+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Broadcasting Regulations (/forumdisplay.php?fid=138)
+---- Thread: Porn Filters (/showthread.php?tid=45765)
RE: Porn Filters - HannahsPet - 27-12-2013 13:59
(26-12-2013 22:49 )Fernandez Esperenda Wrote: Well if Cameron is voted in again i'm heading back home!
better get a flight sorted out for May 2015 then
cos if its a choice of him or milliband most will choose him 
RE: Porn Filters - munch1917 - 31-01-2014 16:21
Not exactly 'porn filter' related, but on a similar theme, an interesting piece of news on ISP level site blocking in Holland :
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=11194944
Seems the dutch introduced blocks on torrent sites like PirateBay, similar to those in the UK, but has found them to have no effect on torrent traffic levels. The court case that revealed this news also allows the blocks to now be removed.
The article suggests this may pave the way for the UK blocks to be challenged, but we shall see!
RE: Porn Filters - blackjaques - 31-01-2014 20:52
(27-12-2013 13:59 )HannahsPet Wrote:I cannot fathom out why anyone would choose Dave. I really can't. Censorship, gagging, eroding rights of the common man,?(26-12-2013 22:49 )Fernandez Esperenda Wrote: Well if Cameron is voted in again i'm heading back home!
better get a flight sorted out for May 2015 then
Then again, I'm not from southern England.
RE: Porn Filters - admiral decker - 01-02-2014 16:22
(31-01-2014 20:52 )blackjaques Wrote: I cannot fathom out why anyone would choose Dave. I really can't. Censorship, gagging, eroding rights of the common man,?
What has he censored or gagged then?
RE: Porn Filters - LatexRyan - 11-02-2014 13:20
(01-02-2014 16:22 )admiral decker Wrote:(31-01-2014 20:52 )blackjaques Wrote: I cannot fathom out why anyone would choose Dave. I really can't. Censorship, gagging, eroding rights of the common man,?
What has he censored or gagged then?
Censored the internet for one. Gagged, well it was his party who introduced the Gagging Law, which prevents campaigners who aren't helping the government or lining their pockets from actively going out and campaigning, and it doesn't apply to political campaigning only. They can still campaign of course, but only for a certain period of time.
RE: Porn Filters - saviour123 - 12-02-2014 18:00
(31-01-2014 20:52 )blackjaques Wrote:(27-12-2013 13:59 )HannahsPet Wrote:I cannot fathom out why anyone would choose Dave. I really can't. Censorship, gagging, eroding rights of the common man,?(26-12-2013 22:49 )Fernandez Esperenda Wrote: Well if Cameron is voted in again i'm heading back home!
better get a flight sorted out for May 2015 then
Then again, I'm not from southern England.
I am from the South of England..... and I still would not vote for him. If the Tories had their way, we would all be back in Victorian times, porn would be completely illegal, and there would be no sex before marriage.
The Tories have allways increased censorship when they have come in, however this time they have been pegged back a little due to not having a majority. I know nobody seems to like the Liberals atm, but I can assure you that a pure Tory government would have come down far harder on Porn.
RE: Porn Filters - circles_o_o_o - 04-03-2014 22:07
One of Cameron's senior advisors who was involved in making up policy on web porn filters has been arrested on charges of having child images.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572495/No-10-aide-arrested-child-porn-Police-quiz-man-advised-Cameron-web-filters.html
And these people say they have your best interests at heart.
RE: Porn Filters - munch1917 - 05-03-2014 15:57
(04-03-2014 22:07 )circles_o_o_o Wrote: One of Cameron's senior advisors who was involved in making up policy on web porn filters has been arrested on charges of having child images.
...
There's a potential shit-storm brewing over this on several fronts, but I suspect the other parties and the media are so deep in their own corruption they won't have the balls to follow it through.
He resigned from office one day before his arrest, suggesting he was tipped off about it in advance. How kind of the fuzz to warn him he was about to get get his collar felt!
Also, Downing Street computers were made available to plod to search for possible evidence, yet they kept quiet about the whole episode until it leaked out yesterday. Surely the arrest of one of your senior advisers on such a serious charge, when he was instrumental in your policies regarding internet censorship supposedly to limit access to such material, is something you really should be commenting on!
Without wishing to get overly political here, it was also suggested earlier this week that Cameron told the fuzz to leave his buddy Nigella Lawson alone after she admitted snorting coke. Seems he is happy to tell the rest of us how to live our lives, and to curtail our ability to make decisions for ourselves because he apparently knows best, but he and his pals can do as they please, and act as they please and that's all fine and dandy.
RE: Porn Filters - tony confederate - 05-03-2014 20:21
(05-03-2014 15:57 )munch1917 Wrote: He resigned from office one day before his arrest, suggesting he was tipped off about it in advance. How kind of the fuzz to warn him he was about to get get his collar felt!
By most accounts it wasn't the police who tipped him off. Downing Street computers were searched and apparently someone in Downing Street then tipped off the person in question.
RE: Porn Filters - Captain Vimes - 05-03-2014 21:23
(04-03-2014 22:07 )circles_o_o_o Wrote: One of Cameron's senior advisors who was involved in making up policy on web porn filters has been arrested on charges of having child images.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572495/No-10-aide-arrested-child-porn-Police-quiz-man-advised-Cameron-web-filters.html
And these people say they have your best interests at heart.
Stop it.
I've seen this all over the internet today because he has been arrested then he must be guilty. Okay the delay in informing the general public as to the time of his arrest looks well dodgy and you have only implied and not stated that he is guilty with the 'And these people say they have our best interests at heart' comment.
You are falling into the trap the tabloids have set. Remember Christopher Jefferies, judged, convicted and hanged by the press because he looked a bit 'weird'.
If this guy is guilty of viewing child abuse images then I hope he rots in hell but you have not heard any evidence and I well aware that the rich and powerful find satisfactory outcomes in the law courts that are denied to your average Joe/Joess but this is the road those of a repressive nature wish us, as a society. to travel down.
No need for proof, you one of those filthy bastards who likes looking at nude women, should be put in jail, don't agree with government policies should be put in jail.
It's the slippery slope to anyone who doesn't conform to the norm is seen as a deviant whether they have been actually proven to break a law of the land. Of course it will never be you until it is you. Whatever happened to innocent until proved guilty in this country?
Again, I reiterate that if he is proved guilty in a court of law then I hope he rots in hell but at the moment he has not been found guilty of anything but the 'cut his balls off, the guy doesn't deserve to live' comments are about as useful as mobs trying to lynch paediatricians.