Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

China's Response To the Internet Addiction Death

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the i'm-sure-everyone-will-get-a-fair-trial dept.

The Internet 250

eldavojohn writes "Last week, news broke of a tragic incident that resulted in the death of a 16-year-old boy at one of China's internet addiction camps. Details were scarce except for reports that the camp remained open. New reports are now coming in from China Daily that report 13 arrested and the camp closed down on Friday with 122 participants being sent home. The vice-chief of the district has stated that the authorities are working on the case to identify and punish the criminals involved in the death. Xinhua is reporting that the camp was unlicensed. This is directly in conflict with what the Southern Metropolis Daily reporter is saying, 'When the reporter arrived outside the rear wall of the school, children on the third and fourth floors started to stick notes into aluminum cans, drink bottles, and slippers, and others folded notes into paper planes. They tried to throw them over the wall, but owing to the distance, none of them succeeded. Some children had papers bearing the messages "SOS" and "beating" which they waved out the windows. Some wrote calls for help on their clothing, which they displayed to the reporter. Some even yelled for help. They were all stopped by the instructors.' Here is that original story in Chinese. Is China handling this delicate issue appropriately or are the news reports of justice and monitoring treatments merely a facade?"

cancel ×

250 comments

Wait and see (5, Informative)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010149)

There was a similar case at a Florida boot camp a few years back. A kid was beaten to death, and it was all caught on tape. The murderers were acquitted [go.com] , but Florida did shut down its boot camps. We'll probably see similar results from this incident in China.

Re:Wait and see (2, Insightful)

Savior_on_a_Stick (971781) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010173)

Or summary executions of all involved - flip a coin.

Re:Wait and see (3, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010303)

The murderers were acquitted [go.com], but Florida did shut down its boot camps.

Small nitpick but they aren't 'murderers' when they were found innocent by a jury of their peers.

We'll probably see similar results from this incident in China.

Because they care so much about public outrage and human rights?

Re:Wait and see (5, Informative)

Synchis (191050) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010369)

The murderers were acquitted [go.com], but Florida did shut down its boot camps.

Small nitpick but they aren't 'murderers' when they were found innocent by a jury of their peers.

Small nitpick, but aquittal != innocent.

Aquittal simply means there was not enough evidence to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Re:Wait and see (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010507)

Since in America you are innocent until proven guilty, and they were not proven guilty...

Re:Wait and see (2, Funny)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010951)

That is an extremely stupid thing to write.

Innocence or guilt is a matter of fact, not of proof.

Re:Wait and see (2, Insightful)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010961)

You don't get ruled innocent though, merely not guilty.

Re:Wait and see (3, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011021)

And here we're supposed to be all versed in binary logic here at /. That's like saying that an equation doesn't evaluate to true, just to not false. Here's a hint, just as !false == true, so does !guilty == innocent. Particularly in a legal system that is built completely on the notion that you are innocent until proven guilty. Until that guilt is proven you are and have always been innocent.

Re:Wait and see (2, Interesting)

Sardak (773761) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011087)

You might find this article [wikipedia.org] a good read. Particularly the part that says:

The phrase that a person is innocent until proven guilty refers to legal as opposed to factual guilt. In every case, the defendant either committed the offense or they did not; a fact that will remain true regardless of whether the jury acquits or convicts the defendant. The phrase means simply that a person is not legally guilty until a jury returns a verdict of guilty--which is little more than a tautology.

Re:Wait and see (2, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011361)

True, but in reality the distinctions of guilt or innocence mean little outside of the legal framework. We have established a method of determining guilt in a fair and balanced system, and when that system fails to prove guilt then essentially "factual guilt" is left between the accused and God, the FSM, or their conscience - or anyone who they chose to confide a confession to. Since no one here on Slashdot is likely to meet any of those descriptions, then any discussion of "factual guilt" is useless, as factual guilt cannot be proven (and the result of a trial has already shown this), so we just fall back to the only form of guilt that means anything - legal.

Re:Wait and see (1)

eyrieowl (881195) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011517)

That's amusing. Way to quote an "authoritative" source as a means for trying to prove a subtle point. FWIW, just because Wikipedia says something is a tautology does not make it so. The statement "a person is not legally guilty until a jury returns a verdict of guilty" is not a tautology, it is only true in a system which says you are "innocent until proven guilty". You could just as easily have a system in which the accused are presumed guilty, where the courts either find them innocent or affirm their guilt. That's not a meaningless distinction. I suppose it's heartening that the writer has so internalized the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" that they can't conceive of another mode, but it's important to remember that not all legal systems work that way and that it's an important principle to uphold and cherish.

Re:Wait and see (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011445)

"just as !false == true, so does !guilty == innocent"

You presume that people are as logical as a programming language? Or, you presume that law is that logical?

Either way, you fail.

Do you, perhaps, live in your mother's basement? You should get out and stufy people more. You might even browse some lawbooks and legal cases. In real life, not only are there black and white, and shades of grey, but there are MILLIONS OF COLORS. Kinda like your monitor, I hope.

If juries could be handed just black and white facts, along with clearly stated, logical laws, few people would escape justice. But, that will only ever happen in dream worlds and Hollywood.

Re:Wait and see (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011491)

Ok. You're making an unjustified assumption. You're assuming that someone is (guilty XOR innocent). Legally, the situation is more along the lines of (guilty XOR not guilty). In particular, to be convicted of something (found guilty), they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the crime. I would suggest that "innocent" is a more specific case of "not guilty". I.E. "innocent" implies "not guilty", but not the other way around.

To put it another way, consider the following scenario. I go out and kill someone, and the whole thing is caught on camera. There is no doubt whatsoever that I did it, and in fact I wrote a letter to the DA explaining all the details, enclosing a vial of my blood, as well as a videotape of me writing the letter. In the following manhunt, I die. I was never tried legally, and hence never found guilty. Does that mean that I'm innocent?

Re:Wait and see (1)

djfuq (1151563) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011365)

In America you are guilty until proven innocent - that is why you can be taken to jail until the court finds you "not guilty". - The burden of proof rests too often in a jailed defendant's hands. I wouldn't expect you educated folks to know about that though...

Re:Wait and see (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010619)

Excuse me! But in this country, there is a presumption of innocence. So you are innocent *UNLESS* proven guilty. Of course, that doesn't mean murder was not committed, but we really need to be careful with language.

Re:Wait and see (4, Insightful)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010677)

No we don't. This is just a silly slashdot discussion board. We can be careful with language or not, it doesn't really effect anything.

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010895)

No we don't. This is just a silly slashdot discussion board. We can be careful with language or not, it doesn't really effect anything.

The word to use there is 'affect'

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29011049)

Grandparent used the right word, but the logic was incorrect. Being careless with your language clearly effects a response from the army of grammar nazis.

Re:Wait and see (1)

cmdr_tofu (826352) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011281)

sorry but this is mandatory: http://xkcd.com/326/ [xkcd.com]

Re:Wait and see (2, Informative)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011025)

Well, with a little googling you will find that according to 12 of Chinese criminal procedure law no one is guilty of a crime without a people's court rendering a judgment according to law.

It is a presumption of innocence.

Re:Wait and see (1)

Savior_on_a_Stick (971781) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011051)

Why don't we start with understanding the presumption of innocence?

The principle applies to the relationship between a government and it's citizens.

It doesn't refer to the opinions held by it's citizenry, since these are outside the purview of government.

If I say that OJ killed his ex wife, OJ's only remedy is via civil litigation, and I can offer truth as an absolute defense, if I can show by preponderance of evidence that my conclusions are those of a reasonable person.

IINAL - so this is probably a gross oversimplification.

Re:Wait and see (2, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010385)

Small nitpick but they aren't 'murderers' when they were found innocent by a jury of their peers.

That just means they are murderers with good lawyers.

Re:Wait and see (4, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010547)

That just means they are murderers with good lawyers.

It's amusing that you've made up your mind based on media reporting and are second guessing the jury. Did you sit in the court room? Did you see the evidence that was presented? Are you looking at it logically or are your beliefs driven by emotion?

It's supposed to be hard to get criminal convictions in this country. Get washed through the legal system for a felony or two and you might come to appreciate why our system functions the way it does.

Re:Wait and see (4, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011027)

Um, guards being a kid and having him die may not be murder, but it certainly sounds like manslaughter. That beatings were routine doesn't make it ok, it makes it a human rights violation. yes, its supposed to be hard to convict... but to say the guards and nurse did nothing wrong is simply not true either.

Re:Wait and see (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011075)

but to say the guards and nurse did nothing wrong is simply not true either.

Please point out the comment in which I said they did nothing wrong.

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29011267)

The actual raw video was available on the internet. It probably still is, if someone bothered to google for it. The camera began by sweeping the area, then someone decided to focus on the area in which the boy was being disciplined. People who make up their minds based on that video are probably right. Someone above stated that the prison employees are murderers with good lawyers, and I believe that statement to be right.

1. The boy was physically disciplined/assaulted
2. The boy had an established medical condition
3. After being assaulted, the kid collapsed
4. Upon collapsing, the kid was allowed to lie in the sun for a lengthy period of time (ten minutes? can't really remember)
5. When medical staff finally arrived, she administered the wrong treatment for his condition (fat old broad bumbled around like she had just finished an EMT course last week, and was trying to remember what the text book said)
6. As I recall, more than half an hour passed between the boy collapsing, and the call for an ambulance. IIRC, the news article stated that the ambulance was located only 5 minutes from the scene - had it been called when the kid collapsed, it would have arrived before the nurse.
7. The displayed attitudes in the video appeared to be uniformly callous.

A homicide occured, that was unjustifiable. That is murder. Court room rules that exclude evidence, combined with jury instructions and confusing arguments from pretty smart lawyers prevented this bunch of scumbags from being properly punished.

I have never made up my mind in a case like this based on re-enactments, or dramatizations put together by investigative reporters. Not even when Walsh does it on America's Most Wanted. But, in this case, I examined the raw video of the actual incident.

Yes, the employees of that state run boot camp got away with 3rd degree murder. I already mentioned apparent attitudes. I feel that, had the camera picked up audio, that murder might have been upgraded to 2nd degree. The victim was black, there was only one black guard, and the actions of the white guards seemed like they MIGHT indicate racial motivation. Of course, we all know that the Florida state government has never been biased against poor black kids, or poor black voters, or even poor blacks in general. My feelings regarding racial motivation are just that. (and, no, I'm not a black guy, nor what bigots like to call a "nigger lover" - I'm just an honest person who recognizes hatred when he sees it)

Re:Wait and see (1)

OldSoldier (168889) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011325)

Let's not forget that "murder" is also a legal term. I have not read the Florida case, but I'd expect "manslaughter" would have been a better crime for the DA to prosecute. We've all seen this happen, a DA apparently under public pressure, tries to prosecute a death as a murder instead of a manslaughter and sometimes succeeds sometimes fails.

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010909)

no. that means that in your opinion the law that left them off the hook is wrong, but you didn't do anything to prevent the law from being approved / to push for a harsh penalty over the existing law (pick which one apply)

blameshift is fun!

Re:Wait and see (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010425)

The facts and truth do not magically "change" based on human decisions in a courtroom. Go fuck mcgrew's prostitute friends and get this bullshit out of your system once and for all.

Re:Wait and see (1)

DrLang21 (900992) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010675)

Small nitpick but they aren't 'murderers' when they were found innocent by a jury of their peers.

In the eyes of the law perhaps (as it should be). But never confuse law with reason. That will get you nowhere. Just because a court finds that grass does not reflect green light does not make it so.

Re:Wait and see (5, Insightful)

phulegart (997083) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010863)

what court found that grass did not reflect green light? Here, you are using an example that would never exist, to prove your point. Since that example WOULD and could never exist, you not only did not make your point, you only succeeded in proving that you are really bad at using analogy.

Now. Have guilty people been found innocent in the past? Sure. Does that mean every person found innocent is guilty? Nope. Does that mean that most people found innocent are guilty? Nope. All it means is that some guilty people have been found innocent in the past. It does not reflect or prove out any future percentages. Some people who are innocent have been found guilty in the past. Does this mean every guilty conviction is incorrect? Because some innocent people have been found guilty, exactly what percentage of guilty convictions are incorrect? Exactly what percentage of acquittals are incorrect, based on the number of incorrect acquittals that have been passed out?

The fact that you are attempting to "educate" people in how they should never confuse law with reason is one of the reasons why our legal system faces the troubles it does. If the law finds someone that YOU believe is guilty, to be innocent, then your choices are clear. Accept the decision of the courts and stop persecuting that party found innocent, or find the necessary proof to PROVE they are guilty. Standing there with your hands on your hips shouting.. "But he is GUILTY! I have no proof, but I just KNOW it!" does nothing at all.

Re:Wait and see (3, Interesting)

drc003 (738548) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011149)

I have actually seen the video of what took place when this kid died. That is the proof. It was at the very least manslaughter. However I and many others who agree weren't on the jury. They have already been tried so what can people actually do other than stand there and say "but they are guilty, I have seen the proof but unfortunately loopholes, good lawyers and a carefully chosen jury have set them free"?

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29011473)

what court found that grass did not reflect green light?

What about a State legislature declaring Pluto a planet [slashdot.org] ? Or attempting to pass legislation [wikipedia.org] dictating the value of pi at 3.2?

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010805)

The murderers were acquitted [go.com], but Florida did shut down its boot camps.

Small nitpick but they aren't 'murderers' when they were found innocent by a jury of their peers.

I'm entitled to have a different opinion based on the facts I know. When I call a murderer a murderer that's not a verdict, and US law isn't the only source for the meaning of words. Also, being acquitted doesn't mean being "found innocent". All it means is that the jury thought that guilt in the legal sense had not been established beyond reasonable doubt.

Re:Wait and see (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011133)

You CANNOT be "found innocent". The allowed verdicts are "guilty" and "not guilty" in a criminal court. Innocent is what you are before the trial.

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29011345)

Because they care so much about public outrage and human rights?

They do, however, care about saving face.

If kids on the Internet are potentially embarassing the government's domestic policy by mocking the Great Firewall, then the Internet is the problem. Letting a local Party hack run some boot camps lets the Government reinforce the message to the parents that the Internet is a Bad Thing. "Thanks for the bribe, the kids are yours, do whatever you like to 'em, but keep it quiet. Don't fuck it up."

If the Party hack does manage to fuck it up, however, then it becomes a matter of international policy. "You fucked up. Made us look bad in front of the rest of the world. Now you're the Bad Thing that has to be made an example of. That'll be $0.10 for the bullet. *BANG*"

Re:Wait and see (1)

spacefiddle (620205) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011353)

Small nitpick but they aren't 'murderers' when they were found innocent by a jury of their peers.

Whew, I feel so much better about OJ now.

No Equivalence with Tragedies in the West (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010417)

There is no equivalence between the Chinese tragedy and the tragedy in Florida or other parts of the West. We Westerners have a functioning justice system that sends the murderers of children to prisoner. China does not have such a system. The Chinese government is riddled with corruption, and the government does not answer to the people. It answers to the Chinese politburo. A murderer with a backer in the politburo will not go to prison.

The only good thing that we can say is that the Chinese government is not the African government. Also, the Chinese are not Africans.

Nearly the entire continent of Africa is more horrible than China -- due to the low IQ of the Africans. African IQ is about 20 points lower than Chinese IQ. South Africa is often cited as an exception, but you note that the Whites built its infrastructure and were forced to transfer it to the Africans. So, the Africans had an already built society that was given to them -- wholesale.

Of course not... (5, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010197)

Is China handling this delicate issue appropriately or are the news reports of justice and monitoring treatments merely a facade?

Of course it is not, you cannot say that a country that allows for few basic freedoms, has a mostly state-run economy, and has almost no non-state run news. Along with no real way for its people to voice their opinion in government matters. So lets see, we have no third-party news service, no public records, and no way for Chinese citizens to act against this. How can anyone say they are anything but a facade?

Re:Of course not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010259)

And the same thing would never happen in a country with a good track record on human rights?

Re:Of course not... (3, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010317)

With a country with decent human rights you can at least protest without having to fear being shot, you can spread your word around in many outlets, and you have a media which has the ability to track the government. With government-run news you do not have an incentive to break news against the government unlike private news. While the deaths might have happened in a country with human rights, you can be sure that they would not be able to cover them up as much as in China.

Re:Of course not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29011333)

With government-run news you do not have an incentive to break news against the government unlike private news.

While true in many cases, this is not an absolute truth. For instance look at the BBC, their news services seem to enjoy (in a understated British way) "biting the hand that feeds them" when the oppurtunity presents itself. Of course the the socio-political enviornment in the UK is significantly different than China, both currently and historically.

Re:Of course not... (5, Insightful)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010279)

Is China handling this delicate issue appropriately or are the news reports of justice and monitoring treatments merely a facade?

Of course it is not, you cannot say that a country that allows for few basic freedoms, has a mostly state-run economy, and has almost no non-state run news. Along with no real way for its people to voice their opinion in government matters. So lets see, we have no third-party news service, no public records, and no way for Chinese citizens to act against this. How can anyone say they are anything but a facade?

Ok I'll bite. They aren't a facade because they clearly have the manpower to overthrow their government, but have not done so. Either they keep their current form of government because it works better than anything they've had in their history, or because they are completely broken as a people and thus indifferent.

Re:Of course not... (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010469)

Or you know, the fact that they are constantly being bombarded with pro-government propaganda, has internet censorship, the fact that protests are violently stopped, and the fact that even very basic rights like the right to religion isn't even there, even for religions that are very non-violent. Mix that in with the fact that a violent revolution is nearly impossible, no media to report on your death, and you have a situation that is nearly impossible to rebel against. Take the American revolution, you had guys with muskets fighting other guys with muskets, in China if you are lucky you are a guy with a 9 MM fighting other guys with tanks, sniper rifles, bombers, and missiles.

Re:Of course not... (0, Troll)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010659)

Or you know, the fact that they are constantly being bombarded with pro-government propaganda, has internet censorship, the fact that protests are violently stopped, and the fact that even very basic rights like the right to religion isn't even there, even for religions that are very non-violent. Mix that in with the fact that a violent revolution is nearly impossible, no media to report on your death, and you have a situation that is nearly impossible to rebel against. Take the American revolution, you had guys with muskets fighting other guys with muskets, in China if you are lucky you are a guy with a 9 MM fighting other guys with tanks, sniper rifles, bombers, and missiles.

I'll bite again. I live in the US and I can't say that I'm not being constantly bombarded with pro-government propaganda and censorship. We've also had plenty of protests stopped violently, including one where the military slaughtered students at a college. In the American Revolution we also had farmers with pitch-forks and torches. We had to make or buy firearms to compete "fairly" as you eluded to.

I've seen China do rolling formations with tanks to demonstrate their power, and read about them using infantry to suppress protesters with lethal force. I have never read of China deploying snipers, bombers, missiles, and using them on their civilians. I highly doubt that any 1st world country a part of the UN would sit idly by if that were indeed happening.

Just remember what I said about anti-China propaganda in my country the USA.

Re:Of course not... (2, Insightful)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010809)

It's a valid point that there are similar abuses here. However, the key difference is one of scale: here you're also bombarded with anti-US messages and almost every single protests goes smoothly and doesn't provoke a reaction from the state. This makes for a vastly different experience.

Re:Of course not... (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010907)

I'll bite again. I live in the US and I can't say that I'm not being constantly bombarded with pro-government propaganda and censorship. We've also had plenty of protests stopped violently, including one where the military slaughtered students at a college. In the American Revolution we also had farmers with pitch-forks and torches. We had to make or buy firearms to compete "fairly" as you eluded to.

Sure, there is censorship in the US, yes, there is propaganda in the US. On the other hand though, there are many, many, many news outlets that we can turn to for US news. While each one has their own bias, we don't have a government-owned news station giving us -all- of our news and censorship in place where we can't get news from other sources about other forms of government. If you want Anarchy a quick Google search pulls up http://www.anarchistnews.org/ [anarchistnews.org] , want Communism? You are free to get your news from People's Weekly World (http://www.pww.org/). You can find news sites for every single political view. All uncensored in the USA. In China, you have a few state-run news agencies, and that is it.

However, it was not a crime to own a gun in colonial times in the USA. Everyone could own a gun. Heck, they even had their own militia allowing them to have military-grade weapons. It is -illegal- for a citizen in China to own even a low-powered gun. If the American Revolution happened today with all the same conditions just with newer weapons, the revolutionaries would have access to fighter aircraft, tanks, cruise missiles and almost every home would have a fully automatic rifle, all legally.

I've seen China do rolling formations with tanks to demonstrate their power, and read about them using infantry to suppress protesters with lethal force. I have never read of China deploying snipers, bombers, missiles, and using them on their civilians. I highly doubt that any 1st world country a part of the UN would sit idly by if that were indeed happening.

Sure, but if the revolution broke into full civil war (which is what would happen if a violent revolution ended up gaining momentum), it wouldn't be too far fetched for them to use those types of weapons.

Re:Of course not... (0, Troll)

dcollins (135727) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011109)

"I have never read of China deploying snipers, bombers, missiles, and using them on their civilians. I highly doubt that any 1st world country a part of the UN would sit idly by if that were indeed happening."

You had me thinking I needed to respond to your argument until I read this. Ha.

Something's fishy here... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010311)

Dear President Obama,

I write to express my concern about a new White House program to monitor American citizens' speech opposing your health care policies, and to seek your assurances that this program is being carried out in a manner consistent with the First Amendment and America's tradition of free speech and public discourse.

Yesterday, in an official White House release entitled "Facts are Stubborn Things," the White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips, asserted that there was "a lot of disinformation out there," and encouraged citizens to report "fishy" speech opposing your health care policies to the White House. Phillips specifically targeted private, unpublished, even casual speech, writing that "rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation." Phillips wrote "If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed "fishy" or otherwise inimical to the White House's political interests.

By requesting that citizens send "fishy" emails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House. You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights.

I can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had your predecessor asked Americans to forward emails critical of his policies to the White House. I suspect that you would have been leading the charge in condemning such a program-and I would have been at your side denouncing such heavy-handed government action.

So I urge you to cease this program immediately. At the very least, I request that you detail to Congress and the public the protocols that your White House is following to purge the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in "fishy" speech. And I respectfully request an answer to the following:

        * How do you intend to use the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in "fishy" speech?
        * How do you intend to notify citizens who have been reported for "fishy" speech?
        * What action do you intend to take against citizens who have been reported for engaging in "fishy" speech?
        * Do your own past statements qualify as "disinformation"? For example, is it "disinformation" to note that in 2003 you said:"I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan"?

I look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator

Re:Something's fishy here... (-1, Offtopic)

Anarchduke (1551707) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010475)

Dear Senator Cornyn,

In response to your question about so-called "fishy speech", I recomment you look over any number of your own speeches as reference material. Or, you can review any of the many lies the republican leadership is knowingly spreading about the proposed health-care plan.

The very popular youtube video of the republican mob overwhelming what was supposed to be a civilized discourse on the proposed health care plan seems to be somewhat fishy.

As to what we plan to do with all the lies you and your party have been spreading, I would think that must be obvious. We plan to counter the bullshit assertions your bitches on FOX news have been making in an attempt to give Americans real information about the proposed health care plan. I realize you wouldn't have a chance in hell of recognizing truth and integrity if it bit you on the ass, but you can't assume we are all republicans, especially after the ass kicking the republicans got during the last election.

For instance, turning what was meant to be a bi-partisan offering to help those on medicaid have a full and unfettered discussion with their doctors, including the option of not treating terninal illnesses into the republican's current crap argument of, healthcare will kill all the old people.

So, Senator Cornyn, why don't you come by the White House and we can talk honestly about health care. But, I am warning you, you will first have to stop sucking on the dicks of the insurance industry to do so.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA
President of the United States of America

Re:Of course not... (5, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010397)

Not to defend China, which certainly does have a very bad track record, but your logic doesn't make sense. The fact that the Chinese government does not grant what we consider normal and appropriate rights to its people has little to do with how they handle this matter, which appears to relate to a non-government unlicensed facility. Just because a person or entity does things which we disagree with doesn't mean that they will always without fail make every choice with an eye toward "what's the opposite of what Darkness404 would do?"

It's certainly possible that they will handle this badly and cover it up, they've done so before. On the other hand, to assume that you simply know what's happening, because you disagree with other policies of the Chinese government is a complete non sequitur.

Re:Of course not... (0, Flamebait)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010647)

Basic freedoms are essential to preventing this though. If there was a larger presence of non-state-run media, could this have been brought to the attention sooner before this person died? Could people organize protests to give these "camps" such a bad name that no one is willing to send their child to them? If the Chinese government had allowed freedoms, could this have been prevented? I think the answer might just be a yes.

Re:Of course not... (4, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010941)

Maybe, maybe not. There have been death at American "Youth Boot Camps" too, and we have all of the freedoms you mention. Accepting for the moment that you are right, however, and that this death could have been prevented in a "free society", it's not the argument you were making in your original post. There you implied that you already knew the Chinese Government was going to just cover this up and let the camp continue operations as normal, because the Chinese Government has done other thing which you disagree with. Your argument these was essentially "China has done evil things, therefore China is inherently evil, and will always make an evil choice over a good in every situation."

It just doesn't work that way.

Re:Of course not... (5, Interesting)

ebonum (830686) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010655)

I'm sorry but I would have to respectfully disagree. Like many things in life, China is not all bad, and the US is not all good. I have lived in China for 2 years, and I tell you for working with the Chinese government that the Chinese government generally does want to do the right thing and often does try its best. Does it fail at times, yes. Is is subject to problems with bribery, yes. Does it occasionally do some really, really bad things, yes.

The western media will ignore 10,000 good things that happen in China and focus on the one bad thing. I know, this is how news works. The same is true in the US. However, if all you knew about the US was what you read in the news, you would think people in the US all carry guns and live in fear of being shot. That does not make up for Chinese government's bad behavior, but I do get tired of these westerns who think China is purely evil. It isn't. Life here in China is actually pretty good. I go about my business, and no one bothers me. All my employees go about their lives and never have any trouble with government. They know everything the government does because the government has almost no control over news and the internet ( Everyone uses proxies to read the foreign news in Chinese. Foreign news in English is almost never blocked - including slashdot and articles highly critical of China. ) Please stop acting like the Chinese government is the same as it was under Mao. It isn't.

Re:Of course not... (3, Insightful)

i4ybrid (1615617) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010823)

Were you referring to China, USA or Great Britain? I can't really tell the difference anymore.

Re:Of course not... (2, Interesting)

GargamelSpaceman (992546) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010949)

This seems to be a camp that charges parents for admission for their kids, (without connection to the state?). The first thing I thought when I saw 'Chinese Internet Addiction Camp' was that the kid must have said something online to piss off the authorities and they shut him up 'for his own good' in an 'Internet Addiction Camp' ( read political re-education camp ).

Especially as Internet Addiction / pathalogical internet use / pornography etc seems to be being played up Chinese media of late, I suspect the government of shenanigans until proven otherwise given the character of the Chinese government.

Maybe the Chinese government has learned to be more subtle in it's control of late, realising that shutting people up for speaking out against the government makes them look bad? Here are some possiblities that the burden of proof is on the Chinese government to disprove.

The Chinese government probably outlaws porn and manipulates public opinion to create a class of generally dispised internet perverts it can persecute. The general opinion is that when someone is locked up for looking at porn it is something they did to themselves and which they deserve.

In fact whenever someone gets locked up for doing something on the internet, the public likely assumes they were locked up for looking at porn. It may even be that in many cases they WERE looking at porn because the government might not prosecute porn looking unless there is something else that pisses them off. Many people may have an incriminating hard drive full of porn thinking that they've gotten away with it and somehow gamed the system. They are now at the mercy of the state.

Even if the person has no porn whatsoever, the fact tha most people locked up for internet crimes are being locked up for porn means that they will be assumed to have been looking at porn when they are locked up. China doesn't appear to be limiting political dissention, but only porn. Sure limiting porn is a restriction of rights, and probably a wrong thing to do, but it's a minor thing, nobody thinks much less of the Chinese government for doing so, especially since the policy is probably popular within China.

With these youths, maybe they have pissed off the authorities, and their parents have been given the choice to send their children to 'Internet Addiction Camps' paying for it out of their own pockets or their children will be prosecuted for some more serious trouble their youthfully brash fingers have typed online.

The public sees some fat stupid teens wasting their life playing games who are saved by sending them to 'Rehab' when in fact they are being subjected to Orwellian 're-education' without the bad publicity for China that less subtle means would entail.

Given the character of the Chinese government the burden of proof is on them to prove otherwise.

Re:Of course not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29011257)

Are you insane?

I mean seriously.

I've got quite a few chinese friends, and several western friends that live in china, and ALL of them. ALL of them. ALL OF THEM.

All of them are happy with whats going on 99% of the time, sure there are weird things that happen and all that, but when is anyone every completely happy with the government?

Re:Of course not... (2, Insightful)

Jeeeb (1141117) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010967)

So an unlicensed privately run boot camp to treat internet addiction beats a child to death. The police launch an investigation remaining silent on the mater while it is underway. After appropriate investigations they take action and shut down the camp and arrest those responsible. All this is reported to the public through the media.

Sounds to me like that is exactly how this would play out in any western democracy as well. Maybe, just maybe, the Chinese as well think it's terrible that a child is beaten to death and wish to punish those responsible. But no it couldn't be a genuine pursuit of justice, must just be a facade to protect the powers that be...

what happens to the 13 arrested people? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010251)

Are they gonna send them to a 'addicted to killing your clients' camp? ;)

Re:what happens to the 13 arrested people? (1)

MoldySpore (1280634) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010299)

No, this is China we are talking about here.

They will be sending them to the "Try again, but this time bar the windows and draw the shades" camp.

Re:what happens to the 13 arrested people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010405)

Uh, no. That is what USA does to war criminals.

Incident like this in china will most likely mean 13 very quick trials, all ending in very public death sentences.

Re:what happens to the 13 arrested people? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010645)

Incident like this in china will most likely mean 13 very quick trials, all ending in very public death sentences.

Actually, China carries out many of her executions [wikipedia.org] using execution vans [wikipedia.org] . The remainder are usually ad-hoc affairs at random locations wherein the condemned is shot once in the back in the head. In neither instance is the public allowed to view the execution. They aren't real big on the public execution concept. Perhaps you were thinking of any one of a number of Middle Eastern countries?

Re:what happens to the 13 arrested people? (1)

euyis (1521257) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010391)

They will end up in a prison, in order to appease the anger of the people - "Look, the bad guys are all punished!"
But those who are behind this will not - bribes surely works fine.

I have been in China since I was born, and I'm sure that it will end in this way. Not troll, just experience.

Re:what happens to the 13 arrested people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010473)

They will end up in a prison, in order to appease the anger of the people - "Look, the bad guys are all punished!" But those who are behind this will not - bribes surely works fine. I have been in China since I was born, and I'm sure that it will end in this way. Not troll, just experience.

If you're really in China, RUN. NOW. You just said something that claims that state officials are susceptible to bribery.
Run. Run so far away.

Oh China... (1)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010255)

You remind me of me when I was young.

lrn2ask non self answering questions (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010275)

Is China handling this delicate issue appropriately or are the news reports of justice and monitoring treatments merely a facade?

I'd think that the 6 sentences this preceded that question would answer to that.

Re:lrn2ask non self answering questions (4, Informative)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010333)

Considering that the "editorial" staff here missed the fact that the Southern Metropolis Daily article covered a DIFFERENT camp with the same problems and claimed that there was conflicting stories...Heh...

Easy Solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010313)

Just send internet addicted kids to a "concentration camp"

There is NO conflict (5, Informative)

xniteman (1598779) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010319)

What the Southern Metropolis Daily reported was a case in Guangzhou, Guangdong province, in contrast to the other case in the Guangxi province, where the death happened. See the difference here?

Re:There is NO conflict (1)

Missing_dc (1074809) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011071)

What the Southern Metropolis Daily reported was a case in Guangzhou, Guangdong province, in contrast to the other case in the Guangxi province, where the death happened. See the difference here?

Guanxi,Guandong,Guangzhou.... All sounds Chinese* to them. (*Greek)

Woot! (1)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010325)

Is China handling this delicate issue appropriately or are the news reports of justice and monitoring treatments merely a facade?

You used "China," "Justice," and "Appropriately" all in the same sentence. I think that means you get triple-points in geo-political Scrabble.

Bad article blurb on /. (1)

furby076 (1461805) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010335)

And in the news, /. readers go blind trying to read a poorly written summary.

/. editors - please do some editing - it took me three reads to fully understand the summary

Re:Bad article blurb on /. (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010445)

Which is wrong and implies that a news report about a different camp shows a contradiction to the government report about this camp. Whee.

people love making orwellian allusions to (4, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010345)

various practices of western governments. i won't aggrevate your prejudices too much by suggesting some of your fears of an unstoppable march to orwellian fascism in the west are somewhat hysterical or overhyped

but did any of you stop and think that what is going on in iran or china is perhaps exactly what your orwellian fears allude to? and that it might pay more dividends, at least in the realm of intellectual honesty, to criticize those governments rather than western governments?

because no matter how bad it is in the west, surely you can see how downright horrific it is in some other places in the world. not that the west doesn't have problems. not that horrible problems elsewhere doesn't mean you should ignore little problems close by. and of course, it is invalid to be only able to criticize practices in other countries, not your own

its just that, to me, there seems to be a lot of people in the west who fall into a ridiculous trap: some people's ability to criticize ends at the borders of their own countries. you are a human being, right? or does the rationale for your ability to judge right and wrong magically vaporize at the straits of bosporus or the rio grande?

while you make mountains out of molehills in the practices of governments in the west, all i am asking is that you sometimes actually pay attention to the real mountains outside your border. they represent a threat to you just as much, if not more. its not THAT big of a planet you know, and its not the days of slowly sailing ships. what happens in beijing and tehran does have a real and measurable impact on your life, and it isn't a good impact. some days, you should stop beating the drums of the evils of the west, and turn your moral and intellectual concerns outside your borders

the only valid moral and intellectual point of view is a global one, not a western one, nor an indian one, nor a chinese one. its just that, if you only concern yourself with criticism of the west, you fail this qualificiation for being able to consider yourself as having a truly human conscience

stand up, criticize beijing and tehran. it doesn't mean you are suddenly a dick cheney style neocon. the rationale and ability to criticize nonwestern governments does not start with the assumption that you are enamored of western governments. you can hate washington dc just as much as you hate beijing. criticizing the former does not mean you love the latter, and visa versa

Re:people love making orwellian allusions to (2, Funny)

srealm (157581) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010549)

Tell me, how did you fix your shift of caps lock key for a single word? Or are you just making a statement against the imperialistic capital .. uhh .. letters.

Re:people love making orwellian allusions to (2, Insightful)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010605)

Some may call that inspiring, but its ultimately pointless. As a westerner under the rule of the evil western governments (though apparenty not upto the Evilness of those of asia), what do you want me to do? We can't stop our own less-evil governments from cranking out laws stripping us of our freedoms, let alone get the majority of the population to even vote to stop it. What can I, as a man who has so very little influence over his own country, do to right the wrongs of a country the purposely limits the flow of information to stop whatever little influence I may have.

You may want me to act on this, but you don't say how. We have lots of meaningless banner waving, that does nothing.

p.s On a very vaguely related note, I urge UK readers to atleast glance at http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/ [pirateparty.org.uk] , its not much, but its some sort of start.

when your neighbor's house is on fire (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010773)

you might want to make sure to help him put it out, before the whole neighborhood is aflame. rather than watch his house burn down while you obsess over the fact the upstairs toilet's flush handle stays stuck

really, that's about the scale of comparison when it comes to the "stripping of our freedoms" under western governments (now there's a loaded concept) with what goes elsewhere in your world. do you think it made sense to focus only on fascist elements in great britain in 1939 as germany invaded poland? same concept in play here

as for your suggestion that you have very little influence over other world governments, while you can only wield influnece at home: this is like letting a murderer run away from a murder scene you witness because he won't stop when you yell "stop!" at him... meanwhile, the jaywalker stops and turns around and acts responsibly when you yell "stop!" so let's prosecute the hell out of the jaywalker instead of the murderer. your moral conscience should not be calibrated only to how receptive a criminal is to your prosecution of him, but by the scale of their crime

in fact, the very notion that you DO have influence at home, in a western democracy, speaks volumes about how good you really do have it in the west: your government listens to you. do you know how vital and fragile a concept that really is in the history of the world?

Re:when your neighbor's house is on fire (1)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011077)

Wow, just wow. Seriously.

when your neighbor's house is on fire you might want to make sure to help him put it out, before the whole neighborhood is aflame. rather than watch his house burn down while you obsess over the fact the upstairs toilet's flush handle stays stuck

Since you seem to Your house may be ablaze, but mines starting to smolder, its taking my effort to stop it from burning to the ground. Once its safe, I'll come help you, otherwise my house will burn as yours does. And im pretty certain your house will burn down before theres anything I can do. Atleast if mines still there and I help you rebuild yours rather than rebuild mine.

really, that's about the scale of comparison when it comes to the "stripping of our freedoms" under western governments (now there's a loaded concept) with what goes elsewhere in your world. do you think it made sense to focus only on fascist elements in great britain in 1939 as germany invaded poland? same concept in play here

as for your suggestion that you have very little influence over other world governments, while you can only wield influnece at home: this is like letting a murderer run away from a murder scene you witness because he won't stop when you yell "stop!" at him... meanwhile, the jaywalker stops and turns around and acts responsibly when you yell "stop!" so let's prosecute the hell out of the jaywalker instead of the murderer. your moral conscience should not be calibrated only to how receptive a criminal is to your prosecution of him, but by the scale of their crime

Its nothing like this, at all. Its like going "hey china stop being so mean, or we'll, er, just stop it". Terrifying, a nation willing to employ its military on its own people will surely listen to the civilians of a nation following the same path. We didn't do anything at the invasion of poland. Oh sure, we "declared war" but we made no real military move to stop them, france did the same. As soon as they hit Belguim (i.e coming our way) we got involved. So on the whole you got that right, not that you knew you did.

in fact, the very notion that you DO have influence at home, in a western democracy, speaks volumes about how good you really do have it in the west: your government listens to you. do you know how vital and fragile a concept that really is in the history of the world?

In the history of the world? It means nothing, its the blink on an eye. Lords, Kings and Emperors which endured many long years in control. Democracy as we know it is quite new, and slowly eroding back into the old ways.

Your also still calling for action without call of what that action is. Its still pointless banner waving.

the ivory tower, eh? (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011303)

"In the history of the world? It means nothing, its the blink on an eye"

its nice of you to sit so oblivious and detached from any concern for any suffering in the world. and yet to be so horribly upset by my call to actually care

i know its difficult for you to maintain the sneer on your upper lip as you look down from on yonder high at us mere mortals in the mud actually trying to care about the fate of other people in this world. i apologize. next time when i call for you to care about the suffering of your fellow human beings who made the error of being born outside the borders of your country, i'll try to keep in mind how difficult it is for you to do that

listen closely to what i am asking for: care about and be concerned if citizens in other countries are being abused. not even out of pure altruism, but also because if it goes down the shitter far away over there, it will affect you someday. do you really have a criticism of me for that suggestion?

Re:the ivory tower, eh? (2, Insightful)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011461)

Yes, Life Is Hard. Accept it, work with it, deal with it. Your posts are getting worse and worse, tending more to victim syndrome. Did you even read all my post or just look for something to take out of context and snipe at?

I'll ask you a third time now DO NOT IGNORE THIS.

YOU, yes, YOU. YOU ask for action, yet YOU suggest NONE. You have ideals and dreams, you have a vision of a better world. Good. But you have no action, no plan, no suggestion as to how this may be done. You look away to foriegn powers to solve your problems, even though you don't suggest to them how they might do so. I'm doing what I can to change my nation, Im doing something, if not a big thing, to break the UKs Tory and Red Tie Tory (Or labour as they still dare to call themselves) hold over the UK.

INCASE YOU SKIPPED THE REST, AGAIN, LOOK HERE.
So. What do YOU suggest be done, that will change your nation. Action, plans. No more pointless banner waving.

Re:people love making orwellian allusions to (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010701)

Beijing! Tehran! Stop being dicks!

Well, that's that taken care of. While I remember...

Attention tide! Cease and desist your ingress!

Re:people love making orwellian allusions to (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010713)

Yes sir, let's just hang up the towel and scrap our desire for moral and just government because there's a government worse than ours. How insightful. How forward thinking.

Yes, the Chinese government is worse than the American government. No, that doesn't change the fact that the American government has failed on many levels, both economically and with regards to human rights.

Re:people love making orwellian allusions to (1)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010735)

Western world is moving in 1984 direction, China & co. is moving in opposite direction.

Year by year, westerner loose some rights and non-westerners gain some.

Sure, there is point in speeding things up for nations who are already on their way. But there is much bigger point that nations who are already there do every bit they can to stay that way because it is never won entirely. Freedom only thrives when people actively want to obtain and preserve it.

what does the word "scale" mean to you (3, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010977)

if you have a mile length of road, on one end is pure fascism, and on the other is pure democracy

you have two guys on the road. one guy is a lot closer to fascism, and another a lot closer to democracy

the guy closer to democracy wiggles around a bit, and moves a few inches towards fascism. OMFG! IT'S A SLIPPERY UNSTOPPABLE SLOPE TO ORWELL

but, since its still mostly democracy, the next moment he wiggles a few inches back towards democracy. silence on your part

meanwhile, the other guy down there, right close fascism: he steps a couple of feet deeper towards fascism, cheerfully turns to you, and in classic propaganda, tells you of his great strides towards democracy

and you believe him

Re:people love making orwellian allusions to (2, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010781)

You aren't wrong, but you aren't right either. Certainly there are places where it is worse to live than in any Western country, and certainly as citizens of the world and human beings we should be concerned about the people in those places. However, we can only hope to influence our own governments. Since we don't want our own countries to fall down the same rabbit holes that we've seen other countries go down, we monitor and criticize our own governments to try to prevent such a slide. The fact that China may be worse doesn't excuse our government from moving in the same direction as the the Chinese government. To grossly simplify things: if there a continuum of behavior for a national government with "0" being really awful and "100" being really great, just because China is a "20" and your government is a "65" doesn't mean you shouldn't protest when your government moves to "64" or try to influence it to hit "66".

The fact is that we can't do a lot about what Beijing and Tehran do. If we boycott their products are we hurting the government or the people? Same question with economic sanctions. Attempts to impose Western style freedom and democracy from the outside almost universally end badly, and often leave people worse off than they were under the old "bad" regime. I think most of us can agree that we wouldn't want to live in China or Iran, but there is no apparent easy solution to the problem of how to make them better places to live.

Add to this the fact that many (certainly not all, maybe not even most, but many) people in these countries like things as they are, and you have an even bigger mess. Assuming you somehow force a change, how in your newly free and democratic country do you prevent a relapse the first time things get bad? We see this in Western countries all the time... When things are stressful, the country tightens up. Things become less free (still much better than China of course, but we clearly contract in the direction of "safety" when things are tough). In country with little democratic tradition and with conservative pointing back to the "good old days" under the Communists or the Supreme Leader what's to prevent backslides?

Few if any progressive like what happens in China or Iran, but at the same time we know that there's a lot less that we can do about it than we can do about what happens in our own countries.

2 guys you're watching on the street (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011067)

one guy flat out murders a bystander. you yell "stop!" at him, and he pays you no attention. so you let him be

the other guy litters. you yell and "stop!" at him, and apologizes. you proceed to read him the riot act in high holy moral outrage

so in other words, your sense of moral conscience is not calibrated to the depth of a criminal's crime, but only to the level a criminal is willing to engage with you and attempt reconciliation for his crime

but in this simple analogy, we're glossing over a much more important point: yes, you weild a lot more influece in the west than you do in china, but the take home lesson from that observation is that YOU WIELD ANY INFLUENCE AT ALL. as a citizen of a western democcracy, your government LISTENS to you, the common citizen. do you know how rare and vital a gift that is, and how revealing how bad they really do have it elsewhere in the world in comparison?

don't you think they deserve what you have?

China - one child not true? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29010441)

In the picture from the linked article, it shows his father on the beach with two children.... but I thought you were only allowed one child in China? Is this not true?

Re:China - one child not true? (1)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010779)

The little one is actually his wife.

Re:China - one child not true? (1)

BigHungryJoe (737554) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010889)

ok, that was extremely funny, but the caption also says that it was his 6 year old sister.

Re:China - one child not true? (2, Interesting)

FTWinston (1332785) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010869)

There are various exceptions, to try to prevent over geriatrification (if thats a word) of the population.

Couples who were single children themselves, for instance, are allowed a second child.

This can't be true! (2, Funny)

drc003 (738548) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010663)

China involved in a human rights issue? No way. I don't believe it.

Re:This can't be true! (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011101)

No one was acting surprised. It's merely reporting the news. Just because we expect little different from a country doesn't mean that we should just stop reporting the happenings from that locale.

Or do you really respond to all Olympics coverage with "Tons of countries have sports tournament every 4 years. Again? No way. I don't believe it.".

Re:This can't be true! (1)

drc003 (738548) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011331)

It was sarcasm. Something some others obviously noticed. Carry on....

Cannot happen here (1, Troll)

mseeger (40923) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010671)

This couldn't happen in the western world... Those camps would be at least named bootcamp [wikipedia.org] . You wouldn't be beaten to death, they just make you run until you drop dead [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Cannot happen here (1)

drc003 (738548) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010743)

So sad yet so true.

What would be the point? (1)

TheReverandND (926450) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010867)

In China attempting to find "justice" in it's corrupt and intentionally repressive system. That would give hope to their slaves, I mean people hope, and they can't have that.

Interesting responses (3, Interesting)

happy_place (632005) | more than 4 years ago | (#29010945)

Interesting to read that the majority of responses here seem to be in sympathy of china because it apparently happened here. Makes me wonder how many slashdot readers are dupes for some chinese propaganda machine... I know that sounds paranoid, but the fact that these stories about china continue to surface, and the "anonymous" internet response is a collective yawn... The fact remains that one cannot know anything of any country that engages in such invasive propaganda management. It may all be true, but I don't believe it. I can't. Not until the chinese people get a chance to express for themselves their condition, no matter how unflattering it may be to "One China".

So please, continue to reply to this message with 'But you do this in your country' or 'your press is just as bad' or 'you're just a stooge of western media'...

Blah (1)

tarlss (627609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011141)

Posts here seem to have some kind of assanine over-reaching international agenda. Kid here was beat by overzealous camp counselours that abused their authority and deceived parents for financial gain. They screwed up and now they're covering it up. I believe this issue was covered in America some time ago..anyone remember the Camp Krusty episodes of the Simpsons? This is not some kind of symptom of an elusive and corrupt communist state, it's simple greedy bastards taking advantage of lax regulations of other people taking care of their kids. Sure, China's head government is an soulless autocracy..but quite frankly that has nothing to do with it. You may as well blame GW Bush's Invasion of Iraq for...increased divorce rates and proponents of teaching ID in schools. Not really related..

Show trials... (2, Insightful)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011359)

I find that the international media gives a misleading view of what goes on in China. In such cases, for example, they make it seem like China is actively trying to fight corruption and other major issues. In my experience, the reality is nothing like that. The average person, and particularly poor people are constantly getting screwed, both by companies and the government and no one lifts a finger to do anything about it. Action is only taken when something happens to someone wealthy, as was the case here. Most people in China would probably be lucky to earn $1000 a month, let alone pay that much for an internet addiction camp. The only other time the government takes action seems to be when people raise enough furor about an issue.

And the Chinese government likes making a big event of trials and often ends them with harsh punishments. They're almost show trials, except that the charges aren't necessarily trumped up. I wont be surprised if some of those arrested in this case end up being executed.

Evil Empire (2, Interesting)

leereyno (32197) | more than 4 years ago | (#29011539)

Is China handling this delicate issue appropriately or are the news reports of justice and monitoring treatments merely a facade?"

China is the most worthy heir to the title of Evil Empire (after North Korea at least). Like all communist regimes, it is a despotic tyranny that tramples the rights of its victims, the citizens. So no, China is not handling this appropriately. The governement there cannot implement a solution when it is the source of the problem.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...