In Vietnam: Being a Blogger Could Land You In Jail, Cost You Your Life

An anonymous reader writes "Bloggers in Vietnam are increasingly finding themselves thrown in jail. Despite freedom of speech being enshrined in the nation's Constitution, many who speak out against the government are thrown in jail — thanks to a new law that forbids such talk. In one desperate act, Dang Thi Kim Lieng lit herself on fire outside the Bac Lieu People's Committee building in southern Vietnam. She died of her injuries. She was protesting the detention of her daughter who was arrested for blogging against the government. Three other bloggers are scheduled be tried under section 88 of the criminal code, which relates to propaganda against the nation. A maximum sentence could carry with it 20 years in jail."

Comments

"Sounds like the United States"

[hawks5999]

Julian Assange was overheard to say.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, in the United States, you don't even have to be a resident to break the laws.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Sarten-X]

And yet you can blithely say that, posting logged in to your account, with full knowledge that your IP address and user agent string are being logged, and yet still have no fear that the US government will ever come hunting you down for your disparaging remarks.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Darkness404]

There needs to be a mod for funny but all to true.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Hatta]

We're not just talking about Assange. We're talking about thousands of Americans who took to the streets last year to exercise their constitutional right to peaceably assemble. Over 7000 people have been arrested as part of OWS, including Presidential candidate Jill Stein.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Hatta]

still have no fear that the US government will ever come hunting you down for your disparaging remarks.

Yet. If we engage in other constitutionally protected rights, such as the right to peaceably assemble, we can reasonably expect to be arrested for it. Thousands of people already have been.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[CanHasDIY]

And yet you can blithely say that, posting logged in to your account, with full knowledge that your IP address and user agent string are being logged, and yet still have no fear that the US government will ever come hunting you down for your disparaging remarks.

Spoken like someone who's never tried confronting an American politician or candidate with an opinion they don't care for, in person.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[NouberNou]

And yet there are literally hundreds of thousands of people who have never been, and never will be arrested for peaceably assembling...

Also I think your definition of reasonably might be a bit unreasonable.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[NouberNou]

Those 7000 where out of how many total protesters in the United States in 2011? In how many separate incidents did these arrests occur? What was the average arrest rate per event? You can throw out numbers like that and they seem shocking but in the big scheme of things it still comes out to be not really all that shocking, that is unless of course you are a total reactionary, which I have a feeling you are.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Hatta]

When the revolution is authoritarian, I'm proud to be reactionary. I want to take us back to a time when the Constitution was respected, and the law applied to rich and poor alike. When warrantless anything was unconscionable. When torture was punished no matter who the torturer was. When the rule of law still meant something.

Obama delivered big on the change, not so much on the hope.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Doctor_Jest]

Or this:

http://www.copblock.org/858/alaska-troopers-assault-man-with-anti-obama-sign/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6512746

Free speech knows no party affiliation. Free speech suppression is universal by both Donkey and Elephant...

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Trepidity]

Hello this is Sarten-X's newsletter subscription manager, pleased to meet you. Glad to hear of your interest in the newsletter! We will need only several small pieces of information and everything will be set:

First name:
Last name:
Email:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Social Security number:

Thanks again for your interest!

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Anonymous Coward]

still have no fear that the US government will ever come hunting you down for your disparaging remarks.

Yet. If we engage in other constitutionally protected rights, such as the right to peaceably assemble, we can reasonably expect to be arrested for it. Thousands of people already have been.

Arrested, and then free within a few hours. Vietnamese people are being thrown in prison for TWENTY YEARS, for writing on the internet. I think it is perhaps a bit egotistical to think you have problems worth mentioning in comparison. STFU?

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Sarten-X]

A candidate for the U.S. Senate was in town for a discussion panel for which I was running sound (since I volunteer as an audio technician). After the panel, she came out on stage where I was coiling cables, and we had a lovely discussion on labor unions. We presented our positions, discussed the merits and shortcomings of union power, and eventually conceded that both employers and unions too often behave like infants. It was an insightful and interesting conversation.

This is one of several similar encounters I've had over the years, though the majority of discussions I've fallen into were with more local politicians. I doubt I could say I've "confronted" any of them, because I'm not going to go out of my way to be confrontational. Though it seems popular now to call any gaudy spectacle with a political motive a "protest", I prefer to submit my protests in a more effective and less offensive manner: calm and polite discourse.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[paiute]

When the revolution is authoritarian, I'm proud to be reactionary. I want to take us back to a time when the Constitution was respected, and the law applied to rich and poor alike. When warrantless anything was unconscionable. When torture was punished no matter who the torturer was. When the rule of law still meant something.

Did you read History from Little Golden Books? There was never a time when the country resembled your fantasy.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone who blogs in Vietnam ends up in jail just as not everyone who posts a comment like the parent ends up in jail in the US. You have to have certain gravity around what you are posting or else just attempt to shut you down will create that gravity. "They" are not that dumb not do such cost benefit analysis, they only act like dump when they think it helps them.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[trout007]

As someone who values liberty I find posts like yours a bit disturbing. There really was never a time in the past where everyone had liberty. There have been times where certain people had more than today. There were even times when the total liberty was greater. But unfortunately those times were also repressive for many. Talking about going back to a certain time is going to alienate a lot of people.

I suggest talking about liberty as an unknown ideal that we should progress towards. Talk about a government that respects people's lives and property will end up protecting everyone's rights. Talk about how law (force) should only be used to protect life and private property and how that will protect everyone's rights.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Dave Emami]

We're not just talking about Assange. We're talking about thousands of Americans who took to the streets last year to exercise their constitutional right to peaceably assemble. Over 7000 people have been arrested as part of OWS, including Presidential candidate Jill Stein.

To quote from the article you linked: "Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein and her running mate have been arrested at a sit-in at a Philadelphia bank over housing foreclosures." She was arrested for trespassing, not for anything she was saying. Given the refusal of most leftists to make distinctions like that -- the conflation of "expression" or "protest" with "speech", and the attitude that their cause is so righteous that it absolves them of any need to respect the rights of others -- I would expect that the vast majority of those 7000 were arrested for how they tried to convey their message, not what that message was. Your speech rights don't entitle you to stay on private property when you're not welcome there, or to prevent your fellow citizens from using public property (say, by blocking sidewalks), to disturb the peace, or to vandalize.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[trout007]

I have to admit I am a bit afraid every time I post a pro liberty message. I have to travel by plane in a few weeks and it will be my first trip since 9/11. I am a bit curious if I'm flagged by the TSA. I'll let you know.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Black Parrot]

We're not just talking about Assange. We're talking about thousands of Americans who took to the streets last year to exercise their constitutional right to peaceably assemble. Over 7000 people have been arrested as part of OWS, including Presidential candidate Jill Stein.

I've only followed it casually, but ISTM that the problems were almost entirely limited to a few cities (NYC, Okland) where the authorities decided they needed to take a proactively militant/confrontational approach to the protests. In my town the City Council basically said "more power to you".

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Dahamma]

I'm moderately pro-OWS in their general goals (as hard to figure out as they are) but "peaceably assemble" != "camp out on public or private property for weeks at a time". If you think the founding fathers intended squatting or trespassing to be part of the First Amendment you are deluding yourself.

I'm sure there were plenty of cases of people being unjustly arrested (the occasional journalist was even detained for being at the wrong place at the wrong time) but Jill Stein in particular was NOT one of those. She was arrested after refusing to leave a bank lobby during a sit in. Again, not that I necessarily disagree with her message, but I do disagree with her expression of it. She had no more Constitutional right to "assemble" and then refuse to leave a private bank lobby than she would sitting down and refusing to leave your living room.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[shutdown -p now]

Back in Soviet days, an American tourist in Moscow decided to find out whether everything that was being said about USSR in American newspapers is true. So he stopped a passer-by and asked him if he has freedom of speech.

"What's freedom of speech?", the Russian asked.

"Well, for example, I can go straight to White House in Washington, and shout 'Reagan is an asshole', and nothing whatsoever will happen to me - that's freedom of speech."

"Oh, in that case, we have freedom of speech, too. I can go straight to the middle of the Red Square, and shout 'Reagan is an asshole' to my heart's content - and nothing whatsoever will happen to me, either."

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[trout007]

I won't be detained. But I may get extra
scrutiny.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[RabidReindeer]

When the revolution is authoritarian, I'm proud to be reactionary. I want to take us back to a time when the Constitution was respected, and the law applied to rich and poor alike. When warrantless anything was unconscionable. When torture was punished no matter who the torturer was. When the rule of law still meant something.

Did you read History from Little Golden Books? There was never a time when the country resembled your fantasy.

True, but we used to at least try to pretend it was that way. Now we don't even bother.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[RabidReindeer]

And yet you can blithely say that, posting logged in to your account, with full knowledge that your IP address and user agent string are being logged, and yet still have no fear that the US government will ever come hunting you down for your disparaging remarks.

Who needs to hunt? They can collect all they need to prosecute you courtesy of secret intercept rooms in the AT&T offices, etc. The only time they need to do any actual hunting is when someone decides you've said enough to be annnoying and wants to bring you in. By then it's a bit late.

Remember. Innocent people have nothing to hide, but they're not going to be asking YOU what determines who's "innocent".

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Anonymous Coward]

1. 1. Sell off almost all public land so that the right to assembly effectively no longer exists
2. 2. ????
3. 3. PROFIT!!

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Anonymous Coward]

Spoken like someone who's never tried confronting an American politician or candidate [progressive.org] with an opinion [niemanwatchdog.org] they don't care for, [pjmedia.com] in person

Freedom of speech doesn't guarantee you a specific audience or venue, nor does it offer protection when you force it.

Write an open letter to the politician with your grievances and publish it. When you get arrested for doing that, you'll have a legitimate gripe. If you just get ignored by everyone, that's probably a sign that your message wasn't particularly important and you were just being a jackass when you tried to force people to listen to you.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Dave Emami]

1. 1. Sell off almost all public land so that the right to assembly effectively no longer exists

... except that Jill Stein was not trespassing at the bank because she lacked someplace to hold an assembly. She could have voiced her opinion elsewhere just fine. She was trespassing because she wanted to embarrass the bank and draw attention to herself. Her desire to accomplish those goals did not entitle her to violate the rights of others. She had no more right to hold a protest inside the bank than the bank would have to conduct business in her living room.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[artor3]

"Yet" is such a lazy cop-out. You can use it to insinuate absolutely anything, and never be proven wrong.

Lunatic: "Americans eat a dozen new-born babies every Thursday morning!"
Sane Person: "What? No they don't! There's no evidence of that, and moreover, it's physically impossible given the length of human pregnancy."
Lunatic: "Not yet, but just you wait. I saw a person eat a Big Mac last week; they'll start eating babies any day now."

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Dahamma]

Why on earth do Americans still lionize a collection of individuals who had hundreds of slaves each? Why are these considered exemplary human beings? And it tends to be those most vocal about liberty who lionize them the most, which is quite hilarious when you consider said slave ownership.

First, your comment is an ad-hominem and is irrelevant to the discussion (and also an incorrect generalization - many of those at the Constitutional Convention had no slaves, and some were abolitionists).

And second, it was generally the opposite of my point, really. The real question is why do people try to interpret (or in your words, "lionize") a 230 year old document written by these individuals they seem to despise so *literally* without regard to societal and technological changes over time? You are somehow trying to attack me for pointing out the authors of the First Amendment would not consider this peaceable assembly while also trying to use their writing broadly to defend your point. It's inconsistent at best, and more like hypocritical.

Thirdly, refusing to leave someone's PRIVATE property (especially inside their building or residence) is not and has never been considered "peaceful assembly" by the Federal government. It's called trespassing. If you disagree, cite examples if you can...

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[TranquilVoid]

The problem would have ended and would have been very unlikely to repeat.

I disagree on both counts. Given that Assange was in a country that was a firm U.S. ally then declaring war (missiles into a sovereign country) would create far more problems than it would solve. Admittedly it is debated, but U.S. interference encouraged terrorism, and in fact, the very leaks you are proposing even more heavy-handedness would stop.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[LynnwoodRooster]

I travel 15-20 times a year (11-12 International trips, balance domestic) and have been very vocal about liberty, and active in the political community. No issues from TSA... I think you're assuming the US Government is more capable and intelligent than it really is...

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[LynnwoodRooster]

Yes, the OWS movement... Your right to peaceably assemble stops when it interferes with the right of free movement of tens of thousands of others...

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[TranquilVoid]

I think our ideas on how to behave toward others, manage a society and diplomacy are too different to get far here, but a couple of points;

Assange is leaking military secrets intended to kill US servicemen in a war authorized by our Congress

That's not a fair analysis of Wikileak's intentions. If it were they would have redacted nothing. Their intention is to reveal 'unethical' behaviour and embarass the U.S. government into behaving better.

Don't we have any goddamned spies anymore? We should have stuck a shiv [..] quiet and off the public radar.

Why off the public radar, unless you think the government knows best and the opinion of the people should be disregarded? This is the sort of behaviour Wikileaks attempts to reveal because most people disagree with it. Information furthers democracy.

Spying is a strange endeavour, borderline illegal, basically declaring war without declaring war. If the U.S. is allowed to send spies to assassinate people in other countries when it considers they are acting in a warlike way towards them, then shouldn't other countries be allowed to do the same on U.S. soil? You may argue that the U.S. is in the right and other countries are in the wrong, but unless you think the U.S. government is, and will remain, infallible then Wikileaks serves as an important check.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Kittenman]

Ok, I'll bite.. you believe that Assange leaked military secrets to kill US servicemen? Really? I mean, Really?

And you're proposing fixing this sort of issue by throwing some missiles into a neutral country (that happens to be harbouring Assange, but that may be unaware of his actions and is in no way responsible for them) to destroy the DataCentre? Again, Really?

I do agree with you about the failure of intelligence however. I've a nasty feeling that Assange may have ended up dead in a 'road accident' or some such happening, however... and though Assange wouldn't be someone I'd want to have 'round my place for a beer on games night, that's murder.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[nighthawk243]

Releasing unofficially Redacted classified documents is still leaking classified documents. Unless it is declassified officially, it is considered a classified document and must only be accessed by those with the proper clearance level and need to know. Those who release or view documents that are still classified are subject to prosecution. Just because some idiot leaked the documents doesn't mean they're magically declassified.

I'm not even sure why this is showing in the comments. There is a big difference between openly displaying classified material on the open internet and blogging one's gripes about the Vietnamese government.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[rubycodez]

The United State's government forfeits its rights to hold secrets when it acts against the Contitution and against the will of the People, do to evil acts of mass murder and plundering and power mongering. The elite with our government in its pockets needs to be opposed.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[nighthawk243]

Legally you're allowed to. Whether or not corrupt judges and cops (unfortunately common) in that particular jurisdiction want to play by those rules is a completely different matter.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Areyoukiddingme]

"It's a joke, son." -Foghorn Leghorn

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[hairyfeet]

Uhhh...the US government covered up for a PMC that was SELLING LITTLE KIDS to get better arms deals. Oh and that was the SECOND TIME they had been caught pulling that shit, the first was in Kosovo.

I'm sorry but your right to get on a high horse dies when you cover up for child rapists, the end.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[jkflying]

He isn't inside the US, and isn't a citizen of the US, therefore he can't be a traitor for releasing documents on the US, even if the US wanted them kept secret.

Yes, they probably should have asked the datacenter to disconnect him, however even if they had agreed, as the datacenter probably had a contract with Wikileaks, the local court could have ordered them to resume service. That's what happens when another country makes demands somewhere they don't have any sovereignty, people don't tend to listen. How would you feel if Spain suddenly decided that the website you are hosting says things that they would rather keep secret, so they threaten to send missiles in if you won't remove the site? You'd probably laugh them off. Well, Europe feels much the same about the US.

Following a refusal with missiles probably would have caused several embargos on the US from around the world. Certainly from Europe, South America, and Australia. I suspect a lot of countries would start refusing entry for US tourists, and the resultant backlash from the US population on whoever ordered the attacks would be enormous. Mostly, however, it would make Assange a martyr, which is the last thing the US wants. Right now he is a loner with sex scandal charges hanging over him. Take him out, and thousands will rise up in his place.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[jkflying]

Assange is leaking military secrets intended to kill US servicemen in a war authorized by our Congress

You are an idiot if you think he is doing it to try to kill servicemen. And I hate the name servicemen, it sounds like plumbers and carpenters. Call them what they are: soldiers. Be honest and stop trying to give them a nice name. They kill for a living, and they accept the risk of death as part of their occupational hazards.

Nothing he has leaked has resulted in anybody dying. So your entire argument is invalid.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[jkflying]

They're still classified IN THE U.S. The rest of the world couldn't care less what the US thinks should be classified, even if they will toady to the US a bit because they want the US to buy their stuff.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[jkflying]

Congress and the American People serve as the check on our government.

Congress and the American People can only serve as a check if they have the information which will enable them to form a correct opinion. Wikileaks provides this information. The government classifies anything which might otherwise upset the people or cause bigwigs in fancy government offices to lose their jobs, creating the need for an entity like Wikileaks to exist in the first place.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Anonymous Coward]

"No. Congress and the American People serve as the check on our government." How can the people hold the government accountable for something that they don't know about. I mean the government loaned 15 trillion in illegal loans during a recession, and these were only found out because of an audit. And as far as I know no one was ever held accountable for any of the 15 trillion, even though it counts against our national debt, and hurts us directly. Who voted for SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, TIPP, etc... How do we hold them accountable for these? Saying one thing, and actually doing it are different things. Government officials can vote their own raises, get benefits the rest of us can only dream about, get to make decisions that directly effect out lives, have salaries that the rest of us wish we could get, and the worst they face if they do something wrong is that they loose their job. They still get to keep the money the made while in office, the decisions the made that effected us negatively don't get removed or repealed, they don't face jail time, and in some cases they even get to keep their benefits. Remind me again exactly what accountability they have?

I agree that what Wikileak's did was wrong, but there needs to be an organization that is check-able that handles what Wikileak's did in an ethical fashion, and it needs to have the power to actually uphold the will of the people. Without something like that how are we ever going to restore the reputation that the United States once had, a reputation that out politicians have dragged through the mud, and we can do nothing about.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[epyT-R]

I might agree with you if the feds weren't a mercenary government that no longer follows the law.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[gdy]

Refusal should have been swiftly followed by a Hellfire missle or three.

Good luck doing it to Russia or China or any other country having nukes and balls. Exactly this kind of imperial attitude makes countries like Iran want to have nukes too.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[MachineShedFred]

And every one of those 7000+ would be released within 24 hours if there wasn't a charge to back it up - a legal charge under a statute already on the books, tested and proven to be Constitutional.

Never mind that these protesters were being arrested for possession of controlled substances, vandalism, trespassing, assault, criminal mischief, etc. No, they were being locked up because they were "peaceably assembling."

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[sociocapitalist]

Uhhh...the US government covered up for a PMC that was SELLING LITTLE KIDS to get better arms deals. Oh and that was the SECOND TIME they had been caught pulling that shit, the first was in Kosovo.

I'm sorry but your right to get on a high horse dies when you cover up for child rapists, the end.

References?

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[hairyfeet]

Wikileaks, look up "children sold" and you'll find it quick enough, it was Afghanistan and Kosovo and IIRC the PMC was Blackwater. They sold 10 year old boys in Afghanistan, 11 year old girls in Kosovo, and the American embassy was told "bury it".

I'm at work and fixing to head on a call so don't have time to look it up for you, but the Wiki search should take you right to it, just hope you haven't had lunch when you read what our sick fucking government covered up, it will make you wanna puke.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[Johann Lau]

Intentions mean nothing.

Which is why you claimed then, only to say it doesn't matter when you got refuted?

the Truth never truly comes out, all wheels within wheels. Turtles all the way down.

You wish dude, you wish.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[mcgrew]

Being held for 24 hours is the same as being convicted of something and oredered to serve 24 hours in jail. When you're detained, they don't put you in a comfy chair in a comfortable room, they put you in an orange jumpsuit, barely feed you, give you a thin plastic matress about an inch thick on a concrete slab, locked up, often with violent prisoners who have been convicted of crimes.

Being held for 24 hours IS punishment in and of itself. Punishment without trial, I might add.

Re:"Sounds like the United States"

[mcgrew]

Here in Springfield, IL they arrested a coupe of people for criticizing a state congressman by writing their message in chalk on the public sidewalk, just as children do every day. They were charged with vandalism, even though the chalk is gone after the first rain, and no children have ever been arrested or even warned about writing in chalk on public sidewalks.

But at least these protesters weren't beaten, so yeah, it matters where.

No, I am not a blogger

[fustakrakich]

Let's hope they learn how to use proxies and to remain anonymous.

freedom of speech: Vietnam Edition

[v1]

You're free to talk about anything you want to. Unless we don't like what you say, in which case we will lock you up or kill you. Have a nice day.

Funny how governments (usually of the oppressive variety) are deathly scared of people voicing their opinions of them or outing them publicly.

Just how oppressive is Vientnam's government? That's not one I usually hear tossed around with Cuba, North Korea etc. IMHO any government that makes it a crime to speak negatively in public about the government, ruling party, president, or king, is oppressive just from that alone.

Re:freedom of speech: Vietnam Edition

[_merlin]

You have to be somewhat subtle about political commentary. You can't just print it on the front page of the newspaper. However, there are certain soap operas on TV that are obviously thinly veiled criticism of government figures and policies. Corruption is rife, there's a bit gap between the richest and the poorest, health care is expensive but it doesn't bankrupt anyone, they're even stricter on drug crimes than US (death penalty for possession of over 500g). It's not a bad place to live if it's where you want to live, just different trade-offs.

Re:freedom of speech: Vietnam Edition

[ohnocitizen]

We need to track abuses and publicize that tracking (UN Global Compact - Freedom of Speech (click background to view a map)). We then need to make consistent PR moves against all forms of oppression - especially political freedoms. When a government restricts political freedoms they send a clear message: "Our grasp on power is tenuous, we are cowardly, and we fear our own people.". We need to send a message in return: "We support your people, but look down on your government. As long as you restrict political freedoms such as freedom of expression, everything you do will be tainted."

Re:freedom of speech: Vietnam Edition

[J Story]

IMHO any government that makes it a crime to speak negatively in public about the government, ruling party, president, or king, is oppressive just from that alone.

Suppression of dissent implies that a regime has few arguments on its side beyond "might makes right". Its politicians and ruling class have essentially conceded the truth of the criticism levelled against them. What is even worse, however, is that, removed from the glare of public opinion, corruption will flourish, dragging the country down even more.

Meet your developing world net freedom activists

[metrometro]

Some folks who do good work in the less-famous parts of the Internet:

https://www.theengineroom.org/

http://opennet.net/

http://globalintegrity.org/

https://www.eff.org/

Disclosure: I've worked for two of these, though not recently.

Lame title

[noh8rz7]

The title of the post should be, "In Vietnam: being a blogger could land you in jail; setting yourself on fire could cost you your life".

Where is the Supreme Court?

[cpu6502]

If freedom of speech is enshrined in the Viet Constitution, why isn't the Supreme Court (or equivalent) releasing these people and protecting the constitutional law?

Re:Where is the Supreme Court?

[Fned]

"Dammit! I KNEW we forgot something...."

- Vietnamese Constitution authors

Re:Where is the Supreme Court?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same reason it's happening in America. Gov't likes the power. The only difference is that the US gov't hides it better. For example, there are actually lists of topics that churches are not allowed to preach about. One of them is politics.

Re:Where is the Supreme Court?

[Black Parrot]

Same reason it's happening in America. Gov't likes the power. The only difference is that the US gov't hides it better. For example, there are actually lists of topics that churches are not allowed to preach about. One of them is politics.

AIUI, that's just for maintaining their tax exempt status.

Re:Where is the Supreme Court?

[shutdown -p now]

Freedom of speech was also enshrined in the constitution of the USSR (even the one that was enacted under Stalin in 1933), and is enshrined today in the constitution of China.

Any constitution is just a piece of paper, unless enough people believe otherwise, and unless those people are willing to act on their beliefs.

Re:Where is the Supreme Court?

[RabidReindeer]

Ever read the Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR)? It was quite high-minded.

Sometimes a constitution is just a piece of paper.

Re:Where is the Supreme Court?

[LynnwoodRooster]

If freedom of speech is enshrined in the Viet Constitution, why isn't the Supreme Court (or equivalent) releasing these people and protecting the constitutional law?

Much like here in China (I split time between the US and China), freedom of speech is enshrined in the Vietnamese constitution. However, just like the US, it does not protect you from negative results from your speech - like shouting "FIRE!" in a movie theater in the US will get you arrested. In these fascist oligarchical countries (China and Vietnam) they stretch the negative results to include "political instability" and "lack of faith in the central Government". So you can speak all you want, but if it's determined to foment political instability, then it will be interpreted as generally hurting everyone else and thus you pay the price for the results of your actions.

In the US, we tend to be more liberal in what we interpret as "negative results" of free speech, but you can bet if you published a manifesto detailing your plan to assassinate the President, blow up Congress, and eliminate the Supreme Court that you'll have a heck of a lot of scrutiny and possible legal repercussions as well...

DISCLAIMER

[menno_h]

Our blogging service will not be held responsible for blog-induced damage to life, limb and human rights if the name of the country in which the blogging took place includes any of the following words; 'people', 'republic' or 'democratic', unless multiple nongovernmental proxies and an up to date Liberte Linux live cd are used.

Curbing Nationalism

[D H NG]

The Vietnamese government has a fine line to tread. Due to the current territorial disputes with China, there is a resurgence of Sinophobia among the populace in Vietnam. The Vietnamese government doesn't want to antagonize the Chinese government and jeopardize a huge trading relationship, but it also doesn't want to appear to be caving to the Chinese. It had shown remarkable restraints in allowing anti-China protests to proceed, but recently it had been curbing them because the protestors attention is now focussing on the government itself.

Misleading Title

[Dean Edmonds]

The title of this article claims that being a blogger in Vietnam could cost you your life. But the only person to lose their life was a non-blogger who set herself on fire in protest at the new law. So a more accurate title would be, "In Vietnam: Being a Blogger Could Land You In Jail. Setting Yourself On Fire Could Cost You Your Life".

Re:Misleading Title

[Black Parrot]

The title of this article claims that being a blogger in Vietnam could cost you your life. But the only person to lose their life was a non-blogger who set herself on fire in protest at the new law. So a more accurate title would be, "In Vietnam: Being a Blogger Could Land You In Jail. Setting Yourself On Fire Could Cost You Your Life".

Or: "Being a Blogger Could Cost Someone Else Their Life by a Rather Indirect Mechanism".

Re:Misleading Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, quite a few of bloggers have disappeared over the years with flimsy 'evidences' for their 'crimes' or even without trial at all. A famous blogger was arrested first by the law against adultery, the 'evidence' was 2 used condoms. And after he was arrested, the police raided his house and 'found' some evidence on his computer that he violated the 88 article (propaganda against the government), and now he is sentenced for ~6 years in jail. Many other bloggers have been jailed in the similar way, and there has been no news regarding their lives for their families, nobody knows if they are still alive or already dead.

And that is not all, many were defamed on state media, while they have even been prosecuted by law. So what did they do? Outspoken against corruption, illegal land grabbing of local authority and participated in recent anti-china demonstrations. That is not all, the local police will do everything to make your life miserable: your children won't be able to study in university, you will face harder problem finding a job and sometimes they even hire thug to beat you.

So in short, if they hate you, they can and will make you regret your decision and even worse, not only you, but also your family, your relatives etc... And why? They have seen what happened to the USSR and the recent Arab Spring revolution, they don't want it, that is for sure. But most if not all civil servants are now extremely corrupted, the economy is going down the hill, the inflation hit 23%, the people life is getting harder and harder everyday. Now what we need is a big reset button...

Posting anonymously for an obvious reason, it saddens me that a tech-oriented site such as slashdot still hasn't support https yet...

Re:Misleading Title

[LynnwoodRooster]

And thus Government could execute the blogger as well, for involuntary homicide?

Re:I say

[mehaiku]

We could bring Freedom
And Democracy to them
If they had some oil

"Cost you your life"?

[neminem]

In traditional slashdot fashion, I'm posting this without actually reading the article rather than just the summary, but according to the summary, apparently what will cost you your life is if you decide to make a grand-but-probably-ultimately-pointless gesture and commit suicide to protest something, which is kind of tautologically true regardless of what you're protesting, or where.

Meanwhile, everyone also already knows that in Vietnam, you can get thrown in jail for doing just about anything, or nothing, so also in traditional slashdot fashion, I will say: "this is news?"

Re:Waiting for the repenting...

[hondo77]

You really missed the whole point, didn't you? It wasn't our fight! Seriously, try and learn something from history.

Western Governments do this too

[CuteSteveJobs]

In the West jailing people for criticising the government would be unpopular, so they find more subtle but equally effective ways to do it. These silence not just bloggers, but journalists too: The easiest of these is libel laws. US Citizens are lucky that their Right to Free Speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but citizens in other supposedly liberal democracies have no such protection.

Libel Law: "In theory, the objective of defamation laws is to balance protection of individual reputation with freedom of expression. In practice, defamation laws are frequently used as a means of chilling speech. A threat of (costly) defamation proceedings and damages, whether or not a plaintiff's claim is likely to be upheld by a court, is often used to silence criticism not only by a particular person or group but also as a threat to others."
https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/defamation.html

The UK defamation bill will do little to stop corporations suing individuals and should include a public interest defence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jun/27/libel-reform-get-right-defamation-bill

UK Libel reform campaigners demand better public interest defence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jun/27/libel-reform-campaigners-public-interest-defence

It doesn't affect only bloggers: Even journalists are restricted by what they can say:
http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Resources/medialaw_in_australia_02.html

Explanation of UK Libel Law
http://www.urban75.org/info/libel.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law

The Australian Journalist's Defamation Checklist: Can you run this story?
http://www.hss.bond.edu.au/defamkit/

And if they report something embarassing to the Government, then it is jail time:
http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Resources/medialaw_in_australia_06.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Secrets_Act
http://www.caslon.com.au/secrecyguide4.htm

The government redacted 90% of the recent proposal to snoop on Internet Usage. You would think the public have a right to know, but it's National Security if they say it is:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/no-minister-90-of-web-snoop-document-censored-to-stop--premature-unnecessary-debate-20100722-10mxo.html

Re:Western Governments do this too

[Anonymous Coward]

US has libel laws too. More importantly, the most crazy variety are so called "Food libel laws" can get you in jail for a very long time, simply for filming stuff you are not suppose to film, or speaking against a food.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_libel_laws
http://www.cspinet.org/foodspeak/oped/food_sedition.html

These are not just civil law, these are criminal laws where you can be sent to jail.

There is an old saying. Find me a man, and I'll find a paragraph (law) against him. This was used in context of the Inquisition, but I think it predates it. In today's world, if someone in the government doesn't like you, you have a problem.

unmod post

[YrWrstNtmr]

misclick needs to be reversed

Re:I say

[Black Parrot]

We go to WAR!!! That will teach them.

We're talking about blogs, not oil reserves.

Re:Waiting for the repenting...

[Black Parrot]

This goes out to all those hippies who flew Viet Cong flags and were oh so sure that if the Evil Wicked Americans would just lose the Vietnam War that the peaceful VC would make a wonderful People's Republic and everything would be rainbow shitting unicorns

Name a few?

Or you you ready to admit you were just traitors yet and that it wasn't even in a good cause?

Funny sentiment to express in a discussion about governments suppressing free speech.

Whose side are you on?

Re:Waiting for the repenting...

[Black Parrot]

hindsight is always 20/20

It didn't take much hindsight to realize that the USA took over a failed French colonial war. And tried to prop a brutal dictator.

It also doesn't take much wit to find a few basic facts with Teh Google, though you've apparently only got half enough.

Re:Waiting for the repenting...

[Black Parrot]

Are you off your meds again?

Probably he's sitting in his rocker, listening to Barry Sadler and having traumatic flashbacks about some Damn Hippie that spit on him when he was home on leave in 1968.

Re:Waiting for the repenting...

[RabidReindeer]

This goes out to all those hippies who flew Viet Cong flags and were oh so sure that if the Evil Wicked Americans would just lose the Vietnam War that the peaceful VC would make a wonderful People's Republic and everything would be rainbow shitting unicorns... OK ASSHOLES, you got your wish. It has been a generation now, where is the paradise? Or you you ready to admit you were just traitors yet and that it wasn't even in a good cause? Eh? I can't hear you.

More like LALALA I CANT HEAR YOU, isn't it?

What I remember is that if we let Vietnam go, there would be a Domino Effect that would turn all of Asia Communist, followed by invasion of the USA and we'd all end up listening to some fat clown on the radio telling us how to think so we could echo it back.

And, BTW, I hope you're not wearing Nikes. Vietnam won the war, but the capitalists have been doing a pretty tidy job of subverting their goals, I'd say.

Re:Waiting for the repenting...

[Black Parrot]

Forgive me for undercutting the basis for your idiotical ideological rant, but the VC don't run Viet Nam and never did. The government of the north disbanded them in 1975.

I'm willing to name names

[wisebabo]

A long long time ago when Senator John Kerry was running for president, I was at a small event in Los Angeles.

In front of some local media, I confronted him about his "hockey goal" ad in which he (dressed as a goal keeper) said he would protect against Japanese imports. I said his ad (and the tone of his campaign) was contributing to the recent spike in anti-Asian American violence around the country (I'm Asian American).

He said he, of course, didn't mean for it to be construed that way and didn't mean to stigmatize hard working Asian Americans blah, blah. After that I don't think the ad was pulled or altered. However, I DID notice he would, when speaking about Asian imports, would often make a distinction between Asian competitors overseas and Asian citizens at home. Yay!

Even so I wholeheartedly agree that many politicians are lying, scheming scumbags only out for themselves. However censorship in the U.S. compared to some other countries? Give me a break. You're probably one of those people who like arguing for the sake of arguing and make the Internet (and the world) a miserable place to be in. Go away or become a lawyer.

Insecure government = censorship

[wisebabo]

The government here is afraid that its hold on power is weak and that it lacks/is losing legitimacy. After the Vietnam war of course, the government was all powerful and seen as the victorious savior of the country (against the world's greatest power no less!).

Now, more than a generation later, with a youthful population that was mostly born after the war those memories are fading.

So the government mainly tries to keep things stable while it quietly plunders (through corruption) the country. It tries to defuse tensions by being very tentative with its actions; when some farmers killed some police who were reappropriating their land, the central government first hauled the local police/officials into court to charge them with illegal trespass (or something like that). Then they got the farmers. Laws are usually first proposed (I think) and then, depending on the reaction, implemented (or not). It can make for a confusing regulatory situation.

This of course, is very unlike China which rules with an iron fist. They put down a huge number of violent "incidents" (protests involving more than 500 people) every year. This allows them to push through projects at a mindboggling speed (need a neighborhood cleared for a highway or polluting factory? No problem!) The stakes are very very high in China and they're playing for keeps.

Getting back to the Vietnamese government: censorship is done out of insecurity that it will allow enough people to mass together (I guess this is always the case). Their blocking of some social media though is surprisingly weak, many Vietnamese friends I know use Facebook and access YouTube constantly, so there doesn't seem to be a "Great Firewall of Vietnam". Then again due to rising prosperity tensions weren't too bad(?) so maybe they haven't needed to really enforce it (these sites have been blocked from time to time). So actually I don't think censorship is as bad, as say China. (See below the post about indirect criticism of the government on traditional media).

Unfortunately for the government, the economy is really tanking now and they don't seem to have an external enemy they can focus the public's attention on. Their one great international dispute is with China over the Spratly and Paracell Islands (and the rest of the "South China" sea). However, unlike their previous war with China in the 70s, they are going to their heads handed back to them on a platter if they escalate this militarily (the Chinese are now, by far, the dominant regional military power).

With a very large gap between rich and poor (I see Rolls Royces, Bentlys and Maybachs here which, after tax can cost up to a million US in a country with a per cap income of about 1K per year), and a depressed economy, the government may welll start to really censor social media.

Tyrants tyrannize, what else is new?

[russotto]

If they're feeling particularly evil, they'll make the daughter pay for the cost of extinguishment through extra labor in prison.

Another reason we need to have guns

[ub3r n3u7r4l1st]

so that when these schmucks shows up the door we can give them at least some fight before we die.

Whoever managed to streamline delivery of automatic weapons into China, North Korea, Vietnam, Iran etc. and arm their rebels will be the richest man on earth.

Re:nothing changed..

[outsider007]

I will assume by your use of scare quotes that you do not consider the Vietnamese to be people. How racist of you.

Citation needed

[INowRegretThesePosts]

Yet. If we engage in other constitutionally protected rights, such as the right to peaceably assemble, we can reasonably expect to be arrested for it. Thousands of people already have been.

Source?

shill. liar.

[rubycodez]

The U.S. is not involved in any war; the Constitution lays out the procedure for Congress to declare war. We are attacking people who did not attack us, we are mass murdering and maiming for resources and political coin.

Hyperbole. Does not compare.

[INowRegretThesePosts]

Spoken like someone who's never tried confronting an American politician or candidate [progressive.org] with an opinion [niemanwatchdog.org] they don't care for, [pjmedia.com] in person.

In the last link, the guy was arrested for a short while, and he will likely sue the police station for damages. In the second link, we read

almost all of which stem from protests involving nonviolent civil disobedience

I know this kind of people - I would not be surprised if "nonviolent civil disobedience" means invading public buildings, stopping traffic in a key avenue without authorization, and other "please arrest me so I can claim to be a victim" tactics.

In the first link, the victims were arrested for a short while and were awarded $80,000 !

In short: the situation in America is not remotely comparable to the situation in Vietnam. Duh.

The number of heartless assholes on Slashdot...

[Areyoukiddingme]

The number of heartless assholes on Slashdot really boggle my mind.

You're posting to correct the headline, because it was the blogger's mother who died of burns, not the blogger? Really? THAT is what you want to talk about?

It used to be that self-immolation actually caused people to wake up and do something about a massive injustice, with the support of all onlookers. Now you want to sit and quibble about the fucking headline. Somebody burned herself to death in protest of the unjust imprisonment of her daughter and you assholes are arguing over whether or not Viet Nam War protestors in the US are traitors.

I hate you all.

The United States must invade Vietnam immediately

[maroberts]

I'm sure it will work and they'll grant freedom of speech and preserve human rights and that the Vietnamese will welcome them with open arms.....

How come no protest from USA ?

[Taco Cowboy]

When China arrested its dissidents, USA protested

When Russia harassed its dissidents, USA protested

When Syria threatened its dissidents, USA protested

But when Vietnam did that, USA just keep quite, very very quite

Why??
 

Re:How come no protest from USA ?

[mcgrew]

But when Vietnam did that, USA just keep quite, very very quite

Quite what? Don't keep us in suspense, man!

Do something!

[Tablizer]

They are turning into draconian commies. Let's start a war against Vietnam immediately!......oh, wait

Not just the USA, Holland too

[SmallFurryCreature]

The Russian girl group Pussy Riot is in jail for daring to challenge Poetin during a protest.

The Dutch government is protesting. But a Dutch protester who threw a small candle (the kind that go under tea pots) against the golden carriage carrying the queen has been in jail for two years.

And no, minor acts of vandalism are NOT typically sentenced like this. Throw ice-balls causing damage to cars and you don't even get arrested. But dare to do it against the absolute ruler and BAM, in jail for two years.

Democracy, you say you have it, so you don't have to do it.

So what?

[MachineShedFred]

Let me guess, because there's no formal declaration of war, that means that it's just more of the US Government eroding the Constitution and making the founding fathers spin in their graves, right?

Well, I need to ask if you think that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison were also somehow going against what the founding fathers wanted? They WERE the founding fathers, and used this in each of their administrations.

Congress has authorized the use of military force in the following years, for the countries and reasons listed, without a formal declaration of war:
France (protect shipping in the war we weren't part of) 1798
Tripoli (protect shipping from piracy based in what we call Libya today) 1802
Algeria (beat the crap out of their navy for seizing US shipping vessels during the war of 1812) 1815
Suppression of Piracy (more protection of shipping, but this time in the Caribbean) 1819-1823
Formosa (Eisenhower wanted to make sure the new Communist government in China didn't get too frisky with Taiwan) 1955
MiddleEast (Congressional authorization of US forces to assist countries against communist takeover) 1957
Southeast Asia (Gulf of Tonkin resolution - Vietnam War) 1964
Lebanon (Marine deployment as a part of a multinational force) 1983
Iraq (Desert Shield / Desert Storm) 1991
Terrorist Attacks against the United States (Afghanistan) 2001
Authorization for Use of Force Against Iraq (Second Iraq War) 2002

The statutory authorization of use of force is hardly new - it goes back to when the country was founded. It's a tool that Congress can use to limit the scope of engagement without activating many executive powers that come with a formal declaration of war. Here's a nice big fat PDF from the US Department of State covering all of this.

Julian Assange is being prosecuted for rape

[INowRegretThesePosts]

Julian Assange is being prosecuted for rape in a well-recognized first-world democracy.

I assure you: if this guy was a Tea Party leader, and was accused of rape in Sweden, everyone here would say "rot in jail you rapist!". But because he shares the bias of Slashdot, then he is portrayed as an innocent hero.