Slashdot Mirror
Letter Casts Doubt On Yahoo China Testimony
Saint Aardvark writes "A hand-written letter has surfaced that sheds new light on the case of Chinese reporter Shi Tao. The letter (PDF), believed to be from Chinese police, 'is essentially a standardized search warrant making clear that Chinese law enforcement agencies have the legal authority to collect evidence in criminal cases. This contradicts Yahoo's testimony (PDF) to Congress in 2006 that they 'had no information about the nature of the investigation.' 'One does not have to be an expert in Chinese law to know that 'state secrets' charges have often been used to punish political dissent in China,' says Joshua Rosenzweig, manager of research and publications for The Dui Hua Foundation. Shi Tao was sentenced to 10 years in prison for his reporting on the Tianamen Square massacre."
Why, we were just following orders? You don't expect us to break the laws of other nations, do you? Don't worry, by helping Chinese officials silence those Chinese citizens brave enough to criticize their regime, we are in fact bringing freedom to China!
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Normally I'd have something terrible to say, but in this case I think I'd say this: As much as we hate hearing about Paris Hilton 234987129371 times, Freedom of the Press is important, even though Fox abuses it incessantly.
Sure baby, I'll give you my phone number...in Hex
Let's see. After all, it looks like Yahoo lied to congress, if I interpret this correctly. There was an investigation from congress, and they said it ain't so. In my books, this constitutes as a lie.
Now the congress is in a considerable problem. Either they fine a company or they accept that companies lie to them freely. Decisions, decisions...
I have a gut feeling I know how this will end.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
... as to how the comments on this thread will compare to the comments on the thread about police recording license plate locations and times?1 45253
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/30/0
It would appear that some degree of privacy / anonymity is necessary for Freedom.
Lying under oath. Whether in front of congress or a court or whatever, when you take an oath to tell the truth that oath carries legal force and you can be charged for violating it. That's the whole reason for "pleading the 5th" and such. You can't be made to incriminate yourself, but that doesn't mean you are allowed to lie not to. Thus the 5th amendment allows you to not answer the question.
Many people don't realise that this is often the real legal deal surrounding some of the political controversies. For example the legal problem for Bill Clinton wasn't that he banged his secretary, it was that he lied under oath about it. The press and the public may have made a big deal out of the sex act, but the legal problems were surrounding the testimony.
When you are under oath you can refuse to answer for certain limited reasons (like anything that would violate the 5th amendment) and you can always pull the political favourite of "not being able to recall that" but you can't lie about it, at least not legally. Getting caught doing that can get you in trouble, even had what you were being questioned about been perfectly legal. The whole "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth," isn't just for show. When you say "I do," you've made a formal oath and can be held to that.