Apparently the UK government are revisiting the idea of net censorship, in the context of anti-terrorism.

UK Home Secretary Jacqui Smith as reported in the “Guardian, Government targets extremist websites“:

Speaking to the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme before her speech, Smith said there were specific examples of websites that “clearly fall under the category of gratifying terrorism”. “There is growing evidence people may be using the internet both to spread messages and to plan specifically for terrorism,” she said. “That is why, as well as changing the law to make sure we can tackle that, there is more we need to do to show the internet is not a no-go area as far as tackling terrorism is concerned.”

This could go really wrong, really fast. Will we be allowed to read Bin Laden texts online? Hitler, Stalin? Talk to people who sympathise with organizations deemed terroristic? Who live in countries in the ‘axis of evil’? Doubtless the first sites to be targetted will be the most outrageous, but we’re on a slippery slope here.

It’s pretty much impossible to stop the online radicalisation of angry young men. But driving that process underground, and criminalising anyone on the fringes of the scene, will make it all the harder for calm voices and nuanced opinions to be heard. ‘Us and them’ is exactly what we don’t need right now.

Notes from Bristol Amnesty International meeting

Jan 15 AI Bristol: Martin, Nancy, Margaret

Notes taken at the January 15th 2004 Bristol Amnesty International (AI) meeting. There were two guest speakers on the topic of “Israel, Palestine and Amnesty’s new mandate“: Martin Knight, AIUK Co-ordinator for Israel, the Occupied Territories and the Palestine Authority, and Nancy Rollason of Bristol Palestine Soldidarity Movement,

Note: this article was written a week afterwards based on my semi-legible handwritten notes. It likely containing errors and omissions (some but not all flagged with ‘@’ signs). This version (updated 18 March 2004) includes some edits and clarifications from Martin. The text that follows reports as closely as possible what I heard from Martin and Nancy. Also note that I’ve avoided prefixing each sentence with qualifiers such as “Martin reported that…”, since the article itself sets that context. Where my notes seem to capture a reasonably verbatim account of what was said, I’ve put the text in quotes; please bear in mind that I probably didn’t get it word-perfect. I’ve added a few links to supplementary materials that I found online. Except for the AI and ISM sites, these links weren’t provided by the speakers.
Continue reading