and technical ability to stop it. Its

bad enough to have news agencies threatened, and people dying, over
cartoons. But now we may governments actively attacking our news media.

John Herron
at NIST.org

NIST.org

On 28 Feb 2006 21:45:15 -0800, "NIST.org" <>
wrote:

>As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now we possibly have
>foreign governments censoring western media within our own borders!
>
>http://www.nist.org/news.php?extend.86
>
>Hopefully we'll have the backbone and technical ability to stop it. Its
>
>bad enough to have news agencies threatened, and people dying, over
>cartoons. But now we may governments actively attacking our news media.

*******S

Yet another bit of propaganda to discredit the Iranians.

At one stage I had more Internet connectivity than Iran.

A DOS attack on a newspaper does not cost the paper anything,
however the people who worry about that sort of thing and fund the
countermeasures are the gaming sites. Its well known and
understood.

On a political note, the cartoons were plain offensive even if
you are not a believer, and the hipocracy of 'free speech' is seen
jailing David Irving for telling the truth about gas chambers
constructed in 1948 as a propaganda exercise.

Given the mess that the US has made of Iraq, who can blame
the Iranians in wanting to defend their way of life from the Great
Satan greedy for their oil.

--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt

Jim Watt <_way> wrote:

>On a political note, the cartoons were plain offensive even if
>you are not a believer,

What a nonsense. And even if they were, that's called freedom of speech.

>and the hipocracy of 'free speech' is seen
>jailing David Irving for telling the truth about gas chambers
>constructed in 1948 as a propaganda exercise.

I don't believe the nonsense Irving is writing, but I agree that jailing him
for his opinion is plain wrong.

>Given the mess that the US has made of Iraq, who can blame
>the Iranians in wanting to defend their way of life from the Great
>Satan greedy for their oil.

I can certainly understand why they would want nuclear weapons. However,
fortunately the US can't afford to invade Iran too.

--
ir. J.C.A. Wevers // Physics and science fiction site:
// http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/index.html
PGP/GPG public keys at http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/pgpkeys.html

Johan Wevers

On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 19:11:38 GMT, (Johan
Wevers) wrote:

>Jim Watt <_way> wrote:
>
>>On a political note, the cartoons were plain offensive even if
>>you are not a believer,
>
>What a nonsense. And even if they were, that's called freedom of speech.

How can you say 'nonsense' I found them offensive and exceedingly
stupid, not that the Danes are noted for their humour.

>I don't believe the nonsense Irving is writing, but I agree that jailing him
>for his opinion is plain wrong.

Firstly he is not being jailed for anything he has written but for
what he said, which happens to be true.

However, I think the consensus is that in terms of DOS attacks
the story is mindless propaganda.
..
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt

(Johan Wevers) writes:

>Jim Watt <_way> wrote:

>>On a political note, the cartoons were plain offensive even if
>>you are not a believer,

>What a nonsense. And even if they were, that's called freedom of speech.

Complete nonesense. There is not nor ever has been an issue of freedom of
speech. Freedom of speach does not mean that noone should get upset by
anything you say. It just means that you should not be prosecuted for your
political speech.

And where in the world has been the outcry against the jailing of Irving
for his speech in Austria? Or is freedom of speech only there when people
say something you do not object to? ( I think what he said was ignorant and
stupid, but if that were the criterion most of us would be in jail for
something we had said at some time in our lives).


The cartoons were silly, but the reprinting of them and the loud
protestations about freedom of speech were simply blatant hypocrisy.



>>and the hipocracy of 'free speech' is seen
>>jailing David Irving for telling the truth about gas chambers
>>constructed in 1948 as a propaganda exercise.

Hardly the truth. Even he admits that he was wrong.



>I don't believe the nonsense Irving is writing, but I agree that jailing him
>for his opinion is plain wrong.

And where are the mainstream newspapers reprinting his writings to protest against his
jailing?

Unruh

Unruh said


Towelheads!


>>Jim Watt <_way> wrote:
>
>>>On a political note, the cartoons were plain offensive even if
>>>you are not a believer,
>
>>What a nonsense. And even if they were, that's called freedom of
>>speech.
>
> Complete nonesense. There is not nor ever has been an issue of
> freedom of speech. Freedom of speach does not mean that noone
> should get upset by anything you say. It just means that you
> should not be prosecuted for your political speech.
>
> And where in the world has been the outcry against the jailing of
> Irving for his speech in Austria? Or is freedom of speech only
> there when people say something you do not object to? ( I think
> what he said was ignorant and stupid, but if that were the
> criterion most of us would be in jail for something we had said
> at some time in our lives).
>
>
> The cartoons were silly, but the reprinting of them and the loud
> protestations about freedom of speech were simply blatant
> hypocrisy.
>
>
>
>>>and the hipocracy of 'free speech' is seen
>>>jailing David Irving for telling the truth about gas chambers
>>>constructed in 1948 as a propaganda exercise.
>
> Hardly the truth. Even he admits that he was wrong.
>
>
>
>>I don't believe the nonsense Irving is writing, but I agree that
>>jailing him for his opinion is plain wrong.
>
> And where are the mainstream newspapers reprinting his writings
> to protest against his jailing?
>
>
>

A.Melon

On 2 Mar 2006 00:32:31 GMT, Unruh <unruh-> wrote:

>>>and the hipocracy of 'free speech' is seen
>>>jailing David Irving for telling the truth about gas chambers
>>>constructed in 1948 as a propaganda exercise.
>
>Hardly the truth. Even he admits that he was wrong.

He admits saying it was wrong, but its factually correct.

However, it seems that in Austrian law the truth of
things is not a defence.

Remind me not to go there. However none of this has
anything to do with computer security.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt

On 28 Feb 2006 21:45:15 -0800, "NIST.org" <>
wrote:

>As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now we possibly have
>foreign governments censoring western media within our own borders!
###################################
Does that mean they are going to censor all that right wing propaganda
that's I've been hearing since the 50s? Well, I'm glad someone is
thinking clearly.

donnie

donnie wrote:

> On 28 Feb 2006 21:45:15 -0800, "NIST.org" <> wrote:
>
>>As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now we possibly have foreign
>>governments censoring western media within our own borders!
> ###################################
> Does that mean they are going to censor all that right wing propaganda
> that's I've been hearing since the 50s? Well, I'm glad someone is
> thinking clearly.

<laugh>

Ya' know, I was thinking the same thing. If you were to somehow eliminate
the US news media industry from existence right now, the IQ of the average
US citizen would jump 20 points by tomorrow morning.

The US is one of the best places on earth for speaking your mind but
that's a double edged sword. It also means that anyone speaking their
mind has far more latitude when injecting their own bias. As with all
things, the more freedom something offers, the more it can be and will be
abused.

George Orwell

Jim Watt <_way> wrote in
news::

snip
> On a political note, the cartoons were plain offensive even if
> you are not a believer, and the hipocracy of 'free speech' is seen
> jailing David Irving for telling the truth about gas chambers
> constructed in 1948 as a propaganda exercise.

They were built considerably before 1948 sonny. Having watched hundreds
being herded into them and narrowly escaping that fate myself, I KNOW the
reality of the ovens.

Denying the holocaust is an exercise in stupidity. You're free to do so if
you wish, but it's not going to get you anything worthwhile. Some people
will laugh at you, others will hate you, most will wonder at your wilfull
ignorance of truth.

> Given the mess that the US has made of Iraq, who can blame
> the Iranians in wanting to defend their way of life from the Great
> Satan greedy for their oil.

If they're so evil and greedy for oil, why have they not taken any of it
yet? If you claim they have, please provide verifyable documentation.
I'll have you know that those Yanks are the second best thing that has
happened to the modern world. The re-birth of Israel being the best.

none