UK Prime Minister: We have put in place Internet filters to block extremism

Well that didn&#x27;t take long. First it was about porn, now the naked power grab begins. Who gets to define &#x27;extremism&#x27;? Will information that Snowden leaked now be deemed extremist material? It seems only natural that the next step will be blocking dissent and content deemed dangerous to the sanctity of the state.<p>People of Great Britain, I hope you&#x27;re not sleeping on this. Forget the slippery slope, this is the cliff.

Less shit link to the actual speech in question:<p><a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2013-10-23a.299.8#g300.2" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theyworkforyou.com&#x2F;debates&#x2F;?id=2013-10-23a.299.8#...</a><p>But am flagging for the <i>outrageous</i> misquote in the title.

The word &quot;filters&quot; is not in this text<p>What it actually says is far less inflammatory:<p>&quot;We have had repeated meetings of the extremism task force—it met again yesterday—setting out a whole series of steps that we will take to counter the extremist narrative, including by blocking online sites.&quot;

MP Julian Smith: &quot;Following the reckless handling by The Guardian of the Snowden leaks...&quot;<p>Cameron: &quot;My hon. Friend is absolutely right.&quot;<p>Ugh.

The Prime Minister: We have put in place some of the toughest controls that one can possibly have within a democratic Government, and the TPIMs are obviously one part of that. We have had repeated meetings of the extremism task force—it met again yesterday—setting out a whole series of steps that we will take to counter the extremist narrative, including by blocking online sites. Now that I have the opportunity, let me praise Facebook for yesterday reversing the decision it took about the showing of beheading videos online. We will take all these steps and many more to keep our country safe.

This is one of the worst cases of editorialising titles I&#x27;ve seen on HN.<p>Usually I&#x27;m for allowing some flexibility in the titles, but the current title (&quot;UK Prime Minister: We have put in place Internet filters to block extremism&quot;) is a total fabrication not supported by the linked text.<p>Frankly, the misquote in the title borders on libel.

The actual quote:<p>The Prime Minister: We have put in place some of the toughest controls that one can possibly have within a democratic Government, and the TPIMs are obviously one part of that. We have had repeated meetings of the extremism task force—it met again yesterday—setting out a whole series of steps that we will take to counter the extremist narrative, including by blocking online sites. Now that I have the opportunity, let me praise Facebook for yesterday reversing the decision it took about the showing of beheading videos online. We will take all these steps and many more to keep our country safe.

It&#x27;s like watching a horrible accident occurring and knowing that you can do nothing.

I wish politicians would one day face the same amount of word-scrutiny a concerned HN poster&#x2F;commenter does.

Internet filters are extremism.

<a href="http://www.aaisp.net/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aaisp.net&#x2F;</a><p>No filters.

We need to stop create situations that create extremist groups. There is no need for internet censorship.

End of days big brother talk aside, it will be interesting to see how this is actually used. Speculation aside, this could be an interesting case study in internet censorship and government responsibility.

Makes sense. Extremism, along with porn, is corroding childhood.

Do we?<p>And if I were to accept such an <i>extreme</i> stance, who gets to define &quot;extremism&quot; mister prime minister?

In Pakistan, you can hide in a cave ... or in a house next to the Army&#x27;s HQ and no one will know where you are.

Scottish independence can&#x27;t come soon enough.

Oh please. We all know that while al-Qaida will obviously be filtered, so will the Socialist Workers&#x27; Party, and so won&#x27;t English Defence League.