1  |   Order by index

Nov 15, 2002, 4:27pm

WASHINGTON--The Bush administration said on Friday that it will not support a proposed treaty to restrict "hate speech" on the Internet.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?N46523672

FYI
Leo :)

Nov 15, 2002, 5:01pm

That's good to hear, because with some perople saying good morning to them is enough to advocate, promote or incite hatred and discrimination... which means that if they passed a treaty which made it illegal to distribute anything which might cause one of those reactions then either such people would have to be somehow "eliminated" or all communications would have to cease. And I do mean "all" communications, because even a personal note to your closest friend might some day result at least indirectly in such a reaction by somebody someplace on the planet.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Nov 15, 2002, 8:47pm

An identity claiming to be known as "binarybud" <leom at knorrinteractive.com> scribed the following <3dd53c99$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com> in community:

>WASHINGTON--The Bush administration said on Friday that it will not support a proposed treaty to restrict "hate speech" on the Internet.
>
>http://makeashorterlink.com/?N46523672

Well this does belong in 'general-discussion' :o)

[Followup-To: general.discussion]


--
,,,,,
(o o)
/--------------ooO--(_)--Ooo--------------\
| Anduin (317281) |
| o The Gorean Scribe |
| o http://www.anduin-lothario.com |
| o World: GorSJ (Under Construction) |
\--------------ooO-------Ooo--------------/

Nov 15, 2002, 9:09pm

And besides, how can anyone think they can control the entire Internet?
At best, the US Government can only prevent "hate speech" from being
hosted on US servers.

[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Hates hate speech legislation...
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Nov 15, 2002, 11:01pm

Ah thats nice.... Couldent care less because im in the UK like.. but all the same.

Besides, its for the people to sort out, not the idiotic Bush admin that would rather get the world nuked than engage in diplomacy.

- Mark
This Post was writeen after: 2 Bacardi Breezers, 3 Smirnof Ices's, 2 Vodka and Cokes and 1 double vodka shot. So dont take offence if your Bush or 1 of his cronies...

[View Quote]

Nov 15, 2002, 11:24pm

*barf*

[View Quote] 2 Vodka and Cokes and 1 double vodka shot.

Nov 16, 2002, 12:38am

I think you misunderstood the post. The proposal was for a treaty between
many countries. Thus, it wouldn't only be the US who would be dealing with
hate speech.

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 12:49am

My point still applies. How can *anyone* believe they can control the
Internet, be they one country or many? The only possible way to have
truly effective legislation would be if every single technologically
advanced country in the world agreed to the same piece of legislation
*and* actually bothered to enforce it! And I'm sorry, but that just
isn't going to happen.

Therefore, woo Bush! :D

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Maybe Al Gore came up with the treaty... after all, he invented it!
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Nov 16, 2002, 12:51am

Either you're lying through your teeth, or you're having someone dictate
for you in your unconscious stupor. That much alcohol could flatten an
elephant! :P

[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Imagine the effect it could have on a minor...
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Nov 16, 2002, 3:07am

Yeah, it's generally not a good idea to add laws that can not be enforced, because it just adds to the concensus that laws were "made to be broken" which is already a bit too common in the U.S., and I would guess probably in many other countries as well. All a law like that would do is give people who like to take unfair advantage of the legal system to hurt other people one more way to do so. That wouldn't be justice. It would be legalizing and assisting something very unjust.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 3:11am

Perhaps it was consumed over the course of a lifetime. He only said it was "after" all that... not how long after. :)

TZ


[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 7:53am

Over 5 hours, that's nothing compared to what some people had. Was quite funny as that's the first time Ive drank alcohol and it didnt really effect me (although after the first vodka and coke I did get kinda wobbly so I waited for another hour before having another) but 1 girl couldent even stand >:) We had to help her stand up long enough to walk home.

- Mark

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 10:28am

Careful. When you find yourself saying that alcahol doesn't effect you, it usually means you either don't remember what effect it had, or you were incapable of noticing the effect it had. Either of those two conditions are bad news, and a good indicator that you could easily become a problem drinker.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 10:51am

I can remember pritty much all of it, and it did have an effect, I started having some trouble focusing, so I realised and stopped drinking for the night. prob solved.

- Mark
Breath deeply, drink pleanty of water, and Go outside and cool off at least every half an hour.

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 10:53am

Anyhow, I cant believe all this started because of 1 signiture I added because I was feeling rather entertaining. >_<

- Mark
[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 11:24am

Well, when you've seen what alcahol can do to people's lives you tend to take it pretty seriously. By the way I've talked to people who were so drunk they couldn't say what their own name was, recite the alphabet as far as the letter F without making a mistake, or stand up without someone guiding them, who swore they weren't drunk and that alcahol doesn't effect them. Think about it. You have stated that you got wobbly, had trouble focusing, and were completely uneffected. I'm not trying to get on your case, but you really should be careful with alcahol. Lots of people have died from it without ever realizing they were in any danger. People who don't care won't tell you this kind of stuff, so try to take the fact that someone said something as a good sign and listen to the words of caution before you end up being another number in the statistics.

TechnoZeus

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 2002, 11:41am

It doesn't help that you're underage. :P

[View Quote]
--
Goober King
It's an assumption... but a safe one...
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Nov 17, 2002, 9:01pm

How? The same way that a country and war with others for doing something
that they don't agree with...


[View Quote]

Nov 17, 2002, 9:41pm

Umm, unless you failed geography class, the world is still a very big
place. It's physically impossible to enforce a rule that spans the
entire globe, even if you try to go to war with all the disobedient
countries. Besides, the idea of going to war over a couple Internet
rules is just plain lame. :P

[View Quote]
--
Goober King
At least Metallica would be right on the front lines!
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Nov 18, 2002, 2:58am

I was being sarcastic

I was comparing how it was contradictory of the U.S. to say NO to this bill
because they do not feel they neccessarily always "right" when they kill
millions of innocent people for doing something that the U.S. felt was not
"right"

.. . .

[View Quote]

Nov 18, 2002, 9:55am

Exactly WHICH 'millions of people' are you talking about ? I don't recall this mass murder you seem to have contrived in your
mind.......

[View Quote]

Nov 19, 2002, 2:32am

Watch the news.

[View Quote]

Nov 19, 2002, 9:54am

watch WHAT news ? sheesh....... what the heck are you talking about ?


[View Quote]

Nov 24, 2002, 10:02pm

**smells flames**

[View Quote]

Nov 24, 2002, 11:52pm

*gets petrol and fuels*

[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index