Posted on 03/17/2019 2:48:59 PM PDT by blam
New Zealand authorities have reminded citizens that they face up to 10 years in prison for “knowingly” possessing a copy of the New Zealand mosque shooting video – and up to 14 years in prison for sharing it. Corporations (such as web hosts) face an additional $200,000 ($137,000 US) fine under the same law.
Terrorist Brenton Tarrant used Facebook Live to broadcast the first 17 minutes of his attack on the Al Noor Mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand at approximately 1:40 p.m. on Friday – the first of two mosque attacks which left 50 dead and 50 injured.
. Copies of Tarrant’s livestream, along with his lengthy manifesto, began to rapidly circulate on various file hosting sites following the attack, which as we noted Friday – were quickly scrubbed from mainstream platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Scribd. YouTube has gone so far as to intentionally disable search filters so that people cannot find Christchurch shooting materials – including footage of suspected multiple shooters as well as the arrest of Tarrant and other suspects.
On Saturday, journalist Nick Monroe reported that New Zealand police have warned citizens that they face imprisonment for distributing the video, while popular New Zealand Facebook group Wellington Live notes that “NZ police would like to remind the public that it is an offence to share an objectional publication which includes the horrific video from yesterday’s attack. If you see this video, report it immediately. Do not download it. Do not share it. If you are found to have a copy of the video or to have shared it, you face fines & potential imprisonment.”
(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at activistpost.com ...
Almost at the bottom of the page, left column. Or search page for "Favorites ...These might be here for a while"
Once upon a time there was a film/video-maker who was imprisoned for a video seen by a few hundred people — recall the video Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Susan Rice, et al, blamed for the death of American ambassador in Benghazi?
Power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
THIS is why the left and Islam LOVE bloody massacres because they do more for their cause than anything else.
There is still freedom here though.
You got that right!
See post #65
See post #65
Whatever happened to that guy?
Oooops, make that Post 81
Video is at ___ crazy shit dot com ___ and has been for a few days. There is case for suppressing this video because it makes it look too easy to bump off 40-50 people. Looks like a video game. IOW this violence porn video might inspire others.
Here’s the video:
This is what happens when you don't have a First Amendment.
Here you go, have fun:
https://www.dia.govt.nz/Censorship-Objectionable-and-Restricted-Material
What is 'objectionable' and 'restricted' material?Objectionable
Objectionable is defined under the Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act 1993 as:
"a publication...(that) describes, depicts or expresses, or otherwise deals with matters such as sex, horror, crime, cruelty or violence in such a manner that the availability of the publication is likely to be injurious to the public good."
All objectionable material is banned.
In deciding whether a publication is objectionable, or should instead be given an unrestricted or restricted classification, consideration is given to the extent, degree and manner in which the publication describes, depicts, or deals with:
* acts of torture, the infliction of serious physical harm or acts of significant cruelty
* sexual violence or sexual coercion, or violence or coercion in association with sexual conduct
* sexual or physical conduct of a degrading or dehumanising or demeaning nature
* sexual conduct with or by children, or young persons, or both
* physical conduct in which sexual satisfaction is derived from inflicting or suffering cruelty or pain
* exploits the nudity of children, young persons, or both
* degrades or dehumanises or demeans any person
* promotes or encourages criminal acts or acts of terrorism
* represents that members of any particular class of the public are inherently inferior to other members of the public
* by reason of any characteristic of members of that class being a characteristic that is a prohibited ground of discrimination specified in the Human Rights Act 1993.
Don’t forget the other lessons from the video they don’t want us to see.
Dial 911 ( 111 in NZ ) and die.
If only one person there was armed and trained there most likely would not been as many victims. Sadly I think that NZ’s gun laws might have stopped an average citizen from arming themselves for self defense. They can’t have people losing faith in the government.
YUP!!!! I mean look at the lady buffoon NZ Prime Minister who could not wait 5 minutes to put on the (her) Hijab. Lib-lefty-Islam solidarity for evah!
When does the video game come out? I bet it will be a bigger seller than the Lakeland H.S. Shooting, Sandyhook, Columbine, or the Pittsburgh Synagogue Attack.
There was a video game where the shooter (you) has to open fire on civilians in a airport to progress the game. It was very uncomfortable and a lot of people objected.
Only America is America.
What are they trying to cover up??
NOT the US. Yet!
” It is an offense to share an objectionable publication”. Who decides what is objectionable and when is the decision made? Leaves a lot of room for bills of attainder and ex post facto laws. But then when countries and cultures define Liberty as simply democratic nose counting and providing goodies for the people I would expect no less.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.