SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On Tuesday morning, the superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District, a governmental agency which operates hundreds of schools in Los Angeles and nearby areas, sent all its students home. The agency did not make its buses available, but instead asked parents to pick up their children from outside the schools. Superintendent Ramon Cortines ordered all the schools in the district closed because of a threatening message regarding "many schools" which was received by a member of the school board. Cortines called the closure a "precaution based on what has happened recently." Police and the district's "plant managers" are searching the campuses.
Sources:
From Reuters:
The unprecedented move left some 643,000 students of the Los Angeles Unified School District and their families scrambling to make alternate arrangements and drew criticism as officials in New York said they received the same threat and deemed it not to be credible.
A law enforcement source told Reuters that Los Angeles authorities ordered the closure to allow a full search of about 900 public school facilities without consulting with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which takes the lead on any potential terrorism investigation.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday December 16 2015, @01:09AM
Tell that to the people arrested for "providing material support to a terrorist organization", which is what the Internet giants and the US media have been doing.
I know, you're going to tell me that ISPs are not responsible for the data they carry, nor is google responsible for search results nor the file it hosts as long as it obeys a DMCA notice.
But Google censors things that the Chinese government points out as unpleasant. The media censors its knowledge of specific military operations to avoid endangering troops. Both happen even if there are Americans involved.
Does the first amendment apply to a foreign person, listed as a terrorist member, on foreign soil, who explicitly intends to threaten Americans? Then it's not the kind of censorship you're worried about. I'm asking to muzzle the source, because propaganda is their main weapon. US residents can keep exercising their right to support any remote dumbass who wants to declare war on them, but they don't have a first-amendment right to hear or see what he's got to say.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Wednesday December 16 2015, @01:50AM
Tell that to the people arrested for "providing material support to a terrorist organization", which is what the Internet giants and the US media have been doing.
I would tell them that.
as long as it obeys a DMCA notice.
The DMCA is not legitimate in the first place. I don't think it should be obeyed at all, if you are capable of fighting it.
But Google censors things that the Chinese government points out as unpleasant. The media censors its knowledge of specific military operations to avoid endangering troops. Both happen even if there are Americans involved.
It shouldn't.
Does the first amendment apply to a foreign person, listed as a terrorist member, on foreign soil, who explicitly intends to threaten Americans?
The first amendment applies to everyone. But here's what you're actually doing: You want companies *in the US* (meaning that even if you disagree with my previous statement, you're still censoring speech that is hosted in the US) to censor material that you don't like. That the messages were written by a foreign person is entirely irrelevant; the website has an owner, and the government may not force the owner to engage in censorship.
If foreign people had no first amendment protections, and the government could force website owners in the US to censor user-generated messages if they were from a foreign person, then the government could censor any communications from foreign persons that it does not like. After all, if the first amendment doesn't apply, then there are no limitations on the type of communications the government could censor.