by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:26 pm
by The Liberated Territories » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:41 pm
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:43 pm
The Liberated Territories wrote:I would jack up the prices for French commenters but otherwise looks good.
by Pherdistan » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:43 pm
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:46 pm
Pherdistan wrote:It wouldn't work. You'd cause an international incident by claiming sovereignty over every country in the world (through the internet), and fining foreign governments for the acts of their citizens would be unenforceable, unless you want to break up NATO and decades of friendly alliances because some guy in Nowhereshire doesn't like McDonalds.
This, among many flaws in your plan. I suggest you beef up your OP and cite some sources for the abuse you claim, or folks will just laugh at you and this thread will be locked.
Best of luck!
by The Liberated Territories » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:48 pm
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:49 pm
Pherdistan wrote:It wouldn't work. You'd cause an international incident by claiming sovereignty over every country in the world (through the internet), and fining foreign governments for the acts of their citizens would be unenforceable, unless you want to break up NATO and decades of friendly alliances because some guy in Nowhereshire doesn't like McDonalds.
This, among many flaws in your plan. I suggest you beef up your OP and cite some sources for the abuse you claim, or folks will just laugh at you and this thread will be locked.
Best of luck!
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:50 pm
by Franco-Iberie » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:51 pm
The United Republic of New Britannia wrote:Pherdistan wrote:It wouldn't work. You'd cause an international incident by claiming sovereignty over every country in the world (through the internet), and fining foreign governments for the acts of their citizens would be unenforceable, unless you want to break up NATO and decades of friendly alliances because some guy in Nowhereshire doesn't like McDonalds.
This, among many flaws in your plan. I suggest you beef up your OP and cite some sources for the abuse you claim, or folks will just laugh at you and this thread will be locked.
Best of luck!
I also don't care whether they are my friends or not, and if that's how they treat us... I'd rather not have them as a friend so that they're morally eligible to be Aggressed upon by USA Military forces.
by Socialist Nordia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:51 pm
by Free Republics » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:52 pm
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:53 pm
Socialist Nordia wrote:First of all, who do you think you are, some sort of representative of the US government? You make it seem like you're talking about you personally collecting said comments.
Second of all, this is a terrible idea. You're planning on charging entire governments just because random citizens said something that hurt America's feelings on the internet. The US has no authority to mandate that foreign countries crack down on internet freedom.
by The Grande Republic 0f Arcadia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:53 pm
The United Republic of New Britannia wrote:I just chilled the fuck out and put on my thinking cap.
There is no free speech in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the UK or France.
Their Government in fact bans racism, and people are doing 6 months or more for it, in those countries.
This is what I would do if I were the President.
People in the USA, who experience Anti Americanism online, should print out what is said to them, and mail it to me.
I understand that not every comment online can be accounted for....
BUT this is what is going to happen under my plan.
People send me Anti American things that are said to them.
And 1,000 of the worst (RECORDED) will be selected by me to charge other countries with (once per year).
This is what the following countries OWE the IRS (Internal Revenue Service).
United Kingdom : 6 Billion Pound Sterling PER 1,000 Anti American comments online.
France : 6 Billion Euros PER 1,000 Anti American comments online
Canada : 3 Billion Canadian Dollars PER 1,000 Anti American Comments online.
Australia : 3 Billion Australian Dollars PER 1,000 Anti American Comments online.
New Zealand : 1 Billion, 500 Million New Zealand Dollars PER 1,000 Anti American Comments online.
They owe it as part of their UN Dues.
These Charges are in effect UNTIL Their Governments make a decision.
Either (A) They are our friends, and their Governments crack down on Anti Americanism, or (B)They are NOT our friends Anymore, BUT Option B comes with a total and complete Embargo.
Failure to pay is AUTOMATICALLY Option B.
That would get their Government to crack down on Anti American racism, on the basis of National Origin.
What do you think of my plan ?
by Cedoria » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:53 pm
The United Republic of New Britannia wrote:I just chilled the fuck out and put on my thinking cap.
There is no free speech in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the UK or France.
Their Government in fact bans racism, and people are doing 6 months or more for it, in those countries.
This is what I would do if I were the President.
People in the USA, who experience Anti Americanism online, should print out what is said to them, and mail it to me.
I understand that not every comment online can be accounted for....
BUT this is what is going to happen under my plan.
People send me Anti American things that are said to them.
And 1,000 of the worst (RECORDED) will be selected by me to charge other countries with (once per year).
This is what the following countries OWE the IRS (Internal Revenue Service).
United Kingdom : 6 Billion Pound Sterling PER 1,000 Anti American comments online.
France : 6 Billion Euros PER 1,000 Anti American comments online
Canada : 3 Billion Canadian Dollars PER 1,000 Anti American Comments online.
Australia : 3 Billion Australian Dollars PER 1,000 Anti American Comments online.
New Zealand : 1 Billion, 500 Million New Zealand Dollars PER 1,000 Anti American Comments online.
They owe it as part of their UN Dues.
These Charges are in effect UNTIL Their Governments make a decision.
Either (A) They are our friends, and their Governments crack down on Anti Americanism, or (B)They are NOT our friends Anymore, BUT Option B comes with a total and complete Embargo.
Failure to pay is AUTOMATICALLY Option B.
That would get their Government to crack down on Anti American racism, on the basis of National Origin.
What do you think of my plan ?
by Wisconsin9 » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:54 pm
by Franco-Iberie » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:54 pm
The United Republic of New Britannia wrote:Socialist Nordia wrote:First of all, who do you think you are, some sort of representative of the US government? You make it seem like you're talking about you personally collecting said comments.
Second of all, this is a terrible idea. You're planning on charging entire governments just because random citizens said something that hurt America's feelings on the internet. The US has no authority to mandate that foreign countries crack down on internet freedom.
Yes we have authority to sanction Governments to make them enforce their own laws already existing... they don't have internet freedom either.
by The Islands of Versilia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:54 pm
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:54 pm
Free Republics wrote:I find the whole idea absurd because the United States of America stands for freedom of speech and regarding UN dues, America shouldn't be part of the United Nations anyway because it is an un-American organization with a "human rights" body controlled by the worst dictatorships on the planet and a "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" that actually says you have no rights, if you read the fine print (Article 29, Section 3 says "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.").
If America is to take a stand regarding freedom of speech issues in other countries, America should encourage those nations to become free and decent nations by adopting freedom of speech. We should not be encouraging enforcement of any laws against "hate speech" or "racism" or "sexism" or "homophobia" or "blasphemy" or "mansplaining" or whatever kind of speech the unfree nations of the world choose to ban next. We should be condemning nations that enforce such "laws" and denying them access to our foreign aid unless they adopt freedom.
by Rhodevus » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:55 pm
Rodrania wrote:Rhod, I f*cking love you, man. <3
Divergia wrote:The Canadian Polar-Potato-Moose-Cat has spoken!
Beiluxia wrote:Is it just me, or does your name keep getting better the more I see it?
by Cedoria » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:55 pm
Free Republics wrote:I find the whole idea absurd because the United States of America stands for freedom of speech and regarding UN dues, America shouldn't be part of the United Nations anyway because it is an un-American organization with a "human rights" body controlled by the worst dictatorships on the planet and a "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" that actually says you have no rights, if you read the fine print (Article 29, Section 3 says "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.").
If America is to take a stand regarding freedom of speech issues in other countries, America should encourage those nations to become free and decent nations by adopting freedom of speech. We should not be encouraging enforcement of any laws against "hate speech" or "racism" or "sexism" or "homophobia" or "blasphemy" or "mansplaining" or whatever kind of speech the unfree nations of the world choose to ban next. We should be condemning nations that enforce such "laws" and denying them access to our foreign aid unless they adopt freedom.
by The United Republic of New Britannia » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:55 pm
by Cedoria » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:56 pm
Wisconsin9 wrote:Literally everything in the OP is absurd. I realize that that word is an understatement, but it's the only thing I can think of that fits.
by Franco-Iberie » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:56 pm
Thunder Place wrote:This is a terrible idea, mind you, but it's an original terrible idea. Good job!
by Rhodevus » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:57 pm
Rodrania wrote:Rhod, I f*cking love you, man. <3
Divergia wrote:The Canadian Polar-Potato-Moose-Cat has spoken!
Beiluxia wrote:Is it just me, or does your name keep getting better the more I see it?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Based Illinois, Bienenhalde, Dresderstan, Eahland, Elejamie, Hidrandia, Kolatis, Nazel Geldiic, New-Minneapolis, Ors Might, Pasong Tirad, Port Carverton, Rusozak, San Lumen, Shrillland, The Astral Mandate, Tungstan, Verkhoyanska, Zancostan
Advertisement