deskthority

I'm not sure what's happening, I get same messages on PMs and in this topic.


Not at all! I actually love both EU and Germany. Actually, Germany is my 2nd favorite country in the world, right after Japan.

I am just criticizing some of the things your government is pulling off lately - internet censorship. And it DEFINITELY is.

Just because you dislike the tires on a car, it doesn't mean you hate it.

And you know what? I wouldn't even have anything against it, if you weren't trying to push the same censorship on us.

There is no internet censorship in Germany. Your Germany phobia is apparent (to me). Why not just admit it, nothing wrong with that. Do you also happen to believe that Germany is responsible for all bad things in this world?

adhoc wrote: And you know what? I wouldn't even have anything against it, if you weren't trying to push the same censorship on us.

You're contradicting youself. So you do believe that Germany is trying to censor you? Just you or the entire world?

Well, thanks for deciding for me, but I think I'll rather form my own opinions.

Do think that I am trying to censor you also because I am German? But this only applies to German people right?

Is Germany not pushing for internet censorship EU wide? Or is gatestone institute also extremist?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-0 ... ree-speech

The funny thing is, I don't even use ANY social media. I am worried for others...for nothing.

Do you believe that Germany is specifically trying to censor you or anyone in Slovenia? You believe it to be a "conspiracy"?

Please answer with YES or NO.

Not Slovenia, but entire Europe. No, it's not a conspiracy, it's very much real.

Do you believe that this is a a plan by Germany alone? What about the other EU members? Are you scared?

adhoc wrote: […] Does this REALLY not bother anyone here?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-0 ... ree-speech

Nice title: "European Union Declares War On Internet Free Speech"
If you read the article, you see that the authors are bothered by the fact that the EU and (in alphabetical order) Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube have together adopted a "code of conduct against hate speech online".

But what precisely is "hate speech"?
It was defined years ago, in 2008,and the article in the link correctly quotes:
"Illegal hate speech, as defined by the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law and national laws transposing it, means all conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin."
[emphasis added]

What the article doesn't say is that the text doesn't stop there, but continues:
"The IT Companies and the European Commission also stress the need to defend the right to freedom of expression, which, as the European Court of Human Rights has stated, “is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population."
[emphasis added]

So a clear line is drawn between "conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred" and "information or ideas that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population".
The first one is illegal hate speech, the second falls under the right to freedom of expression.

The curious thing is that all those "aboslute freedom of speech" apologetists (who wisely "forget" to say the EU also defined that even offending, schocking or disturbing content, as opposed to hate speech, falls under the right to freedom of expression) did not care 2008, when the definition was adopted. They care now, because they see that actual steps are planned to prevent them from propagating their hate messages. And of course they call it "censorship", probably they haven't found a more powerful word.

Well, they also say the EU "declares war" on free speech. "Declares war" - when are the first bombings to be expected?

seebart wrote: Do you believe that this is a a plan by Germany alone? What about the other EU members? Are you scared?

Well, I'd say most bigger countries are working together on this to push it on smaller countries as well, without asking the people.

Right now, no. As I said, I don't use ANY social media, so it will never affect me. I don't want to use the argument "I have nothing to hide anyway" because it's a bullshit argument.

That said, I am scared what MIGHT follow. Emphasis on might. It might just be a lever to punish neonazis on the internet and I'm kinda OK with that. But it might also turn into a mechanism to punish people for arbitrary reasons. And you know you can't guarantee it never will! The rules are so vague nearly anything can apply!

Kbdfr: as expected from you, your argument is that it's an extremist site. Fascists sure are a predictable bunch!

What's next, after you silence the institutes - think tanks of Europe?

adhoc wrote: Well, I'd say most bigger countries are working together on this to push it on smaller countries as well, without asking the people.

Can you please be more specific on this point? Which countries?

Well, even if you disagree with me, surely you agree the point of EU is a unified governing body over all EU countries, right? This can be seen from numerous examples. Most for the good, some for the bad.

If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

adhoc wrote: […] Kbdfr: as expected from you, your argument is that it's an extremist site. Fascists sure are a predictable bunch! […]

Of course they are, but my point was that the EU, parallel to defining hate speech, also clearly stated that even offending, schocking or disturbing content, as opposed to hate speech, falls under the right to freedom of expression.

So no censorship here, just a line drawn between what is to be accepted (the above) and what is not ("conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred").

adhoc wrote: Well, even if you disagree with me, surely you agree the point of EU is a unified governing body over all EU countries, right? This can be seen from numerous examples. Most for the good, some for the bad.

If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

I know. You know I'm for the complete abolishment of the EU. I'm very anti-EU as are many Germans! Do you believe me? Do you know how much the European Union costs? Too much.

kbdfr wrote:

adhoc wrote: […] Kbdfr: as expected from you, your argument is that it's an extremist site. Fascists sure are a predictable bunch! […]

Of course they are, but my point was that the EU, parallel to defining hate speech, also clearly stated that even offending, schocking or disturbing content, as opposed to hate speech, falls under the right to freedom of expression.

So no censorship here, just a line drawn between what is to be accepted (the above) and what is not ("conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred").

Yup, and you get to decide what's acceptable and what isn't

Now, now, don't try to act like a non fascist. I can smell you lot even via computer screen. If you can call me an extremist, then I can call you as well, right? Or is that an arrestable offence in your book?

Not sure...I think it goes only one way - left to right. Quick now, go make a law to silence me!

seebart wrote:

adhoc wrote: Well, even if you disagree with me, surely you agree the point of EU is a unified governing body over all EU countries, right? This can be seen from numerous examples. Most for the good, some for the bad.

If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

I know. You know I'm for the complete abolishment of the EU. I'm very anti-EU as are many Germans! Do you believe me? Do you know how much the European Union costs? Too much.

Ohhh...you know, it'd (abolishment of EU) be fun just so the world would stop being such a snooze fest. Personally, I wouldn't be affected either way - except I'd have to pay for customs for items from Germany and I sure do order a lot from Germany, because you guys make some damn good products. But then again, I'd just raise my service prices to my main customer - the Germans and it'd be the same. Hmmm...

adhoc wrote: Quick now, go make a law to silence me!

This summarizes your state of mind quite well, except it should read:

Quick now, go make a law to silence me evil Germany.

Snooze fest? Putin, Isis and the specter of fascism on the rise across Europe not enough for you?

"May you live in interesting times." Ancient Chinese curse!

seebart wrote:

adhoc wrote: Quick now, go make a law to silence me!

This summarizes your state of mind quite well, except it should read:

Quick now, go make a law to silence me evil communists.

Fixed that for you!

Muirium wrote: Snooze fest? Putin, Isis and the specter of fascism on the rise across Europe not enough for you?

"May you live in interesting times." Ancient Chinese curse!

So you DO agree with me on the subject of fascists!

adhoc wrote:

kbdfr wrote:

adhoc wrote: […] Kbdfr: as expected from you, your argument is that it's an extremist site. Fascists sure are a predictable bunch! […]

Of course they are, but my point was that the EU, parallel to defining hate speech, also clearly stated that even offending, schocking or disturbing content, as opposed to hate speech, falls under the right to freedom of expression.

So no censorship here, just a line drawn between what is to be accepted (the above) and what is not ("conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred").

Yup, and you get to decide what's acceptable and what isn't

Could you please refrain from distorting the facts?
Not I (or you) "decide what's acceptable and what isn't", the line is drawn, as extensively explained, by the definition in the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008.

Try to at least be honest in your answers.

kbdfr wrote: Try to at least be honest in your answers.

Not to a dishonest person such as yourself.

adhoc wrote: This summarizes your state of mind quite well, except it should read:

Quick now, go make a law to silence me evil communists.

No, Slovenia is not an "evil communist". In fact there are no more "evil communists" IMO.

adhoc wrote:

kbdfr wrote: Try to at least be honest in your answers.

Not to a dishonest person such as yourself.

Ooh, sting! That's some fabulous, rock solid, unsubstantiated ad hominem you've pulled out there! Idiot.

adhoc wrote: […] If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

Sorry adhoc, but here again you seem to have absolutely no clue and obviously don't know what you are talking about.
The EU Parliament can not decide on laws:

"The Commission has the legislative initiative. However, under the Treaty of Maastricht enhanced by the Lisbon Treaty, the European Parliament has a right of legislative initiative that allows it to ask the Commission to submit a proposal."
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparl ... #mergebox3

Good point kbdfr. But that's just a cover-up right adhoc to control and silence all small EU members?

adhoc wrote: If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

Fun fact, the european parliament is a democratic joke. They are just there to say "yes or no".

The laws themselves are been made by the european commission and european commission members are not elected at all....they are APPOINTED. Thats already reason enough to forget about this whole EU construct. Its more anti-democratic than our current system here in Germany, and even miles away from a direct democratic system like Switzerland, which I consider to be the best one worldwide.

Everyone knows that. The EU is a big mess. A nice idea, but just the kind of compromised implementation you'd expect from dozens of governments working together while thing to screw each other. Perhaps fatally so. We'll see.

Very true BimboBB. Not only are there no real important laws passed in Brussels but most of the other stuff is never agreed on either. Very expensive papertiger with zero implications.

seebart wrote:

adhoc wrote: This summarizes your state of mind quite well, except it should read:

Quick now, go make a law to silence me evil communists.

No, Slovenia is not an "evil communist". In fact there are no more "evil communists" IMO.

I was not talking about Slovenia, lol. We were never communists, ever.

Muirium wrote:

adhoc wrote:

kbdfr wrote: Try to at least be honest in your answers.

Not to a dishonest person such as yourself.

Ooh, sting! That's some fabulous, rock solid, unsubstantiated ad hominem you've pulled out there! Idiot.

Just fighting back with what I'm being fought against. I dislike the rhetoric, but that's how it is.

BimboBB wrote:

adhoc wrote: If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

Fun fact, the european parliament is a democratic joke. They are just there to say "yes or no".

The laws themselves are been made by the european commission and european commission members are not elected at all....they are APPOINTED. Thats already reason enough to forget about this whole EU construct. Its more anti-democratic than our current system here in Germany, and even miles away from a direct democratic system like Switzerland, which I consider to be the best one worldwide.

I was honestly not aware of that. Thank you for correcting me. I thought european parliament was the legislative branch?

@seebart not yet, but you sure are working on it!

adhoc wrote:

BimboBB wrote:

adhoc wrote: If you know the structure of EU parliament, you will see that the 5 biggest countries in Europe can decide on laws without even asking everyone else - by majority vote.

Fun fact, the european parliament is a democratic joke. They are just there to say "yes or no". […]

I was honestly not aware of that. Thank you for correcting me. […]

I was the one who first corrected you, so I accept your implicit thanks