Slashdot Mirror

Or, perhaps you're thinking of Qatar. You remember Qatar, right? Another brutal little monarchy with a state run news agency Al-Jazeera that that routinely give Osama bin Laden a pulpit from which to taunt the world.

Maybe I'm being too subtle. I'll be direct. If you think that Saddam is responsible for September 11th, you're a damned moron. If you think that the American government really has any intention to bring justice on those countries that continue to be the biggest direct supporters of the terror cells that created September 11th, you're damned moron.

Whenever I've read that Jefferson quote, it reminded me of the logo of Amnesty International, except where the barbed wire is around the flame instead of the candle, symbolizing to me how copyright prevents one from lighting their taper at another's.

Where did the candle and barbed wire logo come from?

Or is it:

keep_out_minorities_and_preserve_the_white_austr al ian@aph.gov.au

or maybe:

keep_immigrants_and_refugees_in_internment_camps @a ph.gov.au

(spaces not made by author)

Fight the hate.

Illegal building of settlements
Everybody in the world except a tiny minority agrees that Israel is illegally occupying the territories gained after the 1967 war. That's a FACT.

Violation of UN resolutions since 30 years
Israel is violating UN resolution 242, which was voted by the security council and thus is binding by opposition to general assembly resolutions which are not binding.
The fact that the resolution is binding or not does not change anything to the fact that Israel is violating them by the way.

Israeli exactions in occupied territories
The fact that other armies would be worse does not change the fact that Israel is commiting exactions, period.
Israel's offer to the palestinians is not clear, 95% of the territories cut in small pieces is not an acceptable offer. Until I've seen the papers explaining clearly the offer I won't believe either the palestinian or the israeli side as to what was proposed during these discussions

collective punishments
Destroying a house is a collective punishment, the other people who live in this house are not automatically responsible of what their brother/son had done, the people who live in the apartments nearby are not responsible either Olive fields have been destroyed for non-military reasons many times, this is also documented.

discrimination towards Israeli-Arabs
As said before, being able to be elected is not a proof of non-discrimination.
Israeli-arab communities receive less funds than israeli jewish counterparts.
Arabs can't live in jewish settlements
etc...
Go see This report from Amnesty International

Illegal building of settlements
Everybody in the world except a tiny minority agrees that Israel is illegally occupying the territories gained after the 1967 war. That's a FACT.

Violation of UN resolutions since 30 years
Israel is violating UN resolution 242, which was voted by the security council and thus is binding by opposition to general assembly resolutions which are not binding.
The fact that the resolution is binding or not does not change anything to the fact that Israel is violating them by the way.

Israeli exactions in occupied territories
The fact that other armies would be worse does not change the fact that Israel is commiting exactions, period.
Israel's offer to the palestinians is not clear, 95% of the territories cut in small pieces is not an acceptable offer. Until I've seen the papers explaining clearly the offer I won't believe either the palestinian or the israeli side as to what was proposed during these discussions

collective punishments
Destroying a house is a collective punishment, the other people who live in this house are not automatically responsible of what their brother/son had done, the people who live in the apartments nearby are not responsible either Olive fields have been destroyed for non-military reasons many times, this is also documented.

discrimination towards Israeli-Arabs
As said before, being able to be elected is not a proof of non-discrimination.
Israeli-arab communities receive less funds than israeli jewish counterparts.
Arabs can't live in jewish settlements
etc...
Go see This report from Amnesty International

Software as morals is decadant, selfish, and immature. Face it, it, RMS, and you are irrelevant.

Where do you think we already get more than half of what's solded onto our boards (and the boards themselves) China, and the ROC. Why? because US companies save billions of dollars paying $5k/year to Wu Ping rather than giving $25 to John Smith.

And now, because of the huge gigantically monstrous DRM you'd rather buy chips directly from them so that in no way at all does it benefit the US economy. What a great idea, it's not like the Chinese are trying to curtail anyone's individual rights anyway. Let alone on the cyberfront

Wait, you mean American POWs are always treated properly.

I didn't say that at all. I'm saying the US would (rightly) describe failure to treat American POWs properly as war crimes.

On the other hand, the detainees in Gitmo are not being tortured, unless by being held in a pleasant climate and being fed every day counts as torture.

It's not a "pleasant climate" and while there isn't clear evidence of torture the secrecy surrounding the detention camp is somewhat suspicious. A recent Amnesty International press release on the subject states that:

Amnesty International also reiterated its concern about conditions in the Guantánamo Bay detention centre, where detainees are allegedly confined for 24 hours a day to small cells in sweltering heat. Some of the conditions reported -- including exercise limited to 15 minutes twice a week -- are in direct violation of international minimum standards for the treatment of prisoners.

...

Amnesty International is also concerned by reports that suspected members of al-Qa'ida arrested by US officials in Afghanistan or elsewhere have been transported for questioning to third countries where they might be at risk of human rights violations. These countries include Egypt, where suspected members of Islamic opposition groups are frequently tortured during incommunicado detention.

Has anybody read 1984, the novel by George Orwell? There was this ficticious character Goldstein, invented by the government. Reminds me a bit of Osama bin Ladin.
We just need a bad guy, someone we can blame when something goes wrong. And if we want to get rid of someone, we just say: "He was a terrorist, or, worse, a friend of Osama" and everybody agrees that must be imprisioned forever, no proof of guilt necessary. Someone who is friend of personified evil has no rights at all.
It's a war we have to fight. And if we have to torture people to get the truth out of them, who cares.
In 1984, the names were just great, like, "Ministery of Love" for the institution where people were tortured.
Just like Bush's "alliance of peace and freedom", a bunch of nations that obviously only want war (oh, yes, they claim to have proof, that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction, but, unfortunately, these proofs are so top-secret that we have to trust them. Germany trusted Hitler, so what can go wrong?)

Prisoners of war should have no rights, in the end, they fought against the US, which is bad. Don't believe this 14-year-old boy from Afghanistan who says the Taliban forced him to fight. Oh, never mind, he has no possibility to talk to a lawyer anyway.
http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/AMR511862002?O penDocument&of=COUNTRIES\USA

How long has poor US government to ship suspicious people to other countries, because it's *still* illegal in America? Come on, legalize torturing, remember how much more these criminal terrorists would tell if the CIA could do whatever they want! Everything would be so much safer!
http://vigilant.tv/article/1104

You can see how civilized a country is when you look in how it treats its enemies.
http://www.ummah.com/inewsletter/massacres/afghani stan/campxray.htm

http://www.freejohnwalker.net/


I don't remember who said it, but I like this quote:
"Some people fight so hard for freedom until there's nothing left of it".

The Amnesty "illegally imprisoned" link reguards a pare-military group as common burgulars, the Rense.com link invents another class. Both have been addressed by the US courts and neither is addressed in Kevin Poulsen's article.

All that aside, hell no a non-violent criminal should not be locked up. Some other punishment is much more appropriate, like restitution of *real* losses (no making the defendant buy a new security team) and community service, etc.

Jail *should* be for the people that are a physical threat to society, not a theoretical or financial one.

Before the thread runs off the topic, see my website for my position on the death penalty before assigning one to me.

** America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. ~ Abraham Lincoln **

What the heck does Bush think he's doing? Iraq is NOT a threat to anyone but his own people now.
Yes, he is a madman and a criminal and should not be leader of a state. Maybe he wouldn't be in charge anymore if USA hadn't supported him when he attacked Iran, because without their help Iraq might have lost this war. Or if the US hadn't given Anthrax to him (he killed thousands of kurdish people with it, but never mind, he remained "our man" of the US in the gulf region).

But Saddam Hussein is NOT Al Qaida. In fact, they hate each other. Of course, this may change if the recognize they have a common enemy.

Bush must realize that he cannot fight terrorism with war. The sons of the soldiers he kills now are the suicide bombers of tomorrow. And all they need is a knife and a civil plane...

Wake up, America! You cannot fight against the rest of the world! You don't want to? So think about your actions, 1.5 billion Muslims may consider your actions a declaration of war.

I'm not auto-american, I like the American people, that's why I'm very worried about their current foreign politics.

Bush is creating a 1984-like state, with a powerful government and military that doesn't have to obey the law. Bush speaks about the alliance of "freedom and peace", but the world only sees how desperately USA wants war. And what's left of freedom when prisoners of war have no rights to see a court? When they are refused basic human rights as granted by the convention of Geneva?
http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/AMR511862002?O penDocument&of=COUNTRIES\USA

When the US government has suspicious people tortured in other countries, because it's *still* illegal in America?
http://vigilant.tv/article/1104

Or suspects are locked away forever, without the right to go to court?
You can see how civilized a country is when you look in how it treats its enemies.
http://www.ummah.com/inewsletter/massacres/afghani stan/campxray.htm

http://www.freejohnwalker.net/

There was a time when America tried to show they're different from uncivilized countries, that human rights mean something to them. This time seems to be over and the rest of the world sees it.

I don't remember who said it, but I like this quote:
"Some people fight so hard for freedom until there's nothing left of it".

There's more than enough injustice in real life, and you're wasting your time whining about this?!?!

• Amnesty International
• Southern Poverty Law Center
• American Civil Liberties Union
• Oxfam International
• Doctors Without Borders
• Habitat for Humanity International

Yes, of course China could claim jurisdiction. We've already tangled with a list of countries on free speech issues.

If so I hope China doesn't go after a US citizen for running a pro-democracy journal.

I hope they do. That would be a case worth fighting. The Communists versus the Americans -- it would be like a Rocky movie or something. The US itself is supposed to be a pro-democracy journal.

To be serious, the brutal Chinese gov't treatment of Tibet, the Falun Gong, internet surfers (a few are believed to have did in police custody), Tienamen Square, even tax evaders (death penalty!) collectively are overwhelming, yet out trade and other entanglements with them discourage our official protest. Details and details.

To give you an idea of the trade issue, I'm trying nearly in vain to find sneakers not made in China (there are a few).

Are you fucking joking me? China can and does arrest its citizens for viewing and posting "inappropriate" material on the Internet. See the report on Amnesty International. In fact, as an example, if the US were as bad as China, you'd risk imprisonment for the very slashdot post you just made.

I submitted this earlier (and it was rejected), but it seems two Chinese citizens were executed for experssing their opinions on the internet, while countless others have been detained and tortured, the Chinese wont hear about it though because its on a blocked site.

here is more information on Chinas control

I submitted this earlier (and it was rejected), but it seems two Chinese citizens were executed for experssing their opinions on the internet, while countless others have been detained and tortured, the Chinese wont hear about it though because its on a blocked site.

here is more information on Chinas control

They do mention this, but they also discuss police brutality and shootings by police, which are both far too common here, all things considered. Their 2002 Report also raises a number of post-911 issues with regard to human rights, including surveillance, arrest and detention without charges, military tribunals.

By the way, the death penalty is one thing; but I don't know of another nation in the West or elsewhere that openly considers it acceptable to try, sentence, and execute one of its own citizens in another country using an unmanned plane.

No, you entirely missed the point, or rather you prove it -- lazy research.

The report and press release were released in tandem on the same day. The press release is naturally a condensed form of the report. Everything I cited from the press release is in the report, in greater detail.

The Guarantee of Freedom of Speech in US law may not apply, but AI is talking about The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Have a look at the AI report.

Precisely the point... Mandela was put in prison for advocating equality towards blacks. Can you blame him for advocating armed struggle against the apartheid regime? A regime who wouldn't bat an eyelid at someone who is not white regardless whether the protest is peaceful or otherwise.

Whether my position is of ignorance or otherwise is your opinion, and I respect it regardless of whether I think it is true or otherwise. Opinions are (sic) basic human rights, as also taking up struggle against opression regardless whether it is an armed struggle or a peaceful one.

As hard as it may seem to you, my opinions are based on actions they taken in my country has caused more harm than good. And that is my honest opinion.

It is not about getting beat up badly and looking foolish in the process, it is about my own observation on Amnesty's stand in issues that I am very familiar happening in my country and region. What basis did you form your opinions on? Eventhough I absolutely agree that you have valid points, you in turn must not just see what is programmed by parties in the mass media. Take a long hard look at what is going on behind the curtains, some things might suprise you a lot.

Precisely the point... Mandela was put in prison for advocating equality towards blacks. Can you blame him for advocating armed struggle against the apartheid regime? A regime who wouldn't bat an eyelid at someone who is not white regardless whether the protest is peaceful or otherwise.

Whether my position is of ignorance or otherwise is your opinion, and I respect it regardless of whether I think it is true or otherwise. Opinions are (sic) basic human rights, as also taking up struggle against opression regardless whether it is an armed struggle or a peaceful one.

As hard as it may seem to you, my opinions are based on actions they taken in my country has caused more harm than good. And that is my honest opinion.

It is not about getting beat up badly and looking foolish in the process, it is about my own observation on Amnesty's stand in issues that I am very familiar happening in my country and region. What basis did you form your opinions on? Eventhough I absolutely agree that you have valid points, you in turn must not just see what is programmed by parties in the mass media. Take a long hard look at what is going on behind the curtains, some things might suprise you a lot.

Precisely the point... Mandela was put in prison for advocating equality towards blacks. Can you blame him for advocating armed struggle against the apartheid regime? A regime who wouldn't bat an eyelid at someone who is not white regardless whether the protest is peaceful or otherwise.

Whether my position is of ignorance or otherwise is your opinion, and I respect it regardless of whether I think it is true or otherwise. Opinions are (sic) basic human rights, as also taking up struggle against opression regardless whether it is an armed struggle or a peaceful one.

As hard as it may seem to you, my opinions are based on actions they taken in my country has caused more harm than good. And that is my honest opinion.

It is not about getting beat up badly and looking foolish in the process, it is about my own observation on Amnesty's stand in issues that I am very familiar happening in my country and region. What basis did you form your opinions on? Eventhough I absolutely agree that you have valid points, you in turn must not just see what is programmed by parties in the mass media. Take a long hard look at what is going on behind the curtains, some things might suprise you a lot.

Precisely the point... Mandela was put in prison for advocating equality towards blacks. Can you blame him for advocating armed struggle against the apartheid regime? A regime who wouldn't bat an eyelid at someone who is not white regardless whether the protest is peaceful or otherwise.

Whether my position is of ignorance or otherwise is your opinion, and I respect it regardless of whether I think it is true or otherwise. Opinions are (sic) basic human rights, as also taking up struggle against opression regardless whether it is an armed struggle or a peaceful one.

As hard as it may seem to you, my opinions are based on actions they taken in my country has caused more harm than good. And that is my honest opinion.

It is not about getting beat up badly and looking foolish in the process, it is about my own observation on Amnesty's stand in issues that I am very familiar happening in my country and region. What basis did you form your opinions on? Eventhough I absolutely agree that you have valid points, you in turn must not just see what is programmed by parties in the mass media. Take a long hard look at what is going on behind the curtains, some things might suprise you a lot.

Precisely the point... Mandela was put in prison for advocating equality towards blacks. Can you blame him for advocating armed struggle against the apartheid regime? A regime who wouldn't bat an eyelid at someone who is not white regardless whether the protest is peaceful or otherwise.

Whether my position is of ignorance or otherwise is your opinion, and I respect it regardless of whether I think it is true or otherwise. Opinions are (sic) basic human rights, as also taking up struggle against opression regardless whether it is an armed struggle or a peaceful one.

As hard as it may seem to you, my opinions are based on actions they taken in my country has caused more harm than good. And that is my honest opinion.

It is not about getting beat up badly and looking foolish in the process, it is about my own observation on Amnesty's stand in issues that I am very familiar happening in my country and region. What basis did you form your opinions on? Eventhough I absolutely agree that you have valid points, you in turn must not just see what is programmed by parties in the mass media. Take a long hard look at what is going on behind the curtains, some things might suprise you a lot.

Say, are you entirely free of any clue about Amnesty International? Why don't you provide yourself with a minimum information before you start blasting off? You can start with the Amnesty site, and especially its mandate.

As you are evidently unaware, Amnesty is restricted by its mandate to work on behalf of prisoners of conscience provided that they have not used or advocated violence. This is true even for prisoners who, in addition to their use or advocacy of violence, also advocate views that a government finds unpopular, and even if the violence advocated might be viewed as legitimate resistance against an oppressive regime.

For many years, Amnesty would not work on behalf of Nelson Mandela for precisely this reason, even though he was arguably the most celebrated political prisoner in the world. Mandela advocated "armed struggle" against the apartheid regime, and the ANC was partially organized for this purpose. So Amnesty never "sponsored" him while he was in prison, as they did with numerous other prisoners around the world. (IIRC, Mandela eventually renounced "armed struggle" after he had been released.)

MoThugz, or whatever your name is, slow down, take a deep breath, and avail yourself of a little bit of information. Presenting an argument from a position of ignorance is like trying to box with your hands tied. You'll get beat up badly and look foolish in the process.

Appeal Cases

I'm not sure if I'm missing something, or C|Net and I read different reports, but the Amnesty International press release is considerably grimmer than what C|Net selectively relates.

To give you a hint, the document is entitled "China: Internet users at risk of arbitrary detention, torture and even execution."

This is censorship with a big rock, not benign filtering, the occasional arrest and whoops a death or two in custody. "Benign" filtering software would probably be useful to track down suspects, a sinister dimension. Change anyone's minds?

This does remind me of the risk of trusting the press; even if the Amnesty report proves to be baloney, C|Net did not accurately describe it, or provide a link to it.

...in China just for expressing their opinion on the internet and /. has a story about an CD Burner?!?

No, I'm not trolling.
Where do you take those things? 97 percent on west bank under PA control? Gimme a break. There are areas A, B and C and only area A is under full PA control.
For some reason Kofi Annan thinks different, btw. he's UN chief (maybe you need some citation or proof?)

As for 3 million people living in west bank and 1,2 million living in Gaza strip, they are NOT citizens of Israel and they have basically no rights.

This crime of being jewish on PA lands is some new kind of blood libel? Are you aware that such knowing lies can be punishable crimes? What about Ha'aretz reporter Amira Haas, who lives in occupied West bank?
Here you find last childs killed by israelis, you can search for more yourself.

The ratio of israeli vs palestinian children killed is similiar - about 1:3. For totals check Btselem.

The problem with this discussion is that one of us is underinformed or maybe just hostile. The facts I have brought are widely available and easily confirmed, but you just don't care. So if you think ignorance is strength then there's no point in discussion.

China has some balls suggesting Microsoft open it's code to their government when the Chinese government isn't open to it's own populace.

Can you say "Tiananmen Square, 1989?"

Yeah. I knew that you could. Chinese citizens are still regularly detained, imprisoned and killed for their thoughts and speech. And they want openness?

For once I'm with Microsoft I'm OUTRAGED that such an oppressive group of 1950 throwbacks, not one iota distinct from common criminals, would even request it. Tell them to shove it up their ass.

China has some balls suggesting Microsoft open it's code to their government when the Chinese government isn't open to it's own populace.

Can you say "Tiananmen Square, 1989?"

Yeah. I knew that you could. Chinese citizens are still regularly detained, imprisoned and killed for their thoughts and speech. And they want openness?

For once I'm with Microsoft I'm OUTRAGED that such an oppressive group of 1950 throwbacks, not one iota distinct from common criminals, would even request it. Tell them to shove it up their ass.

China has some balls suggesting Microsoft open it's code to their government when the Chinese government isn't open to it's own populace.

Can you say "Tiananmen Square, 1989?"

Yeah. I knew that you could. Chinese citizens are still regularly detained, imprisoned and killed for their thoughts and speech. And they want openness?

For once I'm with Microsoft I'm OUTRAGED that such an oppressive group of 1950 throwbacks, not one iota distinct from common criminals, would even request it. Tell them to shove it up their ass.

Umm.. I don't have the figures, what % of the US polulation is killed each year by it's own government? I'm sure it's a lot higer than in the UK, and we are as you say in a near civil war.

According to Amnesty International, "In 2001... Sixty-six people were executed in the USA." Also from Anesty International, "A recent research study... found that sectarian hatred had reached unprecedented levels in north Belfast... At least 19 people reportedly died during 2001 as a result of sectarian or paramilitary activity."

Sorry, couldn't find information on the UK as a whole. But given that this is the mortality rate reported for one city, I suspect that overall, the civil war in the UK has a higher toll (in percentage population and raw numbers) than executions carried out by the US government.

Anything you can make, We can make cheaper-
We can make anything cheaper than you!

--
Now seriously. This is really sickening:

No reliable legal system enforces contracts. Theft of intellectual property is routine. Business disputes are often settled by hired thugs; on occasion, those thugs are the local police. But though it can feel like Dodge City, Dongguan works more like 19th-century Manchester, as perhaps the world's most extensive and systematic exploitation of transient labor by mobile capital. And the people who oversee this system -- and profit handsomely from it -- are the officials of the world's largest Communist Party.

While I am not an blind supporter of Amnesty International, I think they are spot-on with regard to China."

We have normalized trade relations with them, coddled them, and deceived ourselves under the banner of "engagement." We should not accept super-cheap components as a result of slave-labor or child-labor. Communism is bad enough, but now we have the worst of both worlds - totalitarian communism and ruthless robber-baron-style capitalism.

Let me be clear - I have nothing against Chinese people, just their government's practices.

What do /.ers suggest to contribute to the solution? Stop buying consumer goods made in China? Write to congress? To be honest, it seems rather hopeless.

If I recall correctly, it is Israeli intelligence which uses torture to get information. Cf. http://www.free-market.net/forums/main0203b/messag es/838491397.html, http://web.mit.edu/cis/www/mitejmes/issues/200105/ br_asmar1.htm, http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/ar98/mde15.h tm.

The International Criminal Court will get you. I couldn't find a website critical of the ICC, so I'll voice my objections. Any government can accuse you. There is no Jury. A 3 judge panel decides your fate. Basically, if someone in any government anywhere in the world doesn't like you, you're history. For an idea of how fair the 3 judge panel will be - look at the UN Human Rights Commitee. (Members consist of such salutory champions of Human rights as China and Sudan.)

Amnesty International (2002/06/11)

If you're a Nazi, they come and throw you in prison.

If you are stupid enough to wave a Nazi flag around. On the other hand, I can't remember the last time a synagouge got attacked in the US, whereas there are a number of cases of Jews being attacked in Germany. If you search for Jews on the Amnesty International, I get them being attacked in Germany and being considered two sympathetic to keep on a jury in the US.

Strangely enough, while Amnesty International is blocked, Amnesty's Australian site isn't.

Nevertheless,
www.google.com works, as do
images.google.com and
groups.google.com.

Trying to check whether the cached version of Amnesty International is reachable in China, I found that the system returned an error message stating that the Great Firewall blocks requests only by URL and thus the parameters should be removed from the request.
Apparently, the server containing the cached page, "http://216.239.37.100/", can be reached from China.

I am inclined to think that the Chinese Government may already have more subtle methods to block content. On the other hand, they keep shutting down internet cafes...

I visited China very recently (to attend a conference which was being held there), and stayed in a pretty Westernized
hotel with internet access.

slashdot was accessible, as was google, which IIRC was even nice enough to talk to me in the appropriate language. Some bits of yahoo.com were accessible, but not the webmail or news. CNN and BBC News were both blocked, as were quite a few other news sites, and unsurprising things like Amnesty international.

I say blocked, but what I mean is that when I tried to access these sites, the connections would always just time out while others were fine. I can't remember what happened when I tried to ping them.

I had no trouble downloading an SSH client and using it to connect back home.

This is correlation, not causation.

No, this is causation. Observe the chain of events:

1. People believe that they are either weak or unsafe
2. People allow a dictatorial government to come to power, examples:
   1. Cuba let Castro and the communists in, because their economy was owned by foreign businesses
   2. China let the communists in, again because they didn't have control of their country (British China, French China, American China....)
   3. Germany let Hitler and the Nazis in, because they were weak after WWI
3. As a result of a dictatorial government that tolerates no opposition coming to power, people lose their safety, since their own government is free to kill them if they step out of line (I'm sure I don't need to list examples here)

If I haven't convinced you, perhaps you should visit Amnesty International's site. Ask them about the desaparecidos .

Tiananmen Square, oh the happy memories!.

Let's not forget every parent's favourite, the child-quota!. (scroll down a bit)

Fuck the olympics, watching or visiting. If you want to feel good then make a difference! Come on, if you were thinking of going to the Olympics, or know someone who is, ask yourself/them whether Amnesty International [or any worthy cause down to the amusing local alcoholic vagrant] would make better use of the cash than the International Olympic Committee, Chinese Guvverment, etc...

Think about it.

Ali

Tiananmen Square, oh the happy memories!.

Let's not forget every parent's favourite, the child-quota!. (scroll down a bit)

Fuck the olympics, watching or visiting. If you want to feel good then make a difference! Come on, if you were thinking of going to the Olympics, or know someone who is, ask yourself/them whether Amnesty International [or any worthy cause down to the amusing local alcoholic vagrant] would make better use of the cash than the International Olympic Committee, Chinese Guvverment, etc...

Think about it.

Ali

Tiananmen Square, oh the happy memories!.

Let's not forget every parent's favourite, the child-quota!. (scroll down a bit)

Fuck the olympics, watching or visiting. If you want to feel good then make a difference! Come on, if you were thinking of going to the Olympics, or know someone who is, ask yourself/them whether Amnesty International [or any worthy cause down to the amusing local alcoholic vagrant] would make better use of the cash than the International Olympic Committee, Chinese Guvverment, etc...

Think about it.

Ali

Normally I would concede that China has a much worse human rights record (lack of due process etc) and leave it at that, but I won't let "we have due process" be an excuse for Capital Punishment.

We are all born with rights, and top of the list is the right to life. Nothing you can do can take away from those rights. Nothing. NOTHING. Not even murder, manslaughter, treason, conspiracy, N-O-T-H-I-N-G. This is what America is built on, I believe, and for that I applaud the American Way.

My concerns are with the ways in which those rights are trampled on in the name of "what is right, just, American, whatever". I don't hate Americans. I don't hate anyone. [I have two exceptions, but they are irrelevant here. My "best" friend slept with my then gf, told everyone I was paranoid when I suspected something, and generally should go to hell. Not seen either for 5 years now, but I hold a grudge :-)]. But I do despair of Americans who think they are right simply because they are American. The two do not go hand in hand.

Getting back on topic, Yahoo sold out. Money speaks, and they've added to the tools of oppression for a bunch of dollars. That sucks.

If you want to join the anti-oppression movement, you could do worse than join Amnesty International. They campaign for the release of Prisoners of Conscience, and the end to the Death Penalty.

sorry, that should be Amnesty International

How about some historical examples to bolster Michael's claim.

What many of the hard-core groups such as the ACLU and the EFF fear is a return to the days of COINTELPRO when the FBI (with the cooperation of the CIA) used it's vast powers to spy on Americans. And to discredit any political group outside of the mainstream. One noteable target was Dr. Martin Luther King. To quote from the Church Commission's report:

"The FBI collected information about Dr. King's plans and activities through an extensive surveillance program, employing nearly every intelligence-gathering technique at the Bureau's disposal. Wiretaps, which were initially approved by Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, were maintained on Dr. King's home telephone from October 1963 until mid-1965; the SCLC headquarter's telephones were covered by wiretaps for an even longer period. Phones in the homes and offices of some of Dr. King's close advisers were also wiretapped. The FBI has acknowledged 16 occasions on which microphones were hidden in Dr. King's hotel and motel rooms in an "attempt" to obtain information about the "private activities of King and his advisers" for use to "completely discredit" them. " [My Emphasis]

The FBI sought to influence universities to withhold honorary degrees from Dr. King. Attempts were made to prevent the publication of articles favorable to Dr. King and to find "friendly" news sources that would print unfavorable articles. The FBI offered to play for reporters tape recordings allegedly made from microphone surveillance of Dr. King's hotel rooms.

The above quotes are from the final report of the Church Committee (see also Here), a congressional committee set up to investigate the FBI's abuses of power. Out of this investigation arose many of the restrictions that Bush, Ashcroft, and Co. are overturning. These changes and the arguments for them have received opposition from longtime FBI members:

"I feel that certain facts, including the following, have, up to now, been omitted, downplayed, glossed over and/or mis-characterized in an effort to avoid or minimize personal and/or institutional embarrassment on the part of the FBI and/or perhaps even for improper political reasons..."

"Several prominent FBI alumni also blasted Ashcroft's cast-a-wide-net approach to the terrorism investigation, which led to the detention of some 1,200 people, only a dozen of them suspected of having any links with Al Qaeda. The mass arrests were part of a fundamental shift in the bureau's strategy. In the past, the FBI would identify suspected terrorists, move to forestall any immediate threat of violence, then watch the suspects in hopes of cracking an entire cell. Ashcroft's approach, the critics noted, might jeopardize the kinds of investigations that had prevented previous attacks. "We used good investigative techniques and lawful techniques," warned Reagan-era FBI director William Webster, "and we did it without all the suggestion that we are going to jump all over people's private lives."..."

This is what people (quite rightly) fear and what we should be striving against. This is what Prompted Emmanuel Goldstein (editor of 2600) to devote his editorial in the most recent issue to a call to arms against such governance. This is a serious issue and the note that Michael Struck was just right. The FBI stated that carnivore will never collect the wrong information Yet we have admissions of the opposite (see here). In the light of all of this, can you really say that he is wrong?

As always you can contact the ACLU for more.

For some fun side-reading see:

• Amnesty International's 2002 report on the U.S.A.
• NYC Indymedia
• The San Francisco Chronicle
• And, The Register

Free software is built on a pre-existing cultural norm - ie hacking - that doesn't exist for these other media.

The country is famous for its torture. It has more than 10.000 political prisoners, many of them journalists etc.

Those who know the country are not shocked by this, like i said it is the nature of the terrorstate Turkey is.