[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Newsgroup *censorship*?!
- From: email@example.com (Lutz Donnerhacke)
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 96 16:45 MET DST
- Comment: This Message comes from the debate mailing list.
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
>From: BigEars@technocom.com (Big Ears.)
>Subject: Re: Newsgroup *censorship*?!
>Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 17:25:19 GMT
>Organization: Big Ears.
>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227
>Xref: as-node.jena.thur.de alt.censorship:43324 news.admin.censorship:7871
Mike Slocombe wrote:
> METROPOLITAN POLICE SERVICE
> Clubs and Vice Unit
> Charing Cross Police Station
> Agar Street
> London WC2N 4JP
> Telephone: 0171 321 7752
> Facsimile: 0171 321 7762
> To: All Internet Service Providers
> Dear Sir / Madam
> Pornographic Material on the Internet
> Further to the seminar held at New Scotland Yard on 2nd August I enclose,
> as promised by Superintendent Mike Hoskins, a list of those Newsgroups
> which we believe contain pornographic material.
> We have attempted to confirm that the Newsgroups listed currently contain
> this offensive material but as you will be only too aware the content is
> continually changing and you will need to satisfy yourself about the
> nature and content before taking any action. Furthermore, this list is
> not exhaustive and we are looking to you to monitor your Newsgroups
> identifying and taking necessary action against those others found to
> contain such material. As you will be aware the publication of obscene
> articles is an offence.
> This list is only the starting point and we hope, with the co-operation
> and assistance of the industry and your trade organisations, to be moving
> quickly towards the eradication of this type of Newsgroup from the
> Internet. At the seminar we debated the means of maintaining an up to
> date list and you will recall that ISPA volunteered to pool information
> and assist in this initiative. However, we are very anxious that all
> service providers should be taking positive action now, whether or not
> they are members of a trade association.
> We trust that with your co-operation and self regulation it will not be
> necessary for us to move to an enforcement policy.
> Yours Faithfully
> Stephen French
> Chief Inspector
====> a full list of newsgroups is in Mike's original posting in uk.misc
It is genuine. I have just spoken to CI Stephen French but he declined to
comment further on the non-pedo non-child porn newsgroups.
Mr French used the word "obscene" and I was left wondering whether normal
"adult" sex material was going to be targeted as part of this new police
clamp down which in Mr French's own words "was just starting".
Mr French is very approachable but he regretted the publication of his
"secret" letter to ISPs.
Mr French also stated it was "difficult" for the British police to pass on
to their American counterparts details of some really vile pictures of nasty
child abuse now circulating on un-censored Usenet news servers. Since
Michael Howard is against Europol (the EU police co-ordinating body
established in Den Haag) this comes as no surprise especially as Michael
appears to worship everything coming from America.
When I asked Mr French his grounds for believing alt.sex.breast (on his
list) contained child porn (which it does not because I've just looked) he
declined to comment.
To reduce child porn like the currently circulating BANG04.JPG (an American
posting) which shows a young girl 7 years old getting fucked up her arse by
an adult male, the public's participation should be welcome and encouraged.
However in true police fashion the great unwashed (i.e. the general public)
are neither to be trusted nor consulted. This is a fundamental error but an
error which is all too common in British policing.
The Metropolitan Police's clandestine promotion of secret censorship of
adult newsgroups which do not contain child porn is wrong. What other
secret attempts will be made to silently censor political newsgroups or
items critical of the current government in the advent of the General
Child porn definitely NO. Secret British police censorship of Usenet also
The vast majority of us are against child porn / child sexual abuse so Mr
French and Mr Quick at New Scotland Yard's Paedophile Unit give us an email
address where we can send you up-to-date information about any instances of
child porn we find on the Internet. Don't plot behind our backs. Instead
work together with us to tackle the very real problem. For a start get on
the Net and post to this thread.
Will I now be subjected to a 6:00 a.m. police raid ? I'll let you know.