Comment Re:Ha! Broken even before that. (Score 1) 101
Giving them an opportunity to flag anything they disagree with for "governmental review" would result in them flagging just about everything.
Further, there are also the of actions of governments that in lay terms as distinct from legal terms, could be considered terrorism. For example hailing drone strikes on suspected terrorist cells, including innocent civilians in Afghanistan, or Iranian anti-Israel propaganda. Both of these examples are not directly examples of terrorism from a legal perspective, but either could be construed as such by individuals with partisan leanings in either direction. It's too easy to say someone is a terrorist, even Julian Assange is a terrorist according to some. (Rapist maybe under Swedish law, but terrorist!?!?!?)
The whole idea seems to me like a big brother attempt to entrench a singular political paradigm. It seems to me that this is a way to ensure public service employment (reviewing dodgy websites all day - what a gig!!!!) and in many cases I wouldn't trust a vested interest bureaucracy to make balanced decisions on matters like these.