×

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!

Kuwait Sentences Two Men To Jail For Tweets Criticizing Ruler

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the sticks-and-stones dept.

Twitter 91

New submitter Oxide writes "A Kuwaiti court sentenced a man to two years in prison on Monday for insulting the country's ruler on Twitter, his lawyer said, the second person to be jailed for the offense in as many days. The Gulf state has clamped down in recent months on political activists who have been using social media websites to criticize the government and the ruling family. What's interesting is that the tweets in question did not mention the ruler directly but just indicated it might be him it is referring to."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

91 comments

Dont talk shit about people... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530339)

problem solved!

Re:Dont talk shit about people... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530677)

Yeah but , his towel is dirty and his mama dresses him funny, he rides little boys and his camel rides him, he wipes his butt on his hand and bathes once a year.
Praise Allah! Let's not criticize anyone for their culture. We could all be best friends, We could have a barbeque and invite him over to meet your sister, their moustaches match. Who wouldn't want a shit-smelling sand troll around?

Another argument for metric (5, Funny)

MrKaos (858439) | about a year ago | (#42530353)

As it's obvious this ruler was Imperial.

Re:Another argument for metric (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531775)

To be honest, I actually read the headline as if the two men had criticized the measuring tool, and not the country's leader. Only for a few seconds. I blame the fact that only moments before I was reading the headline about the Kilogram posted earlier (you know, cause my mind was thinking about measurements and stuff).

Damned Tyrants! (5, Funny)

neiljt (238527) | about a year ago | (#42530357)

Cripes, reading this makes the US sound like the Land of the Free.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530389)

I know some might have a preference for flexible plastic and some a preference for metal, or metric and imperial, but at least you don't get send to jail for making that choice.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (3, Insightful)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year ago | (#42530609)

What these tyrants fail to realize, is that nobody takes anything anyone states on social media seriously. The Internet is a community of screwballs, nitwits and the outright bat-shit crazy.

On the Internet, folks will say to you stuff like, "Your mother's muff is astroturf!" and "Heidi Klum is actually an investment-grade Lego Mindstorms collectors' edition set!"

So what? "Twits and stones will break your bones . . . ?"

Re:Damned Tyrants! (4, Insightful)

Chatsubo (807023) | about a year ago | (#42530745)

> nobody takes anything anyone states on social media seriously

Until you put them in jail.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42533687)

Ya, once you take extreme action such as jailing. Everyone then takes what they said as fact, after all if it weren't an embarrassing fact then you could laugh it off and ignore it.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (2)

Luckyo (1726890) | about a year ago | (#42530961)

That was sort of true. Then Arab Spring happened.

You may want to note where Kuwait is located.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (4, Insightful)

gtall (79522) | about a year ago | (#42531685)

Let's review the Arab Spring just for giggles. Tunisia: moderate government but the Islamists are grinding their teeth and threatening people. Egypt: elected an Islamist who appears to be governing by decree...admittedly attempting to lead a failed state. Libya: warring clans, no central government. Syria: civil war. Saudi Arabia: Arab What? Yemen: weak central government, Islamists wandering the hills in search of victims...errr...followers. Kuwaiti: still ruled by the fat boys in robes. The rest of the Gulf States: see Saudi Arabia. Algeria: still fighting the Islamists, central government has heard of democracy but is having none of it. Morocco: still has monarchy which is fighting tooth and nail to remain relevant, Islamists don't yet have a significant foothold. The other African countries have Islamists cutting off heads, arms, legs, etc....gotta wonder what they have against those limbs.

Some spring. Allah-forbid summer should come, the Islamists won't rest until every Arab is under their boot.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

ericloewe (2129490) | about a year ago | (#42531771)

If the choice comes down to a western-style dictatorship that's friendlier to us than a bunch of islamists, and said islamists imposing their authoritarian regime, I'll support the former.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about a year ago | (#42532739)

As we've seen in concrete examples, locals prefer the latter. And they're the ones that get to vote.

Notably their locals would have probably preferred islamist authoritarian regime in Western countries too. But here, we get to vote.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about a year ago | (#42534685)

Long-term, you should support not the regime that is friendlier, but the regime that builds schools and generally educates people and keeps the economy more or less relevant - rulers come and go, but populace remains, and educated populace is much less likely to condone dictatorships, and is more likely to be friendly with the West.

From that perspective, though, secular dictatorships are still preferable to "Islamic republics".

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#42534681)

Egypt: elected an Islamist who appears to be governing by decree

Not anymore. They had an vote in Egypt last month, and 64% voted to approve [wikipedia.org] the new constitution. You may not approve of the way Egypt is heading, but the Egyptian people do approve, and it is their country. They replaced non-democratic authoritarianism with democratic authoritarianism, and I think that is an improvement, because now there is at least a mechanism in place for future reform.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531913)

Obama Slash Dots hero does.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#42534575)

What these tyrants fail to realize, is that nobody takes anything anyone states on social media seriously.

"The tyrant fears the laugh more than the assassin's bullet." -- Robert Heinlein

Re:Damned Tyrants! (2)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#42530807)

Cripes, reading this makes the US sound like the Land of the Free.

The Kuwaiti family fails to realize that if they want to have real power and control they need to let go of the "ruling family" thing and get themselves put in charge of the money supply there. Let people say whatever they want, but make 100% of their wealth subject to confiscation for collateral on that money and make their every activity subject to arbitrary rules for enforcement. But let them say whatever they want, because that will make them feel free, and so they'll be more productive.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (0)

gtall (79522) | about a year ago | (#42531715)

The Kuwaiti Royal Family already has control of the money supply. They figure that gives them the power to tell everyone what to believe and say.

The U.S. screwed up after the Kuwait war, they should have offered it to the Palestinians. It would have removed a royal pain in the tookus. "Say, Pals, have we got a deal for you. How'd you like yer own country so you could have yer own civil war, it's got oil, a port or two, verrrrrry friendly neighbors. Warm sunny climate....location, location, location!!!"

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

TheMiddleRoad (1153113) | about a year ago | (#42533831)

After the US kicked Iraq out of Kuwait, the Kuwaitis ethnically cleansed the Palestinians from Kuwait. Hundreds of thousands forced to move. Let's blame Israel.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#42534115)

After the US invasion the Emir was a bit annoyed because the US made him free his slaves. Now they import 'guest workers' from Indonesia and the Philippines and treat them worse than they ever treated their slaves (some of whom had served the royalty for multiple generations). They knew the Palestinians wouldn't put up with that crap so they had to go.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (4, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#42531051)

Cripes, reading this makes the US sound like the Land of the Free.

It sure does, doesn't it? That's why I yell so loudly about every little infringement of our freedoms. We'll miss them when they're gone, even the ones we didn't think we were interested in.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (2)

daem0n1x (748565) | about a year ago | (#42532237)

I'm soooo glad you guys went there in '90 to liberate the country when Saddam invaded it, or Kuwait would be a freedom-hating dictatorship now.

Re:Damned Tyrants! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42532645)

For the moment. US is rapidly heading towards this end...

Re:Damned Tyrants! (1)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#42534059)

Doesn't it make you proud that this is one of our government's closest allies? [/sarcasm]

Criticizing ruler? (4, Funny)

TheDarAve (513675) | about a year ago | (#42530405)

What did they post? "Your numbers aren't fully in line!" "You don't take exact measurements! " "Being flat and metal with writing all over you is evil!"

I don't blame them (3, Funny)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#42530423)

I still remember with bitter disappointment the day I discovered that the 30cm on one edge of my ruler didn't exactly line up with the 15" on the other side after all.

Re:I don't blame them (2, Insightful)

telchine (719345) | about a year ago | (#42530473)

I still remember with bitter disappointment the day I discovered that the 30cm on one edge of my ruler didn't exactly line up with the 15" on the other side after all.

Why would you be disappointed? They should be out by approximately three inches!

Re:I don't blame them (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#42533459)

Oops. 12".

Up until that fateful day, I'd never looked closely enough to see that, while the 0cm and 12" marks lined up, the 30cm and 0" marks didn't :(

Re:I don't blame them (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531569)

I still remember with bitter disappointment the day I discovered that the 30cm on one edge of my ruler didn't exactly line up with the 15" on the other side after all.

It's not the size that matters but how you use it!

All Hail the Principle. (4, Funny)

MRe_nl (306212) | about a year ago | (#42530453)

Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah al-Streisand effect.

Re:All Hail the Principle. (1)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#42532089)

Making an example of the offenders is exactly what they ARE trying to do. The specific content of the tweet, nobody will care or even remember.

Re:All Hail the Principle. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42533219)

Oh, they're making an example alright. Just not the kind they want to make.

They're making these guys into an example of what happens when you mock some egotistical asshole in the middle east that has "power". I predict this will lead to a large-scale mocking of all egotistical assholes with "power" in the middle east, causing many of them to get upset and throwing a hysterical tantrum (look up the word "hysterical" sometime) leading to further mocking. This cycle will build until all credibility in their "power" is gone, leading exactly to their fall.

If they'd just let it pass, it wouldn't have happened. That's what a sandy vagina gets you.

Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530483)

Should have let Saddam have them.

I think I remember (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530501)

Didn't the west stop an invasion of Kuwait a few decades ago? Kinda a big thing at the time. Hmmm if this is what that conflict led to maybe stopping the invasion was not entirely a good idea hmmm

Re:I think I remember (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530579)

yeah remember? we were over there because we want to spread democracy and freedom and stuff... we had to get rid of those jerks doing all the oppression!

Kuwait, Quatar, Saudi Arabia... those are all great places, full of fun and happiness... that's why they're our allies.

Re:I think I remember (2)

TheMathemagician (2515102) | about a year ago | (#42530595)

Well Saddam Hussein wasn't known for embracing constructive criticism either but you have a fair point. The West - which realistically means the US - should insist on democratic reforms and freedoms when using its power to save these dictatorships from each other. There's currently a similar wilfull blindness in Afghanistan. The enemy (the Taliban) is demonised by various views on women's education/behaviour etc. However the Afghans themselves are just as extremist once you get outside Kabul. Their differences with the Taliban are more based on tribal and clan loyalties than fundamental differences in beliefs. The media likes to imply that once the evil Taliban is defeated Afghani women will be able to marry who they want, go to university, and parade round in bikinis. They won't.

Re:I think I remember (4, Insightful)

Jiro (131519) | about a year ago | (#42532193)

This isn't true. For instance, the Taliban banned the education of women, but education of women was allowed before that. Schools had to close down--why would they have to close down something which according to you never could have existed?

The Taliban were also known for destroying some historical Buddhist statues for religious reasons. If what you were saying is true, and the people of the area have the same beliefs as the Taliban, those statues would have been destroyed already by the locals.

It's true that the people of Afghanistan want what would by Western standards still be a dictatorship, but some dictatorships are bad, and some are really bad.

Re:I think I remember (1)

TheMathemagician (2515102) | about a year ago | (#42534631)

"But outside Kabul and other big cities the changes are more patchy. Most Afghans still live in rural areas, where poverty, conflict and conservative attitudes are more likely to keep girls and women at home. [...] These are also the heartlands of the Pashtuns, the ethnic group from which the Taliban emerged and who have always had the most conservative views of a woman's role." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19911341 [bbc.co.uk]

Re:I think I remember (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about a year ago | (#42534793)

This isn't true. For instance, the Taliban banned the education of women, but education of women was allowed before that. Schools had to close down--why would they have to close down something which according to you never could have existed?

The areas where there were schools (like Kabul) were mostly under the control of DRA government before Taliban took over. To remind, that's the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan - i.e. the pro-Soviet government that Soviets fought to defend in the 80s, and abandoned by early 90s. It was a secular authoritarian but progressive government, and yes, among other things, it also built schools (one of the things that drew ire of islamists way back then was that DRA schools were mixed, boys and girls together). It did not have the support of the majority of the population, however, which is precisely why it collapsed.

Re:I think I remember (0)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#42530833)

Hmmm if this is what that conflict led to

The conflict led to an end to Iraq's slant drilling under the Kuwaiti border, ensuring a smooth flow of OPEC exports.

Re:I think I remember (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531175)

Actually, the accusation was the other way around [wikipedia.org] -- that Kuwait was drilling under the border into the Rumaila oil field on the Iraq side. This was one of the pretexts for Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. I don't know if it was ever resolved if this was actually happening rather than being a trumped-up, bogus excuse, but the rationale you have described isn't correct.

And this is Slashdot worthy why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530519)

And the point here is? It's not a technical story, just that they used an internet service to communicate their thoughts.

If you don't have nice to say about someone... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530527)

don't say it at all. Or learn to create a fake name and use the Tor browser.

Enough said.

Good Thing (4, Insightful)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about a year ago | (#42530597)

Good thing the US saved these scions of freedom from the clutches of a tyrant, eh?

Re:Good Thing (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#42531239)

Yup. The US also protected the Saudis and U.A.E. from being oppressed by the Iraqis so they could instead by oppressed by their own monarchs. And then we wonder why a bunch of them got mad at the US and flew some planes into buildings (which the US responded to by helpfully invading Iraq).

Re:Good Thing (2)

idontgno (624372) | about a year ago | (#42532083)

They're scions of freedom in the only ways that matter: free to quietly support our policies and actions in the Gulf region, and free to sell us all the oil we can buy.

I hope this isn't some kind of shock for you. Our foreign policy is pretty consistently utilitarian. The moral considerations are, at best, icing.

Actually, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42540593)

Kuwait is and was a member of the UN and it was invaded by Iraq whose leader announced his intent to annex the place. This violated the most basic rules of the UN and UN membership, so if the UN had not intervened and kicked Iraq out, then the UN would have been truly pointless. I dislike Bush41 rather intensely but I am always amused when so many people who like the UN denounce Bush41's gulf war as some form of evil ..... no Bush41 Gulf War == irrelevent UN.

Kuwait? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530649)

So, did Al-Jazeera cover this?

Re:Kuwait? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530715)

Re:Kuwait? (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#42531305)

The only government that Al Jazeera might have a tough time criticizing is Qatar, because that's who owns them. And that's why I like their coverage of Middle East affairs: They don't pull punches, no matter what they're reporting on.

Re:Kuwait? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531859)

Coverage on the English Al-Jazeerah is of no value. They usually just follow / copy other English media.

I would like to know if they cover these abuses on the original Arabic Al-Jazeera. No the news are not the same on those two channels. The news on each of these channels is tailored according to the audience. Arabic channel is pro-fundamentalism to say the least...

Re:Kuwait? (3, Informative)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#42532899)

Coverage on the English Al-Jazeerah is of no value. They usually just follow / copy other English media.

Right, that's why they report stories that a lot of the American media won't even touch, and report the same story from a different perspective. That's why they've won the Columbia Journalism Award [columbia.edu].

Some examples of what you're missing if you ignore them:
- They covered the Egyptian revolution very very different viewpoint from, say, the New York Times. If you read only American press, you'd think that Mohammed Morsi was a dictator. If you read or watch Al-Jazeera English, you'd know that he was the duly elected winner of a hotly contested election.
- They exposed the details of a negotiation session between Israel and Fatah over who was going to own what in the West Bank, including actual video. The editorial aftermath was highly critical of both sides.
- They've reported on the effects of US drone strikes beyond the typical "US officials say that 15 militants were killed in a drone strike in Pakistan today."

Re:Kuwait? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42534549)

This may be news to you, but there is English media outside of the United States.

so? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42540921)

They covered the Egyptian revolution very very different viewpoint from, say, the New York Times. If you read only American press, you'd think that Mohammed Morsi was a dictator. If you read or watch Al-Jazeera English, you'd know that he was the duly elected winner of a hotly contested election.

So what? The NAZIs covered WWII from a different viewpoint ..... just reporting from a "different viewpoint" is of no value without establishing WHAT that viewpoint is and that it is an honest viewpoint. Also, if you watch Fox News then you are quite aware that Morsi was elected .... so I presume you are either being ignorant or are only aware of the DNC-approved US media

They exposed the details of a negotiation session between Israel and Fatah over who was going to own what in the West Bank, including actual video. The editorial aftermath was highly critical of both sides.

So what? Being "critical of both sides" has no particular value if by it you mean: "those jerks at Fatah dared to talk to the Jews, who should all be killed .... and those Jews are vile rats who should all kill themselves"

They've reported on the effects of US drone strikes beyond the typical "US officials say that 15 militants were killed in a drone strike in Pakistan today."

So what? First, most American media will not cover this because their guy (Obama) is doing it and because it's only bad people being killed. It's either militants dying, or the civilians who are allowing the militants to hide behind them. When the middle east is full of evil women who teach their children to embrace jihad and evil men who raise their sons to be suicide bombers there is nothing there worth saving. It's a matter of perspective, of course.... I doubt Al-Jazeerah spends much time on the individual humanity of the American or English or other western people who've been slain by jihadists over the past few decades

Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530769)

Coming soon to any American who criticizes Obama!

Re:Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530971)

I'm going to enjoy making you people dig your own graves in the FEMA camps.

Re:Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531011)

Coming soon to any American who criticizes Obama!

Really? The biggest free speech problem in the US is that we are too generous in what counts as protected "speech".
Case in point: campaign contributions.

You have the right not to use Twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42530829)

Everything you say can and will be used against you.

And we defended this country from Iraq? (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | about a year ago | (#42530973)

I think we should have let it become part of Iraq and then taken Iraq.

Sometimes, most of the time, I say we should stay the hell out of the middle east. It's not the "American peoples' business." Sure, there are some people in the US who have business there and so be it. Let THEM pay for their armed assistance defending their business. Why should US tax payers pay for the armed defense of their business? Do we get tax breaks or rebates? Sure, we get cheaper prices at the pump, but cheaper compared to what? I think the result of higher gas prices are well known... higher cost of employees and a shortage of the ones employers want. That would lead to more use of public transportation and/or telecommuting and all the things the oil industry dreads because it's all a reduction in the use and dependency on big oil. It all serves big oil's business interests which are:

1. Maintain everyone's dependence on big oil

Short list of interests right?

Re:And we defended this country from Iraq? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#42531125)

I think we should have let it become part of Iraq and then taken Iraq.

This would make more sense to me than what we are doing. But remember, it's not based on what makes sense for humanity in the long term. It's based on what makes sense for the people in power right now. On one hand you have the interest of The People, who would like to see the amount of work they have to do to survive fall, the level of comfort in their life rise, and the amount of violence in their life decline so they can relax and enjoy life. On the other hand you have the interest of a tiny slice of the population which happens to be in control of nearly everything, who would like to see the same things. Unfortunately, statistically nobody in this system really cares about anyone else, and The People don't work together. But since the same strategies enable TPTB to maintain the status quo, it has the effect that they do work together even when they aren't organized because they want the same things. They want confusing laws that can be selectively enforced against their enemies and don't care how many innocent men go to prison over them, they want economic chaos so that they can acquire assets at depressed prices and don't care how many people lose their livelihoods, they want to profit by pumping dino juice out of the ground and turn it into fuel and they'll be dead within a century or less so they don't care what happens to the environment. If we had ramped up "alternative" energy sources say in the 1970s when solar panels became practical (and able to reasonably repay their energy investment within their lifetime, and make a profit too) where would we be today? Answer, we wouldn't need Big Oil at all, and TPTB can't have that, can they?

What I find most pathetic about all this is that surely they can profit just as well from not destroying the biosphere. They already tell us what we can buy, who we can vote for, et cetera. Why can't they just tell us who we can buy biofuel from, so they can profit from that instead of carbon release?

Re:And we defended this country from Iraq? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531933)

"Why can't they just tell us who we can buy biofuel from"

Because our masters are THAT fucking lazy.

Re:And we defended this country from Iraq? (1, Troll)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#42532707)

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism."
- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933 (2-time Medal of Honor recipient)

2 for 1 deal! (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about a year ago | (#42533217)

In the future, just let the neighboring despot invade and take over, THEN invade and "liberate", that way you get two countries for the price of one!

Of course one might argue that Iraq might have used the additional resources in money and oil to further militarize the area. Then again, so long as you don't wait overly long it shouldn't be a problem. Might take 4 days rather than 3 to totally wipe out their forces. Additional, that way rather than having to fight insurgance all day long, you automatically recieve your own insurgance force to use presumably.

What ... you expected a Jeffersonian paradise ? (1)

noshellswill (598066) | about a year ago | (#42530995)

Why is this behavior newsworthy? Kuwait is a camel-fyucking Muzzi-wog desert shitewhole; w.r.t. (re)publican virtues you expected WHAT kind of gub'mnt action ?

Not so different here in the EU (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531057)

What is acceptable or unacceptable depends on each country's culture.

Remember that british guy who posted that Jimmy Savile joke on tweeter and got fined ? How is that any different ?

Liberated (3, Insightful)

kimvette (919543) | about a year ago | (#42531079)

I'm so glad we liberated Kuwait, so that they could get their tyrannical regime back.

Re:Liberated (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42532073)

They will be liberated in a couple of years, after someone finds out they are being ruled by tyrants

Re:Liberated (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42537619)

Like Saudi Arabia and Qatar you mean? Not gonna happen.

Wow, they're pretty progressive! (1)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | about a year ago | (#42531165)

Darn, Kuwait is pretty progressive - most countries in that region would have sentenced them to death!

Seriously though, as much as I might complain about what's wrong with America, it's comforting that we are free to criticize our government without fear of prison or worse.

If I want to say that the House of Representatives is the most wretched hive of scum and vil... *pounding at door* ... oh, scuse me one sec... +++CARRIER LOST+++

Re:Wow, they're pretty progressive! (1)

JTsyo (1338447) | about a year ago | (#42531915)

That's impressive they got to your door before you hit submit. Must the the Thought Police.

Does this happen in the U.S. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42531215)

If things like this already do not happen in the United States, they will start happening. Bush layed the framework.

ISLAM IS THE CANCER (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42533153)

NUKE THEM ALL

A rule in the USA for insulting the President (1)

nauseous (2239684) | about a year ago | (#42533371)

If we put people in jail for insulting the president of the united states, there sure would be a lot of people in jail right now :).

In related news ... (1)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#42533389)

... Governor Christie remains unpunished after chastising the GOP for dragging their heels on hurricane aid.

There just ain't no justice!

UK government actively encourages this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42533553)

When the British left the Middle East, in most important senses it really did not. Pseudo regimes like Kuwait's do exactly what their British masters tell them is appropriate.

Britain has been leading the way, in the West, for prosecuting online speech. Political activists have their homes raided, and all their computer equipment confiscated, regardless of charges. In the UK, the police boot regularly stamps upon anyone who challenges the state.

The 'ex-colonies' are instructed to use the British acts of suppression as a model AND a justification. So, when someone burns a poppy (symbol of British warmongering through the ages) online, or expresses powerful anti-war sentiments, they are arrested in the UK. The UK has no right to free speech. The trick used to eliminate this was to push POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and to state that offending anybody with your words is a potential crime. Anti-war views 'offends' those in the armed services, so are illegal when powerfully expressed by ordinary people.

The UK uses the trick of NOT prosecuting those seen as having a 'professional' voice like journalists. All the news agencies in the UK are establishment, and have the closest ties to the UK intelligence services, so no mainstream British journalist poses any kind of threat. Citizens, on the other hand, are a very different matter.

The UK government actually has high ranking members of the UK police force acting as senior advisers in these gulf states. The crack-downs you see in places like Bahrain and Kuwait are a result of direct suggestions by these representatives of the UK. They actively use examples of free-speech prosecution in the UK as models for action in places like Kuwait.

Far from punishing these states for their Human Rights abuses, the UN actually hosts major international conferences in the West friendly gulf states, corruptly enjoying the massive luxury resorts that have been built their for the untouchable elites. Unbelievably, these conferences are often discussing 'Human Rights' issues.

Again, I must point out that it is the UK, not the USA, that is encouraging and helping the crack-down on regime opponents in these ex-colonies. By-and-large, the USA is just the (very) dumb muscle.

Iran has a democracy that seeks votes from every adult citizen, male or female. Kuwait does not. Saudi does not. Bahrain and the other emirates do not. Syria has a democracy that seeks votes from every adult male and female. Now think about the Gulf nations that Obama and Slashdot are ALWAYS attacking. Saudi? Nope! Kuwait? Nope! The Emirates? Nope.

Slashdot and Obama only attack the Middle East regimes where the regime, by and large, represents the will of the people. This story may be about Kuwait, but go check the history of Slashdot articles. If the US State Department is attacking a nation, the owners of Slashdot move heaven and earth to find stories that bash that nation too.

Too Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42535739)

Kuwait needs a new ruler, the ruler the currently have is obviously way too short, not even a 04 on a scale of 12, not even a proper ruler.

So (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#42536063)

Aren't we all just thrilled that we have been ensnared in two costly wars in that region all started by (supposedly) us protecting this ruler's power?

Hypocrisy (1)

White Flame (1074973) | about a year ago | (#42536797)

In Washington, the US state department said it had seen the reports of the two men's sentences and had raised the issue with the Kuwaiti government, which it urged to respect freedom of speech.

"We call on the government of Kuwait to adhere to its tradition of respect for freedom of assembly, association, and expression," spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said. "You know how strongly we feel about locking people up for their use of Twitter."

Yeah, how many Americans have been locked up or are now labeled terrorists for saying dumb things on the internet?

In E-Solidarity... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42538129)

Well, then I'm going to say that ruling emir, Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah is a fucking piece of goat-fucking human trash who can suck diseased dick cheese from the penis of a dead inmate. Also, he likes it when fat, hairy women shit on his chest.

That is all.

lol capcha puberty wow.

Check for New 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...