by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 6:10 pm
by Freeoplis » Thu May 13, 2010 6:15 pm
by A mean old man » Thu May 13, 2010 6:18 pm
by Zeppy » Thu May 13, 2010 6:20 pm
American Capitalist wrote:Cyber Monitoring and Prevention Act
A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.
??? -> ???
NOTING the current times of terror and fear we live in which a single person can cause much strife and havoc with relatively little funds,
ALSO NOTING that most terrorist act and plan in groups on the internet,
BELIEVING that we need to warn WA nation on threats coming from violent groups,
HEREBY ESTABLISHES the Terrorism Monitoring and Prevention Council with the following goals and guidelines :
1) To monitor the internet for groups planning to over throw the Government of WA nations,
2) To warn WA nations of these incidents so that they can plan accordingly,
3) To watch for groups planning attacks on the WA's Headquarters,
4) To stop hackers from attacking the private data of citizens around the globe;
ENCOURAGES nations to share information about terrorist groups.
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 6:22 pm
Freeoplis wrote:Considering this proposal will monitor only the medium of the internet we feel this would hinder freedom of speech and civil liberties of citizens, monitoring such activity is not something we could support.
A mean old man wrote:My nation is a nation that likes to know what's going on and who's saying what, and I'd certainly support this resolution once it's been fleshed out a bit more.
by Freeoplis » Thu May 13, 2010 6:25 pm
American Capitalist wrote:Freeoplis wrote:Considering this proposal will monitor only the medium of the internet we feel this would hinder freedom of speech and civil liberties of citizens, monitoring such activity is not something we could support.
Explain in what way would it hurt freedom of speech, or civil liberties? This resolution is purely for monitoring public chat on the internet and informing the government of these activities.
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 6:27 pm
Zeppy wrote:American Capitalist wrote:Cyber Monitoring and Prevention Act
A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.
??? -> ???
You need show the strength and what are the effects of the resolution.NOTING the current times of terror and fear we live in which a single person can cause much strife and havoc with relatively little funds,
ALSO NOTING that most terrorist act and plan in groups on the internet,
BELIEVING that we need to warn WA nation on threats coming from violent groups,
HEREBY ESTABLISHES the Terrorism Monitoring and Prevention Council with the following goals and guidelines :
1) To monitor the internet for groups planning to over throw the Government of WA nations,
2) To warn WA nations of these incidents so that they can plan accordingly,
3) To watch for groups planning attacks on the WA's Headquarters,
4) To stop hackers from attacking the private data of citizens around the globe;
ENCOURAGES nations to share information about terrorist groups.
Some errors.
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 6:29 pm
Freeoplis wrote:American Capitalist wrote:Freeoplis wrote:Considering this proposal will monitor only the medium of the internet we feel this would hinder freedom of speech and civil liberties of citizens, monitoring such activity is not something we could support.
Explain in what way would it hurt freedom of speech, or civil liberties? This resolution is purely for monitoring public chat on the internet and informing the government of these activities.
Given the choice between our citizens being monitored and not monitored we would choose the latter. Such intrusion into the daily activities and communications of individuals in our view cannot be justified regardless of the consequences such a policy seeks to prevent against.
by A mean old man » Thu May 13, 2010 6:29 pm
Freeoplis wrote:Given the choice between our citizens being monitored and not monitored we would choose the latter.
by Freeoplis » Thu May 13, 2010 6:31 pm
American Capitalist wrote:1) To monitor the internet for groups planning to over throw the Government of WA nations,
by Freeoplis » Thu May 13, 2010 6:36 pm
A mean old man wrote:Freeoplis wrote:Given the choice between our citizens being monitored and not monitored we would choose the latter.
Good God! How will you maintain your national security!?
The WCL is proud to take any measures possible to keep its people, its government, and its economic well-being as safe as possible, and I think monitoring what is said by potential rambunctious rapscallions who want to take down the righteous and fair government of our great nation is a grand step to take.
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 6:39 pm
Freeoplis wrote:A mean old man wrote:Freeoplis wrote:Given the choice between our citizens being monitored and not monitored we would choose the latter.
Good God! How will you maintain your national security!?
The WCL is proud to take any measures possible to keep its people, its government, and its economic well-being as safe as possible, and I think monitoring what is said by potential rambunctious rapscallions who want to take down the righteous and fair government of our great nation is a grand step to take.
The freedoms of our civilians shall come before intrusive legislative decisions. The freedom to browse and utilize the internet we see as an important civil liberty to preserve free from government interference. Our intelligence agencies are well trained in other methods to identify and deal with potential terrorist threats.
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 6:43 pm
Grandais wrote:AGAINST AGAINST AGAINST
While I see the reasoning behind this proposal, it is poorly written and too broad, which would result in a lot of totalitarianism going on.
by Nullarni » Thu May 13, 2010 7:08 pm
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 7:09 pm
Nullarni wrote:Hmmm... I suppose we could possibly support this. However, we are a bit concerned that without special consideration it may need to be retitled "The Big Brother Act".
by Nullarni » Thu May 13, 2010 7:23 pm
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 7:29 pm
Nullarni wrote:
Honestly, I would remove, "1) To monitor the internet for groups planning to over throw the Government of WA nations," and "4) To stop hackers from attacking the private data of citizens around the globe."
I would focus it on looking for hackers and "cyber terrorists" and merely inform the individual nations of the situation instead of stopping it themselves.
The reason I am against point one, is that it could be easily abused. I say just keep it focused on hackers and cyber terrorists.
by Nullarni » Thu May 13, 2010 7:41 pm
by Nullarni » Thu May 13, 2010 7:46 pm
by American Capitalist » Thu May 13, 2010 7:50 pm
by Chrinthanium » Fri May 14, 2010 1:09 am
by Buffett and Colbert » Fri May 14, 2010 4:43 am
You-Gi-Owe wrote:If someone were to ask me about your online persona as a standard of your "date-ability", I'd rate you as "worth investigating further & passionate about beliefs". But, enough of the idle speculation on why you didn't score with the opposite gender.
by Charlotte Ryberg » Fri May 14, 2010 5:14 am
by Nullarni » Fri May 14, 2010 5:39 am
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:The subject in question is going to be a tough nut to crack here, honoured ambassador, but I think that the draft should not just focus on a committee, but I think it is not just member states' governments that should play a part in this (ban them from sponsoring cyber terrorism), but also internet registries to remove and salt offending domains. All must be done with great respect given to civil liberties because if it does not respect such then it is likely to be met with huge opposition by other member states.
Yours etc,
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement