I told you so

I told you so 1: High cost of internet filtering and controls stricter than Iran's, oh and critics bullied.

I told you so 2: Terrorism laws unsafe, court rejects charge of breaking laws that did not exist when the "crime" was done

More like this

You know what makes an already scary world a lot scarier? When a government decides it's a crime for disease researchers to do their job. From Declan Butler: Iran has summarily tried two of the nation's HIV researchers with communicating with an "enemy government," in a half-day trial that…
The government of Iran sucks. Doctor Arash Alaei and Doctor Kamiar Alaei are two Iranian physicians who have reportedly been detained in Iran by Iranian authorities. The physicians, who are brothers, were apparently arrested at the end of June, 2008 and their current whereabouts are unknown.…
There is a loud and painful screech of microphone feedback. As it fades out, there is a series of loud, reverberating thumping noises, followed by: ANNOUNCER: ....um, hello? Is this on? The announcer, a small, hunched, elderly old man, continues to speak timidly into the microphone. ANNOUNCER: Um…
Christoper Rhoads and Loretta Chao report in today's Journal: ...the Iranian government appears to be engaging in a practice often called deep packet inspection, which enables authorities to not only block communication but to monitor it to gather information about individuals, as well as alter it…

Maybe, just maybe, this will start the process of dismantling the terrorism laws, but I'm not holding my breath.

By John Monfries (not verified) on 24 Oct 2008 #permalink

This is why so many Americans want to keep the right to have weapons - at the end of the day, people have no means to protect themselves againt the government. I mean, the police and the army obey the government, not the population. So what is a people to do if its government unduly deprives it of its fundamental rights?

In my opinion, there's no better protection than for the government to know that it is surrounded by millions of armed citizens. For the government, aggressing the people would be like killing a cop in a police station. In theory anyway...

That reasoning may sound a little naive, but keep in mind that at the end of the day, we do rely on force (the police, the army) to protect ourselves against other citizens or against people from other countries, so relying on force to protect ourselves against a government is only a continuation of that reasoning.