Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes of ncourse

    Is very very very very very very very very very veryveryvery vveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryvery vveryvery veryvery v very very very very very very v very very very very very very very very very very very very veryveryvvvvv v v veryveryvery veryvvery v vvv veryvery vveryveryvery very veryvv very very veryvery v good

  • Yes of ncourse

    Is very very very very very very very very very veryveryvery vveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryvery vveryvery veryvery v very very very very very very v very very very very very very very very very very very very veryveryvvvvv v v veryveryvery veryvvery v vvv veryvery vveryveryvery very veryvv very very veryvery v good

  • Yes of ncourse

    Is very very very very very very very very very veryveryvery vveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryveryvery vveryvery veryvery v very very very very very very v very very very very very very very very very very very very veryveryvvvvv v v veryveryvery veryvvery v vvv veryvery vveryveryvery very veryvv very very veryvery v good

  • Freedom of Speech: Applies to All

    Whether the website be based in the U.S. or other country, freedom of speech ought to trump government control. Especially control that is tied to punishment. Users of extremist websites ought not to be punished unless they have actually committed a punishable offense. Posting extremist content online is nothing more than voicing an opinion.

  • No

    I find the notion of flagging content as unlawful or suspicious highly offensive. Even if the law defines explicitly what websites could be considered violent or terrorist activity it sends the message that the government is able to suppress or outlaw information and expressions it disagrees with. Today it could be a terrorist or pedophile website, in 20 years it could be anything.

  • No, users of extremist websites should not be punished

    The idea is far too vague, what is extreme to one person may not be to another and vice versa. It is a relative term. We would be better served punishing ACTUAL criminals, not those engaged in so called "thought crime". Where does it stop? If you can punish someone cause of the website they go on, what's to stop them from being punished just for the things they say or believe? So no, we should not be punishing users of extremist websites, it would set a terrible precedent and create a very slippery slope as it pertains to what is permissable behavior and what isn't.

  • No they should not be punished

    There is a distinction between visiting an extremist website and committing acts of extremism or violence. For instance, I might be a grad student studying extremist ideas in my culture. The mere fact of using such a site does not necessarily mean I would in the end come to believe the extremist views are valid or that I would advocate applying them.

  • Websites Don't Kill People, People Kill People

    We live in a free country with free speech. Websites don't kill people, people kill people. Owners of extremist websites may be distasteful, but they aren't illegal unless the owner physically kills someone or launders money to terrorist organizations. Internet websites should be filtered by parents, not by the government. Extremist websites are distasteful but they are a part of modern lift.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.