De Lille urges crackdown on Internet blogs

Chavez said:
What an idiotic statement and gesture!!! :confused: What next, are they going to try and regulate all SMS's, emails and in fact the ENTIRE Internet?!?!?!?! :eek: Better not saying anything bad about her here....now now our forum gets regulated and shut down as well. :D
Click to expand...
Like the ANC is trying to shutdown the press with their Film&Publications ruse that is meant to protect children. And as has been explained many,many times now: Neither the SAPS, Thabo, NIA or the ferocious KokstadPadda that turned Kokstad into a ghost town for two days can prosecute or shutdown or force you to relicense you firearm: http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/LegalPerspective.

There is this vast continued delusion amongst lawyers and the pubilc that if the ANC decrees a law the Directors of Prosecution goes: Ja, baas ANC ons sal net doen wat baas ons se om te doen. Why is this message that the http://www.npa.gov.za don't take orders from the ANC not getting through?

Relax my friend, we have a constitution that protects us against ANC insanity - to bad that lawyers are in a conspiracy to prevent you from understanding this.
 
Last edited:
icyrus said:
Are you talking about hate speech and incitement to violence, cause those are already covered.
Click to expand...

So you don't believe that the africancrisis website perpetrates hate speech? Has anyone here (Except atho and edc) been to the africancrisis website? Do you or don't you agree that theirs is a crusade inspired by hatred?
 
Jozi101 said:
So you don't believe that the africancrisis website perpetrates hate speech? Has anyone here (Except atho and edc) been to the africancrisis website? Do you or don't you agree that theirs is a crusade inspired by hatred?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know as I haven't heard of it before you mentioned it.
 
Jozi101 said:
Yes accountability is required. Freedom of speech has to have boundaries and rules. Otherwise it gets taken advantage of by scumbags. We have people who truly believe that theirs is a superiour (race/relion/language etc etc). Such opinions only serve to enforce evil intentions and cannot be allowed to be aired.
Click to expand...

What good do you think it does to stop people airing any opinion? If some ******* thinks his race/religion/language is superior, do you think he will stop believing it if you stop him from saying it publicly? Or that he will stop talking about it in private?

I say get it all out there and lets talk about it no matter how evil it may seem to us.

You can't legislate opinion away. The only way to combat negative opinion is to openly debate those who hold negative opinions.
 
Jozi101 said:
Yes accountability is required. Freedom of speech has to have boundaries and rules. Otherwise it gets taken advantage of by scumbags. We have people who truly believe that theirs is a superiour (race/relion/language etc etc). Such opinions only serve to enforce evil intentions and cannot be allowed to be aired.
Click to expand...
Freedom of Speech by decree, statement, implication is exactly that and no other! Therefore no boundaries or rules otherwise it is not "freedom of speech" is it?!

Freedom of Speech is exactly that: and others can express similar or contrary opinions. I mean, you have a brain don't you? You have a sense of discernment don't you? You have a sense of right and wrong, don't you?

Is not criteria of race itself an aspect of the police state?! Yes, so now curtail opinion, I mean we are all senseless, brainless human beings with no sense of discernment etc. Yes, bring on the nanny state because we do not have brain enough to decide for ourselves!?

Catch a wakeup and realise YOU are perpetuating the aparthate state all over again!!!
 
So the ID is against free speech? :/ The most important type of free speech to allow, is that which you hate hearing the most.
 
Jozi101 said:
So you don't believe that the africancrisis website perpetrates hate speech? Has anyone here (Except atho and edc) been to the africancrisis website? Do you or don't you agree that theirs is a crusade inspired by hatred?
Click to expand...

I've seen it and I agree it is hate speech. What we should we do? Shut it down because it offends us? And when we say something that offends someone, should we shut up? Who decides what is offensive and what isn't? The majority? The government? If you want to censor, you've got to give someone the power to censor. I hope you know God personally, because if you think a human or a human institution has the wisdom to exercise that power then you are sadly deluded.

Incidently those a$$holes at africancrisis would love to be shut down by government, it would fulfill their persecution complex.
 
icyrus said:
I wouldn't know as I haven't heard of it before you mentioned it.
Click to expand...

That alright. You don't need to know it. I bumped into it on a coleague's work station one day, and it changed my perception of the types of racists we're dealing with in the country.

Ugly staff indeed.
 
So has anyone found the offending "internet blog"?

Damn I been googling every slanderous phrase involving Simon Grinrod, an ex-Springbok, an entertainer and a priest that I can think of - still no luck.
:)
 
@ Jozi101. Racism is bad right? Everybody knows that. Except of course the racists. Because the majority of us know its bad we'll ban it.

The majority of people in power in this country seem to believe that criticizing government is bad right? They are supported by the majority. Because the majority think criticism of government is bad we should ban it.

The ability to censor and ban is power. Power corrupts every time. EVERY TIME. Its human nature. The only way to protect ourselves from corruption is to limit power. When people have the power to say stuff that is offensive we know we are safe from corruption. Do we have absolute freedom of speech in this country? Not really. The corruption has already begun to creep in.

Your knee jerk reaction to things that offend you will lead to more corruption when a$$holes like de Lille demand more power to stop people from offending others.
 
chiskop said:
So has anyone found the offending "internet blog"?

Damn I been googling every slanderous phrase involving Simon Grinrod, an ex-Springbok, an entertainer and a priest that I can think of - still no luck.
:)
Click to expand...

Keep trying, I want to see it :)
 
Jozi101 said:
So you don't believe that the africancrisis website perpetrates hate speech? Has anyone here (Except atho and edc) been to the africancrisis website? Do you or don't you agree that theirs is a crusade inspired by hatred?
Click to expand...
africacrises has an agenda. It is plain to see. Why then spend time there? Why then use that as an example to downgrade freespeech if you yourself are not a proponent of banning, censorship and all those other aspects of the police state? Let's see now: racist criteria, banning and censorship, support of cartels, disregard for human life (crime and aids,) I mean, what do we have here? You tell me 'cause from what I can see so far it stinks (and don't make me look north to see the endgame!)
 
Jozi101 said:
So you don't believe that the africancrisis website perpetrates hate speech? Has anyone here (Except atho and edc) been to the africancrisis website? Do you or don't you agree that theirs is a crusade inspired by hatred?
Click to expand...

Jozi, stfu. I dislike you, even more so if you post defamatory comments about me in a forum I was not involved in. I don't even know of an African crises website. As you are engaged in defamatory comments concerning me and think censorship is a good idea, I propose we remove you from the forums.

Anyway, de Lille has lost my vote.
 
Anyway, someone private message me, I want to know who I need to contact about the problem Jozi.
 
open-letter

Abuse of the Internet is a problem, but censorship only makes things more difficult for the average user which is innocent, but any steps implemented, will be circumvented one way or another by those intent on it. Criminals, regardless of laws and regulations, will break the law. 'Punishing' the innocent users with measures to track illegal content, will by no means stop criminals.

Regardless of the content of media found on Internet, it is a means to keep the government in check, how would a person express his critic about a government, which falls in to decay and corruption without the Internet? The ANC is proof of this problem, and my solution, which is to fervently spread awareness whenever news articles about corruption is posted on official news sites.

I also believe it is impossible to control media on the Internet, China has tried and failed, it would also be impossible in South-Africa. Do not try push this idea further, since it is a joke. The practicalities are far above your current understanding. If I were to try send questionable content to a server in Belgium (where I have an account for my website), I would open an encrypted tunnel, similar to that used to send banking details and upload in peace. I have closely followed DA policies lately, but I now have misgivings about who I would want to vote for now.

If you want to perspective, visit http://yro.slashdot.org/ which discusses copyright, censorship and various related topics often. You will find that my views reflect the general opinion shared among users like me, who are aware of the proposed solutions to the problem.

If you wish to stop illegal content, you need to address the root of the problem, not the medium.
Click to expand...

Sent in an email to the DA.
 
Jozi101 said:
We have people who truly believe that theirs is a superiour (race/relion/language etc etc).
Click to expand...
All people have a belief that in some or other way they're superior - it's a survival of the fittest trait.

If you don't like a particular blog, you have the freedom not to read that blog. Our constitution protects people's rights to free speech, and there exists a subjective exclusion based on hate speech and criminal inference. In other words, there exists a high level of rules and laws which directly impacts and often even impedes ones right to the Freedom of Speech. It is exactly this argument that forms the oppositional crux of the newly proposed and aptly christened Media Gagging Bill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X