Slashdot Mirror

Although their approach to civil rights is a bit backwards from the Western perspective

All the executed homosexuals and women beaten for not maintaining the appropriate veil angle on the street say "hi."

Oh, so do the journalists killed in detention by the regime.

So do the children being kids being executed by the regime.

So does Amnesty International , while we're at it...

Oh, and so do the local Christians, Zoroastrians, Bahai, and Jews, who are routinely persecuted by the regime (you can do the search yourself, I'm getting nauseated looking at these links).

Look, I understand people don't like GWB, but to insinuate that the US is somehow responsible for human rights violations in Iran, or has a somehow comprable record on human rights is insane.

Although their approach to civil rights is a bit backwards from the Western perspective

All the executed homosexuals and women beaten for not maintaining the appropriate veil angle on the street say "hi."

Oh, so do the journalists killed in detention by the regime.

So do the children being kids being executed by the regime.

So does Amnesty International , while we're at it...

Oh, and so do the local Christians, Zoroastrians, Bahai, and Jews, who are routinely persecuted by the regime (you can do the search yourself, I'm getting nauseated looking at these links).

Look, I understand people don't like GWB, but to insinuate that the US is somehow responsible for human rights violations in Iran, or has a somehow comprable record on human rights is insane.

I'll bet you we see a lot more of this in the future, because internationalization has introduced an element of nationalism into the competitions between companies. Nationalism enables our tribalist ability to slaughter (i.e. rip off) any human who is from a different tribe.

I think that calling this "nationalism" is to give it too much credit... it's more like a retreat to a medieval attitude, a worship of the divine right of your local warlord. There's this general sense that whatever Big Corporation wants to do must be okay, it's not as if they were criminals or terrorists or something.

I would guess that "tribalism" is closer to the mark, but I wouldn't be suprised if actual tribes are often saner and more sensible than nations about these things (if you were an Igbo living in Nigeria, why would you care more about country than tribe? The country wasn't even there a hundred years ago, and it demonstrably cares more about international oil companies than local citizens).

US Threats to the International Criminal Court

The United States of America is the only state that is actively opposed to the new International Criminal Court. US opposition to the Court can be traced back to the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute) in 1998, where the USA was one of only 7 states to vote against adoption of the Statute. Reportedly a major reason for not supporting adoption of the Statute stems from the refusal of the international community to grant the United Nations Security Council (of which the USA is a veto holding permanent member) control over which cases the Court considered, instead favouring an independent Prosecutor who - subject to safeguards and fair trial guarantees - would make such decisions.

On 31 December 2000, however, President Clinton signed the Rome Statute, which was a positive step in favour of the Court. However, the US position has changed dramatically since the new administration under President Bush took office in 2001. On 6 May 2002, the US government took the unprecedented step of repudiating its signature of the Rome Statute and began a worldwide campaign to weaken the Court and to obtain impunity for all US nationals from the jurisdiction of the Court.

Amnesty International believes that the US concerns that the ICC will be used to bring politically motivated prosecutions against US nationals are wholly unfounded. The substantial safeguards and fair trial guarantees in the Rome Statute will ensure that such a situation would never arise.

This page provides information on two parts of the current US campaign against the ICC: impunity agreements and Security Council Resolution 1422. For further information on the USA and the ICC, please see the AI USA website, the AMICC website, the CICC website, or the Washington Working Group on the ICC website.

US Impunity Agreements

The USA is currently approaching governments around the world and asking them to enter into illegal impunity agreements. These agreements provide that a government will not surrender or transfer US nationals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes to the ICC, if requested by the Court. The agreements do not require the USA or the other state concerned to investigate and, if there is sufficient evidence, to prosecute such a person in US Courts. Indeed in many cases it would be impossible for US courts to do so, as US law does not include many of the crimes under the Rome Statute.

On 1 July 2003 the USA announced the withdrawal of military assistance to 35 states who are parties to the Rome Statute and have refused to sign an impunity agreement with the USA. On 8 December 2004, the USA went even further, withdrawing economic support from states that still refuse to sign impunity agreements. The withdrawal of this economic funding threatens to undermine counter-terrorism efforts, peace process programs, anti-drug trafficking initiatives, truth and reconciliation commissions and HIV/Aids education, and threatens states such as Jordan, Ireland, Cyprus, Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela and South Africa.

The USA claims that these agreements are legal and in conformity with Article 98 of the Statute. However, Amnesty International has conducted a legal analysis which demonstrates that US Impunity Agreements do not fall under Article 98, and states that enter into such agreements with the USA are in breach of their obligations under international law. This legal analysis (International Criminal Court: US efforts to obtain impunity for genocide, crimes against humanity and war

This is nothing we haven't seen before and nothing we won't be seeing again. The Chinese government will go to great lengths for its powerlust and especially to protect itself from the people, and every year the march of technology hands them more power. So what can we do about it? Making brooding, cynical posts is the usual M.O. and the generated online badwill has no doubt brough them to their knees. How can we do what little we can to end this obscenity?

Run Tor?
Join Amnesty International and buy some of their nifty hoodies?
Hold a public protest?
Boycott Chinese goods (yeah, right)?
Organize a fuck-off massive online attack and hammer on the Great Firewall? ("one of the most important projects for ensuring its political power..." indeed.)

Help me out here.

I don't believe Turkey was implicated in any of the suspected CIA flights of detainees to be rendered, detainees headed to secret Prisons as many EU nations have been, or accused of being one of the nations that allowed the Secret American Prisons within their sovereign territory. As I recall, Turkey's parliament voted against the US using its country as a base from which to launch their attack on Iraq, with the stated objection being that it was illegal without UN Security Council agreement.

Oh yeah, those civilized Euros.

Here is just one report.

I suggest you live in China and speak out against the Chinese government. Then maybe you could understand how China treats disidents and tolerates free speech as long as you speak the party line. Just ask how all the Chinese political prisoners and the 10 to 15 thousand people executed under the death sentence each year according to Amnesty international. http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/china/index.do

Steven Chen is a slimebag. First, he is working to help the Chinese government develop
technology with skills he learned at Cray. This is a transfer of US technical skills to the Chinese militaty and mirrors Chinese industrial espionage. Chen is helping support a communist state that is killing people in Tibet and has the humanitarian aims of a dictator like Sadam Husein and supports torture. Steven Chen just took his skills to China to help the Chinese government which kills and interns millions in Stallinist style concentration camps and helped Pakistan and North Korea get an Atomic bomb. Those high tech computers he's building are being used to make better nuclear weapons. Steven Chen's ethics are on the level of a street urchin. Notice how the article mentions supercomputer applications except nuclear weapons which is one application that really uses supercomputers. Steven Chen was probably a Chinese plant though to take his knowledge back to China after he worked at Cray.

There is also evidence the Chinese reverse engineered a Cray. Chen is no different from Chinese technicians trying to steal chip designs and fly back to China after working at an American company and the blueprints.

China also supports widespread censorship of the internet and press. Freedom of speech does not exist in China. Steven Chen is promoting and supporting a China where freedom of speech
doesn't exist and an e-mail can get you 10 years. http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy /index.aspx?c=goJTI0OvElH&b=953489&template=x.ascx &action=5385

China is also militaristic and destabilizes Asia with ambitions of power. China wants to takeover Taiwan either by military force or politically. Any attempts to declare Taiwan a separate and autonomous country are met by Chinese government attacks and threats of reprisal against the US no less. In fact Chinese influence reaches to even the hidden corridors of the White House. China wants to add Taiwan to it's territories militarily or by any other means.

Way to go Steve. Help out a corrupt Chinese government. Maybe the Dalai Lama can congratulate you.
At least Steven Chen could be working in the west and supporting economic and political reforms in China but he's doing the opposite. Steven Chen should be proud that he's helping support democracy in China by working in a corrupt and unreformed system where economic reforms do not encourage government reforms.

You can't injure someone in normal health with a taser.

Incorrect. Dozens of people have been killed by tasers.

Humm, a few /.'ers seem to not like such a nice down to earth guy as Steve. I wonder what comments would be said if it was Paris Hilton, Tom Cruise, Jolie or Pitt ( Too bad life is not a chess game, so we could trade up for a better piece) I for one, would prefer to see Paris Hilton impaled on a snorkeling trip to the Bahamas and read the entertaining excerpts of how all the local villagers rushed to dive after for all the diamonds and sparkly gifts she left scattered on the sea floor.

Oh yea...and please do not try to tell me how much humanitarian Jolie is..and her Pitt sidekick get real, how much humanitarian aid can you do, if each time to travel you come back with various cafe shots and a new baby in the oven.

I think this may be the first time, those names were ever posted in the entire Slashdot website...sorry guys..I know, stick with news that matters..

anyway, lets all hog tie Paris and toss her in a volcano see of we can trade up.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/iran/index.do
http://hrw.org/doc/?t=mideast&c=iran
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/defenders/hrd_iran /alert081606_ebadi.htm
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/02/49f87 7bc-61bb-4b7d-87e0-663033df3404.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4114621.stm

From the BBC article:

The execution of children

Torture, as well as degrading punishments such as amputation, flogging and stoning

Discrimination against women and girls

The persecution of political opponents, following last February's mass disqualification of opposition candidates in the run-up to parliamentary elections

Discrimination against minorities, including Christians, Jews, Sunni Muslims, and in particular followers of the Baha'i faith, including arbitrary arrest and detention.

Can we start being worried yet?
Can we start telling them they can't do this yet?
Or are these still wonderful people who should have A-bombs?

*sits and waits for the moral equivalency arguments*

"The caste system does not violate human rights"

Amnesty International seems to disagree with you on this issue:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/americas/documen t.do?id=ENGUSA2005100705001

Abuses against dalits are numerous and take many different forms, they include (but are not limited to):
        * Socioeconomic discrimination
        * Beatings, slashings, and other forms of torture
        * Arson - the burning of dalit communities
        * Violence against women
                    o Rape, gang rape, and the parading of women through the streets naked
                                + As a form of punishment
                                + As the right of the upper-caste male
                                + To punish or embarrass the woman's family
                    o Beating and torture of women
        * Summary execution, many times by burning alive
        * Bonded labor
        * Denial of rights, especially land rights
        * Police abuses against dalits, custodial abuse

Exactly *how* does this NOT violate human rights?

Where is this proof that EU countries are torturing people ? Click away. Bear in mind, that I am fully aware that currently we in the USA are worse than all of EU. Normally, we are not. But the last 6 years have been different.

unlike in the US where the people even cheer on the torture we would have a public outrage, and governments would fall.
I agree. I think that we as a nation have lost our moral backbone over the last 6 years. We express outrage over a president who has sex and lies about it, but a number of citizens take no offense to a president who lies, commits treason, is a coward, endorses torture, and runs up an outlandeous debt (one that combined with the oil issue may take the world economy over the edge, certainly our own). But we are slowly getting it back. Hopefully with all the corruption that is going on (bush, cheney, libbey, Friest, Delay, Abramhoff, etc, etc), ppl will rethink what kind of a nation we want.

In fact, even in Europe (eastern europe, Turkey, etc; and I suspect most if not all of the major western european) you have torture occuring.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/women/document.do?id=D2C 1FC0DC59EC51C802569610071BFEC

It simply is not true that people in the countries you mentioned live like we do in the U.S.A. Free.

Here's just one article that proves you wrong: http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/iran/document. do?id=BC7ABDB06436BBB9802569A500714EF4

Each year thousands of Chinese citizens are put to death under a legal system plagued with corruption and secrecy. While the rest of the world moves toward abolition, Chinese authorities only continue to expand the application of the death penalty. According to reports, an average of 15,000 people per year were executed, judicially or extrajudicially, by the government between 1997 and 2001...

And since I don't believe that we should be willing to waste $36,000 per year on their permanent incarceration, it's merely a matter of economic logic that they be disposed of. Personally, I'd harvest anything I could from them (organs, tissue, etc.) and give the proceeds to the victim's family but that's just me.

It doesn't work that way. The death penalty costs quite a bit more than life incarceration.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=10 8&scid=7
http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/cost.html

I have no moral "problems" with the idea of executing the guilty. My problem lies in the costs in doing so, and in the risks of executing the innocent. You'll need umpteen appeals, just in case someone is innocent, and the process of proving guilt to that degree is very expensive.

Better to throw someone in jail forever, so that they may emerge if they are innocent. Keep in mind people tend to sit on death row for 20-30 years anyways; at that point their crimes are so far in the past that I can't imagine the relatives of the victim really dwell on it.

As you were saying?

i really hate it when people get high and mighty and give glib "it's so easy" responses to pandemics.

while the "1,2,3" reasoning may work in the States / West (and that's a *big* may), i encourage you to find the nearest fireman and borrow his 'jaws of life' so that your head may be removed from your own ass. take your little "changes to social norms", board an airplane, and tell it to the raped and abused the world over.

fucking prick. seriously, what mods posted this arrogant shit insightful?

It's not about getting yahoo to change, it's about initiating change in China itself. What you and I do are irrelevant in the end, because it will be the Chinese people who will have to demand freedom from their government... It's a call that can not be made by anyone else.

This isn't exactly true. If we show that we accept their actions then we can't get any official pressure put on China. If we don't show interest then we can't get the government actively involved in trying to support said dissidents. It is their call, but we can be doing things to pressure the Chinese government officially while we also introduce the propaganda to get people to become dissidents. Corporations aren't exactly the ones we should rely on to bring about the change so to me this is a non-issue in that point. However I fully support expressing your opinion to your representatives (this applies worldwide). Covert radio broadcasts, internet attacks on Chinese publishing sites (planting material) and funding covert networks are all good ideas that I only want the government involved in (CIA, NSA, etc) - I don't want Yahoo! being the defender of freedom. At the same time however, I wonder how many people don't actually mind the "oppression". For the system to work as well as it has until today a lot of people must be working in the system very well.

I sure hate oppression and violence but I don't know the truth about China. I can't really decide how I feel about this or any other issue of human rights abuse. Really, I wonder about others that we just as actively trade with.

Moreso, we cannot really fault companies who give in to China's demands. Companies operating within China's shores, or otherwise targetting the Chinese people will have to submit to Chinese law. If Yahoo or MSN did otherwise, then it is their company that would be in violation of the law.

Exactly right. To do business in China you must abide by their rules. Pretty much the same thing here in America. I assume that Yahoo holds a corporate charter (or some such statement that says they can do business within the nation of P.R.C.) and said charter binds them to operate within the laws of the land and says that they are more of a "peoples" company than anything else. Really, American corporate charters phrase the legal paperwork as the corporation doing a service for the people of their state (and beyond) and grants them the right to incorporate.

It's a small barrier to entry but it does exist. Obtaining and keeping a corporate charter was once a hard task in America. For American companies in China today - they are doing the same thing they did just 70 years ago to get into business. I suspect however that Yahoo! (et.al.) existing in China is a GoodThing. American companies are a great cover for covert operations and it is possible to "brain drain" China and maybe steal a few intellectual property secrets like they've been doing to us all these years. Eventually, no matter how covert we get, we will have exported something that people use daily and that helps influence the culture.

Let China bring in all the American companies they want. At some point someone like KFC will not stand for the law that is a thorn in their side and revolt. One brick at a time they will eat that Great Wall down from the inside.

Yep, it was. We all know that the US was guilty of all kinds of human rights violations 35+ years ago, but the protests in Seattle have to do with what's going on now in Vietnam

In your initial post you strongly imply that it is somehow wrong to imply china is "corrupt above and beyond" the democracies elsewhere.

But then you say "I of course don't mean to say they're equivalent"?

So you're saying they're not equivalent, they're ... just not any worse? And then you say that western democracies are "just as rotten"? But "just as rotten" is different from "equivalent"?

when really the ruling parties in the West are just as rotten

No... really... the CCP is worse.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with "the west", the media, "identity politics", or "propaganda"; this is just about you entirely lacking a sense of perspective. The greater of two evils is still a greater evil. Being "bad", or "rotten", or containing nations which abuse prisoners of war, or whatever it is you're upset at contemporary western democratic systems over, still doesn't come even with executing 89 people a day without a legitimate trial.

You are correct about the official executions. Unofficially, however, Cuban policy has been to use lethal force to stop escapees. See the 13 de Marzo massacre for instance, in which Cuban coast guard sunk a fleeing tug (killing 41) or note the Clinton administrations's formal protest in '93 of the cuban practice of shooting swimmers in Guantanamo bay...

Even if not executed, being jailed in Castro's Cuba is not exactly a joyride. Amnesty International's annual reports (http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/cuba/index.do ) consistently find evidence of torture of political prisoners (most commonly beating, burning with a cigarette, etc) and bad jail conditions (5x5x5 cells, no medical treatment, no sanitary facilities, etc) resulting in the occasional death of prisoners of Conscience. Since the 2004 crackdown, it doesn't seem that you have to be very vocal to be imprisoned under the vague anti "disprespect" or "Propaganda" statutes...

Fidel may not be responsible for all the ills of Cuban society. But he is responsible for the political system's consistent oppression of the cuban people. I'm not here to defend the embargo, but I certainly don't have any affection for bully and won't waste any time trying to figure out what percentage of the oppression is his fault. Cuba Libre... But it won't happen under Castro (Fidel or Raoul).

Not to mention that artificial diamond is "more pure", in the sense that it's not a blood/conflict diamond.

Bring them on.

Lets check these 'facts':

So the Chinese Army did not send in tanks to stop students protesting?
- The US Govt has used the army against its own population. Check the protests in the 60's. The US regularly uses its army both overtly (iraq, grenada) and covertly (cambodia, iran, south america) against other countries.

So those executions I saw where they had the people kneel and put a bullet in their brain never happened?
- The US executes a truck-load of people. In fact, this is a problem highlighted by both Amnesty International and the US Supreme Court.

So there really is freedom of religion and speech in China?
- Freedom on religion and speech? No problem (as long as you are not a muslim). Yes, I will conceded that on this point, the US does provide significantly more freedoms.

And the Chinese did not lob missiles over an island full of people to keep them in line?
- The US government regularly lobs missiles into cities and towns (iraq, afghanistan). Dont be fooled into thinking these 'smart bombs' are really that smart - 17,000 iraqis can't be wrong (but they are dead).

- TV does propogate myths in both directions - dont believe everything your overlords tell you.

Here's a link to the Human Rights in China site. They aren't President Bush.

I suppose I should mention Human Rights Watch, another group not affiliated with President Bush or the U.S. Government. They aren't happy with China's approach to human rights, which is to propagandize about how wonderful things are in China.

Amnesty International, a group critical of the Bush Administration, thinks even less of PRChina.

I've never been to China. Have you?

Here's a link to the Human Rights in China site. They aren't President Bush.

I suppose I should mention Human Rights Watch, another group not affiliated with President Bush or the U.S. Government. They aren't happy with China's approach to human rights, which is to propagandize about how wonderful things are in China.

Amnesty International, a group critical of the Bush Administration, thinks even less of PRChina.

I've never been to China. Have you?

How does the poster come close to vindicating those who dealt with the Third Reich?

The companies that dealt with them, first off, are still around. Ford is a good example. But in reality their dealings with Nazi Germany were okay until we were at war with them. I know, I know. I hate Nazis too, and I'm jewish... but telling a company not to do business in a certain country because their "evil" isn't good enough.

If that was the case we wouldn't have trade deficit. We import more stuff from China than anywhere else I believe. If being "evil" was a good reason not to do business with someone why do we deal with the Saudi's so much? They are "evil" to the 3rd degree and even have U.S. citizens in custody (custody which usually ends in 0 trial and 1 beheading + torture).

To think that Google is supposed to bring democracy to China is ridiculous. Sure, they had a big IPO, but they are not close to China's size and I don't think have nukes... as China does.

Let's quit acting like Google is responsible for "Communism" in China. If you really want to do something write your President, or Senator. Write the U.N., which counts them among legitimate regimes. Do something worthwhile.

Google may "censor" results and all, but something makes me think that they will stay one step ahead of the Chinese government regardless. They are, after all smarter. (But really, what does Google gain from a Chinese overthrow?)

How does the poster come close to vindicating those who dealt with the Third Reich?

The companies that dealt with them, first off, are still around. Ford is a good example. But in reality their dealings with Nazi Germany were okay until we were at war with them. I know, I know. I hate Nazis too, and I'm jewish... but telling a company not to do business in a certain country because their "evil" isn't good enough.

If that was the case we wouldn't have trade deficit. We import more stuff from China than anywhere else I believe. If being "evil" was a good reason not to do business with someone why do we deal with the Saudi's so much? They are "evil" to the 3rd degree and even have U.S. citizens in custody (custody which usually ends in 0 trial and 1 beheading + torture).

To think that Google is supposed to bring democracy to China is ridiculous. Sure, they had a big IPO, but they are not close to China's size and I don't think have nukes... as China does.

Let's quit acting like Google is responsible for "Communism" in China. If you really want to do something write your President, or Senator. Write the U.N., which counts them among legitimate regimes. Do something worthwhile.

Google may "censor" results and all, but something makes me think that they will stay one step ahead of the Chinese government regardless. They are, after all smarter. (But really, what does Google gain from a Chinese overthrow?)

--
Try Nuggets , the mobile search engine. We answer your questions via SMS, across the UK.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/listbyyear.do

A comic strip, a Washington Post editorial, and using the Slashdot community as an example ... doesn't sound like much of an argument to me. If you're saying the western world hasn't come a long, long way from how women used to be treated, I ain't buying it.

The world I know - the third world - is on its way. It's happening. We're going slowly - there's a lot of history, a lot of stereotypes, a lot of social rules to get over - but you know what? We'll get there someday. The cosmopolitan upper classes, they're *there*. The rest will take time to catch up - maybe a lot of time - but there are people working at it.

Advice to parent poster: relax. We can only change the world one person at a time. If you're in a hurry, you can always help out.

True, but in that case, why didn't we liberate the saudis since Saudi Arabia got about just as bad record as Iraq when it comes to human rights?

I wondered a few years ago wy the US is against the International Criminal Court, and "trying to ensure that US nationals are exempt from ICC jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes". This is the court that Saddam Husein should stand trial at. But it could also be the court that American Officers guilty of crimes against humanity may also be guilty of.
Maybe the US is against the ICC because their soldiers might be called in front of it for such actions they are responsible for, as are currently happening in Iraq, and they know that such actions may lead to facing the ICC.

Amnesty International has received frequent reports of torture or other ill-treatment by Coalition Forces during the past year. Detainees have reported being routinely subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during arrest and detention. Many have told Amnesty International that they were tortured and ill-treated by US and UK troops during interrogation. Methods often reported include prolonged sleep deprivation; beatings; prolonged restraint in painful positions, sometimes combined with exposure to loud music; prolonged hooding; and exposure to bright lights. Virtually none of the allegations of torture or ill-treatment has been adequately investigated by the authorities.

"Our extensive research in Iraq suggests that this is not an isolated incident. It is not enough for the USA to react only once images have hit the television screens".

the US sucks.

Watch for the door on your way out.

Seriously though, be sure to compare USA vs. Malaysia before moving, or, indeed, before making such statements. There are also other concerns, but you probably don't care.

the US sucks.

Watch for the door on your way out.

Seriously though, be sure to compare USA vs. Malaysia before moving, or, indeed, before making such statements. There are also other concerns, but you probably don't care.

No, as shown with regard to US pulling out of the World Court.

Read about it here, here, here or here.

War is GOOD!
The
World's Largest Arms Exporter

Regards,
Kilgore Trout

I'd rather starve here first.

amnesty
cia

It is always good to remember, and to be informed about the present situation.

Here you have some recent news.

My point is while there is certainly nice tolerance it is a facade to some degree. Ask immigrants how they feel, the warm welcome that the Turkish and Marocans receive in Dutch society.

Well, my African-American friends say much the same things about the USA, only they aren't recent immigrants but have been there for several generations.

Turks and Marocans aren't very likely to be gunned down in their homes, or have a broomstick jammed up their arses by arresting police officers in the Netherlands either. Are these typical? Of course not, but such incidents do happen with a disturbing regularity in the USA and I can't recall ever hearing of such events in the Netherlands.

Tolerance just to ideas is also lacking. Try critizing the Dutch government in front of them, they'll either 1) tell you how broken American government is in response or 2) tell you you're clueless because you don't know how brilliant the Dutch system is.

Yeah, I think that's right. However, in my experience, they're far less strident than the United States in their defence of 'my country right or wrong', and I can perfectly understand their unwillingness to be lectured on how they should run their government from an American. I certainly don't have the sense that the only way to achieve high political office in the Netherlands is by being in thrall to vested interests. In reference to Rush Limbaugh or Pat Buchanan, did you not hear about Pim Fortuin? He wasn't as hateful as good ole Rush or Pat, but he was pretty radical in views

I don't think Fortuin was comparable for a moment -- and if anything, Fortuin is a pretty good counter-example to the things that you're saying.

Firstly, he was gay. Can you even begin to contemplate a gay Jesse Helms?

Secondly, he was critical of the existing Dutch system -- and gained an immense amount of support from the population for expressing what were effectively heretical views that broke with the longstanding liberal consensus.

Finally, Fortuin wasn't opposed to immigrants simply because they were different -- inferior mongrel races -- but rather, was concerned about the impact that immigrants from certain other cultures were having on the Dutch way of life -- and most particularly, those enlightenment values of tolerance, equality, etc. that the Netherlands has worked so hard to enshrine.

This isn't an issue that's ever likely to arise in the USA because you insist that every immigrant pledge allegiance to the flag, motherhood and apple pie before they ever get citizenship, and the moment you begin to even start perceiving them as a potential threat you start locking them up or expelling them, regardless of the evidence against them.

Don't get me wrong. The USA has many great qualities and I love the place as much -- perhaps even more -- than I love the Netherlands. But freedom and tolerance just aren't the first things that spring to mind when I think about the place and I often have to struggle to reconcile the good things I like about the political system there (such as the very spirited defence of freedoms of speech and expression, the constitution, etc.) with the reality of how that system actually operates.

Because this is about the RIAA, and it brings out the worst in me, I couldn't help but bring your attention in this analogy of the diamond trade and the music trade - the "Blood Diamond." Does the RIAA have blood on its hands ... (of course this is meant only in the sense of extending the analogy ... so RIAA please don't try to sue me ... ha ha.)

Blood Diamonds

http://www.amnestyusa.org/amnestynow/diamonds.html

Greg Campbell is the author of the forthcoming Blood Diamonds: Tracing the Deadly Path of the World?s Most Precious Stones (Westview Press), to be released in September 2002.

Illicit diamonds make fabulous profits for terrorists and corporations alike. The trade illustrates with the hard clarity of the gem itself that no matter where human rights violations occur, the world ignores them at its peril.

...reality and math says that the Chinese will be better at it simply because they have more people and their people are willing to work for alot less money.

Just like with the car industry, and all the other industries.

Not in the US, anyway.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most widely accepted human rights treaty - of all the United Nations member states, only the United States and the collapsed state of Somalia have not ratified it. The United States continues to lead a defensive action against Children's human Rights lobbying against further measures designed to protect children - most recently against efforts to stop the use of child soldiers.

1. segregationist there is a two tiered legal system for "in-groups" and "out-groups". these groupings can be religious, racial, ethnic.
2. expansionist usually through direct force of state (viz. war). but also via economic imperialism.
3. ultranationalistic some sort of mystical, mythical or quasireligious importance is placed on the nation.
4. capitalist contrary to the nsadp's name, there ain't no socialism in national socialism.
5. reactionary makes policy based upon current circumstances rather than creating policies to prevent problems.
6. repressive all the secret police stuff that we associate with fascism.

so...

1. iraq wins (treatement of kurds worse than treatment of african americans. hands down)
2. u.s. wins (have you been listening to the "pax americana" stuff from pearle &co? that plus the habit of the u.s. running "proxy wars" to expand their influence (hussein was a pro-us proxy warrior to fight iran once) gives this to the u.s. hands down)
3. tie. maybe down in the states you don't see it, but from the outside american nationalism looks really scary! i can't speak for iraqi nationlism - but i am willing to wager it's pretty hefty
4. u.s. wins - although not socialist, iraq is not as ideologically committed to laissez faire capitalsim as the u.s. is.
5. tie - iraq has been struggling to avoid internal collapse for twelve years. survival struggles are by definition reactionary. the us has based it's entire foreign policy in response to s11 - a reactionary stance.
6. iraq wins - well, duh. in the united states the cops don't shoot you without trial... well sometimes but not very often... but homeland security may be looking to change that( here, here, here)

fascism comes in 31 different flavours. feel free to oppose them all.

I think there's a difference between letters to the editor and other kinds of communication mentioned in the article, such as letters to congressional representatives. When you send a letter to your representative or senator, you're really just voting, in a way. I don't think they really read them -- they just tabulate for and against on specific issues. The fact that the internet makes it easier for people to participate in this kind of democracy is great (as long as people read the letters they sign). Amnesty International has a program called Freedom Writers which is very similar, and I don't think anyone would want a dictator to ignore a landslide of letters in support of a political prisoner, just because it was obvious astroturfing by Amnesty International

But letters to the editor are treated as if they come from individuals. So, while encouraging people to write to their newspapers is one thing, encouraging them to write this to their newspaper, because the audience of these letters is partly the editors but also partly the general public, seems much more like the creation of propaganda -- like hiring actors to say something everywhere everyday until people believe it's true because they keep hearing it. Insofar as editors are paying attention to public opinion they should take these letters into account, but their job is, I hope, to be more thoughtful than that.