×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Thai Government To Close 400 Anti-government Sites

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the wonder-how-long-before-it's-our-turn dept.

Censorship 267

Will Lord writes "The Guardian is reporting that the Thai government plans to close down 400 anti-government websites and is asking ISPs to block 1,200 more. The response follows a declaration of a state of emergency which has seen troops take to the streets of Bangkok to police anti-government protests. With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent, do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

267 comments

In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RIAA (5, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858039)

It won't be so much the government cracking down against *dissident* websites in the U.S., it will be the government and major broadband ISP's cracking down on websites based on file-sharing and "Intellectual Property" violations (at the behest of the MPAA/RIAA and their ilk). It's only a matter of time before typing in piratebay.org into your browser leads you to a page that says "This page is blocked for copyright violations" or something similar. The courts have already directly taken down sites like Torrentspy [wikipedia.org] and Lokitorrent [wikipedia.org] in the U.S.

People will learn to get around blocks with proxies, true, but how long before ISP's start blocking major proxy sites too? If my workplace can use Websense [wikipedia.org] to block virtually any proxy list (and it's REALLY good at it too, BTW), there is nothing to stop my ISP from doing it too. And, like most people, I only have a couple of choices of broadband ISP's in my area (AT&T and Time Warner), so it's not like I could just take my business elsewhere.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1)

Spazztastic (814296) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858137)

They'll also do it under the guise of "The protection of children" because of one person posting photos of people who are underaged. It's what caused ISPs to stop providing USENET access to anything but The Big 8.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (5, Insightful)

mitchplanck (1233258) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858173)

It's only a matter of time before typing in piratebay.org into your browser leads you to a page that says "This page is blocked for copyright violations" or something similar.

It won't say "This page is blocked..." it will say "Your IP address has been recorded and the FBI has been notified that you are attempting illegal activities."

RIAA/MPAA (3, Insightful)

Beer Drunk (1059846) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858215)

This is America, the corporations ARE the government. Just check out all the lobbyists at the conventions.

Re:RIAA/MPAA (5, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858953)

This is America, the corporations ARE the government.

No, they are not. Actually being the government would leave them with all the bothersome stuff, like the national debt or the responsibility to run a country and provide at least basic services to people. Also the whole problem of elections.

Being "just very influential" to the point of control is much better, as it leaves you with the profits, but without the costs.

Re:RIAA/MPAA (5, Insightful)

InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860217)

"No, they are not. Actually being the government would leave them with all the bothersome stuff, like the national debt or the responsibility to run a country and provide at least basic services to people."

Except that none of these are the responsibility of a properly-functioning government. There is no right to "basic services". There is only the right to your life and your property, the protection of which is the function of the government. The debt can easily be handled if the government shuts down the services that it does not have the right to run, and sells off the infrastructure and equipment used to maintain and facilitate those services.

A company can persuade all it wants. It is only when an elected official helps pass laws in that company's favor that corruption occurs.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (0, Offtopic)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858451)

Yeah, but at least then people would pay to see crappy movies and listen to horrible music. Right? All problems solved? No? Oh.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858545)

In the US I am afraid of draconian censorship being applied to all of us. I'm not entirely convinced that people who become "political" are safe from death squads or assassination here either. Once people are required to protest "elsewhere" it is only a matter of degree in having them protest in the absolute elsewhere, as in six feet under.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (2, Interesting)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858657)

You can thank the Noerr Pennington doctrine for that. I'd love to see it challenged but I don't know how we can do so.

Get rid of that, and you won't see corporations with lobbyists. Would fix a TON of shit in the US.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1)

u-235-sentinel (594077) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858769)

People will learn to get around blocks with proxies, true, but how long before ISP's start blocking major proxy sites too? If my workplace can use Websense [wikipedia.org] to block virtually any proxy list (and it's REALLY good at it too, BTW), there is nothing to stop my ISP from doing it too. And, like most people, I only have a couple of choices of broadband ISP's in my area (AT&T and Time Warner), so it's not like I could just take my business elsewhere.

Well.... there is always Comcast .... right? ;-)

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858925)

A lot of those old blocking systems are based off of IPV4; once IPV6 gets on the go, although it has some fairly frightening features, it'll be next to impossible to police anything; getting a new small subnet is cheap. Not to mention 3rd Party DNS services are also popping up which may if IANA starts blocking things, compete directly with IANA for DNS services.

Plus there's things like Tor and round robin. If you bit torrented a tracker site, then added a round robin DNS tracker to it like Wikilinks off of a 3rd party DNS tracker, then loaded all of it into a nice easy to execute app. The amount of resources required to block something like that; sure you could jam it but it isn't like the app couldn't be set up to check things like that. There's also things like WASTE still out there and kicking. Plus in a few years we'll see hard-drives grow by leaps and bounds so storing large data vaults will be less of a problem making public networks less necissary. It isn't too far off we'll see 1TB drives grow into 2TB, 4TB, 8TB, 10TB, 20TB etc. A 20TB drive can store a lot of data.

What will inevitably happen is the internet will force things into the public domain that aught to be in the public domain in the first place. Imagine a world where pornstars have a problem making a living since they have to compete with 1000's of people who've made porn before them; where there is so much porn it competes with your "product" and that's how it will be for music, movies, and other forms of media. Sure, there'll always be a market for the new stuff, and there'll always be a market for hard copy and concerts, but really copyright should not be about controlling the public domain.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (2, Funny)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859079)

Hard copy porn and porn concerts?

So in other words, prostitution and orgies?

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859113)

Please do not use the term "cracking down" with respect to peaceful, voluntary activity. This implies something wrong or immoral about what the victims of the "crackdown" are doing. By any stretch of the imagination, a peaceful protest cannot be viewed as aggression, and by using the propaganda term "crackdown" we are only furthing the cause of the true aggressors (government).

Again, government cannot "crack down" on peaceful activity. Government can attack and oppress peaceful activity, but they cannot "crack down" on something which wasn't morally wrong in the first place.

The correct term here is "oppression", not "crackdown".

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859755)

Please do not use the term "cracking down" with respect to peaceful, voluntary activity. This implies something wrong or immoral about what the victims of the "crackdown" are doing.

Apart from breaking the law by ripping off the people whose products they apparently value but won't pay for if they can get away with it, you mean?

There's plenty to debate about copyright both in theory and in practice, but let's not pretend that the kind of person who uses TPB is an honest, upstanding citizen and not an antisocial freeloader who thinks they'll get away with it. Cracking down seems an entirely fair description to me.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859891)

You sir, are making the wrong argument, in the wrong discussion on the wrong web site.

a) This discussion has nothing at all to do with copyright and IP, it's about government censoring anti-government web sites.
b) This is Slashdot. Take your anti-piracy sentiments to where someone cares. Like, say, the RIAA offices.

Re:In the U.S., expect it on behalf of the MPAA/RI (3, Insightful)

Awptimus Prime (695459) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860361)

It won't be so much the government cracking down against *dissident* websites in the U.S.

Yes, only on /. is it "Insightful" to compare an attempt to foil software pirates in the U.S. to the attempted annihilation of expressing political beliefs by those in another country.

The last I checked, both of our major political parties thrive on protesting each other. Somehow I do not see this changing anytime soon. The right will want people protesting the left, the left will want people protesting the right, etc. This is kind of a tradition here.

Anyone who moderates up this kind of garbage really should be ashamed. People in Thailand are up a creek without a paddle and you actually encourage bringing a discussion of U.S. piracy into the thread. Shame.

What's next? GWB isn't going to leave office peacefully when the new guy is voted in and immediately begin leading an army of robots to take over the world? That sounds "Insightful". /rant

In soviet russia (1)

emj (15659) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858045)

At least they aren't shooting them

Re:In soviet russia (1)

mapsjanhere (1130359) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858449)

Sure not. They still need to sell you what you can't obtain "for free" anymore.
The message will read "you IP address has been recorded and will be forwarded to the FBI unless you purchase the legal copyrights at ourstore.com within the next 24h"

Re:In soviet russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858965)

unless you purchase the legal copyrights at ourstore.com within the next 24h

'the copyrights' themselves are not for sale (to the likes of us) so I assume you mean 'a licensed copy'.

In that case, a licensed copy of what? The example is about blocking TPB or other torrent search sites. You haven't even searched for a torrent file yet.

Lemme think... (1)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858101)

With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?

Yes. A simple answer for an obvious question.

Re:Lemme think... (1)

neuromancer23 (1122449) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858211)

Seriously. Apparently someone hasn't been watching what has been going on in Denver and Minnesota.

Re:Lemme think... (2, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858535)

The anarchists' website is still up - what are you talking about?

Maybe YOU think that "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble" includes blocking public access to roads, but I disagree. You can protest, but you can't render public infrastructure unusable.

Re:Lemme think... (0, Troll)

neuromancer23 (1122449) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858893)

The so called 'anarchists' are government agents.

http://www.google.com/search?&q=recreate+68+provocateurs [google.com]

For the record, a real anarchist is someone who believes in freedom, and is therefore logically opposed to government in all of its forms. The people who are calling themselves anarchists are anarchists in the Noam Chomsky sense of the word: super-statist, jackbooted, nazis (i.e. communists).

Your inability to distinguish what is really going on is an indication that you have been brainwashed by the statist media.

I was referring to the police raiding homes of suspected protesters without warrants (or even probable cause) in Minnesota:

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-cvn-convention-protest,0,1495260.story [newsday.com]

Pull your head out of your ass.

Re:Lemme think... (2, Interesting)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859205)

Well, you sure are pleasant.

I was referring to the exact same thing as you. While I don't support raids without warrants, I also don't support blocking of roads to make a deranged point.

You think I've been brainwashed by the statist media, and I think you've been brainwashed by crazy people on the internet.

Fairness Doctrine (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858225)

Wait till the Dems have full control of Executive and Legislative Branches to bring back the good old Fairness Doctrine. It'll be applied to the the web as well as TV/Radio.

Re:Fairness Doctrine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858467)

You are comparing apples to oranges.

There's bad censorship and there's good censorship. What you're describing is good censorship.

Re:Fairness Doctrine (1)

phlinn (819946) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858689)

There is no way the fairness doctrine can be considered good censorship when applied to a medium with extremely low barriers to entry. It made a certain amount of sense when applied to the initially scarce public radio and tv channels. I still disagree with the concept, but I could at least comprehend the reasoning.

Re:Fairness Doctrine (1, Interesting)

zeptobyte (1140111) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858859)

Actually, there's just bad censorship.

Re:Fairness Doctrine (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24860067)

Go to /b/ and post CP. I dare you.

Re:Fairness Doctrine (1)

robert899 (769631) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859827)

Wait till the Dems have full control of Executive and Legislative Branches to bring back the good old Fairness Doctrine. It'll be applied to the the web as well as TV/Radio.

Looking at this article: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6573406.html [broadcastingcable.com] , Obama is on the record against the Fairness Doctrine. If he's elected and changes his mind, he'll have a Democratic House and Senate more than happy to bring it back.

Roots of the Issue (5, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858129)

With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?

I doubt it ... although, I think China & Russia will follow suit (if they aren't already).

From what I've read, the short of this state of emergency is simply an elite urban ruling class that supports the Thai monarchy and abolished the prime minister back in 2006. The elite class is calling itself the People's Alliance for Democracy even though they have little to nothing to do with fair representation across the entire state. Again, I don't live there, this is second hand information.

Basically, violent protests from both sides are going down and people are dying. Hopefully shutting down the sites that point out the obvious will stop these clashes. I sincerely doubt it, this will clearly be more justification for the rest of Thailand to revolt against the Monarchy.

Unfortunately, Russia & China could both be seen in this same light with Beijing & Moscow being islands of wealth in an otherwise third world country.

I doubt the US and much of Europe need to do this ... although I was getting a bit frightened there when it seemed for the longest time that a small select elite few wanted the war in Iraq. When Bush was re-elected, there wasn't much I could say however. I feel like half the country wanted it so there's no sense in me violently reacting to this. I'm certain the Thai feel much differently about their situation.

If you can't see healthy dissent in a country to some extent--something is terribly wrong.

Re:Roots of the Issue (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858311)

> I doubt it ... although, I think China & Russia will follow suit (if they aren't already).

Regarding China...

Owners of protest and dissident websites during the olympics

Re:Roots of the Issue (4, Informative)

TorKlingberg (599697) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858585)

You have missed some news. The supporters of the previous prime minister won the recent election and got the power back from the military. Now it is the People's Alliance for Democracy that is revolting.

Re:Roots of the Issue (4, Insightful)

TheLink (130905) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858669)

"I sincerely doubt it, this will clearly be more justification for the rest of Thailand to revolt against the Monarchy. "

Revolt against the monarchy? Uh this is Thailand we're talking about. Far far less than 1% will revolt against the King. This is not a revolt against the monarchy, this is a revolt against the government.

Everyone respects the King a lot in Thailand (some to the point of worship) see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej [wikipedia.org]

The government != the monarchy.

All Thai governments claim to support the king, otherwise they'd never get power or stay in power.

The king could probably stop the protests by just telling everyone to go home, and the king could probably kick the current government too just by disapproving of them. But so far it seems he hasn't showed his hand yet.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_May_(1992)#Royal_intervention [wikipedia.org]

Re:Roots of the Issue (4, Interesting)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858997)

Uh this is Thailand we're talking about. Far far less than 1% will revolt against the King.

Unless the Thais have changed drastically since 1974 (and as they have a 5,000 year history I sincerely doubt it), you are correct. I was there from August 1973 to August 1974 and I never once met a Thai would wouldn't lay his or her life down for the king. Most people had his portrait/photograph displayed in their homes.

Re:Roots of the Issue (-1, Offtopic)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859083)

You may not have noticed, but Amy Goodman of Democracy Now was arrested and charged with conspiracy to riot [infowars.com] in St. Paul while asking why her fellow reporters were also arrested. The videos of the RNC protests are crazy. People being pepper sprayed at random and for no good reason [infowars.com] .

Other reports from the area have houses full of journalists raided and lawyers from the national lawyers guild also being detained. I don't have much time, or I'd link to all the different videos..... They're out there if you're willing to spend the time to find them. Unfortunately, the major news media outlets are barely touching the story, and one thinks it doesn't go far enough. A Fox and Friends featured a short conversation which included a suggestion that the protesters should be arrested.

I would've linked to the original stories, but it seems that the Democracy Now website is currently down.

Yoy goose stepping coward (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859229)

>feel like half the country wanted it so there's no >sense in me violently reacting to this.

You would have made such a good nazi.

And more than half this country believe Saddam was responsible for 9/11. Not just because they are stupid but because the single point of view of a the state department fed media was the only one this country had.

My pappy wasnt really into lynching the negroes but it seemed like most people where we came from were into it and it made no sense to be against that. Majority mob rule is always right.

Re:Roots of the Issue (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860137)

You my friend know nothing of Thai politics.

There is no chance of an anti-monarchy revolt. All Thais, without exception, revere the King. The current state was brought about by the educated classes rejecting the current prime minister, as they think he is just a proxy for the old elitist prime minister who fled the country and is now wanted on corruption charges.

They feel that the poor classes were bribed into voting for the current prime minister with cheap election promises, easy to do when 90% of the population are poor, politically naive and cannot comprenend the disgustingly amoral free-for-all that is modern politics. They are still from a generation that comes from the ability to hear what your leader says, and know that it is reliable because if they were a liar, they would not be a leader.

The Thai king, in my opinion, is perhaps the only leader in the modern world with his people's interests genuinely at heart, and the Thai people are one of the few that genuinely look out for each other as a society. They are proof to me that the western conceptoin that self-interest alone drives a society is a total load of bullshit.

The educated classes are fighting for, what they see, the interests of the country as a whole, not just their own secure demographic. Unlike in the western world, bribing land owners with promises of an interest rate cut doesn't work in a Thai election.

Disclaimer: I don't live in Thailand, but I do my scuba dive training there and I'm fairly familiar with Thai society for a farang [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Roots of the Issue (1)

raju1kabir (251972) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860297)

From what I've read, the short of this state of emergency is simply an elite urban ruling class that supports the Thai monarchy and abolished the prime minister back in 2006. The elite class is calling itself the People's Alliance for Democracy even though they have little to nothing to do with fair representation across the entire state. Again, I don't live there, this is second hand information.

It's more like this:

From 2001 to 2006, PM Thaksin Shinawatra presided over an administration that systematically violated the human rights of its subjects, and which stole public money at a rate unprecedented in the history of democratic Thailand. For every dollar stolen, he gave a few cents to the poor in rural areas. To be fair, these poor people hadn't really seen much of anything before, so even those few cents were pretty exciting to them.

This polarised the country:

On the one hand, you had the middle and upper class, who were on relatively solid economic ground and didn't benefit much from Thaksin's giveaway programmes. They had the luxury of focusing their attention on the waves of brutal extrajudicial killings, the wholesale expropriation of national assets into Thaksin family portfolios, and the repeated clampdowns on Thaksin's political opposition.

On the other hand, you had the rural poor, who were more numerous, and for whom human rights and national financial stewardship were only high-falutin' mumbo-jumbo. All they knew was suddenly they were getting paved roads through their villages and other cheap but highly visible handouts. They came to the polling place in droves and re-elected Thaksin in 2005.

Finally, in 2006, a military coup with some level of support from the king deposed Thaksin and sent him to exile.

Now, we have a new PM, viewed by many on both sides as being nothing more than a puppet for Thaksin. That view helped get him elected by the rural masses, and it predisposed the educated urban population to disliking him. As his government continued to pursue policies aimed at defending Thaksin and freeing his assets from the legal system, the people in the cities launched the present unrest.

I really don't think this is as simple as "lovely democratic government ousted by wealthy elite pigs". It's more like "successful kleptocratic demagogues ousted by democracy-agnostic educated classes".

Do I think western countries will crack down? (3, Interesting)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858141)

"With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?"

No. You may see maneuvering by ISPs and content providers. I seriously doubt you'll see any crackdown by the governments.

This seriously reminds me of that yearly list of censored stories. I mean, you get the list, you whine they're censored, yet provide links to each one. Sorry, there's no censorship here, least of all against anti-government sentiment, whether the content is true or 100% false, as should be quite obvious by some of the sites out there.

Comprehensive Crackdown Required (1)

Nymz (905908) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858671)

In order to pass legislation, a comprehensive solution will be required, that covers multiple forms of communication, and covers enough issues to gain enough votes. Similar to passing a budget, there must be enough pork spread around in order to gain enough votes to pass.

This year is too soon IMO, because it's not an election type of issue for voters to decide, it's an issue decided by backroom politics. In the past I've predicted something like Net Neutrality + Fairness Doctrine = 2010 [slashdot.org]

Re:Comprehensive Crackdown Required (1)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858823)

I honestly think you will see a legislative turnover if the Fairness Doctrine is reinstated... talk radio is very powerful, and it won't just be Limbaugh egging on his listeners, it'll be Hannity, Beck, and a myriad of others... I wouldn't doubt you'd see left wing hosts getting their listeners agitated about it.

Lack of coverage is censorship. (1, Offtopic)

copponex (13876) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859041)

How many times do you hear about the fact that Walmart could not expand and make as much profit without the existence of government welfare programs? Or that the FBI employs fewer than fifty people who know Arabic? I can link you to one story about each of these items, but try to find them on your own. Now look for meaningless stories about sports, celebrities, fashion, celebrity news. There are tens of thousands of individually written stories about Brangelina's baby, but as far as I can see, not a single major news organization wrote anything about the Secretary of Defense claiming that the government had lost 2.3 trillion dollars on September 10th, 2001. How in the world is that just a coincidence?

Sure, you hear about "scandals," which is little more than confirmed political gossip. The real and sensible criticism of government and business simply isn't covered, though it does exist. You have to look for it, because no news corporation is going to endanger their profit, their friends, or their access to government power for the sake of society.

Re:Do I think western countries will crack down? (1)

Yeb (7194) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859417)

Ya, no censorship in the USA...

http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Indymedia [eff.org]

That may be old news, but it continues. The cops are harassing lots of Indymedia (and related) people in Minnesota right now. Lots of people being charged with felonies for "rioting" even when they are in their *homes*.

The censorship is already here. They have intimidated people to *not* report (but plenty reports come through).

Oh and Amy Goodman of Democracy Now was arrested this week too.

Not to talk of the control of the radio/tv exerted by the govt, and how often they shut down "pirate" radio....

With the public now knowing that their phones and emails are recorded, the intimidation is already in place. Who wants to speak up or protest in Minnesota now for example? A few remaining die hards, but the rest have been (reasonably) scared away. That itself is censorship (if not state terrorism).

The people who claim "no censorship" are likely people who have never said anything.

Seriously now... (3, Insightful)

spasmhead (1301953) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858151)

If you were standing next to a guy with a knife as big as the one in photo on the guardian site [guardian.co.uk] , would you even bother to get that "my penis is smaller than his" catapult out of your pocket?

Seriously though, I don't think many western governments will be doing what this desperate Thai government is doing, not until there is rioting through the streets and they are fearful of their power. In that situation western government would probably do a lot worse than shut down websites.

Re:Seriously now... (1)

mccabem (44513) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858981)

...I don't think many western governments will be doing what this desperate Thai government is doing, not until there is rioting through the streets and they are fearful of their power.

What about this [wikipedia.org] , or this [wikipedia.org] or this [wikipedia.org] ?

It may be arguable if there was direct cause and effect between those riots (just the highlights) and all the political/social assassinations of that era, but I think anyone would find a hard time arguing they were purely coincidental. Our "elite" were (sadly) scared shitless during that time.

Short term memory can be dangerous if that's all you have...don't pretend it can't happen here. (Again.)

-Matt

Re:Seriously now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859085)

Forgot a big one [wikipedia.org] .

You just might be (5, Funny)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858179)

If people rebelling is so much of a concern that you find yourself trying to regulate it, you just might be a facist!

With web crackdowns like this becoming more and mo (4, Insightful)

iplayfast (166447) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858199)

The US government is controlled by financial interests. Whether the congressmen who vote because of local financial interests, or big oil causing wars.

So I would look to cases where sites are being cracked down where the sites protest against companies in an effective way. For example the RIAA, has been able to push DMCA and DRM through, which has been a disaster for all concerned. Yet they are now able to close down sites that share keytabs for guitars, many types of filesharing that in the past were just gray are now illegal.

story summary sucks (0, Offtopic)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858203)

"somebody somewhere is suffering... so anyway, what about me?"

if you want to preserve rights and freedoms in this world, you go on the offensive, you take the fight to the regimes where they are being abused

if you play a defensive game, if you only worry about yourself, you will lose your rights and freedoms anyway, and furthermore, you don't deserve the rights and freedoms you worry about because of this self-concern

how can i say this?

because the rights and freedoms we are talking about here are aspects of higher morality, of a human conscience. part of a human conscience is concern for the well-being of others. these are not merely contemporaneous concerns: rights and freedoms and concern for the well-being of others, but dependent upon each other in order to exist: it is through concern for the well-being of others that you maintain and repair and extend the framework of rights and freedoms in this world

meanwhile, if you only care about yourself, how can you expect society to protect you? society protects you by you staying involved in society, and by society, i mean the world at large, not your own little nationalist fiefdom

which is all the story summary seems to care about

selfishness will lead to your loss of freedoms faster than anything happening in authoritarian regimes

in the story summary above "someone somewhere is suffering, anyway, how about me me me?" is the beginning of the downfall of your rights and freedoms. your selfishness indicates you don't deserve them

Re:story summary sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858301)

"selfishness will lead to your loss of freedoms faster than anything happening in authoritarian regimes"

Poppycock.

You're mistaking shortsightedness for selfishness. It is my self interest that as much freedom of speech is possible no matter who is doing the talking. It is the individuals self interest to secure and protect the rights of others.

It is an uneven fight, the individual against the government. Therefore it is in the self interest of the individuals to "hang together or hang separately".

you can't play that loose with terms (0, Offtopic)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858551)

you accuse me of mistaking shortsightedness for selfishness

ok, charge accepted

but at least i didn't mistake altruism for selfishness, antonymns:

"It is the individuals self interest to secure and protect the rights of others"

paraphrased: "it is selfish to be altruistic"

wtf?

i understand that selfish interest and altruism can go hand in hand, which is what you probably meant to say

but you are not allowed to equate contradictory terms and still think you are saying anything coherent

Re:story summary sucks (3, Insightful)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858501)

if you want to preserve rights and freedoms in this world, you go on the offensive, you take the fight to the regimes where they are being abused

Yeah, and then you get accused of being the Imperialist World Police who should mind their own goddamn business.

if you play a defensive game, if you only worry about yourself, you will lose your rights and freedoms anyway, and furthermore, you don't deserve the rights and freedoms you worry about because of this self-concern

How will Western country X lose its freedoms because of what's going on in third world country Y?

and furthermore, you don't deserve the rights and freedoms you worry about because of this self-concern

So what should the West do? Occupy every country where human rights aren't up to our standards? Then we'll be blamed of imperialism and genocide and God knows what else. We can't save all the peoples of the world from themselves, and it's not like we don't have problems of our own.

Anyway, we're already doing aid work and peacekeeping, giving money to developing countries and making a big scene about human rights violations (both real and imagined) through groups like Amnesty.

meanwhile, if you only care about yourself, how can you expect society to protect you? society protects you by you staying involved in society, and by society, i mean the world at large, not your own little nationalist fiefdom

I don't think developing countries on the other side of the world are heavily involved in protecting Finland.

you fail (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858621)

where you equate a basic human concern for the well-being for others with western imperialism

can a brazilian care about what goes on in thailand? can a nigerian? can a japanese? and if they get involved, are they being imperialist warmongers?

but if an american or a french cares about what goes on in thailand and gets involved, its automatic in your mind they are being imperialist warmongers?

why can't what motivates the nigerian who cares about what goes on in thailand and what motivates the french who cares about what goes on in thailand come from the same moral sense of human conscience?

why do you have to think western imperialism is all there is happening when someone gets involved? what is the source of this blindness on your part?

the problem is that you have a historical hangover. dude, its not 1848. you need to update your terminology and perspective. your perspective of the world is from a dead era

thailand has always been a free country. in fact, "thai" means free, it has never been colonized by western powers. so if the french or the american sent support ships to bangkok: this means they are going to turn thailand into a colony? you really believe that?

perhaps its the year 2008 and you need to update your idea of what motivates concern here

Re:you fail (1, Insightful)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858761)

you fail where you equate a basic human concern for the well-being for others with western imperialism

Oh, I thought we were talking about taking action and making changes, not sitting around and feeling concerned.

why do you have to think western imperialism is all there is happening when someone gets involved? what is the source of this blindness on your part?

When the US rolled into Iraq it was accused of being the Imperialist World Police and told to mind its own business.

if you get involved in other people's business (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859613)

you are going to be accused of all sorts of fearful bullshit, regardless of your real reason for getting involved

there is the propaganda reason the usa got involved, and the real reason the usa involved

for the usa in iraq, it was liberation, but really concern for oil supply

there is also another propaganda reason the usa got involved: the reason the usa got involved according to to anti-american morons (as opposed to pro-american morons, the only people who aren't morons are the ones who aren't blindly and rabidly pro or anti american)

there argument is the usa got into iraq for american imperialism. really? people believe that? that the usa is suddenly going to start colonizing iraq and turn it into a territory?

you really believe that?

Re:if you get involved in other people's business (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860283)

Where did I ever say I believe that? I'm just pointing out what's going to happen if the West gets involved anywhere. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Re:story summary sucks (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859489)

Hmm, both of my posts were modded down. I think some asshole with an axe to grind might be following me around...

Re:story summary sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24860081)

Perhaps you're being modded down because you're being a paranoid jerk. (At least that's why I'm modding you down anyway).

Already happens in EU / USA (1)

CdBee (742846) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858205)

Suppose I believe that - regardless of the religious rights and wrong - it is a legitimate action for citizens of a country to take paramilitary action against foreign forces present in their land?

OK - not a present-day situation but lets suppose back just after Saddam's regime had fallen and before the foundation of the present Iraqi government, I made that argument? I'd have been closed down and probably arrested too

Re:Already happens in EU / USA (1)

phlinn (819946) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858717)

Bull. Not one person was arrested just for making those exact arguments, and those arguments were made.

Re:Already happens in EU / USA (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859069)

OK - not a present-day situation but lets suppose back just after Saddam's regime had fallen and before the foundation of the present Iraqi government, I made that argument? I'd have been closed down and probably arrested too

Do you have a single citation of an American citizen being "closed down and probably arrested" for speaking out against the Iraq War? Or are you just talking out of your ass?

Dear World, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858255)

Please stop giving our government ideas like this.

Thanks,

USA

We had damned well better not! (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858547)

That is simply unacceptable in the United States. The government has been getting away with a lot of things that they should not have been, but that kind of thing is very clearly over the line.

Well there goes my holiday (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858591)

I was supposed to be heading to Thailand for the first week of october.

Looks pretty unlikely now though.

Guess I'll have to be stisfied with *just* singapore and australia.

Re:Well there goes my holiday (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859295)

I was there during the end of the Vietnam war, and never met a friendlier, happier people in my entire life. It was a wonderful experience, it was a beautiful country, and I urge you to visit despite the unrest. They had a revolution the year I was there.

A few things, though - their culture is very unlike western culture. Do not under any circumstances step on money, as it has the king's picture on it. You could get killed for that. Do not under any ciscumstances point your foot at anyone, you can get your ass kicked for that.

If someone bows, bow back even lower. If someone offers you food or drink, take it and eat/drink it, as refusal of a gift is seen as a grave insult. I had a loaded and cocked .45 pointed at my face once when I didn't want to drink a shot of whiskey.

After drinking the shot, the guy with the pistol was my new friend. The place is wierd and wonderful, and so are its people. I would dearly love to be able to visit Thailand again!

Oh yeah - they have stunningly beautiful women there.

I visited Thailand in 1973 (5, Interesting)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858595)

I spent August 1973 to August 1974 in Utapao AFB in Thailand. Utapao was a short boat ride away from Phuket (pronounced "fuck it"; the Thais have a different alphabet than we do) At the time, Thailand was then a third world country. Utapao was in the southern part of the country, and there was no electricity nor running water nor natural gas in homes. The roads were unpaved. The business districts of Saddaheep and Bong Chong to the south of Utapao had electricity, but not the houses.

We had a Thai intern at work a few years ago, and from her account Thailand has industrialized and is no longer a third world country.

Once while riding a bhat bus (so called because it cost one bhat to ride; a bhat equaled five American pennies. The "bus" was a Japanese pickup truck with benches in the bed) flashing lights came up behind us, the driver skidded to a halt and took off running. I cursed and started to get out. "No!" a fellow passenger insisted, "Day keel you!" She was right; I watched in horror as Thai police shot the driver as he ran across the field.

I attributed it to the fact that Thaland was closer to Vietnam than St Louis is to Chicago, and the war was going on, but it appears that even though they may no longer be a third world country, their government is still authoritarian.

What's troublesome is my government, USA, seems to have been headed more and more towards authoritarianism and less free as time has gone on. So I fear that the answer to the question posed in TFS is "yes".

I wrote two K5 diaries about my Thailand experiences a few years ago, Gecko Poker [kuro5hin.org] and War and Sex [kuro5hin.org] if anyone is interested in hearing about the place.

While I was there I thought that a visit to Mars couldn't be stranger. Nothing was the same as here, even the dirt was a different color, the hills were a different shape, the vegetation was completely different. But the world seems to becoming more homogenous as time goes on.

Re:I visited Thailand in 1973 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859941)

You lost credibility with me with your phonetic for Phuket. It's more like "poo ket". Do you think Thailand is "thigh land"?

Re:I visited Thailand in 1973 (1)

raju1kabir (251972) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860397)

Phuket (pronounced "fuck it"

Pronounced "poo-KET".

We had a Thai intern at work a few years ago, and from her account Thailand has industrialized and is no longer a third world country.

Well, we know where she comes from then (the city). There's two very different countries inside Thailand's borders. A few pockets of expensive development, some shiny high-tech factories... and thousands of miles of desperately poor rural areas.

it appears that even though they may no longer be a third world country, their government is still authoritarian.

Actually I would say that remarkable restraint has been the main hallmark of the present uprising.

The military has largely been standing and watching, most of the police have been ordered to leave their batons at the station, and even the beseiged PM has insisted against a violent crackdown (unless things changed dramatically since last I read the news 12 hours ago).

Thoughtcrime. (2, Insightful)

MRe_nl (306212) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858641)

"In addition, a Thai court issued three orders to shut down about 400 websites, 344 of which, it claimed, carried material that was contemptuous of the country's royal family. The other blocked websites included two with religious content, one video sex game and five sites deemed to carry obscene content."
Ooh, contempt, content, games and obscenity. We wouldn't want any of that on our internet.

Q: With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?

A: No, they'll be as covert as possible.

Archive.org..... (2, Insightful)

mccabem (44513) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859403)

Yup. Here's how we do it [archive.org] in the States.

You'll never hear about 90+% of the shutdowns because the takedown order will come with a legal threat (from the FBI) against even talking about it. A gag order [wikipedia.org] .

-Matt

Re:Thoughtcrime. (1)

megamerican (1073936) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859869)

In the U.S. we call thought crime "HR 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007." [govtrack.us]

`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.

What this bill does is set up a commission to decide what speech is terrorism and what isn't. During hearings for this bill they showed examples of this supposed homegrown terrorism. In between different Al-Qaeda websites, they showed Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth. [ae911truth.org] Even if you don't agree with them, I doubt anyone would believe that asking questions makes you a homegrown terrorist. This bill was passed through the house 404-6 and has yet [govtrack.us] to be debated in the Senate.

When will the US do this? (5, Insightful)

quag7 (462196) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858755)

As soon as someone dips their toe in the water and realizes that, in addition to all of the other legal transgressions committed by the government in recent years, they can get away with this to.

By "get away," I mean that they can forcibly take down a website and the public reaction will be a bunch of angry blogging and a noisy protest march, both of which completely unfaze the government (nor does the direct action (aka vandalism, aka hissy-fits) of the so-called anarchists).

Considering that this was as much as anyone did when the government started a war under either deliberately false pretenses, cherry-picked intelligence, or outright incompetence, I think there are those already thinking about outright censorship, which they'll cloak in some kind of undead HUAC-style (except having to do with "terrorism") rhetoric. I don't think this is some dark conspiracy where they're twisting their mustaches and laughing easily. Rather, the urge of this government and the power behind it is a line on a project plan somewhere, mapped to some kind of sick bottom line.

The same was the result of monkeying with the electoral system, and the same is the result of the various crackdowns on protesters, illegal detention of supposed "combatants", extraordinary rendition, and so on. Angry blogging and impotent protests.

The issue here is that no one is really willing to risk their neck to confront the government, or those who are, are unwilling to commit legal or literal suicide in doing so when the most solidarity they can hope for is people posting a bunch of angry shit on the Internet when they are arrested or worse.

This administration is laughing in the face of our impotence as citzens. They've probably always felt this way about us, but are now doing it in our faces.

There's nothing we can do. We have made this military-industrial corporatist complex into a religion of sorts, and they have addicted us to it - our jobs count on it - and they've basically got our nuts in a vice. They've taken a whole lot already. You can bet they'll take more, and with the witless approval of between 40 and 60% of US citizens, too.

Stupid question (0, Troll)

silentcoder (1241496) | more than 5 years ago | (#24858805)

>With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?"

Duh.

Of course we will. There is only one way to prevent governments from abusing power and that is not to let them. With the general complacency that the population shows about issues where civil liberties are at stake (remember most people are in favor of censorship 'to protect the children' [and oddity since I rather think we should be protecting our children from living in a police state shouldn't we ?]) this kind of thing will only get more mainstream.
When will people want to fight back ? The same time they always have- when they have lost all their rights, people as a rule aren't known for valuing their most precious gifts until they lose them. The trouble is - this time, that may really be too late. With the kind of weaponry and power governments can wield today, if a citizenry doesn't defend it's rights while it still has them - they are likely to find that when they have lost them, there is no way to ever get it back.
And sorry folks, the second amendment will not help my US friends when that day comes. You will pull out your nine-mill and find out exactly HOW useless it is against a tank. And don't count on massive revolt from the soldiery either, they sign away their civil rights when they join so the services tends to self-selects against those who actually value having those rights.
Ultimately our biggest problem isn't that corrupt politicians want too much power (that's always been the case) but that people who value short-term security over freedom are happy to hand all our rights over to them for the promise of protection. Throw in the fact that some of them are skillfull manipulators of people's religious and moral believes and you have real trouble. Even McCain has been campaigning for the religious right vote with his anti-abortion stuff.
By making moral issues into artificial legal issues - they can get a lot of people to vote on a moral base instead of a practical base. Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice really shouldn't HAVE anything to do with what president you vote for, that's a matter for the courts. What should matter is who will give you the highest level of protection of your basic civil rights. That is after all what the government is SUPPOSED to be for. We can never get one that won't mess up at least a bit, but we can do a damn site better than the kind that wants you to think his ideas about who-can-marry-who is a valid consideration of his potential skill as a leader.

A matter for the courts VIA the presidency (2, Interesting)

JonTurner (178845) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859283)

>>Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice really shouldn't HAVE anything to do with what president you vote for, that's a matter for the courts.

The Supreme Court is populated by judges nominated by the President and approved by congress. We currently have a left-wing of the Court that is eager to use foreign laws as a lens by which to view our constitution and views it as a "living, breathing document" which changes in its meaning according to the times we live in. By contrast, the Court has a right-wing population that interprets the document in terms of the Original Intent of its authors and sees the meanings within as rigid. The result is either document which can mean anything the reader wishes (a legal Rorschach inkblot test?) or it has specific meanings that cannot vary. I find the former alarming since our rights and the very nature of our government would then depend highly on who is currently in power and could change like the weather.

Rights are inalienable and God given, not granted by man, and the Constitution is a document designed to limit Government, not grant it unyielding power. But so long as there is a risk of judges willing to "read between the lines" and ignore fundamental measures (such as the 2nd and 10th Amendments), I would argue the election of the President is tremendously important to the state of law in America.

Re:A matter for the courts VIA the presidency (1)

silentcoder (1241496) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859881)

>I would argue the election of the President is tremendously important to the state of law in America.

You are rigt about that, but you missed my point. My point is that moral matters shouldn't BE legal matters. Part of the purpose of your supreme court (and our constitutional court) is to evaluate particular cases which were not there previously and determine how (and if) the constitution applies to them.

But courts also serve another function. That of 'common law'. The determination of how moral matters should be enforced to be inline with needs of the majority of society. I am saying that these things which are such political platform issues in the USA should be matters like that: decided on a court-by-court and region-by-region basis, not a national basis and certainly not by the legislative power.
It won't be a perfect solution (since the system isn't) but it is how the system is MEANT to work and will be a lot better than what we have now.

Let me use two local examples (since I know them well). In the 1920's a South African man wanted to have his wife jailed for adultery which was a common-law crime at the time. The judge decided however that the vast majority of society no longer believes adultery should be a crime - it may be grounds for divorce but that's an entirely different thing - and ever since then, it ISN'T a crime.
In 1993 the city of Durban wanted to legalize topless sunbathing on the beaches. There was quite an outcry from our own religious right who took the matter to court. The court however decided that the vast majority of people would not be offended by topless sunbathing and that it therefore was no longer out of line with moral believes of the majority of society. Since then, topless sunbathing is legal on South African beaches.
Intriguingly this didn't lead to any kind of major upsets, beaches became known as 'good topless spots' and women there tend to feel free to be topless, and most of them will be. Other beaches are not popular for toplessnes and since any women taken her top of there will be entirely alone in doing so, nobody does. So the people who think that seeing breasts are harmful to children go to the beaches where toplessness is not the norm, everybody else goes to the beaches where it is. Nobody is particularly inconvenienced and there are no laws about this, society just adapted to make room for both sets of believes.

The interesting thing about my examples are that both of them are cases where things which used to be illegal was made legal because the court research indicated (and the lawyers made a good case of course) that society in general had changed it's views on the matters.
What I was trying to say is that both our countries should give a lot more respect to the common-law tradition because common-law decisions are much easier to change with society than legislative laws and can change on demand and based on current societal norms. Legislative laws are hard to change and hard for the man in the street to influence. Anybody can bring a case to change a common-law matter and if the case is well made will change it - only a small elite has real influence on legislative laws.
We have to realize that ALL matters of morality ought to be the exlusive domain of common-law (in an ideal world they wouldn't be a matter of LAW at ALL and would be 100% individually decided at all times, but we don't live in an ideal world so I doubt we can ever make that happen) - while matters of NATIONAL interest and FOREIGN policy (technically the one is the other of course) should be the SOLE powers of the legislature. Property laws are national interest, gay-marriage is not. Trade negotiations are national interest, abortions are not, inter-region highways and postal deliveries are matters of national interest - people who like a bit of weed now and then are not.

Man, I wish I could find a country that worked like that... I would emigrate faster than you can say "VISA APPROVED"

yvou insensItive clod! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858833)

Oaver to yet another aacording tothis

Some Background (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24858909)

TRT = the old elected government deposed by the military
PAD = the wannabe government that called for the military coup

The leader of PAD owns a TV station (manager TV) this station promotes his cause. He claims to be democratic, but calls on the King and military to take control of the country away from Thaksin Shinawatra and the TRT party. His excuse was 'vote buying'. King said no, that would be undemocratic.

So Thaksin calls a snap election, says PAD should monitor elections closely, wins easily, but not an outright majority. Goes to King, King tells him, for the sake of unity of country step down anyway, even though you won.

Thaksin says OK, preps another election without him.

PAD claims he'll rig election for his successor, suggests maybe he'll do a U turn and not step down. Military decides to have a coup.

So PAD got it's coup, and the miltary took over, they rewrote the constitution, banned TRT, arrested a lot of its leaders.

The military leadership was crap, nothing got better, a lot of the allegations against Thaksin evaporated as false. Things they blamed Thaksin for got worse under the army. Especially the muslim insurgency in the south.

But with TRT banned and leaders locked up, PAD is sure to win right? Right?

Military ran elections closely monitored by the military and police.

Old TRT members that were not arrested formed PPP and won the election.

PAD are seriously pissed off, continue to make ever more serious allegations against the government, call for protests and demonstrations to bring down the government.

Thailand more divided than ever.

PAD+ military won't let the government rule, but people won't vote for PAD. The D in PAD stands for democracy, but their leader can't take it when they don't vote for him.

The EU has investigated the possibility of this. (2, Interesting)

jabithew (1340853) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859129)

See here [telegraph.co.uk] (Torygraph via Guido, with relevant thanks). Essentially the issue is that there aren't many pro-EU establishment blogs (because even an ardent Europhile like myself finds it impossible to justify things like the CAP or the fact that the Eurocracy hasn't had its accounts signed off [blogs.com] , via the Adam Smith Institute).

The European Union has already taken corrupt and borderline illegal action to suppress an anti-fraud journalist, Hans-Martin Tillack [wikipedia.org] , working for Der Stern, because he had the audacity to protect whistle blowers on the Eurostat scandal [wikipedia.org] .

i hope so.. it is illegal to incite murder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859157)

check out free republic or patdollard.com some time, there are dozens of posts a day about how 'liberals should be killed', and there was even a radio show on blogtalkradio.com/patdollard where they basically, guaranteed themselves a secret service visit. (that episode has since vanished without a trace)

as for the anarchist websites, i dont even want to think about what is on there.

i have seen alex jones screaming at michelle malkin for at least 10 minutes, saying he 'doesnt care' if he 'incites violence'.

creators to open newclear power kode (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859221)

no gadgets required. greed, fear & ego (in any order you choose) are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of yOUR dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & the notion of prosperity, not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one. see you on the other side of it. the lights are coming up all over now. conspiracy theorists are being vindicated. some might choose a tin umbrella to go with their hats. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1216734813&hl=en&topic=n
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/world/29amnesty.html?hp
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/02/nasa.global.warming.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/05/severe.weather.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/06/02/honore.preparedness/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01dowd.html?em&ex=1212638400&en=744b7cebc86723e5&ei=5087%0A
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/washington/17contractor.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/world/middleeast/03kurdistan.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080708/cheney_climate.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080805/pl_politico/12308;_ylt=A0wNcxTPdJhILAYAVQms0NUE
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080903/ts_nm/environment_arctic_dc;_ylt=A0wNcwhhcb5It3EBoy2s0NUE

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=weather+manipulation&btnG=Search
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece

1st Amendment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859241)

Just studying for my civics lesson to become U.S. citizen, wouldn't taking down anti-government sites be a complete violation of the 1st amendment (vital part of the U.S. constitution)? I mean I know it has happened in the past that the government did make use of "in the interest of national security". However this would violate the 1st so blatantly, so I think that the suggestion is far fetched. Oh, and yeah, we all can whine about our governments (both US and EU), but point me to a government outside the western block that allows its citizens greater freedom. Don't get me wrong, whining is good for progress and to keep freedom active, but let's try to whine about more sensible things (like wars?). Oh, and I think its not fair to compare file sharing sites or related to government protest sites. I'm in no way supportive of the RIAA, but DRM and DMCA is to protect the intellectual goods of these companies from being copied illegitimately. Even if the system of DRM and DMCA is fundamentally flawed, file sharing sites just don't fall under "freedom of speech". If our founding fathers would have wanted it, we would have included "...and the freedom to copy printed press...". They didn't, so no, such sites (and those that promote such sites) are not protected. Now I feel disgusted supporting such a slimy industry and wish we'd tackle this issue differently.

Is this a fetish? (1)

kiehlster (844523) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859243)

It would seem dictators/governments and such have a thing for blocking anti-government websites. Companies block anti-business websites. Then you have the parents who block anti-family websites. I'm starting to see a trend... This might be more prevalent than furries.

Plausibility of crackdown scenario in US (1)

genoese (415161) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859337)

Q: With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?

A: In order to do this in the U.S. on any significant scale ( e.g. China), there would have to be a pervasive, gradual (so as not to raise alarms in the general populace) erosion of 1st Amendment Constitutional sensibilities. There are several pretexts that could be used to accomplish this, all of which are based on fears of one sort or another. I doubt very much if commercial concerns would succeed directly, but certainly commercial interests are capable of co-opting gov't, as we have seen many times in U.S. history. Consider how the confinement into concentration camps of U.S. citizens in WW II was rendered acceptable to the population at large by spreading FUD regarding the possibility of Japanese 5th column activity. I say that in the end fear is much more powerful than greed, both as a motivator and as a pretext. The notion of "the enemy within" is powerful indeed.

As fears of terrorism and 5th column activity within our borders increase, it becomes easier and easier to sway popular sentiment away from safeguarding 1st Amendment rights and move it towards safety and security. I need not repeat the admonition of Benjamin Franklin [wikiquote.org] to this audience. I make no judgement as to the legitimacy of such a move when we are at genuine extremity, but in any other circumstance, it would be a tragedy.

Sadly... (1)

that IT girl (864406) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859391)

"With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?"

You know, ten years ago I'd have said no way. Now... with ridiculous 'security' efforts, the Dems (yeah yeah, mod me down if you must, it's true) trying to make Big Government regulating absolutely everything and taking away freedoms left and right... Sadly, I do think this is possible. And it scares me.

Re:Sadly... (1)

eean (177028) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860255)

The Democrats drafted the Patriot Act and jammed it through to a vote?

Blaming Democrats for "taking away freedoms left and right" seems like an old tired story after the last 8 years.

Stupid Question (2, Insightful)

IanHurst (979275) | more than 5 years ago | (#24859411)

"With web crackdowns like this becoming more and more frequent do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?"

No, and equivocating a place that gets rocked by military coups to the most stable, progressive democracies in the world leads me to think your world view is wildly fucked up.

The right to criticize the governments of the west tend to have been enshrined in law at the most basic level for decades or even *centuries*. Our right to criticize the government is one of the civic cornerstones of our culture. Nothing short of catastrophe, revolution, and fascism will change that. Get out of the basement and get some perspective.

To all who will provide examples of recent "fascist" tendencies, I say these aren't recent - they've always been with us and they always will be, because we're human, and humans are horrible shits. Luckily we have very mature systems of government that minimize our tendency to be shits to each other, like representative government, independent courts, and the right to disagree enshrined in fundamental laws.

To the contrary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24859801)

Please... We are more likely to wind up seeing some sanctions against Thailand than anything else.

anti-democratic protests (2, Interesting)

eean (177028) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860209)

An important thing to keep in mind is that these latest protests are pro-military, pro-monarchy and anti-democratic. And they actually do threaten the stability of the country and its lawfully elected government.

Basically the protesters don't like how the election turned out.

Not saying censorship is the solution, but its kind of hard to judge them as an outsider.

They already have (1)

Iowan41 (1139959) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860345)

with BO's attack on talk radio and any television station that might air negative information about him, and the threat not only to the airwaves, but also to web content by Democrats in Congress, to apply the "fairness act" to the web (as if there were a limited number of channels on the web).

Darknet, this is why we need one (1)

Bragador (1036480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24860363)

I'm not going to make a long post since my title says it all but having a free Internet is the only way to make sure this kind of thing never happens again. For example, if everyone was using freenet, the Thai government wouldn't be able to do a thing.

Personally, I'm waiting for the "other" one that is a little bit past version 0.6 (they don't want us to name them on slashdot for now, too much publicity). If they could just work faster and get more donations though...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...