3 ms·

Huh? The US has been very aggressive about shutting down websites that spread Al-Qaeda and ISIS propaganda on most websites. ISIS basically caught everyone with

Huh? The US has been very aggressive about shutting down websites that spread Al-Qaeda and ISIS propaganda on most websites. ISIS basically caught everyone with their pants down spreading their stuff on social media, but once people started noticing it, it was purged rapidly. It's not my view, but you could make the argument than the original sin was censoring Al-Qaeda content post-9/11. Obviously, nobody complained. Now the same tactics are being turned against the far-right and people have discovered a new love for free speech.

Miner49er 7y ago
Yeah, maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I didn't see any people protecting ISIS's free speech. Now that this censorship is targeting other hate speech, suddenly everyone is shouting "free speech". The fact is, most people calling for free speech don't truly believe in it, they just want to be able to spout their own version of hate.
- spamizbad 7y ago
  FWIW, there were a small group of people raising concerns about how the government went about shutting down "terrorist" websites after 9/11 but it largely fell on deaf ears. These people have been ideologically consistent, but they're outside of the political mainstream.
  - brianmc21 7y ago
    Also consider the fact that even if you do support free speech speaking out against censorship of a terrorist organization is only going to lead to blowback because you are supporting the enemy.
    - Joakal 7y ago
      First they came for al Qaeda content, Then they came for ISIS comtent, Then...
      - spamizbad 7y ago
        Basically this. It was Pandora’s Box.
  - acct1771 7y ago
    We're the same people that think PayPal shouldn't be allowed to seize your funds for writing "ISIS Beer Fund" on a $40 toss over to your mate...
darkpuma 7y ago
> "Huh? The US has been very aggressive about shutting down websites that spread Al-Qaeda and ISIS propaganda on most websites" You mean like archive.org? That's the website I've seen hosting all the ISIS shit.
- spamizbad 7y ago
  True, there's a few other "ISIS archives" that are used largely by intelligence analysts, journalists, historians, and academics for study. But I don't think NZ is saying "Hey journalists and academics, don't study a dump of 8chan!"
  - makomk 7y ago
    What NZ has been saying is that there should be no way for an ordinary, unaccredited member of the public to view any archived copies of any of the Christchurch killer's propaganda anywhere online, something normal internet users apparently can do with ISIS propaganda via archive.org. They've been quite consistent about this since day zero, from what I can tell.
  - hulahoof 7y ago
    I wouldn't be so sure, following the aftermath of Christchurch my network (AU) and several others have not unblocked the Chan's. I don't believe they are planning to either.
    - int_19h 7y ago
      Can you clarify if there are actual legal restrictions on that content in place, or is this still unilateral ISP action?
      - hulahoof 7y ago
        There are no current legal restrictions as I understand, it is the decision of my provider to continue restricting this access. The restrictions are not unilateral, the largest ISP has released the restrictions. I will be changing providers as soon as my contract allows.

Miner49er 7y ago

Yeah, maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I didn't see any people protecting ISIS's free speech. Now that this censorship is targeting other hate speech, suddenly everyone is shouting "free speech". The fact is, most people calling for free speech don't truly believe in it, they just want to be able to spout their own version of hate.

spamizbad 7y ago
FWIW, there were a small group of people raising concerns about how the government went about shutting down "terrorist" websites after 9/11 but it largely fell on deaf ears. These people have been ideologically consistent, but they're outside of the political mainstream.
- brianmc21 7y ago
  Also consider the fact that even if you do support free speech speaking out against censorship of a terrorist organization is only going to lead to blowback because you are supporting the enemy.
  - Joakal 7y ago
    First they came for al Qaeda content, Then they came for ISIS comtent, Then...
    - spamizbad 7y ago
      Basically this. It was Pandora’s Box.
- acct1771 7y ago
  We're the same people that think PayPal shouldn't be allowed to seize your funds for writing "ISIS Beer Fund" on a $40 toss over to your mate...

darkpuma 7y ago

> "Huh? The US has been very aggressive about shutting down websites that spread Al-Qaeda and ISIS propaganda on most websites" You mean like archive.org? That's the website I've seen hosting all the ISIS shit.

spamizbad 7y ago
True, there's a few other "ISIS archives" that are used largely by intelligence analysts, journalists, historians, and academics for study. But I don't think NZ is saying "Hey journalists and academics, don't study a dump of 8chan!"
- makomk 7y ago
  What NZ has been saying is that there should be no way for an ordinary, unaccredited member of the public to view any archived copies of any of the Christchurch killer's propaganda anywhere online, something normal internet users apparently can do with ISIS propaganda via archive.org. They've been quite consistent about this since day zero, from what I can tell.
- hulahoof 7y ago
  I wouldn't be so sure, following the aftermath of Christchurch my network (AU) and several others have not unblocked the Chan's. I don't believe they are planning to either.
  - int_19h 7y ago
    Can you clarify if there are actual legal restrictions on that content in place, or is this still unilateral ISP action?
    - hulahoof 7y ago
      There are no current legal restrictions as I understand, it is the decision of my provider to continue restricting this access. The restrictions are not unilateral, the largest ISP has released the restrictions. I will be changing providers as soon as my contract allows.