Online Law Banning Discussion of Current Affairs Comes Into Force In Vietnam

another random user writes in with news about new internet restrictions come into effect in Vietnam. "A controversial law banning Vietnamese online users from discussing current affairs has come into effect. The decree, known as Decree 72, says blogs and social websites should not be used to share news articles, but only personal information. The law also requires foreign internet companies to keep their local servers inside Vietnam. The new law specifies that social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook should only be used 'to provide and exchange personal information.' It also prohibits the online publication of material that "opposes" the Vietnamese government or 'harms national security.' Last month the US embassy in Hanoi said it was 'deeply concerned by the decree's provisions,' arguing that 'fundamental freedoms apply online just as they do offline.'"

Comments

Pot calling kettle black

[ckhorne]

And the US is in a position to be talking about "fundamental freedoms"?

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[MightyMartian]

The US government is all for fundamental freedoms, providing your use of them can be logged, queried at will and used against you later.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[0123456]

The US government is all for fundamental freedoms, providing your use of them can be logged, queried at will and used against you later.

Indeed. The US government wants everyone to talk about current affairs online, so they can easily flag and monitor the trouble-makers.

The Vietnamese alternative is just so twentieth century.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[St.Creed]

The US embassy in Hanoi is deeply concerned about the situation in Vietnam. Meanwhile, the Russian embassy is deeply concerned about the situation in the US. Meanwhile, the Turkish embassy was deeply concerned about the situation in Germany. Meanwhile...

Every government is deeply concerned with the freedoms of someone else's citizens. Even Putin is probably deeply concerned about some foreign citizens somewhere.

It really breaks my heart to see all our leaders so concerned for the welfare and freedom of citizens that don't live in their own country *sniff*.

Although I don't think the US embassy is wrong here. This decree is ofcourse a blatant attack on the rights of the Vietnamese people to have a say in how their country is run, which is undesirable as far as the Vietnamese rulers are concerned. The fact they deemed it necessary to actually pronounce this decree, however, gives me great hopes for the future, since laws are mostly made about events that are happening. Even the laws in Hammurabi's codex give great insight of the problems the rulers had in these days with the opposition. And while this decree is a big step backward, it also shows huge trouble brewing for the Vietnamese government.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

And the US is in a position to be talking about "fundamental freedoms"?

Depressingly, they do tend to bat above average RE: free speech: The feds are unnervingly interested listeners; but the list of subjects you can't talk about is very short.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[Seumas]

America's leaders just got a massive secret erection at the idea of doing this, themselves.

The first step, they've been pushing for ages. Control who can become a "journalist". Then license them. Then punish anyone "practicing journalism without a license".

Oooh gaaaawd! I think they just came!

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[girlintraining]

The US government is all for fundamental freedoms, providing your use of them can be logged, queried at will and used against you later.

No, I'm afraid not. Let's go down the amendments one by one and see where we come out:

First amendment: Freedom of speech and the press.
The United States has no Journalistic shield law. Basically, if a whistleblower drops of some incriminating government documents, publication can land you in jail. Failing to reveal your source? That's a one-way trip to Guantanamo. Then there's the designated Free Speech Cages, surrounded by police, cameras, and barbed wire, and usually located far away from a place where your protect might be visible. Failure to protest within the cage will and you in a different cage. Don't worry -- they pre-construct them for all major events at nearby warehouses.

The right to bear arms
In New York and elsewhere... yeah, no. There are so many examples of the constant attempts to remove this or at least regulate it to the point it is effectively removed, I won't provide more examples. Go look them up yourself.

Not having soldiers quartered in your home
Yeah... a guy was recently arrested, beaten, and dragged out of his house for refusing to allow the police entry, so they could pitch a tent and enact surveillance of one of his neighbors. The story has since vanished off the internet, and very few sites still have any information on it.

Unlawful search and seizure
The Department of Homeland Security has granted itself the ability to declare arbitrary constitution-free zones, which cover approximately 80% of the US population -- as most of the population lives within 50 miles of one of the country's borders, and that's one of the areas covered.

Right not to self-incriminate
unless of course, the FBI thinks you might have child porn. ...

I could go on, but I think you get the point: They're not for all fundamental freedoms... they just want them on paper, but not in reality. Subtle difference.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, you are not allowed to report about the government committing crimes against wiretapping laws, you are not allowed to report about getting "National Security Letters" demanding to wiretap and keylog your entire infrastructure, you are not allowed to publish videos of soldiers having video-game style fun killing unarmed civilians.

On the plus side, you can lie under oath with impunity to congress without fearing repercussions as long as you are not lying about sex affairs or sports but areas of actual national importance.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello, I'm posting this from Vietnam so I can't discuss your comment but I would like to tell you about my family:

My uncle Acirema pretends to be a generous and liberal man but runs his family with an iron fist, monitoring all his kids activities. Yet he also likes to complain to everyone about how uncle Manteiv doesn't let his kids go out after school or talk to anyone.

Uncle Manteiv meanwhile says he's doing it for his kids security and points out that aunt Aissur does worse by intercepting her kids emails and changing the content before they're sent out.

Aunt Aissur herself had to give shelter to one of uncle Acirema's kids who was really scared of being brutally punished after telling his school mates about his dad's snoopings.

Grandpa Anihc is the best, he also runs his household with an iron fist but readily admits to it.

I'll be back later to tell you about how uncle Acimera wants to take over aunt Airys' house because she has the best apple trees in town. Of course he can't say that outright so he claims she poured bleach into her kids' soup, although rumor has it that the kids were the ones who tried to poison her instead.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[phantomfive]

Well, you are not allowed to report about the government committing crimes against wiretapping laws, you are not allowed to report about getting "National Security Letters" demanding to wiretap and keylog your entire infrastructure,

That might not be true. It's in the courts right now, I fully expect it to be overturned.

Re: Pot calling kettle black

[DigiShaman]

Barbara Boxer already made a statement that you are not a journalist unless you draw a salary. This was in response to the topic of Internet blogging. Durbin and Harry Reid already weighed in on the same.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/03/Durbin-Wants-Government-to-Decide-Who-is-a-Journalist

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[Sabriel]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/07/anthony-mitchell-lawsuit-third-amendment-_n_3557431.html
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/henderson.pdf - Case 2:13-cv-01154-APG-CWH United States District Court District of Nevada

19. After Plaintiff ANTHONY MITCHELL refused to allow the police to enter his home, the De-fendant police officers, including Defendants SERGEANT MICHAEL WALLER, OFFICER DAVID CAWTHORN and OFFICER CHRISTOPHER WORLEY, conspired among themselves to force AN-THONY MITCHELL out of his residence and to occupy his home for their own use. Defendant OFFICER DAVID CAWTHORN outlined the Defendants’ plan in his official report:

It was determined to move to 367 Evening Side and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.

That's a nice Catch-22 you've created there, Officer. Pity about that pesky Third Amendment (plaintiff is also suing under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments as well).

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[dmbasso]

Because no government would ever abuse such powers, turning into a totalitarian regime without hope of reverting back to democracy, right[U+2e2e]

If you want to take the risk, then you're really stupid. Unless for you it is not a risk, but the objective. Then you're waaaay more stupid than I thought.

Re:Pot calling kettle black

[ShanghaiBill]

The United States has no Journalistic shield law

Journalistic shield laws are a terrible idea. The freedom to speak and publish is a right shared by everyone. There should not be a special group of government approved "journalists" that have special rights that are denied to other citizens.

We should invade

[The_Star_Child]

We should invade Vietnam to teach them a lesson.

There's an obvious solution...

[evilviper]

We should send in the military to help out those poor oppressed people. Sure, an invasion is excessive and would look bad, but we could certainly send in a few "advisors" under the radar, and see how that goes...