Blocking the net: Corporations help governments shut down the information superhighway

Vermont Guardian ^ | September 16, 2005 | By Ron Chepesiuk

[F14 Pilot]

ping

[spinestein]

Any government which thinks it can allow its citizens to be online but still effectively censor ideas from them in the long run is genuinely stupid.

I mock them and laugh at their efforts. (HA)

[angkor]

I mock them and laugh at their efforts. (HA)

In the late 90's Vietnam had an OUTBOUND firewall, IIRC it was Raptor and had been installed by French consultants. I do recall reading an article about it, maybe in the (Hanoi controlled) Vietnam Business Review.

I don't really know the current status, but when in VN in 2003 they were still *definitely* tapping business telephone calls between Saigon and Hanoi.

Aside from business intelligence, my understading is that the Hanoi government seems most terrified by local access to anti-communist sites in the USA.

[mysterio]

The days of free, unregulated anything are certainly numbered. government likes to control, and people like to feel "safe." And I'm talking about our government and our people.

[Hank Rearden]

According to reports by CNET and the LA Weekly, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is even considering regulating political bloggers by using the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law as its authority.

Thanks a lot, George Jr., you dumbass.

[sure_fine]

they don't want our MSM's or Al Reuters or Abu Associated in there

[meyer]

Aside from business intelligence, my understading is that the Hanoi government seems most terrified by local access to anti-communist sites in the USA.

So are the democrats, it would seem.

[spinestein]

[my understading is that the Hanoi government seems most terrified by local access to anti-communist sites in the USA.]



That is exactly what terrifies them and others like them. And they have good reason to be afraid.

[spinestein]

[The days of free, unregulated anything are certainly numbered. government likes to control, and people like to feel "safe." And I'm talking about our government and our people.]


This is a most legitimate concern over anything which can be taken away from a free people by an overzealous government.

Except for the Internet. It's simply not possible for any government to significantly control what is or is not viewed without restricting its use completely.

And the more that oppressive governments TRY to restrict limited portions of the Internet that they don't want their citizens to see, the more they'll increase interest and demand for the forbidden sites.

For a democratically accountable government such as our own to restrict specific information on Internet sites (using the FEC to regulate political content for example) is absurd. That is not to say that there won't be some fools in our government who won't TRY, but any who do will be quickly mocked, removed from power, and just as quickly forgotten.

Anybody who doubts this just needs to ask themselves "How effective has the effort been to restrict hardcore child pornography from the Internet?" Answer: "NOT EFFECTIVE AT ALL." And the reason is, anyone with a computer and an Internet connection can post whatever information they want to, anytime they want to, from nearly anywhere in the world usually with complete anonymity. And anyone with their own computer and an Internet connection who wants to view that same information can do so just as easily, and any efforts by the government to filter that information are laughably easy to bypass.

[angkor]

In March 2005 they released a former Saigon history professor from 30+ years in prison.

His crime? He advocated democracy.

He's frail and in his 70's, and the wonderful Hanoi government now has secret police monitoring his phone calls, watching his house, and interrogating his neighbors in Saigon.

http://www.hdvnbtdt.org/article.php3?id_article=97

[Prime Choice]

Last June, Microsoft began blocking consumers of its new China-based Internet protocol from using such “dangerous” words and phrases as “freedom,” “democracy,” “human rights,” “demonstration,” and “Taiwan independence.” Users who fail to comply get this message: “This item should not contain forbidden speech, such as profanity.”

And to think of all the Redmond shills here who whine that Linux is the tool of the Communists...

For shame...for shame...

[spinestein]

The practice of jailing (or worse) of political dissidents is as old as government itself.

The existence of the Internet makes it much easier for dissidents to remain anonymous to the government while at the same time allowing them to reach a vastly larger audience. It also makes it easier for political prisoners' stories to be spread around the world which increases the chances that they'll be released.

[angkor]

remain anonymous to the government while at the same time allowing them to reach a vastly larger audience

Dr. Nguyen Dinh Huy has a web site hosted in the U.S., as well as many international supporters.

That doesn't bode well for the Hanoi communists or their attempts to control political dissent.

Check it out, all the guy is saying is that communism doesn't work.

http://www.pttndt.org/

[F14 Pilot]

Sounds like Cuba and Iran though

[spinestein]

I don't understand a word of what is written there, and the English translator button seems not to work for me.

But I'll take your word for it that Nguyen Dinh Huy says communism sucks. :^)

[angkor]

I don't understand a word of what is written there

Yeah sorry, the site is a little flakey (still, provided to me by a member of his family).

In any case, Nguyen Dinh Chi is basically a Vietnamese Nationalist. He's saying in his essay that communism doesn't work, and that it has been destroying Vietnam.

This ought to do it:

http://www.pttndt.org/movement/pt_man.htm

[angkor]

Nguyen Dinh Chi Huy

[spinestein]

[...To empower the people to appoint the government and carry out their will. ... a new constitution derived by the consent of the people and in the best interests of the people so that they can remain free and perpetuate a democratic republic.]



Now why does this sound familiar?

Oh yeah: http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

[snowsislander]

The Internet may seem like a medium that can democratize China, but the Chinese authorities have developed effective ways to sabotage online dissent. In fact, the RWB believes that “the way the Chinese government has stifled online dissent offers a model for dictatorships in all corners of the world.”

Moreover, the Chinese have help from the West to achieve their repressive objectives. Several large multinationals, including Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo!, have been willing to allow China to censor ideas and stifle free expression in exchange for profit. Last June, Microsoft began blocking consumers of its new China-based Internet protocol from using such “dangerous” words and phrases as “freedom,” “democracy,” “human rights,” “demonstration,” and “Taiwan independence.” Users who fail to comply get this message: “This item should not contain forbidden speech, such as profanity.”

The policy of "engagement" via trade with totalitarian regimes such as China and Vietnam is a failure. Companies such as Microsoft, Cisco, and Yahoo! are not acting as catalysts for democracy but are being turned into forces for repression.