Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: Govt sets target for blocking child porn sites

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Percy Picacity

unread,
May 20, 2006, 11:27:42 AM5/20/06
to
Dave J. <req...@freeuk.com> wrote in
news:o6vt629ibq8bvo05n...@4ax.com:

> In MsgID<4d464eF...@individual.net> within
> uk.politics.censorship, 'Simon Dobson' wrote:
>
>>Cub Reporter wrote:
>>>
>>> The Home Office had admitted that it had considered blocking
>>> websites that "glorified terrorism" under the Terrorism Act
>>> (2006).....
>>
>>That slippery slope is on its way.
>
> ITYM we're halfway down it, the pit at the bottom is becoming
> visible.
>
> Dave J.
>

I should like to know whether those members of the IWF who assured
us that they were not part of a government controlled censorship
body will now resign.

I wonder, given the difficulty journalists usually have with facts,
whether the only internet access being blocked is to web sites? I
discount the blocking of individual news groups on ISPs' own
servers, because that is a slightly different matter.

--
Percy Picacity

PeteM

unread,
May 20, 2006, 12:38:22 PM5/20/06
to
Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> posted

>I wonder, given the difficulty journalists usually have with facts,
>whether the only internet access being blocked is to web sites? I
>discount the blocking of individual news groups on ISPs' own
>servers, because that is a slightly different matter.
>

What else did you have in mind?

--
PeteM

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Percy Picacity

unread,
May 20, 2006, 5:24:46 PM5/20/06
to
PeteM <Ot...@callnetuk.com> wrote in
news:cCrTxIA+...@callnetuk.com:

> Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> posted
>>I wonder, given the difficulty journalists usually have with facts,
>>whether the only internet access being blocked is to web sites? I
>>discount the blocking of individual news groups on ISPs' own
>>servers, because that is a slightly different matter.
>>
>
> What else did you have in mind?
>

Well if I was the Chinese^WSaudi^WUK govt. I would not want want my
citizens signing up for shell accounts in free countries, using
encrypted p2p networks, joining subversive mailing lists, using
subversive news servers, or otherwise showing an unhealthy tendency to
want to glorify terrorism. I'd want them to stick to web portals and
read about Big Brother and football and nasty asylum seekers, and buy
mail order "bargains".

--
Percy Picacity

Message has been deleted

Percy Picacity

unread,
May 21, 2006, 4:29:00 AM5/21/06
to
TrueFacts.co.uk Editor <null...@truefacts.co.uk> wrote in
news:4e2a34653...@truefacts.co.uk:


> I can only assume that you have no experience of cryptography or
> that your posting was a tongue in cheek attempt at satire?
>

You're not an American are you? I didn't think I was that subtle.

(follow-ups unset, as uk.net.regulation has occasionally in the past
been visited by rather sheepish IWF members trying to justify their
obvious complicity in censorship)

--
Percy Picacity

0 new messages