KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
The All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into anti-semitism, has made a formal request that politicians make it possible to ban racists from social networks in their entirety, much like sex offenders can have their internet access restricted. This comes after the group's recent report found that anti-semitism was on the rise on sites like Twitter.
The inquiry was set up last year, following on from several incidents between Gaza and Israel, to investigate what seemed to be a growing sentiment of anti-semitism on the UK. In-fact the Community Security trust said that incidents of hate against Jewish people had risen to 1,168 throughout the year, the highest results since it began recording in the mid-80s. However, it did factor in social network hate, which of course wasn't possible until the mid-'00s.
Regardless, the group wants to see people who preach hate online banned from using social platforms:
“If it can be proven in a detailed way that someone has made a considered and determined view to exploit various online networks to harm and perpetrate hate crimes against others then the accepted principles, rules and restrictions that are relevant to sex offences must surely apply,” reads the report (via BBC).
Letting bigots speak in public at least lets us know who they are
Other requested changes to the law included a government provided allowance set up to pay for security at synagogues and guidance for how teachers should handle discussion of the conflict between Israel and Palestine in the class-room. British Prime Minister David Cameron's response was to call the report “hugely important,” and reiterated that he and the country as a whole was committed to tackling hate speech.
However some groups that stand for freedom of speech may be worried about the report's wording. In a section that is designed to address potential infringement of people's freedom of speech (say, to disagree, rather than ‘hate' the methods and actions of those taking part in the Gaza conflict), it reads:
“Free speech is and remains a vitally essential and rightly guarded tenet of our British life. It is important that a multitude of voices are heard in the debate on the Middle East or indeed any other conflict. Free speech is however inextricably bound together with a set of responsibilities which if abandoned can lead to abuse of this inalienable freedom and encroachment on the rights of others. The legal limits to free speech must be obeyed and freedom of speech held in equal measure with other fundamental principles such as religious and racial tolerance.”
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: ‘Tolerance' is the key word here. There is nothing legally or morally wrong with disagreeing or even disliking something or someone. Nobody is condoning being hateful, but a lot of people have legitimate reasons of concern with the Isarel, Palestine conflict and should equally be able to voice them.
Image source: BlackCarrionRose
I’m not sure I’m in favor of that. Some people are REALLY quick to cry wolf when it comes to anti-semitism, and our historical baggage means few try to oppose them. Criticizing Israel on a public forum or chat will get you called a terrorist or a nazi faster than you can say “1st amendment”.
Gee, I think I’ll stop reading this site after this. It’s so kosher, I wanna puke.
Yeah but, criticising Islam get’s you called a racist or an Islamaphobe, so there’s no real difference, well, accept, the Jews are a more tolerant religious following..
So in other words the Jewish movers and shakers want the ability to silence the internet every time Israel terrorises Palestine ? To me that suggests that all Jews (at the least the ones involved in the enquiry) support Israel and it’s inhumane/racist behaviour.
Oh and I’m not a Nazi or terrorist Fartsmith2 😉
so, let me get this straight: UK gets a new “law” to ban anti-semitism comments and if it’s really ofensive it should not be considered “free speech” and when a magazine publish way more ofensive things to other religions nobody bats an eye? because if you even read internet comments there is waaayyyy more insults towards christians and muslims than against jews, just saying, oh and lets not forget the comments insulting atheists. so, again, why the special treatment?
edit: i almost forgot: why isnt there an “anti-christians report” or an “anti-atheist report” or an “anti-muslim report”? because extremists are in every single ideology, dont just single out anti-semitism
Hating someone because they were born a Jew is wrong, it’s racism; hating the Isreali government is something a lot of people feel they have perfectly legitimate reasons for. They really should not confuse the two.
It’s messier than that and this makes it more complicated. Some of the Jewish beliefs are pretty repugnant – just like many in Christianity, Islam and other religions. The problem is that it’s already against the law to protest many of these repugnant beliefs. Ironically, hate speech is protected by the law as long as that hate speech stems from a recognised religious belief. I feel perfectly justified in condemning a lot of the stuff that’s going on in Israel-Palestine, and a lot of that stuff stems from the religious views of each group. It’s very difficult to separate someone who has a legitimate and rational grievance with a belief/viewpoint of a certain religion, and someone who actively persecutes a group. Personally, I wouldn’t have a problem with ‘Jews’, ‘Christians’, or ‘Muslims’, but I do have an issue with much of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. How do you separate the two? They’re very different but it’s exceptionally difficult to tell the difference sometimes.
On the other hand, while I’m not condoning the report or the recommendation *at all*, something does need to be done about the rising anti-semitism. Sure, a lot of what’s being called ‘anti-semitism’ is really people who have a problem with the politics of Israel or zionism, but alongside that there are some serious problems with vandalism etc.
What does an extremist atheist do, exactly? Talk you to death?
any ideology extremist does exactly what any other extremist does, the only difference is their motivations, so by definition, an EXTREMIST atheist is someone who believes ANY kind of religion is a cancer and should be erradicated, but exactly the same way a jew EXTREMIST (yes, they exist no matter what some people say) believes judaism is the only and one true answer to the universe and anything that goes against it should be erradicated
i come back to my main point: an EXTREMIST IS AN EXTREMIST no matter the ideology, and IMO there isnt more extremism now than in previous years, you can simply see it more because of the internet
you want less extremism? educate, comunicate and admit you can be wrong
Yeah but only the zionist scumbags are the Jewish movers & shakers involved. There are factions among jews who oppose what is happening in Palestine but they are either arrested or silenced. The Zionist scum are the real problem and they are the group that have way too much power world wide, not just in Israel.