>>581632

filtering the name was the first thing i did ITT

>>581673

>consequences of viewing this child porn video?

multiple levels of retarded here. illegal to broadcast. illegal to view. and the video isn't a fucking diddle pr0n

>>581701

you missed the point. if it's child porn, they can't broadcast it. which means no one is going to accidentally break the law because no one can fucking watch it, except for the people whose job it is to watched fucked up shit like that - police, courts, etc

>>581749

besides that, i don't think it's kiddie porn anyway. i think it's probably evidence of treason, like anon said >>581744

at this point, i'm not sure it matters, since none of us know what video it is or what the contents of the video are

>>581813

>Thank you for a sensible exchange!

no problem, anon. i try to shitpost when i see the chance on /qresearch/. it's too tame and friendly most of the time, needs a bit of edge to keep things spicy

>>581916

i'll support it once i can read a copy of the proposed legislation. until then it's just a feel-good name, like "the patriot act"

>>581977

>There is no legislation on [IBOR]. We are not there yet

well aware, anon. it doesn't change my views. i'll support it when i can read a copy, but not before then

>>582041

>what are ID's

>petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/internet-bill-rights-2

oh fugg. they changed the wording. now this i can get behind. brb… signing

>>582125

see

>>582127

but also, do what you think is right, anon. if you want to sign it, sign it. if you don't, then don't. nothing you say will change my mind.

how is the petitions site set up? isn't there a minimum number of signatures a petition has to have before it is listed on the front page?

>>582195

<whitehouse.gov

>Doesn't Soros own that site?

JFC i should hope not