Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Yahoo! Accused of Lying to Congress about Chinese Journalist

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the summon-the-yang dept.

verybadradio writes "The House Committee on Foreign Affairs is calling Yahoo! chief executive Jerry Yang to a hearing on 6 November to explain why the company lied to Congress in early 2006 about its knowledge of the investigation into Chinese journalist Shi Tao."

1 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. Re:pot.kettle.black by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    When has anyone in the US gone to jail for publishing a blog critical of the US government?

    That's because the politicos in the U.S. are MUCH more advanced about manipulating the media than in China.

    They don't have to throw anybody in jail (which can given credence to someone's message) when they can use the media to completely discredit anybody whose message starts becoming dangerous.

    Once someone has been discredited in the eyes of the public, it becomes very difficult for them to say ANYTHING that will be taken seriously, even if what they're saying is perfectly true. People will (in some cases actively) rationalize why that person must be wrong.

    I would like to see an investigation of what is going on at Gitmo but you do know that prisoners of war are NOT protected by the US constitution and never have been. They have no right to a trial or legal counsel. Trying to apply constitutional protections too them is invalid.

    You are incorrect on a couple fronts.

    1) The power of the U.S. Constitution (including the Bill of Rights + all of its amendments) applies to EVERYONE in U.S. jurisdiction, not just citizens.

    There are only a few places in the Constitution which are specific to citizens, and they mainly have to do with defining who gets to vote, and who they get to vote for. Statutory law might be more specific, but there's nothing in the Constitution that prevents anyone under U.S. jurisdiction from receiving the same level of human rights protections as its citizens.

    2) The U.S. Constitution specifically says that treaties that the U.S. is signatory to, must be given the same priority as the "law of the land". I suspect that the Founders wanted to reassure the rest of the world that the U.S. would take treaty obligations seriously, and not just blow off promises in the next session of Congress.

    This includes the Geneva Convention, which has all that prisoner-of-war stuff that you (and the Administration) seem to be so intent on ignoring.