New 'Enemies of the Internet' Listed In Reporters Without Borders Study

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New 'Enemies of the Internet' Listed In Reporters Without Borders Study

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @07:45AM from the beware-the-anti-tube-legislation dept.

New submitter Warmlight writes "The BBC reports that 'Bahrain and Belarus have been added to Reporters Without Borders' annual list of "enemies of the internet." They join 10 other nations on the campaign group's register of states that restrict net access, filter content and imprison bloggers. India and Kazakhstan have also joined RWB's list of "countries under surveillance" because of concerns that they are becoming more repressive.' I wonder how ACTA will affect this in the next year? In their report, they say, 'Resistance to ACTA is stronger than ever and the treaty may not see the light of day. Vigilance must be maintained.'"

63 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Bahrain exempt under "But they give us oil" clause by elrous0 · 2012-03-13 07:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

Bahrain and Saudi Arabia can do whatever they like as long as they keep that sweet, sweet crude coming. I've got an SUV to fill.

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
"enemies of the West" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 07:51 · Score: 0

The country with one of the oldest centralised Internet censorship systems, the Internet Watch Foundation, seems not to be on this list. This is so even as recently it has been ordered that sites must be censored for issues as trivial as linking to files which infringe copyright. Why is that?
1. Re:"enemies of the West" by interkin3tic · 2012-03-13 08:04 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The full list of "enemies" seems to be: Bahrain Belarus Burma China Cuba Iran North Korea Saudi Arabia Syria Turkmenistan Uzbekistan and Vietnam
  
  There's a subtle difference between "We're shutting you down because you're giving people free movies that you don't have the rights to" and "We're keeping you from accessing these websites because they say we are corrupt assholes." Or "We're going to kill you for saying things we don't like online."
  
  Both are bad in my opinion, the US could easily slide into outright internet censorship, and the US is also hypocritical on this matter, but for right now I feel we're not in the same league as, say, Syria.
2. Re:"enemies of the West" by betterunixthanunix · 2012-03-13 08:17 · Score: 2
  
  "We're keeping you from accessing these websites because they say we are corrupt assholes."
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks
  
  the US is also hypocritical on this matter, but for right now I feel we're not in the same league as, say, Syria.
  Does the US order soldiers to open fire on protesters? No, of course not, we prefer to have our paramilitary police enter homes in the early hours of the morning and shoot people:
  
  http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug-war-victim/
  
  Here is the point where you say, "But that is still different, because those people died due to government mistakes!" At the end of the day, however, people were killed by militarized government agents.
  
  --
  Palm trees and 8
3. Re:"enemies of the West" by interkin3tic · 2012-03-13 13:13 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, wikileaks. The government doesn't like it. I can, however, type in www.wikileaks.org and go to wikileaks, and not run into anything like the Great Firewall. They are not preventing me from accessing those websites for political speech. They are taking some shady approaches to wikileaks and Assange, but blocking due to political reasons, they're not to that yet.
  
  Does the US order soldiers to open fire on protesters? No, of course not, we prefer to have our paramilitary police enter homes in the early hours of the morning and shoot people.
  But not for the purposes of suppressing political speech. Perhaps only because law enforcement has learned not to make martyrs of people they disagree with, but we do not arrest or kill JUST for political speech.
  
  Here is the point where you say, "But that is still different, because those people died due to government mistakes!" At the end of the day, however, people were killed by militarized government agents.
  Name for me, if you will, a country on earth today whose law enforcement has not killed innocent people by mistake. This is not to say it's okay because everyone does it, my point is that if you make a list of countries where law enforcement is not perfect, you may as well just hold up a globe. The point of THIS list was to highlight the worst censors of the internet. And, just to be clear, the point of my post was not to defend the US as a saint, my point was merely that we're not the worst of the worst.
4. Re:"enemies of the West" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 13:16 · Score: 0
  
  Oh please. Are you so fucking delusional that you're equating mass genocide in Syria to a few bad egg police incidents in the USA?
5. Re:"enemies of the West" by jaymemaurice · 2012-03-13 18:27 · Score: 1
  
  Are you in Syria? Is it genocide or the a few bad eggs?? I don't know for sure because I am not there and different media is painting different pictures.
  
  Do I think all is peachy in Syria, hell no... but the one thing I do know is that the media represents the interest.
  
  If there wasn't US interest, there wouldn't be US news covering the story like many other parts of the world where such genocide was occuring and not reported because nobody gave a shit.
  
  --
  120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
Re:Hm by GameboyRMH · 2012-03-13 07:52 · Score: 3, Funny

The purest form of free speech allows censorship?

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Bahrain exempt under "But they give us oil" cla by GameboyRMH · 2012-03-13 07:54 · Score: 1

Not RTFA'ing is fair game, but it's clear that you failed to RTFS.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
See, it used to be by Compaqt · 2012-03-13 07:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

the Internet was just "our little private world", like Second Life.
It wasn't "real life". It was just a separate little thing.
Nobody (especially governments) cared about since, mostly since they didn't even know about it.
Now that everybody's on it, they want:
-Nothing exposing misdeeds (US)
-Nothing about the Nazis (Germany)
-Nothing about competing brands (France)
-Nothing offensive (India)
-Nothing about how the rest of the world lives (China)
and so on.
If only there, there were another interconnected network ... hmm.

--
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
1. Re:See, it used to be by betterunixthanunix · 2012-03-13 08:07 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  If only there, there were another interconnected network ... hmm.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidonet
  
  --
  Palm trees and 8
2. Re:See, it used to be by cpghost · 2012-03-13 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  If only there, there were another interconnected network ... hmm.
  Some of us are still running UUCP nodes over POTS phone lines just for the heck of it. Others are running various darknets on top of the main IP network (Freenet, RetroShare, and many, many others). There are also UUCP-based or even IP-based packet radio out there if you have a HAM license...
  
  --
  cpghost at Cordula's Web.
3. Re:See, it used to be by cpu6502 · 2012-03-13 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  I used to get Fidonet through my local BBS, but now I have no idea how to access it. (It's not easy like usenet which can be reached through google.)
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
4. Re:See, it used to be by forkfail · 2012-03-13 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Not exposing the misdeeds of Nazis is offensive to the rest of the world; several different magazines have written articles on this.
  
  --
  Check your premises.
5. Re:See, it used to be by tlhIngan · 2012-03-13 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  If only there, there were another interconnected network ... hmm.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidonet
  
  Fidonet actually has a claim to fame on this - while governments are restricting net access, the lowly modem is often free and clear as POTS aren't monitored as heavily, so the passage of messages through Fidonet is often much easier and much safer. It's just a lot slower as it's basically computers synchronizing with each other daily via modem.
  And apparently it's been used for just that purpose to get information out.
6. Re:See, it used to be by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 09:34 · Score: 0
  
  Don't you wish you could just tell the whole fucking world... yeah you got me my 20mbps cable, facebook, netflix, and 4chan great shit... but go ahead, take it with you and just leave.. just go back to AOL and take all your shit with you, you're no longer welcome in our home you came here and fucked everything up and now we're deporting you back to 10c/minute voice, $15bux a pop PPV movies, and commercial network access paid by the hour it's what everyone wants to give you, you won't know the difference and it's all you can handle anyhow.
7. Re:See, it used to be by antdude · 2012-03-13 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  Internet 2? :P
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
8. Re:See, it used to be by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-03-13 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with FidoNet is that it's explicitly non-anonymous by design. Also, since network topology is geographical, it's fairly easy to trace things, and for stuff that matters most of the time (e.g. correspondence between two citizens of the same country), falls entirely in the jurisdiction of a single government - so if it's oppressive, it can easily obtain evidence or wiretap.
9. Re: See, it used to be by gidds · 2012-03-14 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  If only there, there were another interconnected network ...
  THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
  
  --
  Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
Re:Hm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 07:56 · Score: 0

Yes, yes, it is so terrible that this organization is so intolerant of regimes that shoot, beat, and arrest people for what they say online.
bullets = free speech in its purest form.
Great list by gmuslera · 2012-03-13 07:57 · Score: 5, Interesting

The country that promoted SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, taken hostile control of the root dns, made raids overseas for Megaupload and others, have laws that force big companies like google/facebook/etc to give them their customers information and a "few" more is somewhat absent there. We need the Archenemy of the Internet list for it?
1. Re:Great list by GameboyRMH · 2012-03-13 08:07 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  You know I tried to write a post describing how what these countries are doing is worse, but the only thing they do that's worse is put people to death in some cases.
  Also:
  
  Kazakhstan was added to the list after being said to have cut communications around the city of Zhanaozen during a riot
  And what is routinely done in first-world countries in cities where the G8/G20 is being held?
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
2. Re:Great list by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:09 · Score: 0
  
  Considering the list is for countries that "restrict net access" from a group "Reporters without Borders", I think you're missing the point.
  Of course, you stopped reading after "enemies" and immediately launched into your prepackaged anti-US rant.
  None of the issues you list are invalid. Root dns ownership certainly does impact 'net access'. Make your own 'enemies of the internet' list if you like. I don't know of many (any?) developed countries that aren't currently struggling with issues like this.
  Rant on. But make sure your soapbox is firmly located in Utopia.
3. Re:Great list by betterunixthanunix · 2012-03-13 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know of many (any?) developed countries that aren't currently struggling with issues like this.
  So what you are saying is that governments in general have a problem with a network that allows cheap, fast, long-distance and hard-to-control communication between people? Yeah, I guess I cannot really disagree with that: governments want to control everything, and the Internet is a hard thing to control.
  
  --
  Palm trees and 8
4. Re:Great list by gmuslera · 2012-03-13 08:42 · Score: 2
  
  If for you killing is specifically shooting in the heart with a 9mm and not all the other possible ways, yes, the enemies of internet could be just the ones that restrict net access. But restricting net access to the citizens of one of your own cities or even your own country looks less severe than restricting somewhat internet (and free expression, and a lot more) to all the world.
  Don't know what does Iran, Belarus, or Bahrain to you if you do in your own country (provided that is not one of them) something that is illegail in them, but we know what US do.
Re:Hm by GameboyRMH · 2012-03-13 07:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

Ah I think I understand now, if cash can be speech then why not bullets and tanks? They convey much more of a message IMO.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Bahrain exempt under "But they give us oil" cla by FrozenFood · 2012-03-13 07:59 · Score: 1

I agree!
More blood for oil!
I think we need another campain of crusades.
Re:Bahrain exempt under "But they give us oil" cla by Lunix+Nutcase · 2012-03-13 08:01 · Score: 2

Sarcasm detector broke? He was making a quip about how the western governments turns a blind eye to these country's terrible actions to keep the oil flowing.
If the U.S. isn't on that list by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

along with other first-world nations like Australia and the U.K., then the list isn't honest or accurate.
1. Re:If the U.S. isn't on that list by Galestar · 2012-03-13 08:07 · Score: 1
  
  ^ this
  
  --
  AccountKiller
2. Re:If the U.S. isn't on that list by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 11:32 · Score: 1
  
  With your asinine comment, you have just proven that you don't know what censorship, corruption, or oppression actually are.
  Fuck off.
3. Re:If the U.S. isn't on that list by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 15:07 · Score: 0
  
  Censorship is censorship, whether gunpowder is involved or not.
4. Re:If the U.S. isn't on that list by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 21:01 · Score: 0
  
  Thanks for that.
  I'm absolutely sick at reading those silly posts.
  Not that the post itself exists (everyone experience youth at one point), but at the fact that this nonsense get modded up.
Re:Hm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:03 · Score: 0, Troll

Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.
Re:I bought an iPad! by JustAnotherIdiot · 2012-03-13 08:04 · Score: 2

An iPad? Pfff, that's so last hour. The iPad 45 came out a few minutes ago.

--
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Hypocrisy now by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:10 · Score: 0

I've seen my blog censored by Google, de-indexed from their search results. Technorati went even further, and not only censored the blog, censored any other website that re-posted entries contained within.
And then when I came here to protest this censorship, I was censored here too.
Same thing happened on reddit.
From my point of view, all of this hand-waving Americans do about censorship overseas is nonsense. It's a pose. Nothing more.
1. Re:Hypocrisy now by Qzukk · 2012-03-13 11:11 · Score: 1
  
  I was censored here too.
  No, you were modded down. Anyone who wants to read at 0 or -1 can see it.
  You'd need proof to convince me that your post was deleted. I've even bookmarked links that I've used the new flag feature to flag as spam, and checked on them (yep, still there).
  
  --
  If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Russia is there; why not U.S.? by cpu6502 · 2012-03-13 08:11 · Score: 4, Informative

"The 'under surveillance' list also includes Russia, which has used cyber-attacks and has arrested bloggers and netizens to prevent a real online political debate."
The U.S. has done the same (usually with a false claim of copyright infringement)
.

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Mod this Down - WRONG by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:13 · Score: 1

Anybody with a half a clue would know that Bahrain has little oil and it certainly isn't a factor the reason it is friendly with Western governments.
Thus, moderator, please mod the parent down to oblivion for being utterly and completely wrong.
Facts 1 - elrous0 0.
1. Re:Mod this Down - WRONG by jaymemaurice · 2012-03-13 18:21 · Score: 1
  
  I would think Bahrain is a nice buffer from Iran in control of the straights (indirectly related to oil) and is quite close with Saudi (indirectly related to oil) and the stability of Bahrain is important to regional interests (indirectly related to oil). But that said... come to the region and you will find that there is more then just oil. There is a different way of thinking that is not all bad. And much of the western media and pop culture about the region leaves me scratching my head thinking WTF?
  
  --
  120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
2. Re:Mod this Down - WRONG by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 22:18 · Score: 0
  
  Well, if freedom, the way it's been applied to the Arab Spring movements, is applied here to Bahrein, it would have a Shia regime pretty close to Iran. That's what would happen if RWB had its way - the mobs everywhere would win out. It's not that RWB is going according to Western interests, it's just that RWB looks only at the ethical lapses of regimes, but overlooks the ethical lapses of populaces, so that a regime trying to oppress, say, honor-killing clans gets the shaft, while those honor killing clans go immune from criticism.
Re:I bought an iPad! by pankkake · 2012-03-13 08:25 · Score: 1

Product numbers are so 2011.
I have the new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new iPad.
> Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition.

--
Kill all hipsters.
Every government by Hentes · 2012-03-13 08:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

Governments of Earth tend to view the Internet as a threat to their power.
Re:Hm by MysteriousPreacher · 2012-03-13 08:25 · Score: 1

President Obama, don't you think that slogan of yours is a wee bit negative. Even if you end up going toe to toe with Santorum, you'll still need something that speaks more to your strengths.

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:Hm by forkfail · 2012-03-13 08:28 · Score: 1

doublethink r plusplusgood

--
Check your premises.
Re:I bought an iPad! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:42 · Score: 1

Enjoy the Koolaid... You may be happy to spend your money on over-priced toys, for no reason other than your loyalty to the HOLY APPLE (a company INTERESTED IN MAKING PROFITS!)
While you're wasting money on Apple junk, I'm saving a fortune by sitting sobbing in a darkened room, my solitary sorrow punctuated only by brief posts on Slashdot, the hourly self-conscious wank, and checking outside my door to see if mother has left me some sandwiches.
Enjoy your walled garden!
USA needs to be on this list. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 08:44 · Score: 0

In the #1 position.
We're #1! Go usa!
Add Canada by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 09:01 · Score: 0

Due to this clause of an upcoming copyright bill
-change enabler provision to providing a service primarily for the purpose of enabling acts of infringement
and this clause
-a new limitation on disclosure of security flaws that requires advance notice to the copyright owner unless it is in the public interest to have it disclosed without such notice
ADD the spying internet bill....and its all dead....BYE no more archiving sites.Can't prove in some cases whom owns copyright thus would be breaking law.THUS any programing done anonymously is now illegal to host ...
Re:Hm by tqk · 2012-03-13 09:16 · Score: 1

Ah I think I understand now, if cash can be speech then why not bullets and tanks? They convey much more of a message IMO.
I think it depends on who you're trying to get the message to, and current conditions. A whisper to your wife in bed usually works, but King George, Muammar Ghadaffi, and Hosni Mubarak took a bit stronger amplitude.
The *AAs may be completely deaf from all indications so far.

--
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
Where's the US? by g0bshiTe · 2012-03-13 09:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'd say that the US is the biggest enemy overall to the internet. I mean those others are just censoring for their people. The US has decided to censor it for the world. And if they can't do that, they'll just seize the domain.

--
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
1. Re:Where's the US? by unixisc · 2012-03-13 22:21 · Score: 1
  
  The US (I'm talking the public at large, not the government) is an enemy to the internet for dragging its feet in converting to IPv6.
I agree, why? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 11:55 · Score: 0

Just like the printing press was feared pretty much! Fact is, I know a FAIRLY high ranking field grade officer in the military (or two over time due to work as well as personal life) - HOWEVER, the problem is, misinformation & propoganda is also possible online, along with "the truth" (problem is, who's truth, right?):
One's told me, point-blank, they & the "FEDS" (insert whatever agency you want here) HATE "GEEKS", and yes, they fear the internet (they should IF they're pulling crap, because you can own every newspaper on the planet, even TV stations & radio stations too, but you CANNOT OWN THE NET & edit its content or fabricate its news as easily... fact, & we all now it)!
(I.E.-> They hate hacker/cracker types FAR worse than geeks/techs etc. (we're tools for them, the 'good ones' that is), especially the person I refer to, because they have messed him up personally before (not with military data, but with personal work related stuff being delayed by infestations))...
Do I blame him? Heck no. I don't think anyone would. I am not fond of that "type" (malware makers/hacker-crackers) either, & do my best to stop them IF possible in various ways in fact + I have for decades in MANY ways.
How's that working out here? Hehe, gets me harassed online by them quite often actually... lol. Same with other guys I know into "that game"... why would I bother?? Because of what the net is, which, in my estimation @ least??? Has FAR MORE GOOD POTENTIAL, than bad.
That's why. I wish it was around for example when I was first in collegiate academia for EVERYONE really. The net's a massively powerful knowledgebase is why, where you can meet your peers (in my case coders & networkers) to share know-how with & grow by.
They are WRONG as wrong gets is why these hacker/cracker malware maker types I feel & The ONLY "GOOD" thing that type does, is expose what needs reinforcement. I try to make lemonade out of THAT lemon.
So, that said?
Well - if anyone would know, it's he. After al, He's part of their structure, as well as the fabled "Eisehower Military Industrial Complex" (which an honest politician even warned us all about decades ago).
That "complex", which face it, has money, power, & influence... is THAT the problem? No, not even that.
They're just guys trying to make a buck who are part of it, to keep their lives/family going - it's the wealthy behind the curtain who are... we all know THEY are the ones starting the wars out there, to profit by, even more.
I have to give they 1 thing: They have an EXCELLENT sense of what motivates people (not a big trick though), & how to get them to do what "the infamous they behind the curtain" want done.
AND, No - I can't spill his name, & I never would!
However, I am saying it point-blank here now as to what I was told.
Those types of guys are only doing what they're told by the "REAL POWERS THAT BE" (same as company mgt. does) - the wealthy/stockholders (majority ones & boards of directors who are usually that too). High ranking officers I have worked for professionally told me the same, how shoddily things get built, things that our military who defends us uses, JUST so they can nickle & dime profit, AND BE THE LOWEST BIDDER to get the contract (that is, when it was still "open bidded" not handed to cronies).
It's "ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS" people... not doing the right thing... far from it. I don't think it even has to be said, we all know it:
"BIG MONEY RUNS THE SHOW" & to find out who that "infamous they" are? Heck oldest rule in the world: FOLLOW THE MONEY. It's that simple, it really is.
Man, I mean... IF the people @ the top operate honestly, they have nothing to fear.
And, sure: I know my nation pulls its share of shit, often in response to what's being done to they/use, since an honest man has chains on him in rules, whereas 'bad guys' do not!
(& bad/good? ALL A POINT OF VIEW, a perspective quite often, because
Re:I bought an iPad! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 13:05 · Score: 0

I have the new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new new iPad.
That old thing? It was obsolete before you hit the "submit" button.
Another network by DanielRavenNest · 2012-03-13 13:57 · Score: 1

Homeless people with pirate boxes?
http://mxp.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/robin-meades-tuesday-morning-express-preview-controversial-scheme-pays-homeless-to-be-wifi-hotspots-at-sxsw/
+
http://torrentfreak.com/piratebox-takes-file-sharing-off-the-radar-and-offline-for-next-to-nothing-120311/
For those that want a list.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 14:32 · Score: 0

From the BBC article:
"Enemies of the internet"
Bahrain
Belarus
Burma
China
Cuba
Iran
North Korea
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Sounds familiar by shiftless · 2012-03-13 21:08 · Score: 1

You sound like a Hitler apologist, in 1932.
1. Re:Sounds familiar by interkin3tic · 2012-03-14 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  Explain, please.
2. Re:Sounds familiar by shiftless · 2012-03-14 21:19 · Score: 1
  
  What I meant was, it's easy to get too busy analyzing what HAS happened, and how its impact hasn't been "that bad", and in the process ignore the direction things are going, and thus seeing even the present, seemingly innocent/explainable actions should be considered evil in light of the whole, bigger picture.
  Also, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. If the actual outcome of a course of action is death and destruction, it doesn't matter one bit what the initial intentions were.
U.S. and EU by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 22:54 · Score: 0

I think nowadays, the real enemies of the internet are the U.S.A. and the European Union. Until quite recently, mass surveilance and censorship were terms we associated with nasty dictatorships, but nowadays, the major Western powers are far ahead on that.
In Soviet Russia by Roachie · 2012-03-14 16:34 · Score: 1

Enemies of border listed on internet!

--
This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.