About
Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon,Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Congo Democratic Republic, Djibouti, Egypt, Equitorial Guinea, Eritrea,Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Ivory Coast,Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania,Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda,Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia,South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda,Western Sahara, Zambia, Zimbabwe
ASIA
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, China, East Timor, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Kazakhstan,Korea - North, Korea - South, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Malaysia, Maldives,Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan,Vietnam
AUSTRALIA AND OCEANIA
Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia,Nauru, New Zealand, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu
EUROPE
Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium,Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Chechnya, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia,Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova,Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Norway, Poland,Portugal, Romania, Russia, Scotland, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia,Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, Vatican City, Wales
MIDDLE EAST
Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman,Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
NORTH AND CENTRAL AMERICA
Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Islands, Canada, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica,Mexico, Montserrat, Nicaragua, Panama, Puerto Rico, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago
SOUTH AMERICA
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Falkland Islands,Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela
US Newspapers
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii,Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine,Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey,New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina,South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming
Accounts
Friends
Click here to check if anything new just came in.
March 03 2012
Serbia: First Conviction for Online Hate Speech
The High Court in Belgrade has recently brought its first conviction for online hate speech, sentencing Simo Vladičić to three months in prison and two years of probation for threatening members of the LGBT community via the Facebook group 500.000 Srba protiv gej parade/500,000 Serbs against gay parade in September 2011, when the gay pride parade in Belgrade was canceled due to security reasons. In a similar case, the European Court of Human Rights has recently ruled that hate speech against members of the LGBT community cannot be justified by the right to freedom of speech.
Russia: A Last-Minute Overview of Pre-Election Blogging
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
On Dec. 31, 1999, as Russians were celebrating New Year's Eve, a holiday that transcends religion and politics, President Boris Yeltsin went on the air and announced that Vladimir Putin would be instated as acting President. Before signing off, he added: “I want to beg forgiveness for your dreams that never came true. And also I would like to beg forgiveness not to have justified your hopes.”
In the aftermath of the devastating apartment bombings that occurred in September 1999 and the launching of the Second Chechen War, Mr. Putin's sole platform for the 2000 Russian presidential election was counter-terrorism in the North Caucasus. Beyond that, Mr. Putin refused to campaign or to join a political party. Nevertheless, he finished first among the 11 candidates with 53% of the vote - and the “Putin Era” began.
Twelve years later, Mr Putin's candidacy seems much more turbulent, as protesters took to the the streets alleging improprieties in the Dec. 2011 parliamentary elections. Still, polling data suggests that he is heading into Sunday's election with the support of the majority of the electorate.
Protesters hold a poster against the Russian Prime Minister and presidential candidate Vladimir Putin during a rally for fair elections in St. Petersburg, Russia. Photo by MIKE KIREEV, copyright © Demotix (25/02/12).
For World Affairs Journal Blog, Vladimir Kara-Murza contextualized the March 4 election in a post entitled, “In Sunday's Vote, It's Putin Vs. Russia”:
On Monday, Polish composer Krzysztof Penderecki was at the Bolshoi Theatre in Moscow, attending a performance of Rodion Shchedrin’s opera Dead Souls. As the performance was getting underway, spectators noticed Penderecki in the box and started booing. The legendary musician was bewildered, not understanding the reason for such hostility. Only later was it explained to him that the audience mistook him for Vladimir Churov, the chairman of Russia’s Central Electoral Commission — to whom he indeed bears an uncanny resemblance.
As Sunday’s presidential election draws near, the public frustration with Vladimir Putin is becoming increasingly apparent. Over the weekend, thousands of Muscovites formed a human chain alongside the 10-mile Garden Ring Road — inspired by the pro-independence “Baltic Way” of 1989 — to protest Putin’s return to power and demand free and fair elections. In St. Petersburg, thousands of people from across the political spectrum marched through the city center calling for “a peaceful revolution.” Attitudes to the regime are also being expressed in less political ways: a mock Channel One “news report” from the future showing Putin’s arrest and trial in Moscow became an instant online hit, with five million views in one week. […]
Sean Guillory of Sean's Russia Blog provided the background for the candidates running against Mr. Putin:
[…] Indeed, the Russian presidential election has been anything but ordinary. Sure, the official cast of characters remains virtually identical to past contests, save a few additions. Communist Party stalwart, Gennady Ziuganov still plays the role of “loyal opposition in-chief,” the aging face of a Communist Party that has the organizational resources to actually present a political alternative to Putin, but lacks the so-called “Leninist will” to adapt to present political conditions. Part of that adaption, however, would require dumping Ziuganov and forsake its aging electorate, something the KPRF mandarins and rank and file are still unwilling to do. Opposite Ziuganov is Vladimir Zhirinovsky, another perennial “loyal oppositionist.” Zhirik plays the harlequin in this grand performance, adding outrageous, comic relief to a show already thin on drama. In a way, Zhirinovsky reflects the whole process itself, a clown for a clownish spectacle. Then there is Mikhail Prokhorov, the new addition to the cast. Prokhorov serves as a kind of Khodorkovsky-lite (since the real Khodorkovsky is less pliable and, well, in jail for the foreseeable future). An oligarch who “made” the bulk of his wealth in the “loans for shares” scheme that saved Boris Yeltsin from defeat in the 1996 Presidential election, Prokhorov, unlike Khodorkovsky, not only understood the rules of the game, but also played them correctly. But the biggest question that has dogged Prokhorov is not his past, but whether he’s a Kremlin project or not. I suspect that he’s a mixture. One thing is clear to me after reading Julia Ioffe’s profile of him in the New Yorker is that Prokhorov’s biggest obstacle is that he’s a sleazeball. Bringing up the rear is Just Russia’s candidate, Sergei Mironov. His candidacy only inspires one question: Who’s he? […]
Along with the results of the election itself, freedom of expression has been a resounding issue for the past few months.
Committee to Protect Journalists Blog provided details to the backlash the Russian media endured after its coverage of the protests surrounding the controversial Dec. 2011 parliamentary elections:
[…] On December 12, Russian tycoon Alisher Usmanov, owner of the Kommersant Publishing House - which produces independent business daily Kommersant and several other news outlets - announced that he was sacking Maksim Kovalsky, chief editor of the popular weekly magazine Kommersant-Vlast. Demyan Kudryavtsev, the publisher's executive director, announced he would resign. The news was a huge blow, as Kovalsky and Kudryavtsev are leading journalists and considered fathers of Kommersant and its publisher.
The magazine's coverage of the parliamentary election was surely the reason for Kommersant's beheading. A week after the vote, most of Kommersant-Vlast's coverage was of the alleged fraud that led to public outrage and protests unprecedented in Russia in the past decade. But Usmanov - believed to be in Putin's close circle - zeroed in on a formal reason to punish the magazine. In its December 12 issue, Kommersant-Vlast published a picture of a ballot cast in London for the opposition Yabloko party; the ballot carried a hand-written insult to Putin across it. Usmanov publicly scolded the magazine for “unacceptable use of coarse language,” and said it was unethical and “on the borderline of hooliganism.” The magazine removed the picture from its website, but it was circulated on social networks, including Kommersant reporter Oleg Kashin's Twitter account.
The removal of Kovalsky and Kudryavtsev angered their colleagues at Kommersant. Two days later, dozens of journalists from Usmanov's news outlets - including independent news website Gazeta - signed and published online an open letter headlined, “We are forced into cowardice.” Veronika Kucyllo, a long-serving deputy editor at Kommersant-Vlast, announced her resignation in protest of Usmanov's decision.
Another important theme this election season has been the role of citizen media as a catalyst of political activism in Russia. Even though they are harder to censor than mainstream news sources, they are not totally immune to censorship, however, as Global Voices discussed in a post entitled, “Why are Russians Protesting Now?”
In a post entitled, “The Man Vladimir Putin Fears Most,” Wall Street Journal Blog predicts that blogger and anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny will have an impact on the presidential election:
[…] Anticorruption blogger and activist Alexei Navalny will be in the middle of it — as he has been over the past three months of Russia's unexpected political awakening. By the tens of thousands, Russians shed their fear and apathy to protest December's fraud-ridden parliamentary elections and Mr. Putin's hold on power. From a crowded stage of opposition figures, Mr. Navalny has emerged as the charismatic and fresh face of the movement.
The next phase will test him and the opposition. The series of large demonstrations after December exposed the shallowness of support for Mr. Putin in the large cities and public frustration with the political stagnation and lack of accountability in Russia. Yet the rallies forced no notable government concessions. Though weakened, Mr. Putin gets a new term and possibly energy to reverse his slide or to crack down. […]
Tolik Belenko's Russian-language LiveJounal blog included a link to a “Nashi” announcement [ru] that the pro-Putin youth group has made plans to quash civil unrest in the aftermath of the elections:
On March 5, a few thousand activists from the groups “Nashi” and “Steel” will take to the streets of Moscow in order to prevent any illegal activity aimed at destabilizing society in the aftermath of the Russian presidential election.
LJ user tolik_belenko also shared the link to Nashi's announcement on his ya.ru page [ru]. Readers' comments were somewhat ominous.
Johnny TraHvoltin wrote [ru]:
This has already happened, though not with us, but in China, when [Mao Zedong] occasionally called out the [Red Guards Hóng Wèibīng] troops to the streets in order to maintain order. How did it end? Read history.
Svetlana wrote [ru]:
It's not yet tomorrow. Why guess? We shall see.
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
March 01 2012
Russia: The Early Days of Government Transparency
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
“Make your work available online.”
It may seem a harmless demand, but in Russia it's more than that.
Such a request led to Alexey Navalny, a famed anti-establishment blogger and activist, scrutinizing public procurement contracts to expose shady practices by officials and private companies.
Navalny's project, RosPil [ru], helped earn him the reputation of Russia's most viable opposition leader — though he says he won't partake in or respect elections that aren't clean (a popular stance these days).
The RosPil project exposes corruption in Russia. Photo: Sven Hultberg Carlsson
That Navalny and other contributors to RosPil were able to examine public procurements — a job that needs doing not only in Russia — is thanks to a small triumph of open governance. At the end of 2005, enough pressure had been laid on the Kremlin for its leaders to make public procurement contracts available to the public.
The simple but insistent demand had come from the Freedom of Information Foundation (FIF) [ru], a non-profit founded in 2004. In a recent interview with Global Voices, Ivan Pavlov, its chairman, argues that open access to government information enbles citizens to act as a check on their rulers:
Everyone agrees that corruption is a huge problem in Russia. But the government's solution has been stronger government control. I believe that public control is much more effective. Government information must therefore be available so that the public can exercise control over it and oversee its actions.
Our demand is that the government and all public institutions make everything that isn't secret available to the public on a website.
The Foundation has made encouraging advances in their field. Early in Dmitry Medvedev's presidency, when his reform initiatives had a semblance of bite to them, work on Russia's Freedom of Information Act began to gain momentum.
With the help of persistent officials at Russia's Ministry of Economic Development — officials who, coincidentally or not, “no longer work there” — the Duma passed what Pavlov deems a “revolutionary” and “very progressive” piece of legislation:
The Freedom of Information Act was Medvedev's greatest achievement as president. I am an optimist and still believe the act will change the whole Russian system. But the government has to use this immense resource as a way to change. So far, that hasn't happened.
The act has been in effect since 2010. Its implementation is lacking. Little if any information is provided when requests are put to authorities, prompting the Foundation to litigate against secretive bodies that, believe it or not, are breaking the law.
Veracity tests have become a daily routine. When Medvedev proclaimed the need for an independent judiciary, Pavlov’s organisation put Russian courts to the test.
Many courts were unwilling to publish short bios and pictures of their judges online, but some reacted positively to the challenge. Pavlov says:
The courts may have published this information because they wanted to take the lead in our ratings. But I hope that these courts also understand how such a decision can contribute to society.
Of course, making information available online does not guarantee transparent governance. Pavlov admits that sensitive information is the hardest to expose.
Very few government agencies, federal or regional, want their financial records in public view. Information on cash flow, which could expose corruption, is kept secret — not only by the authorities, but by non-profit organisations as well.
And in the week of Russia’s presidential elections, there is an elephant in the room. Vladimir Putin, very likely about to enter his third term as president, favours a closed society. Russia’s ministries, reluctant collaborators even during Medvedev’s presidency, are much less prone to cooperation now.
The Freedom of Information Foundation operate from their offices in St. Petersburg. Photo: Sven Hultberg Carlsson
Even historical records, politically less toxic for today's leaders, are off limits. Historians researching the Soviet-era repressions cannot examine victims’ records without explicit approval by each related family.
Why, then, would information incriminating the Kremlin directly be brought to light?
Pavlov explains:
Putin cannot control the whole system. My hope is that the popular demands we have seen increase since the Duma elections last year will bring about change.
We see Russia developing in our research. In 2005 two thirds of Russia's federal executive agencies had no websites. Today all of them do.
But projects like RosPil cannot be alone. Civil activists and NGOs must use the Freedom of Information Act to expose situations where there is no justice.
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
Hungary: Tax Administration Investigates Citizen Activists
Véleményvezér blog commented [hu] on the news of the most popular citizen movement's activists being checked by the National Tax and Customs Administration, interpreting it as a sign of fear by the ruling party Fidesz: “Two years after [winning] a two-thirds [majority], they're already catching flies, they're chasing civil activists.” The movement being targeted now started from a Facebook page ‘One Million for the Freedom of Press in Hungary‘ (aka Milla; hu; over 99,000 followers) and organized several rallies against the new media law and the government's politics. On the Hungarian national holiday on March 15, Milla is planning to hold another rally.
February 29 2012
Cuba: Worry about Hunger Striker
Uncommon Sense hopes that political prisoner Ernesto Borges' fate will not go the way of so many other hunger strikers, saying: “He needs you to learn his story and to spread it so that his life can be saved.”
Trinidad & Tobago: Battle with Media
Afra Raymond outlines what he believes is a “sinister pattern” towards the media in Trinidad & Tobago, since the People's Partnership has been in government.
According to Raymond, who elaborated on his views in an accompanying webcast, “…given the boundless nature of the new technology, we are going to see a sharper, more wily, battle to reduce the strength and clarity of our media. I greet it.”
Iran: A pro-animal blog was filtered
Sepehr Salimi writes another pro-animal and pro-environment blog got filtered in Iran.Dadkhahi Heyvanat az Ensanha (animals ask people for justice) used to write about pets.
Russia: An Overview of the Pre-Election Anglophone Blogging
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
The pre-election month of February has been filled with reports of large-scale gatherings of both the opponents and the supporters of Russia's current regime. On Monday, Feb. 27, however, as the countdown to the March 4 presidential vote entered its final stages, the news of the foiled attempt to assassinate Vladimir Putin, the Russian PM and one of the presidential candidates, temporarily succeeded in shifting the spotlight onto the person who may re-enter Russia's political scene as the head of state quite soon - and away from the citizens, their hopes, fears and demands.
Below is a quick overview of what some of the Anglophone bloggers have been writing about the pre-election politics in Russia this past month.
Mark Galeotti of In Moscow's Shadows shared initial thoughts on the Putin assassination plot:
[…] I’m willing to accept that this was a real plot, not some complete fabrication (as some seem to imply). On the other hand, the news was obviously held back with the aim of seizing the news cycle just before the elections. This is not exactly unique to Russians, but considering the wide scale skepticism, even downright disbelief with which the revelation has been greeted in Russia, this does not seem to have been an especially effective tactic. To be honest, how many times can you play the same kind of card? […]
Mark Adomanis wrote this on the same issue:
[…] Discussion has already turned to the political significance of this plot, and it is fully possible that it augurs for a “tightening of the screws” and that Putin will once again use the threat of terrorism as an excuse to tighten political control (recall that the most dramatic re-centralization of political power occurred in the aftermath of the attack on Beslan). However I lean towards a slightly less malign interpretation in which the thwarting of this plot is merely a PR stunt and an opportunity for some (mostly harmless) pre-election chest thumping: Putin will get a chance to play the aggrieved victim of aggression, a role he plays very well, and say a few things about the tenacity and determination of his government in confronting and defeating terror. We’ll see what happens, but given the totality of the political situation in Russia and the obvious weakening of Putin’s position I don’t think a dramatic re-centralization of power is even possible, at least without the widespread use of force. […]
St. Petersburg: "For Putin" banners inside a bus that has brought people to a presidential campaign rally in support of the Russian PM. Photo by YURY GOLDENSHTEYN, copyright © Demotix (18/02/12).
Eugene Ivanov of The Ivanov Report has produced a series of posts on the upcoming election: The Dinosaur (on Vladimir Zhirinovsky, Feb. 9) Putin and the Polls (Feb. 16), Putin and Elites (Feb. 21), and Putin and Protesters (Feb. 26). In the latest post, he put the recent rallies into perspective and explained their significance for Putin's political future:
I’m puzzled when someone begins comparing the number of people participating in pro- and anti-Putin demonstrations in Russia: to me, it’s like comparing the number of apples with the size of oranges. I get even more puzzled when I hear that by putting more people on the streets, the Kremlin “has won” over its opponents. It’s about the same as to say that because the admirers of Yo-Yo Ma can be comfortably accommodated in the Carnegie Hall with its 2,800 seats whereas Britney Spears can easily attract a crowd of 30,000 fans at a sports arena, the pop diva is ten-time better musician than the venerable cellist.
[…]
What the protesters should really pay attention to is their message. Brought together by the power of a single emotion – the outrage at the rigged Duma elections – they now need to transform their “raw feelings” into a set of comprehensive political goals and demands. Far from trying to beat the Kremlin in the game of numbers, the protesters should actually reduce the size of their columns by decisively parting with the nationalists, monarchists and the like. And if they want to broaden their appeal, they would better outreach to industrial workers whose loyalty to Putin is only conditional and may rapidly disappear should Russia’s economic situation deteriorate.
[…]
Yet, the major reason Putin so far hasn’t made any attempt to start a dialog with the protesters is that he doesn’t understand them. Putin seems to be genuinely at a loss to figure out why a bunch of well fed people would go on a protest action, especially if their grievances are caused by such a nuisance as “irregularities” in the parliamentary elections. The concept that some people may value their principles and their dignity over material well-being seems to be completely foreign to Putin. (Apparently, there are no such people in the close circle of Putin’s associates.) That’s why he tries to explain their behavior by something he can comprehend: money, directives from the State Department, or “orange leprosy.” […]
Following the Feb. 4 opposition rallies, Mark Adomanis compared the turnout in Moscow with that in other Russian cities:
[…] One thing that does seem noteworthy, though, is that the protests in other Russian cities seem to have been rather underwhelming. […]
[…]
What does this mean for the future of the protests? Well, probably nothing good. Putin and his team are not going to be easy to displace, and I think only a sustained and truly nation-wide popular mobilization could possibly compel them to do so. As always, the situation is fluid and should be watched closely, but there are certainly indications that Putin’s grip on power remains quite secure in large sections of the country. His image has taken a very big and very noteworthy dent, but at this juncture it seems improper to project the palpable anger and frustration of Muscovites onto all Russians. […]
Kevin Rothrock of A Good Treaty moved a few levels down from the overly familiar nationwide politics story, taking a closer look at the relatively obscure local confrontation that occurred in the town of Lermontov in Stavropol region; not surprisingly, he discovered that the latter shared its most important elements with the former:
Yesterday, the town of Lermontov (located in Russia’s North Caucasus) experienced what some are calling “a small revolution.” As the state municipal building was preparing to close for the evening, a collection of townsfolk and former members of the city council gathered and eventually forced their way into the main lobby. Once inside, reporters accompanying the activists took turns interviewing ex-deputies and disgruntled locals. Acting head of the city’s government Viktor Vasil’ev warned protesters that they were breaking the law by illegally occupying state property. Undeterred, the former deputies announced the beginning of an indefinite hunger strike, promising to occupy Lermontov’s municipal building night and day, until their demands are met: chiefly, the cancelation of the city’s upcoming local elections, which the ex-deputies consider to be illegitimate because they were denied the right to participate.
[…]
The Lermontov ‘crisis’ has something for everyone. If you’re a diehard enemy of the Putin regime, there are former city officials protesting in the open, linking local regional corruption to the Kremlin’s evil influence. Certainly, many aspects of the Lermontov election — barred candidates, political control of the courts, and the squashing of local independence — echo the larger criticisms commonly made of ‘Putinism.’
On the other hand, fans of the Prime Minister seem to find it inspiring that several of the assembled protesters are reaching out to Putin in the tradition of ‘good tsarism,’ hoping that he’ll notice their plight and swoop in to right the city’s wrongs. […]
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
Cuba, U.S.A.: Blogger Perspectives on the Embargo's 50th Anniversary (Part 1)
The United States' economic embargo against Cuba has been in existence for 50 years. Several bloggers marked the “embargo-versary” with noticeably opposing commentary.
Earlier this month, The Cuban Triangle noted the inherent discrepancies in the system:
If you enjoy celebrating big old failures, the 50th anniversary of the U.S. embargo against Cuba has just passed. Get yourself some rum and have a ball.
One feature of the embargo has been its changing justifications over time: a response to expropriations, an instrument with which to demand that Cuba break its ties to the Soviet bloc and its projection of military power outside its borders, a tool for pressure for the release of political prisoners. These days, the honest justification of it on the part of its partisans seems to be that it will one day serve as leverage over a future Cuban government when Fidel and Raul are no longer around.
Meanwhile, more than 300,000 Cuban Americans per year are traveling to an island they still consider in some measure to be home. Some are just visiting, many are investing at the family level.
Notes from the Exile Quarter, on the other hand, published a post titled “Don't end economic sanctions on Castro regime”, explaining:
Unfortunately the trade embargo on Cuba for all practical purposes was ended in 2000. Economic sanctions remain but since 2001 there has been over $3.5 billion dollars in trade between American businesses and the Cuban dictatorship. The human rights situation on the island has not improved.
These differences of opinion about an issue that is so complex and multi-layered got Spanish Language Editor Firuzeh Shokooh-Valle and I wondering whether members of the Cuban diaspora in the United States and Cubans still living on the Island could be at loggerheads over the effectiveness of the embargo. Is it still relevant? Is it accomplishing anything? Are the measures hurting the Cuban government or the Cuban people? So we decided to ask.
For the diaspora perspective, I interviewed Alberto de la Cruz, Managing Editor of babalu blog, which describes itself as “an island on the net without a bearded dictator” and routinely agitates for political and human rights freedoms on the island. This is the viewpoint that we'll focus on first (Alberto's interview follows, below). Then, to give you an idea of how Cubans on-island feel, Firuzeh will publish the second part of this post - an interview that she conducted with Elaine Diaz (full disclosure: she's a Global Voices contributor), who teaches at the University of Havana and blogs here [ES].
Global Voices: The U.S. embargo on Cuba - probably the longest-running economic ban in history - recently turned 50! Supporters see it as a necessary measure against a communist government; critics say that the policy is a failure that is really not hurting the regime, but instead, the average Cuban. Where do you stand on the issue?
Cuban diaspora blogger, Alberto de la Cruz
The sign says: 3 days of the blockade is equivalent to the pencils, paper and other materials for a whole school course
What the U.S. “embargo” actually does is prevent the Castro government from adding the U.S. to its long list of debtors who are currently owed billions of dollars with no hope of getting paid in the foreseeable future. From that perspective, the embargo has been a phenomenal success. We are perhaps the only nation in the world that does business with Cuba who is not owed millions of dollars by a regime with a decades-long history of not honoring their financial commitments.
GV: What do you think the embargo has accomplished, if anything?
AdlC: In addition to precluding the U.S. from becoming another victim of the Castro regime’s propensity for borrowing money and not paying it back, the U.S. embargo is the only leverage the U.S. has against the Castro dictatorship. As history indicates, the countries that have normalized relations and business dealings with the Castro government are severely limited in their ability to demand respect for human rights on the island. When these countries have attempted to pressure the Cuban dictatorship into stopping their repressive tactics, their economic interests on the island are immediately threatened. Therefore, their decision to promote respect for human rights in Cuba ceases to be a moral one and becomes an economic decision instead. Since, because of the embargo, the U.S. has zero investments on the island that can be threatened, it can maintain its firm stance on human rights and democracy for the Cuban people.
GV: Do you think the embargo, as it stands now, is doing anything to improve the political or human rights situation in Cuba?
AdlC: In essence, yes. The U.S. embargo has deprived the Castro dictatorship of hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars it can use to maintain and fuel its machine of repression. For the past fifty years, the Cuban regime has used hard currency provided by other countries – beginning with the former Soviet Union and now Venezuela – to fund its brutal, East German Stasi-trained State Security apparatus. By denying the Castro regime U.S. dollars from American tourism, credit, and normalized trade, they have less cash to maintain, strengthen, and expand their repressive policies.
GV: What effect do you think the embargo has had on the Cuban economy and do you see a better alternative?
AdlC: Cuba and its economy are run and completely controlled by a totalitarian military dictatorship. The Castro regime has taken a country and an economy that was once productive and vibrant, and whose standard of living in 1958 surpassed that of some Western European nations, and has turned it into a third-world country. A better question, I believe, would be what effects the economic policies and decisions of the Castro government over the past five decades have had on the Cuban economy.
The only viable alternative that exists is for the Cuban people to rid themselves of the dictatorial regime that enslaves and represses them. History has shown that engagement with this brutal and criminal regime produces zero positive results. The entrenched dictatorship has no interest in true reform or limiting its power, let alone relinquishing it.
GV: How do you feel about the recent lifting of travel restrictions to Cuba and making remittances easier?
AdlC: The lifting of travel restrictions and increased remittances to Cuba from the U.S. [has] been a financial boon for the Cuban dictatorship and has unleashed a wave of repression against Cuba’s opposition movement. In the two years since the Obama administration unilaterally relaxed sanctions against Cuba, the Castro regime’s cash reserves have grown by more than $2-billion, while politically motivated arrests on the island have increased almost threefold. Visiting American tourists on the island are led on Potemkin Village-like tours, denied any interaction with Cuba's democracy activists. In the end, American tourists visiting Cuba will provide the same help in fostering democracy on the island that the 2-million+ yearly tourists from other countries have had, which is to say, none.
GV: What have been some of the “creative” responses to the embargo from Cubans outside the island?
AdlC: Since the Obama administration unilaterally relaxed travel restrictions to Cuba, Cuban exiles no longer have to come up with “creative” ways to evade the law. In the past, however, the most common method of circumventing U.S. travel restrictions was to visit the island through a third country. The most popular were Mexico and the Bahamas, although Cubans living in the northern part of the U.S. could also use Canada as an intermediary stop on their way to Cuba.
GV: Do you think there a generational shift in attitudes about the embargo for Cubans inside and outside the island?
AdlC: In regards to Cubans in exile, for almost two decades now, we have been hearing and reading about this community’s supposed generational shift in attitude regarding the U.S. embargo on the Castro dictatorship. It seems that every year several polls are published showing a softening in the so-called “hard line and intransigent” stance against the Castro regime by Cuban exiles. However, while these polls claim to accurately gauge the sentiment amongst Cubans in the U.S., the most accurate and reliable poll, the voting booth, shows a different outcome. Year after year, election cycle after election cycle, Cuban exiles have overwhelmingly voted for representatives that echo a hard line approach towards the dictatorship in Havana.
In terms of Cubans on the island, I find it difficult to get an accurate reading on their opinions regarding the embargo. Cubans are forced to live in an information-deprived society and therefore, their attitudes are colored by the false reality created by the regime. For instance, the vast majority of Cubans on the island are not aware the U.S. is one of the island’s major food suppliers, mainly because very few of them ever see any of the food shipped to Cuba from the U.S. Through no fault of their own, they are left to formulate opinions regarding the U.S. embargo without knowing the facts. Personally, I would put more stock in any generational shift occurring in attitudes in Cuba towards the embargo if the population had access to all the information it needed to form an educated opinion.
"Department Store, Cuba-Style" - Does the embargo really make consumer goods hard to come by?
GV: While we're on the topic of access to information, how has the embargo affected the Internet in Cuba?
AdlC: Since all “legitimate” internet access in Cuba is severely restricted by the Castro government, I cannot see how U.S. policy plays any role in average Cubans accessing the internet. Consider the recently completed fiber-optic cable between Venezuela and Cuba offering improved internet access to the island. After connecting the cable, the Cuban regime immediately quashed any hopes of internet access for its citizens by declaring all internet access would be reserved for government entities only. Moreover, in January of 2010, a Miami-based company, TeleCuba, was granted permission by U.S. authorities to lay a fiber-optic cable between Key West and Havana, but according to reports, the Castro regime has refused to strike a deal with this company. Add to this the fact that American aid worker Alan Gross was arrested in 2009 and sentenced to 15 years in prison for providing Cubans with unfiltered internet access and the obvious becomes more obvious: The Castro dictatorship is not interested in providing Cubans with unfiltered or unrestricted internet access, regardless of U.S. policy towards the island.
GV: Is the embargo an important issue for you in the upcoming US presidential elections? Why or why not?
AdlC: For me, personally, Cuba is an important issue in the upcoming U.S. presidential elections. I would like to see a president that is committed to defending the human rights of the Cuban people and maintains a firm stance against a tyrannical regime just ninety miles from our shores. From a diplomatic perspective, the embargo remains a tool that can help an administration stand up to tyranny and defend human rights.
GV: Who would stand to benefit from a lifting of the embargo? And who would stand to lose?
AdlC: The first and foremost benefactor of any lifting of the embargo would be the Castro dictatorship. Such an act would provide an economic boon to the regime, flushing them with cash and political capital, which history has proven time and again they will use to perpetuate their iron-grip on power and maintain the Cuban people enslaved. The second benefactors would be U.S. corporations who would be given the opportunity to strike deals with the Cuban government that would give them exclusivity in the marketplace and eliminate any competition normally found in a free marketplace. The Cuban consumers, as always, will receive little to no benefit, as the regime’s business deals with the rest of the world have clearly indicated.
The first and foremost loser would be the Cuban people and democracy activists on the island. With the Castro regime given a new lease on life with cash revenues and political clout, the government will be free to repress and quash any dissent with impunity, while maintaining the rest of the population enslaved. If the U.S. finally bowed to the Castro regime and removed the embargo, there would be no leverage left to demand the Cuban government respect human rights. The U.S. would become like Canada, Spain, or the EU: another country or union more interested in protecting its economic interests in Cuba than protecting the human rights of the Cuban people.
A reminder to look out for Part 2 of this post, which will examine the embargo from the point of view of a Cuban blogger who lives in Havana.
February 28 2012
Video Highlights: Defending Human Rights
This section aims to showcase interesting and recent posts in Global Voices that show the many ways in which videos are helping people tell stories all around the world. You can follow the activity by regions in our YouTube channel.
Several stories using video this month have focused on human rights violations and the steps being taken to speak out on the abuses and try to protect minorities and disadvantaged communities. Click through to the stories to see more videos and learn more about each case.
The right to life and non-discrimination
Guatemala: Speaking Out on the Genocide of Indigenous Women
Thanks to activists the international courts following the genocide proceedings against Guatemala will be taking into account the violence indigenous women faced for more than 36 years where they were victims because they were women and because they were indigenous.
A documentary and several video testimonials tell their harrowing stories, stories that due to the discrimination the victims faced in their communities and the fear of retribution many kept silent for decades.
Fighting for sexual diversityUganda: The Anti-Gay Bill That Won't Go Away
The same bill that was presented in 2009 is showing up again for voting in Uganda:
Uganda has again re-tabled the controversial anti-gay bill. Ugandan member of parliament, David Bahati, who proposed the bill back in 2009 has again considered tabling the draconian bill but with changes. He claims to have dropped the death penalty and jailing of family members who fail to report homosexuals to the authorities.
However, under further scrutiny it has been noted that no changes have been made in the bill, and it is still exactly the same one presented back in 2009. The following video explains the impact this bill will have on the LGBT community as well as their families and friends:
Hong Kong: Videos Against Homophobic Bullying in Schools
In Hong Kong, students in schools admit that homosexual students are bullied and discriminated, so an organization has spearheaded a campaign to raise awareness on this issue, focusing on producing online videos of interviews with sexually diverse students and experts on the topic.
The right for an education
Spain: Police Violence Against Students in Valencia
and
Spain: Crackdown Against Students Continues in Valencia
In Valencia, school children decided to protest budget cuts that affected their schools, forcing them to carry blankets with them due to lack of heating, in what has been a particularly cold winter in Europe. Police reacted to the protests violently with students injured and detained; many videos have been made showing the abuses against minors, females and the elderly.
Just a few days after the brutal police crackdown at the Luis Vives Institute of Secondary Education in Valencia [es], students have again been the target of beatings, pushing and violence from the police at a pacific protest in which they were, precisely, demonstrating against police violence. This time,the crackdown started on the afternoon with unexpected force.
The right to a home
Brazil: Quilombo Community in Bahia About to Be Evicted
One of the oldest slave descendent communities in Brazil, Quilombo Rio dos Macacos, where around 50 families live, has a date for eviction: March 4, 2012. The claim for the land comes from the Navy of Brazil, that intends to broaden a condo for its officers in that territory, in the border area between Salvador and Simões Filho, state of Bahia…
Descendants of original peoples from Africa who, during colonialism, were taken from their land to become slaves in Brazil, the Quilombolas now see themselves under threat of losing their homes again, despite their right to the land they inhabit enshrined in the constitution.
This short documentary [pt] shows the situation the Quilombolas are facing: afraid to leave their houses, unable to move freely and fearing for their well-being, their families and their homes.
Colombia: Citizen Journalist Threatened Over Viral Video
A video [es] made of the violent response the government had to peaceful protesters standing up against the rerouting of a river in their community for a dam construction has caused the citizen journalist to receive death threats.
Brazil: The Deficient Prison Systems of the Americas
Recent events in Latin American prisons that cost the life of hundreds of inmates have people looking into the living situation and overcrowding faced in many penitentiary centers, and analyzing if they are tragedies waiting to happen. People who are being deprived of their liberty as punishment for their crimes should be guaranteed minimum living conditions, and sometimes these aren't met, as shown in the documentary of life in Brazilian prisons, which also provides possible solutions for this difficult situation.
Cuba: Dialogue with the Opposition?
“It might be paranoia. In totalitarian states, suspicion and the absurd become habit. But it isn’t insane to think that to give the dissidents a space if circumstances force their hand, could become a part of the island’s mandarin’s calculus”: Iván's File Cabinet puts forward a compelling theory.
February 25 2012
Pakistan: The Government Tender To Purchase Filtering Tools
Apparently the Pakistani government has invited tender to private and semi-private companies to purchase a tool to block thousands of urls. Awab Alvi and Faisal Kapadia hosts a video podcast at SpeakForChange to discuss why the government is doing this.
Iran: Another blogger was arrested
Nama Jafari,blogger and journalist was arrested. He was editor of a cultural site. He also wrote a book called “a gathering in solitary confinement”.
Russia: Bloggers' Photo Reports and Reflections on Pro-Putin Rally in Moscow
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
On Thursday, Feb. 23, ten days before the March 4 presidential election, the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin addressed thousands of people at the Luzhniki Stadium in Moscow. The Guardian's Miriam Elder described the event as “a gathering reminiscent of Soviet spectacle both in rhetoric and style”:
[…] Thousands of workers from the provinces were bussed in or rushed on to trains to attend the event. […]
A rally in support of PM Vladimir Putin took place in Moscow on Feb. 23, ahead of the presidential election on March 4. Photo by Irina Firsova, copyright © Demotix (23/02/12).
A number of Moscow-based bloggers attended the Feb. 23 rally, too. Below is a selection of their photo reports and observations, along with some of the remarks from their audiences.
LJ user mi3ch posted 17 photos and wrote [ru]:
Absolutely ordinary people. Trusting. Good. Like my aunt. Like my next-door neighbor. Students, workers, [state employees], pensioners. Seven out of ten - women. Mothers and grandmothers. And they really like Putin. He is so brave and decisive. […]
Their main distinction from [those who attended the opposition's rallies at Bolotnaya Square] are their faces. At Luzhniki, hardly anyone was smiling. And almost everyone walked silently. […]
LJ user otshellnica rebuked the blogger [ru] in the comments section:
At Bolotnaya, you could find the same [unsmiling] faces in the multi-thousand crowd. Just as there were nice and smiling faces at this rally. You, of all people, shouldn't be playing with such cheap arguments.
LJ user maxsytch offered [ru] a different point of comparison between the anti- and pro-Putin rallies:
The difference was in the percentage of the people who came to Bolotnaya and Luzhniki voluntarily.
Ryazan-based LJ user tamrat elaborated [ru] on the definition of ‘voluntarily,' citing her city's participation in the Feb. 23 rally as an example:
People from Ryazan enterprises came voluntarily - and joyfully. And whether they are for Putin or not is irrelevant. They had a tour of Moscow for free! They were taken there, got fed, listened to a concert. And all this for free! People came back home happy. And nothing will change in our country until a person can be made happy with free food and a trip!
LJ user vova-maltsev posted 14 photos [ru] and recounted his quick conversations with some of the rally's participants:
[…]
- Why are you here?
- We've been brought in here, [damn it].
- Are you for Putin?
- [Screw him], our salary's 17,000 [rubles a month, $580].[…]
There were [Tajik migrant workers] sitting in one of the buses.
- Are you for Putin?
- [We work as cleaners in Izmailovo, damn it, and we are stuck here now. Will have to do our job all night.][…]
Nice [female] school cooks.
- What are you doing here?
- We've been dispatched here.
- To cook porridge [for the rally's participants]?
- Yes.
- Did you go to Bolotnaya?
- No, they didn't send us there.
- Are you for Putin?
- Yes, of course… Are you a journalist?
- Yes. I'm not for Putin.
- (whispering) We are all against him. All our teachers are against, too.
An anonymous reader left this comment [ru] to LJ user vova-maltsev's post:
[They are being drawn there forcefully.] They aren't even getting paid, the motivation is their fear of problems at work + 1 day off. This info is 100% true. Relatives work at a state enterprise, in Moscow.
LJ user panzicov (Alexei Vitvitskiy) posted 48 photos [ru] on his blog. Five of these photos, the blogger claims, show a group of people allegedly being paid for their participation in the rally:
[…] The conscience of the people costs 800 rubles [$27] for two hours, [the money] was being handed out at [Park Kultury metro station] right after the rally. […]
Seven photos in LJ user panzicov's report show a group of young black men carrying handmade banners with pro-Putin slogans on them. Another blogger, LJ user drandin (Igor Drandin), talked with these men, asking them where they were from, and posted the video [ru, en] on his blog and on YouTube; one of the men explained, in English, that they were from Kenya.
LJ user pier_luigi, commenting on LJ user panzicov's post, wrote this [ru] about Putin's Kenyan supporters:
North Korea this is not - not yet… But the representatives of international Putinism are very impressive!
LJ user tushinetc posted 16 photos [ru] taken before most of the rally's participants took their seats at the Luzhniki Stadium. One of the photos shows empty seats with identical plastic bags on them. LJ user tushinetc explained:
[…] Some organizations took good care of their employees, making sure they do not get cold while sitting on plastic [seats]. In each bag placed on the seats there's a blanket, as well as a candy and a tangerine, and on the seat itself, there's [a cloth mat for sitting]. […]
LJ user 2014imeretinka commented [ru]:
How mean! For a candy and a tangerine…
LJ user panfilosoff replied [ru]:
Not mean at all… If you don't attend, you'll have serious problems at work, and if you do attend, you'll get a reward and a tangerine. Everything's simple and logical.
This post is part of our special coverage Russia Elections 2011/12.
February 24 2012
Cuba: Prisoners' Rights
Uncommon Sense republishes a statement by Amnesty International about “former prisoner of conscience Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia [whose] whereabouts are unknown following his alleged arrest in central Havana, Cuba, on 21 February”; Pedazos de la Isla, meanwhile, reports that “the political prisoner on hunger strike, Ernesto Borges, was taken from Combinado del Este prison of Havana to an unknown location on a stretcher and in critical condition.”
Puerto Rico: Blogosphere Denounces Proposed Cybergag
[All links lead to Spanish language pages except when otherwise noted]
The mayor the city of Mayagüez in the western part of Puerto Rico, José Guillermo Rodríguez, was given the power through a resolution from the Municipal Legislature to investigate anyone who publishes content on social networks that he takes as sullying “the good name and image of the municipal government of Mayagüez, its managers, officials, and employees”, according to the stipulations of the resolution approved by the Municipal Assembly of Mayagüez. The news website Noticel reported that the mayor had decided to not enforce the resolution. Nevertheless, Rodríguez released a warning:
En algún momento muy cercano vendrán más regulaciones para atender la utilización inadecuada de las redes sociales, y eso lo provocarán los que no hacen uso correcto de las mismas, acechando, amenazando, utilizando identificaciones falsas para tratar de mancillar la imagen de gente íntegra y decente. Hemos cumplido con nuestro deber de ser de los primeros en alertarlo.
Resolution 102, approved on February 9, authorized the mayor to contract legal and investigatory services to prosecute anyone who users social networks in a “malicious way”. This includes trying to identify users who prefer to utilize a pseudonym instead of their real name.
Mayor Rodríguez, affiliated with the Popular Democratic Party (PPD), attempting to justify this measure said in statements published by the weekly regional newspaper La Estrella that the use of social networks “should be a privilege in democratic countries”, inciting the Puerto Rican blogosphere to rail against him.
Luis J. Villanueva from the Raciocinio said:
Este sujeto no tiene idea de las reglas que determinan lo que él puede y no puede hacer porque este tipo de actividad está prohibida por la Constitución y las Leyes de Puerto Rico y los EEUU. ¡Más preocupante es la visión de que el uso de las redes sociales es un privilegio!”
Other bloggers also could not wait to react. Mario Núñez Molina on his blog DigiZen expressed his take on the matter:
A mi esto me suena a mordaza, censura y un atentado contra la libertad de expresión ya que la evaluación que se haga de lo que se publique en contra de estos funcionarios será una altamente subjetiva y tendrá como fin el que nadie diga nada malo de Guillito [José Guillermo Rodríguez] y sus seguidores.
On the Puerto Rico Law Blog, lawyer Christian M. Frank Fas confirmed that the municipal measure goes against the laws and principles of a democratic society:
La libertad de expresión es un pilar constitucional por una razón. Es uno de los cimientos de toda sociedad democrática y civilizada, y si al municipio le preocupa tanto que mancillen su estelar desempeño, quizás podrían dedicar esos mismos recursos contratando una firma publicitaria, y no utilizar el afilado intelecto legislativo para investigar y “carpetear” a sus constituyentes y, de paso, suprimir un derecho democrático fundamental.
The Overseas Press Club de Puerto Rico issued the following statements also repudiated Resolution 102:
Amparado en una alegada defensa de la imagen del municipio y sus funcionarios, el Alcalde de Mayagüez y su legislatura municipal intentan censurar a quienes critiquen su gestión. Rodríguez debe recordar que precisamente por ser figura pública está expuesto a las críticas y de ninguna manera puede querer controlarlo. Eso sería dar al traste con el derecho a la libre expresión y la libertad de prensa.
The antipathy toward Resolution 102 has been so widespread that the president of the Popular Democratic Party and candidate for the government through the same party, Alejandro García Padilla, also came out against the measure on Twitter @agarciapadilla:
Estoy en contra de la Resolución aprobada por el Municipio de Mayagüez. Voy a hablar personalmente con el Alcalde para aclarar este asunto.
Among the firestorm of complaints that the measure provoked, the hilarious commentary on the Puerto Rican blog El Ñame could not be missed, highlighting how absurd it would be to implement this measure:
Uno de los blogueros que critican la ley, quien permaneció en el anonimato porque es un cobarde de siete suelas, arguyó: “No entiendo cómo alguien podría determinar la ubicación física del autor de un contenido cibernético ofensivo a los funcionarios municipales. ¿O es que el Alcalde podrá soltarle los perros a cualquier bloguero que hable pestes de él o de su administración, sin importar dónde habite? ¿Quién hubiera podido imaginar que la Sultana del Oeste tuviera tanto poder?”, preguntó sarcásticamente, aunque la respuesta a su pregunta es “nadie, porque la imaginación de nadie podría superar la realidad boricua”.”
February 23 2012
Iran: Letter from Jailed Blogger Details “Blue Sky of Pain”
Dr. Khazali with his daughter
Dr. Mehdi Khazali, a jailed Iranian blogger, publisher and government critic, wrote a letter this month from prison describing a “blue sky of pain” of his first-hand experience with the injustice of jails in Iran where prisoners face torture and arbitrary death sentences.
Khazali's daughter (see photo) and wife were briefly arrested too.
Mehdi Khazali's letter was published in his personal blog (some activists pass on passwords to their blogs and Facebook accounts before they lose access themselves).
He writes [fa]:
One person was sentenced to death for receiving a fake one and half sentence email. What I see with my own eyes is that prisoners have no rights in revolutionary courts. Many have no rights to legal defense, nobody has the right to read his or her own file to be able to defend him or herself… You can't even read the court's sentence for you before you are forced to sign it.
The blogger adds:
Three prisoners who were in my cell were sentenced to 17 years in prison in a trial which lasted just two mintues. One of them has been on hunger strike for 10 days now… Three Christians are in prison too, just for their faith.
Khazali says prsioners who escaped mass executions in 1988 and remain alongside him in prison, and have told him about coffins (some prisoners were put in coffins as a torture) and iron cages.
Khazali wrote the letter to Ahmad Montazeri, the late Grand Ayatollah Hussein-Ali Montazeri's son. Ayatoolah Montazeri criticized mass executions and revealed some information on this topic.
Georgia: Online campaign targets Russian president's Facebook page
With Russian soldiers stationed in Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, a group of Forum.ge users proposed to mark the Defender of the Fatherland Day on February 23 by posting anti-occupation comments on Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's Facebook page.
Cyxymu, a Georgian blogger who was the target of attacks on Facebook, Google Blogger, LiveJournal and Twitter, forcing the latter offline for two hours on 7 August 2009, posted a photo on Facebook alerting many Georgians to the campaign.
More than 200 users of the social networking site then started to post comments and continue to do so.
“Дмитрий Анатольевич, я требую вывода российских оккупационных войск из Грузии!”
“Dmitry Anatolevich, I demand the withdrawal of Russian occupational forces from Georgia!”
An hour later comments started to disappear from the page, reported Cyxymu. Georgians, however, did not stop posting the comments and taking screenshots of Medvedev's Facebook page.
Facebook users later reported that the page was no longer accessible in Georgia, with some alleging it had been blocked. Later, when it was available, many comments left by Georgians users were found to have been deleted.
February 22 2012
Tunisia: Court Quashes Verdict Ordering the Filtering of Pornography
Today, the Cassation Court of Tunis (highest court of appeal) threw out a verdict to censor pornography on the Internet. On May, 26, 2011, a court of first instance issued a ruling ordering the Tunisian Internet Agency (ATI), to filter X rated websites. On August, 15, 2011, the ruling was affirmed by the court of appeal.
Outside the Tunisian Internet Agency (ATI) in Tunis, Tunisia by Jillian C. York
Today's verdict was welcomed by netizens, supporting an absolute net freedom.
Reporters Without Reporters Tunisia office, was the first to report the court's ruling:
#ATI - la cour de cassation casse le jugement et renvoie le procès en appel.
The news quickly spread, and reactions via the micro blogging website, Twitter started pouring in. Here is a selection of reactions:
@RODE86: Ya7ya el 3adl! Ya7ya el 3adl!
@HBHassine: je suis heureuse qu on reconnaisse enfin que les Tunisiens sont adultes et responsables! #contrelinfantilisationdesTunisiens #ATI
@yassine95140: La bonne nouvelle, qu'on soit pour ou contre la décision de la cour, c qu'on a la preuve d'1 séparation réelle d pouvoirs. #ATI #TNAC #TNGOV
Others have aired more suspicious and careful views.
@El_7oss: Ces connards de la cassation pouvaient aussi casser le jugement sans renvoyer en appel #ATI
@Selim_: bien. Mais c pas fini
@omessaoud: Le renvoi de l'affaire #ATI en appel à nouveau est un renvoi de responsabilité pas une victoire. #free404 #tunisie #censure
Syria: Call to Free Human Rights Detainees
Syrian blogger Razan Ghazzawi appeals to supporters to exert pressure on the Syrian government to release her colleagues at the Office of the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression in Damascus. Ghazzawi herself was among those detained when the centre was raided on February 16. She has since been released.
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
