Europol, bots, end-user filters, creepy NGOs, Virtual Police Officers and abuse officials soon to be trawling our Internet and Social networks for "extremist" content
Excerpts below, full pdf report embedded at the botom of the post.
But first Clean IT´s embarrassing excuse after EDRI leaked the document
________________________
28-8-2012, version 0.63
CLEAN IT PROJECT
- DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS DOCUMENT
FOR BEST PRACTICES AND PERMANENT DIALOGUE
CONFIDENTIAL / NOT FOR PUBLICATION / LIMITED DISTRIBUTION
This document is not for publication. The recipient may share this document only with others within
their organization on a u need~to-know" basis.
Legal framework
Recommendations:
a. All States committing to the Clean IT document must implement the EU FD 2002 and EU FD 2008;
b. All States must implement the EU Data Directive;
...
2. Governments must have clear policies on intelligence gathering and when to take action, against terrorist or
radicalizing co
3. Governments must have specialized police officer(s) 'patrol" on social media;
7. Governments must disseminate lists of domain names that can are not allowed to be registered, to prevent
terrorist propaganda;
8. Governments must subsidize competent NGOs that substantially contribute to reducing terrorist use of the Internet and radicalizing content on the internet;
11. Governments should include Internet companies' track record on reducing terrorist use of the Internet as a
criterion in purchasing policies and Public Relation policies;
12. Governments could have programs to educate web moderators;
13. Governments could implement counter narrative policies and projects.
furthermore...
e. How flagging/reporting works must be explained by service providers to their users.
f. The anonymity of the reporter must be preserved. Reporter details must never be shown to content owners;
g. Internet companies must be sufficiently (quantity and quality) staffed or supported to handle reports. Recognizing illegal, terrorist use of the Internet requires specialist knowledge on terrorism, (national) legislation and (national) cultural differences;
h. Reports of (potential) cases of terrorist use of the platform must be analyzed. Clearly illegal terrorist activity must be reported to LEAs immediately;
i. Specialized NGOs should actively flag what is (deemed) illegal terrorist content;
j. LEAs should primarily use formal ways of notifying Internet companies (notice and take action). In some countries flagging is also regarded as a formal notification;
k. Internet companies could extend a higher credibility status to trusted flagging organizations, like LEAs and specialized NGOs. Users could also be provided higher credibility status based on their (calculated) reputation in successfully reporting abuse.
i. Service/business conditions and abuse policies should not be very detailed in describing terrorist activity. A very detailed description will very likely cause gaps;
Centralisation
1. A European organisation, preferably Europol, should operate and host this points of contact system;
3. Persons in the points of contact systems that are regularly and repeatedly complained about their performance, should be removed from the system, and replace by another person from the same organisation;
4. Large Internet companies should not have to deal, if they do not want to, with too many individual LEAs and NGOs, but only a few representatives. It would be good if regular telephone calls are organised to discuss overall contacts and ooperation. It would also be desirable to channel requests to these companies via a limited number of (government or LEA contacts);
5. Only persons committed to implementing the Clean IT 'draft document' practices should be included in the Points of Contact System. Plus some recognized and 'logical' LEA, government and academic/research specialists.
Furthermore..
a. The Organization will provide research and advice on terrorist and other content which is recognised as dangerous throughout the EU and in each individual country;
e. The organization must include staff drawn from, not representatives of, governments, LEAs, Internet companies, NGOs and academic institutions;
f. The Organization should provide advice on:
• Material that can be researched and used for 'machine-learning';
• Known terrorist and extremist content;
• Hate Speech;
End Privacy
4. Internet companies must allow only real, common names. These must be entered when registering. On request of the Internet company, a registrant must provide proof of the real or common name. Internet companies can request to prove the real or common name also after a user has been flagged, signalled or reported.
5. Social media companies must allow only real pictures of users;
7. Internet companies must know and store the real identity and contact information of users and customers, in order to provide at least this information to LEAs in case of an investigation into (potential) terrorist use of the Internet.
Virtual POlice Force!
1. Virtual community policing must be used to find and connect to persons in danger to get radicalized.
2. To reduce terrorist use of the Internet virtual community police officers should (also) be active on those social media platforms known for terrorist or radicalizing activity.
5. Virtual police officers should use easy to understand ('popular') language, friendly icons and profile photographs, in order to lower the threshold of being contacted and in order to be effective in combination with (often younger) users of the social medium.
7. Virtual police offers must organize ways that other users of the social media can 'follow' or 'link' (to) them to increase awareness of terrorist use of the social medium and what is being or can be done against it.
8. Virtual police officers should become members in extremist and terrorist fora as much as possible, subscribe to news, mailing and alerts etc. to be able to detect any terrorist content or activity.
11. Virtual police officers should act on any terrorist content or activity they encounter, not only which is (clearly) related to their country, geographical unit or specialism.
12. Virtual police officers should also discuss with parents the dangers of radicalization of their children via social media.
Automatic Detection Systems
7. Governments and LEAs must offer assistance to Internet companies developing or using automated detection systems;
9. All terrorist use of the Internet signaled by the automated detection system and after that judged as such by the abuse officer of an Internet company, must be removed from the Internet, and put to the attention of LEA as soon as possible;
10. All terrorist use of the Internet signaled by the automated detection system and after that judged as such by an NGO must be put to the attention the Internet company and the competent LEA as soon as possible;
Operative System and Browser based policing buttons!
13. The browser or operating system base reporting button must send a signal to the Internet company involved, which will take appropriate action;
14. The system will also send a signal to LEA, which after some time will check whether it is satisfied with the action taken by the internet company and could chose to start a formal notice and action procedure,
15. Governments will start drafting legislation that will make offering such a system to Internet
users obligatory for browser or operating system service company as a condition of selling their
products in this country or the European Union.
CleanIT -Leaked EU Internet Censorship Legislation - LEA Clean IT
Europe at the Brink - A Wall Street Journal Documentary
In this documentary, Wall Street Journal editors and reporters examine the origins of Europe's debt crisis and why it spread with such ferocity to engulf much of the continent and threaten the entire world.
The EU has been sold to Britain as our best hope for the future . . . But behind the scenes, has another, more unsettling agenda been unfolding? The European Economic Community (EEC) began for Britain as a free-trade agreement in 1972. Today's European Union is well on its way to becoming a federal superstate, complete with one currency, one legal system, one military, one police force â even its own national anthem. In this shocking new documentary featuring EU insiders and commentators, independent author Phillip Day covers the history and goals of the European Union, as well as the disturbing, irrevocable implications this new government has for every British citizen. Whether the viewer is for or against Britain's participation, this film asks the troubling questions the mainstream media has refused to confront.
Thanks to Islam vs. the West"The identification of statements that could be classified
as “hate speech” seems all the more difficult because this
kind of speech does not necessarily manifest itself through
expressions of “hatred” or emotions. “Hate speech” can be
concealed in statements which at a first glance may seem
to be rational or normal." p.5
EU Manual on Hate Speech
Link:
Thanks to Postmandper!
Splendid documentary exposing the the EU expenses racket, showing how MEPs enrich themselves through expenses housing, travels and pensions, hiring of spouses, renting of party real estate etc. etc.
Add to this all the other schemes we have very little knowledge of such the surely very "generous" tax-rules applicable to EU oligarchs.
All of it obviously makes up a whole system of schemes carefully devised to redistribute the riches collected by draconian taxation on work in the former nation-states to special interest groups, cleptocrats and professional revolutionaries.
Framework Decision on combating Racism and Xenophobia
Thanks to Vladtepesblog
The Time That is Given Us
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I stand here before you in the city of Copenhagen in the year 2010. This is widely considered to be an enlightened country in the heart of an enlightened continent.
Our basic freedoms have long been guaranteed — first by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as passed by the United Nations in 1948, and then buttressed by the Council of Europe in 1950 through the European Convention of Human Rights, which was later affirmed by the European Union. Our individual countries have additionally codified the same basic rights in their own constitutions.
These rights include the freedom of individual conscience, the right to assemble peaceably, and the right to practice our religion freely, or to have no religion at all. And, perhaps most importantly of all, they include the right to voice our opinions freely and to publish them without hindrance.
Yet freedom of speech is under attack today here in Denmark, as it is in my own country Austria, and indeed all across Europe. Today, in 21st century Western Europe, our right to free speech is being shut down quietly and systematically with an effectiveness that the commissars in the old Soviet Union could only dream of.
A milestone in this ominous totalitarian trend will be reached tomorrow, 28 November 2010, when the member states of the European Union are required to implement an innocuous-sounding legal provision known as the “Framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia”, or, more fully, the “Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.” According to the final article of the Framework Decision, “Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Framework Decision by 28 November 2010.”
Why does this matter to the cause of free speech in Europe?
If you read the full text of the Framework Decision (which may be found in the legislative section of the EU’s website), you will learn that “Each Member State shall take the measures necessary… to ensure that the following intentional conduct is punishable.” Such “intentional conduct” includes “conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.”
Based on what has recently happened to Geert Wilders and me — and earlier to Gregorius Nekschot, Jussi Halla-aho, and numerous others — we can all guess who will be punished under this provision of the Framework Decision: those who criticize Islam.
Even worse, a complaint made by a member state does not have to be “dependent on a report or an accusation made by a victim of the conduct”, nor does the alleged offender have to be “physically present in its territory”.
In other words, if the dhimmi Austrian government objects to a cartoon published by Kurt Westergaard here in Denmark, Mr. Westergaard may be extradited by the Austrian Ministry of Justice to answer to hate speech charges in Austria. The European Arrest Warrant guarantees that the Danish government cannot legally interfere with such an extradition, and the 800-strong “European Gendarmerie Force” would be available to fetch Mr. Westergaard out of his bed and bring him to Vienna — with impunity.
As of tomorrow, the above scenario becomes a real possibility. It is not a paranoid fantasy. These legal provisions are detailed in the EU’s public documents, and they will enjoy the full force of law in all EU member states as of midnight tonight.
The death throes of free speech in Europe begin tomorrow morning.
Thanks to Vladtepesblog
The Time That is Given Us
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I stand here before you in the city of Copenhagen in the year 2010. This is widely considered to be an enlightened country in the heart of an enlightened continent.
Our basic freedoms have long been guaranteed — first by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as passed by the United Nations in 1948, and then buttressed by the Council of Europe in 1950 through the European Convention of Human Rights, which was later affirmed by the European Union. Our individual countries have additionally codified the same basic rights in their own constitutions.
These rights include the freedom of individual conscience, the right to assemble peaceably, and the right to practice our religion freely, or to have no religion at all. And, perhaps most importantly of all, they include the right to voice our opinions freely and to publish them without hindrance.
Yet freedom of speech is under attack today here in Denmark, as it is in my own country Austria, and indeed all across Europe. Today, in 21st century Western Europe, our right to free speech is being shut down quietly and systematically with an effectiveness that the commissars in the old Soviet Union could only dream of.
A milestone in this ominous totalitarian trend will be reached tomorrow, 28 November 2010, when the member states of the European Union are required to implement an innocuous-sounding legal provision known as the “Framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia”, or, more fully, the “Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.” According to the final article of the Framework Decision, “Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Framework Decision by 28 November 2010.”
Why does this matter to the cause of free speech in Europe?
If you read the full text of the Framework Decision (which may be found in the legislative section of the EU’s website), you will learn that “Each Member State shall take the measures necessary… to ensure that the following intentional conduct is punishable.” Such “intentional conduct” includes “conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.”
Based on what has recently happened to Geert Wilders and me — and earlier to Gregorius Nekschot, Jussi Halla-aho, and numerous others — we can all guess who will be punished under this provision of the Framework Decision: those who criticize Islam.
Even worse, a complaint made by a member state does not have to be “dependent on a report or an accusation made by a victim of the conduct”, nor does the alleged offender have to be “physically present in its territory”.
In other words, if the dhimmi Austrian government objects to a cartoon published by Kurt Westergaard here in Denmark, Mr. Westergaard may be extradited by the Austrian Ministry of Justice to answer to hate speech charges in Austria. The European Arrest Warrant guarantees that the Danish government cannot legally interfere with such an extradition, and the 800-strong “European Gendarmerie Force” would be available to fetch Mr. Westergaard out of his bed and bring him to Vienna — with impunity.
As of tomorrow, the above scenario becomes a real possibility. It is not a paranoid fantasy. These legal provisions are detailed in the EU’s public documents, and they will enjoy the full force of law in all EU member states as of midnight tonight.
The death throes of free speech in Europe begin tomorrow morning.
Enoch Powell speaks on December 29, 1976 on Britain's entry into the European Economic Community, today morphed into the EU. He frames the debate as a battle over Britain's national existence and parliamentary independence; and a fight for the continued existence of the nation itself.
4pat playlist
Since 1973 British politicians have been giving away control of your life to Brussels in secret...until now.
This video exposes the corruption in the EU.
We set out to make a video about the pros and cons of the Lisbon Treaty and found out to our horror the lies, manipulations and deceit behind the EU. From MEPs, legal experts and EU researches the true nature of the EU unfolded, how it really operates from behind closed doors and away from prying eyes. We discovered the massive power grab away from citizens and nations to the elites that is being proposed in this treaty.
Most shocking of all was how our elected representatives are willingly handing us over to this emerging Totalitarian Superstate by deception , propaganda and outright lies.This video details how the structures of the EU really operate, what the full significance of the Lisbon Treaty is and how it is the end of Nations within in the EU. MEPs describe their experience in Brussels and how they are undermined by the real power of the unelected and unaccountable Eurocrats who run the organization. How the politicians are working together for their own selfish needs while being used for a bigger agenda.