British Porn-Censoring MP Has Website Defaced With Porn 266
twoheadedboy writes "Claire Perry MP, who has been the main driver of the UK government's plans for default blocking of pornography, has had her website plastered in porn by hackers. But the story only just begins there. Notable blogger Guido Fawkes, otherwise known as Paul Staines, posted on the matter, only to later be accused of sponsoring the hacking himself. During some back and forth over Twitter, it appeared Perry was 'confused,' as she said Fawkes had posted a link to the defaced page, when he had only shown a screenshot of the site. Given the backlash against the government's plans to censor porn and its technical fallacies, the event could be particularly embarrassing for Perry. She is not commenting on the matter, whilst Staines has threatened to sue unless Perry offers a retraction of her claim he had anything to do with the hack."
The tweet: 'Apologies to anyone affected by the hacking of my website sponsored by @GuidoFawkes – proves so clearly what we are dealing with.' Someone needs a lesson about hypertext.
Libellous? (Score:5, Interesting)
Claire Perrys comments may be libellous, as the UK has a more extensive libel law than the US. Fun, games and large legal fees may be forthcoming.....
A recent example can be found on Twitter remarks by Sally Bercow [bbc.co.uk], which cost her lots of legal fees and a substantial settlement. The irony of Claire Perry getting whipped in court over a freedom of speech issue would cause a massive outbreak of schadenfreude across the UK.....
Re:Technical illiteracy among politicians (Score:2, Interesting)
They can make it hard for the common folk to access it, I don't think anybody can realistically aim for 100% on something like this no matter how incompetent. It'd be interesting to get a glimpse of statistics into a move like this by comparing the blocking of TPB and what that's done to piracy in the UK.
Now that that's explained... lets consider the ethics of this: it's Orwellian oppressive. I can see where they mean well, and I think that online porn has massive ramifications to society that we have only partially begun to experience... but... I also think that they'd accomplish more by shipping the feminists that drive men to online porn in the first place off to an island... end of story. What about legalizing prostitution??? My point being out of control online porn use is a consequence of modern society's relationship between the sexes not an instigator to be hunted with fire.
Some can make the argument that online porn is easily accessible, but I don't know anybody that would ever pick porn over real sex, and I'll go on to say that porn's been available far longer than the internet's been around.
Re:Further proof that the people pushing this agen (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is that the blind is leading the stupid. Or, in other words, the idiots voting her in ain't any smarter. Sadly, having a clue is neither a requirement for a political office nor one to vote in elections.
No matter how much I think it should be. For BOTH. Or at the very least the former. It's a kinda lopsided battle when dimwitted politicians are pitted against corporation negotiators hand picked for their swindling abilities. I can't help but it reminds me of the trades between the European settlers and the natives.
Re:Lawmaker doesn't grasp technology .... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yup, Guido Fawkes has already run a poll on whether he should sue Claire Perry [order-order.com]. 86% of people say yes. He's already asked her to remove the tweet, but it's still up there.
Re:Technical illiteracy among politicians (Score:5, Interesting)
Massive ramifications? Citation? Several major studies have been commissioned with the intention of proving this point, but all they have shown is that exposure to pornography does not have negative psychological or physiological effects. Most sociological impact is due to negative views on sexuality in general, and cannot be attributed to the pornography per se. In the few cases where it has been shown to have negative psychological effects, those were normally traced to religious or cultural taboo.
People have sex. It's an important and fun part of life. Why shouldn't it be part of entertainment, too? Oh right, it's supposed to be some sacred union between a man and a woman in love. I guess we all have Paul to thank for all that anti-sex mumbo jumbo in the New Testament. Hello!? Solomon had hundreds of wives and half as many concubines. I can't even comprehend numbers like that, when it comes to sexual encounters.
And don't get me started on feminists. If they really wanted to empower women, they'd do like the bonobos and wield their vaginas as a mighty weapon for peace and community integration. But whatever.