Wednesday, March 12, 2008
posted by @netwurker at 7:37 am
'The war in Iraq will cost US taxpayers at least three trillion dollars, a respected, Nobel Prize-winning economist wrote in a new book which was excerpted in the US press this week.

Joseph Stiglitz's book "The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict," concluded that US military operations in Iraq already have exceeded the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

"The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million US troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007, inflation-adjusted dollars) of about five trillion dollars," he wrote in the work co-authored with Harvard professor Linda Bilmes.

"With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than 100,000 dollars in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of 400,000 dollars per troop."'

Labels: , ,

 
Thursday, February 21, 2008
posted by @netwurker at 9:59 am
"Something is in the air these days because in two separate cases, federal court judges have issued rulings that do some damage to the First Amendment right to free speech. In the first case Judge Jeffrey S. White of the Federal District Court in San Francisco issued last week what the Citizen Media Project calls a "stunningly broad injunction" against web site Wikileaks.

Wikileaks says it's an "uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis," and has actively published a number of purloined documents submitted to it, including the secret censorship lists of Thailand's military Junta and files that purported to expose money-laundering by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi.

This go-around Wikileaks published documents regarding a Cayman Islands bank Julius Baer Bank and Trust Company. Julius Baer asked first for a temporary restraining order against Wikileaks and then received a permanent injunction against the web site because, it argued, a disgruntled ex-employee has provided the site with stolen documents that violate a confidentiality agreement and banking laws. Judge White issued an order not to the site itself but to Wikileaks domain registrar Dynadot to disable the entire Wikileaks.org domain name and account and remove all DNS hosting records."

Labels: , ,

 
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
posted by @netwurker at 12:55 pm
"from the seems-excessive dept

Over a year ago, we wrote about the Wikileaks project, designed to allow government and company officials to anonymously leak documents as a way of whistleblowing questionable activities. Apparently, it's been quite successful at times. However, in doing so, it's also building up a list of enemies, including one who has apparently convinced a California court to make the entire site disappear in the US. The Swiss banking group, Julius Baer, was upset by documents found on the site that they believe were posted by a former VP at the bank, alleging that the bank was involved in money laundering operations. Julius Baer's lawyers claim that having these documents public could influence ongoing litigation in Switzerland (one assumes having to do with money laundering). While it's understandable that the bank might not want those documents online, or that those documents might impact current litigation, that doesn't explain why the California court ordered the entire site offline, demanded that its registrar block the transfer of the domain, force the registrar to point all visitors to a blank page and also having the registrar hand over all information on IP addresses of people who accessed the wikileaks site. All of that seems rather excessive, and of questionable legality. After all, doesn't Section 230 of the CDA provide safe harbor for the service provider? I could see an order demanding the specific documents be taken down, but the rest of the order seems to go well beyond what's both reasonable and standard in cases of this nature. The folks behind Wikileaks are equally perplexed, noting that they were only given a few hours warning before the hearing, meaning they were unable to attend or send representation. All in all this seems rather excessive, especially compared to existing similar cases on record. Even odder about all of this is that since the court went after the registrar, not whoever is actually hosting the site, you can apparently still reach the actual site if you know the IP address."

Labels:

 
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 11:40 am
By Cade Metz

'On the surface, all is well in Wikiland. Just last week, a headline from The San Francisco Chronicle told the world that "Wikipedia's Future Is Still Looking Up," as the paper happily announced that founder Jimmy "Jimbo" Wales plans to expand his operation with a high-profile move to the city by the bay.

But underneath, there's trouble brewing.

Controversy has erupted among the encyclopedia's core contributors, after a rogue editor revealed that the site's top administrators are using a secret insider mailing list to crackdown on perceived threats to their power.

Many suspected that such a list was in use, as the Wikipedia "ruling clique" grew increasingly concerned with banning editors for the most petty of reasons. But now that the list's existence is confirmed, the rank and file are on the verge of revolt.

Revealed after an uber-admin called "Durova" used it in an attempt to enforce the quixotic ban of a longtime contributor, this secret mailing list seems to undermine the site's famously egalitarian ethos. At the very least, the list allows the ruling clique to push its agenda without scrutiny from the community at large. But clearly, it has also been used to silence the voice of at least one person who was merely trying to improve the encyclopedia's content.

"I've never seen the Wikipedia community as angry as they are with this one," says Charles Ainsworth, a Japan-based editor who's contributed more feature articles to the site than all but six other writers. "I think there was more hidden anger and frustration with the 'ruling clique' than I thought and Durova's heavy-handed action and arrogant refusal to take sufficient accountability for it has released all of it into the open."

Kelly Martin, a former member of Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, leaves no doubt that this sort of surreptitious communication has gone on for ages. "This particular list is new, but the strategy is old," Martin told us via phone, from outside Chicago. "It's certainly not consistent with the public principles of the site. But in reality, it's standard practice."

Meanwhile, Jimbo Wales has told the community that all this is merely a tempest in a teacup. As he points out, the user that Durova wrongly banned was reinstated after a mere 75 minutes. But it would seem that Jimbo has done his best to suppress any talk of the secret mailing list.

Whatever the case, many longtime editors are up-in-arms. And the site's top administrators seem more concerned with petty site politics than with building a trustworthy encyclopedia. "The problem with Wikipedia is that, for so many in the project, it's no longer about the encyclopedia," Martin wrote in a recent blog post. "The problem is that Wikipedia's community has defined itself not in terms of the encyclopedia it is supposedly producing, but instead of the people it venerates and the people it abhors."'

Labels: ,

 
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 12:26 pm
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge Monday ordered the White House to preserve copies of all its e-mails, a move that Bush administration lawyers had argued strongly against.

A judge ordered the White House to keep copies of all e-mails.

U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy directed the Executive Office of the President to safeguard the material in response to two lawsuits that seek to determine whether the White House has destroyed e-mails in violation of federal law.

In response, the White House said it has been taking steps to preserve copies of all e-mails and will continue to do so. The administration is seeking dismissal of the lawsuits brought by two private groups, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the National Security Archive.

The organizations allege the disappearance of 5 million White House e-mails. The court order issued by Kennedy, an appointee of President Clinton, is directed at maintaining backup tapes which contain copies of White House e-mails.

The Federal Records Act details strict standards prohibiting the destruction of government documents including electronic messages, unless first approved by the archivist of the United States."

Labels: , ,

 
Friday, November 02, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 8:54 am
"United States President George W Bush has defended his attorney-general nominee, saying Michael Mukasey will not tell lawmakers weighing his confirmation if he judges "waterboarding" of terrorism suspects is torture, and thus illegal.

Mr Bush's defiant defense of Mr Mukasey came in a speech that portrayed his Democratic critics as weak on terrorism -- a replay of his successful 2004 reelection message as the 2008 White House race heats up.

Prominent Democrats, whose party retook the US Congress in November 2006 largely thanks to anger at the unpopular war in Iraq, quickly shot back that they would oppose Mr Mukasey if he did not answer the question."

Labels: , ,

 
Sunday, October 28, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 7:51 pm
By Spencer S. Hsu | Washington Post
6:33 PM CDT, October 26, 2007

"WASHINGTON - The Federal Emergency Management Agency's No. 2 official apologized Friday for leading a staged news conference Tuesday in which FEMA employees posed as reporters while real reporters listened on a telephone conference line and were barred from asking questions.

"We are reviewing our press procedures and will make the changes necessary to ensure that all of our communications are straight forward and transparent," Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson Jr., FEMA's deputy administrator, said in a four-paragraph statement.

"We can and must do better, and apologize for this error in judgment," Johnson said, a view repeated Friday by press officers at the White House and the Department of Homeland Security, who criticized the event."

Labels: , ,

 
Monday, October 22, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 1:31 pm
"The ABC, in cahoots with the National Press Club, pulled the Nine Network's election debate feed on behalf of the Liberal Party in an "outrageous act of censorship", Nine's news chief John Westacott says.

The network's feed from the televised debate between Prime Minister John Howard and Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd last night was cut after the network broadcast the controversial "worm" with its coverage, he said.

The ABC has denied the allegation and said it had "no role" in the decision to cut the feed, according to a spokeswoman.

"All decisions about the host broadcast feed, including decisions about who it would be provided to, were made by the National Press Club," she said.

Nine was warned its feed was going to be cut and was able to switch to take a feed first from the ABC and then, when that was cut, from Sky News, said Mr Westacott, Nine's director of news and current affairs.

He insists there was "absolutely no agreement" between Nine and the press club over its coverage.

"We were asked not to use the worm, that's correct, and we didn't agree with any of the conditions that were laid down by the Press Club, including charging us for the event," he told ABC Radio this morning.

"We were given warning as they were going to pull it, so we cut to our back-up feed and then they threatened to pull that too," he said."

Labels: , , , ,

 
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 8:23 am
By Jacqui Cheng | Published: September 10, 2007 - 11:19AM CT

"The roughly 500 cybercafés in Mumbai, India, will soon have police-sanctioned keylogging software installed on their machines in the name of fighting terrorism. The software will track everything entered into web forms, chat rooms, e-mail, and more, and report it back to the government. Mumbai police say that cybercafé owners must agree to the installation of the software or else they will lose their licenses."

Labels: ,

 
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 2:00 pm
by Gerard Noonan

"THE reputation of Australian courts has slipped and its position as a bastion of free speech and human rights has eroded in recent times, says the human rights campaigner and prominent international barrister Geoffrey Robertson...He singled out recent legislation introduced by the Treasurer, Peter Costello, which introduces severe penalties for "secondary boycott" campaigners - including the media - campaigning on issues like child slavery or animal cruelty as the latest sign of restrictions on human rights and media freedom."

Labels: , ,

 
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 8:57 am
by David Marr


"...Yet the Office of Film and Literature Classification will soon be hunting for men and women with the amazing ability to pick the books, films, symphonies, news broadcasts, sitcoms and sermons that "might lead a person (regardless of his or her age or any mental impairment) to engage in a terrorist act".

Philip Ruddock wants all such works banned.
We are not defenceless now. For years this country has suppressed any works that "promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence" but the Attorney-General fears that formula is too slack. With his lawyer's mind he sees the risk of insidious material slipping through the net to inspire the naive and impressionable.

It's over a year since he first tried to persuade the state and territory attorneys-general to accept this new rule banning "advocacy" of terrorism. They jacked up, alarmed by the sweeping powers he wanted to give the censors.

When the attorneys meet again in Hobart at the end of this week, Ruddock will once more be insisting his new rule be adopted by the states and territories. If they don't - and several states are still holding out - he has a bill ready and waiting to override the nation's supposedly co-operative censorship arrangements. "I am not prepared," Ruddock told Parliament in June, "to wait indefinitely to address this problem."

But what is the problem, asked the Australian Press Council, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and the Law Council of Australia in submissions to Ruddock's department over the past few months? Promoting terrorism is already banned, so why do we need new rules to suppress urging, advocating and praising?"

Labels: ,

 
Friday, July 20, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 11:02 pm
"Some of the details of a terrorism charge against Mohamed Haneef presented in court by the prosecution may have been incorrect, reports say.

A Brisbane court was told this week a mobile phone SIM card belonging to Haneef, a Gold Coast based doctor, was found in the Jeep that smashed into Glasgow Airport on June 30.

Haneef has been charged with "recklessly" supporting a terrorist organisation, after providing the SIM card to a relative later allegedly involved in plotting the botched car bomb attacks in the UK.

However, sources in the UK and Australia have told ABC Radio the SIM card was actually seized by police eight hours later when Haneef's cousin Sabeel Ahmed was arrested in Liverpool.

Ahmed allegedly had two phones on him at the time of his arrest, one of which contained Haneef's SIM card.

Police in Britain and Australia would not comment on where the SIM card was seized."

Labels: , , ,

 
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 4:31 pm
"The Federal Opposition has demanded that Attorney-General Philip Ruddock explains claims that a secret taxpayer-funded political unit is operating out of his Sydney ministerial office.

Three Labor frontbenchers tried to move a motion to force Mr Ruddock to explain the unit in Parliament this morning.

Labor's Anthony Albanese said he wanted to know details of the alleged unit's funding and staffing arrangements.

The Government used its numbers to vote the motion down."

Labels: , ,

 
Sunday, May 20, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 2:04 pm
"In the space of twenty-four hours what passes for the Iraqi government announced that news photographers, video and still, are forbidden to record images of the mayhem and murder after a bomb has gone off. No more of those pictures of the survivors, hands clapped to head, screaming in front of a smoking ruin, parts of human bodies, men racing to put the maimed into cars while sirens call the news of new horrors.

At almost the same time, the Pentagon had an announcement of its own to make. Henceforth our soldiers in Iraq will find MySpace, YouTube and eleven other websites blocked when they try to write home or post pictures and videos from military computers. This is the latest in an ongoing crackdown on our people blogging from Iraq. Never mind that much of what we know about this war comes not from commercial news outlets but from what servicemen and -women have sent back home through cyberspace."

Labels: ,

 
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 9:33 pm
#1 Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media
#2 Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran
#3 Oceans of the World in Extreme Danger etc

Labels: ,

 
Monday, April 30, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 10:11 am
"High school senior Allen Lee sat down with his creative writing class on Monday and penned an essay that so disturbed his teacher, school administrators and police that he was charged with disorderly conduct.....[his father] added: "I don't see how somebody can get charged by writing in their homework. The teacher asked them to express themselves, and he followed instructions."

Allen Lee, an 18-year-old straight-A student at Cary-Grove High School, was arrested Tuesday near his home and charged with disorderly conduct for an essay police described as violently disturbing but not directed toward any specific person or location.

The youth's father said his son was not suspended or expelled but was forced to attend classes elsewhere for now."

Labels: ,

 
Friday, April 13, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 6:07 pm
"Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock is asking his state and territory counterparts to ban books which advocate terrorism.

Mr Ruddock says current classification laws do not go far enough and says he wants all material advocating terrorism taken off the shelves."

Labels: , ,

 
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
posted by @netwurker at 7:54 am
"Poetry's capacity to rattle governments is not, it appears, confined to totalitarian regimes. A collection of poems by detainees at the US military base in Guantánamo Bay is to be published later this year, but only in the face of strong opposition by suspicious American censors."

Labels: , ,