Slashdot Mirror
Iran Continues to Censor Internet Communications
eldawg writes "Iran has recently been in the news after electing a 'hardliner' president. But even previous 'liberal' Iranian governments have been putting together a sophisticated Internet filtering system to prevent their citizens from visiting 'questionable' websites and censoring dissent. An earlier posting at Slashdot outlined the crackdown on blogs, chat rooms and email communications. A more recent research paper from the OpenNet Initiative provides an update on the censoring activity in Iran. Reports indicate that the Iranian authorities are specifically targetting 'content in the local Farsi language using a filterning second only to China.'
We know Cisco has played a large role in bulding the 'Great Firewall of China' but is the Iranian initiative homegrown?"
I wonder if "freedom of information and communication" will ever become an internationally recognized human right? Maybe we'll invade another country in twenty years under the premise that their citizens are "deprived of a free press and subjected to a singular propagandic source of news?
Tor
An oppressive government is censoring internet connections! Get out!
Cisco built firewall for china and many other cos. helped china in a way that is in use against people who are working for Democratic or other free government. Then Microsoft censored contents for China. Now american cos. are working against the peoples of Iran ?!!!!
Hell is still hot.
From the obvious department?
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
This must have been accepted under the "Stuff that matters," because it certainly isn't news...
This just in:
Tyranny extends to all forms of communication!
Am I to act suprised?
Get your Unix fortune now!
I think they should have done that before Iraq.
Circumcision is child abuse.
So Iran centric! What about the rest of the world?
Abraham Lincoln Still Dead!
Movie at 11.
Ah... the republican solution.
So this is almost as oppressive as, say, Utah?
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
Monitoring internal communications is about catching potential dissenters and organizers of course, but is also about promoting self-censorship. When people know their communications are monitored, they're less likely to say anything negative about the government. That's why the govt makes no attempt to hide the monitoring.
I would say that this is just a sign that the government's scared of their own people and the potential for an uprising. (Which makes sense given that they were revolutionaries themselves.)
Tristan Yates
Oh just shut up and respect their culture!
Joe
http://www.joegrossberg.com
with Proxify (https://proxify.com/) or other proxies (http://proxy.org/).
would slashdotting iran be considered an act of war? who cares, gimme a link.
The Americans are just doing what the client wants, if they are doing anything at all. That's not in the same league as setting the policy, which is certainly coming from Iran.
Ask yourself this: if the Iranians didn't want the censorship, would American companies be helping them do it, if they even are? No, of course not.
And probably if there are people at Cisco doing any dirty work, they are Iranian, or mid-eastern, anyway. Don't jump to the conclusion that just because the company is American everyone who knows their OS has to be American, too.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
Alright, I haven't RTFA yet, but if this is news that Iran is censoring the Net then I dont think it's anything new. There have been a number of recent events that are using the media to direct public attention against Iran now (the most recent of which is probably Rumsfeld's Slam of their elections). As a concerned American citizen who is fast losing faith in the honor of his government, I think this is a ploy, to direct the attention of world citizens, and especially US citizens away from our own flaws and toward the flaws of other countries.
Anybody who read the article a few days ago about the new use of eminent domain can see that the US government has major problems with the way it functions. Instead of anybody pointing out the US censors information also, we all hurry to jump on the band wagon to single out and bash Iran. No, they (the US government) don't prevent you from searching for certain words or anything, at least not yet, but they do force the removal of websites that portray a view contrary to what they want the public to know: see http://www.67cshdocs.com/, a blog that didn't disclose any classified information, but showed you what was really going on on the US war fronts, but was shut down by the government. I'm an American citizen and very patriotic, but I'm not blind. Our government is using the media. No, I'm not saying they are controlling /. or any other news source, I'm saying the media has become the lap dogs who go when the government says fetch.
I don't approve of Iranian censorship. I don't approve of censorship of any sort. But it would be foolish of anyone to believe that the "axis of evil" are the only ones who do this. They simply do not have the size and power to cover up for the mselves and direct public attention elsewhere.
Just my two cents....
If you can't say something nice, make sure you have something heavy to throw.
...government? Hopefully this will serve as a warning to countries that are forgetting about what separation of church and state means. Although it is more likely that it will serve as motivation to eliminate separation of church and state :-(
Heaven forfend!
does anyone know if Slashdot is accessible in China or Iran?
imperialist, terrorist warmongers dept.
Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
Who ever said that every country on the planet must have USA values?
Maybe the people of Iran don't want to watch the stuff we do. Does 1 person who wants to see that content have the right to tell 1,000,000 other people to put up with his crap?
Even in the USA we have community standards. There are some small pockets inside the USA where it is illegal for adult companies to send DVD's. There are places in the USA where the communities want old fashioned values, they want to be able to keep the front door unlocked at night.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Just saying...
Get your Unix fortune now!
It's laughable how the mainstream media is treating the election in the Iranian dictatorship as if it's legitimate. See here for better researched commentary. The new Iranian President was about as "elected" as Stalin was. But we mustn't give President Bush any excuse to actually do anything to help along regime change in Iran, so the charade goes on.
How is this different than what the USA does? True the USA let's its citizens speak freely. However, the government does control the flow of information to its citizens via the media. Just pick up a newspaper in Canada and the USA and you can see differences.
The average joe in Iran *hates* the mullahs. Unlike most other Arab governments (which encourage people to blame and hate the US for all of their home-brewed problems) the Iranian government has no easy scapegoat. (And 36 years of economic deprivation is a lot to answer for) That's why the people in power are so afraid of revolution.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Its an American software maker that is providing the software solutions
:)
for such large scale filtering.
To be honest, the company has stated that they do not have an clients
representing the Iranian government.
This leads one to conclude that the software is either being used illegally
or a 3rd party is interfacing between the company and the country.
regardless, filtering of the internet for Iranians will be here for sometime
yet, though through experience i have seen that those that want to circumvent
the system, easily can. and there aren't many that want to but can't
Arash Partow
Arash Partow's Philosophy: Be a person who knows what they don't know, and not a person who doesn't know.
... that this is gonna stop their jobs from being outsourced over the internet, they sure have a big clue on the way! ;)
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
respect their citizens wishes
it is true what you say if the other country in question had a government whose policies reflected that of the governed
that is not the case in iran or china
therefore, criticism of iran and china is perfectly valid, unless you don't believe the citizens of china or iran deserve a say in how they are governed
the notion of universal human rights is more and more important in today's world, not less
it matters
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The subject says it all....
DISCLAIMER: Before someone thinks I'm some cold hearted jerk.. I want to say I mean in this in the sence that this isn't news for nerds... I would expect most of us know this unless you live in a vacume that opressive govt screws their people.. and companies like cisco profit over it I would be doing the same thing if they called me.. ops.. guess that does make me a cold hearted jerk... HAHAHA
-=Linsys=-
http://www.intrusionsec.com
I thought the republican solution was to get valet parking and an attendant from Mexico.
What? And you don't think the American government participates in a bit of monitoring and censorship? They're just much more clever about it and avoid getting caught.
Comes from experience you know...
It's not that there aren't valid things the U.S. government does that are, broadly, "anti-freedom". But drawing a parallel between eminent domain and the actions of a totalitarian theocracy (despite it's elections, Iran remains dominated by the Revolutionary Guard and its supreme religious leader) and saying "The US is just as bad" is foolish and naive.
Sure, the U.S. government (or, more precisely, a small number of members of the U.S. government) are, time and again, doing something stupid that isn't what you'd expect of a free country, and the examples go back to the founding of the country (counting slaves as 2/3 of a person, etc). Things like Jim Crowe, Viet Nam, Watergate, Iran/Contra, etc etc.
But almost without exception these events are noted in the press, analyzed, criticized, written about by thousands in letters to the editor, protested in the street and very often -- tada -- CHANGED. Civil rights act, voting rights act, Nixon's impeachment, Iran/Contra hearings. And no secret police organization decended on private citizens and beat them, impisoned or tortured them for having an opinion contrary to the government or its policies.
Are we perfect? No way. Are we more free than just about any other place? Absolutely. Will we continue to make missteps from time to time? Sure. Human nature isn't always pretty.
You can be a pessimist and argue that evidence points to a declining level of freedom and government accountability. Maybe. But that hardly means that we're even comperable to North Korea, Iran, Syria, or any of a number of other totalitarian/dicatorial/theocratic societies.
Is this news?
When it comes to Human Rights, countries like Syria and Iran are worse than China. From what I hear, the worst by far is Syria.
Anyone? Beuller? Anyone?
I mean really, do we care if those asshats have better Internet access? Or air/water/food for that matter. Tired of whole populations that got "doesn't play well with others" on their grade school report card.
it is true what you say if the other country in question had a government whose policies reflected that of the governed
that is not the case in iran or china
therefore, criticism of iran and china is perfectly valid, unless you don't believe the citizens of china or iran deserve a say in how they are governed
The USA paid millions and millions of dollars to put the SHAH in power. We supported him, we gave him money, we gave him miliraty power. And what happened?
The PEOPLE of Iran threw him out. How could that happen if the people of Iran wanted USA style values? The SHAH was all about USA values, about capitalism, about trade.
What happened is the PEOPLE of Iran decided that religion was most important to their country. They wanted a government that reflected their faith.
If the PEOPLE of Iran did not want the government they now have, they would revolt. They did it against the SHAH who had far more power and money than the current government. The SHAH had every resource the USA had at his disposal.
the notion of universal human rights is more and more important in today's world, not less
What are universal human rights? My set of values might be incompatible with yours. The anwser is, if I live with people who are 90% in agreement with me, we will get along. But if you come from 7000 miles away and tell me we ALL must change to meet your definition of human values, then we will have problems and probably war. Or if a country can't wage war, then individuals flying airplanes into large buildings.
Here is one other way to look at it. In some parts of Africa it is considered a part of becomming an adult to get the genitals cut. They have been doing it for thousands of years. It is their culture, and those who don't participate never feel like real members of their community. Should the USA go over to these tribes, deep in the wilderness, and tell these tribes they must stop their culture because it is violent and against womens rights?
The anwser is the USA is telling everyone else how they must live, and that is capitalism. If the USA can't get your natural resources, they will attempt to destabalize your part of the world. If that does not cause the government to crash, they will launch war.
I will give you one example. Do you know what happened on Sept 11th? No, not in the USA, in Chile. The people of Chile held an election, and elected a communist. They USA gave his opponent millions of dollars for the next election. The USA spread lies about the current president. But the people of Chile did not believe and re-elected the communist to a second term. Nixon ordered the communist president assasinated. The guy who took over, Pinochet caused over 27,000 people to dissapear, people who were anti-USA and anti-capitalism.
If the USA has cause to go into Iraq over the deaths of 3,000 people who died in the world trade center, what rights does Chile have against the USA?
I wish nothing but the best for Iran. I hope they build nukes. I hope they rebuild the great civilization that was in the middle east, when the best universities and libraries in the world were all in the middle east. Here is a secret the USA does not want you to know. The people of Iran are nice and caring people. If you are poor, there is a better chance of someone opening his door to you in Iran and feeding you. If you are sick and have no money, there is a better chance of a doctor giving you free help in Iran than the USA.
The Iranian people are not like Jehovas witnesses. They don't force anyone to believe anything. But they do want to be respected. They want to be a religious state where the values of the majority are reflected in their newspapers and media and movies.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
This is certainly an interesting problem for "liberals" like me. Which is better? Pushing Western-style Democracy on people that have said they don't want it, or allow what they do want even though we find it repugnantly oppressive to dissenting views and certainly sexist and homophobic?
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
How is having access to information forcing others to put up with your "crap" Unless someone is forcing you to view information or material against your will, why should you care what they are doing?
Or are you one of those people that finds the very existance of opinions that differ from yours offensive?
What does the restriction of information have to do with locking your doors?
what a suprise!
...even previous 'liberal' Iranian governments...
This is a very simplistic view of Iranian politics, which is a battle between reformers (one of whom was the previous President) and the religious mullahs, who control many of the day to day details of life in the country. It even appears to be an attempt to apply USian partisan politics ('liberal' vs 'conservative') to another country.
By that logic and assuming things continue as they are, in 20 years we would have to invade ourselves.
If things continue as they are, in 20 years the only "alternative" media (i.e., not owned and operated by corporate plutocrats) the USA might have is Pacifica Radio, and that's assuming there IS radio in 20 years or that it wasn't bought out by AirAmerica and its corporate sponsors.
Oh come on man. The US has blogs and media of all stripes and flavors coming out the wazoo. There simply is not censorship here even remotely similar to the horrible things that take place elsewhere, and to even hint we are close at it is to demean those that suffer from REAL censorship. Have you been arrested and thrown in prison and then beaten for suggesting you do not like the president? I don't think so. And in twenty years it will most likely be the same, only more so. I'm not likley in twenty years to be bricking up my old copies of Reason behind a wall so the governement can't find them.
I just cannot stand to see people use the argument that America is the next Facist state when they obviously have no idea what the hell that really means or what happens when you are really in one.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Bringing up the "Eminent Domain" problem only says that you dislike the current court. So the original poster is eager then to have three or four Bush appointees to replace some of the people who made that choice? Somehow I don't think that's what he wants either.
As you said the stupid Eminent Domain decision has been roundly criticized from Left, Right, and Center. You simply cannot use THAT example to show how any one area of government is going wrong when most people find it stupid.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's what an Islamic state like Iran (and many others) are. That's what Iraq would like to be. But on the other side of the coin, many people think that's the sort of thing GWB has in mind for us here in the USA, a Christian state. He would probably like it for Iraq as well. Remember, just like with Islamic fundies, it is the mission in life of all Christian fundies to either convert or eliminate.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
I understand that I am using "anti-US relativism" in my argument, but I am using it because the media is so far biased in favor of pro-US relativism instead and I believe it important to express alternative view points. That was pretty much the entire point of my post. I realize I do not have the best examples listed.
As for press coverage of scandals within the United States, there are two inherent flaws in this belief: first of all, if the mainstream media does not focus on it, then how would the general public know that it happened at all? They wouldn't! This sounds all conspiracy-theory and theoretical on the surface, but my favorite example is the Chinagate scandal. Ask your average citizen walking out the door of your local supermarket about it and I can guarantee that 49 out of 50 or more will respond with a blank look. I know because I've tried it for a history class.
For those not in the loop with this, the Chinagate scandal was the event that was manipulated by the government and the press to become the stupid and superficial Monica Lewinsky scandal. It occurred in the mid-90's and it boils down to Bill Clinton providing China with classified US nuclear technologies and bringing them up to a full scale threat. Regardless of his reasons for doing so, the press got ahold of this in the mid 90's and began printing stories.
The 'letters to the editor' that you speak of were beginning to come off the home desks of the American public. But there was a problem: neither of the two major parties in the US wanted the public to know about this!! The democrats of course because Clinton was in office and the blame would fall partly on his shoulders. The Republicans because Bush Sr. had been doing the same thing!! Of course it would be disasterous to both parties if the public knew they were both involved with it, so both parties wanted it hushed. The result: the Monica Lewinsky scandal grabs American attention instead. The press did not have to be forcefully silenced or censored: they chose to write about those stories on their own, but they were manipulated into that position by politicians. This how the government runs its censorship.
The Chinagate scandal blew over. You can still find it from third-party sources all over the web, but it never really got the public!! If the government can censor something like that, then what is to stop them from using the same means to censor other events? None.
And I am being the pessimist here and pointing at our declining freedoms. You say that we're not even comparable to the Axis of Evil, etc, and I would like this to remain true. The only way for it to continue, however, is for people like me to point out our own flaws. If the American public remains in the dark and directing their attention toward other countries, then by the time people like yourself believe that we ARE comparable, it will be far too late!
As for the "secret police" argument, I say to you that if a single American citizen is held by his own government against his will, without evidence and because he has stated views contrary to those of the US government, then it is just as bad as the many who are suppressed in other countries. One is one too many. But guess what? It happens! That one actually gets to the news fairly regularly! But does the public care? No, because the media soon directs their attention to the evil OTHER COUNTRIES.
It is you, my friend, who are foolish and naïve to argue that there is not a parallel between the US and these other countries. The US may not be "just as bad", but without vigilant citizens, it will be.
If you can't say something nice, make sure you have something heavy to throw.
Definitely one of the more insightful posts I have seen lately. I personally believe that they are governing themselves far better than the US-constructed puppet government is ruling Iraq.
If you can't say something nice, make sure you have something heavy to throw.
is slavery evil?
if i go south of the rio grande, does it become legal?
in 1994 hundreds of thousands were exterminated in genocide between hutus and tutsis in rwanda
did you care?
i hope you did, and if you did, you did because you were a human being
being a human being is being a member of something that is more important than being a member of a nationality
a nationality is a tribe, a false arbitrary geopolitical boundary
you mention female genital cutting: that is evil, and should be fought
not from an american perspective
from a world perspective
do you understand the difference between an american perspective and a world persepctive?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
well, iran quietly held elections for the first time since we can all recall. they also withheld many canidates from the ballots. how is it that you can call these elections legitimate when no international watchdogs were policing this so called election?
Although some American companies are completely unethical, the overwhelming majority abide by some minimal standards of decency. Back in the days of apartheid in South Africa, all American companies (except one) doing business there agreed to abide by the Sullivan Principles, which pledged fair treatment to South Africa's blacks.
We need to take the same moral fortitude in dealing with both Iran and China (including Taiwan province). When we slap sanctions against he Beijing government, we should also slap sanctions against the Taipei government. Taiwan and mainland China are one in the same, as far as morality is concerned. When American companies curtailed investments in China just after the Tiananmen Square Incident, Taiwanese companies actually accelerated investments into mainland China, leading to today's massive cumulative Taiwanese investment of $100 billion into mainland China.
at least it's no worse than Utah.
I spoke with a program manager who worked on helping the Chinese, and his reaction was basically that he didn't agree with my outrage. He pointed out that this is no different than working here on technology to block porn sites and helping companies like Yahoo and AOL to automatically filter boards. "The technology to censor is not some monopoly by the Chinese," he said. "It isn't as if I'm working on something that only they use. All that's different is they use some different set of keywords."
Is this the same attitude shared by most geeks who work on these projects?
Yes ! Iran will be first country witch can handle PORNOGRAPHY and PHISHING !
We should support such actions !
Freedom is only stupid word created by peoples without vision of new world order...
Well as long as they concentrate on censoring people, the hell with them. There are a lot of slashdot material geeks in Iran, who bypass these stupid filters everyday!!! One thing that we should all hope for, is that Iran stays Nuke Free! cause trust me, if it goes Nuke... well god help us all!
Well as long as they concentrate on censoring people, the hell with them. There are a lot of slashdot material geeks in Iran, who bypass these stupid filters everyday!!! And for the rest, it is really another reason to hate the government in power, and those Arabs who exist around Iran.
One thing that we should all hope for, is that Iran stays Nuke Free! cause trust me, if it goes Nuke... well god help us all!
What do you think would happen in the USA if good ol' President George W. Bush told the nation that we need to, "Start filtering out Al-Jazeera and other Pro-terrorist websites. It's harming young American minds and threatens our way of life. In order to defeat the Evil doers, we must cut off the roots gripping at America's throats: False Islamic Propaganda."
I guarantee, 40% of this country would instantly go along with the Bush's plan or legislation. Maybe even 60%, if his speech was preceeded by some "Cyber-Terrorist attack". "That's the price of freedom!!" supporters would cry out. Who doubts those are the exact same reasons Iran's Govt gives their people as the justification for such Web filters?
Liberals would fight the law, and the Bush supporters would label those Liberals "Anti-American"....Oh, wait, that's already happened....
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
that is why oppose nondemocratic regimes
see?
at the point where you say "What it comes down to is self determination. People have a right to pick their own lives," you begin to say things that contradicts yourself
if you REALLY believe that, you would be the one shouting the loudest against the regimes in iran and china
on the basis of your OWN STATEMENTS these regimes are not legitimate
do you see?
the point is simply that there are certain rights all humans have, period, end of story
who decides?
all humans decide
if you look hard enough, you will find assholes who think pedophilia is perfectly ok, for example
that doesn't mean that pedophilia should be respected, does it?
cannibalism for example: if a group on some distant island said cannibalism was ok for them, is that to be respected?
i say no, and the world would agree with me
what do you say?
see, the hole in your argument is called human empathy
when you get people to stop caring what happens to other human beings, you win
but if i see a woman getting raped in an alley, i'm going to do something about it
i'm glad you can say "that is there alley, so they decided that was ok, so i'm going to keep walking and ignore that"
you have a point of view which is self-contradictory and also contradictory to certain irremovable aspects of human nature, like empathy
it has nothing to do with america this or america that at all
the point is to analyze the world in terms of principles, not tribes
you are arguing for tribes, i am arguing for principles
your pov has more to do with an american persective than mine does:
i am simply arguing principles, i don't care about nationality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
We all know by now the US wants to invade Iran. We just need a reason. WMD's? Terrorism? Because they live in tyranny and we must give them liberty? Let us Free them of their oil and land. That'll teach them to censor internet communications.
http://www.clantonadvertiser.com/articles/2005/06
so... how many of those are we not doing in the US right now?
Sitting Walrus Blog
First, Iran is a theocracy with strong democratic institutions. They are a lot more democratic than, say, Egypt which is marginally less democratic than the USSR was (maybe less repressive too, but certainly a bit less democratic).
The major problem you have with Iran at the moment is that, although the presidency and parliament are largely democratic (and have a diverse makeup, and a fair bit of power), the "Council of Guardians" is still way too powerful because Iran has never had any sort of check on the power of their clerical judiciary. So the Supreme Ayatolla has veto power over any executive or legislative decision and essentially absolute dictatorial power.
Those who think that the US should be a country which protects and embodies Christian values would lead the US down a very similar path. Iran should be seen by us mostly of a warning of what we could become if we lose our tolerance.
Also, the Iranian nuclear energy programs are not new. They were started with the aid of, you guessed it, the US back in the days of the Shah. Most of what Iran has regarding reactors are light-water moderated reactors which produce less fissile material than they produce. So you would have more luck with enriching raw uranium from ore (like we did in WWII) than you would in using these for bomb-making.
The reactors have *nothing* to do with a weapons program insofar as a weapons program could very well survive without the reactors and that the reactors don't seem to be of appreciable help in producing fissile material. Add to this the closed fuel cycle deal with Russia and I would argue that these are propaganda tools aimed simply at creating a phantom threat or even a diversion.
Now, I will grant that the reprocessing/enrichment technology that Iran has developed is troubling and very well could be weapons related. But you are sadly mistaken if you think that taking out reactors will do much. In essence I don't think that if Iran has such a program, that there is much we can do to stop it.
WRT North Korea.... In 1994, the Framework (that we have heard so much about) obligated the US to help Korea build two light-water moderated non-breeder reactors for producing electricity. The facilities that these would have replaced were ones which produced sufficient plutonium to be useful in producing nuclear weapons. However, the deal was scuttled by the Senate, and so N. Korea was left with their only nuclear power plant being one which aided them in a weapons program. The tragedy of this whole thing is that we had an opportunity to head this off 10 years ago and we blew it. Consequently we have an unpredictable cornered tyrant with a nuke. And this is far more dangerous than people realize.
Basically N. Korea will probably always lack the ability to reliably deliver a nuclear bomb to the US via ICBM, but they could easily deliver it to, say, Seoul. Or they might be able to send it via SLBM (Sub Launched) to a US city. SLBM's are far more difficult to protect against or even detect than ICBM's, and failing that, perhaps it could be smuggled in via cargo ship and detonated in New York Harbour.
North Korea, in that it has a largely failed economy, has been abandoned by its friends, and has a lack of any semblance of democratic institutions (far less than even China or the old USSR), is right now a far more dangerous threat than Iraq ever was or Iran ever will be.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
This is pure racist garbage, without substance.
Yes, the Canadian government very much controls what can be seen on TV and the media in general. That we have known for a long time since Canadians are only allowed to see a certain portion of non-Canadian content. Personally, they are better off for it, but it does go against principles of freedom.
Or did you mean the US government controls the US media ? Hardly, considering how anti-US the bulk of the journalists in the news departments are. What you ascribe to government control is more accurately a symptom of the overall quality of the media - quite plainly they suck.
The main difference between US journalists and their fellow journalists across any border, is that US journalists pretend objectivity in their journalism, and write accordingly, though often poorly so.
Journalists in other countries usually don't both to make any such pretense of objectivity, so you get much more rampaging hystrionics on their reporting.
- 9/11, so that the feds can claim national security on everything.
- When GWB's admin allowed news media to become a conglomerates. Prior to that, everything was fairly independant.
Lets look past your red herring of reporters being beaten. Consider the report on the conditions at Gitmo esp dealing with the Quaran. Newsweek (or whoever it was) was forced to retract the reporters story and state that nothing ever happened to a single Quoran. Then over the next couple of weeks, more and more comes out esp from the Red Cross, the FBI, several senators, and the NSA, that yes, Quarons were "disrespected". In fact, it has being stated that the prisoners are being abused as well (unless you believe GWB, cheney, and rumsfield). Even McKaine has come out against what is happening there. So yes, it is near 100% certain that the reporter was on the mark. So GWB's bullied the mags. owner who then bullied the editor who then bullied the reporter.Now, disregarding that little fiasco, you mention about real censorship. Exactly what is real censorship? It is the ability of a nation to control the flow of information to its' citizens. At this point, the regular media is now a total joke. As to blogs, well, all I have to say is
- a traitor in the white house (anybody who outs a CIA agent to the enemy is a traitor),
- Sibel Edmonds; very interesting case at justacitizen.org
- Who is the captain who reported all the gaft going on with Halliburton ? and more importantly, where is she?
- British memos
- etc. etc. etc.
These are just a few minor items. We are not headed towards being a fasicsts state. We are a fasicsts state. You can bet on it that in the future we will see more OK type senarios where our own citizens will be fighting against exactly what FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and even Nixon tried to warn us about.Demonize the other guy. makes it easier to justify being a prick to them.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
i travel to iran often with work and slashdot is one of the few sites that i check that can still be accessed.
the filtering there is hardcore.
in april there was a political clash with some local arabs and a few were killed - the net to our city was cut off entirely for 6 days or so. no one knew what was wrong, or could give us any info. i eventually found out from a friend that works at the local ISP that the govenment had ordered the cut.
Maybe Iranians have different values than us, and they want the good stuff that technology provides, but not the bad.
Sort of like the Saudis: they want the cars, lobster and Switss watches. They don't want the porn, feminism or modern art.
A lot of the Iranians in the country are probably happy that the arrival of internet doesn't mean they'll be flooded with things they consider degenerate.
Besides, they are smart folks. They'll find a way around it, if they really want the tubgirl, goatsex, etc.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
In essence, you seem to be pointing out that intollerance of criticism regarding religion in the name of tollerance is bad. Or as Tom Lehrer said "There are some people in this world who do not love their fellow man and I hate people like that."
...
I am all for tolerance regarding religion. However, I think people need to stop and think about what this means. Does it mean that rational discussion must be curtailed? I don't think it does. Or rather tolerance, while a noble goal, is also something which can be corruptly used as a shield for fragile egos.....
For example, if you said the things above, I would lable you as intolerant because you seem to be unwilling to look at mainstream versions of the religions which either de-emphasize these things you mention or simply don't fall unto that category. Basically, you have not offered a thoughtful critique of either religion (rational discussion again?) but have simply issued a few statements you believe to be true without backing them up or admitting to debate. Even if you said "I think that Christianity..." or "I think that Islam..." I would not label you as intolerant because you are admitting to another possible viewpoint.
For example:
I think that monotheistic traditions are inherently backward and unable to provide adequate answers to many of the most important questions we often face: How do we build a just society? What is the nature of Good? What should a legal system be based on? In each of these areas, if one believes in a singular divine entity with a definite will, then these questions must simply be deferred to God without question. I.e. Good is in line with God's will (religious principles), our laws should be based on God's will (religious principles), and hence justice means acting in accordance with laws set forth by religious principles. It is very informative to read the Koran and realize that it is largely a set of religious invocations spaced throughout a book prescribing certain rules for *social* interactions.
Also every monotheistic religion as it exists today was built upon a seminal revelation by a singular individual: Christianity came from the teachings of Christ, Islam from Mohammed, and Moses received much (or all) of the basis for Judaism on Mount Sinai. Because these traditions all look back to a seminal founder, their religious principles are frozen in time. So too are the concepts of law.
It is informative to look at the revolution against the intellect that occurred in Islamic religious circles in the 13th and 14th centuries. Prior to this time, Islam was one of the most open, investigative, and intellectually supportive religion in their area. The Muslims had preserved the writings of Plato during a time when they were lost in Europe, etc. They had supported the sciences to the extent that they had measured the circumference of the world, and had many many other achievements (inventing Algebra, and many more things). However in that time frame, there was a large reaction against such intellectual persuits as mathematics, comparing it to wine (it makes men drunk on reason). Fortunately, Europeans had a change of heart in the 12th century and started translating Arabic works into Latin (and discovered many Greek works in the process).
But what is interesting is that while much of what we see as the high civilization of the Renaisance was preserved by the Arabs, it was *authored* by our Pagan Greek ancestors. Even though Plato authored most of the framework of Christian theology (including original sin and the Trinity), our pagan ancestors though systemically because their religion was set up as a series of interlocking systems. Indeed Christianity was not only unnecessary for the advancement of European intellectual advancement but was actually a step backward.
Does this make me intolerant?
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Well this is certainly an opportunity for the slashdot crowd to put their money were their mouth is so to speak. If all their "P2P is only for combatting repressive regimes"? Then it stands to reason that this "news" is unnecessary, because all those Iranians are safe.
If not, then they need to reflect on what that means for their argument, as well as the "digital goods are easy to copy and distribute".
There are any number of censorship laws and tactics I think even the majority of Americans would go along with if it was accompanied by rhetoric about terrorism and democracy.
Also remember that censorship takes many forms. The US government doesn't really need to block anything; thanks to its enormous government agencies, it can simply monitor all communications and make tactical arrests when the time comes. I'm sure all the true patriots are already on lists for detainment if/when martial law comes.
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Guantanamo bay.. apparently the US _does_ hold people without rights.. and to top it off.. they werent even on US soil? You want to list the abuses the US has been involved in around the world? The US has been the source of political governments oppression of their citizens for year.. and there are many countries that the US applys it 'will' over to make sure this happens. Egypt, Morroco, Many South American countries, various middle African countries (Nigeria, Sudan, and so on).. and various other South East asian countries like Thialand, Indonesia and so on.
If anyone need to get off their high horse, its Americans. The use of corp power to control _other_ countries is the source of alot of these governments that are applying strict control on information to try and curb the 'capitalist pig' doctrination the rest of the world suffers.
America has been a Fascist state for the last 50 years at least!! Some of your greatest people have had common liberty's removed from them, just because they spoke out against a government or against a powerful citizen. Read your history books, the US is far from a wonderful benevolent government you beleive it to be. And your citizens continue to apply racist attitudes towards peoples in your own country!! Look at the anti muslim and anti arabian attitude in your country? Are you saying these people dont feel in some way despised, and hated? Are you saying they are not being jailed and beaten up for no reason!! Read your news..
America is no better than anywhere else.. and more so.. since its corporate greed that is currently enveloping the globe. A country has its own soverign rights.. there is no justification for any other country to apply their laws to them..
Btw I guarantee you have never even seen/been involved in what you are talking about.. you really think that mentioning the president in bad terms in Iran will get you locked up.. this is typical of Americans "Everyone else is worse than us" attitude..
Its fuuny that people cant even see Facism occuring in their own country.. and claim its morality and democracy above all others.. complete BS..
Saudi Arabia does the same thing! I don't see why this is considered news, lots of middle eastern countries do this!
Actually, in that respect, the United States is a lot more like the erstwhile Roman Empire than the Third Reich.
Like the Roman Empire, the United States was founded on principles of basic freedom by political visionaries. Like the Roman Empire, the state was slowly lost to tyrants and murderers who used propaganda to energize the masses with ideas of racial and religious superiority and the concept of 'glory' or some abstract idea of creating a utopian society. Like with the Roman Empire, this never actually happened. Like the Romans, the United States started to decay with the growing power of Christians in the State, while simultaneously engaging in acts of excess and decadence as well as brutality towards those who chose not to subscribe to their idealogy. If we carry the comparison to it's logical conclusion, then, like the Roman Empre, this country is inevitably destined to collapse in civil war and anarchy and invasions from foreigners. In this respect, the Islamic zealots are a lot like the Goths, Vandals, and Huns who periodically ransacked Rome during her dying years. Like preying vultures and carrion crows, they sense the eventual destruction of this country and are trying to get in on the feast.
It's very sad that so many innocent people have to die before this happens, but American Society has lost whatever virility and worth it once had, and we should just let them pass into history and allow their civilization a dignified death.
History never repeats itself, but historical situations often recur. I can only hope that wheatever comes after isn't worse.
l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
There are many things about my country that leave a lot to be desired (esp WRT to the last 4 years). As you can tell by looking at some of my postings and nearly all of my foes lists (all but one was a political thing), I am very opposed to GWB and what he does. But leave that aside
What bothers me more are some of your other issues that you are bringing up. While we do have racial issues, we are also one of the most diverse culture on the planet. While you will find some who will see rasicm and discrimination, I have a number of friends (non-white; mostly Hispanic, Indian, and Muslim) who tell me the opposite. They tell me that they will see it occaisionally, but it is the exception, not the norm. Yes, we have work to do, but give credit where due; America is far more integrated than you realize.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
2. you're wrong.
1. I said If things continue as they are, in 20 years
You answered the statement you WANTED to answer by saying
There simply is not censorship here even remotely similar to the horrible things that take place elsewhere
I was not using the present tense - YOU WERE. I was saying that IF THINGS CONTINUE ALONG THE PATH THEY ARE AT PRESENT, we won't have much, if any alternative press in this country.
YOU decided that I was saying that the USA is like Iran TODAY, and responded using such a presumption. Why? Because you're a typical ninny.
2. You're wrong.
Have you been arrested and thrown in prison and then beaten for suggesting you do not like the president? I don't think so.
No, but many people have been arrested and then beaten or tortured or faced with asymmetrical application of state force for much less. Proof?
Here:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0407-06.ht m
Take a look at her face and tell me that isn't torture.
http://www.constitution.org/ghansen/conghansen.htm
He wasn't tortured? He wa a former CONGRESSMAN (even)!
http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/usa-summary-eng
Oh - I guess you didn't read the Amnesty International Report, either...
I could go on and on about the evils of the American Government, but I won't. Suffice to say, you're wrong. RIGHT NOW most of the torture and fascist repression our government does (but not all) is visited upon our victims through proxies - client states and corrupt governments supressing their people in the interests of the local ruling class who support the insane and destructive American lifestyle and get rich in the process.
SOME of the torture is handled here, and is dished out as described above.
Make no mistake about it: the USA is quickly sliding into a new and unique form of "pseudo-democratic fascism" in the form of a 1.5 party state. The "winner take all" structure of the election system prevents third parties from getting any real daylight, and the power duopoly has been so eroded in the past several years by the neocon thugs in the Republican party that it is more of a monopoly of government by and for the corporations.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
How the hell did this generate to a discussion on far right vs far left in American politics? Listen, there are wackos on the right and wackos on the left, but they sure as shit don't have anything to do with censorship in Iran.
Bungo!
Naturally, there are leaks in any embargo. But the tech support and upgrades a "Great Qanat Plug" (ouch!) would require, at least for initial installation, would probably preclude any US products. It's not like they can't get it from an EU-based company, or grabbing one of the numerous books on IOS/Linux/BSD firewalls and filtering and giving it a go locally.
Luke, help me take this mask off
I would have thought that the days of Tor and onion routing would have made such shenannigans futile. Mind you, we don't want them to know that. Let them think they are in control.
Zero Sum (don't amount to much). [root@localhost]
Eco-terrorists are harmless goofs.. totally harmless.. never killed anyone. Just let em' burn their couple of SUVs for publicity and then send em' the bill. Yes, you do need to put them in jail forthe damage they do, but the courts should be looking in the 6 to 12 months range, and passing a civil judgement for the property damage. The big name eco-terrorists gain mucho poblicity from the high sentences, treat em' like a joke, and they will find more reasonable ways to buy publicity.
As for liberals running your life, you got it wrong there too, all the last idealistic communists quit and became neo-conservatives. True, the democrats reliably vote for more invasive government, but so do the republicans. Its not ideological, its just governmental feature creap.
Direct away from face when opening.
Bush needs to be criticized. But you should criticize him for war, torture, the economy --- NOT for something he hasn't done yet, and may never do.
It makes you sound like a nutcase, and besides, most people find it hard to get angry about something that is obviously not happening (i.e., US internet censorship). And at the same time, you end up minimizing the wrongness of what Iran's government is doing.
It's important to remember that most Iranians are not Arabs. There is a small but significant Arab minority in Iran, notably in the Khuzestan region, but they make up only about 3% of Iran's population.
This isn't meant to be pedantic: it makes a big difference to the ethnic politics of the Middle East.
The Chinese and Iranian governments probably do engage in something that can be legitimately characterized as objectionable censorship. But where should the line between censorship and legitimate restrictions be drawn?
The US tracks and prosecutes the copying of music and videos, distribution of pornography showing individuals that appear to be younger than 18 years, and information related to bomb making and terrorism. The latter can land you in indefinite detention without the benefit of a trial, other offenses may result in long jail sentences, prison labor, and may effectively constitute a death sentence given the realities of the US prison system. Germany and France crack down on the distribution of Nazi-related content, even if it not intended to promote Nazi ideology, but they are more liberal on sex and copying. And France seeks out certain kinds of linguistically undesirable content. I suspect most people in each of those nations support most of those policies. Likewise, we don't actually know what the Chinese and Iranian people want; it is wrong to assume that, even if they could decide democratically, they would want to draw the line where we want to draw it.
Before we criticize nations like Iran and China, it's good to reflect on what we actually want them to do and what the people in those nations want. We apparently don't want them to have a free and unrestricted Internet, since we don't have that ourselves. Nor can we expect other societies to tolerate some of the content that we have learned to live with (goatse etc.). So, what do you actually want Iran and China to do? Only filtering and enforcement for the benefit of Disney? Or what?
But there's a good reason why the people staying at Guantanamo have no rights.
Cheney says that they are bad people
Seems that due process isn't needed if the government believes that you're a bad person.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Does 1 person who wants to see that content have the right to tell 1,000,000 other people to put up with his crap?
In a true democracy, the answer is clearly yes, he has that right: democracy does not mean "tyranny of the majority", it means a certain set of basic rights and principles that limit what the majority can impose on the minority. And one of those rights is the right to express your opinion even if it is unpopular.
Giving people the choice to access content deemed undesirable by the majority certainly does not "tell 1,000,000 other people to put up with crap"--they simply don't have to seek out the content.
The problem is that, as you point out, we ourselves don't live by those rules for a democratic society--we are not fully democratic. And if we can restrict content based on "community standards", then, indeed, it's a hard argument to make that an even more conservative society like Iran can't set stricter limits based that may well reflect common public opinion.
> Bush needs to be criticized. But you should criticize him for war, torture,
> the economy --- NOT for something he hasn't done yet, and may never do.
IMHO, the criticism is not so much directed at Bush as it is against the US general public/voters.
>It makes you sound like a nutcase, and besides, most people find it hard to
>get angry about something that is obviously not happening (i.e., US internet censorship).
You just mentioned it's incorrect to pass judgement on something that hasn't happened. This statement equally renders you a nutcase for passing judgment on something that hasn't not happened (unless you're that Anonymous Coward guy on his way Back to the Future).
>And at the same time, you end up minimizing the wrongness of what Iran's
>government is doing.
Hey, it's just someone's opinion. Some people would rather live in the US than Iran, and vice versa.
From one perspective, Iran isn't the one currently occupying other countries. But that's just one perspective, man.
--
The right to speak does not entail the right to be taken seriously
Slaves counted as 3/5 of a person.
I could see an unstable illusion that freedom is not attainable within the scope of law; but organized as a share in a property, then freedom is to the extent of your share and measurable. Can you measure you freeom? Step outside and count what remains of your curses, or the obverse (blessings). Just because someone has "power" to posess property doesn't confer authority from the true party in interest; I don't sell and seal war bonds and related draft vestiture to barter Freedom for Iraq from an unusual target. "United States" is a desperate corporation; it's agents are invading foreign countries to hide its search for a microscopic-minority estate that is confiding seizure to whatever property it nears; more property damage and loss of life that can be held accountable to war debt collections. The greatest victory in global propoganda transmittals is portraying private polls as public and stuffing the mechanism with necessary entropy to regulate the debate with strawmen; invasion speculated on unfounded premises, being a political conversion itself, can suppress the market a little with some corporate charters to compel use of patented crops, and further derive a profit from a prolonged militant occupation to indoctrinate civilianism. All the people in Iraq, before the appears of Sadam Hussein, were counted neither Civilian or Military but both; having duties to perform. Patented foods as indoctrination to promote acceptance of intellectual taxation on everyday life. Don't you remember the days of duplicating data that was never demandant by DRM?
No matter how much UNITED STATES flagwaving, ignoring the prime application of the Constitution of the United States, to spread STATE religion to new heights is un-called forth:
You all wonder why all those people in foreign countries entreat U.S. Army as though illegal aliens... What do you call an illegal alien that bombs buildings to separate you into a foreign politic; but Freedom that isn't free? For every bomb sent to Iraq is someone else's freedom held ransom to a war debt that was not waged or CONTRACTED by them. The protesters are an awfully large minority. Even so, a country-wide fighting spirit is a greater military obstacle; most "strategists" thought a disarmed people would ward off attacks and redirect to centralized military. I have a Tiger Rock too, but I can't throw it any effective distance when forced to wear such heavy anti-arm burdens. If Sadam Hussein didn't perform to expectations, then U.S. simply returned to depose him; Iraq was never free while Sadam Hussein was granted "power" from United States. I suppose one can learn from the strategies developed by Freemasons puppeting Liberia, to predict the conclusion to freedom. The stock in Cuba is maturing today; that's the next crop to harvest, according to banking policy. Agents of "United States" funded Fidel Castro with "power" without a
without prejudice
The UK doesn't have separation of church and state, the queen is the head of the church of england but it seems from reading slashdot that it produces a lot less crazy types than the US
Just a thought
Will wash cars for karma
Oh, so they were just trotting along, flying kites, singing "tra-la-la la-la!" over in the Happy Poppy Fields of Afghanistan when the Evil Bushco Black Helicopter Patrols dropped out of the sky and kidnapped them in order to do what, exactly? Force them to sit in a chilly room? Be given a brand new copy of the Quran and bow to their notion that we're kuffars, unworthy of touching their holy book without gloves? Paint arrows on their cell floors so they know which way Mecca is? Make them listen to Christina Aguillera music at extremely loud volumes for long periods of time in order to try to extract information from their sorry terrorist hides? (Okay, I'll admit that last one is pretty evil. At least we gave Noriega some Guns n' Roses, albeit at insane decibel levels...)
These aren't US citizens and they aren't lawful combatants, so US rights don't apply to them, nor do the Geneva Convention rights that apply to uniformed soldiers captured on the battlefield.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
Same goes here in Canada, we are free for real but we have no system to prevent crimes, we have systems to punish crimes, a lot, but to prevent it no. Of course we do what we call prevention, americans too have this way of seeing thing. Prevention basically mean you spend a shitload of money in focus group and conventions to come up with a lame poster design on which its written some catchy phrase about not speeding in car. It would be a thousand times more efficient and responsible to actually lock cars at the maximum speed permitted and let the driver unlock it for short burst of speed like when you need to pass someone. Race track could be built with the possibility of unlocking the speed limit when on the track, letting racers-at-heart actually race and push their machines. This would solve a lot of problems and actually saves lives, it would be consequent of the law system in place and would actually be responsible. But we prefer to just vote laws and spend money, they actually want people to speed because:
1-our car making friend asked our leaders to, because they sell speed even if you can't use it
2-we are giving tickets to speeders...
But Saudi Arabia is next but one, they can wait their turn.
Anti War protesters need a good bashing up now and again, they love it and it keeps them in check.
:-)
As for Guantanamo and terrorists, think about it. I am not in jail, the police don't knock on my door, reason? Because I am not a terrorist...brilliant!
Don't spread hatred, Don't spread racism, don't spread prejudice and don't spread terror, result.........don't end up in Guantanamo! Go do the Math!
We are free, if we were not then we would not be writing this stuff
If you hate the U.S. gov so much why do you stay? There are countries with govs and people that agree with your appraisal, I'm sure they would accept your request for amnesty.
Seriously...I have no problem with you believing what you want. But why stay if things are as bad as you believe them to be?
I'm not suggesting that these people are innocent. The point though is that there has to be some due process here. Yes, it does look like they are being treated well. Still, the guy I keep chained up in my basement is allowed to watch all his favourite television shows. Doesn't make his kidnapping any more legitimate.
Just because these people were not wearing uniforms doesn't mean that they can simply be locked away indefinitely without a fair hearing.
If America and it's allies are to win in the long term, we have to occupy the moral high ground. We have to show that this is a noble cause. If the US locks up people like this, no matter how nicely they are treated, it still creates resentment.
If the US is trying to share the wonders of democracy and freedom with the world, seems to me that denying these people the same freedoms is hardly a great advert. Saying that it's not against the law is along the same lines as saying "I was just following orders". Something doesn't have to be illegal for it to be wrong.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Of course we all know that European corporations would never even consider aiding repressive regimes in censoring the internet or other forms of speech. After all, they have no experience in such things.
Pot, meet the Kettle
>There simply is not censorship here even remotely similar to the horrible things that take place elsewhere
Depends on how you define it. All this has happened in the US in the last year or so.
- Reporter tells something about the president and its administration, his wifes CIA role is leaked.
- People are moved to "Free speech Zones" to protest which amount to nothing more then a cage. Some people even rounded up and detained by just happening to be near a protest.
- Women beaten at the Republican conference for protesting, while being held by two secret service men (caught on TV as well).
- Lets not forget recently all the American Muslims that are filing charges against being illegally detained without rights/charges for just being muslim (was on BBC news).
- And yous even have your own concentration camp which in time will even have its own place to execute people without having to worry about things like due process.
There is plenty more to go on with but thought I'd throw out a couple.
Each and every detainee at Camp X-Ray have received hearings in re: their status as enemy combatants. This has resulted in the release of several scores of former prisoners.
In fact, I'd say the release policies have been a bit too liberal, as ~10 former Gitmo prisoners were recently captured/killed in Iraq as they attempted to re-join the jiha.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
Errrm, jihad , even.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
According to Pentagon moves to shed Guantanamo numbers, 211 prisoners were transfered, of these 146 were then released. 10 of these prisoners being captured or killed in Iraq is disappointing but still not unexpected. Some of these people are lunatics without a doubt.
Presumably, if there simply wasn't evidence to charge them witha crime, then they should have been released. They can't just hold these people because they fear that they may do something in the future.
Hearings are not the same as having proper access to a court of law. The big problem here seems to be that these people are being held in legal limbo. This is the common perception and this damages America's ability to fight the lunatics who would drag the world down in to a holy war.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
When I was out in the Middle East a couple of weeks ago in the "ultra liberal" UAE sci fi city of Dubai I wasn't able to logon to my betfair.com accounts receiving a message saying that it was against the morals of the state! This is rather surprising as the ruling family have enormous interests in horse racing where most of the prizemoney comes indirectly from gambling. However in Tehran, the heart of the islamic revolution I could logon no problem.
heh heh.
Even if it's spelt correctly, jihad still doesn't make sense to anyone with an ounce of reasoning.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
I read a well researched series of articles on mistreatment. (And it happens, as it happen.) He is deploring the fact that these things are occurring. (What, he should rejoice?)
He wouldn't deplore it if he was outside the country and for what was happening. Basically your "My countr right or right!" is the kind of blinkered, knee-jerk, thoughtless but well ingrained attitute that tell me volumes about what you are.
I'm writing this knowing you'll never read it or understand it if you do.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
No, I agree with your asseertion that the two are different - but the problem is, the two are *intertwined*.
When you reach a point where your government no longer really listens to what the citizens are asking for (because individuals with a differing opinion + enough money can buy into getting things their way), it jeopardizes individual freedoms, including speech.
Luckily, most of the political decisions being "paid for" are by corporations that right now, wouldn't stand to benefit by free speech restrictions. (Hey, that might cut into their ability to advertise their next product or service, right?) But as private industry grows more reliant on military contracts, I could see this changing too.
Can anyone tell me how liberal became a derogatory term in the U.S. ?
Supposedly it's FDR's fault. He turned it into a synonym for socialism and it was downhill from there. McGovern didn't help, as another poster noted.
Sometimes we use the term "classical liberal" in vain attempts to rescue the term.
If you read the full text of the article, it states and confirms "that it uses the commercial filtering package SmartFilter - made by the US-based company, Secure Computing - as the primary technical engine of its filtering system." The multilingual support allows them to filter Farsi. So the same company that stops you so many from visiting just about any site at work is proping up other restrictive regeimes.
As the great liberal leader explained it, "I guess that depends on what your definition of 'it' is".
The only PT Boat Journal on the web: http://www.PT171.org
Yeah, but did God tell your queen "Go kill Saddam"? I hear he told our president that. And all this time I thought Jesus was the 'prince of peace'. Guess I'll need to look for another reason for the crazies.
The press did not have to be forcefully silenced or censored [on Chinagate]: they chose to write about those stories on their own, but they were manipulated into that position by politicians.
PPOSTFU: Post Proof Or Shut The Fuck Up.
Your comment is nothing I couldn't have read on any one of a number of tinfoil conspiracy websites. If you have any evidence for the assertions that you make, and you want critical minds like mine to believe it, pony up already.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
maybe he did, but I always think its a bad idea for a head of state to be involved in politics, that should be the head of governments job... what? you've got the same person doing both!
Will wash cars for karma
My understanding is that the religious leaders who selected the "candidates" chose only 'hardliners'. So it is hardly surprising that in a one-party system that a 'hardliner' was "elected".
Umm.. Pointing out that the US's actualization freedom of speech could use some work DOES NOT 'demean those that suffer from REAL censorship'. Just because censorship is not as bad in the US as in some other countries shouldn't stifle our motivation to call it out and try to be better.
"As the great liberal leader explained it"
Who is the great Liberal leader? Trudeau? Wilfrid Laurier?
And if I dig around, I can discover that the Earth is flat.
Do us a favor and grow a brain.
And you respond with disparaging quotes that say "religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis" and "Three quarters of the American population literally believe in religious miracles. The numbers who believe in the devil, in resurrection, in God doing this and that -- it's astonishing. These numbers aren't duplicated anywhere else in the industrial world. You'd have to maybe go to mosques in Iran or do a poll among old ladies in Sicily to get numbers like this. Yet this is the American population."
Either you're subtly satirizing the endemic liberal sense of superiority, or you're displaying utter and universe-encompassing obliviousness.
In short, Occam's Razor forces me to conclude you're fucking stupid.
DrSoCold, why do you hate America?
"Taiwan and mainland China are one in the same, as far as morality is concerned."
"Taiwan and mainland China are one in the same, as far as morality is concerned."
Did you read that before you posted it? Taiwan and China are not one in the same in anything other then how the UN has drawn their borders. That is like declaring Cuba and Mexico are the same. The two countries just barely even have diplomatic ties and just recently started let people travel between the two directly via Hong Kong. I should also point out obvious that Taiwan is a democracy. Taiwan has had a spotty past, but in this day and age their democracy is on par with South Korea's. That isn't to say they have a perfect democracy, but they absolutely meet the minimum requirements for a solid democracy by anyone's standards.
As far as punishing companies that work with China... people, really. The reason why companies work with China to build things like their fire walls is because we allow them to. Companies are mindless entities. If you set out rules, they will blindly follow them. Some times they break the rules, but for the most part, companies are just as law abiding (if not more so) then your average citizen. If we don't like the way that companies are operating, it is because of the rules (or lack of rules) that we have put in place.
Look, we choose our leaders. We have picked people that don't want to confront China. They want to assimilate China via trade. Is it a stupid method? Who knows, but it is the method the US, and the rest of the world for that matter, has chosen. The US didn't want another cold war, and Europe didn't exactly pick up the mantel of freedom and decide to go crusading via economic persuasion (Europe did try and sell China weapons though). If Europe, the US, and all of the other democracies of the world have chosen to not try and collapse the Chinese state... well, we reap what we sow.
Spread hatred, spread racism, spread pejudice and spread terror ... and end up in the White House ! Go do the math !
Danathar, why do you hate America?
Still, the guy I keep chained up in my basement is allowed to watch all his favourite television shows. Doesn't make his kidnapping any more legitimate.
And I get internet access. It's really not all that bad down here, actually. Oh, gotta go, Friends is coming on!
Slashdot: News for nerds. Stuff tha-- MICRO$OFT IS THE DEVIL!!1
At least we gave Noriega some Guns n' Roses, albeit at insane decibel levels...
We've got over 1 million people here who subjected themselves to that voluntarily.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
This is my country too, and I have every right to participate in its development and future - THAT'S WHAT DEMOCRACY IS ALL ABOUT YOU IDIOT.
And when I see a perfectly useful republic such as the USA abdicate into a pseudo-democratic fascism, and I HAPPEN TO LIVE IN SUCH A COUNTRY, I just happen to have that crazy silly feeling THAT I SHOULD HELP DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, and pointing out the heinous errors (committed either willfully or through negligence) of the US Gov is, IMHO, what EVERY citizen should be doing, no matter what their political persuasion.
Example: when a bunch of ninnies ban Huckleberry Finn for being racist - the right wing has a perfectly legitimate target.
Example: when a bunch of power mad assholes fix an election and then invade a foreign country on false pretexts - the left wing has a perfectly legitimate target.
Etc. Etc. and so on.
So kindly take your "love it or leave it" attitude and stick it where the sun don't shine you pathetic tool. This is MY COUNTRY TOO!
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Whatever it was, it's not posting at -1 like you.
More retards calling regular posters retards is what I don't care to read about.
select * from base where originalOwner = 'you' and currentOwner != 'us'.
0 rows returned.
Isn't that the eventual fate of all societies? And yet apocalyptic predictions are more common than apocalyptic events.
Forty years ago, hippies were evidence of terminal decadence and moral decay. Thirty years ago, defeat in Vietnam was the last nail in the coffin of a declining imperial power. Twenty years ago, Communists outside the gates and stock market speculators inside were gloating over the imminent destruction of the United States. Ten years ago, nation states were going to dissolve into a loose coalition of cyber-tribes. This year, a handful of terrorists are going to bring down the world's biggest economic, military and industrial power, aided by corrupt, self-serving politicians...
Perhaps next time the US invades a country it should drop a few crates of uniforms first, so the people defending their homes against an invading army can be classed as lawful combatants.
Yes, it does look like they are being treated well.
This is your home since April 2002. Note the view. Note the camera angle which suggests the photographer is already standing as far back as he can without getting the door frame in the picture.
This is where you sit and get asked the same questions every day. Note the subtle details such as the corner you sit in, the smaller chair you get, there's a one-way mirror not shown.
This is how they question you.
The above, is what we know about.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Thanks for the links. Yeah, this doesn't exactly look like a way to show the world that you're defending freedom and fighting tryanny.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Reason is the only mag to which I subscribe. You would think I agree with you. But recent Supreme Court rulings (eminent domain) along with dozens of entertainers losing their jobs for speaking their minds are the first steps towards such a state.
Fascism is sneaky and the institutions I once thought would make facism moot are no longer as untouchable as I once thought they were.
That's what happens when dissenting voices are ridiculed and the messengers attacked instead of the message. This is not limited to one party or the other (although the draconian rules lobbyists must now adhere to really does imabalance the power structures in Wshington).
his administration has made criticising the messenger an art form. Rarely do they address they message.
And that *is* one easy way for this to get out of hand. Okay, coupled with an international emergency that makes us all scared and crazy and turn off our intellect and let our lizard brains take control.
If we had done that a few years ago, we'd likely have Bin Lauden, Afghanistan would be a much more peaceful place, and Saddam would have every reason to fear the international buildup of support for his ouster.
I don't you wally, I love it. God bless the USA. You must have misread my post.
I have the stars and stripes above my bed. And I live in England!
I don't hate the USA, I love it. USA is #1. I sleep under the stars and stripes every night and I live in england!
That's a good point. However, the claims made above are either cases of priests screaming for the 4 horsemen of the christian apocalypse, or the political rantings of Rabochy Put. They are made with malicious intent in order to advance a political agenda. What I said was a simple statement of fact concluded from social observations and based on the dynamics of human interaction. They're not made with any malicious intent.
And that is not always the fate of all societies. A few cultures have endured for a long time, despite the vissicitudes of history. This is primarily due to checks and balances placed on their societies that prevent the dominance of a particular ideology. This has not happened with the United States. One ideology has started to dominate in their culture, creating a dogmatic society that can only result in their decline and fall. There is nothing that can be done to prevent this fall, but the effects and repercussions of that destruction can be minimized.
l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
China? Anyone? China? Is anyone awake out there?
Pointing at the US as a fascist state with China doing what it does is like complaining about mouse crap on the floor when an elephant is crapping there too.
While I certainly agree that separation of church and state is pretty much necessary in order to have a functioning democracy, but here's something interesting I learned recently: there are countries (like Iceland and Sweden, for example) where there exists a state church but which still are functioning democracies (in fact, I'd even go so far as to say that they function better than other democracies in which there is a separation of church and state).
Of course, I don't believe that this is because they don't have this separation (if anything, it's despite the fact), but it does raise an interesting point: it obviously is possible to have a democracy even when a separation of church and state does not exist.
Which in turn makes you wonder what really lies at the heart of the problems we're seeing in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and so on. I haven't found an answer to that yet - not in the slightest. But it's certainly interesting as food for thought.
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
I beg to differ. Firstly, Original Sin is a Catholic Belief, not a Christian one (Roman Catholics worship Mary above Jesus, they should be called Maryans, not Christians). And the idea of Plato inventing the Trinity is laughable at best.
First, last I checked the Roman Catholic church *was* synonymous with Christianity for the few hundred years before the Great Schism, and was synonymous in Western Europe with Christianity until the time of Henry VIII. This whole "Catholics aren't Christians" thing is more laughable than anything I have said. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but I think that with the exception of the Quakers, every branch of Christianity shares a hieratic lineage to the Catholic clergy. I.e. Martin Luther was a Catholic cleric, and each split has occurred because of clerics in other Christian denominations founding their own schools of thought.
Secondly, regarding Original Sin... The idea as it is generally accepted in Catholicism was articulated by Augustin and is largely drawn from Plato's dialog Phaedrus (Augustin drew quite heavily from Plato in many of his other works, such as City of God as well). Augustin postulates that by virtue of being born, we are separated from God, and that this is what causes us to live our lives in a way which he characterizes as sin. Plato makes a very similar argument in Phaedrus (i.e. that we incarnate because we forget The Good).
Now for the trinity... I was exposed to this theory when reading a 16th century work in which the author (Heinrich Agrippa) credits Plato with the development of the idea of the Trinity. Naturally at first I dismissed the idea. However, on further research this is what I found:
In "Letters," Plato states "The Great Theos (tr. Godhead) is Jupiter (tr. The Father-God), the father of the active principle." The second part of this statement is where the trinity analogy comes from. In Republic, Plato hypothesized that humans and hence socities were composed of a head/ruling, heart/active, and belly/producing principles. It seems that in "Letters" he was specifically referencing this tripartite structure and stating that Godhead followed the same structure.
This allusion was mot lost on Plato's followers, who quickly fleshed out the model as The Father/The All, The Son/The Logos, and The World Soul. You might notice that in John 1:1, the word Logos is translated as "Word" from the original Greek... (In the beginning was the Logos). It is difficult to argue that this is not a direct reference to the words of Plato and his followers.
People want to poohpooh the relationship between the writings of Plato and the development of Christian theology because they don't want to admit that so much of their ideas came from a man who was, at least culturally, pagan and clearly thought like a pagan. Indeed Georges Dumezil has largely shown that Plato's tripartite structure in Republic was based on an older Indo-European pagan liturgical and iconographic formula.
BTW, when I was a Christian, I found the arguments of Arius to be quite persuasive as well. I was more of a follower of his branch of Christianity than the mainstream. Arius's ideas are, I think, arguable by careful analysis of formuleic passages in the New Testiment and comparing them with the (probably older) Greek Magical Papyri. For a modern analysis of this theory, see Prof. Morton Smith's "Jesus the Magician."
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Today Americans spend over 45% of their income on taxes. Our forebearers in Egypt, under Pharoah, were taxed 20%. Who would you say is deeper in Bondage?
"None Are More Hopelessly Enslaved Than Those Who Believe They Are Free" --Johann W. V. Goethe (Illuminati Poet)
Umm.. Pointing out that the US's actualization freedom of speech could use some work DOES NOT 'demean those that suffer from REAL censorship'.
You should really clear up that speech impediment. Umm. I think. Umm. Do you not know? It sounds like it. Use of Umm is one of my pet peeves as it just make people look like childish idiots. No offense meant but it pisses me off and really makes people dismiss what you say.
It DOES deman things when you attach a label like Facism to said problems when it has a much deeper history behind it. I am in agreement the US needs work in that regard, but I'm not willing to rewrite history so people who want to point that out can use a Scary Word to scare people into doing what they say.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Hey. I agree. I realized after I made the first post that Americans are not the only people who visit slashdot. Im sorry about that. We are probably the only people who use those terms in that way.
Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
Referring to the Congressman Hansen story: I am unable to find a citation for the case at the Findlaw archive. Does anyone have evidence of this case's existence?
I shall try to stay professional........I failed. ...Anonymous you are full of shit.
BTW. I'm having some guests over to the house tonight so would appreciate it if you could avoid screaming for help. It really freaks out my guests. ;-)
-- Using the preview button since 2005
I see..you are the type of person who gets all frothy round the mouth like a dog with rabies when somebody questions your motives or thoughts.
I have no problem with people complaining. But it seems democratic participation (my opinion) includes putting forth REALISTIC answers other than just complaining about what's wrong.
I deal with people like that all the time...and you are one of them.. always quick to point out what does not work but NEVER for once offering a usable solution.
So unless you have a realistic solution nobody is going to care about what you think is wrong.