Virtual WW3,Internet Freedom and the war in cyberspace


 A Call to arms for all Keyboard Crusaders and Armchair Activists. In the endless struggle for freedom the battle for hearts and minds is the goal and a free press is the essential tool . A tool that reports the good ,the bad and the ugly warts and all ,from many different perspectives.Today the press is NOT FREE ,ask Rupert Murdoch he paid a lot for it!

When the government is scared of the people and the power of the people to investigate the deeds and workings of government ,then we have a strong and FREE society. When the people are scared of the governments power to investigate the deeds and workings of the people ,we have a strong DICTATORSHIP!

Leftwing vs rightwing is an old divide and rule concept given to us by AUTHORITARIANS. The same authoritarians that claim to be Labour or Tory ,Democrate or Republican, but apart from the colour of the rossettes and balloons there is NO DIFFERENCE!! left wing ,right wing is a distraction from the REALPOLITIK  


IMHO If we are going to fly ,we need 2 wings. I see no conflict between the teachings of Adam Smith a Libertarian and Karl Marx another Libertarian. Both believed in governmentless societies. In Adam Smith’s ideology there never was a government. It was meant to be a meritocracy with only a trade and standards commision. The government was the Invisible hand. Karl Marx believed that the state should do nothing but wither away. “While there is state there is no freedom , when there is freedom there is no state.” Lennin

Today we have capitalists and socialists that believe in big government. These people are in fact FASCISTS and BOTH follow state capitalism ,the  only slight difference is that one prefers BIG GOVERNMENT and the other BIG CORPORATIONS. The Two cheeks of the same arse!

State capitalism has various different meanings, but is usually described as a society wherein the productive forces are controlled and directed by the state in a capitalist manner, even if such a state calls itself socialist.[1] Corporatized state agencies and states that own controlling shares of publicly-listed firms, and thus acting as a capitalist itself, are two examples of state capitalism


Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Benito Mussolini, fascist dictator of Italy (1922-1943)

The FREE UNRESTRICTED INTERNET gives us the tools we need to defend freedom and democracy and more and more people are turning to it everyday ,as they realise that it is more informing and entertaining and TRUTHFUL!!!


Internet tops TV viewing in Canada: Ipsos poll

For the first time ever, Canadians are spending more time surfing the web than they are watching television, a new poll shows.

Canadians are now spending more than 18 hours each week online, and 16.9 hours watching television, the Ipsos Reid study shows. That’s up from last year, when we were spending 14.9 hours on the Internet and 15.8 hours watching TV. Males are spending more time online than females – 20 hours for men, 16 hours for women – and those aged 18-34 are spending 20 hours each week online, while people 35 and up are spending about 18 hours online. “Today, online Canadians are finding a myriad of entertainment options available to them within the walls of their homes. While some entertainment content has simply shifted from television to online, the Internet is also providing new content to Canadians,” study author Mark Laver says in a press release.

“The Internet is poised to take the next step in our lives as it delivers more and more entertainment content to Canadians in their homes and on the go.” When it comes to watching TV, those 55 and up are sitting in front of the tube for about 20 hours each week. But the hours drop as people get younger.People between the ages of 35-54 spend about 15 hours watching their favourite shows while those 18-34 will watch TV for about 13 hours each week.The online survey of 839 people was conducted via the Ipsos Online Panel last fall. “The data indicates that not only are people of all ages spending more and more time online, but it also points to a shift in how online Canadians are consuming media and where they are spending their free time,” Laver said.



This document is a classifed (SECRET/NOFORN) 32 page U.S. counterintelligence investigation into WikiLeaks.
“The possibility that current employees or moles within DoD or elsewhere in the U.S. government are providing sensitive or classified information to cannot be ruled out”. It concocts a plan to fatally marginalize the organization. Since WikiLeaks uses “trust as a center of gravity by protecting the anonymity and identity of the insiders, leakers or whisteblowers”, the report recommends

“The identification, exposure, termination of employment,criminal prosecution, legal action against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistlblowers could potentially damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others considering similar actions from using the Web site”.
[As two years have passed since the date of the report, with no WikiLeaks’ source exposed, it appears that this plan was ineffective]. As an odd justificaton for the plan, the report claims that “Several foreign countries including China,Israel, North Kora, Russia, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe have denounced or blocked access to the website”.
The report provides further justification by enumerating embarrassing stories broken by WikiLeaks—U.S. equipment expenditure in Iraq, probable U.S. violations of the Cemical Warfare Convention Treaty in Iraq, the battle over the Iraqi town of Fallujah and human rights violations at Guantanmo Bay. Note that the report contains a number of inaccurances, for instance, the claim that WikiLeaks has no editorial control. The report concludes with 13 items of intelligence to be answered about WikiLeaks

I always said Military Intelligence is a contradiction in terms…

MICROSOFT IS A NARK AND A SUPERGRASS AND SUPERSPY DO NOT USE ITS PRODUCTS!! There are much better Open Source Products availale free of charge without SPYWARE! takedown: Microsoft Global Criminal Compliance Handbook, 24 Feb 2010 is a venerable New York based anti-secrecy site that has been publishing since 1999. On Feb 24, 2010, the site was forcably taken down following its publication Microsoft’s “Global Criminal Compliance Handbook”, a confidential 22 page booklet designed for police and intelligence services. The guide provides a “menu” of information Microsoft collects on the users of its online services.

Microsoft lawyers threatened Cryptome and its “printer”, internet hosting provider giant Network Solutions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA was designed to protect the legitimate rights of publishers, not to conceal scandalous internal documents that were never intended for sale. Although the action is a clear abuse of the DMCA, Network Solutions, a company with extensive connections to U.S. intelligence contractors, gagged the site in its entirety. Such actions are a serious problem in the United States, where although in theory the First Amendment protects the freedom of the press, in practice, censorship has been privatized via abuse of the judicial system and corporate patronage networks.


Internet censorship in Australia primarily refers to the proposed banning of certain Internet materials by the Australian Federal Government, through mandatory filtering of website access from all Australian Internet Service Providers. Censorship also occurs by the issuing of take-down notices to websites operating in Australia, and by requiring Google to remove some sites from their search results. In 2008, the Australian Labor Party introduced a policy of mandatory Internet filtering for all Australians. While the policy has not yet come into force, it has generated substantial opposition, with only a few groups in support. The Labor Party does not have enough votes in the Senate to enact any legislation to support the filter, so the filter has “effectively been scuttled” unless the government is able to implement the filter by other means.[1][2][3] The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) maintains a blacklist, leaked in March 2009,[4] of websites which would form the basis for the mandatory filter. It has issued a take-down notice and threatened fines of $11,000 per day to at least one website hosted in Australia which contained a link to material on this blacklist.[5]On Tuesday 15 December 2009, it was announced that new legislation, entitled “Measures to improve  safety of the internet for families”, would be introduced to support mandatory Internet filtering.[6]

This legislation is unlikely to be introduced before June 2010

Internet censorship is control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet. The legal issues are similar to offline censorship.

One difference is that national borders are more permeable online: residents of a country that bans certain information can find it on websites hosted outside the country. A government can try to prevent its citizens from viewing these even if it has no control over the websites themselves. Filtering can be based on a blacklist or be dynamic. In the case of a blacklist, that list is usually not published. The list may be produced manually or automatically.

Barring total control on Internet-connected computers, such as in North Korea, total censorship of information on the Internet is very difficult (or impossible) to achieve due to the underlying distributed technology of the Internet. Pseudonymity and data havens (such as Freenet) allow unconditional free speech, as the technology guarantees that material cannot be removed and the authorof any information is impossible to link to a physical identity or organization.

Technical censorship

Some commonly used methods for censoring content are:

  • IP blocking. Access to a certain IP address is denied. If the target Web site is hosted in a shared hosting server, all websites on the same server will be blocked. This affects IP-based protocols such as HTTP, FTP and POP. A typical circumvention method is to find proxies that have access to the target websites, but proxies may be jammed or blocked, and some Web sites, such as Wikipedia (when editing), also block proxies. Some large websites like Google have allocated additional IP addresses to circumvent the block, but later the block was extended to cover the new IPs.
  • DNS filtering and redirection. Don’t resolve domain names, or return incorrect IP addresses. This affects all IP-based protocols such as HTTP, FTP and POP. A typical circumvention method is to find a domain name server that resolves domain names correctly, but domain name servers are subject to blockage as well, especially IP blocking. Another workaround is to bypass DNS if the IP address is obtainable from other sources and is not blocked. Examples are modifying the Hosts file or typing the IP address instead of the domain name in a Web browser.
  • Uniform Resource Locator (URL) filtering. Scan the requested URL string for target keywords regardless of the domain name specified in the URL. This affects the HTTP protocol. Typical circumvention methods are to use escaped characters in the URL, or to use encrypted protocols such as VPN and TLS/SSL.[3]
  • Packet filtering. Terminate TCP packet transmissions when a certain number of controversial keywords are detected. This affects all TCP-based protocols such as HTTP, FTP and POP, but Search engine results pages are more likely to be censored. Typical circumvention methods are to use encrypted connections – such as VPN and TLS/SSL – to escape the HTML content, or by reducing the TCP/IP stack‘s MTU/MSS to reduce the amount of text contained in a given packet.
  • Connection reset. If a previous TCP connection is blocked by the filter, future connection attempts from both sides will also be blocked for up to 30 minutes. Depending on the location of the block, other users or websites may also be blocked if the communication is routed to the location of the block. A circumvention method is to ignore the reset packet sent by the firewall.[4]
  • Web feed blocking. Increasingly, incoming URLs starting with the words “rss”, “feed”, or “blog” are blocked.[5]
  • Reverse surveillance. Computers accessing certain websites including Google are automatically exposed to reverse scanning from the ISP in an apparent attempt to extract further information from the “offending” system.[citation needed]

One of the most popular filtering software programmes is SmartFilter, owned by Secure Computing in California, which has recently been bought by McAfee. SmartFilter has been used by Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, as well as in the US and the UK

BLACK= Heavy cencorship

RED = Under Survellience and tracking

YELLOW =Limited Cencorship


File:Internet blackholes.svg

The fight for free access to information is being played out to an ever greater extent on the Internet. The emerging general trend is that a growing number of countries are attemptimg to tighten their control of the Net, but at the same time, increasingly inventive netizens demonstrate mutual solidarity by mobilizing when necessary.

The Internet: a space for information-sharing and mobilizing

In authoritarian countries in which the traditional media are state-controlled, the Internet offers a unique space for discussion and information-sharing, and has become an ever more important engine for protest and mobilization. The Internet is the crucible in which repressed civil societies can revive and develop.

While there is no universally agreed upon definition of what constitutes “pervasive censorship”, RSF (Reporters sans frontières) maintains an internet enemy list[11] while the OpenNet Initiative categorizes some nations as practicing extreme levels of Internet censorship. Such nations often censor political content and may retaliate against citizens who violate the censorship with imprisonment or other sanctions.

Main article: Internet censorship in Burma
Burma (also known as Myanmar) is in ONI’s substantial category and is on the RSF’s internet enemy list. Internet use is so threatening in Burma that even going online is considered a dissident act, thus giving the country a very low penetration rate. The internet is regulated by the Electronic Act which bans the importing and use of a modem without official permission, and the penalty for violating this is a 15 year prison sentence, as it is considered “damaging state security, national unity, culture, the national economy and law and order.” [12]Burma has banned the websites of political opposition groups, sites relating to human rights, and organizations promoting democracy in Burma.[10] During the 2007 anti-government protests, Burma completely shut down all internet links from its country.[13]

Main article: Censorship in Cuba
Cuba is on ONI’s watchlist and on RSF’s internet enemy list. According to Reporters Without Borders[14], Cuba has the lowest ratio of computers per inhabitant in Latin America, and the lowest internet access ratio of all the Western hemisphere.[15] Citizens have to use government controlled “access points”, where their activity is monitored through IP blocking, keyword filtering and browsing history checking. The government cites its citizens’ access to internet services are limited due to high costs and the American embargo, but there are reports concerning the will of the government to control access to uncensored information both from and to the outer world.[16] The Cuban government continues to imprison independent journalists for contributing reports through the Internet to web sites outside of Cuba.[17]Salim Lamrani, a professor at Paris Descartes University, has accused Reporters Without Borders with making unsupported and contradictory statements regarding Internet connectivity in Cuba.[18] However, despite precise figures are hard to know because of the secretive nature of the regime and its telecommunication policies, testimonials from independent bloggers, activists and international watchers agree by saying the difficulties for non-government people to access the web as well as the harsh punishments against transgressors[19][20][21] are the norm. The Committee to Protect Journalists has pointed Cuba as one of the ten most censored countries around the world[22].

Egypt is not categorized by the ONI and is on the RSF’s internet enemy list. Due to fears of terrorism, the government increased web surveillance in 2007. To connect to wireless internet in a public place, such as a cybercafé, a person must give up a lot of personal information, such as a phone number or ID #, making it hard for citizens to express themselves freely.[12]

Main article: Internet censorship in Iran
Iran is in ONI’s pervasive category and on RSF’s internet enemy list. Iran Internet censorship is delegated to ISPs who attempt to filter contents critical of the government, pornographic websites, political blogs, and especially recently women’s rights websites, weblogs, and online magazines.[10][23] Bloggers in Iran have been imprisoned for their Internet activities.[24] Most recently, the Iranian government temporarily blocked access, between 12 May 2006 and January 2009, to video-upload sites such as[25]. Flickr, which was blocked for almost the same amount of time was opened in February 2009. But after 2009 election protests YouTube, Flickr, Twitter, Facebook and many more websites got blocked again.[citation needed]

 North Korea
Main article: Internet censorship in North Korea
North Korea is not categorized by ONI but is on RSF’s internet enemy list. Only a few hundred thousand citizens in North Korea, representing about 4% of the total population, have access to the Internet, which is heavily censored by the national government.[26] According to the RSF North Korea is a prime example where mediums of communication are controlled by the government. According to the RSF, Internet is the medium most used to the service of the North Korean government to primarily spread propaganda. The North Korean network is monitored heavily with only two websites being hosted under a domain name. All websites are under government control, as is all other media in North Korea.[12]

 People’s Republic of China
Main article: Internet censorship in the People’s Republic of China
The People’s Republic of China is in ONI’s pervasive category and is on RSF’s internet enemy list. China blocks or filters Internet content relating to Tibetan independence, Taiwan independence, police brutality, the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, freedom of speech, pornography, some international news sources (such as the VOA), certain religious movements (such as Falun Gong), and many blogging websites. Some 52 cyber dissidents are reportedly imprisoned in China for their online postings.[27]

Syria has banned websites for political reasons and arrested people accessing them, and is in ONI’s pervasive category and is on RSF’s internet enemy list. In addition to filtering a wide range of Web content, the Syrian government monitors Internet use very closely and has detained citizens “for expressing their opinions or reporting information online.” Vague and broadly worded laws invite government abuse and have prompted Internet users to engage in self-censoring and self-monitoring to avoid the state’s ambiguous grounds for arrest.[10][28]

Main article: Internet censorship in Tunisia
Tunisia is in ONI’s pervasive category and is on RSF’s internet enemy list. Tunisia has blocked thousands of websites (such as pornography, mail, search engine cached pages, online documents conversion and translation services) and peer-to-peer and FTP transfer using a transparent proxy and port blocking. Cyber dissidents including pro-democracy lawyer Mohammed Abbou have been jailed by the Tunisian government for their online activities.[29]

Turkmenistan is not categorized by the ONI and it is on the RSF’s internet enemy list. Internet usage in Turkmenistan is under tight control by the government. Turkmen got their news through satellite television until 2008 when the government decided to get rid of satellites leaving Internet as the only medium where information could be gathered. Internet is monitored thoroughly by the government as websites ran by human rights organizations and news agencies were blocked. Attempts to get around this censorship could lead to grave consequences [12]

Uzbekistan is in ONI’s pervasive category and is on RSF’s internet enemy list. Uzbekistan prevents access to websites regarding banned Islamic movements, independent media, NGOs, and material critical of the government’s human rights violations.[10] Some Internet cafes in the capital have posted warnings that users will be fined for viewing pornographic websites or website containing banned political material.[30]

Main article: Internet censorship in Vietnam
Vietnam is in ONI’s pervasive category and is on RSF’s internet enemy list. The main networks in Vietnam prevent access to websites critical of the Vietnamese government, expatriate political parties, and international human rights organizations, among others.[10] Online police reportedly monitor Internet cafes and cyber dissidents have been imprisoned for advocating democracy.


Main article: Internet censorship in Australia
Australia is in ONI’s nominal category as of 2008. It does not allow content that would be classified “RC” (Refused Classification or banned) or “X18+” (hardcore non-violent pornography) to be hosted within Australia and considers such content “prohibited”/”potentially prohibited” outside Australia; it also requires most other age-restricted content sites to verify a user’s age before allowing access. Since January 2008 material that would be likely to be classified “R18+” or “MA15+” and which is not behind such an age verification service (and, for MA15+, which also meets other criteria such as provided for profit, or contains certain media types) also fits the category of “prohibited” or “potentially prohibited”. The regulator ACMA can order local sites which do not comply taken down, and overseas sites added to a blacklist provided to makers of PC-based filtering software. The list itself and associated documentation was specially exempted from Freedom of Information laws under the previous Howard government. Identification of these “prohibited” or “potentially prohibited” items appears to be done mainly as a response to individual complaints rather than by any attempt to pre-emptively classify sites or pages. In addition, certain addresses (mostly of child porn) also come from international and local law enforcement and related sources. The number of items on the prohibited blacklist was in the range of 1,000 to 1,300 in late 2008 and early 2009, with roughly 32% classified as “child abuse material and child sexual abuse material”[32].Both major Australian political parties have shown support for the policy of mandatory blocking at the ISP level, of material on the ACMA blacklist, as well as providing a second level of opt-out “clean feed” which would also block adult content and an unknown number of other categories.[33] As of 2008 this policy has been outlined, but not implemented, and there has been significant opposition to it.[34] In March 2009, the ACMA “blacklist” was leaked, revealing several innocent sites which were included in error.In December 2009, the federal Labor government released results of its censorship technical trial and based on its interpretation of those results released a new internet censorship policy.[35]

 A Bahraini website blockedOn 5 January 2009 the Ministry of Culture and Information issued an order (Resolution No 1 of 2009)[36] pursuant to the Telecommunications Law and Press and Publications Law of Bahrain that regulates the blocking and unblocking of websites. This resolution requires all ISPs – among other things – to procure and install a website blocking software solution chosen by the Ministry. The Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (“TRA”) assisted the Ministry of Culture and Information in the execution of the said Resolution by coordinating the procurement of the unified website blocking software solution. This software solution is operated solely by the Ministry of Information and Culture and neither the TRA nor ISPs have any control over sites that are blocked or unblocked.

 South Korea
South Korea is in ONI’s substantial category but is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. South Korea’s internet censorship policy is highly political and particularly strong toward suppressing anonymity in the Korean internet. In 2007, numerous bloggers were censored and their posts deleted by police for expressing criticism of, or even support for, presidential candidates. This even lead to some bloggers being arrested by the police.[37] Subsequently in 2008, just before a new presidential election, new legislation that required all major internet portal sites to require identity verification of their users was put into effect. This applies to all users who add any publicly viewable content. For example, to post a comment on a news article, a user registration and citizen identity number verification is required. For foreigners who do not have such numbers, a copy of passport must be faxed and verified. Although this law was initially met with public outcry, as of 2008, most of the major portals, including Daum, Naver, Nate, and Yahoo Korea, enforce such verification before the user can post any material that is publicly viewable.[citation needed] Also, South Korea has banned at least 31 sites considered sympathetic to North Korea through the use of IP blocking.[10] Moreover, They started to block illegal websites such as unrated games, pornography, gambling, etc, since 2008. Attempts to access these sites are automatically redirected to the warning page showing “This site is legally blocked by the government regulations.”[38] Furthermore, search engines are required to verify age for some keywords deemed inappropriate for minors. For such keywords, age verification using national identity number is required. For foreigners, a copy of passport must be faxed to verify the age. As of 2008, practically all large search engine companies in South Korea, including foreign-owned companies (e.g. Yahoo! Korea), have complied with this legislation.[citation needed] Only Google evades government’s legislation. In April 2009 when Communication Commission ordered to put on user verification system at YouTube, Google Korea blocked video uploading from user whose country setting is Korean[39].

 Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia is in ONI’s substantial category and is on RSF’s internet enemy list. Saudi Arabia directs all international Internet traffic through a proxy farm located in King Abdulaziz City for Science & Technology. Content filtering is implemented there using software by Secure Computing.[40] Additionally, a number of sites are blocked according to two lists maintained by the Internet Services Unit (ISU):[41] one containing “immoral” (mostly pornographic) sites, the other based on directions from a security committee run by the Ministry of Interior (including sites critical of the Saudi government). Citizens are encouraged to actively report “immoral” sites for blocking, using a provided Web form. The legal basis for content-filtering is the resolution by Council of Ministers dated 12 February 2001.[42] According to a study carried out in 2004 by the OpenNet Initiative:

The most aggressive censorship focused on pornography, drug use, gambling, religious conversion of Muslims, and filtering circumvention tools.[40]See the report by Harvard University’s Law School on Documentation of Internet Filtering in Saudi Arabia.

 United Arab Emirates
The United Arab Emirates is in ONI’s substantial category and is not on Reporters Without Borders (RSF)’s internet enemy list. The United Arab Emirates forcibly censors the Internet using Secure Computing’s solution. The nation’s ISPs Etisalat and du (telco) ban pornography, politically sensitive material, and anything against the perceived moral values of the UAE. All or most VoIP services are blocked.

Yemen is in ONI’s substantial category and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Yemen’s two ISPs block access to contents falling under the categories of gambling, adult contents, and sex education as well as material seeking to convert Muslims to other religions
Nominal and others

Belgian internet providers Belgacom, Telenet, Base, Scarlet, EDPnet, Dommel, Proximus, Mobistar, Mobile Vikings, Tele2, and Versatel have started filtering several websites on DNS level since April 2009[43]. People who browse the internet using one of these providers and hit a blocked website are redirected to a page that claims that the content of the website is illegal under Belgian law and therefore blocked[44].

Brazilian legislation restricts the freedom of expression (Paim Law), directed especially to publications considered racist (such as neo-nazi sites). The Brazilian Constitution also prohibits anonymity of journalists.

Canada is in ONI’s nominal category and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. In a few cases, information which the government is actively attempting to keep out of Canadian broadcast and print media (such as names of young offenders or information on criminal trials subject to publication bans) is available to Canadian users via Internet from sites hosted outside Canada. Project Cleanfeed Canada ( decides what sites are child pornographic in nature and transmits those lists to the voluntarily participating ISPs who can then block the pages for their users. However, some argue that they are accountable to no one and could be adding non pornographic sites to their list without public knowledge.[citation needed]

Chile is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list and it’s considered one of the most liberal countries in terms of internet freedom in Latin America. Many educational institutions (universities and schools) block the access to websites like YouTube, Fotolog, Flickr, Blogger, Rapidshare, Twitter and Facebook, depending of the institution; in some cases also popular portals like,, are also blocked; pornography, specially any kind of child pornographic website is blocked.[45] The Chilean Government also block the access in their computers to blogs or electronic versions of the local newspapers with opinions against the Government or the ruling coalition, for example, during the first days of Transantiago or the 2006 Student Protests or the Chile-Microsoft relationship.

Colombia blocks several websites as part of its Internet Sano program.In December 2009, an internaute was sent to prison for promoting a group against president Alvaro Uribe’s sons [2]. 

In Croatia, Damir Fintić, a “promoter of a blog site” is in jail because an anonymous blogger has written something against one politician. That politician sued Fintić and won. Fintić does not have the money to pay the lost cause and is in jail.

 Czech Republic
Since 2008, mobile operators T-mobile[46] and Vodafone [47][48] pass mobile and fixed Internet traffic through Cleanfeed which uses data provided by the Internet Watch Foundation to identify pages believed to contain indecent photographs of children, and racist materials. On August 13, 2009, Telefónica O2 Czech Republic, Czech DSL incumbent and mobile operator, started to block access to sites listed by Internet Watch Foundation. Operator said he wanted to replace the list with data provided by Czech Police.[49] Blocking system roll-out attracted public attention due to serious network service difficulties and many innocent sites mistakenly blocked[50]. The concrete blocking implementation is unknown but it’s believed recursive DNS servers provided by the operator to his customers have been modified to return fake answers diverting consequent TCP connections to HTTP firewall.[51]

Denmark is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Denmark’s biggest Internet service provider TDC A/S launched a DNS-based child pornography filter on 18 October 2005 in cooperation with the state police department and Save the Children, a charity organisation. Since then, all major providers have joined and as of May 2006, 98% of the Danish Internet users are restricted by the filter.[52] The filter caused some controversy in March 2006, when a legal sex site named was caught in the filter, sparking discussion about the reliability, accuracy and credibility of the filter.[53] Also, as of 18 October 2005, TDC A/S has blocked access to, a popular MP3 download site, through DNS filtering.[54] 4 February 2008 a Danish court has ordered the Danish ISP Tele2 to shutdown access to the filesharing site for all its Danish users.[55] On 23 December 2008, the list of 3,863 sites filtered in Denmark was released by Wikileaks.[56]

Early 2010 Estonia started DNS filtering of “remote gambling sites” conflicting the renewed Gambling Act (2008). Estonia Implements Gambling Act. So far (2010-03-01) only one casino has obtained the proper license. The Gambling Act says – servers for the “legal” remote gambling must be physically located in Estonia. The latest local news is that Tax and Customs Board has compiled a blocking list containing 175 sites which ISPs are to enforce. Previously Internet was completely free of censorship in Estonia.

Fiji is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. In May 2007 it was reported that the military in Fiji had blocked access to blogs critical of the regime.[57]

Finland is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Following a “voluntary law” [58] enacted by Finnish parliament in 1 January 2007, most of the Finland’s major Internet service providers decided on 22 November 2006 to begin filtering child pornography and ISPs first started filtering on January 2008. The Ministry of Communications has commented that filtering is voluntary for ISPs as long as they do not refuse. The blacklist is provided by Finnish police and should contain only foreign sites. Technically filtering was planned to be URI based like the United Kingdom’s Cleanfeed, but so far implementations have been DNS based.A majority of these censored Internet sites, however, do not actually seem to be censored by the Finnish ISPs due to actual child pornography, but due to “normal” adult pornography instead. Most of the known sites are also located in EU or United States where child pornography is strictly illegal anyway. Two-thirds of the Finnish internet censorship list of the filtered domains were collected on,[59] the homepage of Matti Nikki, a Finnish activist criticizing Internet censorship in the European Union and especially in Finland. On 12 February 2008, Nikki’s page was also added to National Bureau of Investigation’s blacklist (Wikinews article). As the list was compiled using links from pornography sites, this list does not tell anything about the last third of the blocked sites. At September 2008 problems with accuracy continued, when websites of main international standards organization for World Wide Web W3C was briefly blacklisted as childporn by mistake.[60] More recently, a government-sponsored report has considered establishing similar filtering in order to curb online gambling.[61]After investigation of complaints about how the law on filtering child pornography has been implemented and the actions of the police the vice Parliamentary Ombudsman concludes (29.5.2009) that the police has followed the law and that most sites on the list did have material that could be classified as child pornography at the time they were investigated by the police. He also found that the law is somewhat unclear and that its effect on free speech is problematic and recommends these matters be considered when the law is overseen.[62]

France is in ONI’s watchlist and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. French courts demanded Yahoo! block Nazi material in the case LICRA vs. Yahoo. The case is currently[citation needed] on appeal for an en banc rehearing. The Hadopi law, enacted in 2009, allows disconnecting from the Internet users that have been caught illegally downloading copyrighted content, or failing to secure their system again such illegal downloads; as of August 2009, this law is to be supplemented by a Hadopi2 law. The LOPPSI 2 law, brought before Parliament in 2009, will authorize a blacklist of sites providing child pornography,established by the Ministry of the Interior, which Internet service providers will have to block. The Loppsi “Bill on direction and planning for the performance of domestic security” is a far-reaching security bill that seeks to modernise Internet laws, criminalising online identity theft, allowing police to tap Internet connections as well as phone lines during investigations and targeting child pornography by ordering ISPs to filter Internet connections. In 2010, French parliament opposed all the amendments seeking to minimise the use of filtering Internet sites. This move has stirred controversy throughout French society, as the Internet filtering intended to catch child pornographers could also be extended to censor other material.[63] Critics also warn that filtering URLs will have no effect, as distributors of child pornographer and other materials are already using encrypted peer-to-peer systems to deliver their wares.[64]

Main article: Internet censorship in Germany

Ghana is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. In 2002 the government of Ghana censored internet media coverage of tribal violence in Northern Ghana.[65]

Main article: Internet censorship in Ireland

Main article: Internet censorship in India
India is in ONI’s nominal category and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. As of July 2006[update] the Indian government has directed ISPs to block seventeen websites, including some hosted on the Geocities, Blogspot and Typepad domains. Initial implementation difficulties led to these domains being blocked entirely.[66][67] Access to sites on these domains other than the specifically banned ones was restored by most ISPs after about a week.[68] The first documented incident of Internet censorship in India was the Yahoo! Groups ban of 23 September 2003. Kynhun, a Yahoo! group linked to the outlawed “Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council”, a minor separatist group, was ordered banned by the Department of Telecommunications. Difficulties in implementing the ban by the ISP’s ultimately led to all Yahoo! groups being banned for a period of about two weeks. Recently, Indian law enforcement has entered an agreement with the popular social networking site Orkut to track down what it deems defamatory content which, in their example, includes content critical of Bal Thackeray.[69]India is also looking to block Google Maps due to the Mumbai attacks.

Israel is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. The Orthodox Jewish parties in Israel proposed an internet censorship legislation would only allow access to adult-content Internet sites for users who identify themselves as adults and request not to be subject to filtering. In 27/02/2008 the law passed in its first of three votes required[70], however it has been rejected by the government’s legislation committee on 12/07/2009.[71] Israeli laws regarding the holocaust denial [72] apply to the Internet as well as to traditional media. Sites which deny the holocaust cannot be hosted in Israel and Israelis who attempt to use the Internet for the purposes of holocaust denial face arrest and imprisonment.

Main article: Censorship in Italy
Italy is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Italy bans the use of foreign bookmakers over the Internet by mandating certain edits to DNS host files of Italian ISPs.[73][74].Italy is also blocking access to websites containing child pornography.[75] In 2008, Italy blocked also The Pirate Bay website[76][77] for some time, basing this censorship on a law on electronic commerce.

Jordan is not on RSF’s internet enemy list and censorship is relatively light. Access to Internet content in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan remains largely unfettered, with filtering selectively applied to only a small number of sites. However, media laws and regulations encourage some measure of self-censorship in cyberspace, and citizens have reportedly been questioned and arrested for Web content they have authored. Censorship in Jordan is mainly focused on political issues that might be seen as a threat to national security due to the nation’s close proximity to regional hotspots like Israel, Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories. Jordan, unlike most of its neighbors, has a free and an advanced telecommunications sector.

 News blogs
Deputy Science and Technology Minister Kong Cho Ha has announced that all Malaysian news blogs will have to be register with the Ministry of Information. he justified this by stating the law was necessary to dissuade bloggers from promoting disorder in Malaysia’s multi-ethnic society.

In May 2009, the Mexican Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), asked Youtube to remove a parody of Fidel Herrera, governor of the state of Veracruz. Negative advertising in political campaigns is prohibited by present law, although the video appears to be made by a regular citizen which would make it legal. It was the first time a Mexican institution intervened directly with the Internet. However, Mexico has yet to censor any sites.

Main article: Internet censorship in Morocco
Morocco is in ONI’s watchlist and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. As of March 2006, Morocco had blocked access to a few blogging sites, such as LiveJournal. Reporters Without Borders says that Morocco now censors all political websites advocating Western Sahara’s independence, however many Western Sahara-related blogs are still accessible. Google Earth has also been added to the list of filtered Web sites in Morocco. In 2007 Morocco’s main telecommunication operator Maroc Telecom also blocked access to YouTube for nearly a month, without giving any reason.

Since 2007 in the Netherlands one major ISP, UPC Netherlands, blocks access on DNS level to sites authorities claim are known to provide child pornography. In the second quarter of 2008 all major Dutch ISPs have agreed with Ernst Hirsch Ballin of the Ministry of Justice to also block all the sites that are on the list. The blacklist is compiled by the National Police Forces (KLPD) [79]. Ernst Hirsch Ballin has said [80] that at the moment 150 websites are blocked. It contains no websites that are hosted in EU countries and they are checked once every 2 months by Productteam Bestrijding Kinderpornografie. Providers will not be forced to use it since that would be unconstitutional according to a research done by the governmental Scientific Research- and Documentation Center (WODC)[81] commissioned by the Ministry of Justice. As of 2009 the only providers that use the filter are UPC and two small providers, Scarlet and Kliksafe. The providers that have been positive about a non-mandatory filter do not have it in use.

Norway is in ONI’s watchlist and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Norway’s major Internet service providers have a DNS filter which blocks access to sites authorities claim are known to provide child pornography,[82] similar to Denmark’s filter. A list claimed to be the Norwegian DNS blacklist was published at Wikileaks in March 2009[83]. The minister of justice, Knut Storberget, sent a letter threatening ISPs with a law compelling them to use the filter should they refuse to do so voluntarily (dated August 29, 2008).[84]

Main article: Internet censorship in Pakistan
Pakistan is in ONI’s watchlist and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Pakistan has blocked access to websites critical of the government. Currently[citation needed], the government has blocked blogs hosted on A ban on pornographic websites has also been enacted.[citation needed]. Websites promoting Balochistan and Sindh nationalism or documenting human rights abuses in those places have also been banned.[3]Since 2007, No material has been reported are banned or censored including pornographic material.2008, Youtube was banned by the government and enforced throughout the country due to the launch of an Anti-Islamic video being posted. Ban was lifted only after 5 days.

Although in Poland the Internet is basically free from state interventions there is a problem with portal censorship[citation needed]. Most popular forums are heavily manipulated by their managements through organized mass-posting of preferred views[citation needed]. This kind of manipulation may hamper discussions between people of different outlooks and falsify the representativeness of a forum.
As of December 2008, Poland’s main ISP,TPSA, started to occasionally block some websites, which they deem “improper”, most notably child pornography and adult sites, but they also block some IRC channels and they used to block website for some time. [85] At present some legalisations about Internet censorships are proposed. There are propositions to build Register of blocked web sites, based on government organ choice ( Police, Ministry of Finance, Secret Police etc.). In project administrative decisions, without court intervention, may be performed, and then chosen address would be blocked. Owner of the site would not be informed until performing blockade. Then may be possible to follow procedure to legalise blocked site.

Russia is in ONI’s watchlist and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Russia pressured Lithuania into shutting down the Kavkaz-Center website, a site that hosts videos on attacks on Russian forces in Chechnya, and reports on the Second Chechen War from a Chechen separatist perspective.[10] In February 2008, it became known that six Russian internet providers with ties to the government were blocking access to an opposition aggregate news site. After this became public, the biggest of these companies dropped the block and explained that it was “testing content filters”. The other five blocks remain in place.[86]

In 2007 a lawsuit against Savva Terentiev, a musician from Syktyvkar, was started because of a commentary in a LiveJournal blog, in which he sharply criticised local police forces. He was accused of “provoking antagonism between social groups”. Although several philological expert examinations of the text denied this accusations, arguing that this was just a relational expression, he received a one-year suspended jail sentence.[87] Censorship of health-related issues on the Internet in Russia mounts, and encompasses the entire world to English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Foundation as well. It violates basic human rights of Russian-reading audience on health and freedom of expression.

Singapore is in ONI’s nominal category and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. In Singapore, three people were arrested and charged with sedition for posting racist comments on the Internet, of which two have been sentenced to imprisonment.[citation needed] Some ISPs also block internet content related to recreational drug use. Singapore’s government-run Media Development Authority maintains a confidential list of blocked websites that are inaccessible within the country. The Media Development Agency exerts control over Singapore’s three ISPs to ensure that blocked content is entirely inaccessible.

Slovenian National Assembly on 28 January 2010 accepted new changes to the law governing gambling which legalized Internet censorship in Slovenia, although currently just for Internet gambling web sites that run without permission of the Slovenian government. The law makes Internet service providers responsible for accessing those sites and thus requires them to install censorship equipment/systems which currently they have not yet had.

Sweden is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Sweden’s major Internet service providers have a DNS filter which blocks access to sites authorities claim are known to provide child porn, similar to Denmark’s filter. A partial sample of the Swedish internet censorship list can be seen at a Finnish site criticizing internet censorship. The Swedish police are responsible for updating this list of forbidden Internet sites. On 6 July, Swedish police said that there is material with child pornography available on torrents linked to from the torrent tracker site Pirate Bay and said it would be included in the list of forbidden Internet sites. This, however, did not happen as the police claimed the illegal material had been removed from the site. Police never specified what the illegal content was on TPB. This came with criticism and accusations that the intended The Pirate Bay’s censorship was political in nature.

Main article: Internet censorship in Thailand
Thailand is in ONI’s nominal category and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. Significant efforts have been made in Thailand to oppose sites that are representing illegal activities. Activities such as gambling, drug usage and pornography are strictly banned, using DNS control in Thailand and, more effectively, a transparent proxy. This makes the website appear to be inaccessible. Also, the government has banned sites that discuss circumventing Internet censorship.[citation needed]

Main article: Internet censorship in Turkey
Many minor and major websites in Turkey have been subject to censorship until now, including the oldest and most popular Turkish social blogging community Sourtimes and widely popular poetry and literature community On 6 March 2007, the government of Turkey blocked access to the video-upload site, with the following statement parked on the domain: “Access to site has been suspended in accordance with decision no: 2007/384 dated 06.03.2007 of Istanbul First Criminal Peace Court.”[88] The ban was met with widespread protests and lifted two days later. Youtube was banned again in 12.03.2008 with decision no 2008/251, which was then soon lifted. As of August 2008, Youtube is still banned in the country since 5 May 2008, due to two court decisions.

Beside Youtube, 853 minor and major websites are currently banned in Turkey, including the widely popular blogging site, which has been banned since August 2007 complete with all subdomains. As of October 2008, Blogger is banned too. Other prominent websites currently on ban in Turkey include Youporn, The Pirate Bay, Megaupload, Deezer, Virb, Dailymotion, Google Groups, Tagged,Netlog, Slide, GeoCities, CareerBuilder ,Alibaba, ShoutCast and in 24 October 2008 Blogspot.

Ironically, The Internet Movie Database had been lucky enough to get away from being censored due to amisspelling of its domain, resulting in a futile ban on[89]

As of September 2008, Turkey filters access to prominent evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins’ Web site. The filtering was in response to a complaint from Turkish creationist Adnan Oktar (nom de plumeHarun Yahya). Oktar is also behind the filtering of WordPress and Google Groups.

Turkey is not categorized by ONI and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. However, beside the old media control and censorship association RTÜK, a new governmental association has been recently established just for Internet control and censorship without prior court judgement as it was before. According to the 5651st law of Turkish Penal Code, all media including websites directing people to suicide, child abuse, drugs, pornography, prostitution, insulting and gambling are forbidden.Turkish Telecommute Foundation has also a website for public reports[90]. Nevertheless due to the public profile of the major websites currently on ban; juridicial, technical and ethical arguments for their complete censoring have been painfully lacking, which resulted in extensive piercing of the prohibitions via the use of proxies or change of DNS servers.

 United Kingdom
Main article: Internet Censorship in the United Kingdom
The United Kingdom is in ONI’s watchlist and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list. British Telecommunications ISP passes internet traffic through a service called Cleanfeed which uses data provided by the Internet Watch Foundation to identify pages believed to contain indecent photographs of children.[91][92] When such a page is found, the system creates a ‘URL not found page’ error rather than deliver the actual page or a warning page. Other ISPs use different systems such as WebMinder [4].

Regarding CleanFeed, the list of banned websites is provided by Internet Watch Foundation (IWF).

CleanFeed is a silent content filtering system, which means that internet users cannot state if they are being regulated by CleanFeed or facing connection failures. According to a small-sample survey being conducted at 2008 by Nikolaos Koumartzis [93], an MA researcher at London College of Communication, the vast majority of UK based internet users (90.21%) were unaware of the existence of CleanFeed software. Moreover, 60.87% of the participants stated that they don’t trust BT and 65.22% of them that don’t trust IWF either to be responsible for a silent censorship system in UK.

 United States of America
Main article: Internet censorship in the United States
The United States of America is in ONI’s nominal category and is not on RSF’s internet enemy list.

In 1996, the United States enacted the Communications Decency Act, which severely restricted online speech that could potentially be seen by a minor – which, it was argued, was most of online speech.

Free speech advocates, however, managed to have most of the act overturned by the courts. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act criminalizes the discussion and dissemination of technology that could be used to circumvent copyright protection mechanisms, and makes it easier to act against alleged copyright infringement on the Internet. Many school districts in the United States frequently censor material deemed inappropriate for the school setting. In 2000, the U.S. Congress passed the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) which requires schools and public libraries receiving federal funding to install internet filters or blocking software.[94] Congress is also considering legislation to require schools,some businesses and libraries to block access to social networking websites, The Deleting Online Predators Act. Opponents of Internet censorship argue that the free speech provisions of the First Amendment bars the government from any law or regulation that censors the Internet.[95]

A 4 January 2007 restraining order issued by U.S. District Court Judge Jack B. Weinstein forbade a large number of activists in the psychiatric survivors movement from posting links on their websites to ostensibly leaked documents which purportedly show that Eli Lilly and Company intentionally withheld information as to the lethal side-effects of Zyprexa. The Electronic Frontier Foundation appealed this as prior restraint on the right to link to and post documents, saying that citizen-journalists should have the same First Amendment rights as major media outlets.[96] It was later held that the judgement was unenforcable, though First Amendment claims were rejected.[97]

In January 2010, a lawsuit was filed against an online forum,, by a Maldives diving charter company (see scubaboard lawsuit). The owner of the company claimed $10 million in damages caused by users of scubaboard,, and the owner of Individual forum members were named in the lawsuit as “employees” of the forum, despite their identity being anonymous except for their IP address to the moderators and owners of

The Department of Defense filters certain IP addresses. The US military’s filtering policy is laid out in a report to congress entitled Department of Defense Personnel Access to the Internet.
Google:[99] “Google may temporarily or permanently remove sites from its index and search results if it believes it is obligated to do so by law, if the sites do not meet Google’s quality guidelines, or for other reasons, such as if the sites detract from users’ ability to locate relevant information.”

Censorship by Google refers to Google Inc.’s removal or omission of information from its services or subsidiary companies, such as YouTube, in order to comply with its company policies, legal demands, or various government censorship laws

Yahoo!:[100] Yahoo!’s terms of service state that they reserve the right to “pre-screen, refuse or remove” any content that they feel violates the terms of service or deem distasteful, however removing information is never obligatory. Yahoo! also does not reserve the right to pre-screen any information.



Venezuela’s Chavez calls for internet controls

(Reuters) – Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez, who is criticized by media freedom groups, called on Saturday for regulation of the Internet and singled out a website that he said falsely reported the murder of one of his ministers.


“The Internet cannot be something open where anything is said and done. Every country has to apply its own rules and norms,” Chavez said. He cited German Chancellor Angel Merkel as having expressed a similar sentiment recently.

Chavez is angry with Venezuelan political opinion and gossip website Noticierodigital, which he said had falsely written that Diosdado Cabello, a senior minister and close aide, had been assassinated. The president said the story remained on the site for two days.

“We have to act. We are going to ask the attorney general for help, because this is a crime. I have information that this page periodically publishes stories calling for a coup d’etat. That cannot be permitted.”

Social networking web sites like Twitter and Facebook are very popular among Venezuela’s opposition movements to organize protests against the government. Chavez has complained that people use such sites to spread unfounded rumors.

Many opponents fear Chavez plans to emulate the government oversight of the Web used by allies Cuba, China and Iran, but the socialist leader has not given any sign that he is planning such a move.

In 2007 Chavez refused to renew the license for television station RCTV, which is now battling to survive as a cable-only operator.

The government has also put pressure on opposition TV network Globovision to soften its editorial line and last year closed dozens of radio stations for administrative breaches.

(Reporting by Eyanir Chinea; writing by Frank Jack Daniel)


The real reasons for War ,Government and religious peadophile rings , drug company test results , bank bailout plans , MP’s expences and lobby groups, anti-Israel news ,etc etc





In November 2007, “Father of the Internet” Vint Cerf stated that he sees Government-led control of the Internet failing due to private ownership.



A data haven is a computer or a network that holds data protected from government action by both technical means (encryption) and location in a country that has either no laws, or poorly-enforced laws restricting use of data and no extradition treaties. HavenCo (centralized) and Freenet (decentralized) are two models of modern-day data havens.
Purposes of data havens
Reasons for establishing data havens include access to free political speech for users in countries

where censorship of the Internet is practiced.

Other reasons can include:

Distributing software, data or speech that violates laws such as the DMCA.
Copyright infringement.
Circumventing data protection laws.
Online gambling.

There are a number of resources that allow users to bypass the technical aspects of Internet censorship. Each solution has differing ease of use, speed, and security from other options. 

 Proxy websites
Main article: Proxy server
Proxy websites are often the simplest and fastest way to access banned websites in censored nations.Such websites work by being themselves un-banned but capable of displaying banned material within them.This is usually accomplished by entering a URL address which the proxy website will fetch and display.They recommend using the https protocol since it is encrypted and harder to block.

 Java Anon Proxy
Java Anon Proxy is primarily a strong, free and open source anonymizer software available for all operating systems. As of 2004[update], it also includes a blocking resistance functionality that allows users to circumvent the blocking of the underlying anonymity service AN.ON by accessing it via other users of the software (forwarding client).The addresses of JAP users that provide a forwarding server can be retrieved by getting contact to AN.ON’s InfoService network, either automatically or, if this network is blocked, too, by writing an e-mail to one of these InfoServices. The JAP software automatically decrypts the answer after the user completes a CAPTCHA. The developers are currently[citation needed] planning to integrate additional and even stronger blocking resistance functions.

 Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)
Using Virtual Private Networks, a user who experiences internet censorship can create a secure connection to a more permissive country, and browse the internet as if they were situated in that country. Some services are offered for a monthly fee, others are ad-supported.

Psiphon software allows users in nations with censored Internet such as China to access banned websites like Wikipedia. The service requires that the software be installed on a computer with uncensored access to the Internet so that the computer can act as a proxy for users in censored environments.[6]

I2P is open source software that can be used for anonymous surfing, chatting, blogging and file transfers, among other things.

Tor is a free software implementation that allows users to bypass Internet censorship while granting strong anonymity.

Sneakernet is a term used to describe the transfer of electronic information, especially computer files, by physically carrying data on storage media from one place to another. A sneakernet can movedata regardless of network restrictions simply by not using the network at all.[7]

The volunteer organization Information Without Borders is attempting to implement a sneakernet routing protocol for providing cheap Internet access to developing and post-conflict regions using donated flash drives, PDAs and mobile phones. The protocol is also useful for providing free and open Internet access to people living under repressive regimes that restrict free expression by limiting access.[8]

This protocol is still under development, but actual flash-drive sneakernets are known to exist in Cuba. Flash-drive sneakernets were used in 2008 to distribute a video of a student asking why Cubans are not permitted to access web sites like Yahoo.

Most of these solutions rely on gaining access to an internet connection that is not subject to filtering, often overseas or in a neighbouring state not subject to the same censorship laws. This is an inherent problem in internet censorship in that so long as there is one publicly accessible system in the world without censorship, it will still be possible to have an access censored material.


Iceland could become a journalism haven if a proposal put forward by some Icelandic MPs, aided by Wikileaks, succeeds. Julian Assange, editor of Wikileaks, said that the idea is to “try and reform Iceland’s media law to be a very attractive jurisdiction for investigative journalists.” The article notes one area in which supporters of the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative need to tread carefully: “…the troubles of the financial sector may lead some Icelanders to be sceptical of efforts to transform their country and [one supporter] is aware of the need not to make exaggerated claims.” A British opponent of the idea (and supporter of the UK’s draconian libel laws) is quoted: “The provisions allowing defendants to counter-sue ‘libel tourists’ in their home courts could transform the humble Icelander into a legal superman, virtually untouchable abroad for comment written — and uploaded — at home.”


To try and control this only leads to disaster. Today thanks to government cencorship we protect peadophiles in government and the church , we cover for government financial corruption and illegal mass murder abroad and this is just the tip of the iceberg……






3 Responses to Virtual WW3,Internet Freedom and the war in cyberspace

  1. Just want to say your article is as astonishing. The clearness in your post is simply cool and i can assume you’re an expert on this subject. Well with your permission let me to grab your RSS feed to keep updated with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please continue the enjoyable work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: