Bush's website rejects non-US visitors

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter graphic7
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the decision of the Bush-Cheney campaign to block non-US visitors from accessing their website. Participants explore potential motivations behind this action, including security concerns and capacity limitations, while also expressing skepticism about the stated reasons.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the restriction may be a way to prevent international criticism of US policies, while others propose it could be due to capacity limits to ensure access for US visitors.
  • One participant argues that the server's single connection implies a need for rate limiting foreign access, which they view as problematic.
  • Another participant cites a news article claiming the campaign cited security reasons for the ban, expressing disbelief and suggesting that better server security would be a more appropriate response.
  • Some participants characterize Bush as an international threat, linking the ban to broader issues of foreign relations and military actions in Iraq.
  • There is a discussion about the effectiveness of the ban, with one participant questioning whether it would truly prevent malicious activities, as individuals with malicious intent could use US proxies.
  • Another participant expresses concern about the erosion of freedoms and the implications of restricting communication with foreign individuals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views regarding the motivations and implications of the website's restrictions, with no clear consensus on the reasons behind the ban or its appropriateness.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific dates and events, suggesting that the timing of the ban may be significant, but the discussion does not resolve the underlying assumptions or implications of these points.

Physics news on Phys.org
Well, either that or due to capacity limits, he wants to make sure the people who matter have access to his site.
 
russ_watters said:
Well, either that or due to capacity limits, he wants to make sure the people who matter have access to his site.

Well the server is hosted on a single connection. Therefore, he'd have to be explicitly rate limiting foreign access, which is just as bad as denying any in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Bush is an international threat. He was first to agree his sight must have homeland security. After you go murdering and stealing across Iraq, you must protect yourself because the international community condemns it.
 
Notice this only started on October 24th. If he was as anti foreign as you are seeming to imply this would have been done ages ago, most likely around September 11th.
After you go murdering and stealing across Iraq, you must protect yourself because the international community condemns it.
Stealing? Murdering yes but it is a war and I don't believe a war has been fought without killing. You make it seem as though the Iraqi's have not killed any of our soldiers, along with any of their innocent citizens who were glad to see Sadam go.
 
Your guess is just as good as mine as to why the Bush-Cheney campaign would ban foreign visitors. The "security" issue seems rather artificial. Any person with a malicious intent would be intelligent enough to grab a US proxy, and use it to carry out their malicious activities. Banning all foreign users certainly wouldn't stop that. And, who's to say that people in the United States aren't wanting to deface the President's web site?
 
Well I don't know anything about computer hacking but if someone managed to do that to the presidents website, and they were on U.S grounds and got caught I'm assuming they would have some "problems" which would be different if a foreigner did it. Still it is a bit weird and annoying, I guess.
 
You mean you haven't got used to having your freedoms eroded? I'm wondering how long you are going to be allowed to have any genuine communication left at all. But don't worry, Mr President knows best; you don't want us nasty foreigners putting un-American ideas in your heads, do you?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 96 ·
4
Replies
96
Views
12K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K