Slashdot Mirror


Greek Blog Aggregator Arrested

arcanumas writes to tell us that Greek authorities have raided the house of Antonis Tsipropoulos, administrator of the blog aggregation site Blogme.gr. His hard drive was seized and he was arrested. The impetus was a satiric website, not named in the stories, that apparently offended a Greek public figure (also unnamed). The site in question was not hosted by Tsipropoulos but was merely linked to by his RSS fed. From the first article: "The developing story coincides with the Internet Governance Forum being hosted in Athens this week, to be attended by Internet luminaries, entrepreneurs, and activists like Vint Cerf, Bob Kahn, and Joi Ito and featuring panels on Openness and Freedom of Expression."

180 comments

  1. Remember kids... by WindozeSux · · Score: 1

    The big boys don't like to look bad.

    --
    Fallout 3 will suck.
  2. Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster. - Voltaire
    Seems to be a monster in the Greek government. I would love to hear some of the luminaries at the conference discuss this and embaress the Greek govenment publicly.

    1. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are the quotes picked randomly or are they chosen or picked automatically by keywords?

    2. Re:Monsters by kfg · · Score: 1

      You don't suppose that this is a signal that such behavior won't be looked on kindly by the Greek authorities? The most effective censor is yourself.

      KFG

    3. Re:Monsters by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that this is a country that still hasn't figured out separation of church and state...

      Greece is generally democratic, but it isn't really a towering symbol of European freedom. So, an article like this should hardly be surprising, when stuff almost as bad as this happens occasionally in the US/UK/Germany/etc.

    4. Re:Monsters by CRCulver · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Keep in mind that this is a country that still hasn't figured out separation of church and state...

      The concept hasn't existed for most of human history, why do you think this creation of 18th-century French and English nihilists is the One True Way?

    5. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Because it is an requirement for true religious freedom. Besides, it makes sense.

    6. Re:Monsters by headkase · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Its just the abstract entity that lives in the fortune's random number generator trying to get through to you in it's own special way ;)
      But seriously, the human mind is a correlational machine. Think of a number, say, 711. Now look for it - you'll find it everywhere, twice a day on your clock, on a receipt, going to the corner-store, part of a license plate, and everywhere. It's not that you're looking for it it is that you notice when you see it and that therefore strengthen the action of subconsciously looking for it. As people mature, they tend to fill in the "connectedness" within their minds and are more able to start from one set of concepts and translate to another in a meaningful (if eccentric) way. This may shed some understanding on why teenagers seem to have such clear pictures in their beliefs - they haven't linked it all up yet.

      --
      Shh.
    7. Re:Monsters by chill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Because government and religion are the two main bastions of power. The only way the little guy has a chance is to play them off each other.

      Religion, as a whole, is a very bad thing to base government off of because it is so absolutist. "This is the word of God. You can't argue with God. The gov't is God's will on Earth, so arguing with the gov't is like arguing with God, you heretic." The problem is, God isn't around to run things and the people that do, in His name, are frequently bloody autocrats.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    8. Re:Monsters by misterpib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Keep in mind that this is a country that still hasn't figured out separation of church and state...

      Oh, you mean kinda like the USA?

    9. Re:Monsters by rthille · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, there's no evidence that the concept of 'state' existed for 'most of human history'...unless you count the tribe of humans living in a valley a 'state'.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    10. Re:Monsters by CRCulver · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The Orthodox Church, which is the majority faith in Greece, has fond memories of the Byzantine Empire. While there were autocratic episodes (generally by those who turned away from the Church), the rule of the Empire was generally benign and the spiritual well-being of the people was much higher than now, when now much of Greece is experiencing an existential crisis from the empty values imported from the West.

    11. Re:Monsters by Rakishi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The blind look towards the past and envision utopias while unable to see all the filth their little eden swam in.

    12. Re:Monsters by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      It has existed in various forms before that, it is simply an extension of religious freedom which has existed in Rome for example (as long as you made a gesture of loyalty to the emperor which unfortunately was against Jewish and Christian views). It is interesting to note that the Roman Empire/Republic had a rather large amount of such freedom and is seen as a rather good place. On the other hand the next thousand years in the same area had very little such freedom and is looked down upon with horror.

    13. Re:Monsters by mc6809e · · Score: 1
      Greece is generally democratic, but it isn't really a towering symbol of European freedom.


      Don't confuse democracy and freedom. They're not the same at all.

    14. Re:Monsters by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      It is interesting to note that the Roman Empire/Republic had a rather large amount of such freedom and is seen as a rather good place. On the other hand the next thousand years in the same area had very little such freedom and is looked down upon with horror.

      You mean the Western part of the same area. The Eastern part of the Roman Empire passed into the Byzantine Empire for the next thousand years, which also had little freedom but is regarded by most modern historians as a productive and civilized society. Freedom and "good place" do not necessarily coincide.

    15. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's it dude, call other people blind as if you're so enlightened and ahead of the pack, while you sit in your Mom's basement and eat Fritos while longing to kiss a girl and find a job.

    16. Re:Monsters by thripper · · Score: 1

      "Think of a number, say, 711. Now look for it - you'll find it everywhere, twice a day on your clock, on a receipt, going to the corner-sto..." You forgot the quotes. This idea wa presented in a movie , PI

    17. Re:Monsters by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      It is the One Acceptable Way, because if the "state supported religions" are "false" then forcing them onto the citizens is an abomination.
      If they are "true" forcing them onto the citizens supresses the difference between trully religious people and cowards that are just afraid of the cops.

      For example currently the worst place to be a good muslim (exept for converts) is in Saudi, since if you are born there of muslim parents NOT being a muslim is forbiden, so if you are a sincere believer and want to share your belief with others it is impossible, since there is no option to dissent everybody "seems" to share your belief, but their true feelings are more or less unknown.

      So unless one believe that a religion that one does not need to believe in, but only to obey like a robot is "good" separation of religion and of any organization that can use force to support religion is an absolute necessity.

      And people that want to put religion in the government are weak in their own faith, and this is what makes them want to "have to" be religious.

    18. Re:Monsters by drsmithy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While there were autocratic episodes (generally by those who turned away from the Church), the rule of the Empire was generally benign and the spiritual well-being of the people was much higher than now, when now much of Greece is experiencing an existential crisis from the empty values imported from the West.

      The separation of Church and State does not remove the former's role as a spiritual leader, merely its ability to be a spiritual dictator.

    19. Re:Monsters by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Keep in mind that this is a country that still hasn't figured out separation of church and state...
      That's not it. It's simpler than that.

      It's "southernness".

      In general, "southern" countries, that is, countries which do not experience overly cold climate have in common the fact that democracy is either poorly developped or a newfangled phenomenon (think of Spain, Greece and Portugal who ditched their fascist dictatorships [often installed by the US] around 30 years ago).

      In these countries, the mild climate means that one can live for cheap, as one does not need an elaborate house to keep him warm during the winter.

      Thus, the necessity of work is less ingrained in southern populations, and this is reflected by the presence of stupid religions that do not push hard towards hard work (scatholicism, orthododoxy or islam), and actually suppress the accumulation of wealth (for a devout scatholic, making money is a one-way reserved ticket to hell; I recall seeing in a scatholic school book that "money is the devil's dung" [actual french: l'argent est le crottin du diable]).

      Contrast this to northern protestant countries where wealth is not only welcome, but necessary for survival in the winter; hence, it's not surprising that protestantism evolved this way because when you have to bust your arse all year long to insure that you won't freeze in winter, any jerk who comes along and tells you that you oughta share with the poor is going to attain #1 grade asshole status pretty quickly...

      In southern countries, democracy is underdevelopped also because only a few people managed to hold a disproportionate amount of influence, because they alone worked harder than the rest of the people whose religion does not push them towards hard-work. Hence governments are more tilted towards the oligarchy and the kind of stupid banana-republic antics southern countries are well known for.

      The greek blog aggregator crackdown is yet another illustration of this principle that little chickenshit dictators can pop-up everywhere (a good example is the sicilian and calabrese mafias of southern Italy) and are able to bamboozle authorities into silencing critics (interestingly, this principle is also alive and well in the US, too, hardly a southern scatholic country in principle).

    20. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.

      Yup this blogger certainly is a monster, persecuting a public figure like that! Just as well they've taken him off the streets.

    21. Re:Monsters by Original+Replica · · Score: 1

      "Freedom and "good place" do not necessarily coincide."
      As much as we love the idea of Democracy, there are alot of good arguments for a Benevolent Monarchy as the best form of government. The practicle problem seems to be the benevolent part.

      --
      We are all just people.
    22. Re:Monsters by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Do you have any more academic sources for that point of view? That's a very Jared-Diamond-esque way of looking at how geography influences behavior, but neither JD nor anyone else I've read has explicitly tied democracy to a harsh climate (though it makes senes on the gut feeling level.)

      Why would some of the world's first (sort-of) democratic societies, ancient Greece and the Roman Republic, have evolved in these "southern" countries?

      Thanks.

    23. Re:Monsters by Joey7F · · Score: 1

      They are only different in definition. Free societies are uniformly democratic and vice versa (mostly).

      --Joey

    24. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is the One Acceptable Way, because ...

      ... it is what you are familiar with and you are unable to think outside the square.

      For example currently the worst place to be a good muslim (exept for converts) is in Saudi, since if you are born there of muslim parents NOT being a muslim is forbiden, so if you are a sincere believer and want to share your belief with others it is impossible, since there is no option to dissent everybody "seems" to share your belief, but their true feelings are more or less unknown.

      Because you have been indoctrinated in protestant christian individualism, you make some characteristic assumptions. Eg. that grace rather than works are the source of salvation; or that reglious piety is about an individual's mental relationship with God. Being a good muslim is about what you do and it is about living in a community where all obey God's law.

      That's the problem with the separation of Church and State, it forces people to live a semi-life as a non-reglious citizen, when our entire beings should be given up to God. We don't really need governments of lawmakers, we already have God's law. And democracy is simply the fallacy that the mistaken beliefs of the majority are more valuable than the truth of God's revealed Word.

    25. Re:Monsters by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      And you're trolling on Slashdot.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    26. Re:Monsters by kilocoder · · Score: 1

      Very true.

      IMHO - people who understand religion never -insist- and -proclaim- that 'you can't argue with God' or 'It is an absolute'. They just live according to it. And the essence of no sane religion contains 'rule your neighbors and force them to obey my word'.

      ('zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance' contains something to this effect - no one is going around yelling that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. people can only be fanatic about something they doubt - probably because they don't understand it.)

    27. Re:Monsters by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      I do believe he's quoting something, man.

      Meanwhile, please keep assuming that anyone who you disagree with is some kind of basement dwelling uber geek.

      You make me ill, troll.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    28. Re:Monsters by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      Speakfor yourself, zealot.

      Example: I have no belief in God. Yet, oddly, most people I meet consider me to be one of the nicest persons they've ever met. And, while I don't care if I'm recognized for it or not, I will bend over backwards to assist a cause I think is noble and worthy, even if it's something as simple as helping someone who's gotten a flat tire on the highway.

      So, if it's deeds, I'm going to whatever 'good' version of the afterlife there is - but that's not enough if I'm in a church-mandated government; I also have to go through the rediculous rituals, the lame on-your-knees begging for salvation, etc.

      Not only is that an inconvenience, it's an infringement on my rights, as far as I'm concerned. Seriously. I consider evangelists to be something on the order of spammers and telemarketers: least-of-evils that, given the existence of Dante's hell and a rational God, would be placed in the outer circle with the unbaptised.

      That's why I smile and shut the door on the religious salesmen you see everywhere; sure I'm going to hell. I'll see you there, spammer.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    29. Re:Monsters by Grimmreaper74 · · Score: 1

      I lived in Greece for 4 years and I am greek also and trust me the Greek Government doesn't need to be embarrassed publicly, they do a fine job on their own...

      --
      Live life to the fullest, you only get one chance at it.
    30. Re:Monsters by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      Do you have any more academic sources for that point of view? That's a very Jared-Diamond-esque way of looking at how geography influences behavior, but neither JD nor anyone else I've read has explicitly tied democracy to a harsh climate (though it makes senes on the gut feeling level.)
      No. It's just my gut feeling.
      Why would some of the world's first (sort-of) democratic societies, ancient Greece and the Roman Republic, have evolved in these "southern" countries?
      Those societies were far from being democratic. Power was held by an oligarchy of patricians who ruled plebeian and slave classes.

      However, the inuit who evolved in arctic conditions, arguably the most harsh environment humans ever inhabited, have soon evolved a socially advanced communistic society. Even today, canadian aboriginals do not have a very developped sense of property; in their communities, all the infrastructure all the way to the individual housing is the collectivity of their band councils.

    31. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Speakfor yourself, zealot.

      I speak only for the Truth.

      Example: I have no belief in God. Yet, oddly, most people I meet consider me to be one of the nicest persons they've ever met

      It is odd indeed, for so far from beig a nice person, you are a doomed no-believer. The problem is that it is not only your own soul that you are damming, you are bringing the anger of God onto every person you meet. This is whay all decent countries have the death penalty for atheism.

      So, if it's deeds, I'm going to whatever 'good' version of the afterlife there is ...

      But your refusal to offer gratitude to the Creator, or even to acknowledge Him as your Father is an extremely evil deed. Hence you are doomed to be swallowed in the lake of fire.

      ... but that's not enough if I'm in a church-mandated government; I also have to go through the rediculous rituals, the lame on-your-knees begging for salvation.

      God demands obedience, nothing more nothing less. Obviously even denying His existence is not obedience. Refusing to participate in those rituals He has prescribed for us is also not obedience. I'm sorry you think obedience to God is "lame," but this kind of attitude just shows why you need to be removed from the community.

      Not only is that an inconvenience, it's an infringement on my rights

      What rights? You have no rights other than those God grants you and since you refuse to acknowledge your Creator you have no rights at all. Only those fake "rights" which your secular government thinks it can give, but you will find them to be hollow at the end of days!

    32. Re:Monsters by Millenniumman · · Score: 1

      No.

      Yes, religion has some effects on U.S governments policies, but that is a given considering laws are made by people and religion is a huge part in many people's beliefs.

      In "Separation of Church and State", "Church" refers to a group, not a set of beliefs. Laws will always be based on beliefs, and many of them will be religious or semi-religious (not based on any solid facts). The idea that we should have freedom of speech is not a scientific law, or mathematic property.

      Laws should be made by an elected government, not a religious group-controlled government. That is separation of Church and State, and the U.S. has it.

      Note: I am not saying religion be forced upon people. Just that some religious beliefs do and always will play a part in even the most secular government.

      --
      Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
    33. Re:Monsters by l0cust · · Score: 1

      You know, although your analysis is interesting, cherry picking facts and causation have next to nothing in common. You decided to pick the climate of some places. How about their history ? How about their place in the imperialist culture in the last few centuries ? How about we point to countries in the middle east or Afghanistan where the climate is moderate in most parts but still have some of the worst government structures. Oh yes, they mostly follow Islam, which is not the case with Spain, Greece or Portugal. But thats the whole point isn't it. There are so many factors at work that simply picking one particular trait, which just happened to be most visible, is not going to explain the occurrence of something as complex as frequency of dictatorship or poorly implemented democratic governments in some particular places.(We can go to the Cambodian region if Islam's presence in a region makes objective argument difficult for some reason)

      --
      Politicians and Pedophiles: Two groups of exploitive bastards who are most dangerous when they're thinking of children.
    34. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ive lived in greece the first 18 years of my life. it's funny reading all that doom's day scenarios in here and the opportunists that found another way to say "see america is not that bad look at the crap around!". no, look, greeks care less for the police than in other countries. greece had a military dictatorship between 1967-74. we aren't that fond of any kind of security forces.

      btw, freedom of speech is secured in the constiturion. of course, it's not 100%. the window is you can't do personal attacks based on no evidence. well you can be sued but don't expect anything serious. a few controversial reporters are sued everyday and nothing happens, they even enjoy it some of them.

      the crap thing about greece's constitution is that it mentions the orthodox christian church as 'official'.

    35. Re:Monsters by crazyeddie740 · · Score: 1

      Actually, IIRC, the (pre-Christian) Romans had a bit of ulterior motive in providing for local autonomy in religious matters - namely, they didn't want to piss off the local gods. One of the reasons that Christians were persecuted against is that Christian soldiers wouldn't worship the local gods, which the other soldiers saw as bad luck.

      I'm afraid I don't have any sources for this, this is just something I heard somewhere.

    36. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, usa doesn't mention the orthodox christian church or any church as 'official'.

      not that in greece it has any real political power but still, it doesn't sound right.

      btw, greece unlike some "enlightened" countries has a constitution. it ensures free speech. not 100% because you can be sued for personal attacks based on no evidence. that of course isn't that serious, some controversial reporters get sued every day and nothing serious happens, some even enjoy it.

      remember, greece had a military dictatorship between 1967-74, we aren't that much 'in love' with any kind of 'security' forces.

    37. Re:Monsters by crazyeddie740 · · Score: 1

      No, I wouldn't accuse Jared Diamond of this sort of thinking. Arnold J. Toynbee did have something like that - IIRC, he believed that cultures from colder climates (Northern Europe, for example) were more advanced than cultures elsewhere because they had to develop technologies to deal with the harsher climate. Most modern historians/social scientists, etc., disagree with him rather strongly, but at least it was an alternative to some more racist views his contemporaries were spewing.

      What Diamond does is explain why certain cultures - namely, those from the entire Eurasia super-continent - had a major leg-up over cultures elsewhere. The answer turns out to be that Eurasia had greater access to domesticatable crops and animals, plus Eurasia's major axis is east-west, which made diffusion of crops much easier than in the Americas or Africa, whose major axes are north-south. This allowed civilization (defined as a city-building culture, which in turn implies a society that can produce enough food surplus to support a non-food producing urban elite) to develop sooner and spread faster in Eurasia than on other continents. Diamond's account is a lot more plausible than Toynbee's.

      However, Diamond's theory is not sufficient to explain the modern-day diffusion of the notion of the separation of church and state or democracy. For that, you have to look at how the concepts developed historically. I would suggest looking at the Thirty Years War and the revolution in military affairs caused by the development of firearms.

    38. Re:Monsters by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right. I read Guns, Germs and Steel. The poster had a line of reasoning that was also based on geography, but not having remembered seeing that point in Diamond's book, I asked for additional sources. Thanks for letting me know that the GPP's idea has been long discredited.

    39. Re:Monsters by crazyeddie740 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call the traditional Inuit society democratic so much as egalitarian. This is true of most nomadic cultures. It's a bit tough to lord it over everybody else when your belongings are limited to what you can lug around. Which would you say is a more "democratic" culture - the Inuit or the Maasai? (It's difficult to imagine a culture more "southern" than the Maasi...)

    40. Re:Monsters by crazyeddie740 · · Score: 1

      It also looks like he has shades of Max Weber's "Protestant Work Ethic" in there. I'm a bit skeptical of that idea as well. Weber said essentially that Calvinism saw wealth as a sign of divine grace, so Calvininst nations placed a greater emphasis on capital deepening than Catholic countries. However, I remember reading one economist who said that the industrial revolution had more to do with technological advances than with capital deepening. Why technological advances happened in the countries they did might bear some investigating, granted. But it might also be worthwhile to look at the actual economic situations, independent of religions. Well, at any rate, it is a bit jarring to see that mixed in with the "stimulating northern climate" meme. I'm not entirely sure that Weber himself would buy into that one.

    41. Re:Monsters by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      Speakfor yourself, zealot.
      I speak only for the Truth.
      Dear AC, Speaking for the truth is easy to state harder to demonstrate
      Example: I have no belief in God. Yet, oddly, most people I meet consider me to be one of the nicest persons they've ever met
      It is odd indeed, for so far from beig a nice person, you are a doomed no-believer. The problem is that it is not only your own soul that you are damming, you are bringing the anger of God onto every person you meet. This is whay all decent countries have the death penalty for atheism.
      Without the option of being a "doomed no-believer" no true believer can exist. And believing that the Anger of God will come to people that meet "bad people" is confusing god's will and "community leader's will", because the "community leader" have an interest in "keeping everybody in line", because they are intrisincly weak, wherease God if he (she, it) exist is absolutelly powerful, if he would want total obedience, he would not need humans to enforce it, he would just "make it so".
      So, if it's deeds, I'm going to whatever 'good' version of the afterlife there is ...
      But your refusal to offer gratitude to the Creator, or even to acknowledge Him as your Father is an extremely evil deed. Hence you are doomed to be swallowed in the lake of fire.
      The possibility to refuse gratitude is what makes the difference between sincere gratitude and "exchange of goods", if my father gives me a house, he gets my gratitude (because i'm a nice guy BTW not protestant) but only the fact that I could be a ungrateful SOB is making his action an action of true generosity. When somebody gives me ahouse an "insist on getting something in return" s/he is either a real estate sales person, or expects some form of prostitution from me (well in my personal situation the former is more likely :-)).
      ... but that's not enough if I'm in a church-mandated government; I also have to go through the rediculous rituals, the lame on-your-knees begging for salvation.
      God demands obedience, nothing more nothing less. Obviously even denying His existence is not obedience. Refusing to participate in those rituals He has prescribed for us is also not obedience. I'm sorry you think obedience to God is "lame," but this kind of attitude just shows why you need to be removed from the community.
      If the strongest kid in the playground demands that all the other kids obey him, he is a bully. If God is allseeing, allknowing, allpowerful and still demands total obedience this would make god a bully, being a bully is not a crime on the same level as mass murder, but still quite incompatible with being "good".
      Therefore by claiming that God is expecting full not to be discussed obedience from all people, you are insulting him and commiting apostasy, therefore your only hope of salvation is that god does not exist, wich of course makes the fact of being saved a tad pointless.
      Live and let live...
      Not only is that an inconvenience, it's an infringement on my rights
      What rights? You have no rights other than those God grants you and since you refuse to acknowledge your Creator you have no rights at all. Only those fake "rights" which your secular government thinks it can give, but you will find them to be hollow at the end of days!
      Your faith is weak if you need the extra incentive to get some rights in order to believe. Are you sure you really believe ?
      "while there are some who worship Him to keep themselves free from His Wrath, this is the worship of slaves;"Saying 205 of Iman Ali as reported in the NAHJUL BALAGHA

    42. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without the option of being a "doomed no-believer" no true believer can exist. And believing that the Anger of God will come to people that meet "bad people" is confusing god's will and "community leader's will"

      That's like arguing that in order to believe that we are alive there must be people who believe we are not in fact alive. The point is that God exists, whether you believe it or not. If you insist on disbelieving reality you are in effect showing a lack of gratitude to God and must therefore be doomed to eternal torture. As far as confusing God's will, He has been quite clear that He demands universal obedience or else the entire community will suffer. Reread Kings I & II and see for yourself the cost, to the entire nation of Israel for the disobedience of the few.

      The possibility to refuse gratitude is what makes the difference between sincere gratitude and "exchange of goods" ...

      It is possible to be too clever and Satan has clearly mislead you with this pride you have in your words. But the simple fact is that if you don't show gratitude to the Creator you will suffer for eternity (and you cannot be considered a 'good' person by any reasonable measure).

      If God is allseeing, allknowing, allpowerful and still demands total obedience this would make god a bully, being a bully is not a crime on the same level as mass murder, but still quite incompatible with being "good".

      Who do you think you are that you can judge God by what your standard of "good" is? Yes God demands total obedience, if that makes Him a bully in your eyes, rest assured that He is the greatest of all bullies.

      Your faith is weak if you need the extra incentive to get some rights in order to believe. Are you sure you really believe ?

      I don't need "rights" as an extra incentive to do anything. It is you who is complaining about "rights," I just don't think that you, being such an evil person, deserve any.

    43. Re:Monsters by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      I might be burning for eternity, but you are living as a slave fearful of the "greatest bully".
      I might get used to burning, I do not plan to get used to be a slave.

    44. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in Greece we have a problem because the right-wing government has been in contact with the Arch Bishop several times, even claiming that the win in elections was a Godly intervention.

      This turn to conservatism can be seen in many places on Earth...and it is not good. It is like going back to the dark ages...

    45. Re:Monsters by deimtee · · Score: 1

      The practical problem seems to be the benevolent part.

      Gordon R Dickson had some interesting ideas on that - see "Call him Lord"

      --
      I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
    46. Re:Monsters by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      My own view is that all forms of government are like food, they all spoil with time. Democracy just spoils slower than the rest. Any human monarchy will implode given some time as either idiots, the power hungry or just plain bastards come into power. If nothing else democracy makes sure that at least a good number of the rulers don't stay in power long enough to become too used to the position.

    47. Re:Monsters by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      I needed that laugh thanks, you were trying to amuse me right?

      As for the second part, let's just say I'm well off enough to have no need to boost my ego by showing off to some slashdot anon.

    48. Re:Monsters by alexhard · · Score: 1

      Hi, I'm half Swedish, half Greek..I have been living all my life in Greece and moved to Sweden 3 months ago..

      The Swedish are so under-developed both in regards to "freedom" and "democracy" (that's a bullshit term when we actually mean representative democracies) that I find it really hard to comprehend how they can live like this..

      Also, contrast to the UK..really cold, surveillance everywhere, "anti-terrorist" laws...I call shenanigans on your theory

      --
      Infinite time means everything that can happen, will. You being you is absolutely incidental. You do not exist.
    49. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HE is RIGHT. He who modded this funny WILL PAY IN HELL.
      -the anonymous coward that is GOD (no i will not tell which religion is right)

    50. Re:Monsters by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      I apologize to everyone else for feeding this troll.

      "I speak only for the Truth."

      Who's truth? Yours? The Pope's? Bin Laden's? Bobby Henderson's? Which God do you speak for?

      "The problem is that it is not only your own soul that you are damming, you are bringing the anger of God onto every person you meet."

      This could not possibly be true of a rational God who has given his children free will.

      "But your refusal to offer gratitude to the Creator, or even to acknowledge Him as your Father is an extremely evil deed."

      More evil than to bluntly state that no God exists? I have no belief, but that doesn't mean I couldn't be wrong; God, I'll admit, is possible by the very design of the concept ofan all-father. It's just that he's very improbable.

      "I'm sorry you think obedience to God is 'lame,' but this kind of attitude just shows why you need to be removed from the community."

      Why? My non-belief infringes on the existence of believers? You're fooling yourself if you think there's a valid justification for your earlier comment about decent countries having death penalties for atheism. Decent countries don't have death penalties.

      Even putting it in perspective; the death penalty denies the atheist the opportunity to repent - an obvious affront to God. Why do you think the all-mighty hasn't taken the atheist's life already? Remember, man: the book of Exodus (common to Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) says 'thou shalt not kill'. Those who feel they can ignore that have most certainly strayed from their chosen path.

      It's like Sci-Fi; it's no good if it can't follow its own rules.

      "What rights? You have no rights other than those God grants you..."

      And, apparently, one of those is free will. So, yeah. You can argue tooth and nail about this, but in the end, I'm really not going to care.

      Of course, there's a reason I call myself an 'apathist'. This is how religious conversations usually go:
      "Is there a God?"
      Well, I can't prove it one way or another, and people seem to be having the same hard time whether or not they believe in one, so really, does it matter? I can't see a reason why it should.

      "How did the universe begin?"
      Well, religious tomes have their stories, and the scientific community has its evidence and theorys, but to be honest, it happened long before I was born, and probably won't carry any ill effects into my life. Once again, who cares?

      "How did mankind come about?"
      Feh. All these questions. No, really, I'm here, I think, and I can do what I need to do to live. That's lucky; some aren't as. All these theocratic hypothetical questions are just wastes of my mind. I could be spending some time generating some social benefits, or improving my own situation. Instead, I'm sitting here answering stupid questions. Don't you have better things to do?

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    51. Re:Monsters by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      Feh. You know what they say. Heaven for the weather, hell for the company.

      Seriously. I wouldn't want to share a heaven with a lunatic like yourself.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    52. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who's truth? Yours? The Pope's? Bin Laden's? Bobby Henderson's? Which God do you speak for?

      There is only the one true God. That's whom I speak for.

      This could not possibly be true of a rational God ...

      God is not subject to your reason. If God's plan seems irrational to you, this only demonstrates the shortcomings of human reason, not of God.

      More evil than to bluntly state that no God exists? I have no belief, but that doesn't mean I couldn't be wrong; God, I'll admit, is possible by the very design of the concept ofan all-father. It's just that he's very improbable.

      Try to keep up to speed! I was describing the OP's atheism (ie bluntly stating that God doesn't exist) as a "refusal to offer gratitude ... or even acknowledge Him." Not only that, but it is studied wickedness, because everyone knows in their heart the truth of God's greatness, so being an atheist is denying what is on your own heart.

      Why? My non-belief infringes on the existence of believers?

      Yes it does. What is so difficult to understand here? Even the innocent are not spared God's wrath. The whole community suffers because of the evildoers in their midst. This is why the Bible insists that witches and other non-believers must be put to death.

      Decent countries don't have death penalties.

      Why doesn't it suprise me that a left-wing atheist like you hates America?

      the death penalty denies the atheist the opportunity to repent - an obvious affront to God.

      It is the very existence of the atheist which is an affront to God and blessed is the man who does God's will and removes such a blot from His view.

      Remember, man: the book of Exodus (common to Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) says 'thou shalt not kill'. Those who feel they can ignore that have most certainly strayed from their chosen path.

      Before you presume to lecture me about what the Bible says, at least read it. 'Thou shalt not kill' addresses unprovoked killing, not a death penalty handed out in accordance with scripture and not lawful revenge, "a life for a life." If you were to read Exodus and Leviticus, you would see that there are many offences for which God requires the death penalty. Therefore your view that the death penalty is somehow indecent is merely another indication of how confused you really are.

      You can argue tooth and nail about this, but in the end, I'm really not going to care.

      Believe me sinner, in the End, you will care!

      I apologize to everyone else for feeding this troll.

      Well then don't! Especially after this troll already admitted it was one (see above).

    53. Re:Monsters by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Why, when I read this post, do I imagine it being said by Vala's Ori-worshipping husband in Stargate SG-1?

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    54. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am Vala's Ori-worshipping husband, you insensitive clod!

    55. Re:Monsters by WgT2 · · Score: 1

      It's "southernness".

      It's the 'southerners' of Greece that started Democracy.... or do you conveniently forget such historical truths.


      ...necessity of work is less ingrained in southern populations, and this is reflected by the presence of stupid religions that do not push hard towards hard work (scatholicism, orthododoxy or islam)...

      Again, you mention two religions (at least I think you do: scatholicism = Catholicism?) that directly had their roots in the in parts more southern than Greece; namely Israel. From there they moved north and split and morphed into those things who's history you claim to understand today. So, I ask: what about those northern areas before Martin Luther? (I'll answer) They were Catholic (for better or worse). And what about Russian Orthodoxy? Talk about living in the cold without the values you claim they should have.


      little chickenshit dictators can pop-up everywhere

      Just like it can popup within your too. If you don't understand that, then you don't understand the state of man nor the necessity of real religion.

    56. Re:Monsters by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      It's the 'southerners' of Greece that started Democracy.... or do you conveniently forget such historical truths.
      Some "democracy" indeed... A "democracy" where only the elite could vote, but not the slaves and masses... And only Athens had that "democracy"; the rest of Greece did not.
      Again, you mention two religions (at least I think you do: scatholicism = Catholicism?)
      Yup, that's it. Catholicism is really a piece-of-shit religion, because it enslaves the mind. It is directly responsible for the fall of the roman empire. Without it, Mankind would not have lost nearly a millenium of progress.
      So, I ask: what about those northern areas before Martin Luther? (I'll answer) They were Catholic (for better or worse). And what about Russian Orthodoxy? Talk about living in the cold without the values you claim they should have.
      The now protestant areas were quite backwards, just as Russia whose religion utterly crushed the masses under the oligarchy. Orthodox Russia abolished serfdom only 150 years ago...
      Just like it can popup within your too. If you don't understand that, then you don't understand the state of man nor the necessity of real religion.
      Religions (there is no "real" religion. **ALL** religions are false) is only a brainwashing means of control, which only serves to prevent social progress and maintain the status-quo.

      The main idea is to make people believe that they cannot control themselves so they are better listening to what the priests and the established authorities tell them to do.

      Now that all cultures mingle and mix to an unprecedented level in History, it is absolutely vital to eliminate and destroy religion, because with all those cultures, languages and even races going side by side, the last need Mankind need is another totally artificial, illogical and 100% bullshit way of divide people and breed hatred.

      Now, if you are unable to conceptualize a religionless world, at the very least, you should avoid annoying with your stupid religion the people who are intellectually advanced enough to go about without any religion. Stupid people have no business telling smart people what to do.

    57. Re:Monsters by RKBA · · Score: 1

      Well said. Not to mention the fact that in addition to all the other BS, churches expect people to tithe 10% of their incomes. Except for a couple of times when I was a kid and watched some of the local holy rollers just for laughs (yes, I have witnessed people writhing around on the floor and "speaking in tongues" as it's called), the only time I went to the a church more than once was at a Unitarian church and I was curious to find out exactly what it is that the Unitarians believe and don't believe, but on my third visit the pastor/preacher/whatever hit me up for 10% of my income. I never did figure out what the Unitarians do/don't believe. ;-)

      My Religion Webpage

    58. Re:Monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's quite possibly the dumbest thing anyone's ever written at Slashdot. You call shenanigans? How about the rest of the world call 'congenitally dumb' or 'irretrievably stupid' on you? Sounds fine to us. BTW your contention you're half Swedish holds about a much water as an Athens reservoir. You're lucky if you're 0.00001% Swedish. Blah.

  3. Re:RUN BITCH RUN ! by Joebert · · Score: 1

    The lima beans had their chance, they fucked it up.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  4. Protect yourself by cptgrudge · · Score: 1

    Maybe it's time to start using I2P or similar?

    --
    Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
    1. Re:Protect yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Touché.

    2. Re:Protect yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'd say Anonet myself

    3. Re:Protect yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used i2p, mute, ants, and waste. The best anonymous network I've found is anonet.. its got great speeds, and any services you run on the internet can be run there as well. Check it out at anonet.org

    4. Re:Protect yourself by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's too late. BTW, the government knows you like child porn.

    5. Re:Protect yourself by cptgrudge · · Score: 1

      Obviously, it's the only reason to use something like that in the US.

      --
      Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
  5. If it was his site that was raided by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 0

    Then why was his home hard drive confiscated and not the site drive?

    Other than that, I can't get any deeper cos I don't understand any of it - its all greek to me.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  6. Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by DumbSwede · · Score: 1

    If find this link in the main story to be just as alarming or worse: Swedish programmer in Greek spam probe protests innocence

    The Greek police will arrest you on suspicion of spamming. Given the coincidence they have followed as "reasonable grounds" it would seem anyone that gets a virus or trojan that might scan your address book is in jeopardy if they visit Greece. This is just crazy.

    1. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by arcanumas · · Score: 1

      Worse.
      There was a guy who had setup a website were he supposedly, for a given price, would find you a job as a civil servant by using his 'connections' to elected official (effectively satirizing the situation in Greece).
      Anyone who who has been on 'the internets' for more than 5 minutes and has an intelligence quotient over 70, could tell it was a joke (it even had badly photoshoped images)
      Guess what happened. Not only was he arrested, but the mainstream media in Greece (tv, etc) reported it as completely legitimate for a few days. (till they figured it out..)

      --
      Slashdot Sig. version 0.1alpha. Use at your own risk.
    2. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      He's Dmitri Fotiou. His website was a riot. The lack of intelligence of these Greek authorities is amazing - they didn't even check the HTML. That's how bloody incompetent they are.

      Fotiou still has to report to the police every month. Incredible. They still insist on holding a trial, despite the fact the situation is totally ridiculous.

      See these links for more on the Foutiou story.
      http://rixstep.com/1/0/20060505,00.shtml
      http://rixstep.com/1/0/20060507,00.shtml

      Visit Dmitri's blog here.
      http://fotiou.net/blog2/blogger.html

      And lest we forget: cellphones were officially illegal in Greece at the time of the 2004 Olympics and a representative of the Greek embassy in London at the time was quoted as saying:

      "If you know they are illegal then don't bring them into our country."

      Both the Fotiou and the spammer/programmer cases are still wide open; in the latter case (which was repeatedly reported to Slashdot at the time but was ignored) the forensic lab returned "no evidence" over ten months ago and still nothing happens - and a simple phone call before calling out the National Guard would have resulted in laughs all around; in the Fotiou case a simple inspection of the HTML would have shown it was all a joke as well. These people are simply too much.

      But in Greece that which is a joke is not funny and that which should be taken seriously is a joke. It is the height of hypocrisy and effrontery that this conference be held in this country - a country moreover where over 100 top cabinet and other officials let themselves be spied on through their cellphones for over two years, and where the whistle blower, initially silenced, later committed suicide, and where the government have done everything in their power to hush things up ever since.

      Greece is not only one of the most corrupt governments and societies in the world; it is also one of the most clumsy and confused.

    3. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by Jessta · · Score: 1

      You are responible for the actions of computer systems that you own. If this were not so, then crackers and spams could just deny that they knew their computers were taking such actions.

      --
      ...and that is all I have to say about that.
      http://jessta.id.au
    4. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by DumbSwede · · Score: 1

      Sure they can deny it, but in their cases there should be a money trail and source code.
      I'll bet over 50% of computers have had at least some minor level of compromise at sometime, should we jail 50% of the population?

      If you own a computer and someone else, an uncle for instance downloads some kiddy porn on it while you are away are you responsible for this? You should only be held responsible for your actions directly.

      I wouldn't kick if there were some kind of (minor) penalties for your computer becoming part of a bot-net if it was proven your action were reckless, no virus software, no firewall, and then only if there was prior notification this would be the outcome of unsafe security practices.

    5. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And lest we forget: cellphones were officially illegal in Greece at the time of the 2004 Olympics

      Do you have a cite for that?

    6. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh geez. Do you? Can't you search the Internet yourself? This is common knowledge. Sheesh. Start with Rupert Goodwins at ZD UK. Check TechDirt. The articles are ALL OVER THE PLACE.

      Do your own research - everyone else is fully aware of this.

    7. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by Lith+Maethor · · Score: 0

      funny... cause those of us in the country never heard any of it

    8. Re:Greeks will Arrest on ANY Suspicion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They banned video games a few years ago in a stupid overly broad law. This technically outlawed anything capable of playing an electronic game, including cell phones and PCs. It was never enforced outside its intended focus of gambling and internet cafes. No tourist was ever denied his cell phone, nor did they go house to house confiscating PCs.

      Now, I say again, do you have a cite to support this claim?

  7. Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The Greek government is not particularly known for its respect of people's rights. Just ask them if they have any minorities in their country, and how many Greek minorities there are in other countries bordering Greece.

    1. Re:Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Don't trust the results, though--the Greek government will only admit to the existence of minorities specifically mentioned in their international treaties.

      Also, their human trafficking record is a good place to look for Human Rights issues.

      For a more general picture, consult The Human Rights Watch scoop.

    2. Re:Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and let me guess. You also think that greece is located near mexico, it has a dictator and people eat bananas there. And they are black. Muslims.

      And there are no minorities in countries around greece because they have been genocided.

    3. Re:Typical by satan666 · · Score: 1

      STFU because you have no idea of what you're talking about.

      Greece is a country of 10 Million people, what minorities are you talking about idiot?

      Last time I was in Greece I saw Albanians, Bulgarians and not to mention other Balkan nationals working in many jobs
      and owning many stores.

      So, your statement, unsupported by facts, is just plaint bullshit.

      So, again, STFU!

    4. Re:Typical by gclef · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension, my friend. He didn't say to look around for how many minorities there *are*, he said to ask the government how many *it* *thinks* there are. The difference between what the government thinks and reality can be surprisingly large.

    5. Re:Typical by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Just north of Greece, there is an area that used to be called Yugoslavia. There are three major ethnic groups there. The two largest groups are the Serbs, who are Eastern Orthodox Slavs, and the Croats, who are Roman Catholic Slavs. The third-largest group are...the Muslims.
      And guess what it was in the news for the most in the last decade or so? Ethnic cleansing, also known as genocide, from a Serb named Slobodan Milosevich.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    6. Re:Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We do have a minority of Muslims in Thrace who are treated even better than the Greeks over there..We also do have many Albanians and some Nigerians (African in general I guess but all the ppl I have met self identified themselves as Nigerians) living in big cities. Greece used to have Greeks in Instabul but there were some "misfortunate events" that forced most of them to either come back to Greece or send their children to Greece so there are hardly any Greeks left over there. There are also some Greeks in South Albania from what I know..
      Greek government is respecting people's rights more than most European countries (and of course US) whereas many of our neighbours are not that kind to people with Greek origin...
      Nonetheless, the point is that the "cybercrime" division in Greece is just pretty much computer illiterate. Their infamous attempts to meet with people from the athens.indymedia.org website are well known in the Greek internet community. They would sign at the end of the email as "Sfakianakis" but their outlook client was sending out the email address together with their actual name...
      So, nothing really to see here, just incompetent bureaucrats working for (surprise!) the Government:(

    7. Re:Typical by subtilior · · Score: 1

      >shrug Ethnic Cleansing is pretty typical in most western countries. Most of the western democracies seem to be actively involved in ethnically cleansing their native peoples from major cities. Why do our beloved leaders wanna do that? Several reasons - politically correct liberalism insists that people are the same wherever they come from, so speaking out against the ethnic cleansing is considered evil and wrong; secondly, the beloved leaders believe that the immigrants will be grateful enough to vote for them, perhaps even guaranteeing a permanent majority to the party; thirdly, more people gives rise to a higher GNP, which gives the country more prestige internationally, and our beloved leaders just *love* that prestige stuff.

      In practise, of course, when the immigrants get enough numbers, they quickly form their own political pressure groups, and the country in question turns from sensible policy making to rabid, inter-tribal strife. Which is more or less violent, depending on the immigrants in question.

    8. Re:Typical by Bloody+Troll · · Score: 1
      Ethnic cleansing, also known as genocide, from a Serb named Slobodan Milosevich.
      Yep. So that's why there are no Serbs left in Kosovo (used to be around 700 thousand). And Milosevic (of course) has died of natural causes. - Dumb CNN-brainwashed American arsehole.
    9. Re:Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Greek, I would like to point out that the problem is not with recognizing minorities, but with the identity these minorities are assigned to either by themselves or by external forces:

      -there is no 'Macedonian' minority. Macedonians are not a separate ethnic group; they are a mixture of Slavic people which were assigned the label 'Macedonian' by Tito (communist leader of Yugoslavia), with the purpose of taking the northern part of Greece when the communist block would be extended to the south (by force, of course). The label 'Macedonia' stuck, and those people are now claiming that the Great Alexander and the great philosopher Aristotelis were not Greek...we are talking about identity theft.

      -there is no Turkish minority. Turks have all left in 1955, with population exchanges. The muslims remaining in north Greece are Pomacs. Well, there may be few people of Turkish identity around, but we are talking about a few of them...

      There are some people like mr Soros that fund non-government organizations to promote the ideas of Macedonia as a country...the tactics of 'divide and conquer' are well known. The Balkans is the single greatest source of a rare metal used for tanks (I do not remember exactly the right terms), and of course locals should not get their hands on the valuable resource...

    10. Re:Typical by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Go talk to any Bosnian Croat or Muslim and tell them that there was no genocide.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    11. Re:Typical by Bloody+Troll · · Score: 1
      Go talk to any Bosnian Croat or Muslim and tell them that there was no genocide.
      And your point would be? Conversely, go talk to any Serb (Bosnian, Croatian or, well, Serbian) and tell them there was genocide. Alternatively, Go talk to your beloved Bosnians and Croats (Ustasa) and ask them where has the population of Srpska Krajina gone. Or, again, the Serb (and non-Albanian) population of Kosovo.
  8. The weblog by grazzy · · Score: 1

    Could be this one: http://funel.blogspot.com/
    Also, the wikipedia entry on Dimosthenis Liakopoulos is very entertaining: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimosthenis_Liakopoul os

    1. Re:The weblog by jbourj · · Score: 1
      Although Tsipropoulos gave no clues to the identity of the plaintiff, the only satirical blog known to appear in blogme.gr lampooned televangelist and national mysticist Dimosthenis Liakopoulos.

      But it couldn't be! Televangelists never go to extremes; when was the last time you heard of a religious evangelical wako with enough influence in governemnt to get people arrested?

      But seriously now, maybe Liakopoulos just took the advice of Ted Haggard.

    2. Re:The weblog by stavrosg · · Score: 1
      Although Tsipropoulos gave no clues to the identity of the plaintiff, the only satirical blog known to appear in blogme.gr lampooned televangelist and national mysticist Dimosthenis Liakopoulos.
      But it couldn't be! Televangelists never go to extremes; when was the last time you heard of a religious evangelical wako with enough influence in government to get people arrested?

      It makes sense.

      He is selling some extreme ideas, but the whole package is is Christian Orthodox (the most prominent religion is Greece), and we locals all know that the official church would like to say these things themselves, but cannot do it to maintain a state of at least a minimum correctness.

      Furthermore, the current ruling party does not hide its close ties with the church, so if something bothers the church, it usually bothers the government, too.

    3. Re:The weblog by savethelecture · · Score: 1

      Could this be the person who sued him? Could there be an arm twisting of the Greek justice, or just "friends" helping an offended friend? You see, there is a great distance from the European Ideal to the local power of authority, as there is from the American Ideals to a nowheresville sherif in the states.

      --
      -Neurosis should be taken out in sex instead of politics and IT.
  9. Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee, it's too bad Condoleeza Rice didn't turn the Internet over to the UN, like you guys all wanted...

  10. Freedom of Speech by photomonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know sometimes it's hard for us living in the US to remember that our case of (mostly) free speech is not common in other parts of the world.

    Even Great Britain has no guarantee of free speech, per se.

    Now, if only we could start spreading that around the world instead of spreading DemocracyTM, real democracy might ensue.

    --
    Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    1. Re:Freedom of Speech by slusich · · Score: 1

      And here in the US we are dangerously close to loosing what we have. "Free Speech Zones", talk of putting newspaper editors on trial for treason and a goverment which is more and more inclined to shroud itself in secrecy all threaten the rights to which we've become accustomed.

    2. Re:Freedom of Speech by photomonkey · · Score: 1

      All the while, I find myself wondering how much of the US population knows, or cares that we're headed for a place where speech is free as long as it's popular.

      --
      Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    3. Re:Freedom of Speech by ThJ · · Score: 1

      Hasn't most of Western Europe got free speech? In Norway, there are a couple of exceptions. One is quite archaic: it's illegal to insult His Majesty the King. Also, I think hate speech may be illegal. This would generally apply to the rest of Scandinavia too. When Americans speak of the rest of the world and how unfortunate they are, it touches a nerve in me...

    4. Re:Freedom of Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, any looser and they might just fall off.

    5. Re:Freedom of Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As with the examples you mention, the US tends to have more absolute protection of speech (particularly political speech) than most Western European countries do. But I think the point people are making here isn't that Western Europeans are essentially unfree (which would be silly) but more of a reaction against the constant stream of whiny stories and comments about how the US is worse than North Korea. Yesterday's idiotic "Bush declares martial law!!!" story is a good example.

    6. Re:Freedom of Speech by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      To an American, the restrictions in Norway sound appalling. Some Americans would agree with a ban on hate speech in principle, but would sour to the idea when it came to letting someone else decide what hate speech consists of.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    7. Re:Freedom of Speech by avxo · · Score: 1

      The "other parts of the world" that you specify don't include Greece. There, free speech and the freedom of the press is guaranteed by the Constitution (Section II, Article 14) with exceptions similar to those in force of the U.S.A. by Court fiat (such as yelling "fire" in a crowded theater or publicizing details detrimental to national security) and two additional restrictions against insulting the person of the President of the Republic, and the Christian faith, which is the de jure national religion.

    8. Re:Freedom of Speech by Gandalf_the_Beardy · · Score: 1

      Article Ten of the European Convention of Human Rights explicilty grants it. (and article nine is essentially freedom of religion). http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html The ECHR specifically supersedes any existing national laws that it may conflict.

    9. Re:Freedom of Speech by LabRatty · · Score: 2, Informative

      You may not be near a dictatorship, but you are not as good as you seem to think you are. And certainly not better than the UK.

      Freedom of the press survey - http://www.worldaudit.org/press.htm

      Including democracy and corruption figures - http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm

    10. Re:Freedom of Speech by Joey7F · · Score: 1

      Right, another way of saying that for our Scandinavian readership is that we feel the most appropriate punishment for hatespeech mongers is to be marginalized and ridiculed.

      I was thinking about the hate speech exclusion in several western European nations the other day listening to a satire on the radio. A man in New York city had on a Nazi helmet (complete with flag) and tried to get a taxi at the same time a black guy was trying to get the cab. In a best of 7 match, the Nazi won 4 to 3. I wonder if that would have been allowed in Germany or Austria?

      --Joey

    11. Re:Freedom of Speech by grmarkam · · Score: 1

      According to that, while the UK is better than the US in terms of corruption (rank 14 vs 10) and democracy (14 vs 9), on freedom of the press the US is better than the UK (11 vs 18).

    12. Re:Freedom of Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    13. Re:Freedom of Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "our case of (mostly) free speech is not common in other parts"..

      why does this thread has to be yet another "oh, see? we americans aren't that bad" thread. greece has a constitution and guarantees free speech. the only window towards being stopped from talking in greece is if it's proven you're doing personal attacks based on unproven accusations. ok, that's not 100% free speech, but I know of no other case where free speech can be stopped there.

      you brough UK as an example? practically it's not that bad over there, but if their laws were fully followed it'd be a disaster.

    14. Re:Freedom of Speech by Typing+Monkey · · Score: 1

      I wholeheartedly agree. The strong protection speech has in the US is one thing I really envy and hope Europe one day will have too. Could you pull that stunt in Germany or Austria? Maybe. Could you do that in Scandinavia? Yes, almost certainly. I can't speak for Sweden or Denmark, but in Norway you could do that. We even had a satirical TV show a couple of years ago on the goverment owned(but not directly controlled) TV network where the host was walking around in an SS uniform. He even had a cute little dog called Vidkun(as in Vidkun Quisling) with a Nazi flag over its back. The character was a Nazi in cloths only tho. I guess an infantile hippie would describe his demeanour, making the contrast pretty funny.
      When it comes to the real Nazis and the likes it gets cloudier. In 2001 a neo-Nazi was acquitted for saying (my translation) "Every day immigrants rob, rape and kill Norwegians, every day our people are looted and destroyed by Jews that leech away our wealth and replaces it with low moral values and foreign thoughts." Currently another neo-Nazi has been found guilty for saying (my translation) "We wish to take power, wipe out the Jews and send the immigrants out of the country. Jews are our main enemy; they have killed our people, they are evil murderers. They are not humans, they are parasites that are going to be wiped out." He is appealing the judgment. These idiots are clearly talking piss, but I have to side with Evelyn Beatrice Hall on the issue and defend their right to say it even though I disapprove of what they say.

    15. Re:Freedom of Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's only because the press in the US don't report on anything really meaningful that would conflict with the US government too much.

    16. Re:Freedom of Speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whatever...there is no free speech in the US either.

      The fact is that if you go against powerful people you are screwed in the US as well as anywhere.

      There is no democracy in the US either as there is none in other countries.

      I can tell you this though what happenned in Greece is certainly not democratic but there is certainly more freedom of speech and protest in Greece than the US.

      I have lived in both countries.

      In addition, the US justice system is problematic as in many other countries.

      ohh and talking about minorities why dont you visit the US jails....ha ha

    17. Re:Freedom of Speech by ricky-road-flats · · Score: 1
      Hang on, Great Britain (just the biggest island of the British Isles, the country is the United Kingdom) has the Human Rights Act, an EU-wide declaration of human rights, which explicitly includes freedom of expression, thought, conscience and religion.

      Oh and please, USA, put your own house in order before spreading it around - things like industry lobby groups buying laws (Disney, RIAA, oil), unsafe elections (Diebold et al), massive religious interference in policies and laws, etc.

    18. Re:Freedom of Speech by ThJ · · Score: 1

      Isn't this a perfect example of how this law is good? You really have to say something outrageous to even be touched by this law. There was recently an article by Jostein Gaarder, author of Sophie's World, alluding that the Jews weren't as innocent as made out to be. Yes! He received a lot of criticism for it. No! He did not get arrested for hate speech.

      Let me say that I personally feel that neo-Nazism is idiotic. However, neo-Nazi or not, anyone making such outrageous statements as above is an idiot. If these Nazis had any wit, they would wrap their point of view in much better packaging. Just look at The Progress Party. They cleverly exploit the public's fear of foreigners, plus other grassroots attitudes, in order to gain popularity. They don't explicitly say "Stop letting bad black people into our country!" but they're pretty damn close.

      To try to sum it up: The law against hate speech does not silence controversial statements, nor does it prevent them spreading (several news outlets quoted the statements above). It merely punishes irresponsible idiots.

    19. Re:Freedom of Speech by alexhard · · Score: 1

      You my friend, are an idiot.

      Now, go watch some more Fox ;)

      --
      Infinite time means everything that can happen, will. You being you is absolutely incidental. You do not exist.
    20. Re:Freedom of Speech by Typing+Monkey · · Score: 1

      So if a political party decides socialism, capitalism or religion is evil, you would have no problem with them banning speech trying to further these causes? If you have a problem with that I have to ask you what's the core difference? Allowing the government to ban speech it deems harmful to society, entails you to accept their right to ban something you find perfectly legitimate. I think the crap neo-Nazis spew out is stupid and wrong on an ethical level. I also feel the same way about many religious texts. Banning them I do not agree with.

      That aside I still think the law is flawed. If, as you say, these idiots are jailed only because they have a limited vocabulary, what hate speech are you stopping? If you then tighten the screws to jail more, you kill off the free discussion. What's hate speech to me might not be hate speech to you, making trails arbitrary.

    21. Re:Freedom of Speech by ThJ · · Score: 1

      I feel that free speech is partly a spawn of relativism. Your truth is as good as mine. If we look at the law of any civilized nation, we will find passages on freedom. We will also find passages that -restrict- your freedom as to prevent you from harming other people. Hateful statements cause emotional distress and can thus be said to harm people. You are free to swing your arm around, but if you hit someones face...

      I would say that the core difference is that hate speech is considered to be immoral by the vast majority of people. Just like murder. Or stealing.

    22. Re:Freedom of Speech by Typing+Monkey · · Score: 1

      I do recognize that there must be some limits to speech. Death threats and yelling fire in a crowded theatre, these types of things. People should also have protection against slander to some degree.

      Free speech is an ethical standpoint. You do not have to accept the other parts beliefs as truth. You can actively work against their goals. You only have to recognize their right to express a point of view contrary to your own.
      I do believe that relativism is the nature of the universe. There are no right or wrong. But I do not believe in relativism as a form of government. I'm an absolutist liberal humanist you can say. I believe people have rights by default; one of them is the right to free speech. But I ask you this. If I where in power with backing from the majority. Do really think I should have the right to put you in jail for disagreeing with me if I thought your ideas might cause discomfort for other people? If no, welcome to the club. If yes, I hope you change your mind. Tyranny of the masses can be just as bad as any dictatorship.

  11. My favourite sites are blog aggregators by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 1
    I don't want to scare my buddies in the aggregator "business", but this is bad news if the arrests happen in the West too. Aggregators aren't huge in the American blogosphere, but they get lots of traffic in Canada, where Blogging Tories, Progressivebloggers.ca and even local ones like Sask Blogs Aggregator get more traffic than most individual bloggers.

    Lance at Saskblogs has a nice little disclaimer:
    Disclaimer:

    Catprint Computing, Lance Levsen, and the blog, "Catprint in the Mash" does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external sites.

    What you are seeing is a pull from the originating site. This site, or any of my related websites, are not meant, nor to be interpreted as, an endorsement of the postings, content, or links from the originating sites contained herein.

    In other words, you wanna sue? Click the links to find the defendants, cuz I ain't them.

    If you find questionable, copyrighted, libellous, or slanderous content, please email me here. I will review your concerns and if I find in favour, will pull the content forthwith.

    Cheers,
    lance
  12. Missread... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My god.. I read that GEEK Authorities.. :P

    1. Re:Missread... by Chmcginn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They would have done a better job. Probably framed him for downloading child porn, and avoided all this bad publicity.

      --
      Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  13. How? by grev · · Score: 1

    How is this illegal?

    1. Re:How? by thanasakis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Obviously it is not illegal. The guy was set free the next day. And after all this publicity, I suspect that he will have no problem being acquited in trial.

      This is yet another example of litigation used as a means of threat. Unfortunately, this doesn't happen around Greece only. The guys that started all this probably don't have a chance in court, but they sure caused a whole lot of trouble to that guy. I only hope that he will countersue them for moral damage and demand a shitload of money in compensation.

  14. Meanwhile, in the USA.... by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I still find it ironic that I get a lot of trash talk about how "unfree" speech is the US, yet I see US policitians call each other worse stuff during any election cycle, and no one goes to jail. Just as you can't have a pro-nazi site in Germany, and a host of other restrictions in every other country.

    We have our own problems here in the States, (ie: 2600 getting sued for linking to DeCSS code...) but at least pretty much anything goes when it comes to politicians.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    1. Re:Meanwhile, in the USA.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Been reading the news lately? Special prisons are being erected as we speak, especially for folk like you. Free speech? As long as you say exactly what's allowed to be said, you're free to say it!

      Remember to vote next election.

    2. Re:Meanwhile, in the USA.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot.

  15. Beware of Greeks bearing... by Roger_Wilco · · Score: 1

    Blogs?

  16. Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..it's really hard to say if you are being sarcastic. Considering what has been happening in the US lately... and the fact that Greece is the birth place of democracy... and then the twist at the end..... *head explodes*

    1. Re:Wow... by ricree · · Score: 1

      The problem with the US isn't a lack of rights. The problem is that our freedoms are decreasing. If this trend were to continue, we would have a lot of problems, but our overall state at the present isn't all that bad.

    2. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Greece was also the birthplace of Sodomy.

      So the Democrats practice sodomy. What else is new?

    3. Re:Wow... by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      No, homosexual activities have been observed in animals which have lived hundreds of millenia before Man formed coherent speech.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    4. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But duh, as most americans know, the world is only 6000 years old. And flat.

    5. Re:Wow... by mpe · · Score: 1

      ..it's really hard to say if you are being sarcastic. Considering what has been happening in the US lately... and the fact that Greece is the birth place of democracy... and then the twist at the end..... *head explodes*

      Actually it's Athens, as a city state, which developed the idea. Anyway Classical Athenean Democracy is very different in many ways from that practiced now. AFAIK no modern nation state has randomly selected juries carrying out executive and legislative functions of government.

  17. Name of the accusor by Project2501a · · Score: 4, Informative

    the name of the suitor is Dimosthenis Liakopoulos, a well-known tv-bookseller and demagogue in Greece, who also "happens" to belong to the ultra-right wing in Greece I'm Greek, and i got to say I find myself being ashamed one more time, after the "Greece bans Videogames" thingie

    --
    ----
    1. Re:Name of the accusor by Etz+Haim · · Score: 3, Informative

      And what a guy Liakopoulos is...

  18. Am I alone in this? by AWhiteFlame · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else read this as "Geek Blog" instead of "Greek Blog"?

    --
    "Everything worth innovating today will go to court tomorrow."
    1. Re:Am I alone in this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Made me wonder who the Geek authorities were.

    2. Re:Am I alone in this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Did anyone else read this as "Geek Blog" instead of "Greek Blog"?"

      That's how I first read it, too. I thought CowboyNeal had been arrested.

  19. The beginning of any "democracy" by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    IS free speech. This is where it starts. ( and remember, that we here in the US dont have a democracy.. never really have.. we have a Representative Republic. However, free speech is still its cornerstone.

    Thus the reason for the first amendment.

    After that, you have to be able to stand up and fght for your rights .. thus the 2nd amendment... This is the mortar that holds the stone of free speech together.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:The beginning of any "democracy" by node+3 · · Score: 1
      we have a Representative Republic
      That's a tautology. Republics are defined, in part, by having representatives.

      Additionally, republics *are* democratic. They aren't democratic in the sense that every single action taken by the state is put up for a vote, but democratic in the sense that the representatives are elected by the people.

      In other words, a republic is a form of democracy. The only reason people (*ALWAYS* from the right-wing, both conservative and libertarian) try to make a distinction between democracy and republic is because they don't actually want the people to have any power. This is the *exact* opposite of democracy, and is not, even, a republic.
    2. Re:The beginning of any "democracy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A republican form of government need not have representatives elected by the people... they could just as easily be elected by the aristocracy, by the military, by corporate leaders, etc.

      "Representative republic" is redundant, but "democratic republic" is not.

    3. Re:The beginning of any "democracy" by Joey7F · · Score: 1

      How are libertarians right wing? Is it because they aren't left wing? In the standard compass of political beliefs, North is Libertarian, East is Conservative, South is Totalitarianism, and West is Liberal.

      I want people to have power, but I don't want people confused by what we have either. By the way, for American readers, early voting is probably starting this coming week/weekend. There is no excuse to not vote :)

      --Joey

    4. Re:The beginning of any "democracy" by node+3 · · Score: 1
      You did not address the issue that republics are democracies.

      How are libertarians right wing?
      Because in America, libertarians are right-wing. They identify more with Ronald Reagan than Bill Clinton.

      I want people to have power, but I don't want people confused by what we have either.
      That would be more convincing if you weren't actively trying to deny an integral aspect of our republic--namely that it *is* a democracy.

      By the way, for American readers, early voting is probably starting this coming week/weekend. There is no excuse to not vote :)
      Agreed.
    5. Re:The beginning of any "democracy" by Joey7F · · Score: 1

              How are libertarians right wing?

      Because in America, libertarians are right-wing. They identify more with Ronald Reagan than Bill Clinton.


      I am not sure that makes them right wing. Plus I tend to think that most people approach libertarianism from the left or the right. I tend to approach from the right, because I view fiscal issues as being more important than social ones. I may not be a Libertarian but I am libertarian and registered as a Republican.

      I didn't address the democracy republic issue because I think it is unnecessary to expound on it.

      --Joey
    6. Re:The beginning of any "democracy" by Smartcowboy · · Score: 1

      You don't understand what a republic is. A republic is a country where the head of state is not a hereditary monarch. Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Hitler's Germany, Stalin's USSR, today's Cuba and China were/are republics and they were/are obviously not democratic. Canada, United Kindom and Japan are three examples of democracies that are not republics. Democracy don't imply a republic nor a republic imply democracy.

      This is semantic. It has nothing to do with being right-wing, left-wing, or mammal.

  20. Somebody one day will launch by netglen · · Score: 1

    a satellite and host all those "Too hot to handle sites". It would be great having the first public site where anybody in the world can post their thoughts without fear of the jack booted govs throwing them in jail.

    1. Re:Somebody one day will launch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens when the server crashes? Or needs some extra RAM or HDD space because of increased use?

    2. Re:Somebody one day will launch by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Won't work. Orbital positions belong to countries, and conceivably the owning country could apply its law to the infringing satellite.

      And no, they won't need to launch anti-sat weapons at it to enforce their laws, they just confiscate the ground equipment controlling it.

    3. Re:Somebody one day will launch by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      Isn't that just for geo stationary satellites? Wouldn't something like a hamsat be outside of any one country's control?

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    4. Re:Somebody one day will launch by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Isn't that just for geo stationary satellites?

      Indeed it is.

      Wouldn't something like a hamsat be outside of any one country's control?

      Except you wouldn't need just one satellite, but a whole fleet of them... Unless you're happy with a half-hour coverage per day...

    5. Re:Somebody one day will launch by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Orbital positions belong to countries, and conceivably the owning country could apply its law to the infringing satellite.

      Who allocates these, and on what grounds? I'd guess the only reasonable territorial claim would be by equatorial nations directly below the geostationary orbit. So, hang a geostationary server over the middle of the Atlantic, within sight of the eastern US and western Europe, but located above international waters. Who exactly owns that space?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    6. Re:Somebody one day will launch by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Who allocates these,

      The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and on what grounds?

      Procedures are a mess (a mixture of first come/first served, proportionality to country's size, use-it-or-lose-it, and just plain "who shouts loudest at the WRC"), and described here (sorry for the Word doc, but ITU is somewhat akin to a banana republic...)

      I'd guess the only reasonable territorial claim would be by equatorial nations directly below the geostationary orbit.

      Nope, any country can apply. Obviously the satellite needs to be visible from the owning country (or else it would be rather useless, at least for use by the country itself), but the country does not need to be directly underneath it.

  21. Hello from CellegeTown, USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Alpha Alpha Alpha!"

  22. that is interesting... by Lith+Maethor · · Score: 0

    have to admit i had to wait for Slashdot in order to learn about this... and i live in the same city as the one that most probably is behind this frell up... there are three basic things here: 1. most greek officials are technologically impaired (kinda like the amish, but more sneaky about it) cops and judges are no different 2. the one who sued blogme (if it is liakopoulos after all) is hardly someone people actually take seriously ...nobody with half a braincell anyway 3. there is a slight possibility this is not real, as he has been the target of far more intense satire and never acted upon it

  23. fascist dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Greece was a pretty seriously and heinously run dictatorship, courtesy of the CIA and assorted leftover nazis and sympathsizers for a very long time. I don't know what it is like now, but it used to be that way. The rule of the Generals, complete with a lot of massacres, torture, dissapeared people, the regular stuff you get from the oil and drugs soaked US spooks.

    1. Re:fascist dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the dictatorship was between 1967-74, it is long gone.

      the _very_ reason we aren't that fond of security forces now and we love democracy is that we had that dictatorship back then.

      we have free speech. the lawsuits because of 'personal attacks based on no evidence' are often loughed about. hah, some major politicians do it to each other and nobody really takes it seriously. some controversial reporters even enjoy it. no jailtime and that some say in here. you can talk in greece, don't worry, i feel the same as in any west country ive been. the thing i don't like in the constitution is that it considers the orthodox christian church 'official'.`

  24. AnoNet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    To those who feel they might be unjustly persecuted, AnoNet has helped immensely in the direction of anonymity - http://anonetnfo.brinkster.net/

  25. Anti-satellite weapon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haven't you heard about Anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) ?

    * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon

    Interesting idea though... with a satellite in space and wireless connection...

  26. Blame World War 2 by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    That's the gist of it. No one in Europe wants another Hitler/Mussolini/Stalin type debacle, and they think that making people say only nice things will keep the peace.

  27. Shame by MagnusE · · Score: 1

    Shame on the Greek Authorities (Body of Electronic Crime included), really. They've done a pretty good job in arresting criminals that take advantage of child pornography or thieves that take advantage of people's ignorance over the use of electronic payment methods, but some times I doubt if they have the judgeship of how things really work over the internet. Unfortunately there are public prosecutors that simply don't laugh at such accusations.
    However, Greek Law is somehow up-to-date for such accusations and I estimate that the defendant will be acquitted. The problem is that the PC of the defendant (confiscated by the authorities) contained important data of his small personal enterprise (that is subsidised by the Greek Unemployment Office - that is in turn funded by European Union) and now his professional reliability is shattered.

    --
    Fortune Rota Volvitur
  28. Wow by Salvance · · Score: 1

    And there's so much talk on here (particularly by foreigners) about how bad the U.S. has gotten. I guess nobody in Greece allows unmoderated comments on their blogs ...

    --
    Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
    1. Re:Wow by Clopy · · Score: 1

      Well, at least the Greek government doesn't kidnap people. And it doesn't pretend that there are places that human rights do not exist. Please. We (Greeks) have an awful government but at least we don't have J.W.Bush

  29. Greek in the West by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Greeks are understandably proud of their achievement and influence in the development of the Western Civ. You know, this whole democracy thing.

    Now, the West are seen more as the US and the norhtern Europeans. I have no idea what the point of this post was, and while it's bit sad that Greek gov't is behaving this way, I LOVE Greece and her people. Sort out the Cyprus mess, please.

  30. And think... by Avantare · · Score: 1

    What will happen when the UN has control of the Internet. Chuck

  31. RSS fed by dextromulous · · Score: 1

    That's a funny typo. I herby proclaim that the past tense of RSS feed is now RSS fed.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: those who divide people into two types and those who don't.
  32. Forgot your medication? by alienmole · · Score: 1

    You know, anti-schizophrenia drugs would really help with your condition.

    1. Re:Forgot your medication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, anti-schizophrenia drugs would really help with your condition.

      Anti-schizophrenia drugs help with ED? I didn't know that!

      Seriously, I was originally illustrating how support for the separation of church and state (like support for many of the extant cultural/political practices of one's own society), seem to many to be the "One Acceptable Way," is merely because of unreflective cultural prejudice. And I pointed out how the example the OP used illustrated this by projecting a Nth American protestant individualism unproblematically (well unreflectively) onto Islam (where it don't fit).

      But when I got accused of being a zealot (actually I'm an atheist, and I'm quite fond of the separation of church and state too), I just ran with it ... ;)

  33. He knows... by deesine · · Score: 1

    he just likes living on the edge!

    --
    damaged by dogma
  34. article on theregister.co.uk for blogme.gr arrest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This time it's much worse than with the Swedish guy

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/30/greek_blog ger_arrested/ has a new article.

    I'm a Greek and I really hope that the "public persona" who sued the bloggers, will find difficult time in court.

  35. For post #3!! Embarrassing the Greek government . by Grimmreaper74 · · Score: 1

    I say this from experience. I'm Greek and lived in Athens for four years. You said that they should publicly embarrassed the Greek government. Well, there is no need to do that. Reason being . They do a good job of that on their own. If you didn't know they just recently had their elections and if you have ever watched their pre-election political debate they get up on the podium and fight like a bunch of old housewives. I believe that their government is probably the most corrupt and money under the table country and government, and the money under the table isn't only to politicians. I mean everything works with the money in an envelope there. Being that it's free hospitals (not free, payed by taxes that go up every other week) If you are seriously hurt and you go to the hospital it doesn't matter. you'll sit there for hours till the doctor takes care of the people that gave him a little envelope of money. I personally seen this when I lived there. Same thing with my school bus driver. Being that I'm American, I had to go to the American-Greek school on the old U.S Air Force Base (Helecon) and even though when he picked up a kid about 2 miles down the road he still wanted to go down the other street and make me go to the stop that was about 4 miles from my house, just cause he's lazy. Well, that was fixed with a bribe and he would now stop about 600 yards from my house. Being that the school, buses there are only Privately owned tour buses and the driver gets a list of kids and addresses and he would make up his own route. Now I know I'm a little off topic but this is just to let you know how corrupt things are over there. Not to mention the the border there is a joke and everyone and everything gets in and out of there as they please with no problem. When you go to the supermarket your actually surprised to see a Greek person. It's pull with Albanians, Pakistanis Afghans, Iranians, Iraqi's, Russians. Everything you name it, and I bet you only 10% of them went through customs. If that. Want to talk about terrorist hideouts... that would be the place... The cops over there are a joke... All you see them do is sit in front of their station drink coffee, play cards or backgammon or argue about politics or their soccer team. The only way they catch crooks is if something stupid happens and someone called the police and the crook decides to stay around for a while then they get there about 30 min later. Talk about response time. Now I go there every year to visit my dad and I'll tell you what. Nothing has changed...

    --
    Live life to the fullest, you only get one chance at it.
  36. Oh man... by Poromenos1 · · Score: 1

    Liakopoulos is crazy (well, if he believes what he says, anyway). He sells books and is always on about how Greeks are better than everyone else and how we've descended from aliens and will conquer the world. Odd that they'd actually raid a house based on what he says, though, I thought he was rather harmless (until now).

    I don't think this will go well for the authorities.

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
  37. Was ancient Athens a Democracy ? by sperxios10 · · Score: 1

    While i absolutely agree with your gut feelings, the logic behined the "Those societies [ancient Greece and the Roman Republic] were far from being democratic. Power was held by an oligarchy of patricians who ruled plebeian and slave classes." part is flawed:

    The term 'democracy' has primarily been defined against the state organization used by the ancient Athenians (and about 80 other democratic cities that Plato described, but the manuscripts describing them have long been lost). So it is a strong contradiction to not call these sociaties democratic. Propably you give a more wider meaning to democrarcy.

    Actually this is a common fallacy we often do. First we tend to attribute moral value to state systems, democracy is good, oligarchy is bad, benevolent dictatorship is better, and so on (see Cornelius Castoriadis). Often we promote democracy to the top of the list and eventually we expect everything from it! Wel, that's actually utopia, not democracy.

    Democracy was never meant to be applied to all (men, women, rich, slaves, dogs, sheeps, trees and houses). This is a complete different topic; the catholicity of a democracy, which is part of the human rights appendix of democracy. And indeed, the later notions are contradictory to democracy, that somehow we, as humans, have to compromise!
    (for instance, we all agree that dogs are not citizens, so we should be allowed to exterminate them with no penalty...or shouldn't we?)

    In principal, you can have a democratic way of ruling for an organization (either a revolutionaly party, or a business company, or a city, or a planet) and at the same time, not to allow anyone from outside to participate to your decision-making process. The definition of the outsiders is a very controversial issue.

    And think about it for a while: When Athenians devised democracy, they had slaves, as many other cities did, and yet, they were the ones to discover democracy, not the citizens from other cities! Why?

    ------------------

    Ancient Rome is a totally different story! It is a republic, not a democracy! Expect all kinds of differencies here. Apart from the fact that the public did not govern, the public-related decision-making processes were based mostly on majority and voting, while in ancient Athens, the sortion was in widespread use (see Athenian democracy).

  38. What a load of tosh. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Do you realize that for hundreds and even thousends of years cultures like Faraonic Egypt, classic Greece, Rome, Persia, the Ottomans, the Maya, the Inca developped on those countries you mention while people in colder climates lived in huts in what can be only kindly described as townships?

    Your monumental ignorance about universal history is only matched by the idiotic conclussions reached by your uninformed, baseless arguments.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:What a load of tosh. by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      In fact, the first civilization, period, developed in the easiest place on the planet to live, the Fertile Crescent, where you could live naked almost all year round and the river kept bringing topsoil for free.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  39. Are you some kind of troll? by Stavr0 · · Score: 1
    What in the hell is 'scatholic'?

    Is that some kind of lame pun?

    1. Re:Are you some kind of troll? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      Scatholic is used to describe one of the shittiest religions ever, the scatholics.

  40. No excuse? by 87C751 · · Score: 1
    By the way, for American readers, early voting is probably starting this coming week/weekend. There is no excuse to not vote :)
    Agreed.
    What if you are firmly convinced that the whole election process (and indeed the whole of the US political machine) is corrupt beyond retrieval? Voting means acting to perpetuate the broken system, no?
    --
    Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.