Would it be acceptable for a government to temporarily close down a social media site?
In the event of a terrorist attack would you be comfortable letting them 'switch it off 'even just for a few hours so the terrorists can't communicate ?
Possibly mobile phone networks to in the same situation?

I'm updating this to include sites such as this and hundreds like it after all, it's a form of communication!

While I understand your sentiment. You have to look at the opportunity something like that happening gives to the espianage community.

If something like the bombings happen and people praise it...we know who to watch.

I have a buddy who does counter intel for the FBI...

Social media is the best tool they have to fight this crap.

Yes, I can see what you're saying to and I also know someone in the same business hear. I agree it's an essential tool for the modern day, but I was thinking more of the moments during and for a couple of hours after the event?

With 9/11, airlines were shut down all across the country. All planes were grounded.

If the attack is tech based, I could see it happening.
Not to stifle people's opinions but to limit the terrorists abilities.

A road block after a bank robbery does more than just hope to catch the robbers. It cuts off their escape route and contains them. It forces them to do something they did not plan for and prevents them from spreading the chaos.

the movie Untraceable, shows how the FBI use's social media..if you haven't seen it and you like, thriller, crime, drama's...it is a must see..

Will do. Thanks for that

Honestly I can't see them ever shutting down all the Social Media Sites due to they have total access to what ever they need. And many times it is the social sites how they catch them due to what they post ect....

I have seen it happen more then once where kids went missing, robbery, ect and it goes viral on Social Media and due to that alone they were able to catch who they needed too..

Social Media gives them more access then any other way to solve crimes...

the Perps are using the Deep Web!
Would be useless to shut down normal Socializing Sites!
It would be just another Case of Government Paranoia and Over-reach!

I disagree, for the deep rooted then yes but for the more 'home grown ' then I'd say it's a tool for them. just using a simple site like this would give them communication.
Just by 'turning it off ' for a couple of hours would interrupt a means for them.

Who was it said something like
Those who give up essential freedom for a little more safety deserve neither freedom nor safety, or something like that.

I agree, but I do wonder why those who we know are a threat are not just taken away and buried somewhere.
Some people will say if we do that we are just the same as them and that would make us lawless.
I'd say that was us taking care of our own, as we have failed to do for years now.

https://fee.org/articles/we-wont-stop-terror-by-sacrificing-internet-privacy/

Government’s main and possibly only purpose should be the protection of its citizens. We delegate this responsibility to our governments so that we can better use our time to enjoy leisure activities and civilized pursuits not associated with law enforcement and security protection. When a government no longer provides that security and stability for its citizens, they rarely exist much past that point.

How much of our freedom do we relinquish to secure our cities and our way of life?

Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Many interpretations of this quote exist in relation to the current state of radical Islamic terrorism plaguing many countries throughout the world. How much of our freedom do we relinquish to secure our cities and our way of life?

Massive Online Monitoring

Benjamin Wittes, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the editor of, Lawfare, was interviewed a few years ago by Robert Siegel of NPR, stating that Franklin’s quote was misunderstood in the context of a changing landscape of threats and the digital revolution. He states,

It is a quotation that defends the authority of a legislature to govern in the interests of collective security. It means, in context, not quite the opposite of what it’s almost always quoted as saying but much closer to the opposite than to the thing that people think it means.”

Considering the most recent terror attack in London, which left 7 people dead and 50+ people injured thus far, English Prime Minister Theresa May has called for a massive uptick in online monitoring of social media accounts, among other measures, to monitor communication channels in hopes of locating and preventing terror attacks.

“We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed  –  yet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide,” Ms. May said. But what does that mean?

Charles Arthur at The Guardian and Andrew Griffin at The Independent make a case for the exact opposite intent occurring from drastic measures that Ms. May is proposing.

The Internet is not a cause of this hatred and violence.

“If successful, Theresa May could push these vile networks into even darker corners of the web, where they will be even harder to observe,” wrote Jim Killock, the executive director of the Open Rights Group, “But we should not be distracted: the Internet and companies like Facebook are not a cause of this hatred and violence, but tools that can be abused. While governments and companies should take sensible measures to stop abuse, attempts to control the Internet is not the simple solution that Theresa May is claiming.”<more>

Good point, as you know jo here the human rights brigade wouldn't let it happen. I saw a clip of Corbyn on the tv at a rally. One of his followers said 'we should just love each other '
Yeah right.
We'll see what happens tonight!

............and they will turn to any other Communications possible,from Landlines,to Ham-Radio to Citizen's-Band-Radio!

...........and when would you know when to shut down which Communications?

“Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
yep,old Ben Franklin!

Corbyn is an absolute joke.
He was asked a question a few days ago, 'if another Country fired a nuke at the UK, would you fire one back while you still had time' he refused to answer and tried to change the subject.
I can't believe he even made it to become leader of a political party, nothing but a pacifist.

And also keep them on the run.
It's a game of cat and mouse, our security services have to be lucky all the time. They only have to be lucky once.

He has opposed every anti terrorist law or recommendation the government has put forward.

it is a new age,,,they prosecute sex crimes many times by monitoring social media which seems a necessary evil to me

so, likewise, I feel social media should be highly monitored for terrorist recruitment as well,,

I do not know if shutting them down would prevent communication unless you shut down ALL of the internet,, which is not really an option