3 ms·

Provisions in the law the gag participants from even talking about a violation of their rights are particularly insidious. Sure, they're Kafka-esque, but they a

by r0h1n 12y ago

Provisions in the law the gag participants from even talking about a violation of their rights are particularly insidious. Sure, they're Kafka-esque, but they also affect the poor, small and marginalized disproportionately. What is a small business or private citizen to do if they cannot even talk about how they're being wronged against? How will they solicit the support of others? How will they use the free media/press (meant to be a bulwark against injustice) to publicize their cause? This isn't isolated to just the NSA/FBI/DoJ, or the US alone. Ag-gag laws [1], "super injunctions" [2] and "secret trials" [3] are all examples of this dangerous trend. [1] - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/06/agriculture-gag-laws-press-freedom http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/06/agricul... [2] - http://www.lawteacher.net/human-rights/essays/super-injunction-used-to-gag-investigative.php http://www.lawteacher.net/human-rights/essays/super-injuncti... [3] - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27806814 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27806814

dmix 12y ago
There was a particularly apt quote from UK's former homeland security spokesman: > Secret court hearings will hand a major propaganda victory to terrorists, a former security adviser to David Cameron has warned. Senior Tory MP Patrick Mercer said he had ‘grave’ concerns about the Government’s plans, which he warned would erode centuries of open justice. > The former Army officer, who served as the party’s homeland security spokesman until 2007, also claimed the measures would succeed in destroying British values – effectively doing the terrorists’ job for them http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126374/Secret-courts-hand-victory-terrorists-David-Camerons-ex-security-adviser-warns-PM.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126374/Secret-court... It's a shame that American lawmakers did not come to a similar conclusion, that secret courts and rulings erode the values of a free and open society.
- chii 12y ago
  > secret courts and rulings erode the values of a free and open society. secret courts allow the appearance of a free and open society whilst actually enacting draconian practices without fear of reprisal.
- talmand 12y ago
  Some did and continue to do so, they are usually the people labeled as crackpots, conspiracy theorists, and/or unpatriotic.
rayiner 12y ago
> Provisions in the law the gag participants from even talking about a violation of their rights are particularly insidious. Sure, they're Kafka-esque Nit-pick: people misuse the term "Kafka-esque" when they mean "Orwellian." It doesn't refer to insidious, purposeful, bureaucracy. It refers to bureaucracy that is irrational as a whole because of the mechanical, impersonal nature of its parts. E.g. to get a social security card you need to show your driver's license; to get a driver's license you need to show your social security card.
- findjashua 12y ago
  You don't need a driver's license to get a social security card. I didn't have a DL back when I got my SSC, I only needed proof of legal residence (student/work visa in my case) and employment (offer letter). IIRC, I didn't need a SSC for the DL either, but it's been a while, so I'm not too sure on that.

by r0h1n 12y ago

dmix 12y ago

There was a particularly apt quote from UK's former homeland security spokesman: > Secret court hearings will hand a major propaganda victory to terrorists, a former security adviser to David Cameron has warned. Senior Tory MP Patrick Mercer said he had ‘grave’ concerns about the Government’s plans, which he warned would erode centuries of open justice. > The former Army officer, who served as the party’s homeland security spokesman until 2007, also claimed the measures would succeed in destroying British values – effectively doing the terrorists’ job for them http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126374/Secret-courts-hand-victory-terrorists-David-Camerons-ex-security-adviser-warns-PM.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126374/Secret-court... It's a shame that American lawmakers did not come to a similar conclusion, that secret courts and rulings erode the values of a free and open society.

chii 12y ago
> secret courts and rulings erode the values of a free and open society. secret courts allow the appearance of a free and open society whilst actually enacting draconian practices without fear of reprisal.
talmand 12y ago
Some did and continue to do so, they are usually the people labeled as crackpots, conspiracy theorists, and/or unpatriotic.

rayiner 12y ago

> Provisions in the law the gag participants from even talking about a violation of their rights are particularly insidious. Sure, they're Kafka-esque Nit-pick: people misuse the term "Kafka-esque" when they mean "Orwellian." It doesn't refer to insidious, purposeful, bureaucracy. It refers to bureaucracy that is irrational as a whole because of the mechanical, impersonal nature of its parts. E.g. to get a social security card you need to show your driver's license; to get a driver's license you need to show your social security card.

findjashua 12y ago
You don't need a driver's license to get a social security card. I didn't have a DL back when I got my SSC, I only needed proof of legal residence (student/work visa in my case) and employment (offer letter). IIRC, I didn't need a SSC for the DL either, but it's been a while, so I'm not too sure on that.