Government Orders You Tube To Censor Protest Video

Avatar image for turoksonofstone
turoksonofstone

15045

Forum Posts

279813

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 24

Edited By turoksonofstone


In a frightening example of how the state is tightening its grip around the free Internet, it has emerged that You Tube is complying with thousands of requests from governments to censor and remove videos that show protests and other examples of citizens simply asserting their rights, while also deleting search terms by government mandate.

The latest example is You Tube’s compliance with a request from the British government to censor footage of the British Constitution Group’s Lawful Rebellion protest, during which they attempted to civilly arrest Judge Michael Peake at Birkenhead county court.

Peake was ruling on a case involving Roger Hayes, former member of UKIP, who has refused to pay council tax, both as a protest against the government’s treasonous activities in sacrificing Britain to globalist interests and as a result of Hayes clearly proving that council tax is illegal.

Hayes has embarked on an effort to legally prove that the enforced collection of council tax by government is unlawful because no contract has been agreed between the individual and the state. His argument is based on the sound legal principle that just like the council, Hayes can represent himself as a third party in court and that “Roger Hayes” is a corporation and must be treated as one in the eyes of the law.

The British government doesn’t want this kind of information going viral in the public domain because it is scared stiff of a repeat of the infamous poll tax riots of 1990, a massive tax revolt in the UK that forced the Thatcher government to scrap the poll tax altogether because of mass civil disobedience and refusal to pay.

When viewers in the UK attempt to watch videos of the protest, they are met with the message, “This content is not available in your country due to a government removal request.”

We then click through to learn that, “YouTube occasionally receives requests from governments around the world to remove content from our site, and as a result, YouTube may block specific content in order to comply with local laws in certain countries.”

You can also search by country to discover that Google, the owner of You Tube, has complied with the majority of requests from governments, particularly in the United States and the UK, not only to remove You Tube videos, but also specific web search terms and thousands of “data requests,” meaning demands for information that would reveal the true identity of a You Tube user. Google claims that the information sent to governments is “needed for legitimate criminal investigations,” but whether these “data requests” have been backed up by warrants is not divulged by the company.

“Between July 1 and Dec. 31 (2009), Google received 3,580 requests for user data from U.S. government agencies, slightly less than the 3,663 originating from Brazil,” reports PC World. “The United Kingdom and India sent more than 1,000 requests each, and smaller numbers originated from various other countries.”

With regard to search terms, one struggles to understand how a specific combination of words in a Google search can be considered a violation of any law. This is about government and Google working hand in hand to manipulate search results in order to censor inconvenient information, something which Google now freely admits to doing.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (AD)

You Tube’s behavior is more despicable than the Communist Chinese, who are at least open about their censorship policies, whereas You Tube hides behind a blanket excuse and doesn’t even say what law has been broken.

Anyone who swallows the explanation that the videos were censored in this case because the government was justifiably enforcing a law that says scenes from inside a court room cannot be filmed is beyond naive. Court was not even in session in the protest footage that was removed, and the judge had already left the courtroom.

The real reason for the removal is the fact that the British government is obviously petrified of seeing a group of focused and educated citizens, black, white, old and young, male and female, go head to head with the corrupt system on its own stomping ground.

In their efforts to keep a lid on the growing populist fury that has arrived in response to rampant and growing financial and political tyranny in every sector of society, governments in the west are now mimicking Communist Chinese-style Internet censorship policies in a bid to neutralize protest movements, while hypocritically lecturing the rest of the world on maintaining web freedom.

Via a combination of cybersecurity legislation and policy that is hastily introduced with no real oversight, governments and large Internet corporations are crafting an environment where the state can simply demand information be removed on a whim with total disregard for freedom of speech protections.

This was underscored last year at the height of the Wikileaks issue, when Amazon axed Wikileaks from its servers following a phone call made by Senator Joe Lieberman’s Senate Homeland Security Committee demanding the website be deleted.

Lieberman has been at the forefront of a push to purge the Internet of all dissent by empowering Obama with a figurative Internet kill switch that he would use to shut down parts of the Internet or terminate websites under the guise of national security. Lieberman spilled the beans on the true reason for the move during a CNN interview when he stated “Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too.”

Except that China doesn’t disconnect the Internet “in case of war,” it only ever does so to censor and intimidate people who express dissent against government atrocities or corruption, as we have documented. This is precisely the kind of online environment the British and American governments are trying to replicate as they attempt to put a stranglehold on the last bastion of true free speech – the world wide web.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/government- ... ideos.html
Avatar image for thebatman586
TheBatman586

6466

Forum Posts

309

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By TheBatman586
No Caption Provided
Avatar image for powerherc
PowerHerc

86191

Forum Posts

211478

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

#2  Edited By PowerHerc

I wouldn't rule out the U.S. Government pulling the same thing here.

Avatar image for texasdeathmatch
texasdeathmatch

14212

Forum Posts

30

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By texasdeathmatch

Meh, I lost hope in YouTube when they restricted entire episodes of Venture Brothers.
 
Back to crazy cat lady videos, whooooo!

Avatar image for ssejllenrad
ssejllenrad

13112

Forum Posts

145

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By ssejllenrad

@turoksonofstone: Yo V! Wanna send an explosive-rigged train to 10 Downing Street and light things up?

Avatar image for innervenom123
InnerVenom123

29886

Forum Posts

1786

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 1

#5  Edited By InnerVenom123

O_O

Avatar image for cainpanell
CainPanell

23760

Forum Posts

171

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#6  Edited By CainPanell

( two hours from now in the news)

" this just in anonymous has declared war on the U.S. "

Avatar image for doom_doom_doom
DoomDoomDoom

4405

Forum Posts

33212

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 10

#8  Edited By DoomDoomDoom

You might find this funny Turok, my mom called me today and was like " I just had this feeling you were out protesting and you need to quit it before you get hurt. I was watching the google and things are getting bad" It was pretty funny.

Also

@#$% the government, we don't need it lol.

Avatar image for turoksonofstone
turoksonofstone

15045

Forum Posts

279813

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 24

#9  Edited By turoksonofstone

  

This is hardly a surprise but, this morning (as previously announced), the lame duck Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted to move forward with censoring the internet via the COICA bill — despite a bunch of law professors explaining to them how this law is a clearviolation of the First Amendment. What’s really amazing is that many of the same Senators have been speaking out against internet censorship in other countries, yet they happily vote to approve it here because it’s seen as a way to make many of their largest campaign contributors happy. There’s very little chance that the bill will actually get passed by the end of the term but, in the meantime, we figured it might be useful to highlight the 19 Senators who voted to censor the internet this morning:

* Patrick J. Leahy — Vermont
* Herb Kohl — Wisconsin
* Jeff Sessions — Alabama
* Dianne Feinstein — California
* Orrin G. Hatch — Utah
* Russ Feingold — Wisconsin
* Chuck Grassley — Iowa
* Arlen Specter — Pennsylvania
* Jon Kyl — Arizona
* Chuck Schumer — New York
* Lindsey Graham — South Carolina
* Dick Durbin — Illinois
* John Cornyn — Texas
* Benjamin L. Cardin — Maryland
* Tom Coburn — Oklahoma
* Sheldon Whitehouse — Rhode Island
* Amy Klobuchar — Minnesota
* Al Franken — Minnesota
* Chris Coons — Delaware


This should be a list of shame. You would think that our own elected officials would understand the First Amendment but, apparently, they have no problem turning the US into one of the small list of authoritarian countries that censors internet content it does not like (in this case, content some of its largest campaign contributors do not like). We already have laws in place to deal with infringing content, so don’t buy the excuse that this law is about stopping infringement. This law takes down entire websites based on the government’s say-so. First Amendment protections make clear that if you are going to stop any specific speech, it has to be extremely specific speech. This law has no such restrictions. It’s really quite unfortunate that these 19 US Senators are the first American politicians to publicly vote in favor of censoring speech in America. 
No Caption Provided
  
Avatar image for omega_ray_jay
Omega Ray Jay

8496

Forum Posts

50508

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 5

#10  Edited By Omega Ray Jay

Oh great.