Pretty foolish idea

Internet giants face a multimillion-pound tax raid unless they agree to help combat the terrorist threat to ­Britain, which is at its worst “for 100 years”, the security minister revealed last night.

Ben Wallace accused internet firms of being “ruthless profiteers” that cost government a fortune by failing to assist the security ­ser­vices in identifying terrorists and stamping out extremism online.

Isn’t the general complaint rather that we can’t work out how to tax them in the first place?

The rather more basic point is that it’s we the people doing the actions, it’s we the people who want (maybe) the policing, we the people should be paying for it.

26 comments on “Pretty foolish idea

  1. In a lawful society there should be an obligation on its members to uphold the law. But oh boy, there’s a world of difference between “identifying terrorists” and “stamping out extremism online”. When did extremism become illegal? What’s the legal definition of extremism?
    Sounds like another opportunity to deploy the stiff middle finger.

  2. Given that the sort of posting caught by this would likely be broader than the postings caught by terror legislation, the scope to bankrupt the tech firms with bots posting messages would be too hard for some to resist.

  3. What do the Inet Giants have here that politico scum can seize–should the companies give the state a well-deserved “forcoffee? fourcoffeee!!”?

    Amazon are in Ireland and the others are on the end of phone lines so I’m not sure what the Fish Faced Cow could actually do to back up her anti-freedom commissar bullshit. Even without the 1st Amendment as an obstacle, asking Trump for help is a non-starter after the BluLabour Cow’s combined dissing/badmouth sprees against him. And the UN vote. Oh Dear.

    They should just laugh in her face. And publicly write to the 1922 Committee suggesting that there should be no place in their Party for a clown like May.

  4. Well, at least the government can take this tax revenue raised by “fighting extremism” and give it to known extremists to try to stop them blowing people up, thus making ‘Prevent’ fiscally neutral.

  5. YouTube, Twitter and the rest are already well on the way to cracking down on “extremism” (ie white male people representing their own interests). Lots of voices have disappeared already.

  6. When they say they’re going to fine the Post Office and telephone companies for not preventing terrorism over their carriers, *THEN* I’ll beleive that something is happening

  7. YouTube, Twitter and the rest are already well on the way to cracking down on “extremism” (ie white male people representing their own interests).

    Hence I don’t have much sympathy for them. The owners of these tech giants were quite happy to help the government squash opposing voices, especially in the run up to the 2016 US election. Now they are being hounded by the same governments. Boo fucking hoo.

  8. I was involved in the conversations at (what is now) Virgin Media when they were pressed by the government to implement the kiddie porn filters.

    Despite arguing that they should tell the government to introduce legislation if they wanted this to happen, they rolled over like placid lapdogs and did it voluntarily.

    We now have them blocking soccer from abroad and via Kodi boxes using the same technology – next it’ll be the extremism that gets banned.

    No better definition of the thin end of the wedge.

  9. Muslims were a peaceful, tolerant people with exemplary personal hygiene before Twitter came along.

  10. Increasingly, the Government is delegating its few real duties to private business. It’s so much cheaper to get someone else to do things for free (by making it illegal not to do them) than to go to all that bother of using the thousands of civil servants or the police or the fire service or the NHS or the Leaky Borders to do it.

  11. People in the U.S. spend more on private security than the cost of government security (police/courts/jails/prisons). A powerful indictment of government security.

    50 years ago, you commit a felony, you’d be sent to prison for a few years. Today, you will be released with an apology from the judge for your crummy childhood.

  12. Is it legal for the government to tax companies specifically as punishment for actions that are not illegal? Is this minister just a blowhard, or are we already at the thicker end of the wedge?

  13. Mmmm…. some fawlty logic there. A terrorist scare in the mall… I lose a couple of hours shopping time. The police/army/government response probably costs a hundred thou. If the scare turns out to be genuine, with casualties, multiply that by a hundred. Government would have to be damfools not to want to stop this at source.

    Say that a thousand crazy Southerners like me put up Youtube videos saying “kill all Whites/Asian/Blacks/The Queen/Tim Worstall” should we be stopped one by one, at huge expense, or should Youtube run a simple algorithm on all uploads, at little or no cost? If Facebook can tell there’s a tree and smiling people in a pic I post, surely it can detect death threats too.

  14. “”” the terrorist threat to ­Britain, which is at its worst “for 100 years” “””

    Am I the only person old enough to remember the IRA years?

  15. Well, all the IRA wanted was Papist-tinged Maoism across the 32 counties; they didn’t want to convert everyone in the world to left footery on pain of death.

  16. Their aims were different, but the terrorism cost more, disrupted more, and killed more, whichever is meant by “worst”.

  17. Ben Wallace: terrorist threat to Britain, which is at its worst “for 100 years”, the security minister revealed last night.

    Mr Wallace is lying, terrorist threat to Britain was much higher in 1970s, 80s & 90s

    Laughing in the face of evil: New book reveals the indomitable spirit – and remarkable black humour – of [Britain after terrorist attack]

    He was told that no bones were broken but that he was likely to suffer from shock and trauma and needed to stay in bed.

    He was not impressed by the diagnosis. ‘Listen, mate,’ he told the doctor, ‘I’ve just been blown up by a bomb and buried under ten tons of rubble. What bigger shock can I have than that?’

    Stiff-upper-lip attitudes like this amazed Carlos Perez-Avila, an A&E consultant from South America: ‘At home there would have been hysteria but here there was no crying and no one moaned, despite very serious injuries. I had never come across that sort of attitude before. It was surreal.’

  18. “What was the threat more than 100 years ago?”
    Well… one that comes to mind was the Fenians, the Irish Dynamiters, how little things change!

  19. British politicians allow hundreds of thousands of alien, intolerant, violent extremists into the country then, as a result, move urgently to eradicate free speech.

    To be honest, I think the crackdown following the Reichstag fire had more credibility.

  20. Security minister? What the hell does that even mean?

    I didn’t know we had a retard post like that until now.

  21. ‘that cost government a fortune by failing to assist the security ­ser­vices in identifying terrorists and stamping out extremism online’

    Not their job, mon.

    They don’t ‘cost government’ a fvcking thing. Government fails; it’s someone else’s fault.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.