4 ms·

The Christchurch shooter amassed a cache of weapons, and also posted a copy of his manifesto and a link to his real Facebook account to 4chan. The censorship/F

by elken 7y ago

The Christchurch shooter amassed a cache of weapons, and also posted a copy of his manifesto and a link to his real Facebook account to 4chan. The censorship/Facebook algorithms amplifying abhorrent content debate is one thing but I'm surprised by the lack of scrutiny of the security services over this. Especially for a member of the 5 Eyes. I can't help but feel this could have been prevented without any of the changes being proposed.

LilBytes 7y ago
4Chan and LiveLeak have both been blocked (via DNS) in Australia and New Zealand. So, the scrutiny albeit region specific has occurred.
- elken 7y ago
  I don't think you understood my point. Blocking websites is not scrutiny of the intelligence services. I'm saying an individual with weapons doxed himself and telegraphed his intentions on a public forum and the security services completely missed it. That could all have been be picked up without any new laws or intervention from Facebook. We need to analyse how it was missed and learn from it.
  - LilBytes 7y ago
    Ah I see, I did misunderstand. I agree with your comments entirely.
- 0xADEADBEE 7y ago
  Just to expand on this a little bit, it is contingent on ISP and as far as I know, the following websites: - voat.co - 4chan.org - 8ch.net - liveleak.com - archive.is - bitchute.com - zerohedge.com - kiwifarms.net I think I'm right in saying that Telstra, Optus and Vodafone are the 'Big Three', and they have blocked the above. Here in NZ, It's Vodafone, Spark and 2 Degrees, all of whom, I understand, blocked access, though I've been unable to verify this first-hand. There are also hefty prison sentences [0] (up to 14 years) and fines for people who read/distributed the manifesto and watched/shared the original footage. Edit: More comprehensive block-list can be found here: [1] [0] - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/world/asia/new-zealand-attacks-social-media.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/world/asia/new-zealand-at... [1] - https://www.citizensagainstidiocracy.com/93/internet-censorship-in-australia-and-new-zealand-who-decides https://www.citizensagainstidiocracy.com/93/internet-censors...
  - int_19h 7y ago
    Wait, are you saying that watching the video is considered a crime in and of itself? Not redistribution, and not even mere possession, but just seeing it?
    - PorterDuff 7y ago
      Evidently you can't even read the manifesto (which involves possession of course. Dunno if you get in trouble for reading it over someone's shoulder). https://qz.com/1579660/new-zealands-manifesto-ban-explained-by-its-chief-censor/ https://qz.com/1579660/new-zealands-manifesto-ban-explained-... According to that article, having a copy is worth 10 years in the pokey.
      - stallmanite 7y ago
        Well that makes me want to go read the damn thing. Good job NZ. This is why you get left off maps.
    - Taniwha 7y ago
      Certainly, like child porn, watching snuff movies was already illegal in NZ before the alt-right terrorist attack, all the NZ censor did was confirm that the snuff movie fell under that category, it was essentially born illegal. No one passed any special new laws to make it so. It also falls under the US supreme court test for obscenity and is equally illegal in the US
      - asdf21 7y ago
        >It also falls under the US supreme court test for obscenity and is equally illegal in the US I don't think that's correct. There are no federal obscenity laws. The U.S. government does not expressly prohibit obscene conduct. In fact, the U.S. government expressly protects some communications in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. https://legalcareerpath.com/obscenity-law/ https://legalcareerpath.com/obscenity-law/
- mr_toad 7y ago
  And according to my kids ‘everyone’ at school uses VPNs. The only people who don’t have access to these sites are the people who don’t want to see it.
EdwardDiego 7y ago
The Royal Commission of Inquiry is just beginning and will specifically focus on what the relevant agencies did, or failed to do.
- pryce 7y ago
  One of the questions the public is asking them is why White Supremacy is not mentioned in 10 years of NZ SIS and GCSB reports. For readers unfamiliar with the agencies involved, the NZ SIS is NZ's domestic intelligence agency, whereas the GCSB is ostensibly focused on foreign intelligence.
roca 7y ago
AFAIK (and according to Wikipedia) the manifesto was only posted "minutes before the attacks began". There wasn't any system for gun tracking that would let any agency detect he was amassing a cache. That is likely to change.

by elken 7y ago

LilBytes 7y ago

4Chan and LiveLeak have both been blocked (via DNS) in Australia and New Zealand. So, the scrutiny albeit region specific has occurred.

elken 7y ago
I don't think you understood my point. Blocking websites is not scrutiny of the intelligence services. I'm saying an individual with weapons doxed himself and telegraphed his intentions on a public forum and the security services completely missed it. That could all have been be picked up without any new laws or intervention from Facebook. We need to analyse how it was missed and learn from it.
- LilBytes 7y ago
  Ah I see, I did misunderstand. I agree with your comments entirely.
0xADEADBEE 7y ago
Just to expand on this a little bit, it is contingent on ISP and as far as I know, the following websites: - voat.co - 4chan.org - 8ch.net - liveleak.com - archive.is - bitchute.com - zerohedge.com - kiwifarms.net I think I'm right in saying that Telstra, Optus and Vodafone are the 'Big Three', and they have blocked the above. Here in NZ, It's Vodafone, Spark and 2 Degrees, all of whom, I understand, blocked access, though I've been unable to verify this first-hand. There are also hefty prison sentences [0] (up to 14 years) and fines for people who read/distributed the manifesto and watched/shared the original footage. Edit: More comprehensive block-list can be found here: [1] [0] - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/world/asia/new-zealand-attacks-social-media.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/world/asia/new-zealand-at... [1] - https://www.citizensagainstidiocracy.com/93/internet-censorship-in-australia-and-new-zealand-who-decides https://www.citizensagainstidiocracy.com/93/internet-censors...
- int_19h 7y ago
  Wait, are you saying that watching the video is considered a crime in and of itself? Not redistribution, and not even mere possession, but just seeing it?
  - PorterDuff 7y ago
    Evidently you can't even read the manifesto (which involves possession of course. Dunno if you get in trouble for reading it over someone's shoulder). https://qz.com/1579660/new-zealands-manifesto-ban-explained-by-its-chief-censor/ https://qz.com/1579660/new-zealands-manifesto-ban-explained-... According to that article, having a copy is worth 10 years in the pokey.
    - stallmanite 7y ago
      Well that makes me want to go read the damn thing. Good job NZ. This is why you get left off maps.
  - Taniwha 7y ago
    Certainly, like child porn, watching snuff movies was already illegal in NZ before the alt-right terrorist attack, all the NZ censor did was confirm that the snuff movie fell under that category, it was essentially born illegal. No one passed any special new laws to make it so. It also falls under the US supreme court test for obscenity and is equally illegal in the US
    - asdf21 7y ago
      >It also falls under the US supreme court test for obscenity and is equally illegal in the US I don't think that's correct. There are no federal obscenity laws. The U.S. government does not expressly prohibit obscene conduct. In fact, the U.S. government expressly protects some communications in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. https://legalcareerpath.com/obscenity-law/ https://legalcareerpath.com/obscenity-law/
mr_toad 7y ago
And according to my kids ‘everyone’ at school uses VPNs. The only people who don’t have access to these sites are the people who don’t want to see it.

EdwardDiego 7y ago

The Royal Commission of Inquiry is just beginning and will specifically focus on what the relevant agencies did, or failed to do.

pryce 7y ago
One of the questions the public is asking them is why White Supremacy is not mentioned in 10 years of NZ SIS and GCSB reports. For readers unfamiliar with the agencies involved, the NZ SIS is NZ's domestic intelligence agency, whereas the GCSB is ostensibly focused on foreign intelligence.

roca 7y ago

AFAIK (and according to Wikipedia) the manifesto was only posted "minutes before the attacks began". There wasn't any system for gun tracking that would let any agency detect he was amassing a cache. That is likely to change.